Gregarius » éléments par Joe Wilcox

éléments par Joe Wilcox

Microsoft's core platform isn't software, it's trust

Publié: mai 7, 2019, 1:04am CEST par Joe Wilcox

For the first time in a half-decade, I watched a Microsoft Build keynote this morning. Time gives fresh perspective, looking at where the company was compared to where it is today. Listening to CEO Satya Nadella and other Softies, I repeatedly found myself reminded of Isaac Asimov's three laws or Robotics and how they might realistically be applied in the 21st Century. The rules, whether wise or not, set to ensure that humans could safely interact with complex, thinking machines. In Asimov's science fiction stories, the laws were core components of the automaton's brain—baked in, so to speak, and thus… [Continue Reading]

Grado Labs GW100 wireless headphones [Review]

Publié: décembre 29, 2018, 12:00am CET par Joe Wilcox

When I first opened the box containing the Grado Labs GW100 headphones, one word came to mind: "Cheap". The cans didn't look or feel like the classy Grado RS1i and RS1e, which I once owned, or the GS1000e that are still beloved and possessed. But after connecting to Google Pixel 2 XL (and later the 3 XL), via Bluetooth, I exclaimed: "Priceless". The first offering in the company's "Wireless Series" rises to an audiophile class unmatched by most competing cans; I prefer the GW100 to the GS1000e, which cost four times more to buy. Four words best describe the experience listening… [Continue Reading]

My AMC Stubs A-List subscription is a bad B-movie

Publié: décembre 22, 2018, 4:27am CET par Joe Wilcox

Earlier this week, movie theater chain AMC dumped coal in my Christmas stocking when I attempted to cancel the $19.95-a-month, watch-three-movies-a-week Stubs A-List subscription. One, and then another, customer representative informed me that at signup, the terms of service explicitly states that commitment is for three months. He, then she, warned that cancellation would trigger immediate charge for the remaining two months. But the ToS restriction shouldn't apply to me, being a returning customer. Everything comes down to the meaning of one word: Initial. When A-List launched, on June 26, 2018, my wife and I joined. We ended our membership… [Continue Reading]

Tuft + Paw Gatto Basket (review)

Publié: décembre 17, 2018, 10:49pm CET par Joe Wilcox

When I think beta testing, low-tech doesn't come to mind. The gadgets that you use demand extensive quality review during design and prefabrication stages, long before ever being manufactured. But, gasp, cat furniture? Seeing this website is still called BetaNews 20 years on—and felines own the Internet—there's strange sense to spotlighting something for your furry friend(s) the week before Christmas. Call it a stocking stuffer, but one where the kitty is stuffed. And, this wool wonder, like other things from Tuft + Paw, was thoroughly beta tested. Cali Cattitude The company contacted me nearly six months ago "to collaborate with… [Continue Reading]

10 quick observations about Google Pixel Slate

Publié: décembre 3, 2018, 6:10am CET par Joe Wilcox

Pixel Slate arrived at the Wilcox household on Nov. 28, 2018, from Google Store, with the order correctly fulfilled. Initial out-of-the-box reaction: "Oh". Underwhelmed. Nearly five days later: "Wow". The Chrome OS tablet is understated in all the ways that matter. My brain just needed a wee bit of time to appreciate the many nuances, rather than one obvious thing flipping the "ah-ha" switch. The Slate will finally complete my move away from Apple products, started in late July. The Chrome OS slab is set to replace iPad 10.5 and possibly could displace my beloved Pixelbook, as well. We shall see… [Continue Reading]

Worth waiting for, I get satisfaction from Google Store

Publié: décembre 1, 2018, 12:56am CET par Joe Wilcox

Part 3 of three. My six-week saga, where Google Store sent the wrong Pixel phones, is nearly over. I would like to thank the Advanced Support Technician team member who worked with me to end the drama and restore my (previous) confidence purchasing gadgets from the retailer. The generous solution minimizes any further complications and leaves me with a usable phone—with "Preferred Care" that I paid for correctly attached. Sometimes satisfaction is a process, rather than immediacy. To recap: The 128GB Clearly White Pixel 3 ordered on launch day arrived on Oct. 17, 2018 as a 128GB Just Black Pixel… [Continue Reading]

My Google Store customer service nightmare goes from bad to worse

Publié: novembre 28, 2018, 6:59am CET par Joe Wilcox

For readers who like to criticize and gloat, I have an early Holiday present for you: This story. You can call me an effing idiot, and I couldn't disagree. After Google Store sent me the wrong Pixel phone, I foolishly placed another order, and a similar distribution mishap occurred. Bad is now worse; I also write to caution other potential Google Store shoppers: This could happen to you. To briefly recap the first instance: In October, I ordered Pixel 3 Clearly White 128GB. On the 17th, the Pixel 3 XL Just Black 128GB arrived instead. Google Store couldn't process a… [Continue Reading]

Microsoft market capitalization (briefly) tops Apple (again)

Publié: novembre 27, 2018, 12:00am CET par Joe Wilcox

In May 2010, I wrote about Apple's market cap passing top-valued Microsoft; it's only fitting to follow up with an analysis about the unbelievable turnabout that, like the first, marks a changing of technological vanguards. Briefly today, the software and services giant nudged past the stock market's fruit-logo darling. A few minutes after 1 p.m. EST, the pair's respective market caps hovered in the $812 billion range, with Microsoft cresting Apple by about $300 million. By the stock market close, a rally for Apple put distance from its rival: $828.64 billion to $817.29 billion, respectively (Bloomberg says $822.9 billion, BTW).… [Continue Reading]

Google Store sent me kicking and screaming back to Apple

Publié: novembre 15, 2018, 9:32pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Google Store's bureaucratic ineptitude is beyond belief. My recent, unresolved customer crisis is an experience in artificial unintelligence. For a parent company whose core competency is supposed to be indexing, crunching, and disseminating information, it's inconceivable that something so simple as fixing a single order error could escalate into a tragically comic Catch-22. I should have abandoned all efforts long before reaching the point of penning this post and looking back to the Apple Way. To summarize: I received the wrong Pixel phone nearly a month ago. Google Store struggled to process a return authorization, because the device in hand… [Continue Reading]

Goodbye noisy neighbors, I quit Nextdoor

Publié: octobre 17, 2018, 5:49pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Six days ago, Facebook notified me that my personal information had been pilfered in a recently revealed hack affecting tens of millions subscribers. Lovely. Why don't you kick me in the head, too, Mark Zuckerberg? Perhaps you would prefer a baseball bat, so you can beat me to death instead? I responded by removing most of the same information from my FB and started a content purge ahead of possible account deletion. Since then, I have been on a social media account rampage, which turned my sights to Nextdoor, where I joined on Aug. 29, 2017 (my Facebook is 12 years… [Continue Reading]

The price you pay Apple for (so-called) iPhone innovation

Publié: septembre 13, 2018, 9:01am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Trendsetter Apple has done it again! Just when you thought there was no innovation left in the smartphone market, CEO Tim Cook delivers the wildly price-disruptive iPhone Xs Max 512GB for heart-stopping $1,449. Smartphones simply don't cost this much. What other company would stoop so low by reaching so high? This thing is a monster with its 6.5-inch (nearly) edge-to-edge display; 2688 x 1242 resolution at 458 pixels per inch (less than Google Pixel 2 XL at 2880 x 1440 and 538 ppi); and dual-SIM support (so telemarketers can ring more often on two numbers). For anyone whose hands aren't… [Continue Reading]

Google's Two Pixel Problems

Publié: août 31, 2018, 11:30pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Like unwanted mushrooms popping up after rain, Pixel 3/XL rumors are everywhere. Google gets gravy from all the free fan- and blog-post hype. Am I imagining, or is there even more buzz than for the next iPhone(s), which presumably comes soon (Apple sent out invites yesterday for a September 12 product event). Buzz is the measure of interest—and while iPhone has commanding market share, Pixel's mindshare is formidable. Someone tell me: Is Google's new device really going to be that good? The leaked photos aren't that inspiring with respect to design (little is different). Or perhaps expectations about iPhone X… [Continue Reading]

Apple replaced my butterfly keyboard

Publié: août 27, 2018, 12:30am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Yesterday, the local Apple Store emailed that my wife's former 13.3-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar was ready. We picked up the laptop hours later. If you haven't heard about specks of debris causing MBP keyboard failure, I can confirm from our experience that such problem occurs. In mid-June 2018, Apple initiated a free repair program, which we used last week with surprisingly positive results. I purchased the custom-configured MBP in mid-November 2016, and right out of the box the spacebar occasionally skipped. The malfunctioning worsened over time, and, coincidentally (or not), reached crisis a few days after Apple admitted… [Continue Reading]

Two months later, switching to Google from Apple

Publié: août 20, 2018, 6:49pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Doubt disturbed my commitment to give up the Apple Way for the Google lifestyle two months ago. Preparing to pack up my wife's 64GB white iPhone X, I was taken aback by how pretty it was. She kept the thing in a case, which protected from damage but also obscured beauty. For fleeting seconds, I wondered why switch. Product design that generates joy is another benefit—and one transcending any, and every, feature. But the moment passed, and I boxed up her smartphone along with my 256GB black iPhone X. Google gave great trade-in values, which dispatched the hassle of reselling… [Continue Reading]

I declare independence from Apple (and mean it this time)

Publié: juillet 4, 2018, 9:45am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Six years ago today I penned my personal Declaration of Independence from Apple, nearly a month after pledging to boycott the company's products and services—and I did, only to quietly stop six months later. They say history repeats, eh? On this July 4th, I forsake the fruit-logo company once more. From Apple I return to Google, choosing one digital lifestyle over the other—and not for the first time, as some commenters will be quick to argue. Past to present: By summer 2012, I viewed various patent assaults by Apple against Samsung and others as competition by litigation, not innovation. Weighing on… [Continue Reading]

What's wrong with this picture?

Publié: mai 15, 2018, 11:45pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Earlier today, I needed to get Skype onto my iPhone X to receive an overseas call. So I hauled over to the App Store, like any sensible iOS user would do. I was shocked—absolutely floored—to see an advert for Google Duo taking up about half the screen, and appearing above Skype. You got to ask how many people end up downloading the upper one instead. I don't often go to the App Store and wonder: How long has been this kind of aggressive placement? The Internet has its share of whiners about paid adverts placed on Google search pages—and not… [Continue Reading]

Invasion of the dog-poop phones

Publié: mai 13, 2018, 6:48pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

A few days ago, BetaNews Managing Editor Wayne Williams emailed asking if I could contribute content after being silent for ages, especially as the site's 20th anniversary approaches. He doesn't fathom the potential terror that request will unleash. I have written a total of two tech stories for BN in 2018—surely to the delight of my many commenter critics. Reason: Joe Wilcox is on a self-imposed writing hiatus as he looks distrustfully at the many so-called innovations that he championed during a 25-year technology reporting career. He is disgusted to see how we have become commodities stored in the pantries… [Continue Reading]

Apple HomePod: 'wow' but 'uh-oh'

Publié: février 11, 2018, 3:01am CET par Joe Wilcox

HomePod arrived yesterday at 9:40 a.m. PST; thank-you UPS for prompt delivery of my preorder. My initial reaction: Wow and uh-oh. The wow harkens back to the original iPod, which Apple released in October 2001. The company's design ethic treated the overall experience as the user interface: Attach FireWire cable to Mac and device, music syncs. iTunes manages music on the Mac; for iPod, a simple scroll-wheel navigates tracks displayed on a small screen. The uncomplicated and understated approach defied the UX of every other MP3 sold by all other manufacturers. HomePod is a defining, roots-return that's well-deserving of the… [Continue Reading]

7 things you could do instead of CES

Publié: janvier 8, 2018, 10:56pm CET par Joe Wilcox

The annual scourge is upon us, as tens of thousands of attention seekers descend on Las Vegas for the Consumer Electronics Show. Nowhere else can you watch bloggers and journalists in a constant chase of their public relations foibles, who desperately hunt for all the attention they can get their clients. Think a thousand kids in a small room, calling for mommy and groping her dress. Then multiple ten times. My last CES pilgrimage was 2008. That's right, I haven't gone in 10 years. No-o-o-o regrets. Nothing important ever comes out of the show, even though each year the hype… [Continue Reading]

Something you gotta know about iPhone X

Publié: novembre 5, 2017, 3:40am CET par Joe Wilcox

I consider myself lucky, although some commenters (you know who you are) will disagree, by successfully ordering from Verizon Wireless the iPhone X for delivery on launch day—November 3rd. A FedEx driver brought the anticipated package to my door yesterday afternoon. I hauled down to Apple Store to purchase AppleCare+ before my grubby paws caressed the steel rims (vroom) and generous glass (screen measures 5.8 inches diagonally). Replacing iPhone 7 Plus, which features and benefits greatly satisfy, is a bit extravagant. But I wanted the X to review and for its smaller size but larger display—understanding caveats: Home button's removal… [Continue Reading]

Google Store flubs Pixel Product Preorders

Publié: octobre 5, 2017, 12:53am CEST par Joe Wilcox

I would like to thank Google for saving me thousands of dollars in needless spending. Near the end of today's gangbuster hardware event, I was ready to order two new Chromebooks and smartphones, one each for me and my wife. But "error 500" pages on the company's store website and long-lead new product availability dates prompted me to cancel the one order successfully made and to delete the others in process from my shopping cart. For a company whose product managers droned on this morning about all the reasons why artificial intelligence is so right, Big G got the store… [Continue Reading]

Ouch, that hurts! Verizon's new Unlimited plans throttle customers

Publié: août 23, 2017, 11:13pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

I should have known better. Once burned is supposed to be twice as wary. Right? Disgruntled by pricing and other policies, in autumn 2015, I took my family from Verizon Wireless to T-Mobile, which cut our monthly bill by more than one-third. But in May of this year we made the trek back in part because data speed is so much faster from my apartment than it is with Magenta. Better Red than dead, eh? Wrong. Oh, dumbass me. Un-carrier's aggressive pricing, and Verizon's first-ever quarterly loss of post-paid subscribers, compelled the nation's largest carrier to respond—by, starting in February,… [Continue Reading]

The iPhone Legacy

Publié: juin 29, 2017, 6:01am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Steve was right, and I don't refer to Apple cofounder Jobs, but to an iPhone buyer I met 10 years ago today. He was among the eclectic group of people waiting outside Apple Store Montgomery Mall to spend $499 or $599 on the fruit logo company's first smartphone. The amount was outrageous at the time for a locked, unsubsidized handset. "I think this is a day that you’re going to see a change in how computers, how handheld computers are done", he told me. "I think we’ll look back in 10 or 15 years, and like on that day the… [Continue Reading]

Europe guts Google, and that's just wrong

Publié: juin 27, 2017, 7:49pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Today the European Union gave Apple a great gift to celebrate iPhone's 10th anniversary (on June 29th): The ridiculous, record $2.7 billion fine, and associated sanctions, against Google that once again demonstrates the EU's small-minded oversight that wrongly regulates evolving technologies in a big world. The adverse antitrust ruling finds that the online titan favored its own online shopping services (and paying customers) over rivals. In February 2010, with the EU Competition Commission's preliminary investigation starting, I rightly called "Google a dangerous monopoly". Seven years later, the competitive landscape has dramatically changed, and rapidly evolves. The Commission's action is too… [Continue Reading]

There goes the neighborhood, as snobby 'better-thans' wait for their Whole Foods drone deliveries

Publié: juin 17, 2017, 2:47am CEST par Joe Wilcox

My first reaction to Amazon buying Whole Foods is "Huh?" Few brands could be any more different. The online retailer is all about giving customers the most for the least amount spent, while the grocer is the pricey purview of the alt-organic lifestyle elite. No moment is better metaphor for Whole Foods' clientele than the exchange I heard between a thirtysomething couple standing at the deli holding chicken luncheon meat. "Is it free range?" the women asked her husband. It had to be, or she wouldn't buy. They argued. I silently chuckled: luncheon meat—not a bird! It's all pressed meat,… [Continue Reading]

Google, you better up your tablet game before Apple takes you down

Publié: juin 9, 2017, 7:42am CEST par Joe Wilcox

To celebrate the launch of Apple's new 10.5-inch iPad Pro, I ordered Pixel C, which arrived three days ago. Worst case, the tablet can be returned for refund during the buyer's remorse period; there ain't any regrets so far—just the opposite. To my pleasant surprise, the tab is much more enjoyable than I remember, because Nougat is so pretty, efficient, and buttery smooth than was Marshmallow on the device. The screen scorches any available iPad, Pro or otherwise, and the performance is shockingly nimble. My Pixel C shipped with Android 7.1.1 and quickly updated to 7.1.2. I will soon install Android… [Continue Reading]

May the Moto Z Force Droid be with you [Review]

Publié: juin 3, 2017, 4:34am CEST par Joe Wilcox

If you asked why the Moto Z Force Droid Edition appeals to me, I couldn't identify one thing, which arguably is odd considering this is a review. Benefits and features feel finely balanced, which is a hallmark of good product design. Oh, and that satisfaction is for the pure smartphone experience, which is premium by nearly every measure that matters; I didn't test Moto Mods that expand capabilities. Lenovo/Motorola and Verizon released the smartphone in July 2016, so this exploration is belated—and then some. Apologies, the delay was necessary. In mid-December 2016, Verizon sent a holiday review package unexpectedly. At the time, my father-in-law's health… [Continue Reading]

I am slave to Apple Watch no more

Publié: mai 21, 2017, 3:25am CEST par Joe Wilcox

I suffer from phantom smartwatch syndrome -- an ailment that hopefully will disappear over time. Nearly four weeks ago, I put aside Apple Watch 2 stainless steel and replaced it with the simple but appealing ManchesterWatchWorks Iconik 3. Problem: Almost any shifting movement of the timepiece causes me to reflexively flip my wrist and look down; there is false perception of haptic sensation. Apple has trained me well, and I'm tired of being its dog doing tricks. Woof. Woof. Growl. I feel free! Gone are the nagging alerts -- and I had them barreled down to a minimum of approved services: Some… [Continue Reading]

Meet Fujifilm X100F [Review]

Publié: mai 15, 2017, 1:37am CEST par Joe Wilcox

During the camera film era, Fujifilm battled kingpin Kodak with brighter, more vibrant colors that either photographers loved or hated—perhaps both. That was last century. In the 21st, Kodak is a shadow cast against aged Kodachrome, while its rival has successfully transitioned from print to digital—and with amazing bravado. Fuji's transformation started six years ago with the cleverly-engineered, retro-designed X100, which I reviewed in May 2011. The compact digital camera's success led Fuji to develop a series of additional bodies and lenses; all are designed with professional shooters in mind. The X series family features compact, mirrorless designs that incorporate digital… [Continue Reading]

Let me tell you about Apple Fiscal Q1 2017

Publié: février 2, 2017, 3:53am CET par Joe Wilcox

The measure of Apple fiscal first quarter 2017 isn't record revenues ($78.35 billion) but comparison to major competitors: More than three times Google ($26.06 billion) or Microsoft ($24.1 billion). Amazon announces tomorrow, Groundhog Day. Will the retailer's CEO, Jeff Bezos, see his shadow? The 3x multiplier nearly applies to net income: $17.89 billion, versus $6.64 billion and $5.2 billion, respectively, for the two rivals. Looked at differently, compared to Apple's same quarter in fiscal 2010, seven years later, profits exceed total revenues ($15.68 billion). That's an astounding comparison. The results defy pundits' prognostications, including my own, about gravity pulling the… [Continue Reading]

Master & Dynamic MW50 wireless headphones [Review]

Publié: janvier 24, 2017, 7:08am CET par Joe Wilcox

Headphone manufacturers must make deliberate audio signature decisions when crafting cans. Some shops, like GradoLabs, adopt a house sound. Relative newcomer Master & Dynamic's design ethic seeks to equally please eyes and ears. As such, its flagship wired headphones (MH40) and wireless (MW60) share similar industrial design. Aluminum, lambskin, leather, and stainless steel combine in rugged style that evokes aviators of a bygone era. The newer MW50 Bluetooth headphones strongly resemble the other two, but they're tuned for younger listeners on the move. M&D's earlier cans are over-ear—meaning they cover the lobes, while the MW50 rest on them. The headphones are smaller… [Continue Reading]

Master & Dynamic MW50 wireless headphones [Review]

Publié: janvier 24, 2017, 7:08am CET par Joe Wilcox

The problem with iPhone

Publié: janvier 9, 2017, 8:35am CET par Joe Wilcox

Today we arrive at the first of two 10-year anniversaries regarding iPhone: Steve Jobs unveiling the handset six months before its release -- unusual for Apple's then-CEO to pre-announce something, but necessary, with the federal regulatory rigmarole that cellular devices go through. Jobs and his management team brought the smartphone to market at great risk: Established and entrenched manufacturers, mainly Nokia, had huge distribution channels and massive amounts of research and development invested in their cellulars. iPhone debuted in one market (United States) and on a single carrier (AT&T, which concurrently rebranded). By most measures of business strategies: Insanity. But risk was a… [Continue Reading]

Tidal Masters go their own way

Publié: janvier 6, 2017, 8:49am CET par Joe Wilcox

During Consumer Electronics Show 2017 yesterday, in licensing partnership with MQA, music streamer Tidal announced the new audio-fidelity tier "Masters", which is available for free to existing HiFi subscribers. Early album selection is extremely limited as is access option: macOS or Windows application. Both will expand in time. But wow! I tested skeptically, wiring up my studio cans—Audio-Technica ATH-R70x—to 15.4-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar to hear the difference. Hehe, if any. I deliberately started with Fleetwood Mac's "Go Your Own Way" from album "Rumors", which released 40 years ago on February 4th. Tidal claims that Masters recordings deliver "an audio experience exactly… [Continue Reading]

My favorite tech items of 2016 [Joe]

Publié: janvier 2, 2017, 9:59pm CET par Joe Wilcox

The year 2016 is when the United States sold its soul to Donald Trump and I signed over mine to Apple. How's that for introduction to the five favs series, joining colleagues Alan Buckingham, Brian Fagioli, and Wayne Williams? Yup. I'm an Apple whore as 2017 opens onto its second day. The fruit-logo company won back my business as I gave up the Google lifestyle. Three main reasons: 1) I believed CEO Tim Cook's privacy promises, all while my concerns about Big G information collection increased. 2) I found the visual acuity of Apple fonts and user interfaces to be far superior to Google's, which helped… [Continue Reading]

Adieu, Yahoo

Publié: décembre 29, 2016, 11:41pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Yahoo, one of the earliest and brightest dot-coms, is a Hellhole at the close of 2016. It stinks of decay and neglect. The 1 billion active user accounts ravaged by hackers is a metaphor for the trendy neighborhood turned into gang-ridden slum. Verizon was, or maybe still is, buying Yahoo. Walk away, I say, unless Yahoo is willing to pay for the privilege of becoming part of the expanding VZN communications and media empire. I typically make many changes at the start of the new year, and as 2017 begins, I take my advice offered to Verizon: Abandon Yahoo. First to… [Continue Reading]

Got MacBook Pro with Touch Bar? How's your battery life?

Publié: décembre 28, 2016, 12:05am CET par Joe Wilcox

Consumer Reports played nasty, little Santa's helper by plopping a piece of chunky coal into Apple's Christmas stocking, when denying the coveted—and expected—recommendation. Holy Moly. Over the holiday, the InterWebs exploded with stories during an otherwise, slow tech news cycle. CR found widely, or perhaps wildly, inconsistent charge-to-depletion times for MacBook Pro with Touch Bar. Uh-oh. At least the lap-hugger isn't explodin', like the Samsung Galaxy Note 7. B-b-b-boom! Perhaps, like me, you bought or received as present, one of these newfangled Macs. I have some questions about your experience starting with: How's your battery life? Do you get enough… [Continue Reading]

Apple's 'lump of coal in your stocking' Christmas

Publié: décembre 21, 2016, 6:05am CET par Joe Wilcox

Apple sure knows how to keep its store stocked for the holidays. Ho, ho, ho, bah humbug. The shelves are bare, and you can get your must-have pretty thing some time next year. If you're lucky. Let's start with the delayed AirPods, which went on sale online last week. They arrived in stores on Monday, and whoosh were gone before the waiting line ended. My local shop had about 30 pairs. If you want them, first available retail pickup date is—cough, cough—February 8th. That is 2017. I had to confirm not 2018, because you never know with these dumbfounding delays.… [Continue Reading]

DirecTV Now is a bargain -- for NOW

Publié: décembre 19, 2016, 10:50pm CET par Joe Wilcox

From the day I received the Oct. 14, 2016 letter about billing changes, AT&T U-verse and Internet cancellation was inevitable. I had auto-pay set up to a credit card, but the service provider wanted access to my bank account, which I didn't want to give. "Beginning in December, your credit card will be charged eight days after your Bill Cycle date", the correspondence reads. The change meant AT&T would take payment on the 8th of the month rather than the 21st. Since the company bills a month in advance, the new date would work out to about six-weeks in fees paid ahead for future… [Continue Reading]

iPhone should replace Chromebook in the classroom

Publié: décembre 17, 2016, 11:32pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Many educators won't agree, but perhaps students will: The PC, whether desktop or notebook, is obsolete in the classroom. This reality, if accepted for what it is, presents Apple opportunity to retake the K-12 market from Alphabet-subsidiary Google's incursion and sudden success with Chromebook among U.S. schools. If the fruit-logo company doesn't seize the moment, a competitor will—and almost certainly selling devices running Android. Chromebook's educational appeal is three-fold: low cost, manageability, and easy access to Google informational services. For buy-in price, and TCO, no Apple laptop or tablet running macOS or iOS, respectively, can compete. Think differently! Providing students any… [Continue Reading]

Chromebook's future is bleak

Publié: décembre 15, 2016, 7:19pm CET par Joe Wilcox

A few days ago, one of my Google+ followers, Steve Kluver, commented on an August 2014 share: "I am shopping for some more Chromebooks this Holiday Season, and found this post via G+ hashtag #chromebook search. How current is your ebook now?" He refers to Chromebook Reviews, which is available from Amazon for sale or for free reading with Kindle Unlimited. I apologized that the tome, published more than two years ago, is "way out of date". If I'm not going to revise, I really should remove the title. I offered to give him buying advice, which got me to thinking… [Continue Reading]

Would a Trump administration allow Google to sell Motorola to Lenovo?

Publié: décembre 9, 2016, 7:23pm CET par Joe Wilcox

I don't want to start an argument about politics. My sentiment this lovely day derives from what the incoming White House is, not what so many people here in California want it to be. I wonder: If Google bought Motorola during a Trump presidency, rather than Obama regime, would later sale to Lenovo be allowed or closing of the Texas phone-assembly factory about 18 months after opening? The question arises from a pique of sadness as I look at the FedEx tracking information for two Motorola phones purchased directly from Lenovo. City of origin: Wuhan, China. My last Moto came from the Lone… [Continue Reading]

IDC was so wrong about Windows Phone

Publié: décembre 8, 2016, 9:19pm CET par Joe Wilcox

I laughed so hard and so often at IDC's smartphone forecast, my response took nine days to write—okay, to even start it. The future isn't my chuckable—that data looks reasonably believable enough—but the past. Because 2016 was supposed to be the year that Microsoft's mobile OS rose from the ashes of Symbian to surpass iOS and to challenge Android. In 2011, IDC forecast that Windows Phone global smartphone OS market share would top 20 percent in 2015. The analyst firm reiterated the platform's No. 2 status for 2016 in 2012 as well. Not that I ever believed the ridiculous forecasts,… [Continue Reading]

For the audiophile: Grado Labs RS1e [Review]

Publié: novembre 8, 2016, 8:36pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Late last month, I sold my beloved Grado RS1e headphones, which get my highest recommendation. Parting ways, time is long overdue for a review, even if post-mortem. I let go the cans mainly because my lifestyle changed. Being tethered by wires is too confining; I listen to music more on the move now. As such, fine-fidelity Bluetooth cans—Master & Dynamic MW60—give great sound with more flexibility and mobility. I purchased the RS1e direct from manufacturer Grado Labs in late July 2014, soon after release. Grado is a family-owned/run Brooklyn, New York-based business that opened in 1953 offering turntable cartridges. In 1990,… [Continue Reading]

Meet Master & Dynamic MW50 Wireless on-ear headphones

Publié: novembre 2, 2016, 12:18am CET par Joe Wilcox

I am a big fan of on-ear headphones, which attitude bucks the noise-cancellation trend. The design is a nice compromise between over-ear and open-back styles—the latter of which can present the best soundstage. Cans that rest on the ears, rather than cover them, tend to be lighter and confer airier, more natural sound. However, they also leak noise both ways, which makes them less appealing for commuter trains or air travel. Since I reviewed MW60 Wireless last week, I simply must point out that Master & Dynamic launched MW50 on-ear Bluetooth headphones today. Yes, I plan to review them in the near future. The company… [Continue Reading]

If you're a recent MacBook Pro buyer, Apple just did you a HUGE favor

Publié: octobre 28, 2016, 6:57pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

People wanting a shiny new MacBook Pro are in for sticker shock. The entry-level for the cheapest, newest 13-incher is $200 or $500 more than its predecessor, depending on whether or not opting for the newfangled TouchBar and TouchID. That's $1,499 or $1,799. Yikes. MBP 15 is a $400 price hike, $2,399, for current tech. But if you already own MacBook Pro, particularly the 13-incher released in March 2015 or the larger model two months later, Apple increased the laptop's value by not accelerating its depreciation. No kidding. That's because the new entry-level SKUs are the same as before. The $1,299… [Continue Reading]

Apple fiscal Q4 2016 by the numbers: $46.9B, $1.67 EPS

Publié: octobre 25, 2016, 10:51pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Two days before Apple's next media event, where long-overdue new laptops presumably arrive, the Cupertino, Calif.-based tech giant released fiscal fourth quarter and closed full-year 2016. You could feel the anticipation after the Bell closed on Wall Street today—and, honestly, it had been palpable for weeks. Shares closed $118.25, up .51 percent. The drama is a TV thriller: Release of iPhone 7 and 7 Plus set against a backdrop of saturated global smartphone sales; launch of Apple Watch Series 2 into an already declining market for smart timepieces; analyst data showing calendar third quarter to again be bad for PC shipments—with even… [Continue Reading]

Say, what's going on at Intel Capital Global Summit 2016?

Publié: octobre 25, 2016, 1:35am CEST par Joe Wilcox

San Diego, Calif. As a general rule I never connect to public WiFi networks, which is fine except when attending an event at a hotel ballroom where T-Mobile cellular is like an apparition dancing around a Halloween grave. So as Wendell Brooks, CEO of Intel Capital, begins his speech, I sit typing narrative offline rather than tweeting live. There’s irony, I suppose, reporting old style, about investments in new innovations. Welcome to the trials and travails of the Intel Capital Global Summit, which kicks off today and goes through October 26. Looking at the lineup, I expect to hear about… [Continue Reading]

Master & Dynamic MW60 wireless headphones [Review]

Publié: octobre 24, 2016, 7:17pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

For Christmas 2015, I bought myself a new pair of Bluetooth headphones. After trying several sets, I settled on Master & Dynamic MW60, which were a fantastic choice then and are still my top recommendation nearly a year later. The wireless cans replaced my beloved Grado RS1e -- no small feat. Read no further and buy the M&D cans, if wireless listening is priority -- and should be if using iPhone 7 or 7 Plus, which lack 3.5 mm jack. Authentic audio, spacious soundstage, and full fidelity (without over-punchy bass) make the MW60 the gold standard for Bluetooth cans. Nostalgic and… [Continue Reading]

How do you FEEL about Samsung Galaxy Note 7's demise?

Publié: octobre 19, 2016, 9:36pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

I sold my sister's T-Mobile HTC M9 earlier today. Nan lives in Vermont, where Verizon delivers consistently better coverage and where the market for a used smartphone is much smaller than here in San Diego. The buyer had previously owned the Samsung Galaxy Note 7, which she really enjoyed. While waiting until late November or early December for her matte black iPhone 7 Plus order, the woman has a Samsung Galaxy J7 loaner and hates it. She is familiar with the M9 because her mom owns one. This lady is the fifth person I've met in just a few days who had… [Continue Reading]

When is stupidity fraud?

Publié: septembre 25, 2016, 9:38pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Next month I return from my first—and hopefully last—summer sabbatical. I resume writing with a question for you: "When is stupidity fraud?" I ask because someone is using my gmail address to sign up for a humungous number of newsletters and websites. At first, I presumed someone trolled me. But that no longer appears to be the case. This guy, presumably living in North Carolina, either uses my address randomly to hide his identity, or he mistypes one that is similar. Given many of the services are for an unidentified widower looking for love, I assume the latter. Behind my… [Continue Reading]

Google should Brexit

Publié: juillet 15, 2016, 7:32am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Yesterday, Europe's Competition Commission expanded its legal assault against Alphabet and major subsidiary Google. Four monopolies are under fire: AdSense, Android, search, and shopping services. Trustbusters allege that Google uses anticompetitive tactics to protect its market dominance, which share ranges from 80 percent to 90 percent in each category. Behind the charges is a hoidy-toity attitude typical of overly-protectionist EU regulators. What if the information giant gave them what they want? Imagine this: Google shuts down operations across the entire Euro zone—in a Brexit-like departure, but suddenly with no preparations. Switch it off. Search and other services could remain available in… [Continue Reading]

European trustbusters torpedo Google

Publié: juillet 15, 2016, 1:15am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Alphabet Admirals Sergey Brin and Larry Page had better tell Captain Sundar Pichai to close the watertight doors—lest the search and advertising ship sink in the North Sea, where depths reach 700 meters (2,300). Brrrr. Are the lawyers handing out life preservers? Will paralegals man the water pumps? Today's expansion of the European Union Competition Commission's investigation into Google business practices makes a really bad situation much, much, much worse. Problems are these: Adding advertising to anticompetitive charges; expanding investigation to four monopolies (AdSense, Android, search, shopping services); citing exclusive contracts as violation of the law; and narrowing the applicable market for search… [Continue Reading]

How much storage does your laptop need?

Publié: juillet 7, 2016, 9:08am CEST par Joe Wilcox

The question nags as I prepare to review TarDisk Pear flash memory expansion. The doohickey is available in 128 or 256 gig capacities for either MacBook Air or Pro. It fits neatly and snuggly into the SDXC card slot, which is required; color and finish match, too. Windows users must look elsewhere, though, and many may be glad to. The tech lists for $149 and $399, respectively. But, hey, the Apple fan club is accustomed to paying more for everything. I will test TarDisk Pear on my 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display, 3.1GHz Intel Core i7 processor, 16GB RAM,… [Continue Reading]

Apple should buy Tidal

Publié: juillet 3, 2016, 11:24pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

As a Tidal subscriber. I welcome Apple acquisition—assuming lossless tracks are made available through the fruit-logo company's music services. Not that anyone should seriously believe the rumors. But one can hope. Merger talks are typically silent affairs. When they're serious, you don't hear about them until there is a deal. Reasons are many, with regulatory being among them when public companies are involved. Acquisition rumors often mean something else: Principal party leaks information about preliminary or ongoing discussions to gauge customer and shareholder reaction; one side or the other is dissatisfied with progress/terms and seeks to apply pressure. I don't doubt there… [Continue Reading]

Seven things I learned from Apple's WWDC 2016 keynote

Publié: juin 14, 2016, 7:46pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Apple's annual developer conference is underway in San Francisco. Yesterday's opening keynote was the best since before cofounder Steve Jobs' death nearly 5 years ago. While pundits poo-poo what's missing (shiny gadgets), new and improved software and services matter more—and they showcase priorities properly placed. CEO Tim Cook kicked off the event, by asking attendees to stand and offer a moment of silence for the mass murder victims the previous day in Orlando, Fla. Forty-nine people are confirmed dead and as many hospitalized from the nightclub shooting. He then went on to lay out a clear agenda for the keynote… [Continue Reading]

Is Microsoft trying to steal Apple's WWDC thunder?

Publié: juin 13, 2016, 6:27pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Timing is everything, particularly in business marketing tactics. Surely it's no coincidence that hours before Apple's big developer conference, where questions about iPhone's future and product innovation loom large, that Microsoft announces plans to buy social network LinkedIn. Hehe, how do you like them apples? The merger will split tech news and analysis coverage this fine Monday and spill over to tomorrow, robbing Apple of the attention it needs now to subdue rising negative perceptions about the future. Global smartphone sales are slowing and iPhone accounts for 65 percent of total revenues. Meanwhile, the fruit-logo company hasn't perceptually lifted the… [Continue Reading]

Goodbye, Yahoo!

Publié: juin 8, 2016, 12:29am CEST par Joe Wilcox

My oldest Internet ID, three letters, is vintage 1996. Yahoo's impending demise, which could be to Verizon, almost certainly will mark the end of our long relationship. We mutually will abandon one another. I'm sorry that it comes to this. Yahoo sealed its fate when cutting the deal to outsource search to Microsoft during summer 2009. The disaster I predicted then will soon end the iconic brand, what little remains of it. Many people will blame CEO Marissa Mayer, but she was but steward of the sinking ship. Doom was a certainty after Yahoo surrendered crown jewel search. That the company limped along… [Continue Reading]

Apple is the new Nokia

Publié: mai 24, 2016, 9:05pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Washington Post reporter Hayley Tsukayama asks, following up on a commentary by software developer Marco Arment: "Is Apple really at the risk of becoming BlackBerry?". The answer absolutely is No. But the concept is right. The fruit-logo company's dire straight is much more profoundly catastrophic. The risk is becoming Nokia, and the path to that destination is already well-trodden. Arment calls BlackBerry "king of smartphones", referring to its market position before Apple released iPhone nine years ago in June. The description is apt enough. "BlackBerry’s success came to an end not because RIM started releasing worse smartphones, but because the new… [Continue Reading]

Why is Google bringing Android apps to Chromebook?

Publié: mai 20, 2016, 9:56pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Answer: Your kids. Chromebook leads laptop and desktop sales through U.S. commercial channels to schools, according to NPD. Education is overwhelmingly the primary market for the computers. The institutions can't buy enough of the thangs, for their utility and low-cost compared to notebooks running either OS X or Windows. That cost is as much about extended webapps and services from Google (or its developer partners), available for free or comparatively next-to-nothing, set against software for the other platforms. Wrinkle in the Google firmament: iPhone and Chromebook are like water and dirt. The sediment settles unless shaken up. Sure youngsters can… [Continue Reading]

Remembering Apple Store at 15, and marveling its changes

Publié: mai 20, 2016, 4:14am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Fifteen years ago today, the first Apple Store opened at Tysons Corner Center in McLean, Va. I was there, covering the event for CNET News. Four days earlier, then CEO Steve Jobs briefed journalists—bloggers, bwahaha, no—across the way at upper-scale Tysons Galleria. Most of us thought his scheme was kind of nuts, as did analysts, and news stories reflected the sentiment. Recession gripped the country and rival Gateway was in process of shuttering more than 400 retail shops. Timing was madness. But companies that take big risks during economic downturns are most likely to reap rewards later. Retail would be Apple's… [Continue Reading]

Apple and Google: Two developer conferences, one matters

Publié: mai 18, 2016, 9:58pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Depending on the day, Apple or Alphabet is the world's most valuable company as measured by market cap, and both manage the two dominant computing platforms used anywhere: iOS/OS X and Android/Chrome OS, respectively. As I write, Alphabet-subsidiary Google holds its annual developer conference. Apple's event starts June 13. During the opening keynote, Google CEO Sundar Pichai frames the conference and the company's direction by rightly focusing on two fundamentally future-forward concepts: Voice and context. Google gets what Apple likely won't present to its developers, and we'll know next month. But based on product priority to date, the fruit-logo company is… [Continue Reading]

Can we dispense with the 'Apple is dead' meme -- other CEOs would lose a limb to have a bad quarter like this

Publié: avril 27, 2016, 2:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Listening to Apple's fiscal second quarter 2016 earnings conference call yesterday was like attending a funeral—where the eulogy is for someone whom you know has gone to Hell. There's no way to sugarcoat that the good days are over and an eternity of burning flesh awaits. I kid you not. Haul over to iTunes and download the replay. You'll feel the grim reaper looking over your shoulder while CEO Tim Cook talks as joyfully about Apple's performance as a man granted last words before the gallows. And I wonder why? So what that Apple reported its first revenue decline in… [Continue Reading]

Apple fiscal Q2 2016 by the numbers: $50.6B sales, $1.90 EPS

Publié: avril 26, 2016, 10:59pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

The spotlight shines on the world's most-valuable company this fine Tuesday, as Apple revealed results for fiscal second quarter 2016. Wall Street expected the first revenue growth decline in more than a decade and iPhone's first-ever sales retraction . Is the sky finally falling? Eh, not yet. But the sun slowly sets over the vast smartphone empire. Ahead of today's earnings announcement, Wall Street consensus put revenue down 10.4 percent year over year to $51.97 billion, with earnings per share down 14.2 percent to $2. Apple actual: $50.557 billion sales, $10.5 billion net income, and $1.90 EPS. Three months ago, the… [Continue Reading]

12-inch MacBook's three flaws that Apple could've fixed but didn't

Publié: avril 22, 2016, 7:58pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Earlier this week, Apple finally updated its svelte laptop that launched 13-months ago. I am awe-struck by the company's design-audacity—not for brash innovation but bumbling compromises that make me wonder who needs this thing. The 12-inch MacBook offers much, wth respect to thinness, lightness, and typing experience (the keyboard is clever tech). But baffling is the decision to keep the crappy 480p webcam. These days, not late-1990s state-of-art, 720p is the least a pricey computer should come with, and is it too much to ask for 1080p or 4K when modern smartphones can shoot just that? This shortcoming, and two… [Continue Reading]

Deja Vu! Google's antitrust offenses are like Microsoft's (and the defense, too)

Publié: avril 21, 2016, 1:09am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Once again, as it has done in the past, Google makes the classic monopolist defense for its competitive—or anticompetitive, depending on perspective—behavior with respect to Android. Today, the European Union's Competition Commission formerly charged Alphabet and its major subsidiary, which has 12 weeks to provide satisfactory legal response before the Commission issues corrective sanctions. Simply stated, the EC finds that the company abused its dominant position, in part by contracts compelling Android licensees to preload Google apps and related services, including search. Microsoft ran into similar bundling headaches starting in the late 1990s with respect to Windows. Responding today, Kent Walker, Google… [Continue Reading]

Google Chrome turns 50

Publié: avril 20, 2016, 7:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Dog years is too slow a measurement when it comes to the Internet, which pace maturing makes Moore's Law look like a skeleton sitting at a feast (it's too feeble a metric). Case in point: Google Chrome 50 officially releases this fine Wednesday, which is a long way from its late-2007 alpha. Whew, where did the years go? Now before you quibble about who's how old when, let's clarify. By my math, and an official blog post, Chrome turned 50 one week ago. Maybe none of us noticed. I write this the afternoon before Big G rolls out the birthday cake,… [Continue Reading]

9.7-inch iPad Pro Preview

Publié: avril 17, 2016, 7:19pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

The more I use Apple's smaller Pro tablet, the less likely I am to reach for the larger one. I have tested the 9.7-inch and 12.9-inch tabs side-by-side since March 31st—and the bigger one is my primary PC (most days). Unquestionably, the behemoth is capable of replacing a laptop, as Apple CEO Tim Cook asserts. The smaller-size model is a fine notebook companion, and certainly can substitute sometimes. But more than two weeks using this surprisingly satisfying kit, I can't yet (and may never) recommend it as your next PC. The 9.7-inch iPad Pro, which screen measures like all its forebears,… [Continue Reading]

Master & Dynamic teams with Rolling Stones for 'special edition' MH40 headphones

Publié: avril 12, 2016, 4:12am CEST par Joe Wilcox

MH40 Rolling Stones Headphones

If you're headed to London, or live there, the Rolling Stones have a new exhibit (opened last week) at the Saatchi Gallery. Exhibitionism will be there until early September. After which, the gala moves on to 11 other cities, including New York and Paris. Adults can expect to pay £22 (more than US $30, depending on exchange rate that day). VIP tix are £60.

The memorabilia-filled exhibit is meant to be a nostalgic look at the iconic, aging rock band, which youngest member is (cough, cough) 66. But Exhibitionism is as much about selling collectibles, one of which I can't resist calling attention to: "special edition" MH40 headphones. I reviewed the standard set, which sound exactly the same, on March 29th.

The MH40 typically sell for $399. The Stones' Exhibitionism-branded pair cost about $100 more. You wear the tongue! The tongue! Say, shouldn't Mick Jagger and Company update the symbol—give it some modern bling with big piercing? That would be more in tune with younger concert goers; surely the mosh pit isn't filled with the middle-aged and elderly—who might now more than their youth relate to songs like "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction".

Okay, ribbing agism aside, the MH40 are excellent headphones for listening to the Rolling Stones. During 2016, the band rampaged Central and South America in a tour ending in Cuba last month. The Stones celebrate more than 50 years together, and the Master & Dynamic cans are so retro they could have been used by the rockers a half-decade ago—or by their male relatives flying in World War II bombers.

But audio signature matters more. The MH40 are among the better-balanced headphones for the price. Rather than being bassy, the cans emphasize finer details from the audio source, particularly music engineering during the 1960s, 70s, and 80s.

The MH40 driver is huge—45 mm—with Neodymium transducer. Frequency response is 5Hz to 25kHz, which punches up the midrange, while balancing well against the lows and highs. To repeat: Bass isn’t overbearing but present and clear rather than muddled.

MH40 Special Edition

If you're a Rolling Stones fan, the MH40 are great cans. But if you can live without the collector's branding, you could save $100 plus the price of the Exhibitionism ticket.

I'll say this: The MH40 are the tanks of the headphone market. They're sturdy and built to last decades. If you do go for the tongue, the Exhibitionism pair could be an heirloom for your descendants listening to the truly golden oldies in another 50 years. And with the Rolling Stones gone to the afterlife, perhaps your great-grandchild can listen and for a moment feel a little "Sympathy for the Devil".

Photo Credits: Master & Dynamic

There's something you should know about 12.9-inch iPad Pro [seventh in a series]

Publié: avril 5, 2016, 6:43am CEST par Joe Wilcox

April 3, 2016 marks the first day that I truly could use Apple's over-sized tablet to replace my laptop. But I had to spend another $84, before California tax, to do it. Gadget reviewers who say that iPad Pro cannot be your computer are wrong. The apps, performance, and utility are there. Anyone creating content should consider this device as compliment to, or replacement for, an existing PC. The problem with 12.9-inch iPad Pro isn't what it can do but how much it costs to assemble what you need. This kit is far from budget-friendly, which also can be said of Microsoft's competing Surface Pro 4.

I started my iPad Pro sojourn on Groundhog Day, planning to use the device as my primary PC for 30 days. The objective: Apple CEO Tim Cook says the big-ass tablet can replace a personal computer, I want to see if he is right. The experiment isn't my first journey like this. I tried something similar during summer 2011 with one of the first Chromebooks. The path was a dead end. But Spring 2012, when new commercial models released, I started down the path again and never looked back. Google's Chromebook Pixel LS was my main computer before adopting the iPad lifestyle.

Money, Honey

The tablet's biggest foible as laptop replacement isn't apps, hardware, or operating system but the charging system. The 12-watt brick that Apple ships in the box is inadequate. While battery life is excellent, and enough to last a workday for common tasks, recharging takes a long time. More perplexing, you can't really use iPad Pro and charge simultaneously; there isn't enough juice. An Apple Store specialist recently acknowledged the problem, noting that display models often drain the battery even when plugged in.

But there's a fix. Last month, the company released a lightning-to-USB-C adaptor that lets iPad Pro charge using 12-inch MacBook's 29-watt brick, and the changeover makes a huge difference. In my testing, battery recharges in less than half the time—comparable to my experience with MacBook Pro. The tablet also adequately recharges when in use, as you would expect with any laptop. But to get that utility, you pay extra: $49 for the brick, and either $25 or $35 for the cable, depending on length (1 or 2 meters, respectively). Most users will want the longer cord, which is comparable-length to the one they already have.

That extra cost leads into the price equation and where the math adds up for some buyers but not for many others. The overall kit is pricey. The value is there, and on this point I disagree with most other reviewers. That said, price-wary shoppers can get as much, or more, computing benefit elsewhere by spending lots less.

Last month, Apple released a second, iPad Pro that packs same-size screen as the Air 2—9.7 inches. I am testing one of these, too, and with similar objective as the bigger model; seeing what role it can assume alongside, or instead of, a laptop. Preview reaction: Pretty good kit. With the new model's availability, the Pro line now ranges from $599 to $1,229. It's the high-end models that are more suitable for comparing with a laptop; for price and performance.

The 128GB and 256GB WiFi configurations are $949 and $1.099, respectively. Adding cellular radio jumps the prices to $1,079 and $1,229. Pencil and keyboard add $99 and $169 to the kit's cost, and don't forget the 29-watt charger and cable. Add it up and top-of-the-line model runs $1,581, or $1,451 without LTE. For comparison, the 13.3-inch MacBook Pro Retina Display with 256GB storage is $1,499. Display resolution is similar, but there is no touchscreen, cellular radio, or Pencil (e.g. stylus).

Modularity is a benefit, but it comes with a higher price that also applies to Surface Pro 4, which screen is 12.3 inches. From Microsoft Store, 256GB WiFi configuration with i5 processor sells for $1,299 and includes the stylus. Type Cover keyboard adds $129.99 to the price, or $159.99 with fingerprint reader (which is more comparable to iPad Pro). Final cost works out to either $1,428.99 or $1,458.99.

None of these devices is exactly low-cost for the utility given. Microsoft Store sells a broad selection of Windows 10 laptops with touchscreens and 256GB SSDs for under $1,000; many go for less than $800. Selection is broader still from Amazon. While Windows users can choose touchscreen models at most major price points, Mac buyers get nothing. For touch in a laptop-class device, iPad Pro is the only option.

Apples and Oranges

Notice that my comparisons focus on storage, and also screen size and resolution—12.3 inches and 2736 x 1824 resolution for Surface Pro 4; 12.9 inches and 2732 x 2048 for iPad Pro; 13.3 inches and 2560 x 1600 for MBP Retina. Processor and RAM are purposely ignored, because in my testing comparison is meaningless—even using benchmarks. iPad Pro's A9X chip and 4GB RAM deliver subjectively fantastic performance in day-to-day use. There is no perceptible lag compared to my Chromebook LS or MacBook Pro Retina Display, both of which pack i7 processors and 16GB RAM. The larger iPad Pro brings Apple back to the PowerPC era, when comparison to Intel chips quite literally was apples to oranges.

Modular design, powerful performance, and bountiful apps put the iPad Pro in PC replacement territory. But you will pay for the luxury. Whom should that be? Pencil pushers will love the fine control drawing or annotating. I am no artist and yet still see the nuances given; pen-to-paper like. Content creation is sometimes frustrating because of the file system, or lack of meaningful direct access to it. Nevertheless, keys, stylus, and touch open lots of control for editing photos or videos and creating documents, for example.

The keyboard is delightful. That is for me, I can't say for you. As expressed in previous installments in this series, my fingers find the keys by touch typing more accurately than any other keyboard, Responsiveness and travel are excellent. There is only one angle for the screen, when using Apple's keyboard cover, and it's perfect for me. I'm a short guy; 1.68 meters tall (5 feet 6 inches). I sit low enough to the screen without slouching while level enough with the keys to accurately type. But I wonder about taller folks. Then again, Tim Cook is 1.9 meters (6 feet 3 inches) tall. If Apple's CEO doesn't tower over the rig such that the angle is bad, then maybe most anyone can comfortably use the branded kit. Still, a cheap laptop or Surface Pro 4 gives greater flexibility adjusting angle of the screen.

To my surprise, for typing, iPad Pro comfortably sits on my lap, without tipping off. I expected topsy-turvy, which would be a deal breaker for replacing a notebook. I suspect, and someone can correct me, that Apple's single-angle placement in the keyboard as holder maintains balance when the device is used off the desk and on the lap.

In a future installment, I will discuss the app experience and explain why it's surprisingly good enough for most needs, but by no means all. Apple News is a killer content consumption app. Then there is the Pencil and what you do with it.

Returning to the topic of cost, and what you get, I'm aghast that Apple ships such a dinky charging brick with iPad Pro. From about 10 percent level, setting the tablet aside, recharging often takes as long as 6 hours. The MacBook 29-watt brick pulls back the time to under 3 hours, which is good enough. Benefit maybe, but buyers investing so much in the kit shouldn't have to spend another $74 to $84 to get what Cook contends is possible: Tablet that replaces a laptop.

This post is seventh in a series; Parts One, Two, Three, Four, Five and Six.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Tidal: one year and 3M subscribers later

Publié: avril 2, 2016, 7:26am CEST par Joe Wilcox

April 1st marks my first-year anniversary subscribing to Tidal, which relaunched the same day last year, under new ownership of Jay Z. I love and loathe the music streaming service, which I cancelled at least five times and always renewed—typically before the billing cycle ticked over. But checking archived emails, I see that my sub completely expired thrice but not since July.

Gotta ask: What fool starts a business on April Fools, and what does the day foreshadow; if anything? Apple did it, 40 years ago today. Many commentators have called Jay Z the fool for buying Tidal, which competes against established players like Spotify and newcomer Apple Music. The service claimed to have 540,000 subscribers when acquired last year. This week, Tidal revealed globally there are now 3 million subscribers. Someone correct my math—456 percent increase, right? If Jay Z's the fool, gimme some of that foolishness.

Still, Tidal trails rivals. As of February 2016, Apple Music topped 10 million subscribers; Spotify reached 30 million last month. Both figures come from publicly released data.

Origin Story

In January 2015, Jay Z and his investment partners paid $56.2 million for Tidal, which history goes back to February 2010, when Aspire Group and Platekompaniet debuted the WiMP music service in Norway. The subscription streamer aggressively expanded to other European countries, and among portable and music devices, before adding lossless, CD-quality music under the WiMP HiFi brand on Oct. 1, 2013. A year later, the rebranded Tidal opened for business in the United Kingdom and the United States, focused on higher-fidelity encoding and streaming.

By March 2015, before relaunch under new management, Tidal was also available in Austria, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey.

Unlike some other streamers, Tidal does not offer a free option; elsewhere, freemium means advertisements. You pay to play—$9.99 per month for 320kbps compressed MP3s. Big spenders, those plunking down $19.99, get big sound. HiFi.

Music Lesson

Tidal's appeal is twofold: HiFi encoding and artist exclusives, of which there are many. Competing stores or services claiming CD-quality usually deliver bitrate of 320kbps. They lie about what that is. The compressed files aren’t even close to the source material. Using the Free Lossless Audio Codec, Tidal promises the real thing: 44 kHz, 16 bit, and 1411kbps bitrate. I listen with higher fidelity headphones—Grado Labs RS1e and Master & Dynamic MW60, which I bought with birthday and Christmas money, respectively, in 2014 and last year.

I hear the difference, and you may not, between the lossless and compressed AACs or MP3s tracks—even from Tidal. Detail is finer, overall ambiance is brighter (e.g. less muddy), vocals are crisper but also flatter, and bass is more natural rather than pounding. Because I can hear the difference, and really like it, Tidal pulls me back every time I try to cancel. I'm committed now; stopped trying to quit months ago.

Here and Nowhere Else

Exclusives are the other selling point. Among them, as I write: TWENTY88, a collaboration between Big Sean and Jhene Aiko; Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros' single "Perfect Time"; and exclusive playlists compiled by artists, including Gwen Stefani and Jay Z. Kanye West's album "The Life of Pablo" debuted on Tidal, exclusively during February, generating 250 million streams over 10 days. Exclusivity ended yesterday.

The sound should be a big draw, but there is the price as barrier. According to Tidal, only 45 percent of the 3 million subscribers pay for pricier HiFi. Too bad, because lossless listening is the service's distinctive feature, and it's one sure to be obscured. I expect Apple Music to offer something similar sometime this year.

Likes and Gripes

My major problem with Tidal: Justify spending the $19.99 monthly fee; I have too many different monthly services, and some competing streamers offer family plans for $5.00 less than Tidal's single-subscriber price. So, for example, six people can share the same Apple Music account for $14.99 monthly. Tidal does cut the price for additional users by half. Primary subscriber plus one other would be $29.98 per month, with both getting HiFi. The service does offer select discounts. Student: $4.99 for compressed and $9.99 for lossless. Military: $5.99 and $11.99. Available only to new, standard subscribers: First six months (after 30-day trial) discounted when paid as one sum. That averages out to either $8.49 or $16.99 monthly, depending on encoding.

Besides price, some of my other gripes:

The web player requires Adobe Flash.
The music catalog isn't as extensive as Apple Music.
The default playback setting on mobile apps is Normal not HiFi.
Music playback doesn't sync across devices; you can't stop listening on one and resume on another.

What makes me a Tidal subscriber:

HiFi is just that.
Playlists are superbly curated.
The video collection is superb, as is playback.
Tidal feels like an artist showcase, not record labels'.
Exclusive content is plentiful and frequently updated.
Tidal X live concerts connect artists and fans—fidelity rocks!
Many albums are available in U.S. and/or international versions.

Listen Up

Tidal claims its music library tops 40 million tracks, while there also are 130,000 music videos. The user experience is excellent across interfaces. I have used the Android and iOS apps, as well as the website. Features are comparable to Apple Music and other competitors, which makes Tidal's apps immediately usable.

Wrapping up, exclusives are fine, but any service can offer them. Audio encoding sets apart Tidal—for now—from major competitors. Wanna hear? I suggest testing Tidal by streaming The Beatles catalog from there and somewhere else. Vocals aren't as crisp, bass is punchier, and high notes are more muted on Apple Music, for example. The questions: Can you hear the difference? If so, do you like it, and would you say twice as much for the pleasure?

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

An Apple 40th birthday reflection

Publié: avril 1, 2016, 6:12am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Summer 1984, Chapel Hill, N.C., I learned something about prejudice and discrimination in America and saw my first Macintosh. Strangely, looking back at Apple, which celebrates its 40th birthday today, the two things connect.

As I reflected in Jan. 18, 2004, personal post: "Racism and Naiveté", I never thought much about skin color growing up in a region of America where most everyone is Caucasian. Northern Maine is a white wonderland for more than abundant snowfall. Strangely, though, my best friends had last names like Chung and Zivic. The local Air Force base, Loring, added color to the populace, and when it came to people I was decidedly colorblind.

Because I witnessed so little racism, or discrimination, firsthand, I had no context to understand -- even when learning about slavery or the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in school. Twenty years after that landmark legislation came to be, I watched the film “From Montgomery to Memphis“, and it changed my perspective. First, there was the shock about black and white buses, then black and white waiting rooms at bus stations, and segregated bathrooms. Separate water fountains!

The same afternoon I watched the film, I wandered around the University of North Carolina campus contemplating the documentary. I ambled into the college bookstore, where placed prominently for anyone and everyone to see was Macintosh. I knew nothing about Apple, nor should I have not being a computer geek -- then or even now. But I nevertheless marveled at the graphic display. I had seen movie "WarGames" a few months earlier and recognized the dramatic differences between this machine and the one used by actor Matthew Broderick. (Hehe, Loring Air Force Base plays a role in one of the climactic scenes.)

The next year, I moved to predominately black Washington, D.C. for work, coincidentally. You don’t grow up white and male and suddenly have a feeling for what it’s like to be a minority or female of any race. One movie wouldn't change that, nor my long-time living in the D.C. metro area.

Hello, Mac

While residing there, I bought my first computer -- January 1994 -- months after reading a compelling story in Washington Journalism Review about the coming era of online publishing. I made a career change from general-interest magazine editor to tech-industry reporter. Except for a brief flirtation with IBM OS/2, I exclusively used Windows until December 1998, when I hauled a Bondi Blue iMac out of the local CompUSA. Curiosity -- and interest in expanding tech reporting beats -- prompted the impulsive purchase.

I came to love the fruit-logo company's products, while as a tech journalist developing a reputation for being anti-Apple -- which I am not. Several Apple fanboy bloggers fan the flames of hate through their criticism, sarcasm, and witlessness; they are defenders of the forbidden fruit and tolerate little real or perceived criticism.

I am not much bothered, as I don't typically read their posts or those from their accolades commenting on my stories (and other writers'). I abide by the "be hardest on those whom you love most" principle and therefore understand (and excuse) the misplaced "anti-" accusations. Few of my stories are kind, I concede.

I am not then, nor at anytime, have been a fanboy of Apple or any other tech company. The products are all just tools to me, and I use what makes sense at the time. Google gives greater contextual utility that matters to most everyone, but Apple does deliver things that make people happy to hold, look at, and use in a more human-like, responsive, and immersive way.

Apple Activism

In the nearly 18 years since I booted my first Mac much has changed. Apple has gone from being the little company that could to the behemoth that couldn't -- my first iMac is example of the one and the March 21st "Are you in the Loop?" event as metaphor for the other. CEO Tim Cook's innovation focus is customer retention rather than expansion, and maybe in the end that will prove to be the "can do" strategy.

Apple's empire is built on iPhone, which accounted for 67.4 percent of revenues during fiscal Q1 2016. Yesterday, Gartner warned that global smartphone sales would be flat in the two largest markets -- China and the United States. Existing iPhone owners in those countries could become larger customers, if Cook and Company deftly execute.

During this decade, Apple is also an activist, aggressively and vocally taking positions on real and perceived discrimination, equality, gender bias, and human rights issues, particularly in the United States. That includes the recent ruckus with the FBI about iPhone encryption. By contrast, the company showed little public social activism under Steve Jobs' leadership.

So the two threads tie together from that afternoon in 1984, when I saw America's bad past behavior magnified and a glimmer of the future displayed from a beige box. Prejudice and discrimination aren't easily swept away, and the United States still grapples with both. Eliminating either enables huge portions of our population.

Technology enables everyone, if iPhone's success means anything. No matter what Apple's future, over 40 years the company has succeeded to humanize technology and diminish the complexity using it. Nokia invented the smartphone two decades before Apple brought to market iPhone, which fundamentally changed the cellular handset market -- directly and by way of derivative, imitative devices released by other vendors.

Happy Birthday, Apple.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Sean Locke Photography

Master & Dynamic MH40 headphones [review]

Publié: mars 29, 2016, 7:03pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Newcomer is the only way to describe Master & Dynamic, which on Dec. 31, 2015 completed its first full year of revenue. Young or not, its audio gear is vintage and refined. Wanna see? You can find the MH40 headphones, which look like something World War II bomber pilots would wear, inside any Apple Store. Distribution partnership of that caliber from a near start-up says much about M&D earphones and headphones—design, price, and sound.

The signature sound is full, which is atypical in a market where booming bass ranks among headphone buyers’ top priorities. But for those listeners who delight in the faintest tap of the symbol, warmest treble, and deep lows that reveal details rather than thump, thump, Master & Dynamic delivers. For Christmas I bought the company’s MW60 wireless headphones, which I will review soon. Today's topic is the MH40, which are wired.

Origin Story

Both cans share obvious design heritage, and you could easily mistake one for the other. There are also many audio similarities, where both present rich range rather than pumping bass. I am super picky about headphones. The $549 MW60 are the best wireless cans ever to touch my ears. The MH40 are best-of-class in the price range—$399.

So I am surprised to hear CEO and founder Jonathan Levine’s startling confession: "I have no prior professional connection to music or audio". He’s not a music producer, audio engineer, or anything close to either. At age 16, Levine’s oldest son started learning how to produce music and later to teach others how to deejay. So the dad put together a makeshift music studio. “I’ve had music studios in my businesses for years”.

At 53, Levine stands at the generational divide from Millennials, which gap the home studios and audio company help bridge. About his two sons, Levine says: “They won’t admit it, but they think I’m slightly cool now”.

Levine’s inexperience proved to be an asset and testimony to the concept that fresh ideas come from people with little or no preconceptions. What’s that stereotype about hiring someone who hasn’t developed bad habits, or in this case hires oneself?

In developing the first headphones, Levine wanted to “build something that is iconic and will last”. He chose forged aluminum and leather as the principle materials. only to learn from M&D chief engineer Drew Stone Briggs, after developing the MH40, that aluminum has unique audio characteristics that are beneficial to producing pure sound. Levine then intuitively chose brass for the ME05 earphones. Think of all the musical instruments, like my middle school trumpet, that are made of brass.

I ask Levine how he chose Master & Dynamic, to which he asks: “Have you ever tried to name a company?” I have, and pretty much every good name is claimed. Being iconic is nomenclature, too—using a multiple name, Many grand old brands are such, he says, like A&M records, Arm & Hammer, Black & Decker, Johnson & Johnson, and Proctor & Gamble.

The name derives from several concepts. “In music there is dynamic mastering” Levine explains. “We love to engage with the masters in any endeavor. And we like to engage the up-and-coming dynamics in that particular field".

Behind the Jargon

Before moving to the MH40 audio and design characteristics, let's dispense with some technical talk—terms that are good to understand:

Soundstage is how instruments are spatially placed in audio recordings. The MH40 present dynamic soundstage, such that you often can visually place the instruments and singers, and even feel like you are in the room with them.
Active noise-cancellation uses microphones to capture and largely eliminate ambient, background noise. The MH40 use passive noise-cancellation by way of the closed-ear design. This approach gives purer, more balanced audio than does the active type.
Open-back headphones let in the most background noise or leak sound to those people nearby. Open-backs also typically present the best soundtage of headphone styles.
On-ear headphones are as named. They sit on the lobes rather than enclose them. Whether or not as comfortable as, or more than, over-ear is a matter of taste. Without active noise-cancellation, like open-back, the wearer will hear sounds in the room.
Over-ear headphones typically cover the ear, making a soft seal that improves the aural experience while blocking out most background noise. Many people find this style to be the most comfortable to wear, particularly for long periods of time. The MH40 are this type.
Impedance is a value you need to worry about. We'll skip the science and get to practical matters: If you're buying cans to listen to portable devices, like smartphones or PCs, you want lower impedance; I find 32 ohm to be just right. If impedance is too high, you won't jack enough volume to your headphones without aid of an amplifier. For stereo systems you want higher impedance, upwards of 600 ohm. The MH40 are designed to be used with portable devices like iPhones, iPods, or laptops.
Frequency response typically ranges from 20 to 20,000 Hz, with bass and treble at both ends, respectively. The extremes exceed normal human hearing range, but not necessarily perception: Below 20 Hz, the listener may more feel the bass than hear it.
Transducer creates the sound, and there are typically three types: Dynamic (most common); Orthodynamic; and Electrostatic. Think little speakers. See Headfonics' explanation for more.

Earily Good

As the newcomer in a crowded consumer category, where nearly two decades of digital compression and thumping bass define listening tastes, Master & Dynamic risked everything on audio balance and detail. The signature sound is distinctive and refreshing, but I emphasize this: You like the M&D sound, or you don't—and it's unquestionably not for everyone.

But the sound should be for everyone. If you put on the MH40 and don't like the presentation, use them for a week listening to CD, lossless digital, or vinyl. Then go back to your old cans and MP3s. The difference how quickly your tastes can change and ears be liberated from muddy, lows-blown compression may shock you.

"We purposely stayed away from the sound profiles found in other leading headphones and chose to develop our own genre neutral sound; something we are very proud of", Levine says. "We didn’t tune with a computer; we tuned with our ears based on the music we love".

Authentic and immersive best describes the audio signature of the striking, retro-styled MH40. Soundstage is present—like you're there in the room with the musicians. Tonal range is balanced, presenting fine details. The lows ride the mids and highs, without being overbearing. Meaning: Your ears won't easily fatigue, which is an ailment not uncommon when the lows are too dominating.

While I suggest that some people will need to retune their ears, listeners who immediately like the M&D sound will be amazed by how good listening to compressed AAC and MP3 tracks can be. They are reborn—echoes of their former muddied selves, fresh and vital with renewed dimension. Whatever processing magic Master & Dynamic sprinkles into these cans, seemingly any sound source benefits.

Impedance is 32 ohm, which means even iPhone or iPod should pump out plenty of volume. I tested on several devices, including: Apple iPhone 6s and 13-inch MacBook Pro Retina; Google Chromebook Pixel LS, Nexus 6P, and Pixel C tablet. I got great output from all without cranking the volume up to the max, or anywhere near it. I primarily tested by streaming music in the 1411kbps Free Lossless Audio Codec from Tidal.

The MH40 driver is huge—45 mm—with Neodymium transducer. Frequency response—same as the MW60 (5Hz to 25kHz)—punches up the midrange, which balances well against the lows and highs. To repeat: Bass isn't overbearing but is present and clear rather than muddled.

Retro but Modern

The MH40 design is unmistakable, evoking strength and longevity—heirloom to bequeath to children or grandkids; cans that last a lifetime or more. Aluminum, lambskin, leather, and stainless steel combine in rugged style that evokes aviators of a bygone era. Wearing the headphones makes me feel, even for scant seconds, like the radio operator on an Air Force bomber. The design is both nostalgic and modern.

While looking and feeling rugged, the MH40 are surprisingly light (360 grams) and balanced to hold or to wear. The lambskin-covered memory foam cushions are immensely comfortable and they minimize sound leakage while blocking all but the loudest ambient background noise. This kind of passive noise-cancellation maintains the purity and authenticity of the sound.

Seven color-combinations are available, again for $399: silver metal and brown leather; gunmetal and black leather; silver metal and navy leather; black metal and navy leather; black metal and black leather; silver metal and white leather; gunmetal and black alcantara.

I mentioned at the start, the Apple Store sells the MH40, and Master & Dynamic dishes out iOS favoritism. There are two woven cables—one with mic and volume keys for use with Apple devices and another lacking controls for everything else. Android users can certainly connect the MH40 to their phones and listen, but on-cable mic and controls aren't available to them.

In what might at first be a confusing attribute, each earcup has an audio jack. That's one for you and another for someone else. Confusion comes from this: Sharing is from the Right jack.

The MH40 can daisy-chain along devices. Let someone else jack in and listen, too. It's a nifty feature that again shows the advantages of someone without audio device preconceptions founding the company and bringing the input of teenage boys with him.

Another nicety, but nowhere as clever as the two jacks: Mute button on the Right earcup. One more: The earpads magnetically attach/detach.

Wrapping up, the MH40 offer great style and sound for the price. Audiophiles should love them. Bassaholics probably will not. They should buy Beats, or something like them, instead. They also could boost bass using their music app's graphic equalizer.

Remember: Music listening is a subjective experience. To what sound you are accustomed and to what genre you prefer matters much. The MH40 can give great Rap or Hip Hop but you may find warmth given The Beatles will satisfy more. To my ears, punchier mids and subdued lows open a broader range of genres—from classical to electronic, folk to punk, jazz to metal, and more.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Apple iPad scheme seeks to reclaim the tablet market and win the post-PC wars

Publié: mars 24, 2016, 12:19am CET par Joe Wilcox

iPad Pro with Pencil

Something surely seems missing from this week's Apple Event. A year ago this month, Apple introduced the svelte, 12-inch MacBook. That makes the little laptop ripe for refresh, but it is MIA. Following a media hoopla where the figurative fireworks failed to light, everyone should ask: What is Apple doing? The new 4-inch iPhone is little more than the 5 model introduced in 2012 with fresh internals. The 9.7-inch iPad Pro fits into a crowded category where Apple is mob in the room. Where's the innovation?

After watching the live stream, carefully reviewing what Apple executives said, and looking over device sales trends, I must say this: Either Tim Cook is stupidest tech CEO on the planet, or one of the smartest. The event's big takeaway is this: Apple is trying to corner a faltering computing category on the presumption it's the next big thing. Cook takes great risk in search of greater rewards. If he's right, Apple may come to dominate the next personal computing platform—even as Android armies spread across the planet. Everything hinges on these: Will tablets replace PCs and can Apple become the overwhelming market share leader, regaining dominance held six years ago?

Tablets at Work

Lynchpin is the professional market, which Apple courts with iPad Pro, now available in two screen sizes (7.9 inches and 12.9 inches). I am using the latter as my primary computer, and the experience is as limiting as it is liberating. Some days I'm the post-PC cheerleader. On others, I gape in frustration before the capacitive touchscreen. But overall, the benefits outweigh the detriments. I will explain more in one of several follow-up posts in my adopting iPad Pro series.

Back on point, Apple's in is the creative professional who uses iPad Pro for work and also buys more for family. Sales trickle down, or up if the buyer uses iPhone. He or she can expect similar user experience, regardless of screen size, because there is a single platform (iOS). Apple controls updates, not third-party manufacturers as is the case with Android, making a more appealing and stable platform for developers and users.

Consider this: iOS 9 is installed on 79 percent of active, supporting devices. By contrast, Android 6 adoption: 2.3 percent. Both operating systems are newest versions, released in September and October 2015, respectively.

During this week's event, Apple revealed that the number of available iPad apps had reached 1 million; but it's not how many that matter but which ones are available. Utility is there, with a broad range of apps to choose from, including Microsoft Office for die-hard PC crowd. Many in that group will argue that Windows tablets provide greater utility by running a mature desktop operating system.

Based on my daily iPad Pro use, I disagree. Apps matter more, and iOS has them. Windowing and fast-task switching aren't as necessary as some people claim. That said, Apple's platform collapses with respect to user-accessible file management, which will mater to most anyone creating or archiving documents, photos, spreadsheets, videos, and more.

Upside Down

While iPad Pro could woe some PC upgraders, there remains the issue of ongoing trends, how Apple bucks them, and whether such strategy is forward-thinking brilliance or living-in-the-past denial.

For fiscal Q1 2016, ended Dec. 26, 2015, Apple shipped 16.22 million iPads, generating $7.084 billion revenue. During the same quarter three years earlier: 22.86 million and $19.674 billion. For contrast, during this time period, iPhone shipments rose from 47.789 million to 74.779 million and revenue climbed from $30.66 billion to $51.635. Stated differently, from fiscal Q1 2013-16, iPad shipments fell by 29 percent, while iPhone's soared by 56.5 percent.

Apple isn't the only manufacturer pinched by declines. During fourth quarter 2015, which is congruous with Apple Q1 2016, tablet shipments fell by 13.7 percent year over year, according to IDC. Perhaps, but compared to the same time period three years earlier shipments are up—25.5 percent—to 65.9 million from 52.5 million. However, Apple's market share fell from 43.6 percent to 24.5 percent.

Meanwhile, the market expanded for detachable tablets, like Microsoft Surface and iPad Pro, which was the "top-selling detachable", according to IDC. The category, which includes a keyboard, reached an "all-time high" during the quarter. However, putting growth in context of the broader tablet market: 8.1 million detachables.

"We believe Apple sold just over two million iPad Pros, while Microsoft sold around 1.6 million Surface devices, a majority of which were Surface Pro", Jean Philippe Bouchard, IDC research director, says in a statement. "One of the biggest reasons why detachables are growing so fast is because end users are seeing those devices as PC replacements". Bouchard says.

Risk and Rewards

This is the market Cook wants to reach, and the numbers justify trying. If IDC's 2 million figure is accurate, iPad Pro accounted for 12.3 percent of Apple tablet shipments during its first full quarter of availability.

The question: Who bought them? Also: If purchased to replace PCs, what didn't purchasers buy and what does that mean for Apple?

The answers segue to Apple PCs. During fiscal Q1 2013, Apple shipped 4.061 million Macs, generating $5.518 billion sales. Same quarter 2016: 5.312 million units and $6.746 billion revenue. Mac sales rose by 30.8 percent during the time periods. Based on the growth trajectory, iPad Pro didn't much cannibalize Mac sales during the three months. What about the future?

In trying to guess, let's lay out the major risks that Cook undertakes:

Tablet shipments are retreating
iPad market share is down by 43.8 percent over three years
Apple tabs purchased to replace PCs could cannibalize Mac sales

Let's also review potential rewards:

Detachables bring growth back to tablet market
PC owners, primarily Windows, upgrade to tablets instead
Apple expands tablet market share across all major price points

Crowded Configurations

That last reward/benefit ties together Apple's broader tablet strategy.

The iPad product line is bloated now and arguably overly-large. My first reaction: There's too much complexity. I count five models and 25 configurations without accounting for color; 77 when doing so.

But looking closer, I see daring (and risky) strategy at play. Cook and company looks to fill every major meaningful price band where someone might buy a tablet—but one. Starting with 16GB iPad mini 2 WiFi and ending with ending with 256GB 12.0-inch iPad Pro Cellular, prices range from $269 to $1,229. There are few gaps across the cost continuum and lots of overlap to tempt buyers with a better iPad rather than competing tablet.

I see this continuum as Apple looking to regain market share in the broader category while expanding reach into the detachable tab category. Where the company isn't going: sub-$200, at least not with sales of new tablets (refurbished, maybe).

iPad Air 2 now starts at $399 in a 16GB configuration, making it the most-capable Apple tablet selling for so little. The 64GB variant is $499—or same price as Google's Pixel C with half the memory.

The high-end is most interesting to me, where comparative benefits are more clearly defined and potentially could diminish cannibalization of Apple laptop sales. Consider the 12.9-inch 256GB iPad Pro WiFi. Price, $1,099, matches the 13.3-inch MacBook Air with same storage capacity. The tablet has touchscreen, and its resolution greatly surpasses the laptop. iPad price is $1,268 with keyboard cover and $1,367 when adding the Pencil. The buyer can always add the keyboard later to the tablet but not touch or resolution to the Mac.

The 12-inch MacBook also packs Retina Display and weighs about the same as iPad Pro with keyboard cover. Price with 256GB storage: $1,499—or more than the iPad Pro kit with the Pencil, which offers another benefit with respect to drawing and annotations.

The 13.3-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display and 256GB storage sells for $1,499, or $132 more than the entire tablet kit. Do you want the utility of an OS X laptop or the flexibility of a modular computer—tablet, PC, drawing slate—iOS device? Perhaps you'd like built-in cellular as another benefit. That bumps the 256GB larger iPad Pro to $1,299, or $1,468 with keyboard cover (and $1,567 with Pencil).

Which someone chooses doesn't much matter to Apple as long as buyers remain customers. Cannibalization isn't necessarily a bad thing. But consumption of another market is quite desirable, and the broader objective is wooing Windows PC users to any iPad, whether for displacement or replacement.

Something else, and this cannot be over-emphasized. My comparisons focus on storage and ignore memory because RAM doesn't much matter. Call me surprised. I am testing 12.9-inch iPad Pro, which has 4GB of memory, alongside mid-2015 MBP Retina with 3.1GHz Intel Core i7 processor and 16GB RAM. The tablet packs Apple's A9X chip. Subjectively, I see no performance difference. Both feel plenty fast. Need I repeat that?

Apple optimizes iOS for lower-power, low-memory devices, and the benefit bangs on iPad Pro. This is among the major reasons I can use the tablet as my primary PC. Limitations aren't hardware as much as software, with iOS or apps. I can see why Apple sidelined tiny MacBook for this week's new product fest, favoring 9.7-inch iPad Pro instead.

Tim Cook bets much on his post-PC tablet strategy. Will the iPad as PC replacement, even displacement, pay off? You tell me.

Photo Credit: Apple

Sizing Up Google Pixel C [Review]

Publié: mars 16, 2016, 1:14pm CET par Joe Wilcox

If you're thinking about buying Pixel C, Google gives two good reasons to do so now: Android N beta program and developer discount on the hardware. The tablet normally sells for $499 (32GB) or $599 (64GB) but you could instead pay $375 or $449, respectively. Keyboard is another $149. The discount and beta OS are meant for developers, but anyone can get them.

Pixel C is the best Android tablet I have ever tested, but that's acknowledging prejudice against Samsung tabs, which are worthy contenders, but I dislike TouchWiz UI. Sammy's hardware hums, particularly the stunning screens. But only Google serves up a Marshmallow feast in Android 6.0, and the hardware design and construction are preemo to the max. For less than $400, Pixel C might as well be free, there is so much value here.

The bigger competitor in the size category, Apple's iPad Air 2, costs more: $499 with 16GB storage capacity. There are rumors of a successor, borrowing features from iPad Pro, being announced on March 21st. But that's not what you can buy today. However, if there is a smidgen of truth to Internet rumors, capabilities will be closer to Pixel C -- if not superior.

Pixel C specs: 10.2-inch LTPS LCD touchscreen, 2560 x 1800 resolution, 308 pixels per inch, 500-nit brightness; nVidia Tegra X1 processor with Maxwell graphics; 3GB RAM; 32GB or 64GB storage; 8-megapixel rear and 2MP front cameras; four microphones; two speakers (sideways of screen in portrait mode on the bezel); USB Type-C port; WiFi AC; Bluetooth 4.1; accelerometer; compass; gyroscope; ambient-light, half-effect, and proximity sensors; Android 6. Enclosure is anodized aluminum that measures 242 x 179 x 7 mm and weighs 517 grams.

The design is recognizably reminiscent of Chromebook Pixel. The screen, shape, styling all are derivative. The tablet even adorns the distinctive color bar and adopts USB C. Owners of Google's pricier PC will find no better companion.

Alphabet Spells Business
Pixel C is more than an Android tablet. It's a placeholder in a broader go-to-market strategy. In case you hadn't noticed, Gmail, Google Apps, and related software/services are accelerating updates. Blink your eyes, and you will miss a new feature's addition. Among the goodies that Google unveiled just within the past 30 days:

Smart Reply for Inbox on web
Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP)
Gmail rich-text formatting and RSVPs
Google Docs voice editing and formatting
Inbox by Gmail natural-language snooze features
Gmailify, for bringing competing service inboxes to Gmail
Business-oriented Google Apps templates, including QuickBooks.

It's no coincidence the timing around Pixel C's initial launch, developer discount, and Android N beta. Alphabet, Google's parent company, is massively moving into the corporate, educational, and government segments with ferocious vigor.

Consider Chromebook, which continues its successful sales push into the education market, bumping out OS X and Windows systems. Hehe, Apple CEO Tim Cook's alma mater, Robertsdale High School, is replacing student MacBook Pros with Lenovo N21 Chromebooks.

Pixel C can be tablet, or with attached keyboard, an Android PC -- potentially vying for some of the same buyers looking for alternatives to iOS, Linux, OS X, or Windows. Unlike Apple and Microsoft, which bet on larger tablets for office- and school-usage scenarios, Google goes 10 inches rather than 12 or 13. Is smaller bigger? For some customers it will be, but based on my testing not the majority.

Tablet Extraordinaire

Given this context, the question every prospective buyer should ask: For what would you use Pixel C? As a tablet or something more?

Apple and Samsung offer split-screen modes that extend functionality on their 10-inch-class and larger tabs. Google gives similar capability with Android N. The benefit, matched to multitasking functionality and keyboard, open up business-use scenarios -- as do the rapid-fire enhancements the company bangs into its cloud stack of apps and services.

Much as I like Pixel, and its finger-friendly keyboard, I see limited business or educational use cases; for now. Caveat: Android N beta brings business-case finesse that looks to get lots more appealing as final release approaches. For now, Pixel C is more promise of laptop utility for many, but by no means all, potential users.

As a tablet, Pixel C is best of class. Key points:

Screen. The 10.2-inch display is crisp by every measure that matters and magnificently bright. DisplayMate puts iPad Air 2 at 415 nit, which is excellent. Google claims 500 nit, and whatever the rating, the display is plenty bright and is caress-tempting gorgeous.

The resolution is close to Chromebook Pixel, and a bit finer -- 2560 x 1800 compared to 2560 x 1700, respectively. Likewise, visual quality is similar between them. Many smartphone or tablet screens, particularly those AMOLED, present bold colors and rich contrast that looks good but isn't natural; they're not what the eyes see. Like the Chromebook, Pixel C presents more muted but pleasingly rich color and contrast that aren't over-saturated. Photographers, this tab could be for you.

The aspect ratio is what Google calls √2, or stated another way 1:1.41, or about the same as A4 paper. This makes the tablet more squarish than rectangular in both landscape and portrait orientations and surprisingly more comfortable to hold and to use.

Web content pleasingly presents, as do Google's homegrown apps (and presumably soon those from third-parties). The aspect ratio is closer to Chromebook Pixel's 3:2 (another sign of the shared design legacy), which is superb for photography. Google Photos app presents fantastically with the √2 aspect ratio. Pixel C could be a shooter's dream tablet, much more than any iPad other than the Pro.

Audiovisual. Content consumption is fabulous -- that is for apps optimized for the screen size and aspect ratio, and there aren't enough of them. Google's discounted Pixel C developer program and early Android N beta release are essential to making the overall tablet experience more consistent and more immersive. That is, if app creators can get the schtick with platform-optimized apps.

The √2 aspect ratio presents 16:9 or 16:10 video content pleasingly. The viewing window is plenty large. As for accompanying audio, Google places the speakers on Pixel C's bezel to each side rather than facing front. They give great soundstage and separation.

Where content consumption comes up short is formatted, editorial stuff, such as magazines or the news apps. The iPad experience is superior in both categories. Reading is more immersive in most magazines, and the Apple News app presents content more pleasingly and with more meaningful curation.

The Android experience excels with respect to context, by providing information you need where and when you want it. iOS is deficient, by contrast, and the difference glares more brightly when using Android N's refined Notifications feature, for example.

Handling. Pixel C feels heavy in the hand, but the heft isn't unbearable or even tiring when used as a tablet. iPad Air 2 weighs less than a pound (437 grams), while Pixel C climbs to 1.1 pounds (517 grams). The solid construction contributes to the sense of weightiness, which, to reiterate, isn't uncomfortable.

Regardless the orientation, Pixel C holds well, particularly as a traditional tablet longways vertical. The physical benefit is balance. The aforementioned extra heft is easily ignored because Pixel C balances so well in the hand(s) whether held in landscape or portrait orientation -- and the squarish shape is major reason. Handling the tablet feels familiar, like holding a book, and handles much better than any iPad. How funny if Pixel C's killer application turns out to be the aspect ratio and physical shape.

Productivity Toolkit

Pixel C isn't as good for general PC-like usage as it is an Android tablet. In many respects, the device is proof-of-concept for future tab hybrids -- as Alphabet broadens strategic ambitions, subsidiary Google refines the mobile OS for daily productivity usage, and applications are optimized for the platform.

As a daily productivity tool Pixel C is more about the future than the present. Key points:

Keyboard. Google's extra-cost, $149 keyboard is surprisingly satisfying. The keys feel good, give great travel, and are responsive to the touch -- like I would expect from a device branded Pixel. They look fantastic too, adding to the tablet's classy appearance. I can type effortlessly and, coming from Chromebook Pixel, am not put off working in one app at time.

While some users will want split-screen view or even separate windowed apps, I'm not convinced of the utility on a tablet this small. Apple, Microsoft, and Samsung are right to offer one or both capabilities on tabs with 12-inch or larger displays.

The keyboard magnetically attaches to the the tablet, serving as either cover or stand. The latter role offers tremendous utility. The user can pivot the screen to any angle, even flat-to-surface. The magnetic attachment is strong. The keyboard can also be used as a protective cover, and the combo feels good to hold and looks handsome in the hand.

However, Aluminum all-the-way-around makes the touch more cold feeling, and combined weight jumps by 399 grams to 916 grams (2.02 pounds). For comparison, the 12-inch MacBook weighs 920 grams (2.03 pounds). Point: This isn't a light kit, and some people will find it to be too heavy for the limited productivity utility compared to the Mac or other thin-and-light laptop.

Other Controls. Whether or not used with a keyboard, the touchscreen is the major means of interaction. Responsiveness is excellent, as it should be for a tablet branded Pixel. But user experience is bigger than touch, bolstered by balance of hardware and software. The nVidia Tegra X1 processor, Maxwell graphics, and 3GB RAM matched with Marshmallow make this aluminum beauty one smooth operator. Touch wouldn't feel as fast otherwise, and the experience is consistent, whether apps are homegrown, third-party, or tuned for the display size.

Buttons and ports are laid out for landscape orientation; placement may disorient some users' muscle memory. Held in portrait fashion, power button is upper-right side, volume controls on right-topside, USB C port top-left side, and audio jack lower-right bottom. Turned sideways: power left-topside; volume upper-left side; USB C lower-left side, audio upper-right side.

Landscape placement is convenient, particularly for accessing volume buttons or for USB C charging. Webcam is top-front facing in this orientation, unlike iPad where iSight is left-side front. Meaning: Apple poorly places the webcam for video chats or Hangouts. Google gives better. The placement of controls and webcam is more like a laptop than a tablet, and fits better with using Pixel C with a keyboard.

However, the tablet is also meant for the browser and some other apps in portrait mode, where the layout of buttons and ports is inconvenient. You design primarily for one orientation or the other. For Apple, it's portrait and for Google it's landscape. The difference illuminates design usage philosophies, and both companies compromise.

On iPad Pro, which Apple intends to be used often in landscape mode as a laptop replacement, controls and webcam are placed like the smaller sibling tablets, which, to repeat, controls are laid out better for portrait use. Google's layout, while not as good for portrait use where web browsing (and with it all those ads Big G wants you to click), better suits both orientations than Apple's.

Today and Tomorrow

For my tastes, Pixel C is the ideal Android tablet. Features finely balance, and the device balances beautifully in the hands. However, as a PC-like productivity alternative, the tab is too small and the range of necessary apps isn't big enough. That said, If I were a college student, Pixel C would be the near-perfect carryall. The keyboard pairing turns the tablet into a fantastic tool for taking notes, doing research, and completing homework. The apps are there, if from no other developer than Google. As important: The keyboard covered screen turns Pixel C into an easily and comfortably carried daily device.

It's too bad there is no LTE model because many niche iPad Air 2 or Samsung Galaxy Pro users would benefit more from Pixel C and all the information and cloud services Google wraps around it. Among them: insurance agents, Lyft and Uber drivers, medical professionals, realtors, and other on-the-go contractors, small business owners, or sole-proprietors.

That said, anyone buying Pixel C today as a tablet can expect better PC-like productivity utility at escalating pace. Take a look at Android for Work, the aforementioned shot-list of recent business customer enhancements, and Android N capabilities like always-on VPN. Like the Chromebook sharing the same name, Pixel C will get better as Alphabet/Google grinds out more productivity goodies for Android users.

Later this year look for tighter ties between Chromebook, tablet, and smartphones. Nexus 5X and 6P also support Android N, and they share some go-forward features with the Pixel family; such as USB C. I use one charger for Google laptop, smartphone, and tablet.

Google Pixel C is a great tablet and a pretty good Android PC that can only get better.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Microsoft stands with Apple against the FBI

Publié: février 25, 2016, 9:46pm CET par Joe Wilcox

fight fist

Microsoft will join Apple against the FBI and U.S. Justice Department, filing a friend-of-court—or amicus—brief in a case going to court tomorrow. The government wants Apple to create a special version of iOS, referred to by critics as FBIOS, to break into an iPhone 5c security feature. The device manufacturer argues that compliance would set a precedent that would give law enforcement carte blanche with other mobile devices.

Brad Smith, Microsoft's chief legal counsel, says the company "wholeheartedly supports Apple"—a statement that eradicates any potential confusion caused by cofounder Bill Gates. In an interview with Financial Times two days ago, Gates supported the government's demands. I responded, calling his position a "catastrophic occurrence that demands current chief executive Satya Nadella's official response. There needs to be clear policy about government backdoors and the position with respect to the San Bernardino shooting iPhone". The company's position is now unequivocally clear—presuming the legal filing fits with "wholeheartedly".

Smith publicly disclosed Microsoft's plans during testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today.

At issue, as the case goes to the first of presumably many court hearings is "he said, she said". Apple says compliance with the order will set a dangerous precedent. The government disagrees. ESET security researcher Stephen Cobb explains the implications in an analysis posted by BetaNews today:

There is no technical or legal basis for saying this case is a one- off. If Apple complies with the current court order and creates a version of the OS that facilitates access to this one iPhone, it can be used on other iPhones. Other law enforcement agencies will join the line that is already forming to demand Apple’s assistance with other iPhones, and Apple will have no basis to refuse because that’s the way the legal system works...

if Apple loses in court, a further precedent will be set, one that can be used in cases impacting many aspects of our digital life. Any number of agencies will have a strong legal basis for requiring any hardware and software makers to selectively turn off security features to assist government investigations.

Meaning: The implications are industrywide, not just about Apple opening a floodgate of government intrusions into iPhones. Microsoft's support seems almost silly given Windows Phone's collapsing market share. But precedent on the single iPhone could touch other software—or hardware if considering Surface series devices.

But that's a simplification. Microsoft and other iOS app developers typically rely on the platform's built-in encryption technologies to protect customer data. Apple calls FBIOS a backdoor, but that's just one of potentially many others. Consider the instance of a Microsoft customer whose data, while protected in the company's cloud or in PC applications, is grabbed from iPhone—effectively a backdoor's backdoor. Microsoft could resist government requests to break its own encryption only to see the customer data exposed on iPhone.

Photo Credit: tankist276/Shutterstock

My journey from iPad Pro lemon to Apple lemonade [sixth in a series]

Publié: février 25, 2016, 3:30am CET par Joe Wilcox

My previous post in this series begins: "I cannot presently recommend Apple's big-ass tablet as a laptop replacement—using the official-issue Smart Keyboard". The statement is retracted.

Apple PR contacted me after the story published, asserting that the short battery life I experienced was abnormal behavior. Seeing as it was the last day to return iPad Pro under T-Mobile's buyer's remorse policy, I took the assertion at face value and returned the rig. The exchange interrupted my plans to use the tablet as my primary PC for a month. From today, the clock resets to zero, and I start over.

Do-Over

To recap: Apple positions its largest and costliest tablet as a laptop replacement. Call me a skeptical but willing test subject. I see the potential, much as I did with Chromebook five years ago when embarking on a smiliar experiment. Later, I adopted the Chromie lifestyle after the platform matured enough to provide adequate webapps for my needs.

With respect to apps, iOS is considerably more mature, but the utility of a tablet turned PC differs drastically from a laptop with browser as primary user interface. However, with battery life consistently clocking four hours with keyboard attached but taking more than six to recharge, iPad Pro was a non-starter as laptop replacement. The second unit delivers vastly better battery performance.

My first tablet was a lemon. It happens.

Battery life is exceptional, whether or not using Smart Keyboard—but remarkable without it. The difference disturbs me and raises concerns about any product reviews: How broad are the variances among any mobile devices, regardless of manufacturer? iOS versions and apps are identical on both devices, and I swapped keyboards, too. I now can get a full workday from the kit and several more when used only as a tablet.

Standby impresses, too. I let the tablet set all day yesterday. Twenty-four hours later, battery depleted to 94 percent from full. Putting praise aside, most modern laptops, particularly in similar price range, will outlast iPad Pro and Smart Keyboard.

I start over. February 24th is the new Day One in my quest to use iPad Pro as my primary, and perhaps at some point only, PC. Like Chromebook, the overly-large tablet isn't for everyone, and maybe not most anyone. Apple has produced a reference design for its vision of the so-called post-PC era. Quirks are aplenty, and the app platform must, ah, expand to meet the screen's 12.9 inches. Future posts will expand the themes.

Hardware Specs

Apple manufactures three configuration: 32GB and 128GB WiFi, for $799 and $949, respectively; 128GB WiFi and LTE, for $1,079. All three are available in gold, space grey, or silver. Mine, like the first, is the cellular config in grey. For anyone purchasing iPad Pro to do serious productivity work, I recommend 128GB. Most buyers will also want either the $99 Pencil (for drawing) or $169 Smart Keyboard (for typing), if not both.

Configuration: 12.9-inch multi-touchscreen, 2732-by-2048 resolution at 264 pixels per inch and 424-nit brightness; Apple A9X microprocessor and M9 graphics; 4GB RAM; 32GB or 128GB non-expandable storage; two microphones; four speakers (two on each screen-flanking bezel); 8-megapixel, f/2.4 rear camera that also records 1080p video at 30 frames per second; 1.2MP f/2.2 front camera that shoots 720p vids; fingerprint reader; WiFi ac; Bluetooth 4.2; cellular with assisted GPS and GLONASS (one model); accelerometer; ambient-light sensor; barometer; compass; gyroscope; proximity sensors.

iPad Pro measures 305.7 x 220.6 x 6.9 mm (12 x 8.68 x .27 inches). The cellular plus WiFi variant weights 723 grams (1.59 pounds), while the non-LTE tab is 10 grams less (1.57 pounds). However, Apple’s Smart Keyboard cover makes the heft more like 12-inch MacBook, which weighs 920 grams (2.03 pounds).

Apple's Smart Keyboard doubles as a stand, but the angle is fixed. I find it to be perfect, and I touch-type with ease. The front-facing camera is poorly placed, however. In keeping with the design of iPhone and smaller iPads, the thang is meant to be used in portrait mode, which is unwieldily given the tablet's size and sideways fit into the keyboard kit. I understand the reasoning for conforming with the other iOS devices' design and apps primed for it. But the front camera would be better placed center-top in landscape mode, rather than portrait.

News to Me

At this stage of my retesting, content consumption is the killer application. This is the device for which Apple's News app was made for. Presentation is fantastic. Clicking any headline expands the story into pleasing format that typically exceeds the source's original presentation.

The longer I use iPad Pro, the more time I spend in News than any other app. My written-word consumption is way, way up, while my RSS feeder use is way, way down. The reading experience is personal and intimate in ways I can't easily describe. For now.

Discreet content apps benefit, too. Pinch and zoom is rarely necessary now. Websites, but more particularly news and magazine apps, are life-size readable in portrait mode. The expansive screen and 4:3 aspect ratio elevate iPad Pro above any other devices used to read anything from any source.

Video is as good, if not better, regardless from where. Rendering is smooth, colors are vibrant, and the speakers deliver warm audio and dynamic soundstage.

As the retesting continues, I will get nitty-gritty into app usability and finally will discuss the Pencil's benefits. But for Day 1 re-do, that's a wrap.

This post is the sixth in a series; Parts One, Two, Three, Four, and Five.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Bill Gates is wrong

Publié: février 23, 2016, 8:33pm CET par Joe Wilcox

sad-bill-gates

I see something disingenuous about Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates supporting the government's demands that Apple selectively unlock an iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino, Calif. shooters. The former CEO turned philanthropist spoke to the Financial times in an interview posted today. The implications for Microsoft cannot be overstated, and the company's current chief executive should state corporate policy.

Gates' position aligns with the government's: That this case is specific, and isolated, and that the demand would merely provide "access to information". Here's the thing: The interviewer asks Gates if he supports tech companies providing backdoors to their smartphones. The technologist deflects: "Nobody's talking about a backdoor". Media consultants teach publicly-facing officials to offer non-answers exactly like this one. The answer defines the narrative, not the interviewer's question.

Foot in Mouth

Except this: Gates suffers interviewee foot-in-mouth disease in the worst way, as his response, or lack of it, puts him on the government's side. He later tries to backpedal in an interview with Bloomberg, stating he is "disappointed" with the FT report and "that doesn’t state my view on this". Thing is: Financial Times posts a video of the interview that clearly gives context. The philanthropist's selective, deflective answer to the backdoor question is unambiguous.

In followup question during the FT interview, Gates states—and I'd argue without the technical trade secret expertise about iOS and iCloud encryption—that "Apple has access to the information. They're just refusing to provide the access". He likens the government demands to a bank :tying a ribbon around a disk drive. "Don't make me cut this ribbon, `cause you'll make me cut it many times".

But that response diminishes the encryption technology, which is a helluva lot more like a fortress than a "ribbon" tied around a disk drive.

FBIOS

Quick recap: Law enforcement classifies the Dec. 2, 2015 San Bernardino shooting as an act of terrorism. The county health department owned the iPhone 5c and granted access to it. But a four-digit numerical passcode was needed, and in the hours following the attack an official reset the associated iCloud account, eliminating that as means of getting to the "information".

The Feds want Apple to create custom software, which I've seen on the InterWebs sarcastically called FBIOS, to turn off the security measure that wipes data after 10 failed password attempts and to enable a means for automating a "brute force" attack to uncover the correct combination. Apple contends that complying would undermine security, create a backdoor for accessing any iPhone, and would undermine customer trust. The DOJ disagrees.

In a legal filing, the agency asserts that the so-called FBIOS wouldn't need to come into "government custody...Just as with Apple's already-existing operating systems and software, no one outside Apple would have access to the software required by the order unless Apple itself chose to share it".

Possession doesn't change this: Encryption must be bypassed.

"Complying with this particular FBI request would set a damaging precedent", Stephen Cobb, senior security researcher for ESET, says. "If Apple were to comply with this court order, the ramifications for U.S. companies and consumers would be significant, from undermining international commerce to eroding trust in the technology on which so much of daily life and business in North America depends".

Who Benefits?

In news reporting, my first question always is this: Who benefits? When Gates was Microsoft CEO, I listened to him testify in open court claiming that the company could not remove Internet Explorer from Windows; that such action would break the operating system. The company took a firm position during antitrust cases on two continents that the government shouldn't dictate how software is developed. That is the core issue here with respect to Apple unlocking the iPhone 5c.

But now Gates is a philanthropist, who travels the globe, and many of his operations require government cooperation. Taking a position against the FBI and U.S. Justice Department could undermine his efforts here and abroad. Perception matters as much in philanthropy as business.

I wonder if his answers would be dramatically different and more aligned with past positions if answering for Microsoft. As a journalist covering the tech sector for more than 20 years, and Microsoft for much of that time, I see this: Gates' response to the first interview is appallingly contradictory and his backpedaling in the second bewilderingly undermines his authority as successful entrepreneur and philanthropist.

But matters are worse. During the Windows NT 4 release cycle two decades ago, rumors started circulating that Microsoft had created a backdoor for the NSA. The accusations resurfaced for Windows 2000 and XP. By failing to directly answer FT interviewer Stephen Foley's direct question about allowing government backdoors and by taking a neutral to pro-FBI position with respect to Apple's refusal, Gates appears to support selective government access by way of a backdoor. What he thinks is immaterial to the perception he creates as former Microsoft CEO during the time period in question about the alleged NSA backdoor.

From a Microsoft public relations perspective, Gates' answers in booth interviews are a catastrophic occurrence that demands current chief executive Satya Nadella's official response. There needs to be clear policy about government backdoors and the position with respect to the San Bernardino shooting iPhone. If Microsoft corporate policy aligns with Gates' statements, say so. If not, state the position for the benefit of the large IT organizations that are the company's core customer base.

If not, rumors run wild will set the narrative, causing potential harm to Microsoft's brand.

Tim Cook is absolutely right

Publié: février 17, 2016, 7:12pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Apple CEO Tim Cook

Some documents are historically significant. They mark moments, comment on them, in manner demanding future citation and even use in courts or classrooms. That's how I read Apple CEO Tim Cook's "Open Letter to Our Customers", about breaking iPhone encryption. His exposition spotlights seminal moment in the United States of America: Government's further expansion of powers encroaching indiviuals' rights to privacy and one company standing up and saying "No".

Some people will scoff at my comparison, but it truly is what I see. Cook is like Rosa Parks, refusing to take a seat at the back of the bus—or in this instance behind one court judge and the FBI. Cook and Apple stand up for us all. I applaud law enforcement's efforts to protect us from terrorism but tyranny shouldn't be the means; taking away Constitutionally-given freedoms to protect them. Tim Cook is right.

Encryption is an increasingly contentious topic, which illuminance increased following the Dec. 2, 2015 San Bernardino, Calif. shooting that has been classified as an act of terrorism. Law enforcement can't break the encryption on a key piece of evidence, an iPhone. Cook already is on record opposing backdoors made available to federal agencies. Yesterday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym ordered compliance with the FBI's request to break into the smartphone.

Cook says that Apple has cooperated with law enforcement to a point, but balks at what investigators now seek:

The FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software—which does not exist today—would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.

The question everyone should ask: Is this moment about one investigation or attempt to expand powers for many others? Is this the precedent that changes everything? I ask because this incident isn't isolated, with respect to mobile device privacy protections and government demands that companies like Apple break them.

Cook's position is certain:

The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control...

The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks—from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.

Cook calls capitulation a "dangerous precedent" and refers to the FBI's expansion of powers as "unprecedented". I am no Constitutional lawyer, but as a citizen protected by the U.S. Constitution and as a journalist writing about the tech sector for more than 20 years, I must side with Apple—and I applaud the company's defiance.

For More Perspective: "Why Apple is right to reject the order to unlock a killer's phone"

Cook presents greater case for refusing the court order, such as undermining the broader security of iOS. Further, "government’s demands are chilling", he contends. "The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge".

If, as law enforcement publicly states, the San Bernardino shooting spree is a single act of terrorism, where is the imminent risk that justifies protecting us all? Urgency to save many might justify one instance of capitulation—unless Apple's CEO is correct and accessing one time is for all time, and compliance here establishes precedent that other tech companies must follow.

"Opposing this order is not something we take lightly", Cook writes. "We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government. It would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect".

Tim Cook is absolutely right.

Photo Credit: Apple

iPad Pro's fatal flaw [fifth in a series]

Publié: février 15, 2016, 11:13pm CET par Joe Wilcox

I cannot presently recommend Apple's big-ass tablet as a laptop replacement—using the official-issue Smart Keyboard. The reason may surprise you. The foible isn't the utility of iOS, available apps, or overall hardware performance but the battery and charging system. Inadequate combination is an understatement.

Two weeks ago, I purchased iPad Pro through T-Mobile's Jump On Demand program. My 13th day using the tablet as my primary PC progresses with acceptance that an ongoing problem is a deal breaker. When I use iPad Pro like a laptop, even primarily working only with mail and two browsers (Chrome and Safari), battery burns down too rapidly and subsequent topping off takes too long. Oddly, battery-life is exceptionally good for tablet use.

With Smart Keyboard attached, I can deplete iPad Pro's battery in about four hours, while recharging takes six or more hours. More disturbing: When plugged into the Lightning cable and 12-watt brick, and in-use. the tablet typically reaches a steady-state where the battery charges little to not at all. Yesterday, I got the thing from 14 percent to 100 percent in under 5 hours by powering off and detaching the accessory.

The fundamental problem might be partly remedied. Apple's 12-watt charger is insufficient for the 10,307mAh battery. But the device is capable of 29 watts with right brick and Lightning cable, neither of which the company offers. A bigger brick wouldn't increase battery life, but it should substantially reduce recharge time and make more feasible using the tablet when plugged into electrical outlet.

Restated, there are three related problems with the current configuration:

Battery depletes too quickly with Smart Keyboard attached
Little to no recharging occurs when tablet is used with keyboard
Recharge time takes too long, particularly set against actual usage time

For nearly two weeks I've limped along using iPad Pro as much as possible as my primary PC, but shifting back to laptop when the battery depletes. I have tried working with the tablet plugged into power, but there's something disconcerting watching the charge percentage go down, which can't be good for the battery.

Tablet experience is quite different, however; the overall UX surpasses iPad Air 2. Battery blows past a full waking workday of use, and is easily replenished overnight. The 12.9-inch display delivers content consumption wallop. Now that I'm more accustomed to the size—305.7 x 220.6 x 6.9 mm (12 x 8.68 x .27 inches)—content consumption benefits are better appreciated. Finally, I can read magazines as full page, without pinching to zoom text, for example.

I will have much to say about content consumption and apps usage in a follow-up post. Teaser: Apple's News app is transformative on this tablet like no other or from any competing software-service.

If big is your thing, iPad Pro is a fabulous tablet. But the battery/charging system limits use as a laptop replacement, and that's ignoring other gotchas to be discussed later.

This post is the fifth in a series; Parts One, Two, Three, and Four.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

iPad Pro's fatal flaw? [fifth in a series]

Publié: février 15, 2016, 11:13pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Editor's Note: Apple contacted me on February 16th, suggesting the short battery life is abnormal. We discussed tech support option but I chose instead to replace the whole kit—iPad Pro and keyboard—to see if the short battery life with Smart Keyboard is a one-off hardware problem. Look for an update in the sixth post. The hardware exchange will take a day or so to sort out, before the series can resume.

Original Post: I cannot presently recommend Apple's big-ass tablet as a laptop replacement—using the official-issue Smart Keyboard. The reason may surprise you. The foible isn't the utility of iOS, available apps, or overall hardware performance but the battery and charging system. Inadequate combination is an understatement.

Restated, there are three related problems with the current configuration:

Battery depletes too quickly with Smart Keyboard attached
Little to no recharging occurs when tablet is used with keyboard
Recharge time takes too long, particularly set against actual usage time

I will have much to say about content consumption and apps usage in a follow-up post. Teaser: Apple's News app is transformative on this tablet like no other or from any competing software-service.

If big is your thing, iPad Pro is a fabulous tablet. But the battery/charging system limits use as a laptop replacement, and that's ignoring other gotchas to be discussed later.

This post is the fifth in a series; Parts One, Two, Three, and Four.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

What I like about Apple iPad Pro [fourth in a series]

Publié: février 13, 2016, 12:07am CET par Joe Wilcox

Cat and iPad Pro

Day 10, and it's difficult to wonder where nearly two weeks went. Yet here I am with iPad Pro, and more settled than last weekend, when griping about how the tablet frustrates me.

I want to start by discussing Apple's Smart Keyboard, which is a $169 accessory that I recommend for everyone who doesn't plan on using fingers and Pencil as primary, ah, utensils. Typing is amazingly smooth and accurate. The keys present terrific travel, without requiring too much force while still giving plenty of tactile response. Shocked best describes my reaction to the experience. Sometimes what's missing brings something more: Ommission of the trackpad, which either is brilliant conception or Apple chief designer Jony Ive and team getting goddamn lucky.

By removing all that wasted space given to the trackpad and spread around it, the keyboard is closer to the body and arms, which I find improves posture, reduces stress on the wrists, and increases overall typing accuracy, Something else: Proximity creates intimacy with the tablet you won't have with a laptop.

Additionally, the shorter distance overcomes the great usability flaw with vertical touchscreens: Guerilla Arm, which primary is an aching ailment of the biceps. Reaching to touch the screen is more moving the forearms forward. Had Apple included a touchpad, and thus increased the reaching distance to the screen, Guerilla Arm would surely result (as it does on laptops). By accident or design, what’s missing is something more.

The 12.9-inch Retina Display, with 2732 x 2048 native resolution at 264 pixels per inch, is super sharp, while colors and contrast pop off the screen. What I ike best: The 4:3 aspect ratio makes the display more square than rectangular, expanding the landscape for content. Webpages and apps present beautifully, with a caveat. Websites stuck in the 1024 x 768 past present oversized everything. The worst offenders render mobile sites only optimized for smaller screens and/or lower resolutions. Meaning: They don't scale. Same applies to apps, too many of them, that need resolution/scaling tweaking. Are you listening, developers?

Touch overall impresses, much as I would expect from an iPad but with greater urgency. If the Pro is to be a PC replacement, not companion, and one without a trackpad, touch needs to be accurate. Where your finger goes the cursor must follow, and it does most of the time. Touch responsiveness is best of class and almost mind-reading.

In landscape mode, touch is more intimate than other iPads, when using Smart Keyboard. Because of the screen's proximity, I can rest my forearms on the desk and reach most everything necessary primarily using thumbs and also first two fingers. That positioning makes faster the processing of messages in Apple Mail, for example. Other apps, and even general navigation, benefit, too.

iPad Pro presents a split-screen view but no windowed apps for multitasking. That said, the aforementioned proximity to the screen makes moving among app icons a fairly fast, and not at all cumbersome, activity. Manually switching apps/tasks isn't the hardship that I had anticipated.

Performance is another stunner. Years of PC-configuration mentality must be put aside before considering the tablet as possible primary personal computer. There's Apple's A9 chip, 4GB memory, and 128GB storage set against laptops with Intel Core processors, 8GB (or more) RAM, and as much if not greater SSD. Comparison is less, less, less. But responsiveness is more, more, more. Damn, does this tab feel fast.

That said, iOS idiosyncrasies are in place. When resources shift to one thing from another, something is left behind. I learned when leaving browser tabs with text input but not saved to, say, WordPress. Going back to the tab, refreshed it, wiping away my input content. That's behavior I hadn't seen on Android tablets, although Chrome OS can idle and refresh browser tabs leading to similar result.

That gotcha aside, everything about iPad Pro is perky. Buzzing around my brain: What if Apple bridged its tablet/laptop gap by shipping 12-inch MacBook's successor with A9 chip instead of Intel Penitum M. The little laptop is mighty speedy for its size and processor class. A9X would differentiate MacBook from every other thin-and-light laptop.

Moving along to Pencil, a $99 add-on, I'm impressed based on my limited testing, with two caveats: I need to work more with the stylus, and I am no artist; someone who draws would better evaluate the input device. But I recognize the promise, which will get fuller treatment in a follow-up post. For now: iPad Pro presents in its 12.9-inch display a broad canvas upon which artists can draw or annotate.

Wrapping up, I'm not in love with iPad Pro, but I like it more each day. Some of the quirks are devastating to the typical workflow that is easily achievable on a laptop. These topics will get fuller treatment later on in this series. As my month with iPad Pro progresses I increasingly see that more can be achieved by adapting habits and accepting the user experience for what it is rather than what it is not. I learned that from seeing the many benefits presented by removing the trackpad and Apple's design choices doing so, for example.

While the tablet has been in my possession for 10 days, I placed the order earlier. February 13th is when I must decide whether to keep iPad Pro, and continue this series, or return within the 14-day buyer's remorse period. Installment five will reveal which choice I made (or will make).

This post is the fourth in a series; Parts One, Two and Three.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

What I Don't Like About Apple iPad Pro [third in a series]

Publié: février 7, 2016, 8:24am CET par Joe Wilcox

iPad Pro Batman Returns

Day 5 morning, and I am close to returning the iPad Pro to T-Mobile. There are too many quirks that reaffirm my contention in this series' second post: Apple's big-ass tablet is a proof-of-concept device that's ready, or so I thought, for few users (digital content creators) but not the masses. Now I wonder if the thang is ready for anyone.

Setting up Apple Pencil should be as easy as pulling off the rear cap, inserting into Lightning port, and acknowledging Bluetooth connect request prompt. But there is no response from the tablet, after a half-dozen attempts, so I Google for solutions. No luck there, and I check Bluetooth settings, where the device doesn't appear. Disconnect my Harman Kardon speakers. No change. Turn off and on Bluetooth. Nope. Detach Pencil, try again. Success! Device shows up, pairs, then disconnects, and stays that way until I try again, and then it's "Groundhog Day" time. I'm Bill Murray reliving the same moment over and over without progress.

Resolution comes applying the tried-and-proven troubleshooting tactic: Shut down and restart. Afterwards, plugging into the Lightning port pops the permission prompt. I accept, and Pencil plows digital ink across Adobe Procreate. Something here feels too much like Windows XP during the promised plug-and-play early days. In September I complained about an overall decline in Apple software quality over the past two years. Dare I say buggy?

No Pencil pusher this AM, other things nag. A fair number of websites appear oversized, with fonts bigger than my fingernail. They're effing huge. Some Amazon ebooks are similar, where opening them on iPad Pro enters this magnified reading realm for the nearly blind. Google+ is among the like-magnified offenders, and no setting I find remedies the need to pull way back from the screen to get something resembling reader-friendliness. Hello, developers, can we properly scale apps for the larger screen, please?

The annoyances cumulate: Feedly can't open posts in Chrome, but Safari works just fine. The key combo to bring up a current webpage search box sometimes works in Chrome, but often doesn't. The culmination of these fumbles added to so many other quirks or visual heartbreaks saps some of my enthusiasm for iPad Pro.

Physical size continues to be a dilemma. Is the tablet too big? Set up in landscape orientation with Apple Smart Keyboard attached, the size and dimensions are superior to any Mac laptop. The omission of a trackpad, while strange at first, is brilliant design. I find being closer to the screen, without all that wasted space around the trackpad, to improve typing speed, better my posture, and give greater sense of intimacy.

However, as a tablet, iPad Pro is godawful big, measuring 305.7 x 220.6 x 6.9 mm (12 x 8.68 x .27 inches). The cellular plus WiFi variant, which I own, weights 723 grams (1.59 pounds), while the non-LTE tab is 10 grams less (1.57 pounds).

Thinness, lightness, and excellent physical balance make limited one-hand carrying quite manageable. Nevertheless, I nearly dropped the tab more than once, and that's a problem I haven't encountered with any other. The thing looks too big in my hands, an impression magnified when gigantic text fills the screen. iPad Pro doesn't look or feel like a lug-around tablet. If the landscape experience is so good, then wouldn't a touchscreen MacBook be better? I can't escape that question, which nags and makes me consider returning this beast during the 14-day buyer's remorse period.

Okay, I've vented my frustrations. A follow-up post will put aside grievances and get into what I like about iPad Pro. The device does deliver many benefits and might just be laptop enough for my needs, or even yours. Maybe. It's too soon to say.

This post is the third in a series; Parts One and Two.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Is Apple iPad Pro too big? [second in a series]

Publié: février 6, 2016, 2:37am CET par Joe Wilcox

"Look up, waaaaaay up" is a phrase familiar to Canadians of a certain age, who watched "The Friendly Giant". The kids program aired from 1958 to 1985 on CBC, which our TV antenna grabbed from the local affiliate across the border in New Brunswick (I'm from Northern Maine). There's something about iPad Pro's enormity that makes it feel more like something the Giant would use.

My question this fine Friday: Is iPad Pro too big? For the majority of potential buyers, my answer is unequivocally yes. I don't see a product made for the majority. Whatever Apple's post-PC ambitions, iPad Pro is more a proof-of-concept for future laptop replacement. However, for the few -- creators looking for larger digital canvas -- iPad Pro offers much. For the many, the first version will work out the kinks, such as getting the app platform placed, for mass-market successors. Warning: Embracing the expansive tablet may make switching to something smaller nearly impossible. Size matters, and sometimes larger is better.

(This is second in a series sharing my experience, observations, and review of the tablet, which I hope to use as my primary PC throughout February.)

Deft or Daft?

During Steve Jobs' second coming as CEO, several design ethics consistently permeated Apple products: Humanization, touch as primary user interface, and miniaturization are among the primaries. There's a living, human-like quality to using Apple tech, and you see it too rarely from other inventors in the industry. iPad Air and mini, along with iPhone, are intimate devices because of how they respond to you and the ways you caress them with your fingertips.

Finger-first is one of Apple's oldest design ethics, going back to the original Macintosh launched 32 years ago. But touch's role started to expand with release of the click-wheel iPod in October 2001 before taking a huge leap with iPhone in June 2007. Apple is too obsessed with touch nearly nine years later, I contend. Touchless, voice-response interaction matters as much and in many ways more. iPad Pro is finger-friendly and human-like responsive but I wouldn't describe the user experience as intimate or immersive as the original 9.7-inch tab or its Air successes. Size is major reason.

Conceptually, iPad Pro reminds me of Microsoft's ill-begotten Windows CE for Smart Displays. The concept basically turned LCD flat-screen monitors, ranging from 10 to 15 inches, into pseudo touchscreen tablets. Mira (the codename) failed for many usability reasons -- size being the most forestalling. Carting around a PC monitor, even from den to living room made little sense in 2003 (not that Microsoft or its OEM partners understood). Apple's over-stuffed tablet isn't far removed, with respect to screen landscape but not heft or thickness. That said, meaningful comparison stops there with respect to iPad Pro's considerably greater utility, usability, and flexibility. I refer solely to the concept of carrying around a big slab.

Larger size pushes against Apple's long emphasis making computing devices smaller. Consider the Mac laptop's evolution for the 11.6-inch Air and 12-inch MacBook. iPod's size shrank as song capacity increased, culminating in the lovely iPod nano launched in September 2005. Less than two years later, Apple released the first iPhone, which shrank together capabilities by combining iPod's core functions with a telephony and Internet-connected device. Sure Apple sells a 27-inch iMac and once offered a 17-inch laptop, but the trend has been to put more capability into devices that are less bulky.

Sizing Up

The gorgeous screen is 12.9 inches diagonally, which is marketing-gimmick for making the size seem closer to 12 than to 13. iPad Pro measures 305.7 x 220.6 x 6.9 mm (12 x 8.68 x .27 inches). The cellular plus WiFi variant, which I own, weights 723 grams (1.59 pounds), while the non-LTE tab is 10 grams less (1.57 pounds). However, Apple's Smart Keyboard cover makes the heft more like 12-inch MacBook, which weighs 920 grams (2.03 pounds).

Thinness and lightness counter-balance the screen's expanse. Remarkably, iPad Pro is thinner than iPhone 6s, which is 7.1 mm thick. Regarding that one-and-a-half pounds, consider third-generation iPad, which bulked up for the battery to 662 grams (1.46 pounds). While being heavier, the Pro feels lighter because of balance, which is the hallmark of good design -- particularly for things that are handled. Digital cameras with detachable lenses are good examples of the concept in practice.

Physical balance is paramount. Consider the automobile you drive to work, the aerodynamics and how the vehicle turns. An aerodynamically unbalanced auto will vibrate or burn fuel faster. Likewise, an unbalanced SLR camera will be clumsy in the hand when telephoto lenses are attached, if design isn’t balanced.

For the size, iPad Pro has superb balance. That's despite the laptop-like screen size in the hand. However, the tablet is a bit clumsy to handle when attached to the Smart Keyboard. Unfolding from cover to stand operation can be awkward, and I suspect some people could drop the kit. Expect five or more seconds versus the immediacy of opening a laptop lid. As a slate, however, waking and using the Pro is similar to iPad Air 2. It's quick!

The 4:3 aspect ratio feels more sensible on this tablet than 9.7-inch iPads. In landscape mode, with keyboard attached, the view is more expansive and satisfying than the 16:9 of MacBook Air or 16:10 of the Pro models. If Apple wants the larger tablet to replace laptops, the screen's physical presentation is a check for the plus column.

Portrait mode usage will be a matter of taste. Some people won't like holding the larger tablet. That said, because of fabulous balance, after four days use, my arms don't tire as expected from holding the extra weight. Think of the Pro as being large magazine size (why Rolling Stone for comparative photo) or small picture book. After first feeling the tablet was too large, my perception changed. iPad Air looks puny, undersized, now, If you think that's a vote for bigger being better, perhaps it is.

Nevertheless, despite iPad Pro's relative thinness and lightness, the overall size, shape, and aspect ratio make for one big-ass tablet. Stated differently, the proportions appeal in landscape mode attached to the Smart Keyboard. Held in portrait orientation, the tablet is too wide, like someone who is overweight. No, wait. Short, squat, and overly-wide. The emotional connotations are negative.

The large display, which resolution is 2732 by 2048 at 264 pixels per inch, is a fantastic canvas for consuming and creating content -- much more so than Apple's smaller alternatives. This usage benefit, more than anything else, pushes iPad Pro into the PC replacement category. Artists are going to love Pencil, which I will discuss in a follow-up post that also discusses the overall app experience. Four days usage is far too short a time to properly broach the topic. But even this short of time in, I see the appeal for creative types. Caveat: If the canvas isn't too big, something further testing can answer. Some artists might prefer iPad Air 3 and Pencil to double-wide Pro. Supply stores sell different size sketch pads for a reason. One size doesn't fit all.

And another category: Baby Boomers who are long-time Apple loyalists should find the massive screen real estate better for diminished vision. Every company should be designing with some thought to the rapidly aging population, and in the case of established Apple customers that means money to spend. Starting price is $799 for the 32GB WiFi iPad Pro.

Why No Touchscreen Notebook?

One last topic remains regarding size and the justification for choosing the oversized-tablet for any purpose, including PC replacement: Why is there no touchscreen Mac laptop? My answer: iPhone. Apple's active iOS install base is 1 billion, while during calendar fourth quarter 2015 the handset accounted for more than two-thirds of overall revenue. OS X is not the company's leading platform but iOS, which already is optimized for touchscreens. It's sensible that Apple should push the platform forward for PC-like utility and usability.

My feeling four days in: iPad Pro is for the few not the many, but that's nevertheless a viable and worthwhile market. Meanwhile, the device is proof-of-concept pushing iOS upwards. Platform maturity, or even successor tab, could tip the scales for the masses.

Don't forget the less-is-more principle. Too many professional reviewers hang up on iPad Pro or any other contextual cloud-connected device as needing to do as much as a PC to replace it. Of course not. There is a "good enough" threshold. For many people, a smartphone is computer enough, and it's a more natural progression for an iOS-only user to go to iPad Pro than a personal computer running any operating system.

Microsoft has proved with Surface Pro that there is a market for a 12-inch class device that is both tablet and PC. The company's slate also benefits from a mature desktop operating system capable of running many windowed applications together. From physical design, and associated balance of benefits, I regard Surface Pro 4 to be superior, something a future post in this series will explore.

That said, in some ways SP4 does too much and not enough. Windows 10 complexity and confusion are greater for a touchscreen tab, while many of the most appealing or popular apps available for Android or iOS are missing. While I regard Apple's UI as being tired, it is nevertheless less complex and more mature with respect to applications than Windows 10.

Will I still feel this way in a couple of weeks?

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Hell, yeah, Amazon should open more bookstores

Publié: février 4, 2016, 6:44am CET par Joe Wilcox

AmazonBooks

There is collective head-scratching across the InterWebs about a Wall Street Journal report that Amazon will open as many as 300, or even 400, stores selling books. The company's massive success selling ebooks and the cost and selection advantages of warehousing their physical counterparts make the concept seem nonsensical. I contend that it's brilliant.

Amazon is in process of expanding online services into the purview of local retail, which biggest competitive advantage is immediacy. In conjunction with the $99-per-year Prime program, the online retailer offers faster shipping; same day, and within hours, in some locales. The company increasingly contracts its own carriers, as well. Immediacy requires presence. What better location than a bookstore that also warehouses other goods and provides customer service operations? That's all without considering the branding opportunities, which, as Apple Store demonstrates, can be huge.

During fourth quarter 2015, Amazon generated modest $482 million net profit from $35.7 billion revenue. Cost of sales was $24.34 billion. Meaning: Like retail operations with physical stores, Amazon's margins are thin. Local shops have presence, which is great for their brand awareness, customer interaction, and cost of distribution. On the latter point, Amazon risks higher costs getting goods to customers as Prime membership rises (free shipping benefit), Prime Now shipping increases, amid customer sales priority makes immediacy as important as low cost.

By placing distribution centers closer to larger populations, like cities, Amazon can reduce some distribution overhead. Bookstores would be excellent storefront to a warehouse hub. The stores can:

Extend brand awareness
Build community around the brand
Provide pleasant place for customers to hangout
Be an Amazon Locker for picking up or returning purchases
Build goodwill with locales by providing jobs and paying taxes
Be a place where customers can get live, in-person assistance

Amazon needs to control distribution costs as it makes more products available faster. Bookstores fronting warehouse hubs is my recommendation, regardless of plans underway.

Let customers see the brand
Let them handle actual products for sale
Let them gather to read books, drink coffee, and chat
Let them experience Alexa and what she can do for families

Apple Store helped popularize the corporate brand, at a time when the fruit-logo company had little market share for any product. The retail shops created sense of belonging and good feelings about the brand. Apple promoted a digital lifestyle that customers could experience first-hand around its products and those from platform partners. Amazon could achieve similar results through a chain of bookstores.

With a difference: People already have memories of hanging out at bookstores, scouring the magazine rack, combing the aisles for sweet reads, and relaxing with a hot cup of brew. Amazon can tap into good feelings behind past experiences.

Whatever the cost to set up and operate the stores, the potential long-term benefits are greater.

Image Credit: SEASTOCK/Shutterstock

My Apple iPad Pro adventure begins [first in a series]

Publié: février 3, 2016, 3:43am CET par Joe Wilcox

iPad Pro

The first thing you notice about iPad Pro is the size. The tablet is ginormous. Its 12.9-inch screen lays before you like a chalk slate -- a blank canvas demanding typed text or drawings made with Apple Pencil. Yet something also feels wrong about the thing. During the so-called Steve Jobs era, refined designs were smaller -- like iPod nano. Apple is no stranger to larger; 27-inch iMac today or 17-inch MacBook Pro of yesteryear are examples. Perhaps. But there's big, and BIG.

The giant tablet arrived around 2:50 p.m. PST on Groundhog Day 2016, marking a bold computing adventure for February: Using iPad Pro as my primary PC, and hopefully only one. Perhaps you read my recent obituary to Apple love lost and might wonder why buy anything Apple? I like to experiment and am paid to try out new things (so you won't have to). By sheer size, PC replacement -- not companion -- is the only sensible use for iPad Pro. Can it meet the demands? I want to find out.

Been There

This isn't my first adventure of this kind. On July 31, 2011, I started a summer sojourn using a Samsung Chromebook, which became my primary PC. But three months later, frustrated by lacking utility and performance problems, I put aside Google's then new platform. The experience nevertheless changed my computing lifestyle, pulling my habits from desktop applications to their browser-based, cloud-connect counterparts. Following the release of Samsung Chromebook 550, in May 2012 I made the switch. I've gone back to Apple a few times since but get better overall utility -- as a writer -- from Google platforms. My primary PC is Chromebook Pixel LS -- or was before the next, grand experiment's start.

I have no plans to give up Pixel, which is a joy to use. But iPad Pro intrigues, and I will soon start a podcasting project for which webapps don't deliver the utility I want. Let's see what Apple's big-ass tablet can deliver. Apps are there, and they should be easier to use on the larger screen.

To repeat: I also want to answer for my satisfaction, and hopefully for yours, whether a tablet can replace a PC, as Apple contends. Someone surely will ask why not Surface Pro 4 or Surface Book? Two answers: They're outside my cash-out-of-pocket budget, and both Microsoft device run desktop operating systems. They are PCs. IPad Pro falls into aebulous category, because of iOS. Can the apps be enough? Are ingrained habits a barrier to switching. Little things, like doing away with mouse and trackpad. I don't use Macros or specialized keyboard shortcuts, unlike many other PC users. The answers to these and other questions will unfold as I write about my experience.

Day One

I ordered iPad Pro on Jan. 31, 2016, from my local T-Mobile store, adding the cost to my monthly phone bill. The carrier sells the 128GB cellular model in Space Grey or Gold. I chose the muted of the two. As I type this paragraph, the tab has been out of the box for about two hours.

I purchased the Smart Keyboard from my local Apple Store. Typing has a tacky feeling, by the way, that concerned until surprisingly finding touch typing to be so easy and accurate. I am pleasantly surprised by the keys' responsiveness and touch-without-looking placement. Warning: There is no backlighting, making accurate touch-typing all the more important.

Apple Pencil is perennially sold out at the local store and an online order wouldn't deliver for at least nine days. So yesterday, February 1st, I contacted Apple PR requesting a review loaner. To my surprise, the team obliged and the stylus shipped for arrival February 3rd. This is the first review product that Apple has sent me in six years. Or is it eight?

Smart Keyboard doubles as a cover and stand. The Apple Way or no way is a truism. With Surface Pro 4, users can tilt back the screen to desired angle. Using the Smart Keyboard, there is but one choice. But that's okay. The angle is perfectly chosen (can't promise you will agree). I write this first impressions foreword directly into WordPress using Google Chrome, which got a big rendering engine update during the last week of January.

Got to say: The overall user experience surpasses my expectations, which admittedly were low. The screen is bright and crisp. Performance feels fast from fumbling around; it's smooth. As a tablet, iPad Pro promises to be a grandmaster. I can see that already. I will let you know about laptop replacement as the series unfolds. That's a wrap.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Use smartphones to vote for president

Publié: février 2, 2016, 6:00am CET par Joe Wilcox

Smartphone Vote

Over the weekend, my 94 year-old father-in-law asked what I would do to assure that every American who could vote would do so. That was an unexpected question, but one I addressed gingerly. This post is my answer restated for a public venue.

Simple answer: Smartphone. According to PewResearchCenter, nearly 70 percent of Americans own one of the devices, but the number among voting age adults tops 80 percent, according to other estimates. Surely a program could be in place by the 2020 Presidential race, and if lawmakers were truly serious about universal suffrage, a Manhattan-like project could make it happen by the next Mid-terms.

The program would demand commanding commitment from state and federal governments, starting with the development of voting apps for each and every state and building secure server infrastructure. Then there is the two-pronged problem of making sure everyone who is eligible to vote has a smartphone and every device owner is registered to vote. Authentication, to prevent fraud, is another concern.

The the progam would have three fundamental goals:

Achieve as close as possible universal suffrage
Provide real-time voting results, even for absentee voters
Increase voting accuracy, while eliminating need for absentee ballots

App Development

If built around an adopted standard accepted by all states, the smartphone app could resolve many of the problems with voting today. The process for voters would be similar, regardless of local variances, such as referendums in some locales. Registered voters could cast their ballots, captured in real time, right up until the polls close.

Of course, the result of that could send the news media and pollsters into a frenzy—candidates, too—if large pools of undecided voters watch and wait to cast their ballots based on early returns. But, hey, that's democracy.

For critics who argue that smartphones would be too complex for older voters, come to my ophthalmologist's office where many of the patients are elderly and tap on smartphones just like youngins.

The biggest problem I see is contractual, meaning who gets to make the app(s) and the RFP (request for proposal) process dictated by local governments. Fairness and cost should be lower considerations, and perhaps even ignored. Few mobile apps ever developed would need to be as reliable and absolutely secure; these priorities matter more. Quality should be priority over bidded price.

There would need to be safeguards that ensure votes are captured during times of network congestion, like before polls close, and clear mechanisms (such as text message receipt) that assure the citizen that his or her ballot was registered.

The apps could be built to decrease the likelihood a ballot would be invalidated. Mistakes like marking two candidates go away, for example.

Something else: The apps could enable voters to make more informed decisions. Each candidate's name would be hot-linked to open the smartphone's default search engine, so that citizens could do additional last-minute research on contenders. However, the app should not provide any additional information. Going that route would add unnecessary complexity, increasing the chance the ballot wouldn't be completed, and lead to all kinds of messy ethical/influence problems. Smartphone in hand is a last-minute opportunity for citizens to do additional research—those who choose to do so.

Infrastructure

The more challenging part would be on the back-end. The Affordable Care Act shows that state and federal governments can build big back-end server systems suitable for the purpose. Likewise, problems encountered when launching sites like healthcare.gov spotlight how and where failures can occur.

I expect jurisdictional and states rights issues to complicate the creation of a single-connect server system or local ones that are interconnected.

Security is a worry. Consider the problem of a complex DDOS attack swamping servers during polling, interrupting voting and leading to some ballots being invalidated.

Smartphone Program

Not every voter owns a smartphone, and not every smartphone owner is registered to vote. Solution to both is intertwined. Using a federal subsidy program, perhaps, people who don't own smartphones could get one for free. Flagship phones from the top-five vendors, based on sales, would be eligible for the program.

RFP would be based on lowest bids. Meaning: To be included in the program, manufacturers would not collect from the government, say, $649 for 16GB iPhone 6s. The cost of getting millions of new customers, and at the same time serving the public good, justifies less profit on each device. By limiting the program to flagship phones, government could deter, or even prevent, manufacturers from dumping older or less-desirable handsets.

To participate, citizens would either need to be registered to vote or do so when entering the program. Voters who, by cellular carrier check, do not own a smartphone or possess a device that falls below a minimum standard (such as manufactured more than years earlier) would be eligible for the hand-out.

Registered voters who do not participate in the smartphone program, and are verified to own a device, would receive an income tax credit equivalent to the value set by the aforementioned RFP. Government could encourage any laggards to register by making voter registration requirement to receive the tax credit. Additionally, government could promise, and deliver, a larger tax credit for previous smartphone owners who do vote and a smaller, but in total value equivalent, credit to program participants casting ballots.

Authentication

Voter fraud has to be a concern, and there will always be some regardless of the polling system used. Authorized apps would be distributed through official app stores, mainly (and perhaps only) Apple App Store and Google Play. The dilemma: How to authenticate voters without adding complexity that prevents them from voting.

One idea: Distribute four-digit codes by mail that the citizen combines with the last four digits of his or her social security number when voting. Simpler still: Social security number is authentication mechanism, which also should enable processing of real-time votes, assuming voter registration already is tied to the SS#..

Since the goal of the program is to achieve, as close as possible, universal suffrage, security must be balanced with simplicity.

That's my basic proposal, understanding that bureaucracy, local and federal laws, logistics, special interests, and other factors likely would be wrenches in the works.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Alexandr III

Apple fiscal Q1 2016 by the numbers: $75.9B revenue, $3.28 EPS

Publié: janvier 27, 2016, 3:06am CET par Joe Wilcox

Three questions buzzed among investors and around the Interwebs ahead of today's Apple fiscal first quarter 2016 earnings report: Would iPhone momentum remain; how big could be revenues; and what would be guidance for the quarter in progress? Wall Street consensus was 76.54 million handsets sold and $76.582 billion in sales. Actual: 74.78 million iPhones and $75.872 billion revenue. More unsettling: Apple forecasts its first sales decline in 13 years; guidance is lower than analyst estimates.

After the closing Bell, Apple answered these questions. Revenue rose 2 percent year over, while net income climbed the same to $18.4 billion from $18 billion. Earnings per share of 3,28 nudged ahead of $3.23 consensus estimate. Gross margin reached 40.1 percent, up from 39.9 percent a year earlier.

Guidance shivered Wall Street, which consensus was $55.64 billion revenue and $2.23 EPS for fiscal Q2. Apple expects $50 billion to $53 billion. The stock dipped more than 2.6 percent in after-hours trading in response to actual results and those expected through the end of March. Shareholder reaction could have been more punishing.

A Billion Reasons

While Apple's overall fundamentals remain strong, buoyed by its cash horde of nearly $216 billion, the quarter shows signs that the iPhone empire has peaked. Shipments were flat, while revenue grew 1 percent to $51.635 billion —arguably against a tough year-over-year comparison of $51.182 billion. Cracks in the cement are a long way from holes, meaning: iPhone remains, for now, a formidable foe for the Android Army.

Apple's long-term problem is dependence: Nearly all the colossal revenue growth since calendar 2010 can be attributed to iPhone, which during fiscal Q1 2016 accounted for 67.4 percent revenue. That's down from 68.6 a year earlier. But smartphone sales are slowing in major markets, including respective leaders China and the United States, and shifting to geographies with lower incomes and as such appetite for cheaper-costing handsets.

Today's report deflects some of the concerns about iPhone's longevity to the viability of customers: During the quarter, the company had an "active install base" of 1 billion users across all platforms—Apple Watch, Apple TV, iOS devices, and the Mac. The number dwarfs anything comparable from any competitor, including Alphabet (formerly Google, which is now a subsidiary). Apple's 1 billion is in a whole other league. People paid price premium for Apple devices, rather than just subscribe to a cloud service. The challenge, of course: Keeping these customers buying companion devices and generating profits from ancillary services.

Apple called out the $5.5 billion in services revenue from Apple Music, Apple Pay, App Store, iCloud, iTunes Services, hardware parts, and licensing. Meanwhile, from the install base, the company reports $8.9 billion in "related purchases", up 24 percent year over year. CEO Tim Cook is wise to push out the revenue value of those 1 billion users, which during fiscal 2015 generated $31.2 billion in related purchases and $19.9 billion in services revenue.

Platform Wars

These numbers are more significant than they seem and foreshadow future Apple platform strategy against Android.

Nearly always overlooked in analyses that pit Android against iOS: At the core, comparisons are meaningless. While Apple's platform is mobile (and desktop) operating system, Alphabet's is search. Android is but a means of delivering the primary platform, and the profit center; during calendar Q3 2015, advertising revenues related to search accounted for 90 percent of revenues (the company announces Q4 results on February 1st).

This difference in primary platforms partly explains why Alphabet reportedly paid Apple $1 billion for Google to be the default search provider on iPhone—and why the company's apps and supporting services offerings for iOS are only surpassed on Android, and even then not by much. Alphabet arguably is the largest developer of iOS apps. Stated differently: iPhone and other iOS devices are much less competitors to Android, from Alphabet's vantage point, than is the public sentiment. The information giant supports whatever advances its primary platform, search, and subsequent advertising revenues that are generated.

That said, for Alphabet's OEM partners, Android competition with iOS, matters much—as does the quest to gain and to keep app developer support. App availability matters to buyers, too. Apple's platform is considerably more stable and undermines Alphabet's as services ambitions expand. Consider the ad-blocking features added to iOS 9. Apple takes Alphabet's billion bucks from one hand, while trying to hack off the other. The search giant needs those mobile ad dollars, which Apple doesn't,

That's the other thing often overlooked in the platform competition analysis: Apple sells hardware, for which services enhance. Alphabet sells little to nothing, directly, from its install base. The platform foundations fundamentally differ—like dirt to bedrock. As I said long ago, iPhone will lose the smartphone wars but more likely will win the mobile platform wars. Caveat: As long as someone buys the hardware that generates the bulk of revenues.

Segment Snapshot

Apple divides products into five segments for reporting purposes: iPhone, iPad, Mac, Services, and Other. iPod now falls into the latter category, where also are Apple Watch and Apple TV.

iPhone. We've discussed the core numbers, but a few more: Average selling price rose year over year to $691 from $687, reflecting benefits from Plus iPhones.

Many analysts expected unit shipments to decline for the first quarter ever. Apple got a reprieve, but during today's analyst conference call Cook grudgingly conceded that the fiscal Q2 forecast model anticipates year-over-year retraction.

Cook says that about 60 percent of iPhone owners have not upgraded to the 6 or 6s series handsets. He sees lots of sales growth potential coming from the install base.

iPad. Keeping with the trend of global declining tablet sales, iPad units and revenue fell 25 percent and 21 percent, respectively, to 16.122 million and $7.084 billion.

Mac. Computers don't jive with analysts' preliminary data. For example, IDC has global Apple computer shipments growing 2.8 percent year over year in a broader market that declined 10.8 percent. However, today Cook and Company reported unit and revenue declines of 4 percent and 3 percent, respectively, to 5.312 million and $6.746 billion.

Photo Credit: BMCL/Shutterstock

Apple fiscal Q1 2016 by the numbers: Record revenue falls short

Publié: janvier 27, 2016, 3:06am CET par Joe Wilcox

A Billion Reasons

Platform Wars

These numbers are more significant than they seem and foreshadow future Apple platform strategy against Android.

Segment Snapshot

Apple divides products into five segments for reporting purposes: iPhone, iPad, Mac, Services, and Other. iPod now falls into the latter category, where also are Apple Watch and Apple TV.

iPhone. We've discussed the core numbers, but a few more: Average selling price rose year over year to $691 from $687, reflecting benefits from Plus iPhones.

Cook says that about 60 percent of iPhone owners have not upgraded to the 6 or 6s series handsets. He sees lots of sales growth potential coming from the install base.

iPad. Keeping with the trend of global declining tablet sales, iPad units and revenue fell 25 percent and 21 percent, respectively, to 16.122 million and $7.084 billion.

Photo Credit: BMCL/Shutterstock

Okay, Google, give us Drone Street View

Publié: janvier 24, 2016, 3:14am CET par Joe Wilcox

Blizzard 2016 Washington DC

There is no shortage of online blabbers making predictions about the future or bloggers pining pageviews with rumors about the next thing (usually from Apple). I rarely join the chorus of new year prognosticators—and won't now. Instead I make a wishful what-if aimed squarely at Google. Watching the blizzard blast the Washington, D.C. metro area, once my home and for most of my adult life, I got to thinking: Wouldn't a live feed, something like Google Drone Street View, be fantastic way to experience the storm?

Why shouldn't this be the next wave in drone deployments? If not from Google, then from newscasters? The low-flyers could go where snow would stop motorized vehicles; and, connected in real-time to Google Maps, provide contextual viewing experience. You can be there, too, even if living one-thousand kilometers distant. Newscasters could use drones to give a more immersive watching experience.

The news angle idea isn't original, obviously. Who hasn't seen some sci-fi feature where cameras fly around a reporter. (Say, isn't there something like that in "Back to the Future II?").

Emergency response crews could locate, or even assist, people trapped in vehicles and homes or find folks trudging lost through near white-out conditions—to name but a few obvious applications.

Reaching this paragraph, I thought surely someone else has thought of using drones during the storm. Sure enough, Googling retrieved this news story from Knoxville, Tenn. The home-made snow drone is kind of a case study for what could be.

Again I ask: Why not deploy location-aware drones connected to Google Maps in real time? Wouldn't that be a great innovation that taps into the company's core cloud and other tech strengths. Drone Street View is what I'd like to see this year or next.

Hell, Google Cardboard advances VR on a budget. Say, Google, release Street View kits that drone users can attach to their flyers and from which you can collect more images and vids for Maps. Make some of it available in real-time, rather than use images that are weeks, months, or even years old.

Photo Credit: Ryan McKnight

Apple, give us more like THIS!

Publié: janvier 21, 2016, 10:57pm CET par Joe Wilcox

emo girl music guy

My Apple love-affair started with the allure of hardware—the original Bondi Blue iMac in December 1998—but stayed true because of software. I found Mac OS 8.5.1 to be substantially more satisfying than Windows Me and to support broader range of applications than NT 4. The experience carried forward, particularly during the iLife era and priority placed on content creation that matters to most people. The company caught the transition from documents to digital media as main content created by most people

Over the past couple years, Apple apps and operating systems feel stuck in the last decade. They're directionless. But as 2016 slowly advances, i see hopeful hints that software innovation will rise to the standard set by the company in the early 2000s. Fresh example, which is but a curiosity to some, foreshadows much: Music Memos; released yesterday.

The free iOS app lets the user "record high-quality, uncompressed audio" on the fly, using the device's built-in mic or an externally-attached one. The app is "optimized for acoustic guitar and piano", which is smart design, and provides background instruments for playback and continued refinement by the artist.

The new app compliments other Apple offerings, not the least being GarageBand. The tighter creative fit is Apple Music, which the company positions as a platform for artist-fan engagement as much as being a streaming service. The question to ask: Why should young, burgeoning artists break out on YouTube? And to answer: They can, but why not Apple Music, too?

Memos in the app's name is uninspired because the connotations are all wrong for the functionality. But that's nitpicking, considering the creative firestorm that the music app could unleash.

Apple's empire is built as much on music as iPhone, but for longer, slower beneficial burn, starting with iTunes (January 2001); iPod (October 2001); iTunes Music Store (April 2003); and GarageBand (January 2004). But the long legacy has been more about consumption, despite GarageBand's dozen-year tenure. iPhone is a music studio in your palm that Memos makes approachable and, more importantly, immediate. Brilliant melodies come to you and are forgotten if not captured.

Apple survived the long Windows Winter by developing applications that appealed to a core content-creation customer demographic—artists, of any ilk. Many professional tools remain, but the development energy that brought forth iLife long ago expired. Sure the apps are available for Mac, and also iOS, but they nevertheless have long languished on the Apple tree.

Music Memos is a refreshing reminder about what made Apple great for long loyal customers during the Windows Winter and for the newcomers who followed: Software. Similarly, iOS 9.3 is a promising point release that follows this theme. Apple adds meaningful features alongside the expected bug fixes. Breathe deep; feels like Spring is coming to Apple software development.

Photo Credit: Regissercom/Shutterstock

Why Apple's future failure is certain

Publié: janvier 20, 2016, 6:55am CET par Joe Wilcox

Mime Surprise Shock

Idiots will flame this post "clickbait". It's how they draw attention to themselves, to inflate their egos; others mistakenly will assign motivation to my writing—e.g., for pageviews, when I couldn't care less about them. But I do care about Apple, as a longstanding customer (starting in December 1998). As a journalist, I developed a reputation for hating the company (I don't) so long loved because my stories aren't kiss-ass fanboyism. What's that saying about being hardest on the ones you love most? Kind I am not.

Today's theme isn't new from me and repeats my analysis that Apple has strayed far from the path that brought truly, disruptive innovative products to market. In 2016, the company banks on past successes that are not long-term sustainable. We will get a glimpse after calendar fourth quarter 2015 earnings are announced on January 26th. You will want to watch iPhone and international sales, particularly emerging markets. For analysis about that and more jump to the second subhead; the next one is for idiot clickbait accusers.

Platform Dilemma

My longstanding Apple love-affair has been schizophrenic, because for so many years Microsoft was my main tech news reporting beat and using the company's products made my writing more authoritative by using them. But I preferred Apple platforms, frequently switching. For example, I celebrated Windows XP's release in October 2001 by declining dinner invitation with Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates and switching back to OS X the day XP launched. Even after boycotting Apple for six months in 2012, for its ridiculous patent lawsuit strong-arming, I returned to using the company's products.

But my platform schizophrenia changed in the years following Apple cofounder Steve Jobs' death. On the one hand, Google's platforms provide greater, and better, contextual utility.than do its bitten-fruit rival. On the other hand, I'm the gambler who keeps going back convinced that this time he will win big, that the loseing streak will end. Meaning: I switch to and from, looking for the user experience that made me feel happy when using Apple products. But I can't find it.

Much of the magic goes back to Steve Jobs, and how he made you feel about new Apple products. For years I've explained: When Jobs had an off-day keynote, you left feeling like your life would be better for buying the new thing. But if he was on, you left feeling that if you didn't buy the thing your life would be worse.

But the magic was more than marketing. Or drinking the so-called Kool-Aid. For years, I always came back to Apple, never strayed far, because the products made me feel happy, and I got more work done in less time than, say, using Windows. But more than 17 years after hauling my first Mac out of a CompUSA, the fire in my heart is extinguished, and that's why I write this analysis. Deeply concerned am I.

Logistics Brilliance

Apple CEO Tim Cook is a manufacturing and distribution genius. He's a master at defying typical mass-market, consumer retail product pricing and SKU strategies and in process wringing tremendous gross margins in the process (39.9 percent during calendar third quarter 2015). He's the man that figuratively made the printing press that mints money ($11.1 billion net profit in Q3). He stayed the course of premium pricing and brand allure, when other PC companies competed for the lowest price and while analysts opined that cheaper Macs would build market share.

Cook's tenure as chief executive, and influence over Apple strategies, technically is longer than his officially assuming the role nearly 5 years ago. From then CEO Steve Jobs' January 2009 leave of absence to his death in October 2011, Cook's control over day-to-day operations shaped what would become the financially ginormous tech titan that marvels the industry today.

Among the many validations: During 2015, global PC shipments plummeted 10.5 percent year over year, according to IDC. Apple was the shining star, growing by 2.8 percent, despite the majority of its computers selling for significantly more than $1,000. During calendar Q3 2015, Apple's net income was 2.5 times that of Microsoft, which was the previous computing era's tech titan. Go back to the same quarter in 2009, Apple's net income was just $1.67 billion compared to its rival's $4.48 billion. Or, looked at differently, the company's net income was 6.6 times greater during Q3 2015 compared to the same calendar quarter in 2009.

Jobs may have been the visionary, but Cook's talented control over manufacturing logistics, effective expansion of retail distribution outlets, and sassy premium pricing strategies combined with intangibles like customer satisfaction are the secret to Apple's decade 2010 success.

Cook's Kitchen

However, Cook has not proven to be the visionary leader that Apple needs to maintain long-term success. In a bitterly biting September 2015 analysis, I called Cook's crop—Apple Watch, 12-inch MacBook, and iPad Pro—“products without purpose“. No matter how much revenue these devices generate, none is disruptive innovation. Apple Watch is more fashionable than functional. One-hundred dollar discounts from Best Buy and Target during the holidays hint at real sales demand, or lack of it.

For Christmas shoppers, Best Buy slashed $300 off 12-inch MacBook’s MSRP, bringing the starting price to more reasonable $999. The laptop is pretty, and it sports clever keyboard and magnificent display, but the performance is more comparable to a budget Chromebook costing $300 or less..

iPad Pro is overly-large, and the dimensions, which remind of a giant iPhone, make the thing somewhat unbalanced in the hands; it’s awkward. The screen size has a touch of Tim Cook applying pricing tactics. Like $9.99 feels much less than $10; the 12.9 inches diminishes size perceptions, which really can't change what the tablet packs: 13-inch screen, and that's laptop size.

True innovation is this: Invention of something people don’t know they need until they use it and then react: “Wow, why didn’t I think of that? It’s so obvious”. Apple achieved such success by focusing on benefits not features. But even then, a company has to identify the right benefits. I see lots of clever design attributes in all three aforementioned products but benefits are compromised for fashion. In other words, form trumps function, rather than compliments it.

Much of the "Ah-ha!" moments during a Jobs "One More Thing" unveiling, and experience using it that followed, sparked the you didn't know you needed realization. Is that really the emotional reaction to an over-sized tablet or new features like 3D Touch. Honestly?

Disrupt Thyself

Cook strays from Apple's core philosophy, which extended from Jobs' personality, as I understand it as an outsider but intimate observer: The aforementioned disruptive innovation, which often is misunderstood. Analysts, bloggers, investors, journalists, and others like to waggy-wag their fingers about how Apple successfully disrupts new or even established categories. They're right. But what most of them overlook: How during the Jobs era Apple as often disrupted itself. The quality is fundamental to past successes and its absence assures Apple's eventual fall from the tree; that is if nothing changes.

Risk defined the bitten-fruit logo company under Jobs' leadership and willingness to drastically change the rules of competitive engagement. Let's separate the concepts, which both are fundamental to Apple's past disruptive innovation successes.

When Jobs launched OS X in March 2001, months before Windows XP, he disrupted OS 8.x-9.x, which had a fairly stable app ecosystem that developers supported. Architectural change coming when the majority of developers would follow the money, meaning XP, was madness—and done during a friggin' recession. The pay-off wouldn't come for years, but proved there can be great rewards from tremendous risk-taking.

Two months later, when Apple opened its first two retail stores, Jobs risked disrupting his tenuous reseller supply-chain. Channel conflict could have doomed the Mac, and definitely there were consequences as more stores opened. But this self-disrupting risk also paid off. As did many others.

My favorite is iPod nano, which introduction was a fuck you moment. During the Sept. 7, 2005, launch event, Jobs boasted: “The iPod mini is what all of our competitors have their sights focused on. We’re going to do something pretty bold. Today, we’re gonna replace it”. Apple’s cofounder went on to name the new iPod nano, then asked for a video camera to close-up on his jeans, and, pointing to the coin pouch, asked: “Ever wonder what this pocket is for? I’ve always wondered that”. He then pulled out the diminutive music player.

Under Jobs’ leadership, Apple did something unthinkable, by so blatantly defying the rules of retail: Killing off a product at the height of popularity, what was then the most purchased portable music player in the world. Just as competitors started shipping iPod mini knock-offs to stores for the holidays, Apple made their devices suddenly obsolete—bricks, by comparison. For all the cleverness of nano’s design, there was greater innovation from a product marketing perspective. The little music player was a giant middle finger lifted towards iPod mini imitators.

By contrast, Apple today stretches out the retail supply chain, which is good for return-on-initial investment and bolstering margins. So you see, for example, three generations of iPhone for sale and two-generations each for iPad mini and iPad Air. Adding the Pro disrupts nothing, but simply adds another SKU. That's supply-chain thinking, rather than the self-disrupting mind.

Someone could argue that iPhone 6 and 6 Plus were self-disrupting—that such dramatically larger handsets risked pushing away some customers. Not when Apple kept selling smaller, older models and when market demand had shifted to larger smartphones. If anything, Tim Cook demonstrated risk-aversion and supply-chain thinking by taking so long to release handsets with larger screens. This is where his genius bows before logistics that make short-term revenue-generating, margin-maximizing sense at the expense of Apple's innovation ethic.

By contrast, killing off the popular MacBook Air when introducing 12-inch MacBook would have been risky, self-disrupting innovation. But the innovative benefits, and plenty of them of them like the display or clever keyboard, are lost in continued strong sales of the older (and now less-costly) computer. Air eclipses MacBook's appeal, which is lessened by price ($1,299 to $1,599) and compromises made for lightness and thinness (Intel Core M processor, among them). .

David Thinking

Alongside risk, and associated willingness to self-disrupt, Apple exhibited another potent corporate characteristic under Jobs' leadership. Need, as much as anything else, compelled him to change the competitive rules of engagement, like David vs. Goliath in the Biblical epic. I first wrote about this concept on my personal blog in May 1999, posting to BetaNews an updated version but with same headline—"Why Apple succeeds, and always will"—7 months later.

I apply term "David Thinking", based on fascinating research conducted by Ivan Arreguín-Toft, who is an assistant professor of international relations at Boston University. In 2005 book, How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Tactics, Arreguín-Toft explains that seemingly weaker opponents can prevail against stronger ones by changing the rules of engagement. (So that you don’t have to purchase the book, review paper “How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict” as an alternative; another accessible read is March 11, 2009, The New Yorker story “How David Beats Goliath”. Writer Malcolm Gladwell later expanded his treatise into a book.)

Arreguín-Toft produces excellent historical data showing that, in wars, when smaller rivals apply David Thinking they are more likely to win, even against mightier opponents. The Biblical example of David vs. Goliath is good analogy. Rather than fight like Goliath—and almost certainly lose by dawning armor and sword—David relied on his own strengths. A slingshot and stone kept him out of Goliath’s reach but on the offensive. The farmer changed the rules of engagement.

Goliath represents the status quo, as did Microsoft and Windows OEMs when Jobs donned title interim CEO in 1997. If you closely examine the categories where Apple disrupted established players during his tenure, the company changed the rules to favor its strengths and to prioritize benefits over features. Think of the wrapper that goes around your take-out coffee cup as a feature and protecting your hand from being burned as a benefit.

Apple's colossal success over the past half-decade makes it Goliath, which shouldn't predispose Tim Cook to status quo thinking but he does. And why not? Goliath naturally wants to play to his strengths, too. If you closely look at how little product SKUs change over several generations, how much innovation really is iteration, and how the approaches avoid big risks to protect existing revenue streams, Cook's leadership strengths and foibles lay bare.

In May 2014, I regretfully stepped back from the "always will succeed" position when asserting: "Apple has lost its way". As a long-time Apple customer, it was a disappointing realization reached.

The iPhone Empire

Why this all matters is the early-days changes sweeping smartphone markets. Five months ago, I warned about the "Collapse of the iPhone empire", which generated the typical clickbait crap accusations from the idiot crowd. I stand by the analysis, even more so in 2016. During calendar Q3 2015, iPhone accounted for 62.5 percent of Apple revenues—that's up from 34 percent the same quarter in 2010, when total company revenues were less than a third as much ($15.7 billion vs $51.5 billion). Apple's fortunes rose with iPhones sales success, and, given the current product lineup, will likewise fall.

So much dependence on a single product is the worst kind of risk, when taking risks to innovate could preserve and even extend Apple's dominance as tech titan. Already by calendar Q2 2015, Gartner reported slowdown in global smartphone sales and the first decline in the largest market, China, which is hugely important to Apple—accounting for 24.3 percent of total company calendar Q3 revenues, exceeding Europe. During that quarter, Gartner's global data shows increasing smartphone sales shift to emerging markets, where iPhone's higher pricing poses potential problems.

In the short-term, Apple likely will benefit from the continued shift of existing customers on smaller iPhones to larger ones and switchers on big Androids returning to the iOS ecosystem. But as smartphone sales slow in maturing markets, sales shift to emerging markets, and U.S. carriers do away with margin-lifting subsidies, there must come the quarter where iPhone sales growth stalls or retreats. If Apple Watch or iPad Pro is Apple's Plan B, uh-oh.

My personal loss of interest in Apple products is boredom, partly. For example, MacBook Pro is little changed from 2009 or the Air from 2010. Neither iOS or OS X is dramatically different or improved since Steve Jobs death. Logistics genius Tim Cook milks established product lines, which is great for preserving the status quo and maximizing margins. But as past innovations ripen, and some over-ripen, on the tree and no self-disrupting crop replaces them, the Apple orchard risks being bitten by blight. Risk would be less if there wasn't so much dependence on one variety of fruit.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Dmytro Zinkevych

Lien pour 'BetaNews.Com/2016/01/08/EFF_vs_John%c2%a0Legere'

EFF vs John Legere

Publié: janvier 8, 2016, 5:33am CET par Joe Wilcox

kickboxing

John Legere waved his magic spin-control wand today, following accusations from Google and the EFF—that's Electronic Frontier Foundation to you, Bud—that the cellular carrier throttles video streams in violation of Net Neutrality rules. In a video, T-Mobile's CEO calls the throttling accusations a "game of semantics" and "bullshit".

"We give our customers more choices, and these jerks are complaining?" Legere blasts. "Who the Hell do they think they are? What gives them the right to dictate what my customers or any wireless consumer can choose for themselves?" I wonder, too.

Binge On, Baby

The centerpiece of this spittle-fest is Binge On, which the Magenta carrier turned on in mid-November. Simply stated: Customers watch partner sites' video streams for free, without data consumption being applied to their monthly allotment. However, video quality is downgraded (sorry, no 4K to smartphone for you)—and that applies to non-Binge On partners, like YouTube. Hence the throttling accusations.

Whose bullshit are you going to binge on? T-Mobile's, or EFF's and Google's? What is it with that organization name, by the way? Electronic Frontier Foundation? Frontier of what? The connotations are some brave, new world pioneer paving the way—eh, building a foundation—to a better future. "Freedom for Whom?" I ask. Looks to me like EFF wants to take away my freedom to watch more mobile video.

T-Mobile's CEO wonders who is EFF, too? Hours after posting the video, he answered questions on Twitter, where he was none too polite asking about the organization. "Who the fuck are you EFF?" Good question. "Why are you stirring up so much trouble, and who pays you?" The smarmy protector of so-called Internet values responded with a campaign to "tell T-Mobile's CEO about EFF", bolstered by hashtag #AskJohn.

EFF has fun and generates publicity at John Legere's expense. There's nothing like a so-called fight-for-the-people organization taking on big business to rally sympathizers. Except, this is more like an episode of Bozo vs. the Buffoon. John Legere has done more to bring freedom of choice to the U.S. cellular market, to unshackle customers from oppressive 2-year indentured servitude, than anyone else—and surely lots more than EFF has done, other than bark and wag its tail. He is the anti-establishment establishment (no typo). Like Steve Jobs, Legere is a beloved brand and not one easily tarnished. EFF picked a fight with another David, not Goliath.

Untangling Twisted Logic

EFF's allegations are lopsided. Think about the throttling claims another way. Isn't Net Neutrality about treating all content providers the same? You could argue that T-Mobile is being fair by not playing favorites. Everyone gets crappier video resolution—480p, which is (gasp) oh-so 2010 technology. That's a lifetime ago to a 6 year-old watching old "Big Comfy Couch" episodes on Dad's battered, shattered iPhone 4s (which also was state of the art in 2010).

The whole on-by-default thing has EFF personnel wriggling their undies, which is rather absurd. "You can get three times more video from your data plan by doing nothing," Legere boasts, and he refers to non-partners, since streaming is free from the likes of Netflix and Hulu. The unequal treatment here isn't throttling but what's free. Or am I missing something?

In a daring Midnight jailbreak, two days before Binge On turned on, I escaped Verizon prison and sought asylum from the Un-carrier. Not only did T-Mobile welcome me back, but Magenta paid off some of my obligations to Verizon. In reviewing my account a couple days back, I saw that Binge On is on by default. Well, Hell, yeah. But I can turn it off. On-by-default isn't on-forever. You can turn off the feature, stream glorious quality, but rack up data consumption.

That's the thing: consumption. Google should shut its trap, when Binge On brings potential revenue benefits. Final numbers aren't yet tabulated, but eMarketer estimates that more than half of digital ad spending went to mobile last year, exceeding PCs. The more people watch video, and John Legere claims a 12-percent increase among T-Mobile customers because of Binge On, the more eyeballs for video ads. With more than 90-percent of revenues coming from search-related advertising, you would think Google would welcome more YouTube consumption.

I hadn't heard Legere speak before watching today's video. That's one helluva Massachusetts accent he has. I'm a Maine boy, and my state was part of the Commonwealth of Mass. until 1820. There is shared heritage and cultural attitudes that persist 200 years later. We love our independence, and I can't get enough of John Legere's independent, fuck you attitude. Defiance is in the genetic code of the residents. EFF should be wary of getting into a South Boston-like bar fight.

Photo Credit: photofriday/Shutterstock

You won't find me at CES 2016

Publié: janvier 6, 2016, 10:45pm CET par Joe Wilcox

CES 2015 Show Selfie

This morning I asked someone stomping around the Consumer Electronics Show: "Will your team survive CES? Will anyone?" She answered: "Survival rates still TBD". True that. Today is officially Day 1, but that's a meaningless designation. Major announcements started Day -1, and there were even more on what I call Day 0 because the opening keynote is that evening. Acer shot its wad on January 4th, for example. The 5th brought major announcements from Casio, HP, Lenovo, Samsung, Sony, and, among many, many, many, many more vendors.

CES is such a cacophony of product announcements early is the only way to assure news coverage. Hehe, if any. With so many of vendor mini-events already completed, one could contend that the Consumer Electronics Show is over before the first day ends.

I haven't flown to Las Vegas since 2008 and, yes, celebrate my eighth year kicking CES to the curb. It's not worth my time or money. The news value is null. (Although I might feel differently if writing for a high-traffic tech blog where geek readers can't get enough information fast enough about the next, new thing. Audience matters. Write for it.)

The press meetings rarely yield meaningful relationships, because you're just one of many reporters that vendors grope for attention (CES 2015 official number of news media attendees: 6,592). Deals are made at the show, and for the companies or venture capitalists making them there is huge value rarely seen behind the mayhem. But I'm no rainmaker, just a lowly journalist.

Noise, Noise, Noise

Chaos is the best way to describe CES, which real appeal is competitive insanity. That's the only sense I can make of the madness. "If my competitor goes and gets exposure for its product, I might lose something" or "If my competitor goes there must be value in my attending, too". Value? Don't make me laugh. If there was real value for most vendor attendees so many of them wouldn't rush announcements to get ahead of the noise. Official CES 2015 number of product announcements: 20,000-plus, from 3,631 exhibits and 60,217 exhibitor attendees. Yikes!

CES 2015 was one of the worst for preannouncements, which already were bad two years earlier. As New Years 2016 dawned, I couldn't imagine how this year's show could outdo the last one. But it has, so far. They generally started later, Day -1, but nevertheless packed in a shitload by end of Day 0. Why hold an event at all, if no one waits for the start? Or the big news is over before the first day ends?

The problem is no one wanting to miss press coverage and so everyone yells about their products at once—and early. Seriously, I expect little meaningful left come Thursday morning (January 7). The pileup means that:

Even more products are lost in the noise
There is too much at once for bloggers and journalists to cover
Smaller, deserving vendors are missed, even with something really cool
People bug out of the show earlier, because all the news is over—wasting attendees' time and money

I'm a huge fan of smaller events hosted by tech companies, where there is more focus and clear message. CES is too big for most vendors and bloggers, broadcasters, or journalists covering it. If there is any real value to such a large venue, it's for retail buyers and distributors. Even then, I wonder.

The Audience Here Is...

Let's talk about them more, the buyers and distributors, because from my vantage point on the outside looking in they are the trade show's real audience. The rest of us are window shoppers.

What else makes sense of CES largely being the largest vaporware show on the planet? It's bad enough that vendors yell over one another to get noticed, to glean even a smidgen of marketing attention. Many, and in past years most, announce products that don't ship for months. Some won't release until Holiday 2016. If you're a consumer electronics or tech manufacturer looking to line up retail and other distributers, yelling now and shipping later is sensible enough.

Problem: From a broader product marketing perspective, announcing now and shipping months later is ditz-for-brains promotion. They say the Internet never forgets, but people do. Today's saliva-generating tech toy is forgotten tomorrow and most certainly in three months. If not for bloggers feeding the InterWebs rumors like a momma bird worms to her brood, few people would remember CES' new thing turned past tense.

But I wonder, do you really need a huge venue like CES to line up retail and other distribution deals? I ask because of risk. Tech companies spend millions of dollars on network and other security to deter, and hopefully prevent, corporate espionage. Yet they parade trade secrets at a hugely public event, with scads of press coverage and competitors' spies lurking everywhere.

Yeah, the big manufacturer's product gets noticed and deals are signed. But the new thing is copied and released months earlier, with the original providing free-marketing tailwind. Hehe, today's Best of Show is tomorrow's ripped-off and released.

That's good segue looking at the intended CES audience another way. About one-third of 2015's 176,676 attendees was exhibit personnel. General attendees: 109,507, or 54.5 percent of all. That's right, excluding news media, 4.5 out of every 10 attendees exhibited. Ah, yeah.

If Consumer Electronics Show is your big thing this week, power to you. Enjoy! As a journalist and storyteller, my attention is elsewhere.

Photo Credit: CES

Two weeks with Google Pixel C [preview]

Publié: décembre 30, 2015, 7:16pm CET par Joe Wilcox

For about a fortnight, I have used Google's Pixel C as my primary tablet. I like the 10.2-inch slate much more than anticipated, particularly after being negatively influenced by some rather lukewarm techsite reviews before FedEx delivered the tab to my door.

Google designed and produces Pixel C, which is by far the best Android tablet you can buy anywhere. Like Nexus smartphones, which debuted in January 2010, the tablet is meant as a reference design for OEMs and developing Android apps appropriate for larger, but still mobile, screens. I primarily will focus on the hardware this round; apps and Android will come next year in my full review.

The search-and-information giant unexpectedly unveiled the Pixel C on September 29th. Sales started December 8th. Specs: 10.2-inch LTPS LCD touchscreen, 2560 x 1800 resolution, 308 pixels per inch, 500-nit brightness; nVidia Tegra X1 processor with Maxwell graphics; 3GB RAM; 32GB ($449) or 64GB ($599) storage; 8-megapixel rear and 2MP front cameras; four microphones; two speakers (sideways of screen in portrait mode on the bezel); USB Type-C port; WiFi AC; Bluetooth 4.1; accelerometer; compass; gyroscope; ambient-light, half-effect, and proximity sensors; Android 6. Enclosure is anodized aluminum that measures 242 x 179 x 7 mm and weighs 517 grams.

Now for some early reactions about the hardware, in no particular order of importance:

1. Design is recognizably reminiscent of Chromebook Pixel. The screen, shape, styling all are derivative. Google even added the distinctive color bar and adoption of USB C. See #5, #6, and #8 for more on shared design heritage.

The shared heritage also applies to performance, which will be covered more in the full review. For a cloud-connected computer, Chromebook Pixel is surprisingly speedy. Same applies to Pixel C, which handles smoothly and feels sporty.

2. Buttons and ports are laid out for landscape orientation; placement may disorient some users' muscle memory. Held in portrait fashion, power button is upper-right side, volume controls on right-topside, USB C port top-left side, and audio jack lower-right bottom. Turned sideways: power left-topside; volume upper-left side; USB C lower-left side, audio upper-right side.

Portrait placement is excellent, particularly for accessing volume buttons or for USB C charging. Webcam is top-front facing in this orientation, unlike iPad where iSight is left-side front. Meaning: Apple poorly places the webcam for video chats or Hangouts. Google gives better.

However, Pixel C is also meant for the browser and some other apps in portrait mode, where the layout of buttons and ports is inconvenient. You design primarily for one orientation or the other. For Apple, it's portrait and for Google it's landscape. The difference illuminates design usage philosophies, and both companies compromise.

3. Pixel C feels heavy in the hand—and like a brick with the keyboard magnetically attached as protective cover. The heft isn't unbearable or even tiring using the tablet. iPad Air 2 weighs less than a pound (437 grams), while Pixel C climbs to 1.1 pounds (517 grams). The solid construction contributes to the sense of weightiness, which, to reiterate, doesn't discomfort me.

But i wouldn't want to lug around Pixel C for long with the $149 keyboard cover. Aluminum all-the-way around makes the touch more cold feeling, and combined weight jumps by 399 grams to 916 grams (2.02 pounds). For comparison, the 12-inch MacBook weighs 920 grams (2.03 pounds). Point: This isn't a light kit, and some people will find it to be too heavy.

4. Grip is great. The anodized aluminum shell is not slippery. As such, the hand firmly holds Pixel C, with or without keyboard cover, Drop risk is greater with iPad Air 2 but less with plasticky tablets.

5. The tablet's dimensions feel great. Regardless the orientation, Pixel C holds pleasingly, particularly as a traditional tablet longways vertical. The aspect ratio is what Google calls √2, or stated another way 1:1.41, or about the same as A4 paper. This makes the tablet more squarish than rectangular in both orientations and surprisingly more comfortable to hold and to use.

The benefits are visual and physical. Web content pleasingly presents, as do Google's homegrown apps (and presumably soon those from third-parties). The aspect ratio is closer to Chromebook Pixel's 3;2 (another sign of the shared design legacy), which is superb for photography. Google Photos app present fantastically with the √2 aspect ratio and I report about using editing apps in my full review. Pixel C could be a shooter's dream tablet, much more than any iPad.

The physical benefit is balance. The aforementioned extra heft is easily ignored because Pixel C balances so well in the hand(s) whether held in landscape or portrait orientation—and the squarish shape is major reason. Holding the tablet feels familiar, like holding a book, and handles much better than any iPad. How funny if Pixel C's killer application turns out to be the aspect ratio and physical shape.

6. Screen is gorgeous—best of class. The 10.2-inch display is crisp by every measure that matters and magnificently bright. DisplayMate puts iPad Air 2 at 415 nit, which is excellent. Google claims 500 nit, and we'll see what the industry experts give for final number. Whatever the rating, the display is plenty bright and beautiful to my eyes.

The resolution is close to Chormebook Pixel, and a bit finer—2560 x 1800 compared to 2560 x 1700, respectively. Likewise, visual quality is similar between them. Many smartphone or tablet screens, particularly those AMOLED, present bold colors and rich contrast that looks good but isn't natural; they're not what the eyes. Like the Chromebook, Pixel C presents more muted but pleasingly rich color and contrast that aren't over-saturated. Photographers, this tab could be for you.

7. Flanking speakers deliver dimension. I was a bit skeptical about Google placing the speakers on the bezel to the side rather than facing front. But I got to say, surprisingly, they give great soundstage and separation. For testing, I watched part of the Indochine Tidal X concert, portion of movie Jurassic World (streamed using Google Play Movies app), and many YouTube videos. All sound great.

They look fantastic, too, and I don't see the √2 aspect ratio as presenting problems showing 16:9 or 16:10 content. The viewing window is plenty large,and I would absolutely rate the overall experience of sight and sound ahead of iPad Air 2. Once again, Google gives better.

8. Keyboard satisfies. The keys feel good and responsive to the touch, like I would expect from a device branded Pixel. Keyboard is one of the Chromebook's biggest benefits. Peripheral attachment is easy and magnetically holds strongly fast as Google claims. The real test of any keyboard is how your muscle memory transcends one layout to another. I find switching between the two to devices to be satisfying enough, conceding—and this applies to most tablets—near full-size layout is never nearly enough.

9. Magnetic attachment is strong, and perhaps to a fault. The keyboard can also be used as a protective cover, but should you really have to pry it off to remove? In trying to separate the keyboard as cover from Pixel C, I nearly dropped the tablet and did so the keyboard a couple of times. You've been warned.

10. Battery life depends on brightness. Google claims 10 hours battery life, which would be comparable to other tablets in the size class. However, as previously mentioned, Pixel C's screen is 500 nit, which is brighter than most, if not all, competing tabs. Kicking back brightness to, say, 75 percent, can give still satisfying visual experience while extending time between recharges.

That's a wrap, with one software consideration for anyone deciding on whether to save $100 and buy the 32GB model: Expect 21GB, or thereabouts, available storage out of the box. On my 64 gigger, I see 52.88GB available to start, of which I have used 4.21GB, mostly for apps. Since storage isn't expandable, budget buyers may later regret saving a C-note.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Google+ is too much ghost town for me

Publié: décembre 23, 2015, 7:04pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Ghost Town (the common description of Google+)

As the New Year approaches, and I contemplate 2016, my online social space surely will change; my like-affair with Google+ draws close to an end. Nearly six weeks ago, the service "reimagined", as a "fully redesigned Google+ that puts Communities and Collections front and center".

Since then, my Google+ engagement has dropped by more than 90 percent. I don't find as many posts to Plus-one, to share with others, or on which to comment. Similarly, I see shocking decline in the number of responses to my posts—not something I actively seek so much as by which to judge interest in what I write and also to interact with other Plusers. After years of misguided critics calling Google+ a ghost town, the tumbleweeds roll.

According to analytics firm Compete, the number of unique visitors to Google+ fell 15 percent from March to June 2015 and another 28.1 percent through November, the same month the site realigned and redesigned. From March to November: 38.9 percent decrease. Perhaps the search and information giant sought, with emphasis on Collections and Communities, to add ballast to a listing ship.

Yesterday, I contacted Compete for clarification on the data, whether or not it's global and what regional differences might be. I held back posting this story for the firm's answer, which is absent, presumably because of the Christmas holiday. Surprising: comScore's U.S. data doesn't show the same trend.

In the United States, for 2015 so far, Google+ unique visitors was highest in May: 110.3 million, according to data comScore released at my request. Through November, the decline isn't as steep—15.6 percent—and unique visors rose from October (92.5 million to 93.1 million). December data won't be available until sometime next month.

Where Are They?

I look around Google+ and see abandoned buildings. Maybe the residents have moved to Community skyscrapers. The few of us unwilling to adapt to high-rise living scatter about the old wooden structures. In which case, the social network isn't so much vacant as relocated.

I'm not alone in seeing fewer residents milling about the town square. "The stream of posts I see is far more sparse than even a few months ago", says Debo Capulet, who asks: "But abandon G+? For what?? Facebook is not an option". Agreed. I'm at the point of adapt or leave but with no clear destination.

"Meaningful communication is definitely down" says James M, who claims that fanboys "are in denial that G+ is on the wrong path".

By contrast, Paolo Amoroso has "seen interaction and engagement with my posts grow a lot since Collections were released, but some of mine are featured so this is not unexpected". Maybe he is Google's star-type user, since he is involved in a popular niche category, astronomy, and works at the Planetarium of Milan (Italy) as a space educator.

I have zero interest in Collections, and limited interest in Communities. I interact with people around public posts, which are the core ghost town. Perhaps topic areas are busier. Here's the thing: I don't use the Internet to reinforce my interests or perspectives but to expand them. As such, I rarely frequent closed forums around specific topics or interests; too many are echo chambers. Also, I just don't have time.

Destination Uncertain

John Skeats disagrees, seeing Collections as a "wonderful option. We all know people who share great content on some topics and other content we simply don't want to see. Collections allows those who want to filter individuals' posts to do so—but does not force anyone to use Collections if they don't want to. That's a wonderful thing".

I don't see same value in Collections, or Communities, which demand that Google+ be the hub and spokes of your online activity. Google+ is not my online hub, but one spoke. Similarly, I rarely use Facebook, which would replace all of my online activity if used as designed.

"I haven't really explored Collections, so I can't speak to that", says Jim Carr. "I was initially excited about Communities, but then I found little content of interest in the ones I joined. I'd already been visiting less and less, because my friends either didn't join or weren't very active. Now with the refocus, I barely visit at all. It's feeling more and more like a random mess. It's a real shame, because I thought the overall design and usability—before the refocus—was superior to Facebook".

Inferior to, or only as good as, Facebook makes Google+ a non-starter. The other social network had nearly four times more unique visitors in November, according to Compete.

Facebook interests me even less, as my Google+ usage winds down short of drastic change reviving engagement. My final destination, likely several social spaces, is uncertain. More time on Twitter is option. But where else? I dunno yet. Maybe I should spend more time at the local free-WiFi coffee shop and there start up conversations with the living. Rather than mill among the dead.

Photo Credit: Janelle Lugge/Shutterstock

Holiday 2015 Gift Guide: Stocking stuffers

Publié: décembre 18, 2015, 9:35pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Santa Claus Figure

Here we are, days before Christmas, and you're thinking about last-minute stocking stuffers. I've got an eclectic selection of things I would want to get or give for December 25th. Some of them will demand rushing online to take advantage of last-minute shipping offers. Others require no shipping at all, like music subscription services. Confession: Some items will require a larger stocking but no wrapping.

I present the list alphabetically, and in no order of preference.

Apple Music or Google Music—family edition. Both subscriptions cost $9.99 per month for individuals or $14.99 for families. Apple lets six accounts share, while Google only five. Apps are available for Android and iOS, and Big G lets you also stream from the browser. The fruity service presents music better, and its curated playlists are exceptional. But the search giant includes YouTube Red for free, letting all the family watch videos commercial-free.

Chromecast Audio and Chromecast (2015). Your smartphone is the remote for watching streamed content or listening to wireless audio. Chromecast Audio is new this year and effectively gives you wireless control over your wired speaker. Buy two and sync speakers in different rooms, playing the same tunes among them. Chromecast, now in its second generation, lets you stream content from PCs or phones. Google Store sells each device for $35, with free, overnight-shipping.

GoPro Hero4 Session may be the stocking stuffer of the season, following an unexpected, early December $100 price drop. The diminutive action video cam shoots up to 1440p and is water-proof. The direct price is $199.99, which includes 2-day shipping and gift bag. But Amazon bundles up 32GB memory card and head-mount strap for the same price.

iRig Mic and Mic Lav are designed for use with mobile phones or tablets and can be used for anything from karaoke to professional recording. iRig Mic is a traditional style microphone, while iRig Mic Lav is a small clip-on. Manufacturer-direct prices are $59.99 and $49.99, respectively, and a two-pack of the smaller device sells for $79.99. Both are available for less from Amazon, and Prime members can get them before Christmas. IK Multimedia offers a wide range of other audio products worth exploring for the would-be musician or podcaster on your Christmas list.

Kindle Fire TV Stick offers similar benefits to Chromecast but taps into the Amazon ecosystem and provides a real remote. The retailer just started adding broadcast and cable networks to its video service, like NBC, Showtime, and Starz (additional fees may apply). The streaming stick is ideal for the cord-cutter who also is an Amazon Prime subscriber; for no additional cost, he or she can watch thousands of movies, TV shows, and original productions—like "Mozart in the Jungle" or "The Man from the High Tower".

Kindle Unlimited is the bargain gift for the reader on your gift list. Amazon gives access to millions of books, many in audio, too—$119.88 for twelve months. The Kindle Reader app is available for most major desktop and mobile platforms, or from a web browser. Readers rejoice!

Lomography Camera. Digicams are so popular now, they're passe. Film shooting requires more finesse, and it's increasingly an artform that could be ideal for the independent, creative mind on your gift list. Lomography sells a variety of cool and classy film cameras, lens, or kits. Among the many choices: Limited Winter edition Diana F + Cortina ($99) and the Lomo'Instant (from $119). Amazon and Urban Outfitters also carry cams from Lomography.

Master & Dynamic ME05 is my current pick for audiophile earphones selling under $200 (they're $199). Made from solid brass, they look as good as they sound. You get Neodymium drivers and 16 ohm impedance. But uh-oh, to use the cable's mic and remote you will need an iOS device. Sorry, Android users.Two-day shipping is free from the manufacturer, which will be tight for Christmas. Hurry! They're out of stock at Amazon.

Smartwatch. For the tech geek who wants everything newfangled, high-tech wristwear is the thing, if your budget allows and you don't mind putting pricey gifts in the stocking. Best Buy sells Apple Watch and the cheaper Sport variant for $100 off—that's $449 and $249, respectively, and up depending on band choice. The wearable will compliment your Christmas buddy's iOS device.

Android users will want Wear devices, and Google Store will ship them overnight for free. I have used Huawei Watch ($399), LG Watch Urbane ($349), and Moto 360 ($299.99). But there are plenty of other makers and styles to choose from, Fossil Q ($275) among them. You can't go wrong with most any one. My listed prices, are starting from Google Store; they go up depending on wristband choice, and you may find bargains elsewhere but not necessarily free, overnight shipping in time for Christmas..

Tidal is the music streaming service I use, and it ain't cheap—$19.99 monthly for the HiFi subscription, which serves up music in CD-quality, using the 1411kbps Free Lossless Audio Codec. For the music connoisseur on your list, Tidal will lavish their ears with fine fidelity across genres. A six-month prepay plan costs $101.94, which saves $3 per month. The service is available from Android and iOS apps or from a web browser.

That's a wrap, for now. I may add a few additional items over the weekend.

Photo Credit: Shuterstock/MorganStudio

To truly innovate, Apple needs a lot more than a new COO

Publié: décembre 17, 2015, 8:09pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Back in April 2013, when Forbes ran a commentary asserting it was time for Tim Cook to go, I forcefully responded that "Apple needs a COO, not new CEO". The day has arrived, with the company announcing this morning that Jeff Williams fills the vacant chief operating officer position. Eh, that's not what I had in mind, and Apple investors should question the wisdom of the appointment, too.

I mean no slight towards Mr. Williams, who looks more than adequately competent to handle the job. Like Cook, when COO, Williams is a manufacturing and logistics leader—excellent credentials to manage day-to-day operations over the world's wealthiest tech company as measured by market cap and quarterly net income. The problem: Cook and Williams are questionable pairing, because their backgrounds and skillsets are too much alike. You got an electron circling another electron in the atom's nucleus.

I have repeatedly praised the Steve Jobs and Tim Cook partnership for how they complemented one another. Cook arguably is a logistics genius, and he can be credited for much of Apple's success over the past four years. He stepped into the chief executive's role when the company needed someone to manage the empire and expand its influence rather than develop newfangled things. Jobs brought vision, focus, and good taste. I often liken the two to James Kirk and Mr. Spock from Star Trek—Jobs and Cook, respectively.

I see the Cook-Williams pairing more like two Vulcans running a company which appeal isn't intellectual but emotional. If Apple Watch, 12-inch MacBook, and iPad Pro are any indication, Cook can't cook in the design kitchen anywhere as tastefully as his predecessor. Three months ago, I asserted about the three products, and maintain the position today:

Apple is now the middle-aged boys club; men of the same age designing products for rich, white, middle-age males. 'Products without purpose' I call new MacBook, Apple Watch, and iPad Pro. Where once Steve Jobs filled niches and created new categories, CEO Tim Cook and company create new Apple ware for which there is little to no need whatsoever.

"Products without purpose" do have one purpose: Making more money from higher margins, something Cook manages to execute exceptionally well. Shareholders can rejoice at his success. Sorry, fanboys, he's no visionary leader—and Apple needs someone in that role more than a new COO, which, unfortunately Cook fills all too well.

Apple's success is indisputable, and despite critics calling for imminent collapse none is likely coming in the foreseeable future. Cook runs a seeming perpetual money machine, which inertia is full-motion. "One more thing" is the missing element, however. Apple Watch, 12-inch MacBook, and iPad Pro are not the new innovations we waited for, and some of their features defy Jobs' vision. For example, Cook and Company can call the iPad Pro stylus the Apple Pencil, but it's still a stylus and Jobs argued against one; see his comments in 2007 and 2010.

Logistically, building off existing platforms, primarily iOS, the newer crop of Apple products aren't likely to fail. But they aren't future innovation, and the high emotional quotient within them, that will open up new product categories. How funny that Amazon and Google innovate with voice interaction, while Apple obsesses over touch.

Over the weekend, we set up Amazon Echo in the Wilcox living room, and it's the best new tech put there in a half-decade or more. Asking Alexa questions or giving her commands (like "play Christmas songs") is life-changing. Similarly, Google Now goes everywhere, and I don't mind talking to my phone in public places. Touchless interaction is the future of user interfaces; Apple advances some but pushes more to preserve the status quo, which is good for selling more devices.

I congratulate Apple on finally filling the vacant COO's position, and with someone surely up to the task. That said, I find it highly illogical that two Vulcans can be the emotional consorts that Apple needs to wow new and existing customers.

Photo Credit: BMCL/Shutterstock

Holiday 2015 Gift Guide: Headphones

Publié: décembre 14, 2015, 8:12pm CET par Joe Wilcox

As Christmas comes closer, it's time to think about rewarding your ears, or someone else's, with exceptional audio experience—headphones that I would ask Santa to bring for myself or deliver to another. If big, booming bass is your thing, read no further. Buy Beats, Sony, or another brand boasting barreling lows that shake your skull as well as eardrums.

My picks deliver broader audio range, each with warmer mids and highs and amazing detail, depending somewhat on the source of your content. Highly compressed AAC or MP3 tracks lack lots, but these cans will get a little more fidelity from them. CD or lossless source might change how you listen to music forever.

Our headphone lineup, in order of presentation based on price: Grado Labs Prestige Series SR80e; Audio-Technica ATH-M50x Professional Studio Monitor; Sennheiser Momentum 2.0 Wireless; Bang & Olufsen BeoPlay H7; Master & Dynamic MW60; and Grado Labs RS1e. I pick these six for their ability to deliver a more natural, authentic, sound appropriate for all genres. They range in retail price from $99 to $695.

Three are wired, the RS80e, ATH-50x, and RS1e; the others are wireless. Both Grados are open-back, the Senheiser is on-ear, and the rest are over-ear. Only one, the Momentum 2.0 Wireless, provides active noise-cancellation.

Useful Jargon

Some important technical tips:

Soundstage is how instruments are spatially placed in audio recordings. The headphones in this lineup all present superior soundstage, such that you often can visually place the instruments and singers, and even feel like you are in the room with them.
Open-back headphones let in the most background noise or leak sound to those people nearby. Open-backs also typically present the best soundtage of headphone styles.
On-ear headphones are as named. They sit on the lobes rather than enclose them. Whether or not as comfortable as, or more than, over-ear is a matter of taste. Without active noise-cancellation, like open-back, the wearer will hear sounds in the room.
Over-ear headphones typically cover the ear, making a soft seal that improves the aural experience while blocking out most background noise. Many people find this style to be the most comfortable to wear, particularly for long periods of time.
Impedance is a value you need to worry about. We'll skip the science and get to practical matters: If you're buying cans to listen to portable devices, like smartphones or PCs, you want lower impedance; I find 32 ohm to be just right. If impedance is too high, you won't jack enough volume to your headphones without aid of an amplifier. For stereo systems you want higher impedance, upwards of 600 ohm.
Frequency response typically ranges from 20 to 20,000 Hz, with bass and treble at both ends, respectively. The extremes exceed normal human hearing range, but not necessarily perception: Below 20 Hz, the listener may more feel the bass than hear it.
Transducer creates the sound, and there are typically three types: Dynamic (most common); Orthodynamic; and Electrostatic. Think little speakers. See Headfonics' explanation for more.
Active noise-cancellation, as implemented by the the single pair of headphones featured in this roundup, uses microphones to capture and largely eliminate ambient, background noise.
Aptx codec allows for wireless delivery of high-fidelity music via Bluetooth without imposing heavy compression. HTC, LG, Samsung, and Sony are among the major brands broadly supporting Aptx across their smartphone lineups. Among the missing: Apple. Full list of supported devices.

How I Listen

No headphone primer can satisfy everyone, and maybe not most people. The listening experience is subjective, and in this era of consumption across devices and locales also contextual. The portable Bluetooth speaker is good for the beach, but you want booming sub-woofers at home in the living room.

What you are accustomed to listening will affect your response to different headphones, too. If you mostly listen to compressed AAC or MP3 files with graphic equalizer punching the lows, most of the cans in this roundup likely will sound flat and too finely detailed. Emotionally they will feel wrong.

Grado Labs RS1e natural wood is a metaphor for their natural sound

I do not typically use app/software graphic equalizer, which while adapting music to personal tastes is as much about, if nor more, making up for what compressed music lacks. If you feel need to use EQ with any of these headphones, return them and buy something dirt cheap. These aren't the cans for you.

For the wireless models in this roundup, I conducted modest Aptx testing, because my primary devices—Chromebook Pixel LS, Nexus 6P smartphone, and Nexus 9 tablet—do not support the codec.

I primarily tested by streaming music in the 1411kbps Free Lossless Audio Codec from Tidal. Many people cannot hear the difference between higher and lower bitrate tracks. I can. You probably could, too, with a little effort. In blind tests, people often choose wrongly because they're accustomed to hearing compressed files, which as such sounds more natural. One sure-fire measure: Vocals tend to be crisper from CDs or digital lossless tracks compared to highly compressed AAC or MP3 files.

Even if you can discern the difference, it may not be difference enough. Not everyone wants to hear the fine detail of the symbol or have sense of being in the room during the recording. Perhaps you prefer to feel that boom boom of heavy bass. Good for you. Do enjoy but also understand this roundup probably isn't for you.

Cans for Your Consideration

There are other fine headphones to choose from. My apologies if your fav isn't included. These six would make my Christmas wish or gift list.

Grado Prestige Series SR80e. Brooklyn, New York-based Grado Labs specializes in phonographic needle cartridges and headphones with unique but classic sound signature. Cans are handcrafted and hand-assembled on site and individually tested to ensure they produce the so-called Grado sound.

Surveying user and professional reviews, warm is often used to describe fidelity that favors treble over bass. The SR80e are fairly balanced such that some listeners will regard music as being rather flat. It's my experience that the "e" series Grados are punchier, with respect to lows, than the previous "i" series. Bass is more refined rather than defined, however.

Some specs:

Style: Open-back
Impedance: 32 ohm
Transducer: Dynamic, open
Frequency response: 20-20,000 Hz

The open-ear design gives airier, more realistic soundstage. But the cans leak sound, and you will hear ambient background noise, too. These aren't best for your metro commute or air-flight.

The actual speaker enclosure is made out of a polycarbonate material with S-cushion pads that some people may find uncomfortable for long-wear. Typical selling price is $99.

Audio-Technica ATH-M50x Professional Studio Monitor. Classic and affordable describe these iconic cans, which produce more natural and realistic sound than most any alternatives available anywhere. Monitor headphones, or more traditionally speakers, are designed to deliver sound signature that is truest to the original recording. As such, monitors are popular among professional engineers and musicians.

Some people describe the M50x as flat, or authentic, depending on ear and preferences. I wouldn't call them as warm as the SR80e, but they nevertheless satisfy. There is excellent detail and fairly full, natural soundstage.

Some specs:

Style: Over-ear
Impedance: 38 ohm
Driver diameter: 45 mm
Transducer: Dynamic, open
Frequency response: 15-28,000 Hz

Construction materials don't feel or look high-end, which might deceive some potential buyers. The M50x may not delight the eyes, but the ears will wow. The circumaural, over-ear design diminishes sound leakage and blocks most ambient noise. The cups are cozy comfortable for long-wear.

For authentic sound and fine detail, these cans are the best bargain at almost any price, and they already are remarkably affordable, typically selling for less than $170 and during the holidays even for as little as $120.

Sennheiser Momentum 2.0 Wireless. These cans come in on-ear and over-ear variants, with the latter selling for $100 more. I tested the on-ear model, which fits comfortably even for long periods of time. The active noise-cancellation nearly blocks all ambient background noise, and there is little to no sound leakage. Note: The feature cannot be disabled when the cans are used wirelessly. For the record, I prefer headphones without active noise-cancellation.

Bluetooth connects easily, and controls for adjusting volume and pausing or changing tracks are accessible and easily-used. Listeners can take phone calls, using the built-in microphone, and then resume audio playback.

Senneiser Momentum 2 Wireless offer active noise-cancellation

I describe the audio signature as full. There is excellent definition for lows, mids, and highs. But the soundstage, while vast and surely satisfying, has an artificial quality. Among the six headphones, the M2's deliver the punchiest lows—sub-bass that is more felt than heard. The rumble causes my left ear to ache, even when the volume is fairly low or when listening for shorter intervals. That's a deal-breaker for me.

Some specs:

Style: On-ear
Battery Life: 20 hours+
Transducer: Dynamic, closed
Wireless: Bluetooth 4.0 + Aptx
Frequency response: 16-22,000 Hz

Styling is exceptional—retro cool—and photos do not capture the can's character or charm. From stitched leather to metal sliders, the M2 evoke an earlier audio era, when radio was the dominant means of communication and content consumption. Sennheiser provides a handsome hardback case and soft carrying bag that add value to the typical selling price: $399.

Of course you can use them with a 3.5-mm connector cable, which is supplied. But if you plan to use the M2 wired even 40 percent of the time, better choice could be the non-wireless open-ear model, which costs considerably less. Typically: $229, but during the holidays $149.

Bang & Olufsen BeoPlay H7. Based on audio profile, these modern-styled cans essentially are the Bluetooth version of the H6 wired and should not be confused with the H8 wireless, which sound signature digresses. Flat best describes the H7, like Audio-Technica ATH-M50x but with different audio character. Bass is subdued, but present, while mids and highs are warm and lively. Treble trumpets. The overall range is well-balanced, unlike the H8, which booms more bass, but provides active noise-cancellation.

Authentic and natural also describe the H7's sound signature, which presents dramatic, full soundstage. For Apple users distraught about missing Aptx joys, the BeoPlay model natively supports the AAC codec. But rip and listen lossless for the best bang from your iPad, iPhone, or iPod.

Unlike the other two wireless models in this roundup, the H7 present touch controls, which make me feel like a ditz-for-brains for my constant mistakes using them—like activating the phone when trying to up the volume.

Bluetooth connects easily, and answering a phone call is a snap. Wired is an option using the supplied 3.5-mm connector cord. Nice-to-have: The rechargeable battery is removable, if you'd like to carry a spare.

Some specs:

Style: Over-ear
Impedance: 20 ohm
Battery Life: 20 hours
Driver diameter: 40 mm
Transducer: Electro-dynamic
Wireless: Bluetooth 4.1; Aptx, AAC
Frequency response: 20-22,000 Hz

Plush modern styling defines the BeoPlay lineup. From the aluminum enclosures to the lambskin ear-cups, these cans boast luxury, and they feel luxurious, too. They're cozy-comfy, and you won't easily tire from wearing, nor because of the sound signature suffer ear fatigue easily. The circumaural, over-ear design diminishes sound leakage and blocks most ambient noise.

Typical price is $449. However, during the holidays the BeoPlay H8 can be found for the same price (that's $50 off), boosting bass and providing noise cancellation. Choice is yours which suits your tastes for the same price.

Master & Dynamic MW60. Immersive best describes the audio signature of these striking, retro-styled headphones. Soundstage is present—like you're there in the room with the musicians. Tonal range is balanced, presenting fine details. The lows ride the mids and highs, without overbearing the ears. Where the Momentum 2 cause my ears to ache and fatigue, the MW60 delight them with the faintest creak of the guitar's wood, full timber of the drums, and crackle in the singer's voice.

Compressed AAC and MP3 tracks are reborn, echoes of their former muddied selves, fresh and vital with renewed dimension. Whatever processing magic Master & Dynamic sprinkles into these cans, seemingly any sound source benefits.

Master & Dynamic MW60 deliver roomy soundstage and remarkably fine aural detail

In the strangest of ways, the MW60 are closest in tenor to the Grado RS1e. Both rely on design of the acoustic enclosure, rather than digital curmudgeonry, to produce authentic sound signature—however, using vastly different materials to achieve the feat. But the Grados are bound by wires, whereas the M&Ds free listeners from them.

Bluetooth connects easily, and the range is remarkable; even 15 meters (or more). The controls for adjusting volume and pausing or changing tracks are accessible and easily-used; they feel solid, too. Listeners can take phone calls, using the built-in microphone, and then resume audio playback; easily.

Some specs:

Style: Over-ear
Impedance: 32 ohm
Battery Life: 16 hours
Driver diameter: 45 mm
Transducer: Neodymium
Wireless: Bluetooth 4.1 + Aptx
Frequency response: 5-25,000 Hz

The MW60 are bit of a masculine affair. Aluminum, lambskin, leather, and stainless steel combine in rugged style that evokes aviators of a bygone era. Wearing the headphones makes me feel, even for scant seconds, like the radio operator on an Air Force bomber. The design is both nostalgic and modern.

The lambskin-covered memory foam cushions are immensely comfortable and they minimize sound leakage while blocking all but the loudest ambient background noise. Price is premium: $549. The MW60 are worth every penny and more.

Grado Labs RS1e. Reference Series is etched into the rich mahogany that gives the RS1e their distinctive look and sound signature. The Grado family means the cans to be the standard by which quality audio reproduction is measured. Reference means something. The wood is as much metaphor as it is functional. The material is more than just natural, providing the timber for producing more natural sound.

That is after undergoing a burn-in period. I used the RS1e for about 40 hours, similar to their "i" predecessor, before forever flat sound burst like a nova into spreading spatial fidelity. Spectacular soundstage, bright highs, and warm mids are defining acoustic characteristics.

The lows are present, vital, without being punchy. As such, I can wear the RS1e for hours upon hours with little to no ear fatigue. But I rarely do, because the cable is like a ball and chain. I don't want to sit on my ass, but move around, which is why the MW60 recently replaced the Grados as my headphones of choice.

Some specs:

Style: Open-back
Impedance: 32 ohm
Transducer: Dynamic, open air
Frequency response: 12-30,000 Hz

The open-ear design contributes to the airier, more realistic soundstage. But the cans leak sound, and you will hear ambient background noise, too. These aren't best for your metro commute or air-flight. But listening quietly, you will hear detail silent to other headphones.

Soundstage and definition are most pronounced on music engineered before the turn of the century. Pop and rock classics from the 1960s, 70s, and 80s or classical music from any era get the biggest bang from the RS1e.

You will pay premium price to receive these aural delights. The cans typically sell for $695.

That's a wrap. Note: After finishing principal writing last night, I saw that TechCrunch posted an excellent headphone buying guide that recommends cans based on who the gift is for (e.g. college student, mom, etc.) The approach is excellent; do have a look if shopping for headphones.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Google shares spirit of the season

Publié: décembre 10, 2015, 9:58pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Christmas Gifts Holiday

Ho. Ho. Ho. Google gives early Christmas presents this holiday, by focusing on ways that families (or roomies) can better share that which is contextually precious: music, photos, online, payments, and videos. But Big G also trails Apple, which already offers its customers many of the same benefits.

Fresh today: Google Photos Shared Albums, which applies collaborative concepts that Apps users should find familiar. "People receiving the shared album can join to add their own photos and videos, and also get notifications when new pics are added", according to the official announcement. "You can even save photos and videos from a shared album to your Google Photos library, so that you can hold onto them even if you weren’t the one holding the camera".

Shared Albums are available from web browsers or Android and iOS apps. On the web, choose a pic, click the three vertical dots top-right and then "add to shared album". Process is simple and not exactly cutting-edge innovation. Photo sharing is widely available, particularly using static links.

Also new today: Chromecast Audio adds a multi-room synchronous music feature. The device turns wired speakers wireless, and the new function essentially links together multiple CAs attached to speakers in different rooms. Once synced, the same music plays in all the rooms. Given Chromecast Audio's bargain basement $35 pricing, Google makes upgrading your woofers wirelessly on the cheap.

Yesterday, Google Music Family Sharing debuted for the same price as Apple's similar plan: $14.99 monthly. But Big G is stinger, allowing five unique accounts to share a single subscription; Apple Music is six. But Google kicks in something more; YouTube Red, which is the video service's new ad-free sub. Already, individual Google Music subscribers get Red for free, now it's a shared affair—and helluva bargain.

Something else: Like Apple, Google lets families make payments from a single account—the dryly-named Family Payment Method. Users set up group pay to support services like Google Music Family Sharing. Depending on how the main account holder restricts or enables purchases, the group can make app, book, magazine. movie, music, or TV show purchases.

OnHub Makers Gallery

And finally: I can't resist mentioning Google's Deck-the-Halls gift wrapping of something the family might already share—and this one could cost you: Decor for the OnHub router, which I reviewed in September. There's a handy Maker's Gallery for dressing up your device, and Google sells $29 shells. Seriously? Have you got a 3D printer and nothing to use it for? Google gives instructions on making a shell for your OnHub.

Photo Credit:Shutterstock/gpointstudio

Pixel C arrives at Google Store

Publié: décembre 8, 2015, 9:21pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Today, Google started selling its first homegrown tablet, Pixel C. You can buy one directly from the company—until they sell out! Google typically struggles stocking new devices, like Nexus smartphones and the Chromebook Pixel. On November 30th, I asked: "Where is Pixel C?", which was promised to arrive before the holidays. Now we know.

I hope to have the 10.2-inch tablet in possession within a few days and will subsequently post first-impression and full reviews. If you can't wait for that, and shouldn't, larger tech news sites already have their takes online. Search for the name, and you will find them. Don't wait on me, if you're thinking about one for Christmas!

Pixel C inherits design ethic from the touchscreen Chromebook that Google also makes. That heritage is more than about looks but establishing a base reference design for other Android tablet manufacturers and stable platform for applications development. Like Nexus devices,

Pixel C runs the newest Android version (Marshmallow), which Google updates about every six weeks. If larger screen tabs are the future, the ecosystem needs something built on stock Android. Nice as those Samsung Galaxy tabs are, they're still skinned by TouchWiz UI and no reference for other manufacturers. Google is right to provide a baseline for Android the tablet platform.

The tab arrives as Apple and Microsoft push the motif as PC replacement with iPad Pro and Surface Pro 4/Surface Book, respectively. Whether or not Pixel C can replace a laptop is questionable in my logistical thinking. Rather, it's just another contextual cloud computing device which role changes based on need. I can imagine throwing the beauty in my camera bag, for example. That's much more tenable with a 10.2 inch tab than Apple and Microsoft monsters—12.9 inches and 13.5 inches, respectively.

Google's business is all about context: What you want, where you want, when you need it. The concept is core to search and advertising, and everything Google—and parent company Alphabet—wraps round it. No rival executes better delivering contextually useful products and services.

I will use the new tablet alongside Chromebook Pixel LS, which remains my everyday, all-day PC. Pixel C will open up a wellspring of Android apps to contextually complement the laptop and seamlessly sync with Google's own apps and services across both devices and Nexus 6P. "How well?" is the question, and my review(s) will answer.

If you're thinking about buying Pixel C, Google sells two configs, which are differentiated by storage—32GB ($499) and 64GB ($599). A magnetically-attachable keyboard also is available, for $149. With tax and free shipping, expect to pay about $800 for the 64GB kit.

Specs: 10.2-inch LTPS LCS touchscreen (2560 x 1800 resolution, 308 pixels per inch, 500 nit brightness); Nvidia Tegra XI 64-bit processor; 256-core Maxwell graphics chip; 3GB RAM; 32GB or 64GB storage; 8-megapixel rear and 2MP front cameras; flanking stereo speakers; four microphones; USB Type-C; WiFi AC; Bluetooth 4.1 + HS; six sensors (accelerometer, ambient light, compass, gyroscope, hall, proximity); and Android 6.0 Marshmallow. Measures 242 x 179 x 7 mm and weighs 517 kg. The enclosure is made of anodized aluminum.

Pixel C is gorgeously styled. But is it as functional as beautiful? My review will answer.

Is HTC's A9 the One? [review]

Publié: décembre 7, 2015, 11:18pm CET par Joe Wilcox

So you bought iPhone 6. You love the understated styling of the aluminum enclosure and how the device feels in your hands. But iOS is a dog brain. It's loyal and friendly, but you want more than a tail-wagger that needs to be let out to pee. HTC has your back, with the shockingly similar-looking One A9. The imitator gives you close-enough design benefits with the extra bang of the freshest Android (Marshmallow).

Over the Black-Friday-to-Cyber-Monday weekend, one in ten A9 buyers moved up from iPhone 6 or 6s series devices, according to HTC. The manufacturer has a holiday special ending Jan. 7, 2016 that allures some switchers. Trade-in one of the Apples for full discount off the A9's purchase price (HTC mails a $499.99 check after receiving the old device). Galaxy S6 and S6 Edge traders get $200 and LG3 and LG4 owners $100.

Ten percent is a big number and somewhat validates the imitative strategy. Apple fanboys can leer and sneer, while bloggers blast snarks about copycating. Bottom line: HTC wants to sell more phones, and being similar to a market leader while offering something different is a tried-and-true retail strategy.

What Matters Most

The real question: Is HTC One A9 right for you, whether or not switching from iPhone, 6, 6s, 6 Plus, or 6s Plus? This review will help you sniff out meaningful benefits that could answer the question. I'll say this at the start: The A9 is not state-of-the-art, and in that way differs from the HTC One M series smartphones that precede the iPhone wannabe. The manufacturer makes some design compromises to give that Apple look, but with Android inside.

Optional mesh folio case provides quick info without opening

Stated differently: As a straight iPhone 6 and 6s series competitor, the A9 is compelling. But compared to other Androids selling for similar price, benefits are mixed and some buyers rightly will scoff at how the hardware features compare.

Let's strip down the A9 by 10 Ses: Specs; screen; speed; size; style; software; setup; storage; sound; and shooter.

Specs. The spec-list, while popular metric among buyers and sellers, is an anachronism. The measure that matters more: Benefits, which often are confused with features. The wrapper that goes around a coffee cup is a feature. Protecting your hand from burning is a benefit. While related, the two are different, and there are many features added to devices that offer no meaningful benefits. Think the same wrapper around a cup of room-temp water, as example.

This review purposely highlights feature benefits and failings for iPhone switchers and other Android adopters. However, we must spotlight specifications to clarify the benefits they do and do not provide.

HTC One A9: 5-inch 1080p LCD display; 1.2Ghz Qualcomm Snapdragon 617 Octa-core processor; 3GB RAM; 32GB storage, expandable to 2TB via microSD card; 13-megapixel f/2 rear camera and 4MP UltraPixel on the front.

iPhone 6s: 4.7-inch LCD display; Apple A9 chip; 2GB RAM; 16, 64, or 128GB storage (depending on model) and non-expandable; 12MP f/2.2 front and 5MP f/2.2 front cameras.

Like iPhone 6/6s, the A9 has a fingerprint sensor

The most notable, new feature-benefit independent of Marshmallow, is the fingerprint sensor, which placement on the Home button will be familiar to users moving from iPhone. But Android adopters will get better utility from the smarter-placed sensor on the back of Google Nexus 5X and 6P or LG V10.

Battery life is acceptable, but not as long-lasting as Apple smartphones. Drain is noticeable when the A9 is used intensively, and many users may struggle to get a good day's use under this scenario. That said, HTC's phone supports Qualcomm's Quick Charge feature, so you can top off fast. That's a benefit for iPhone switchers. As for battery life, I again suspect HTC could squeeze out more if not for the homegrown Sense UI (see "Software" for more).

Screen. The A9's AMOLED display is 1080p, which exceeds the 1334 x 750 resolution of newer iPhones. Color and contrast are vivid and the overall look of the screen satisfies; the device gets some bang from Android's Material Design but loses something from HTC's Sense (see "Software" for more).

Apple purists may argue that iPhone's screen is superior, and debating them is pointless. But I must concede that the A9's display lacks the pop of some Android competitors, such as Nexus 6P or Samsung Galaxy S6, both presenting 2560 x 1440 resolution. The 6P sells for the same price as the HTC One flagship and the S6 for $100 more (from Google and Amazon, respectively). That said, the A9's screen should satisfy most anyone looking for an affordable, unlocked Android smartphone.

Speed. The A9 is plenty responsive but not best of class. Still, in my testing, the phone is fast and fluid enough. That said, there is lag compared to Android smartphones running faster Snapdragons, such as the 800 series chips, during some scenarios. But the generous 3GB of RAM compensates, and I am convinced any lagginess is less about raw hardware capabilities and more about the extra toll placed by HTC Sense (again, see "Software" for more).

Considering the overall package of benefits for the price, the A9 performs well enough. Audio and video streaming is smooth, as is web browsing and use of most apps. That said, GPS may muck the works. It's not sugar-in-the-gas-tank bad, but can be close. Games can tax performance, sometimes, too. But, to reiterate, overall, the smartphone speeds along nicely.

MicroSD and SIM slots could be confused for volume buttons

Size. The HTC One A9 measures 145.75 x 70.8. x 7.26 mm and weighs 143 grams. Weight is same as iPhone 6s, which is slightly smaller (138.3 x 67.1 x 7.1 mm).

Compared to older HTC flagships, smaller footprint and removal of the front-facing speakers make the A9 much more comfortable to handle than predecessors M8 and M9. Balance is an important design characteristic, which the A9 meets measurably. The other two Ones are awkward to hold and tend to be more finger fumbly, by comparison. Sometimes less is more.

Style. HTC One A9's overall shape and design will be quite familiar. As previously observed, this thing looks like iPhone 6 or 6s, but also a streamlined M8 or M9. The all-metal enclosure feels much the same, too, despite size slightly larger than the Apple. The A9 is a handsome handset, of which there are four available colors: Carbon Gray, Deep Garnet, Opal Silver, and Topaz Gold,

But iPhone users, and even some other Android adopters, will be frustrated by the ergonomics. The A9 is an affront to your muscle memory, and I expect some people will be confused to frustration. Apple puts the volume buttons on the upper left, when iPhone is held in portrait mode. HTC places protrusions there that look and at first feel like audio controls. But they are instead covers for the SIM and microSD slots.

The resemblance to iPhone 6/6s is striking

On the other side of the phone, A9 presents a different bit of muscle memory trauma by placing the power on/off button below that for sound. IPhone users will be accustomed to a power button top right, while users of many other Androids will be used to volume controls below power. I kind of understanding HTC's reasoning for recessing the on/off switch where it is less likely to be accidentally accessed. But habits run deep on something so personal as a smartphone.

Inheriting a design flaw from iPhone 6 and 6s series, A9 can too easily slip from the hands. The metal finish doesn't give great grip, and the rounded bevel makes fumbling too easy. That said, as previously observed, the A9 offers better balance than the M8 or M9, and it is more firmly handled than the Apples. I would use the HTC bareback, but not iPhone 6 or 6s. Other users should consider a case, however

Software. The greatest and latest Android is inside this beauty, and that's a huge benefit for switchers from any platform. Marshmallow is sweet through and through but burnt, too, by HTC Sense UI. I'm not a fan, from earlier One models or on the A9. I find font and menu adaptions to be visually unappealing; they take away from the freshness of Google's Material Design.

Sense UI simultaneously enhances and diminishes Android 6

Meanwhile, HTC introduces duplicity and unnecessary system overhead. Some users will be confused by multiple apps for calendars, contacts, mail, photos, and such. The Sense phone dialer is clunky and strips away some of the auto-search-fill and caller ID features that Google provides in stock apps. I'm convinced that a purer Marshmallow would be speedier and less confusing.

That said, BlinkFeed remains one of HTC's best adaptions for providing news, weather, and other information to the Home screen. Other embellishments have their place, too, such as the new HyperLapse and stalwart Zoe.

The first feature can be best described as time-lapse video shooting, which benefit besides looking funky cool is making your overly long shots more manageable and meaningful. The other can combine photos and videos into what might be best described as a highlights reel. Both features are meant to improve visual storytelling, and they can do so exceptionally well.

Summing up, HTC adds much with homegrown apps like BlinkFeed, HyperLapse, and Zoe, but diminishes Marshmallow and some of Google's best apps with overly-permissive primping.

Oddly, the power switch is below the volume controls

Setup. HTC sells the A9 direct for the aforementioned $499.99. Four distinct SKUs are currently available—AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and unlocked. Verizon support is a 2016 affair. During initial setup of the unlocked model, the user chooses his or her carrier from a list. Among the supported U.S. cellular providers:

AT&T
Boost Mobile (unlocked Sprint model)
CellularOne
Consumer Cellular
Cricket
GCI
Good2Go
MetroPCS
NET 10
Real Mobile
Simple Mobile
Straight Talk
Sprint (unlocked Sprint model)
Telcel America
T-Mobile
TracFone
Verizon Wireless (following software update arriving next year)
Virgin Mobile (unlocked Sprint model)
Voce Wireless
WalMart Family Mobile

From there, HTC One A9 gets ready for use fairly quickly. iPhone switchers would benefit from setting up a Google account beforehand, if they don't already have one, and ensuring bookmarks, calendars, contacts, etc. are synced to it. That will greatly improve the startup experience, which is similar to any Android released over the past couple years. Meaning: Google keeps it simple.

I set up the unlocked model on T-Mobile, for which expected capabilities are available—namely WiFi calling. This kind of carrier flexibility and adaptability is a commendable benefit.

Storage. Apple opted not to release a 32GB SKU for iPhone 6 or its successor; the entry model starts at 16GB then jumps to 64GB for an additional 100 bucks. The A9 costs considerably less than Apple's $649 16 gigger, while providing something more: massive expansion—up to 2TB with microSD card.

The feature also is a huge benefit for Android adopters. Google's mobile OS has long supported expandable storage, which is a feature with measured benefits. If you don't have first-hand experience with the kind of frustrating calamities that occur, check out any smartphone manufacturer's support forums for horror stories that make the newest "Paranormal Activity" movie (why was there ever more than one) seem like an episode of "Sesame Street". Marshmallow ends the terror.

Sideways, the screen is nearly edge-to-edge

The platform features "adoptable storage" that lets microSD cards truly act like the gigabytes inside the device. Under Settings, Storage & USB, users can (and should) choose to "format as internal", understanding that if there is content on the card that Android 6 will erase it. Once enabled, Marshmallow will essentially treat all storage singly. It's a huge benefit available because HTC chose to ship with the the current operating system.

Sound. The A9's audio experience is as good as iPhone 6 and 6s series, with sound bellowing out a sideways grill. But HTC sacrifices one of the One series' defining design characteristics: front-facing BoomSound speakers flanking the screen. Other manufacturers adopt the style, which pops up, among other smartphones: Google Nexus 5X and 6P; Motorola Moto X and Nexus 6; and most other HTC smartphones.

Audio is good, but lacks the depth and kick that M series Ones deliver. That said, the A9 gives great sound when attached to earphones or headphones. Now that Apple Music is available for Android, iPhone switchers can bring their libraries along, too.

I'm convinced that flanking speakers take away from rather than add to the overall user experience. As previously mentioned, the M8 and M9 are unwieldy in part because of the design, which I can't see appealing to the majority of users. If it did, Apple would have adopted front-facing speakers long ago. Most people listen with earpieces or headphones, I suspect. Also, the single grill (placed on the bottom in portrait mode) is what iPhone switchers will be accustomed to using.

Shooter. If you have seen any recent iPhone commercials, Apple vigorously flaunts camera capabilities; you could come away thinking no other handset could be as good and that your fancy digicam is outdated. Put down the Kool-Aid! There are worthy Android shooters, and HTC One A9 is among their ranks.

In my testing, from the 13MP f/2 rear camera, color and contrast are plenty pleasing. Nice-to-have extras: manual controls and RAW support. Oh yeah, there is optical image stabilization, which Apple only offers on the pricier and larger iPhone 6 Plus or 6s Plus. OIS is pretty sweet for the selling price, Aperture and stabilization together will deliver many more usable shots captured in low light.

Camera app supports RAW and offers manual shooting controls

For Android adopters, HTC's biggest problem is one of image—that's perception, not photography. The company touted the 4MP UltraPixel camera found on the M8 and M9 as a low-light darling. But the camera compromised too much. The revamped rear-shooter, using Sony sensor, delivers; don't let past promises get in the way.

Got to say: There is much I like about the UltraPixel camera, which remains, but on the front, where it is more capable and more appropriate. Get out the selfie stick and head to the rave. Those in-door venues should sing from the larger pixels (2 µm; 1.1 or 1.55 is more typical), which capture more light. iPhone 6s: 1.22 µm. So there's another benefit for switchers.

The two-cam combo isn't best of class for straight shooting, but the extra features, and benefits they deliver, give great value and can produce pleasing photos that will make iPhone users gush with envy.

As for video, front and rear cameras shoot 1080p. By contrast, iPhone 6s only gives 720p on the front, but 4K on the back. The A9 shines, however, with OIS for video, which to repeat, isn't available on either of Apple's 4.7-inch screen smartphones.

The Grand Experiment

As I write, my father-in-law, who turns 94 later this week, possesses the HTC One A9. He agreed to being test subject and moved up from iPhone 5s. That's a challenging migration considering his advanced age, the jump in device size (4-inch to 5-inch screen), and dramatic change in the mobile platforms. Watching how he adapts, or fails to, helps me to anecdotally benchmark HTC's imitative objectives. If this old guy can adapt from the 5s, and perhaps enjoy the change, maybe the A9 can be a switcher's option for iPhone 6 or 6s owners. I may give a report on his experience in the future.

Wrapping up, the HTC One A9 is one of the oddest smartphones to come across my reviews desk. By the raw specs, the device is overpriced compared to, say, Moto X Pure Edition and Nexus 5X or 6P. But as a measure of combined benefits, particularly for anyone wanting an Android iPhone, the A9 is a compelling choice. Is it right for you? You tell me.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Microsoft trolls Apple for peace

Publié: décembre 1, 2015, 6:03pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Advertising rarely gets as good as this! Microsoft sets the mood for the season in a new spot where its New York store staffers serenade Apple specialists for "peace on Earth". A children's choir joins the caroling, creating a classic! This is award-winning advertising in the making. Filming at night adds terrific ambiance, topped off with Apple 5th Avenue Store employees embracing their Microsoft retail rivals.

If Microsoft is the British Empire, then Apple is the American era. Oftentimes, the mighty are arrogant and condescending about their dominance, and it's rare that they sue rivals for peace -- from a position of dominance. The humbled fallen must adopt new tactics in the New World order. For Microsoft, that means cooperation. If nothing else, the commercial is a metaphor for the new Microsoft.

The company's strategy of developing apps for multiple platforms is a good one, and it's as much about cooperation -- peace among rivals -- as competition, something I highlight in analyses "Microsoft is Back!" and "Outlook is the Future of Microsoft" (October and August, respectively). Windows' developer invades competing platforms Android and iOS with trendy apps that connect to its legacy software and to contextual cloud products and services. Invade and conquer.

To the average Jack or Jane, Apple-Microsoft rivalry couldn't be more in their faces, as Surface Pro 4 and Surface Book face off against iPad Pro and MacBook Pro. It's a good rivalry and one beneath which there is longstanding cooperation. Who is one of the large iPad's biggest supporters? Microsoft, which joined Apple's launch stage to show off Office optimized for the tablet.

That comes from longstanding cooperation even when Windows ruled the world. Starting in the 1980s, outside of Apple, Microsoft was (and may still be) the largest software developer supporting Mac OS. Frenemies best describes a partnership going back three decades. The company on top may have changed -- Apple replacing Microsoft as dominant platform provider -- but the relationship remains one as much about cooperation and competition.

Fanboys can argue about who copies whom, and how much Apple and Microsoft retail shops look alike, or the larger numbers of customers in one versus the other, but these are two companies engaged in cool embrace -- regardless which is on top.

Still, the new advert is a jab, and it is brilliantly executed. Microsoft is the good guy here, spreading holiday cheer and asking Apple to set aside weapons of mass competition. Their retail shops are staging grounds.

Five years ago, I wrote about the remarkable Christmas shopping differences between the two retail shop experiences in commentary "Talking about Microsoft Store". Apple Store attracts a trendier, young crowd, while its rival is more familial and community feeling. The differences demonstrate the companies' underlying retail philosophies, which apply as much in 2015 as they did when I wrote about them in 2010; it's all something the Microsoft commercial embodies.

Peace is more than competitive marketing but metaphor for the underlying operational philosophy behind the new, and old, Microsoft.

Real peace isn't possible, nor should it be. Both companies better serve their customers by competition spurring development of better products. Cooperation only goes so far. But "peace on earth" is a helluva good marketing ploy during the holidays, and Microsoft's execution is brilliant.

Where in the world is Google Pixel C?

Publié: novembre 30, 2015, 8:31pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Black Friday is behind us, Cyber Monday is here, and Christmas shipping new purchases cuts off in about three weeks. Which makes me wonder: Where is Google's new tablet? When announced at the end of September, Google product director Andrew Bowers said that the "Pixel C will be available in time for the holidays on the Google Store". Eh, yeah—by whose measure is "in time". The information giant typically sells out of new gear, which leaves little time to manage inventory. "Out of stock" notices will disappoint many shoppers, who may buy something else.

I watched for this baby to drop before Thanksgiving, particularly with Apple iPad Pro already available—three weeks now. Granted, the devices target different markets, if for no other reason than size (12.9 and 10.2 inches, respectively). But each is innovative and stylish and would make great presents for someone. I'm ready to buy, Google. As surely are many Android fanboys. I reached out to the PR staff there today and was told to "stay tuned", which could be interpreted as soon. We shall see, eh?

Pixel C could be the sleeper holiday hit for gadget geeks, if only Google would start selling. Chromebook Pixel is a design darling that acts as a reference for lower-cost models. The new tablet promises to be something similar, and the thing is stately, based on the announcement demo.

Google will sell two models: 32GB ($499) and 64GB ($599); there is an optional magnetically-attaching keyboard for another $149. By comparison, for 500 bucks Google gives twice the storage as iPad Air 2, which at 64 gigs sells for same as Pixel C.

Screen resolution is 2560 x 1800 at 308 pixels per inch, and it is blindingly bright (500 nit). Other features include four microphones (for voice interaction), flanking speakers (for audio), and USB Type C. Processor is the Nvidia Tegra X1, and there is 3GB RAM.

I'm waiting, Google. Surely some of you are, too. Will there be a shiny Pixel C in the holiday stocking or lump of coal instead?

Holiday 2015 Gift Guide: Smartphones

Publié: novembre 29, 2015, 12:32am CET par Joe Wilcox

Santa Claus

If you're smartphone shopping this holiday and wondering what to buy, my primer can assist—with caveats. I focus solely on Androids that are higher end but affordable, and I ignore iPhones. No slight against Apple devices is intended. I figure that people who want an iPhone won't likely consider an alternative. Also: The differences aren't as pronounced. For example, the major benefit choosing 6s or 6s Plus over the two previous models is slightly lower price (3D Touch is an unnecessary gimmick). The major benefit picking 5s over the 6 or 6 Plus is again price but also smaller size.

Among Androids, differences abound—and many, such as older OS versions or custom UI skins, are carrier or manufacturer imposed. That's without considering the bloatware that either or both parties might impose. I intentionally focus on devices that offer the most value for price paid, which includes upfront or payment-plan purchased unlocked.

No one should be compelled to take any kind of cellular contract. These obligations let you get a good phone cheap (during holiday deals often for under $100 if not free) but limit options later on—such as carrier choice or affordable service plans. So my buying guide also slants in favor of devices for which obligation is one: Price you pay to buy, whether upfront or installments.

Nexus 5X

My first of two top value-picks for Holiday 2015 is the LG-manufactured, Google-branded Nexus 5X—with 32GB storage. I wouldn't recommend that anyone buy a 16GB smartphone, particularly if storage is not expandable. Google directly sells the handset, which is discounted $80 through Cyber Monday. Buy now and pay $349 rather than $429.

Major benefits:

Excellent display (5,2 inches; 1920 x 1080 resolution; 423 pixels per inch)
Best-of-price digital cameras (12.3 megapixel f/2 back; 5MP front)
Fingerprint reader (on back) for easy and secure unlocking
All-carrier support, including Verizon
Android 6 Marshmallow
Snappy performance
Shoots 4K video
Slo-mo 120fps
Battery life
Unlocked

As I often say, the best devices aren't about features but how they balance to deliver meaningful benefits. By the specs, some other smartphones seem better for the price paid. I highly recommend this phone, which with Marshmallow meets or outclasses any iPhone in similar price category, and that would be the two-year-old 32GB 5s, which Apple sells for $499.

Nexus 5X Front
LG makes the Nexus 5X for Google

Simply stated: Nexus 5X does everything it needs to well. The fingerprint reader on the back is life-changing, as are some of Android 6 capabilities—Now on Tap tops the list. For more expansive view of specs and benefits, see my Nexus 5X review.

Nexus 6

Think of the 2014-released, Motorola-made, Google-branded phablet as last year's model for tomorrow's price. For what you get, compared to what you pay, this overstuffed smartphone (hey, it's a 6-inch display) offers exceptional value. Briefly on Black Friday, before stock sold out, Amazon offered the 32GB Midnight Blue variant for a sweet $199.99. What a steal!

You may not find anything close to that again, but even current prices are astounding. As I write, Amazon stocks the 32 gigger for $339.95 and the 64GB variant for $399.99. For the specs, and they're as big as the phone, Nexus 6 is the value-pick of the season. I would watch for even better prices as Christmas approaches.

But be warned: This beauty is huge! It measures 159.3 x 83 x 3.8-10.1mm (6.27 x 3.15 x .15-.39 inches) and weighs 184 grams (6.49 ounces). Length is slightly greater than iPhone 6 Plus, which measures 151.8 x 77.8 x 7.1mm (6.22 x 3.06 x .28 inches) and weighs 172 grams (6.07 ounces). My mom and one of my sisters both use Nexus 6, and neither is a geek.

Major benefits:

Overly-large display (5,96 inches; 2560 x 1440 resolution; 493 pixels per inch)
Category-leading digital cameras (13 megapixel f/2 back; 2MP front)
Large enough to functionally replace a 7- or 8-inch tablet
Android 6 Marshmallow upgradeable
All-carrier support, including Verizon
Turbo Charging tops off battery fast
Front-facing speakers
Snappy performance
Bang for the buck
Shoots 4K video
Battery life
Unlocked

For more expansive view of specs and benefits, see my Nexus 6 review.

Nexus 6 and Lucky Cat
Nexus 6 is last year's tech, current this year, but value-priced

Moto X Pure Edition

Lenovo's U.S. subsidiary makes the list twice, largely for value and customization. Motorola lets you design your own phone, with trim and enclosure accents that express your style. Pure Edition starts at $399.99 for 16GB (capacity not recommended) and moves up to $449.99 (32GB), then to $499.99 (64GB). Those prices fluctuate depending on how you personalize. For example, wood or leather backing adds $25.

Major benefits:

Excellent display (5,7 inches; 2560 x 1440 resolution; 520 pixels per inch)
Best-of-price digital cameras (21 megapixel f/2 back; 5MP front)
Personalized design using Moto Maker
All-carrier support, including Verizon
Turbo Charging tops off battery fast
microSD expandable up to 128GB
Front-facing soeakers
Snappy performance
Shoots 4K video
Unlocked

My gripe against Moto X PE is the operating system: Android 5.1.1 Lollipop. I would expect Marshmallow in a smartphone sold unlocked like the Nexuses. That said, memory is expandable, a feature for which Marshmallow hugely improves (well, when available). For expansive view of specs and benefits, see Android Authority's review.

Nexus 6P

Huawei makes the phablet for Google, which, like newer iPhones, tops out at 128GB storage. But the cost is considerably less ($649 compared to $949). Among higher-spec smartphones, the 6P is exceptional value for the price. Google directly sells the large smartphone, starting at $499 for 32GB (the 64 gigger is $549). You won't find many high-end handsets in this class unlocked for such affordable price.

Nexus 6P and Cat Neko
Nexus 6P 128GB sells for $300 less than iPhone 6s Plus

Major benefits:

Superb screen (5,7 inches; 2560 x 1440 resolution; 518 pixels per inch)
Excellent digital cameras (12.3 megapixel f/2 back; 8MP front)
Fingerprint reader (on back) for easy and secure unlocking
All-carrier support, including Verizon
Android 6 Marshmallow
Front-facing speakers
Snappy performance
Shoots 4K video
Slo-mo 240 fps
Battery life
Unlocked

Like other Nexuses, the 6P balances benefits superbly. The finish is a bit too smooth for my taste, making it a greater drop risk than all other smartphones on this list, But gripability is better than 6 or 6s series iPhones, for which I highly recommend a back-fitting case at the least.

For more expansive view of specs and benefits, see my Nexus 6P review.

Addendum

To reiterate, my holiday primer deliberately focuses on higher-end smartphones that are unlocked and in one device available for all carriers. The iPhone 6 and 6s series easily qualify, and if the iOS ecosystem is your thing and you don't mind paying more, Apple gives good. See my iPhone 6 and 6 Plus reviews—and I have used the 6s Plus, too. Few people will be disappointed with the benefits.

But there are some other Androids that deserve mention, namely the LG G4 and V10, along with Samsung Galaxy Note 5. The smartphones' crime is confined carrier distribution in the United States.

G4 and V10. The two LG handsets offer the best camera experience on any handset at every price, including image quality and additional benefit of manual controls. As a measure of balanced benefits, the LG V10 is the best smartphone available anywhere this holiday season.

Want to selfie with friends? There are two front-facing cameras, one of which is for wide-angle shots. T-Mobile's V10 price is best among major carriers: $599.99, with 64GB storage. I hope to review this exceptional smartphone in the near future.

Galaxy Note 5. This exceptional phablet is best-of-class in every way imaginable except U.S. carrier distribution limitations. Screen, camera, build quality, and unquestionably the stylus make the handset among the finest sold anywhere. I'm not a big fan of Samsung's bloatware but on any Note the extras are big-bang benefits when using the S-Pen.

That's a wrap. Good Luck, Shoppers!

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

5 things for which Google can give thanks

Publié: novembre 26, 2015, 7:56pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Another Thanksgiving is upon us, as Americans stuff their bellies with turkey and vittles, before falling asleep during the afternoon football game. It's the day of family feuds, too much food, and setting the mood for the holiday season ahead.

We also count our blessings and give thanks for the year behind. I got to wondering what Google can be grateful for and compiled a short list for you. Perhaps you would like to add to it in comments or lash out at my lack of sensitivity on this special day. Please do. With that brief introduction, I present 5 things for which Google can give thanks, served in no particular order of importance.

1. Sergey Brin and Larry Page learn to spell. They couldn't get googol right, and what a mess they made of it. You can't even blame dyslexia for their coming up with Google. But the men spelled Alphabet rightly when naming the new company that launched this autumn.

How incredibly concise! The cofounders shortened the alphabet from 26 letters to six with clever URL abc.xyz. Imagine the mess they could have made trying to get the right domain, like dot-coms Alphabutt, Laphabet, or Laphabit (which is available; the others are taken). See, there is purpose for the new top-level domains. So that makes another thing for which Big G can be grateful!

2. Thanksgiving is the last Thursday in November this year. That puts Black Friday near the end of the month and shortens shopping days to Christmas. Retailers are responding with weeks-long deals leading up to the biggest day of discounts. Where will people find them? Google Search, of course. Hear that? It's the sound of people clicking contextual search ads to buy $49.99 UHD TVs and $7.95 faux leather flight jackets (with free Grumpy Cat calendar).

Count the ad bucks while you can, Google, and enjoy one last big hoorah before European trustbusters shut down shopping operations—tentacles connecting Android, Chrome, and other homegrown products to search and shopping. Next year, Yelp won't be cast aside in favor of Google Shopping. Count clicks and be grateful.

3. Belgian cats. While Americans feast, the folks in Brussels live in fear of terrorist attacks. The government has ordered everyone to stay indoors. When citizens look outside their windows, they see streets barren of people but filled with feral felines searching for scraps of food. Brrrr, it's cold for hungry furballs forced to fend for themselves.

But the beasts are an inspiration. The hottest hashtag this Thanksgiving is #BrusselsLockdown, featuring cats dressed in all kinds of pathetic garb. Where will people who don't own cats to dressup find them? Google Search—where else?

What a great showcase of Big G tech. Ask Android: "OK, Google, show me pictures of cats!" Pick your beast, Photoshop it, and post to Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. So what if you don't live in Belgium, Show solidarity, Google is there to help, and demonstrate the benefits of using the Now assistant. The company can be thankful for that.

4. Siri still sucks. Someday Apple is going to get this cloud thing right, and, oh, watch out, Google. The difference is startling using Google Now compared to Siri. Try to get to the opera in Vienna from San Diego, Calif., and Apple's assistant will navigate you all over the globe—to Madagascar and Istanbul, Turkey (not the best weekend to go there with tensions over the Russian military plane downing) to Rome, Chicago, Tokyo, and finally the Austrian city. But to the wrong address.

Google Now is like wow. Ask for directions, and the service checks airline schedules; automatically books the most expense but direct flight using Android Pay; arranges Uber pickup; sends your private information to the TSA so you can breeze through airport security; buys box seats (tix waiting with driver at the terminal); and reserves a hotel room. It's simply amazing how much information Google collects about you and how effectively the automatic assistant uses it.

Siri could be so much more useful, if Apple CEO Tim Cook wasn't such a prude about collecting customers' personal data. For shame!

5. "Star Wars: The Force Awakens". The fans are crazed with excitement and chase any imaginable rumor, pic, or quote about the story. Every day—every hour—there is a new meme. "Han Solo says 'fartagarb'", and it blasts across the InterWebs as fans speculate, discuss, and argue about what it means. Where will they find these juicy gems, besides the social sites and feeds that they monitor? Google services like Alerts, News, Now, and Search.

What about the official Disney app that puts Star Wars faces onto your Android Wear? Suck it up, Apple Watch wearers. Direct promotions like this are great for Google, and there also are the indirect ones that people will look for. Can you say everything "Force Awakens" branded for holiday gift givers? The all-encompassing Force in this universe this Christmas will be Google Search.

Photo Credit: tanuha2001 / Shutterstock.com

TAG Heuer shines luxury luminescence onto ALL Android Wear smartwatches

Publié: novembre 9, 2015, 7:50pm CET par Joe Wilcox

TAG Heuer Connected Smartwatch

My colleague Wayne Williams wonders: "I don’t get the appeal of 'smart' versions of luxury Swiss watches". He refers to today's launch of the $1,500 TAG Heuer Connected Android Wear smartwatch. Over on Google+, journalist Kevin Tofel asks: "Who else doesn't think many people will buy a $1,500 Android Wear watch simply because it's made by TAG Heuer?" Both doubters make good, and related, points.

However, I see TAG Heuer Connected differently. Whether or not anyone buys digital over analog—or nothing at all—is immaterial. The high-end brand is carried in fine jewelry stores everywhere. This watch will make Android Wear visible to millions of buyers who might never see the platform. Demographically, many of these same people might never encounter or consider purchasing Apple Watch, either,

Distribution is everything in retail: Where are the outlets? How many are there? Who is likeliest to shop them? Marketing matters as much, or more. TAG Heuer Connected advertising can further promote Android Wear and trickle down sales to smartwatches the masses can afford. Then there are the celeb ambassadors who wear the brand.

Luxury luminescence can shine down from the lofty $1,500 pedestal onto all Android Wear timepieces and increase their appeal.

HTC One A9 is the iPhone 6s for Android

Publié: novembre 6, 2015, 11:39pm CET par Joe Wilcox

iPhone 6 and HTC One A9

Without even turning on the HTC One A9 (which I haven't yet), the physical similarities with iPhone 6/6s are unmistakable. The smartphones share striking design ethic, separated by the shape of the home-button fingerprint sensor, placement of the rear-facing camera, and left-side SIM and microSD card slots. But these differences aren't immediately obvious.

My question: Is this the Android for people wanting the iPhone 6s look but something more flexible than the iOS platform? If there is truth in marketing, HTC's tag lines reveal much: "Design worth imitating", which while referring the company's One legacy also could be interpreted as backhanded praise or even fist-to-snub about Apple's device, which some could argue imitates earlier One models. "Power to choose"—customization and personalization options not offered on fruit-logo handsets.

HTC takes bold strides, which may or may not succeed. I watch with interest. The A9 ships with Android 6 Marshmallow. One of the big benefits: The OS can treat microSD cards as extended, integrated storage. While the handset ships with only 32GB storage, it is truly, seamlessly extendable to 2TB. You read rightly: terabytes.

Price is another benefit: $399 for a limited time before going up to $499. iPhone 6s with twice the storage capacity sells for $749—both phones unlocked and contract-free. Two-year old iPhone 5s sells for $50 more than the A9 at the promotional price. Android buyers get similar design ethic, with expandable storage, Marshmallow, and other benefits for considerably less cash out of their pockets.

Again, it's gutsy but also risky. HTC struggles right now. During calendar third quarter 2015 the company lost $139 million on revenue of $660 million. Gross margin: 18 percent. By comparison, Apple revenue reached $51.5 billion with net profit of $8.5 billion. iPhone generated 62.5 percent of total sales. Gross margin: 39.9 percent.

There is great risk selling a high-end phone for so little, direct, and without massive supporting retail channel. The strategy means tighter margins that only pays off if HTC gobbles up market share.

How high end? Specs: 5-inch 1080p LCD display; 1.2Ghz Qualcomm Snapdragon 617 Octa-core processor; 3GB RAM; 32GB storage, expandable to 2TB via microSD card; 13-megapixel f/2 rear camera and UltraPixel on the front.

By comparison, the similar looking iPhone 6s: 4.7-inch LCD display (1334 x 750 resolution); Apple A9 chip; 16, 64, or 128GB storage (depending on model) and non-expandable; 12MP f/2.2 front and 5MP f/2.2 front cameras.

The A9 measures 145.75 x 70.8. x 7.26 mm, and the 6s is 138.3 x 67.1 x 7.1 mm. Both weigh 143 grams. Say, is it coincidence, that HTC chose A9, which is same name as Apple's processor, for such a physically imitative smartphone? Depending on who copies whom.

By first impression, and again without yet powering up, the new HTC One feels much better in the hand than iPhone 6s. Physical balance is fantastic. While both enclosures are made of aluminum and use rounded rather than flat bevel, they don't share the same design problem. I find either the 6 or 6s to be too slippery, which is what I expected from the A9. But in carelessly fumbling the HTC around, that's not the case. I get better grip on the One than the iPhone.

I will start seriously using HTC One A9 over the weekend ahead of writing my full review. But that's my out-of-the-box fast, first impression.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Revisiting Nexus 9 [review]

Publié: novembre 3, 2015, 5:42pm CET par Joe Wilcox

HTC is just killing me. Last week, I bought a new Nexus 9 tablet from Amazon, thinking: "What a deal!" But every Tuesday, the device manufacturer boasts big 24-hour sale. "What a steal" is my reaction to the weekly price cut, with buyer's remorse. The company sells, today only, the 32GB LTE model for what I paid for the WiFi-only variant: $359. Oh, the pain!

But this story is stranger still. I didn't regard N9 much of a good value when reviewing in May, writing: "I want to love Google-branded, HTC-manufactured Nexus 9. But ours is a contentious relationship". On Oct. 29, 2015, Amazon delivered the new tablet, and the user experience dramatically differs from the previous device—so much I must revise my review. Value is even better, for anyone buying on this November Tuesday and scooping the deep discount.

What the Hell is This?

Days before buying Nexus 9, I parted with iPad Air 2 LTE. The family hopes to change cellular carriers, and there was opportunity to amicably relinquish my payment responsibility to Verizon. I would love to replace the Apple with Google Pixel C, but the tab's forthcoming release date is uncertain. I reconsidered Nexus 9 and found the 32GB white model available from Amazon for $130 less than list price. I ordered, knowing that the device could be returned for refund if Pixel C imminently released or if N9 dissatisfied again. Lower price made buying and trying again an easy decision.

Nothing was normal opening the box. For starters, the tab looked and felt nothing like the black variant previously possessed. Sturdy. Solid—and the dirtiest white I've ever seen. I immediately assumed that Amazon had shipped a Chinese counterfeit, or perhaps I had developed some kind of color blindness. Searching the InterWebs for N9 photos, I concluded: The box outside indicates white, but contains the stone-colored tablet within. That model isn't sold by Amazon, by the way, at least not as the last week of October became November.

While doing color research, I found forum posts among several sites where buyers of white Nexus 9 experienced light-bleeding problems that replacements didn't solve. One remedy: Get stone instead. Lucky me. The mix up made me wonder if the seller shipped a refurbished N9, but by all appearances the packaging and tablet are new.

This is only the second time that an online retailer shipped the wrong computing device. In February 2009, I ordered my second Mac—refurbished PowerBook G3—from PC Connection; listed as the 233MHz model, I received the 266MHz laptop instead. I watched my first DVD on the notebook, rented from Netflix (yeah, I've been a customer for that long).

Same But Different

My new Nexus 9 turned on with nearly full battery charge, and I marveled at how much more substantial, and a little weighty, the thing felt to hold. The back on the other always seemed a bit flimsy to me, and maybe that was my subjective feeling for the price: $479, or $399 for the 16 gigger. But responsiveness is the kicker. I wrote in my original review:

During my four months using the tablet, response occasionally hesitates and WiFi too often disconnects...Click and wait is too common behavior, and it is unacceptable for a tablet costing so much when the market measure is the ever-maturing iPad...Hesitation isn't frequent but nevertheless occurs too often.The fluidity I have come to expect from Android is hit or miss on Nexus 9.

I had no such experience the evening of October 29 or days following. Subjectively, the new Nexus 9 is as fast as, and in some ways faster than, my iPad Air 2. The Android tablet is smooth, and WiFi stays connected—all this while running Lollipop. After setup, N9 downloaded a successive series of updates—four, five, I don't know how many—before offering Android 6.0 (aka Marshmallow). Oh yeah.

I want to say that my switch from iPad Air 2 is no regrets, but I will miss the $35 year subscription to Nature magazine. The pub's app isn't available for Android, and the normal magazine sub is $200.

But stone Nexus 9 is a satisfying tablet, particularly running Marshmallow—even a year after release. I am stunned, and remember this: My immediate comparative, subjective experience is Apple's current flagship, which is larger, costlier, and presumably superior.

Value Comparison
Value looks better, too. Again, that wouldn't be the case if: performance lagged as much on stone as black, WiFi disconnected occasionally, or the overall comparative feeling of device in hand was flimsy. Got to winder: Does HTC have a quality control problem, or did the company resolve manufacturing issues? Stone shipped months later than black or white, so the latter is reasonable.

The Google tablet benefits from something else: Apple and Amazon, the other major digital lifestyle platform competitors, haven't changed their devices dramatically in the year since N9's release. Meanwhile, Android continues to gain app momentum against iOS (right, but no Nature), while Google's Material Design pleases the eyes more than the tragically outdated iOS user interface. Where iPad mini 4 smacks Nexus 9 is storage, like the mini 3 did: 64GB storage for $20 more than the HTC tab's 32GB capacity, which is the maximum available. The tablets are the same $399 for 16GB.

That said, while Google and HTC normally sell for list price, resellers discount, with Amazon being one example. As I write, the 16GB black is $316.82, while the 32 gigger is $370.66, from the online retailer. But 32GB white is less (and more than what I paid days earlier): $358.99—or $315 for 16 gigs. In some cities, all are available for free same-day delivery, which is the option I chose.

Best Apple price-feature comparison is iPad mini 3, in white and gold and 16GB is $289.99, which is $20 less than during the weekend. The iPad's screen is smaller (7.9 inches compared to 8.9 inches) and display resolution is the same. The Android has twice the RAM and front-facing speakers. Both are big benefits. HTC's blow-out sale is irresistible and already blowing through inventory. The 16GB, discounted form $399 to $239.40 already is out of stock. The 32 gigger is still available, like the smaller capacity model in black and white, for $287.40, which a helluva bargain. The LTE is 32GB and black only for $359.40—and I am crying for not waiting several days to buy.

Oh Yeah

Let's discuss some of the features and benefits.

Nexus 9 Specs

Size. Nexus 9 feels chunky in the hands, by comparison to its major contenders. The tablet isn't as thin or petite, measuring 228.25 x 153.68 x 7.95 mm and weighing 425 grams. iPad mini 4: 203.2 x 134.8 x 6.1 mm and 298.8 grams. Granted the mini's display is smaller. Amazon's HDX 8.9, which screen is comparable size to the N9, measures 231 x 158 x 7.8 mm and weighs 389 grams. The HDX feels smaller, even being a tad larger, because of greater thinness and lightness. iPad Air 2 is thinner than all three: 6.1 mm.

That said, Nexus 9 isn't uncomfortable to hold, by any means. There's a ruggedness to the feeling in the hands. Like Fire HDX 8.9, but unlike every slippier iPad, N9's matte finish gives great friction. The HTC tab is not a device that easily slips from the fingers.

Display. As previously mentioned, the IPS screen is 8.9 inches and delivers effective 2048 x 1536 resolution. Colors are muted rather than vivid or contrasty but nevertheless satisfying enough. Text is crisp. At 453 nits, Nexus 9's display is brighter than iPad Air 2 (410)); benchmarks are courtesy of Phone Arena. Laptop Magazine presents different measurements.

I expect that most buyers will be satisfied with the HTC tablet's screen, which benefits from Marshmallow's Material Design and other visual enhancements. Stated differently: Android 6 is a joy to view and use on Nexus 9. Neither Fire OS or iOS competently compare.

Graphics and audio. Media consumption is excellent. Photos look gorgeous, as does streaming video, which gets a boost from the booming speakers flanking the display. There's a 3D aural quality watching movies, Audio output through the headphone jack is excellent. Volume is more than adequate even for cheap earphones.

Streaming from HBO, Hulu, Netflix, Starz, YouTube, and other sources is super smooth and stutter-free. Scrolling through Google photos is equally smooth, with greater fluidity and presentation than Apple Photos on iPad Air 2.

Performance. What can I say? The stone tab I now own bears physical resemblance to the black N9 I used earlier in the year. But the overall user experiences aren't comparable, mainly because of performance. The stutters and hesitations that made the other tablet unpleasant are gone. I enjoy using Nexus 9, which feels as current in 2015 as a year earlier.

Bottom Line

Seven months ago, I knocked Nexus 9 for its dissatisfying value-performance. Maybe I was shipped something defective. The two tablets could be made by different manufacturers, the user experience of one is so improved over the other. Retailers lower Nexus 9 prices; competing tablets marginally improve while costing about the same today as a year ago; and maturing Marshmallow makes modern Android set against outdated iOS. One is fresh, the other tired. Then there is today's HTC sale, which ends as the clock strikes Midnight, Pacific Standard Time.

I almost certainly will keep Nexus 9, even if I buy Pixel C as planned. If that's not an endorsement, what is? But I must admit to temptation to return the one N9 to Amazon and get LTE for the same price. Nah.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Just because Apple CEO Tim Cook claims something doesn't make it true

Publié: octobre 29, 2015, 12:32am CET par Joe Wilcox

Apple CEO Tim Cook

The haughty headline from yesterday's Apple fiscal fourth quarter 2015 earnings report isn't big revenue or profit performance ($51.5 billion and $11.1 billion, respectively), but a figure given by CEO Tim Cook during the analyst call: "We recorded the highest rate on record for Android switches last quarter at 30 percent".

Blogs, and some news sites, set the statement off like an atomic blast of free marketing for Apple. The fallout spreads across the InterWebs this fine Wednesday, largely undisputed or corroborated. Just because Cook claims something doesn't make it true. To get some perspective, and to either correct or confirm the public record, today I asked a half-dozen analysts: "Does your analysis of the smartphone market support that assertion?"

But beyond the question: How did Apple collect the data? Apple Store impromptu polling? The recently released "Move to iOS" app for Android? Cook's statement could easily be technically accurate if the latter, while being misleading. Better analytics doesn't mean an increase in switchers.

Analysts Answer

The real proof comes as analysts release sales, shipment, or subscriber data for calendar third quarter. Even then, much depends on where, which is another way the 30-percent figure could be misleading while being technically accurate. Neither mobile platform is adopted consistently around the world. "Trends are different in different markets, with the US seeing the least amount of switchers", Carolina Milanesi, Kantar WorldPanel's chief of research and head of US operations, says.

Her statement jives with comScore, which for the three months ending August 31st, puts the Android-to-iOS switcher rate at 8 percent. But NPD's US consumer research more closely aligns with Apple's. "In looking at our Q3 consumer tracking that looks about right" Stephen Baker, vice president of industry analysis, says about Cook's claim. "Of the Apple buyers who answered the question about what phone they owned previously about 30 percent said not an iPhone but something else".

But "not an iPhone" would logically include more than Android and raises alarm about Apple's number. To his credit, UBS analyst Steve Milunovich asked Cook what the figure means during yesterday's conference call: "In terms of new customers, just wanted clarity on the switcher number, are you saying that 30 percent of iPhone shipments in the quarter went to android switchers to iOS?" Cook answered:

What this means is that for customers to purchase an iPhone last quarter and replace the smartphone that 30 percent of those switched from an Android device. And so there would have been some switchers on top of that from other operating systems. But, obviously, Android is the largest one by far. And so that's what that means, and that number is the largest that we've ever recorded since we began measuring it three or so years ago. And so, it’s a huge number. We're very, very proud of that number.

My timing asking analyst response is unfortunate, since most firms haven't fully baked their calendar third-quarter smartphone reports. Kantar WorldPanel drops data next week, for example. While we wait, Milanesi referred me to a May statement that corroborates Cook' assessment in one region but for three months earlier: "Across Europe's big five countries during the first quarter, 32.4 percent of Apple’s new customers switched to iOS from Android".

Disparate Desertion

I wondered about how disproportionately might different regions be represented, asking Milanesi: " Given that China is the world's largest smartphone market, where Android's presence is big, how much growth there could account for the 30-percent claim? Or even Europe and US?"

She repeated something tweeted yesterday, and added more: "If you think that in China 56 percent of new iPhone buyers came from Android and in Europe that numbers averages at in Europe they are 29 percent, you can see how those two offset the weaker number in the US, which is 11 percent".

That the world's largest smartphone market would be higher, while the second biggest is much lower, shouldn't surprise. US iPhone adoption is high, by comparison to most every other region, if not all. For example, based on smartphone subscriber share, iOS was 44.1 percent for the three months ending August 31st, compared to Android at 51.7 percent, according to comScore.

However, by sales, the US market measures differently, and that's where final calendar Q3 data will matter assessing the veracity of Cook's claim. For example, again, by smartphone OS sales share, Kantar WorldPanel reports that in second quarter, Android's US share was 66.7 percent, compared to 28.4 percent for iOS. China: Android, 78.1 percent; iOS, 19.4 percent. In context of Android's dominance, 56 percent switchers, while significant, is less than it seems. Reminder: That number is for Q3, while the others are Q2.

Among the five European Countries and Russia, Q2 sales share shows Android between 71 percent and 89.5 percent, depending on locale. United Kingdom is the grand exception, where Android is 51.4 percent and iOS 33.7 percent. Assuming large disparities between the two mobile platforms, 30 percent switchers is unsurprising.

Flipped around, the number is smaller than the headlines make out. Generously assuming that other mobile operating systems add another 5 points to Cook's claim, then at least 65 percent of iPhone buyers were existing customers during calendar Q3. The loyalty rate is meaningful and enviable. Nevertheless, sales are largely contained within the existing customer base, which presumes that Android's overwhelming dominance will not diminish in these countries.

What I want to know, and maybe analysts can answer later: What is the Android loyalty rate, and how many new buyers are iOS switchers?

Android Abandonment

I asked the analysts to offer opinions about Android-to-iOS switching. Two of them answered. Milanesi responds:

"Larger screens"
"Lowers prices on the iPhone 5S (much more interesting proposition than the 5 and the 5C were)"
"Weaker brand power in the Android market as Samsung lost some of its shine in Europe and recent flagship have not been driving excitement"

"There is a catching up going on I think of people who left iPhone for Android because of screen sizes", Baker adds. "I also think that we are seeing, with the increased availability of lower-cost iPhones, folks switching into iPhone as a better platform that maybe they stayed away from because of cost. And I think the growth of installment plan purchasing lowers the initial cost of getting an iPhone so that has opened them up to a new market, and, finally, because Apple has such dominant share all the carriers—and retailers—promote the iPhone the most with the best deals because it brings in the most customers".

Yes, in the United States, iPhone ads are everywhere, so much: why would the average consumer think there is anything else to choose?

Cook's claim likely is technically true, somewhere. Based on comScore and Kantar WorldPanel data, the number is inaccurate for the United States, about right for Europe, and too low for China. Elsewhere? We should soon know.

We wait for the analyst calendar Q3 data that matters more—not that many people will remember, now that bloggers have polluted the public record with free marketing for Apple. The 30 percent of Android switchers is what will be remembered.

YouTube Red is instant gratification

Publié: octobre 28, 2015, 7:35pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Pig with Sungleasses

Wow, and weird, is my reaction to YouTube Red, which is live starting today. The experience is so different from the regular service, I am stunned. Fast-loading is the first thing, so be careful what you click—or turn off autoplay. Videos on Facebook feel like a moped racing a Lamborghini compared to YT Red.

Using this 2012 MissFender video as example: Pressing the stopwatch on my Nexus 6P at the same time I click to enter the URL, 9 seconds passes before I can start watching the vid. The time includes the auto-loading ad, how long it plays before YouTube permits me to skip, and lag caused by my own responsiveness dismissing the advert.

By contrast, the video—and every other tested—loads instantaneously on YT Red. Human perceptually, that is. By eliminating the ad-driven wait time and distractions, I likely will watch many, many, many more YouTube videos, and for longer time, than previously done.

The question, of course: What does this mean for all the independent content producers who make the video streaming service so appealing? For many who count on revenue, Red may jeopardize. Under new terms of service, vids must be available to Red as well as the standard, ad-supported service.

Warning: YT's appeal tarnishes if taken too commercial, which includes Alphabet/Google deciding who are the YouTube stars rather than users, based on compensation and promotion. The improved viewing experience means little if content diminishes with advertising supporting it.

On the other hand, where else can content creators reach such large an audience than YouTube? Do they have any other choice? Is Red really Alphabet flexing its monopoly muscles? Or maybe, I make moot point because too few people will pay $9.99 a month for advertising freedom.

Thing is, I didn't sign up for YouTube Red, which will be true for many other new subscribers. I have a free trial to Google Play Music that ends November 24th. If you subscribe to either service, Google gives you the other, too.

By the way, Play Music loads like Maine molasses in autumn. It feels slower still compared to zippy YouTube Red. What's up with that Google?

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/GTS

You don't need to read this review -- buy Chromecast 2015 instead

Publié: octobre 24, 2015, 12:14am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Chromecast 2015

This is one of the easiest reviews to write—and the shortest, too. If you own an Android or iOS device, buy the new Chromecast. Nothing more needs to be said, but I am obliged because you do want to know why. Right?

Google opened up the streaming stick category with launch of the original Chromecast, in July 2013. Release of its successor, on Sept. 29, 2015, makes an already compelling platform better. I see two benefits that matter: WiFi AC support and the hanging dongle design. Wireless update primps the device for faster routers, like Google's own OnHub. The other is more crucial. Some people needing or wanting to plug into one of a TV's rear HDMI ports may find the original Chromecast won't fit. The new design, puck hanging from HDMI cable, solves that problem.

These two benefits are reason enough for existing Chromecast owners to upgrade—and easy for me to suggest, given the price. Like the original, the streaming device sells for $35. For less than the cost of pizza and beers for your movie or TV watching crew, you can buy the new Chromecast.

That said, if you're super satisfied with the one you've got, the original is good, too—and I don't need tell you why. You know. The platform of supported apps is enormous. Apple TV can't compete, and I refer to the new model about to release. Look at the list of castable apps for yourself. Simple rule, and granted not universally, if you can run the entertainment app on Android or iOS device you probably can cast it.

That's the simplicity of the Chromecast platform. Your familiar mobile, from which you may engage other people or information while watching the boob tube, is the remote control. That experience isn't much changed from the original. There's a new Chromecast app, which works pretty much the same with newer or older device.

The app's big benefits are the attractive (and more useful) design, ease of setting up a new Chromecast, and the robust but sometimes puzzling search feature. In concept, you can search for content across connected apps and services on your device. For example, search for “X-Files”, and the Chromecast app will direct you to the series on Hulu and Netflix, also. If not installed, you will be prompted to download.

Search for “Outlander”, however, and the series shows up on Google Play but not the Starz app, which can cast the series. Uh-oh. But the related content revealed on YouTube is impressive, and will be more useful when the Red subscription service launches on October 28th. YouTube Red is a $9.99 per month sub that includes Google Music and broadcasts without advertising. That's right—ad-free, baby.

Like the original, Chromecast 2—2015 or, ah, puck, if you prefer—draws power from a TV's USB port or electrical outlet. I use the former, without any hardship. There isn't much else to report. The overall user experience between models isn't much changed. For the price, 35 bucks, the two aforementioned big benefits, and three color choices there isn't much to say but "buy it".

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Nexus 5X first-impressions review

Publié: octobre 20, 2015, 8:53pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

The question everyone should ask about Google-branded, LG-manufactured Nexus 5X: Who is it for? My first-impressions review primarily focuses on the answer. My wife is one person, and I am surprised. Because conceptually she steps down from the Motorola Droid Turbo, which by raw specs is the superior mobile. Budget buyers also should consider the 5X or anyone living the Google lifestyle or wanting stock Android.

The new handset course corrects last year's release blunder, when Google sized up to 6-inch screen with the Nexus 6, leaving many satisfied N5 owners in stunned silence followed by loud complaint. While a N6 fan, I agree: It is a huge phone that is overly large for the majority of prospective buyers. This year's solution is smart. Google released two smartphones: Nexus 6P, which while phablet-class is markedly more manageable in the hands than its predecessor; Nexus 5X, for people wanting something smaller and for N5 owners looking to upgrade.

Measuring Value

Size wasn't N6's only drawback. Google ventured from the Nexus line's core value of providing good value. The big phone sold for $649 or $699, in 32GB and 64GB capacities, respectively, By contrast, Nexus 5 cost $349 (16GB) or $399 (32GB) when released in late October 2013. The Alphabet search subsidiary presented N5 uprgraders and others with a $300 price increase that put Nexus in the iPhone cost stratosphere. The air was too thin up there for many potential buyers. Neither Google nor Motorola ever released real sales numbers, but they unquestionably never exceeded measurable fraction of Apple's iPhone.

Nexus 5X brings back value pricing and good features for the price. The 16GB model sells for $379, while $429 gets you 32GB capacity. I am no fan of 16GB, particularly on phones without microSD-expandable storage. The operating system and installed apps can consume a lot of space. On my 32GB loaner, only 24.89GB is available for the user. My wife primarily uses the 5X, and she isn't a power user. Of that remaining 24.89GB, she has consumed 3.75 gigs—3.31GB for apps.

So let's do the math: Presuming preinstallations would consume as much (7.11 gigs) on a 16GB Nexus 5X, only 8.89GB would be available to the user after setup. Using my wife as example, following backup sync of apps and data: 5.14 gigs. Granted, Google generously gives cloud storage for photos and documents, but 5GB nevertheless isn't much to work with on any connected device. Nor is nearly 9 gigs out of the box. Shoot a couple of 4K videos and what's left? The ;point: No manufacturer should sell a 16GB smartphone—beyond barebones pricing, and I arbitrarily put $249 as upper limit for any device in the feature, price, and size class.

I call out storage because value, as in actual cost and what you get for it, is Nexus 5X's big benefit—assuming Google returns to the design ethic adopted for the N4 and N5, both of which LG also manufactured. Budget 16GB smartphone made some sense when Google lowered the price bar with Nexus 4 in 2012. Three years later, it's marginal at best.

Consider the high-value, similarly lower-cost competition: Moto X Pure Edition, for $399, also with 16GB storage, but expandable with microSD card. Apple demands (choke, choke) $450 for the unlocked iPhone 5s, which is more budget buster, although that distinction belongs more to the $549 iPhone 6, with same capacity as the other two. Considering that the 5s is the same vintage as Nexus 5, you could argue that Google gives good value at $379 on new tech while Apple sells what was current two years ago. Personally, if buying Nexus 5X, I would spend the extra $50 for 32GB.

In the price range, the Moto X is Nexus 5X's clearest competitor based on features but not screen size. N5's display is 5.2 inches, while its rival packs a 5.7-inch screen—same as Nexus 6P, which also is a value-oriented phablet, particularly compared to iPhone 6s Plus. For example, Apple charges $300 more, $949, than the 6P for 128GB storage. The 64GB N6P is $549, which compares to $499.99 and $649, respectively, for Pure Edition or the 6s Plus.

Value Comparisons

But this review is about Nexus 5X, so let's get back to it by looking at several other smartphones with comparable-size screens, 5.2 inches: Microsoft Lumia 950 and Sony Xperia Z3+. The 950 is coming soon and rumored to sell for $549.99 with 32GB storage, and like the 5X uses the Qualcomm Snapdragon 808 processor. But the Lumia packs higher resolution display (2560 x 1440 vs 1920 x 1080), more memory (3GB vs 2GB), and greater-capacity battery (3000 mAh vs 2700 mAh), as select examples. But the price also is expected to be $120 to $170 more the the 32GB Nexus 5X.

The Xperia Z3+ arrives this month in the United States. Amazon sells the international model with 32GB storage for $498 and some change. Sony refers Z3 sales to B&H, which stocks the 16 gigger for $549.99. On the Plus model, buyers get the 810 processor, comparable 1080p screen, 3GB RAM, and 2930 mAh battery. Cameras are 20 megapixels from the two competitors, and 12.3MP on the Nexus. All three phones shoot 4K video.

How much is the value if comparing 32GB models, with the 5X at $429, and all three are unlocked and contract-free? Budget doesn't mean what it did when N5 shipped two years ago. Higher pricing generally follows smarphones with larger displays, and low-priced models tend to be more capable. To be fair, the comparisons I make at 5.2-inch screens ignore many other considerations, but I am trying to make a point—or, stated differently, helping you to find one.

Who is Nexus 5X for at $379 or $429? Is this a value phone in the tradition of the N4 or N5? The answer surprises me.

Some Surprises

So let's talk about what you really get from Google and LG. For brevity's sake, and because I have possessed the phone for four days, focus will be limited to a handful of benefits—all of which are shared with Nexus 6P. For N4 pr N5 upgraders that's the value. Google gives as good as the costlier handset in smaller size, for lower price. Inside the shared goody bag: Like 12.3MP camera, fingerprint sensor, and Android 6 Marshmallow; the OS delivers contextual usage benefits that are killer apps.

Before getting to shared features and benefits, I would like to discuss some general first impressions related to my using Nexus 5X and moving my wife to it.

Maybe I am too accustomed to larger phones, because Nexus 5X seems small to me. I mean tiny. This has a 5.2-inch screen? Somebody convince this disbeliever. The fit in the hand is excellent, with terrific balance. What surprises me most is the display, which I find to be crisp and pleasing. Considering I'm coming from a phablet with larger screen (6 inches) and higher resolution (2560 x 1440), my delight is unexpected.

Let me state it differently: Based on the screen viewing experience, audio from the front-facing speakers, overall handling, and the big benefits shared with Nexus 6P, I would gladly use the 5X as my smartphone. I do see value for itself, regardless of what competitors offer in the class. This phone has fantastic physical balance and overall balance of features and benefits.

But my wife claims Nexus 5X for now. I moved her to the handset as an experiment to which I forecasted failure. She used the Droid Turbo, which has small size screen but with 2560 x 1440 resolution, 3GB RAM, enormous battery (3900 mAh), and 21MP camera. Like me, she finds Nexus 5X's lower-res screen to seem more natural and easier to read. Overall performance and responsiveness is zipper than the Droid, although I don't find the 5X to be nearly as smooth as Nexus 6P. She prefers the size and shape to the Turbo. The 5X is narrower and longer in portrait mode and is much lighter (136 grams to 169 grams), She won't give up the 5X, and I can see why.

But as a value comparison, other buyers might evaluate differently. Verizon Wireless sells the 32GB Turbo for $480 unlocked; the pricing anticipates imminent release of the Droid's successor. By the specs, the Motorola-made smartphone should still be current a year from now.

Nexus 6P Disguised

So let's discuss those shared benefits with the 6P.

Nexus Imprint. About three-quarters up the back of the Nexus 5X is a circular sensor sized just right for my forefinger. Google calls the thing Nexus Imprint. Picking up the device and placing my forefinger on the round indentation wakes and unlocks the 5X. The sensor is finely sensitive and perfectly placed. My finger finds it easily and quickly.

Life-changing is how I describe the fingerprint sensor. I am more likely to grab the smartphone because waking and using is so much easier. My wife shares similar sentiment. The location, on the back, is inspired compared to Apple's placing the mechanism on the front of newer iPhones.

Now on Tap

Now On Tap. The virtual Home button gets new capability, which also will be available to other Nexuses running Android 6. Google calls the feature Now on Tap, which is a misnomer. The feature activates with a short press, not a tap. The action brings up Google Now info cards that offer contextually-meaningful information that is relevant to what’s on the screen. Maybe it’s an app, email message, or webpage.

To demonstrate, hehe, NoT, I used the phone like my wife would. She reads the Washington Post, so I started there with a crime story about Prince George's County, where we once lived. Short press brought up an info card about the local police (left screenshot). She also uses IMDB, so I opened the app and clicked on "The Martian". From the movie page, I long tapped again (middle). Google Now presents links to YouTube (for the trailer), the official Facebook page, and cast information, for example. Lastly, I searched Google for "Baker Street" then pressed the virtual Home button. I wasn't sure what to expect, perhaps a Google Map. Instead, Now on Tap presented info about the 1970s pop song, which I loathe.

Now on Tap is another life-changer. In just four days, I frequently use the feature. Google search and informational services take on usefulness unlike any previous experience with them. The utility is fantastic, although limited. Too often, I am greeted with “Nothing on Tap”. It's a work in progress. I see my wife using it less often than me, but more every day.

Voice assistance. Apple is all wrong obsessing about touch—it’s an anachronism. Touchless interaction is the future of computing. Just think “Star Trek” the Original Series. Google illuminates the more sensible user interface, and expands its capabilities with Marshmallow's improved voice response. Used to be you could ask questions, starting with "OK, Google". Now the capability is available to other apps. My problem, and perhaps yours will be: Figuring out which apps support the feature.

Pssst, I hear my wife talking to Nexus 5X, which she rarely did to the Droid. Subtle changes make the voice utility more useful for her to ask the phone questions and get contextually relevant responses.

Photo and video. I expected Google to give budget buyers less camera capabilities, but no! Nexus 5X and 6P share a 12.3MP rear camera. There are some subtle differences, such as slo-mo at 120 frames per second on the smaller smartphone, and additional 240 fps on the other. Aperture is f/2 on both, but the big thing is the sensor, with its 1.55 micron pixels. Larger pixels mean fewer visual artifacts and better low-light performance, particularly matched to the wide-aperture lens.

Front facing cameras are different: 8MP at f/2.4 and 1.42 micron pixels on the 6P and 5MP at f/2 and 1.4 micron pixels on the 5X. I haven't tested yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if the smaller Nexus proved to be the superior self-shooter. I will investigate.

Both rear cameras shoot 4K video at 30 fps. OK, would-be YouTube stars, go for it.

And Finally...

That's a wrap. I generally like Nexus 5X, and my wife loves it.

The question again: Who is the smartphone for? This is a value-oriented handset, but by a different comparison than many buyers may expect. Google's measure of value isn't competing devices but the 6P. The core benefits that should matter to most people will be the same for both devices.

By contrast, while Apple takes similar approach with newer iPhones—major benefits are similar for the 6s and 6s Plus, for example—the company relegates value pricing to older models that overall offer less comparative capabilities and benefits. Google could just reintroduce Nexus 5 and charge more for less, as Apple does with iPhone 5s.

Instead, the search and information giant gives the best benefits to both new Nexuses starting with Marshmallow and extended to hardware like the fingerprint scanner or rear camera. Price, screen, and physical size are more major considerations for people choosing between the smartphones. The approach is super smart and comes at value from price perspective and benefits.

Surely someone at Google recognizes that many existing N4 and N5 owners skipped Nexus 6 because of size and cost. The 5X is a little larger than its predecessor but not ginormously. They get more without, from another perspective, taking lots less.

Nexus 6P or iPhone 6s Plus?

Publié: octobre 19, 2015, 10:47am CEST par Joe Wilcox

iPhone 6s Plus Nexus 6P Fingerprint Readers

If you asked me two months ago about using a Huawei smartwatch or smartphone, I would have scoffed. Yet, here I am doing just that. Timing on the latter is ironic. On Oct. 15, 2015, I bought a 128GB silver (and white) iPhone 6s Plus using Apple's 24-month finance plan, rather than paying in full up front. Huawei-made, Google-branded 64GB Nexus 6P arrived the next day for review. The following morning (the 17th), I hauled down to Apple Store and returned the iPhone for full refund. That act sums up my reaction to the new Android flagship running "Marshmallow".

I didn't expect to be so wooed by Nexus 6P, but Google got me by delivering superior contextual experience. This device, and Android 6, is all about context, starting with what for me is the killer function I couldn't part with: the fingerprint reader on the back of the phone. Picking up the device and placing my forefinger on the circular indentation wakes and unlocks the 6P. Wow-way is right! The mechanism beats the Hell out of Apple's two-handed jimmy from the Home button.

Now on Tap

The other got-me demonstrates fundamental philosophical design differences between Apple and Google regarding finger-first interaction. iPhone 6s and 6s Plus feature what the fruit-logo company calls 3D Touch. The mechanism allows the user to apply different levels of pressure to initiate different actions. Apple uses Peek and Pop to describe the interaction, such as pressing lightly to look at an email and a little harder to open the mail app. By contrast, the Alphabet search subsidiary takes another approach that is killer app in the making.

Called Now on Tap, the name is a misnomer. You briefly press, not tap, the Home button and Android 6 Marshmallow brings up Google Now info cards that offer contextual information that is relevant to what's on the screen. Maybe it's an app, email message, or webpage. As an example, I searched for "feral cats", which led me to website Alley Cat Allies. Then I activated Now on Tap by pressing down the Home button (see screenshot left). One option on the card is images. Who can resist feline photos? (middle). I then clicked News (right), and had an uh-oh moment. I did all this on the evening of October 17, only to learn that I missed National Feral Cat Day on the 16th. Well, Hell.

Cute: When Google can't find anything relevant, you see "Nothing on Tap". That, and some irrelevant info and thin presentation, is why I call the feature a killer app in the making. Google will refine the feature over time, while (in theory) contextual relevance improves as Now collects more (gulp) data about you.

Got to say: The info cards are a wee bit small for my aging eyes. Now on Tap could be even better on a tablet. OK, Google, when will you release Pixel C?

Design Ethics

To get 3D Touch, Apple makes you buy a new phone. Google gives Now on Tap to mobiles upgrading to or shipping with Android 6. For the moment, that generally means a Nexus device. Another difference: The limited contextual benefits from Peek and Pop require more user intervention. Now on Tap strips back the complexity by more proactively providing information. That approach better fits the first four of my principles of good design. Full list of what a tech product should do:

Hide complexity
Emphasize simplicity
Make users feel happy
Build on what is familiar
Imbue human-like qualities
Do what it’s supposed to really well
Allow people to do something they wished they could do but couldn’t
When displacing something else, offer significantly better user experience

The differing design ethics highlight another important development distinction between the companies. Apple sells devices and claims we live in the post-PC era. Google generates revenue from contextual information services—many of which are related to search. As I have repeatedly stated, post-PC is a myth created by Apple (and others) focused on selling mobile devices. We live instead in the contextual cloud computing era, where content is king and making it available anytime, anywhere, and on any device. No company gets context like Google; it's in the corporate cultural DNA; the company's profit center is contextual advertising, leveraged from search.

Android 6 Now on Tap

Now on Tap is but one example, and Marshmallow is the most contextual version of Android yet and only Nexus devices currently are capable—particularly the 6P and sibling 5X. Stated differently: Google bakes search into its freshest operating system like no version before it. If you wonder why European trustbusters investigate Android, Marshmallow might be reason enough. Whether or not the intention, contextual search integration is so tight, Google might as well give the EU's Competition Commission the middle finger.

Digital Lifestyle

Everything in this review should be treated as first impressions focused on benefits; the companies' marketing highlight 3D Touch or Now on Tap as major benefits. For good reasons. The features make the smartphones smarter, at a time when typical hardware improvements have reached a plateau of innovation.

While this review is not a blood-and-guts head-to-head between iPhone 6s Plus and Nexus 6P, other comparisons are nevertheless difficult to ignore. These are both the flagship phones for their respective digital lifestyle platforms, and the similarities surprise me (as they may you).

Smartphones are highly personal, contextual devices that fit into digital lifestyle platforms. Apple's and Google's are the most alike and the most competitively comparable around iPhone and Nexus, and none of the predecessors are more alike (and different) than the 6s Plus and 6P.

Similarities span physical design, hardware features, and underlying digital lifestyle platforms anchored by the operating systems. When you buy iPhone or Nexus, Apple or Google controls the overall user experience. The distinction is important with respect to the Android device. There are no offending skins or users waiting months (or never) for updates. Like Apple and iOS mobiles, Google gives updates promptly to Nexus devices.

But past digital lifestyle platform differences largely muted buying comparisons. For a long time, iPhones were smaller than Nexuses. More recently, 6P's predecessor, made by Motorola, packs a 6-inch display and physical dimensions are nothing like iPhone 6 Plus or 6s Plus. By contrast, the Huawei-made smartphone is similarly-shaped, with like dimensions, hardware features (except for 3D Touch), and digital lifestyle benefits.

Anyone considering either iPhone 6s Plus or Nexus 6P shouldn't ignore the other device. Unless you are adapted to one platform or locked in by app purchases and other circumstances, these are the only flagships to consider. To repeat: Look at both before buying.

Comparisons

Let's examine hardware features:

1. Physical size is the same, except that the 6P is 1mm longer. Nexus: 159.3 by 77.8 by 7.3 mm. iPhone: 158.32 by 77.9 by 7.3 mm.

2. Huawei puts a larger screen into that nearly identical enclosure—5.7 inches vs 5.5 for the 6s Plus.

3. Nexus 6P offers higher-resolution screen: 2560 x 1440 at 518 pixels per inch compared to its rival's 1920 x 1080 at 401 ppi.

4. Both enclosures are aluminum.

5. The new iPhone is considerably heavier, however, and you really feel it even compared to the 6 Plus: 192 grams to the Nexus 6P's 178 grams. But the heft makes Apple's device feel sturdier than its predecessor and in my brief usage better gripped in hand. I no longer recommend a case as necessity; I would carry the 6s Plus bareback.

6. Both mobiles come with fingerprint sensors. As already mentioned, I find the placement and functionality to be superior on the back (Nexus) vs the front (iPhone).

7. Rear cameras are 12 megapixels, f/2.2 aperture for the Apple and f/2 for the Huawei.

8. Conceptually, the Nexus should shoot better in lower-light situations, because of the aperture and because bigger pixels, not more megapixels, is better: 1.55 µm on 6P vs. 1.22 µm on 6s Plus.

9. Apple gives you optical image stabilization for photos and videos, Huawei does not.

10. Rear cameras on both smartphones can shoot 4K video at 30 frames per second.

11. Front-facing cameras are 5MP on the 6s Plus and 8MP on the 6P.

12. The Apple uses proprietary Lightning connector and the Huawei industry-standard USB Type-C.

13. iPhone 6s Plus comes with earphones, Nexus 6P does not.

14. The 6P packs front-facing speakers (that sound awesome), while the 6s Plus offers a sideways grill in landscape view.

15. Storage capacity starts at 32GB on the Huawei vs 16GB on the Apple. Sorry, but 16 gigs should be criminal. Other capacities, for both: 64GB and 128GB.

16. Price is a difference, and Google gives greater value. iPhone 6s Plus: $749 (16GB); $849 (64GB); $949 (128GB). Nexus 6P: $499 (32GB); $549 (64GB); $649 (128GB).

17, Both companies offer damage protection insurance. But at $89, Google charges 40 bucks less than Apple for similar benefits.

Final First Thoughts

Nexus 6P's design didn't wow me out of the box. The phone is handsome enough but not greatly distinguished from other devices in the size class. However, after just a few hours handling, I couldn't put down the smartphone.

As my full first-impressions review explains, key benefits are beautifully balanced (which also can be said iPhone 6 Plus). The rear-fingerprint sensor and Now on Tap sold me, as previously mentioned, and better overall contextual user experience.

Click to enlarge

I cannot at this writing comment on battery life, which demands weeks of usage to rightly assess. However, in brief testing, both phones promise plenty of juice to get you through the day and beyond.

Both smartphones are fast enough, but Nexus 6P is the perkier performer. The days of choppy Android responsiveness are over.

I made my choice, and quickly, because of contextual killer benefits. You may feel differently, which is what makes platform competition great—catering to different individual tastes and needs.

Nexus 6P first-impressions review

Publié: octobre 19, 2015, 10:40am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Finely balanced and contextually practical are the terms that best describe my first impressions of Google's flagship Android. Nexus 6P preorders are about to ship, and I was fortunate to receive a review model but with short embargo lift: Delivered Oct. 16, 2015 before every blogger and reviewer on the planet blasted out simultaneous reviews and first-reactions on the 19th. I choose the latter, because a scant three days isn't enough time to rightly evaluate the smartphone.

Much of my experience is cast in moving from the previous flagship, Nexus 6, although there was a day between them where iPhone 6s Plus and I fitfully danced. The 6P is in many respects what its predecessor should have been: Smaller. Much as I like the larger Motorola-made phablet, its Huawei-manufactured successor has greater physical and feature balance. Both are superb smart devices, but the newer Nexus is better tuned to practical purposes.

Consider dimensions. Nexus 6 measures 159.3 x 83 x 10.1 mm and weighs 184 grams. The 6P is 159.3 by 77.8 by 7.3 mm and weighs 178 grams. The difference in width and depth supporting the 6-inch display make the Motorola much more cumbersome. The Huawei is flatter and thinner, although the screen real estate is less at 5.7 inches. I expected to be put off, because the bigger display is so useful, but better balance in the hand— 6P is so much more comfortable to hold and less lofty to maneuver—is a huge benefit.

In portable devices, physical balance is everything.

On Balance

Nexus 6P is not a remarkable-looking phone. Its design is unassuming; understated. As such, I didn't exactly coo taking it out of the box. But upon closer examination and handling, I quickly appreciated the smartphone's charms. In many respects, again qualifying three-days impression, Nexus 6P is exceptional by being unexceptional.

The human concept about exceptionality is one thing done well: You’re an Olympic runner, stock broker maven, or gifted surgeon. But in product design exceptionality is something both more and less—this is particularly true for personal tech devices used every day. The exceptional thing stands out not for the one attribute but the many combined. That is: How they balance.

Consider your automobile. Balance is hallmark of design, starting with aerodynamics and how the vehicle turns. An aerodynamically unbalanced auto will vibrate or burn fuel faster. Likewise, an unbalanced dSLR camera will be clumsy in the hand when telephoto lenses are attached, if design isn’t balanced.

That’s physical balance. Another type is just as important, and that’s the balance of features against benefits. I see the two are often confused, when they are so clearly separate. My favorite metaphor: The holder that goes around a Starbucks coffee cup is a feature. Keeping your hand from burning is a benefit. While related, the two things are different. Not all features deliver benefits and some can take away from the user experience—like when, say, GPS and mapping app rapidly drain a smartphone's battery. In good design, balance of benefits is even more everything.

Nexus 6P has excellent physical balance and feels comfortable in the hand, even when moved around quickly. The aluminum enclosure is a bit slicker than I prefer but not so much that I would encase it. I carry the handset bareback.

On Benefits

For the rest of this arguably first look, I will focus on features and benefits that made an impression. Because, again, three days is not enough for meaningful review. That will come later some weeks or even month(s) from now.

Setup. Google really disappointed me during the migration from Nexus 6. Setup prompted to use feature "Set up nearby device" to move my settings and stuff. Oh, yeah, baby! That's a feature on 6P running Android 6 Marshmallow but not one I could find on the older phone, which runs Lollipop. Still, The Huawei device easily restored apps and settings from online backup. I would have liked text messages, too, but the process was still easy enough even though not as excitingly simple or as thorough as promised.

Nexus Imprint. The first physical feature to wow me hides behind the phone. About three-quarters up the back is a circular sensor sized just right for my forefinger. Google calls the thing Nexus Imprint. Picking up the device and placing my forefinger on the round indentation wakes and unlocks the 6P; the feature is also available on Nexus 5X. The sensor is finely sensitive and brilliantly balances benefits—hardware against software. With respect to balance in design, the sensor is perfectly placed. My finger finds it easily and quickly.

If there is a flaw with the fingerprint sensor it is the great sensitivity. I carry phones in my right front pocket and tend to mindlessly caress them when walking, or standing for prolonged periods. The action could bring my finger in contact with the sensor and activate the phone. Imagine the embarrassment of accidentally ringing someone about whom you are griping about with another person. I can envision such scenario occurring. Google or Huawei could confirm, but you've been warned.

Life-changing is how I describe the fingerprint sensor. I am more likely to grab the smartphone because waking and using is so much easier. Benefits also need purpose, Nexus Imprint is big with it.

Controls. Like other Nexus devices, Huawei places power and volume controls in the upper right side of the phone when held in portrait orientation. Apple puts the volume buttons on the left, which I prefer. While I am right-handed, I hold a phone in the left, which frees my dominant hand to do other things. Held against my left ear, volume controls are inconveniently positioned. I would prefer to manipulate them with my thumb, as can be done with iPhone. That's my personal thing, about which you might feel differently.

Now On Tap. Other controls also are where you would expect them. But the virtual Home button gets new capability, which also will be available to other Nexuses running Android 6. Google calls the feature Now on Tap, which is a misnomer. The feature activates with a short press, not a tap. The action brings up Google Now info cards that offer contextually-meaningful information that is relevant to what’s on the screen. Maybe it’s an app, email message, or webpage.

Since the movie "Steve Jobs" opens in theaters nationally this week, and Apple's cofounder is such an iconic figure, I searched for his name; timely enough, right? The far left screenshot shows the info cards presented by Now on Tap. I clicked the Flixter icon, which opened the app, then long tapped again from within (middle). Tapping the info card for Jobs' daughter brought me to the final screenshot you see.

Now on Tap is another life-changer. In just three days, I frequently use the feature. Google search and informational services take on usefulness unlike any previous experience with them. The utility is fantastic, although limited. Too often, I am greeted with "Nothing on Tap".

Nexus 6P is a canvas across which Google paints context.

Voice assistance. Another control, but with no buttons: Improved voice response, which Google pioneered on Nexus One, released in January 2010. In another feature not exclusive to the 6P, Marshmallow extends voice response to apps supporting it. I said: "OK, Google, play the 'Steve Jobs' movie trailer". The smartphone bellowed: "Here you go", then YouTube launched and started streaming what I asked for.

My problem, and perhaps yours will be: Figuring out which apps support the feature.

Apple is all wrong obsessing about touch—it's an anachronism. Touchless interaction is the future of computing. Just think "Star Trek" the Original Series. Google illuminates the more sensible user interface, even though it's a work still in progress.

Screen. Resolution is 2560 x 1440, same as Nexus 6, but 518 pixels per inch compared to 493. Text is crisp, which is as much about Google's font selection. Visually strong elements look gorgeous. An ambient mode dimly lights the screen when you physically move the phone or there is a notification.

Audio and video consumption. On October 17th, I conducted some quick video comparisons between the Nexus 6P and iPhone 6s Plus. My purpose was audio—to see how the front-facing speakers sound alongside the Apple device's single grill. Separation and definition are superb and the overall clarity is pleasing. But the video differences captured more of my attention. The 6s Plus skin tones are more accurate but dull. I find the 6P video renders to be warmer and richer.

I also plugged in my Grado RS1e headphones and listened to music on the Tidal app, which streams music losslessly. Oh my. I could hear more detail compared to either Nexus 6 or iPhone 6s Plus, which was quite unexpected. That, again, demonstrates finely-tuned balance between hardware and software—in this instance audio processing.

Photo and video shooting. Many people will want to know about the cameras' capabilities—front and back, which I at this early stage have given light testing. My initial impression: Most users will be satisfied. But the shooters need more thorough testing before (or if) receiving my seal of approval.

The rear camera is 12.3 megapixels at aperture f/2. Larger pixels on the sensor, not more megapixels, is better: 1.55 micron pixels, which with the aperture promises excellent low-light performance. The front camera is a generous 8MP at f/2.4; 1.42 micron pixels.

The rear camera will capture 4K video at 30 frames per second. Slo-mode is available at 120 fps or 240 fps. Circling back to balancing features—here, software, hardware, and services—is Google Photos. Functionality doesn't much differ from Nexus 6 or other Androids. But new and upcoming features, like automatic photo and video sharing among invited groups being an example.

Performance. The best two measures of a device's balance of features are responsiveness and battery life. Starting with the former: Wow. While Nexus 6 is by no means a slowpoke, its successor is a perky performer. "Blink and you will miss it" is the metaphor. Marshmallow is silky smooth running on the 6P.

Under the hood is a 2 GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 (v2.1) 64 bit Octa-core processor and Adreno 430 graphics chip. RAM is 3GB. My review unit has 64GB storage, but 32GB and 128GB options also are available.

Battery. I can't say much because there hasn't been enough testing time. I received Nexus 6P around Noon on October 16th. Setup and sync consumed massively. I write this sentence at 8:45 p.m. PDT on October 18th, with one charge between and 27 percent charge remaining (reportedly 17 hours). Uh, that sure looks damn good to me. Battery is 3,450 mAh, and Google claims topping off for 10 minutes extends life by 7 hours. Oh, Baby.

Google. One more feature/benefit remains: Increased integration with search services and those related to it. You can see for yourself in Settings, where Marshmallow presents "Google" under "Personal". You are given tremendous (presumed) control over privacy, security, and who gets to see what about you. For example, in a twist on Apple's allowing ad blockers, Google gives you direct say-so. Under "Ads", Marshmallow lets you "instruct ads not to use your advertising IB to build profiles to show you interest-based ads".

That's a wrap. I generally like Nexus 6P, which is available in three colors: Aluminum (silver), graphic (black), and frost (white). This is going to be my full-time smartphone for the foreseeable future, which will enable a thorough, real world review later on.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Editor's Note: Several hours after publication, the chart was replaced to correct an error that listed pricing as "on contract".

Microsoft is back!

Publié: octobre 6, 2015, 8:50pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Microsoft Panos Panay Surface Book

That grinding against wood and dirt you hear is the sound of Steve Jobs rolling over in his grave. Microsoft is back! And badass! Today's Surface event in New York City outclasses Apple by every measure that matters: Aspiration, innovation, presentation, and promotional marketing. Microsoft proves that it can build end-to-end solutions—hardware, software, and services—as good as, and better than, the company cofounded by Jobs. Even more importantly: Present the new wares well. Today's event was exceptional.

But there is a shadow looming in the brightness that will matter to some Microsoft customers and not to others: Cost. Surface Book, for all its seeming greatness, is a budget-busting laptop for the majority of potential buyers. The low-cost config, at $1,499, comes with 6th-gen Intel Core i5 processor, 8GB RAM, and 128GB storage. To get the discreet graphics demoed today, with i7 chip, 8GB memory, and 256 SSD, you will spend $2,099. Doubling RAM and storage raises the price to $2,699.

But every product is a measure of its benefits, and how well that they balance. Detachable 13.5-inch touchscreen, 3000 x 2000 resolution, 3:2 display ratio, pen stylus, and conceptually above-average keyboard are standard fare for all models. Surface veep Panos Panay calls Microsoft's laptop the "ultimate computer". I can't confirm without testing, but he presents Surface Book as a believable MacBook Pro Retina Display-killer and the kind of real innovation that Apple delivered when Jobs walked this Earth.

Better Than Steve Jobs

I will go further, and be damned for saying so: Panay gave a better-than-Jobs introduction to Surface Pro 4 and Surface Book. When he walked out into the audience to pass around the new laptops, I was stunned. He easily swamped the disgustingly over-marketing hyped launch of iPad Pro. Where Apple presenters over-used words like "amazing", Panay repeatedly used "you"; that is much more aspirational and demonstrates attention to design that is more about the user than the product itself.

You. You. You. That is the over-arching theme from the entire event today. If you missed it live, watch the replay. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella expanded on the theme, too, when rightly observing that devices come and go. "You are the hub", he says. That's a concept lost on Apple, which innovation focuses more on selling more devices for the so-called post-PC era.

That concept is an underlying development philosophy permeating Microsoft. "You" isn't just marketing. In an August 2015 analysis that you really should, I highlighted how the company is in process of meaningful reinvention. The strategy of releasing apps and services for multiple platforms—hehe, including Apple Watch—are part of a broader platform strategy where you are the center. You are the hub.

Contextual Computing

We do not live in the post-PC era. That's an Apple illusion to sell more iPhones. This is the contextual cloud computing era, which Alphabet (formerly Google) gets and surprisingly so does Microsoft. You are the hub. The device is your extension. Your stuff is available anytime, anywhere, and on anything. Along that path: Microsoft's Continuum concept isn't newfangled, but I saw it meaningfully move forward during the Surface event—and the development philosophy far better fits the era of context than anything Apple sells.

A Microsoft Surface device commercial shown near the end of Panay's presentation begins: "There is a rhythm. You have to listen to hear it. It beats inside each and everyone of us. It beats like a drum. It says: 'Get out there. Create. Do something special'. It is the rhythm of inspiration". The theme, like everything else: "You".

In a January 2004 critique, I faulted Microsoft for focusing on new features in Plus! Digital Media Edition, while Apple promoted iMovie with the aspirational: "You are the editor". "You are the director". "You" was once a development philosophy for Apple. Microsoft's adopts it but better, by providing a vast suite of applications, cloud services, and server software that spans across platforms. Anytime. Anywhere. Anything.

Imitative Innovation

You can accuse Microsoft for copying Apple. The company that Jobs cofounded is the perennial imitator, doing better what already was done before. Microsoft gets it, too. By the way, for years the company had some of the worst nomenclature in techdom. Following Apple, in this decade, Microsoft gives names to some features, like Surface's PixelSense. The tactic makes the specific innovation easier to identify, more likely for people to remember, and easier to market.

Circling back to the beginning: For anyone wondering if Microsoft risks channel conflict with Surface Book, I conclude that Surface tablets already demonstrate there is little concern. The laptop's pricing eliminates even the "little". The Redmond, Wash.-based company isn't competing with its OEM partners but Apple. Wherever creatives or executives run Microsoft applications on MacBook Airs or Pros, these users now have alternatives to buy for about the same price but with more capabilities. No Mac offers touchscreen and stylus or moves forward with improved hardware, software, and services benefits like the Surface line.

If anything, Microsoft does good for OEMs by offering to image-conscious CEOs and other corporate execs, lust-worthy Windows alternatives to pricey Macs. PC manufacturers can only benefit if top decision-makers who otherwise would want Mac laptops ask for either new Surface instead. There is trickle-down benefit from re-untying the IT infrastructure around Windows and the influence on purchasing lower-costing Windows notebooks elsewhere in the organization. Microsoft doesn't create conflict with partners but generates more with Apple and potentially reduces conflict within enterprises that are the core market.

My question: Will the Apple-loving blogosphere give Microsoft the credit it deserves for the new Surface hardware, the underlying "you" philosophy behind them, or the magnificent presentation introducing them (and also new Lumias)?

Amazon Fire TV is hot [first-impressions review]

Publié: octobre 4, 2015, 2:51am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Fire TV

Streaming set-top boxes are no longer about media consumption. The newest entrants—from Amazon, Apple, and Google—fit into a larger lexicon of connected digital lifestyles. Think intelligent television for the information-obsessed and for visual voyeurs demanding the highest-quality video that is commercially available.

On Oct. 1, 2015, I started testing the new Amazon Fire TV, which goes on sale October 5th. I will later review the newer Google Chromecast but unlikely Apple's device (because a review unit isn't available and I wouldn't buy one for personal use). There is nothing radically new about Fire TV. It's more of the same only much better. Key benefit for some: 4K Ultra HD video support. Benefit for all: Enhanced voice-interaction capabilities that include Amazon's Alexa digital assistant. Then there are iterative enhancements that improve overall benefits.

Giving my conclusion at the start: Fire TV is the best all-around streaming box from the three major digital lifestyle platform providers. I deliberately exclude Roku for being a set-top box manufacturer rather than larger platform provider and Microsoft and Sony because their living room lifestyles build around costlier game consoles. If you have a 4K television, Amazon has you covered; Apple and Google don't.

Your Digital Lifestyle

Let's start by surveying the landscape from above before exploring the view at ground level.

As aforementioned, the major streaming boxes fit into one, or even several, digital lifestyles. Amazon, Apple, and Google offer distinct but similar lifestyle platforms built around apps, digital content, online stores, search, voice interaction (new for Apple TV but not the other two set-tops), and other capabilities or benefits.

Amazon's lifestyle is broadest and deepest when adding its larger retail store. Who doesn't shop there? All three companies provide access to your digital stuff anytime, anywhere, and on most anything. I say most because Apple's lifestyle largely locks into its own devices. Additionally, Amazon Instant Video isn't supported by Apple TV or Chromecast.

The day my Fire TV review unit arrived, the retailer informed store partners that the two aforementioned competing devices won't be sold after October 29th. Happy Halloween! How's that for trick or treat? If Apple and Google won't treat their users to Amazon's video service, the retailer will trick their devices.

Each of the three companies lets consumers cast content from smartphones or tablets to their set-top boxes, from which personal content like digital music or photo libraries also can be enjoyed. Joining Amazon, new Apple and Google set-tops also offer gaming.

What sets Amazon apart is Prime. The service that started out by offering free and low-cost shipping is itself a selective digital lifestyle around audiobooks, ebooks, movies, music, online shopping, TV programs, and more. As part of the $99 yearly subscription fee, Amazon includes loads of free-to-stream content. Some of the best is original programming, like the Emmy-award-winning "Transparent", delightful "Mozart in the Jungle", or forthcoming "The Man from High Castle".

I'm surprised: According to a toolbar that Amazon now places on my landing page, I have been a Prime member for 8 years and 4 months. Whoa, that long? And I opened my Amazon account in 1998.

Alexa Answers

Talk to Me

Amazon gets what Apple doesn't but Google does: Voice, not touch, is the user interface for the so-called post-PC era. While the fruit-logo company harps about 3-D Touch as the next thing on iPhone 6s and 6s Plus, Amazon and Google improve voice interaction and extend it to more devices. The retailer jumped ahead of competitors by offering voice search with the original Fire TV, for example, then expanded its utility elsewhere with the clever. multi-faceted Echo, which waits for your questions and follows your commands.

Coming full circle, Fire TV now incorporates Echo's digital assistant, providing surprising benefits. So, alongside the already compelling voice search utility, users can now ask for information while sitting on their comfy couch. Press the voice button, ask "What's the weather?", then release. Alexa will give you a quick synopsis and display the five-day forecast for you.

Problem: Alexa's interactive capabilities are more limited on Fire TV than Echo, and while Amazon says more are coming, it's unclear how much the retailer will cannibalize one device to benefit the other. That said, you can ask Alexa lots, although some things, like traffic for your daily commute, requires some additional, manual set up.

While you and Alexa acquaint and Amazon makes her smarter, Fire TV voice search finds content of all kinds, simply and super fast. The utility is consistently accurate recognizing what you say. The new Apple TV will incorporate—critics might say imitate—some search via voice capabilities. They aren't available to test from the touch-me obsessed company, so I can't compare.

Stream 4K or 1080p

Meanwhile, Chromecast tries to extinguish some of Fire TV's flame, by promising search results beyond Google Play store. Search for "X-Files", and the Chromecast app will direct you to the series on Hulu and Netflix, also. Search for "Outlander", however, and the series shows up on Google Play but not the Starz app, which can cast the series. By contrast, Fire TV first presents the Starz Play app, which I have installed, to stream episodes. Amazon search also supports Crackle, HBO Go, Hulu, and Showtime. The reach Chromecast promises, Fire TV delivers.

That neatly segues into another advantage over Apple TV, but not necessarily Chromecast: Fire TV offers apps for a much broader and meaningful set of video services. My household uses Cox for Internet, and we pay another $20 a month for something called Flex Watch that provides cable box with local HD channels and premium channels Encore, HBO, and Starz. But the Cox connection isn't in the same room as the television, so rather than use the box we use FW for streaming from the Encore Play, HBO Go, and Starz Play apps—all available on Fire TV. Google's got `em, but last I checked Apple has HBO and Showtime but not the other two.

Canvas for Benefits

Let's talk hardware. While the blogosphere laps up Apple Kool-Aid like a narcotic, praising every device as being the best new thing ever, Amazon is largely ignored. The retailer's branded gear is easily dismissed by fashion-tech crazed bloggers; the black matte finish of Fire devices doesn't make any of them stand out. They aren't shiny pretty; the overall design approach is understated. On the inside, however, Amazon offers tremendous value for the features given. How interesting. The company burst into online retail by selling books, which are appropriate metaphor for any Fire device. As the saying goes: You can't judge a book by its cover. Fire burns bright within.

Press the Mic button

Fire HDX 8.9 is good example. The tablet's screen resolution, and I would argue display's visual acuity, exceeds either iPad mini 4 or iPad Air 2. Overall performance is excellent, for considerably less selling price. The fully loaded 8.9-inch Amazon tab, with 64GB storage, WiFi, and LTE, sells for $529.99 (after $50 instant discount). The 7.9-inch mini is $100 more, and the 9.-inch Air is $729.

Fire TV's value is harder to discern, without actually using the unassuming streamer; the specs don't reveal enough: 2GHz quad-core MediaTek processor; 2GB RAM; 8GB GB storage, expandable to 128GB from the microSD card slot; Power VR GX6250 GPU; dual-mode WiFi, supporting AC; Bluetooth 4.1+LE; HDMI and USB 2 ports (one each); 10/100 Ethernet; Dolby 5.1 support. Measures 115 x 115 x 17.8 mm (4.5 x 4.5 x 0.7 inches) and weighs 270 grams (9.5 ounces). Fire TV sells for $99.99, or $139.99 with game controller and 32GB microSD card.

Expand storage with microUSB slot

Benefits are aplenty behind the streamer's unassuming exterior. True to its name, the original Fire TV burned hot. The successor is even hotter. The overall responsiveness surpasses any other set-top box I have tested (yes, that is many). The user interface is fluid almost to fault. I keep scrolling too far using the remote because the visual cues and menus move so quickly. Don't blink! Or you will miss something.

If you think a cable set-top or Smart TV is slow, either will be downright miserable driving after taking Fire TV on the road. The streamer is a speedster that I have yet to see matched by comparable set-tops costing as much or less. Content loads almost instantly in my home, where the Internet is speedy: More than 100 Mbps over WiFi AC from Google OnHub connected to Cox. That surely helps, and that is for 1080p content. I don't own a 4K television, but I will test the capability elsewhere sometime soon.

Ultra HD is a big differenator that makes Fire TV a huge value compared to its lifestyle platform competitors. Amazon started offering 4K content in December 2014, and some of it is free for Prime members. Netflix and YouTube also offer 4K content that is watchable on the streamer.

The Other UI

Circling back to performance, Amazon leverages cloud capabilities with software intelligence to add zang to the hardware's zing. The company claims, and this is hard to discern in testing since there are no obvious cues: "ASAP (Advanced Streaming and Prediction) learns what Amazon movies and shows you like and gets them ready for you to watch. The more you use Fire TV, the more accurate ASAP becomes, dynamically adapting to your viewing habits". ASAP? Surely some geek coined that trying to play off the more traditional "as soon as possible". The connotations are right. Fast.

To repeat, you feel the speed scrolling through the menus, which deserve their own mention. Amazon doesn't much change the new Fire TV user interface from its predecessor so much as subtly improve on an excellent motif. Amazon boldly and invitingly presents content.

I find discovering new stuff on Amazon to be a superior experience compared to Netflix. Both services make recommendations based on your past behavior, but I often miss great programming because Netflix presents meaningless Movie Z based on my having watched Film A. In my humble experience, the service's intelligence increases by compelling you to rate movies, for example (e.g., your extra interaction).

Watch me

By contrast, Amazon applies some of its retail shopping smarts to content discovery. The digital store as used used on Fire TV finds programs or movies that I really would want to watch based on my past viewing habits and, presumably, searches. There must be some magic sprinkled in there, because the adaptive, predictive accuracy easily exceeds Netflix. If Amazon flashed one of those flashing "Palmer Reader" signs on the outside of Fire TV, I would pay up.

Wrapping up, one of Amazon video's best features, spectacularly presented on Fire TV, is X-Ray. With one-click of the remote you can bring up an overlay bottom bar of the film's or TV program's cast. Another click puts them big and bold across the screen, where you can get loads of useful information about them, including other movies or shows in which they appear. It's IMDB on steroids, without using smartphone or tablet. Granted, Google gives something similar, and Apple promises something like it, but Amazon X-Ray's overall presentation is best of class.

Put it all together and we come back to where we started: Fire TV is the best all-around streaming box currently available (well, starting October 5th) from the three major digital lifestyle platform providers.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Such desperation, Apple

Publié: septembre 29, 2015, 5:16pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Look what email greeted when I rolled out of bed and in front of the computer this AM (Pacific Time). Apple Music wants my business. That's not happening. After signing up for the three-month trial, which ends September 30, I returned to using Chromebook Pixel LS and Nexus 6. The streaming service supports neither device, so, yes, I turned off autorenewal.

This brief post is a reminder to you to do likewise, if having signed up you're not planning to keep the service. Apple Music turns on autorenew by default, so if you want out, don't wait. Opt out now. On the other hand, if you enjoy the service, do nothing and listen. You're covered.

Among all the services I have used, Apple Music offers the best—superior, really—music curation and discovery. Google Music can't compare; I mention that one because of a six-month free trial given for buying the Chromebook. That one expires next month. Apple Music's catalog is expansive, too. Tracks I can never find on Tidal are available from the fruity logo. Yum.

As expressed in a June analysis, I don't doubt that Apple Music will succeed and the service marks the true start of the Tim Cook era running the company cofounded by Steve Jobs. Cook may be high on Apple Watch Kool-Aid, but the streaming service is more likely to win the masses and, despite some use interface oddities, packs punch.

But I'm out until there is broader platform support, and the web browser would be enough. Meanwhile, eh, SoundCloud anyone?

Is Android a dangerous monopoly?

Publié: septembre 25, 2015, 10:59pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Android Collectibles

I can't confirm Bloomberg's report that the the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department allegedly are beginning a joint investigation into Google's Android licensing agreements. But I can explain what it means. Striping to the bones, from an antitrust perspective, there are two pivot points: Monopoly position and exclusive contracts. Then there is the broader regulatory agenda: Correcting (or preventing future) consumer harm.

Globally, Android is unquestionably a monopoly in the market for smartphones. However, its dominance in the United States is comparably muted by competition from iPhone. Based on smartphone subscribers, Android's share was 51.4 percent for the three months ending July 31, 2015, according to comScore. iOS ranked second with 44.2 percent. By cell phone manufacturer, Apple leads the market, with the same share, followed by Samsung (27.3 percent). Android is leading but declining—down 0.8 points, while iOS is up 1.1 points, from April to July.

Devil in the Details

I intimately covered Microsoft's U.S. antitrust troubles from 1997 through the judge's final decree at the end of 2002. Legal experts and others more directly involved in the case agreed on at least one thing: Attorneys general for federal and state governments might never have brought the case(s) if not for exclusive agreements that Microsoft imposed on its manufacturing partners. Keyword: Exclusive, and the deals favoring the software giant's products and services (like Internet Explorer) over competitor's wares. Exclusivity that shut out competitors caused consumer harm, trustbusters reasoned.

If there is a problem for Android and Google, licensing terms will be the big thing, I predict.

Android is really two operating system. There is the open-source version that anyone can adapt, and there is the other that Google directly licenses which has strings attached. Stated differently: The search and information giant imposes restrictions, with respect to carrying its apps and services. This is why, for example, you don't see Google apps on Kindle devices. Amazon uses open-source Android and customizes for its customers—something it couldn't do the same way licensing the other Android. That customization includes Amazon's own app store, rather than Google Play.

Think of the Android app shop as the platform's beating heart. The Play store-carry requirement, and all the Google apps with it, could be construed as an exclusive arrangement shutting out competing stores. That is from one perspective. But from another, it's not—with Amazon as case study showing that Android can be used without taking Play and everything else that comes with it.

The point is important. Years ago, one legal academic, in describing to me the Microsoft case and the challenge facing government lawyers, likened competition law to the Stanley Cup playoffs. Referees are more likely to allow rough play rather than interfere. U.S. antitrust law is similar, he said, and that's different than regulations in Europe, which protect competitors alongside consumers. Here, preventing consumer harm is the larger objective, where competition often proves to be the best remedy to one player's bad behavior and encourages increased innovation that brings consumers good.

Freedom to Choose

So the question: Are consumers robbed of choice that causes them harm? The answer relates to what I perceive as Google's primary motivation for the current licensing arrangements. Android is a hugely fragmented operating system because Google doesn't control platform updates. The company lets cellular carrier and manufacturing partners choose when, or if, to dispatch Android version updates. By the way, that demonstrates how much freedom licensees have—to control the experience for their customers, even if it hurts the platform they provide.

Fragmentation is worse than bad. Google reports (consolidated) six different platform versions in use, for the 7 days ended Sept. 7, 2015. The newest, Android 5.x (aka Lollipop), which released a year ago, only accounts for 21 percent of the global device base. By contrast, Apple reports that as of Sept. 19, 2015, 52 percent of iOS 9 devices are on the newest version released three days earlier.

Before autumn 2010, when Gmail appeared in what was then called the Android Market, Google apps updated with the operating system. It could be argued that binding the company's apps, including the source (Play) of them for all, limited consumer choice. Google transcends the worst of fragmentation’s limitations by separating its core apps from disparate Android version distribution, which includes the Play store and source of apps for all. Unbundled Google apps diminish many of fragmentation’s worst negative effects and keep older Android versions more current, which helps to unify an otherwise disparate end user experience and broaden the choice of apps from all developers.

Something else: Consumers are not bound to the Play store. In Android's security settings, users can choose to "allow installation of apps from sources other than the Play Store". They can choose, even if Google imposes other restrictions on its OEM partners. And if the role of the DOJ and FTC is to prevent consumer harm by ensuring users can choose, where's the harm in Google giving them choice?

Apple a Day

Let's look at the competitive landscape, using other data. Across the pond, Android commands dominant position in many countries. For example, the mobile operating system's smartphone sales share, as of July, according to Kantar Worldpanel was: 69.6 percent in France; 73.7 percent in Germany; 54.4 percent in Great Britain; 72.5 percent in Italy; 76.6 percent in Russia; and 89.4 percent in Spain. United States: 65.6 percent.

The U.S. figure shows overwhelmingly dominance, by another measure, and perhaps even a monopoly. Monopolies are not illegal in the United States, just the abuse of their power. Are consumers more harmed by Android's leading position or fragmentation? Google licensing policies seek to diminish fragmentation, while increasing choice of apps (its own and others) across disparate Android versions.

Apple presents competitive alternative from a unified base, as the majority of users typically adopt the newest and safest iOS version. Consumers have another attractive platform choice. By contrast, Android users get something less and quite possibly are harmed in the process. Fragmentation hinders choice and increases security risks presented by consumers running outdated Android versions and choosing to download apps from unmonitored sources (meaning not Google Play).

From that perspective—and a few commenters will blow brain aneurysms with this—it could be argued that Google causes more consumer harm by not imposing more control over Android with its licensees.

OK, Google, make some Apple sauce

Publié: septembre 23, 2015, 8:56pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

In my last post, I joke about the other five people who also bought Nexus 6 to make a broader point. Apple laps up positive PR—and rubs Android's nose in stinky sidewalk dog poop—by touting rapid iOS 9 adoption. Based solely on devices accessing the iTunes App Store, the number is 52 percent as of September 19. By the same measure, as of September 7, from Google Play: 20 percent of Androids run the newest version, Lollipop. iOS 9 released last week, and Android 5 arrived last year. Ouch!

Google shouldn't let the comparison stop there. The company should release Lollipop adoption data selectively, for stock Android devices like Nexus 6. That makes the comparisons to iOS more equal, being devices for which both companies control updates. Apples to, ah, Apple is more appropriate and responsive public relations management.

Surely Lollipop adoption is as high or higher than iOS—and it is good opportunity to promote the benefits of choosing unlocked, stock smartphones or tablets. Granted, channel conflict with existing Android manufacturers could be a problem. But in the larger PR war, Android is repeatedly bruised by the pageview-crazed blogosphere regurgitating Apple marketing. Android OEMs and cellular carrier partners have more to gain from anything positive about Android vs iOS.

Also, Google could include the newest Android devices of all types from all OEMs in the data dump. Wanna bet that the majority released since iPhone 6 a year ago are Lollipop? Apple cuts data to its advantage. Why shouldn't Google?

With next week's annual Nexus event close, and the pageview-obsessed looking to write anything about Android, the blogosphere will blast the data if Google releases it. Besides, conflict sells, and Apple vs Google, Android vs iOS, is a great cat fight.

Photo Credit: Tsahi Levent-Levi

Say, Nexus nerds, what about Project Fi?

Publié: septembre 23, 2015, 8:35pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

As September 29th approaches, and Google's annual autumn launch event, rumors increase in frequency, and a few in absurdity, about what will be revealed. The gadget-obsessed shouldn't forget what else might arrive with one, or even two, rumored new Nexus smartphones: Expanded support for Project Fi. I am surprised how little buzz there is among the fan base. Where are the rumor-wagging tongues?

The search and information giant introduced the invite-only cellular service in April 2015, piggybacking Sprint and T-Mobile networks for a cool $20 a month, plus 10 bucks more for each gigabyte of data (refunding for portion unused). The gotcha: Project Fi only supports one device: Nexus 6. You buy one or you bring your own. Otherwise it's fee-Fi-fo-dumb for you.

New Nexus handsets, presumably supporting all major US carriers (like Nexus 6 does), would enable Google to expand Project Fi's reach—maybe even drop the invites and go wider. My Project Fi invite arrived on August 13th, but my sister had my Nexus 6 while I tested iPhone 6 Plus. (She later gave the phablet to my mom after an accident destroyed her uninsured Moto X Developer Edition. Sis bought the Motorola Dorid for herself.) I am a Nexus 6 owner again, taking advantage of Amazon's recent, insane, and presumably inventory-clearing, price cuts.

I am ready to sign up, finally, and tried to do so this morning. But, whoa, Google is—get this—sold out of SIM cards. See the screen shot and wonder along with me. What? Did the five other Nexus 6 owners all demand SIMs simultaneously? Seriously, how do you run out of SIMs? Devices, I can understand.

Perhaps Google's agreement with Sprint and T-Mobile is capped at X-number of users. Or, maybe, the SIMless situation foreshadows expansion coming along with those rumored new handsets. BTW, choosing to buy Nexus 6 with Project Fi is interesting, too. Google lists the 64GB phablet as "permanently out of stock". What could be more definitive than that?

As a new owner of Google's OnHub router, and understanding how much Project Fi relies on WiFi for calling and data, I am curious to see if there is any extra bang using the two together. I will have to wait for SIMs to restock or perhaps to test a new Nexus—not that I bubble to do so. Based on the leaks, I see nothing that pines my desires away from my Motorola-made, Google-branded phablet.

Meanwhile, I wonder: What's next for Project Fi?

Google gives great WiFi with OnHub [Review]

Publié: septembre 23, 2015, 3:32am CEST par Joe Wilcox

One word describes Google's wireless router: Fantastic! That should be enough said, but one of my colleagues asked me how much OnHub costs. He bristled at $199.99, calling it too much. So, okay, let's do a real review that explains the magic that Google and partner TP-LINK accomplish with this remarkable router. But I warn you now: Buying one, even for two C notes, isn't easy. This thing is out of stock most everywhere, as it has been for weeks.

Simply stated: OnHub is the best router ever to anchor my home network. Beauty, simplicity, availability, and extensibility are On Hub's defining characteristics. Sold in blue or black enclosures, the thing is gorgeous, and it feels as solid as it looks. Setup and maintenance are frightening for their ease. The usable wireless range far exceeds the Apple AirPort Extreme router that OnHub replaces in my home. The network device packs protocols and other features you won't need now but will want later on.

Four Big Benefits

Google unexpectedly unveiled the WiFi router about a month ago. I purchased OnHub from Amazon on Sept. 15, 2015, during a brief period of availability, The device is sold out again, although hucksters will let you have one for $272 or more. Highest price to widen my eyes so far: Twice MSRP. Ouch.

From here the review focuses on the four major benefits.

Beauty. I have never wanted to put a router in the living room more than OnHub. Sigh, but my Cox cable connection is in a back room, so this gorgeous tech doesn't get the attention deserved. I bought the blue model, simply because Amazon had that one in stock. But I must say the color compliments my Nexus 6 nicely (not that it matters—okay, I lie). Confession: My photos do nothing to capture OnHub's beauty. You need to see the device close up and handle it to appreciate the design.

Reminiscent of Google's failed-to-launch Nexus Q, a luminescent ring around the top accents the device. The feature is functional by using color to denote network status—blue for setup, teal for active and online, and amber for trouble. While bright, the colors are also muted so that they don't overly illuminate a darkened room (that's in the default setting; the light's brightness can be increased).

During setup the enclosure twists off, allowing easier access to the four ports on the back: Power, LAN, WAN, and USB 3.0. There is but one LAN port, supporting Gigabit Ethernet, which might put off some people. OnHub is built for a wireless world, where cloud connectivity means everything. If you need more than one network port, buy something else.

The device is compact, measuring 115.4 x 190.4 x 104.5 mm (4.5 x 7.5 x 4.11 inches) and weighing 0.86 kilos (1.9 lbs). Funny thing: OnHub is a little larger, but lighter, than AirPort Extreme, but it looks smaller. I presume that's an illusion from color—dark blue vs white.

Simplicity. Setting up, and more importantly maintaining, WiFi routers can be a chore. AirPort Extreme is among the best for the former, but the required management apps (for iOS, OS X, or Windows) don't provide enough easily accessed information about the network. Many other routers require a web browser to access clunky, clumsy, complicated, on-device user interfaces.

To set up OnHub you download either the Google On Android or iOS app to your smartphone and connect the router cables to power and ISP modem (via the WAN port). This is where the other-world experience begins. The app prompts to place your phone over the top of OnHub, which emits a tone that establishes a secure connection. A Google account is required for extensible cloud and security features; to be discussed later. The last step is to name your network and assign a password.

However, during my setup, OnHub couldn't connect to the Internet, which isn't unusual. As I have experienced with some other routers, briefly powering off the cable modem reset DNS and IP, after which the light changed from amber to teal.

Simplicity extends to manageability and the ways which the Google On app lets you see what's going on across your network. Like OnHub, the app is pretty, and it is intuitively functional. You can even manage more than one Google router. That's handy for the small business owner with several OnHubs in different locations or someone who owns one at home and sets up another for, say, aged parents.

Manageability simplicity goes further, like the ease of conducting a "network check" for connectivity from modem to ISP, from OnHub to modem, and from device to router. Overall bandwidth usage or that by device is a touch-tap away, as well.

Availability. I have used numerous routers over the years, and generally Apple's offer the greatest effective range. In my apartment complex, OnHub does better. Cox promises 100Mbps service but typically delivers 120MBps or more, which is the consistent downstream SpeedTest.net measures over WiFi to Chromebook Pixel LS or to Nexus 6. I keep the Google router where was Apple's: In a back room, which over distance and through walls greatly diminishes bandwidth to my apartment's courtyard below. Typical best speed for AirPort: 3-5Mbps. OnHub: 15-20Mbps, and I can still connect all the way to street; my place is at the back of the building.

To achieve such wireless feats, Google gives the router 13 antennas—six each for 2.4GHz and 5GHz—and another to keep the dozen humming. Should OnHub detect interference or congestion, it switches channels. Baby monitors, cordless phones, and microwave ovens are among the devices that can choke channels and cause interference.

The antenna placement within the cylindrical shape presumes OnHub will be centrally placed within the domicile, providing good bandwidth in every room. While I get good range, it would likely be better if the router was in the living room. For clarification, even in the past when AirPort Extreme was in the main room, WiFi wouldn't reach the street. OnHub does better.

The aforementioned manageability features are not local network dependent. That's another availability bonus. You can check your network status and manage it from anywhere your smartphone has Internet access.

Availability can easily extend to other people. From the WiFi network screen, Google On lets you share your password by several methods, including via Beam or text message, with those whom you want to grant wireless access.

Like AirPort Extreme, OnHub runs simultaneous 2.4GHz and 5GHz networking, supporting all the major 802.11 protocols—a, b, g, n, and ac. Many other routers require setting up two networks with separate SSIDs. The 2.4GHz has greater range but slower speeds and other devices crowd the band causing interference. The 5GHz is faster and freer from interference but doesn't reach as far. OnHub's approach is more dynamic, making the wireless network more easily available with less fuss.

Google masters another availability feat: The On app allows selective bandwidth allocation—and for a fixed time period. Hehe, there's a real art to writing Help docs that make sense of what tech does and why, which Google quite hilariously accomplishes explaining selective allocation: "The devices connected to your WiFi network are like a pack of thirsty animals gathered around a small watering hole. Some get their fill, while others wait and drink only a few mouthfuls".

Streaming a 4K video, for example, is the thirsty animal needing more. You can choose 1, 2, or 4 hours of priority access—if you can figure out the device. On my network, I see those thirsty animals designated by manufacturer of the microprocessor, which complicates telling Intel from Intel, referring to two Chromebooks, or Motorola for two different model smartphones. Refinement is necessary, Google.

Extensibility. OnHub is rigged for the future. Consider the speaker that uses tonal password to connect device and smartphone via the app. Surely Google has bigger plans for the hardware feature than that.

Then there are the things present on the device that are not turned on in the firmware: Bluetooth Smart, Google Weave, and 802.15.4 Wi-Fi. Future-proofing is the term that applies. The hardware is ready to mature with protocols that enhance your network using the router you have rather than compelling you to buy another.

Extensibility comes full circle to this review's start: My colleague balking at the $200 price. In the here and now, I view OnHub as a superb value for a router. But Google clearly has bigger plans around home automation and entertainment that will make this thing better and increase its value proposition.

Like so much that Google does, OnHub is a work in progress. The device performs its core functions magnanimously, but there is more to come as the device becomes something greater.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Google adds new unfriendly features to Gmail

Publié: septembre 22, 2015, 7:12pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

return to sender express mail

One person's spam is another's feast, depending on who is giver or receiver. That's one way to read new capabilities coming to Gmail on Android and the web. The first, available starting today on PCs and arriving on Android devices over the next week, lets users block designated email addresses. Google describes "block", but the feature is more of an easy-and-quick filter that dumps unfriendly senders into the spam folder.

For either platform, you click the dropdown options menu to the right of the email address, and block appears as an option. Unsubscribe already is available from personal computers but is new to Android. For example, in the desktop browser, marking listserver messages as spam solicits the user to unsubscribe. The feature also will roll out over the next week to Android.

New version of Gmail is on Google Play, as of September 21. Today, I downloaded and installed on Nexus 6; block and unsubscribe are not yet available options. Got to wait.

Besides me, who will you block?

Photo Credit: ducu59us/Shutterstock

Apple sweeps aside App Store malware mess

Publié: septembre 22, 2015, 6:29pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Broom Sweep Clean

In the aftermath of the big App Store security breach, today Apple reminds developers where they should obtain Xcode. It's not rocket science—from sanctioned distribution sources. I received an email this morning from the company, dispatched to members of its developer program.

To recap: As the new week dawned, Apple rushed to remove content from its Chinese App Store loaded with XcodeGhost malware. Developers using a counterfeit version of Xcode caused the first, major, widespread security crisis for the seven year-old App Store.

Question to ask: Is Apple resting on its security laurels? I ask because reports of the breach broke online days before the company responded by pulling polluted apps. There's action now, as today's email to developers indicates.

The company writes:

We recently removed apps from the App Store that were built with a counterfeit version of Xcode which had the potential to cause harm to customers. You should always download Xcode directly from the Mac App Store, or from the Apple Developer website, and leave Gatekeeper enabled on all your systems to protect against tampered software.

When you download Xcode from the Mac App Store, OS X automatically checks the code signature for Xcode and validates that it is code signed by Apple. When you download Xcode from the Apple Developer website, the code signature is also automatically checked and validated by default as long as you have not disabled Gatekeeper.

Whether you downloaded Xcode from Apple or received Xcode from another source, such as a USB or Thunderbolt disk, or over a local network, you can easily verify the integrity of your copy of Xcode. Learn more.

Apple offers additional information about validating Xcode from the "learn more" link.

If you're wondering which apps to worry about, some are quite popular, including the Chinese version of Angry Birds 2.

Full list from Lookout security.

Palo Alto Networks provides details on the attack vectors and how to circumvent them.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/iravgustin

How bad is iOS 9 ad blocking for Internet advertising?

Publié: septembre 20, 2015, 12:39am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Stop Do Not Enter Hand

On Sept. 16, 2015, Apple released iOS 9, which enables users of iPad and iPhone to disable ads. The company claims the capability improves the overall user experience. As someone covering the tech industry for more than two decades, I perceive it as something else, too: Competitive assault against Google and means of pushing publishers to iOS 9's new News app. There is nothing friendly about Apple's maneuver. It is aggressive and tactical. But does it really matter?

Stated simply: More than 90 percent of Google revenue comes from contextual and search-related advertising. Apple derives about the same figure from selling devices and supporting services. At the same time, mobile is the future of Internet advertising and the battleground where the two meet. The entities' respective mobile platforms, Android and iOS, long ago put the tech titans on a collision course. Conceptually, what Apple can't gain from iPad and iPhone sales, it can take by shaking pillars supporting its rival's business.

Selective Blocking

Apple announced the change when introducing iOS 9 during the annual developer conference in June. Essentially, Apple will no longer, eh, block ad blockers from the iTunes App Store. Interestingly, or not, their zap in mobile Safari doesn't apply to the News app, from which Apple generates revenue.

But the company doesn't need the ad dollars, unlike Google, and risks little to nothing permitting the blockers. During calendar second quarter 2015, for example, Google reported $17.73 billion revenue and $3.9 billion net profit. Advertising accounted for $16.02 billion, or 92.7 percent, of total revenue. During the same time period, Apple reported $49.6 billion in sales and $10.7 billion net income. Excluding hardware like Apple TV and iPod that the company doesn't separate out in financial disclosures, devices accounted for 84.5 percent of total revenue. iPhone's contribution: 63 percent.

Meanwhile, Apple and Google slug one another for mobile platform supremacy. Based on second quarter smartphone sales to end users, Android's share was 82.2 percent, according to Gartner, compared to 14.6 percent for second-ranked iOS. For all 2015, IDC predicts manufacturers will ship 1.2 billion Android smartphones. iPhones: 224 million. Google gives away its platform but requires most licensees to include its apps, which tap into extended, ad-supported services.

One way to take on Android is to destabilize Google, the platform's primary developer.

Mobile Matters

Timing isn't coincidental. Winds of change sweep across digital advertising: eMarketer predicts that mobile will account for more than 50 percent of spending this year, surpassing the desktop. Purchasing habits already are changing. In the United Kingdom, for example, about one-third of retail ecommerce sales will be made on smartphones and tablets this year, the analytics firm reports. Some other numbers:

In the United States, last year, Google accounted for 38 percent ($19.3 billion) of digital advertising revenues, according to Pew.
In the United Kingdom, this year, Google will account for 41.6 percent of digital ad spending, eMarketer forecasts.
Globally, Google will account for 54.5 percent of search ad spending in 2015, eMarketer estimates.

Pew reveals in its "State of the News Media 2015" report that last year AOL, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Yahoo, "generated 61 percent of total domestic digital ad revenue"; U.S.-only data. These five serve up most of the ads supporting the majority of content publishers.

In mid-August 2015, in conjunction with Adobe, PageFair released its annual ad-blocking report, estimating that blockers would cost publishers $21.8 billion in revenue. For context: eMarketer forecasts digital advertising spending will top $170.17 billion this year, or 29.9 percent of all worldwide advertising ($569.65 billion).

Blocker's Remorse

On September 19, in the early evening EDT, two of the three-top grossing iOS apps visible on my iPad Air 2 are ad blockers, Crystal and Purify as second and third, respectively. Yesterday's topper, Peace, is gone today. Developer Marco Arment pulled the app. He emotionally explains the decision on September 18:

Peace has been the number one paid app in the U.S. App Store for about 36 hours. It’s a massive achievement that should be the highlight of my professional career...Achieving this much success with Peace just doesn’t feel good, which I didn’t anticipate, but probably should have. Ad blockers come with an important asterisk: while they do benefit a ton of people in major ways, they also hurt some, including many who don’t deserve the hit.

But is his remorse justified? Will ad blockers really shake the digital ad economy's foundations? The tech already is quite popular. According to PageFair, globally, about 198 million users actively used ad blockers at the end of June 2015. The increase is enormous, up from 54 million two years earlier.

Ad blocking's popularity grows faster in some parts of Europe than North America. For example, United Kingdom: Up 82 percent, year over year. United States: Up 48 percent.

Interestingly, ad blocking is most popular on Google's own browser: 126 million active blocking users, measured monthly, at the end of second quarter 2015. Firefox: 48 million. Safari: 9 million.

On Android, Firefox is the big conduit for ad blocking: 16 percent of users, or 40 percent of all mobile ad blocking. PageFair claims that "Safari represents 52 percent of the mobile browsing market (and 14 percent of total web browsing). With support for ad block apps in iOS 9, we expect ad blocking on mobile Safari to trend towards the levels seen in the mobile version of Firefox".

Not So Fast

Mobile is the next thing for advertising. Safari is the leading mobile browser. By PageFair's reckoning, 16 percent (or more) of users on iOS could actively block ads. That's bad for the digital advertising economy, right? Wrong. Mobile ad spending on apps will surpass browsers by a measure of 3-to-1 this year, according to eMarketer.

Driving the difference in spending: Consumer behavior. According to comScore, in the United States, for example, consumers ages 18-34 spend more time in apps (88.6 percent) consuming digital media than browsers—60.7 percent for those over 35. Apps also get more time in Canada and United Kingdom, too. More broadly, consumers from all three countries spend more time viewing content from smartphones or tablets than they do PCs.

Something else: In the Canada and United States, news and information accounts for just 3 percent of time spent on mobile devices—5 percent in United Kingdom, comScore finds. In all three countries, social and entertainment, which are more likely consumed in apps, rank much higher. U.S. example: 29 percent and 21 percent respectively.

For broader perspective, I recommend IAB report "Apps and Mobile Web: Understanding the Two Sides of the Mobile Coin" and comScore's "Global Media Report".

Bottom line: The sky isn't falling—no matter what are Apple's ambitions against Google or what fear-mongering marauders say across the InterWebs about mobile ad blocking bankrupting publishers.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Ety

Editor's Note: A version of this story first appeared on Byline.

Why are non-iPhone makers so stupid?

Publié: septembre 14, 2015, 9:29pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Dunce Dumb Stupid

The first weekend of iPhone 6s and 6s Plus preorders are behind us, but Apple already looks ahead. This morning, the company presumably sought to quell last week's Wall Street jitters in statements to CNBC, Financial Times, and MarketWatch, among other news services popular with investors. This is perception-management at Apple's finest, and it is metaphor for success selling smartphones and why most competitors flounder by comparison.

I didn't receive the statement and so cannot attest to its veracity. But presuming esteemed financial news services accurately report, misdirection isn't much better than this. Apple doesn't give an exact figure, instead stating: "We are on pace to beat last year's 10 million unit first-weekend record when the new iPhones go on sale Sept. 25". How circumspect is that? Ten million the first weekend two weeks later?

Fearless Aspiration

Apple has good reason to calm storms of doubt about the new devices. During fiscal third quarter 2015, iPhone accounted for 63 percent of the company's total revenue. Future fortunes, and the present, largely depend on the handset's continued sales success. Perception management matters, but it's core to Apple marketing, too.

Look at how the company calls out otherwise mundane features by naming them. Throw a rock. It's the Lake Erie of nomenclature. You can't miss: 3D Touch, AirDrop, AirPlay, Family Sharing, iSight, Lightning, Touch ID, and more. Each of these carries connotations that are aspirational and/or feel good. More importantly, the naming makes the features easier to market and explain to potential buyers. Why no other phone manufacturer effectively imitates the tactic is brain boggling. There are attempts, like Microsoft's Cortana or Google's Android dessert names, but they are fleeting and inconsistent.

Effectively, Apple does in 2015 what it sought with the Macintosh in 1984: To make technology everyday useable and to make it more approachable by imbuing, at least in marketing, human-like qualities. The approach creates positive perceptions about the brand and products bearing it.

That's not enough. Apple's light shines brighter by building, and selling, a lifestyle around its products. No other tech company comes close. There is something elitist about that lifestyle. The marketing communicates that users of iPhone and other Apple products are special. They belong to a community sharing similar values and ideals, and the capability to pay more for it. Behind all is aspiration: If you buy Apple thingy X your life will be better.

The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus ads leading up to last week's successor launch are superb examples, like the "Shot on iPhone" series, emphasizing the photography lifestyle, or "Loved", using catch-phrase: "If it's not an iPhone, it's not an iPhone". Apple doesn't rattle off features in its marketing but demonstrates what people can do with its products. Additionally, by naming some features, the company makes their benefits easier to identify and remember. My daughter has always referred to webcams as iSight. Perhaps someone you know does the same? Vernacular like that is the marketing gold medal. Wait until some kid in the not so distant future exclaims: "Apple invented the pencil!"

Marketing, Marketing, Marketing

Selling something still requires promotion. Even with iPhone being so successful, Apple keeps brisk advertising pace that no competitor matches. Why the frak is that? I occasionally run live TV in the background some weeknights just to see who advertises what. I might see a dozen commercials, and often more, for Apple products—mostly iPhone, and some from cellular carriers—but few to none for other smartphones. "If it's not an iPhone, it's not an iPhone" is right when consumers see nothing else; like there is only one choice.

The digital lifestyle Apple promotes around its wares is aspirational and compelling. The company creates good feeling about tech and creates community around it. "If you buy Apple Watch, you belong to something"—or Apple Music, Apple Pay, iPhone 6s, or 6s Plus, as several other examples.

Why does no competitor copy Apple and perfect the approach? Samsung used to advertise more, as did Google. If you asked me to identify one feature about the newest Galaxy smartphones, I would say Edge, being part of the product name. But nothing else. However, I remember the Samsung commercials poking fun at so-called Apple sheep standing in long lines to buy new iPhones and what Galaxy handsets offered that iPhone didn't.

The weakness in Apple's marketing is the herd. Belonging isn't for everyone. Many people desire to be individuals; to stand out! Granted, Apple appeals to creatives and others who want to express their individuality, but always within context of the one community bearing the bitten-fruit logo. The Apple Way.

Apps enable freedom for personal expression on either Android or iOS, and there, where Apple excels, is identifying categories that matter more—like personal or professional healthcare. Google and its partners must do better.

Think Differently

Android's advantage should be choice and customization. No device is more personal than a smartphone, and that's something competitors supporting Android can exploit. Funny, fanboys get this concept. Why don't over-paid executives?

There's irony here and opportunity for competitors to read and copy the Apple playbook. After Steve Jobs' second coming in the late 1990s, Apple started the "Think Different" marketing campaign. At the time, the herd belonged to Microsoft and its Windows OEM partners. The bitten-fruit company appealed to people wanting to express their individuality and desiring tools that would enable them to do it.

Ironically, in 2015, Apple is the herdmaster, over a vast landscape of iOS users. Android may command larger overall global market share—82.2 percent based on second calendar quarter 2015 smartphone sales, according to Gartner—but Apple presents the only unified mobile platform with significant install base or continuing sales. Android is fragmented, even when considering market leader Samsung, which bleeds share (down nearly 5 points year over year to 21.9 percent; Apple, 14.6 percent. In the United States, Apple leads Samsung as measured by subscriber share, according to comScore—44.2 percent to 27.3 percent for the three months ending in July 2015.

The smartphone market is ripe for someone to do to Apple what it tried against Microsoft: Pitch "Think Differently". Sell Android as the platform for individuality, free expression, and freedom to choose. Renegades. Figuratively raise the rebel flag over Android much as Steve Jobs literally did over the original Macintosh development team in the 1980s.

Marketing must be sharp, creative, and funny—and blast the airwaves and InterWebs as frequently as Apple's, if not more. As I expressed in 2009, iPhone cannot win the smartphone wars. Android's numbers are too great. But Apple can win the mobile platform wars, which ultimately matters more. If the company's users are sheep, competitors are lemmings. They have been jumping off the cliff for too long.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Brian A Jackson

AppleCare+ price increases 30 percent

Publié: septembre 12, 2015, 10:29am CEST par Joe Wilcox

iPhone-6s

I haven't paid much attention to Apple's newest price-gouging tactics. But it's after Midnight here on the West Coast and preorders are now underway for iPhone 6s and 6s Plus. So I decided to take a progress peak. A year ago, I rushed to get the 6. This upgrade cycle, my interest is zero.

I am not mooning over 3D Touch, although I would gladly moon Apple for such nonsense. Synchronization was the connected device age's first killer app. Touch was second. But the finger is an anachronism compared to voice. Touchless is the next big thing. While Apple brew hoos about smarter Siri, touch gets greater emphasis for this release cycle. I can't blame Apple in a way. Siri still sucks.

So-o-o, peaking at the online preorders, I see a couple things worth calling out. Observation One: Last year, Apple servers choked under the demand. The online store froze right as the clock passed 12. Everything looks good today, which makes me wonder: Is there no stampede, or has Apple increased its server load to handle the capacity?

Observation two, and I didn't see this one coming: Apple raised AppleCare+ from $99 to $129. What the frak? Replacement cost is higher, too. The plan extends the normal warranty to two years and provides damage protection. Device replacement was, and remains, for iPhone 6 and 6 Plus: $79 up to two instances. But you'll pay $99 for the newer models.

The AppleCare+ price hike fits in with colleague Mark Wilson's explanation that the "iPhone Upgrade Program screws Apple junkies". The original headline used the F word, which the editor on duty nixed pretty quickly. I'm using the "F" word in my head while looking over the price hanky panky. So I appreciate Mark's intention.

Observation three: Many previous and new iPhone buyers are being exposed to the real cost of the device for the first time. Will they freak or glom onto monthly payments? The fantasy land of $199 iPhone quickly recedes before the $649 reality ($749 for 64GB and $849 for 128GB).

Observation four, and this is sure to get me in a pile of poop with some commenters: Apple is now the middle-aged boys club; men of the same age designing products for rich, white, middle-age males. "Products without purpose" I call new MacBook, Apple Watch, and iPad Pro. Where once Steve Jobs filled niches and created new categories, CEO Tim Cook and company create new Apple ware for which there is little to no need whatsoever.

Part of the problem is objective: What I call the "pay more", or "buy more", principle. Mark's use of "junkies" is right. The top-line customer goal isn't to satisfy but to addict. Get people coming for the newest fix. "Oh, but this one is so much better! Rose gold is the new gold! I must have it!" This principle existed during Steve Jobs' time, too. But those days are shadows compared to today. Look at all the high-end bling. There are Hermes Apple Watches this release cycle. Does the device come with matching purse?

Yeah, yeah, of course the rich white male execs want women buying pretty Apple things, too. I refer to a mindset that seems to be core to Apple's post-Jobs design ethic. Do these guys all use Tumi luggage, as well?

I'm tired and ready to hit the sack, where hopefully Steve Jobs won't haunt my dreams for the heresy. If he doesn't, commenters who can't tolerate the slightest Apple criticism, will be waiting come daylight hours.

AppleCare+ for iPhone 6s and 6s Plus costs 30 percent more

Publié: septembre 12, 2015, 10:29am CEST par Joe Wilcox

iPhone-6s

Oh, yeah, San Diego, we may get Google Fiber

Publié: septembre 10, 2015, 11:45pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Google Fiber San Diego

Please take my money, Google. Tap the vein right here if blood is the currency you need. I am ready, willing, and over-excited. If you disappoint, I understand, though. My city is a brick wall when it comes to new commerce. It's regulation central. So good luck to you.

This afternoon I received email from the Google Fiber team that stopped my heart: "We wanted you to be among the first to hear the news. Today we announced we're exploring bringing Fiber to San Diego". Hell, yeah, baby. Sign me up. Which up-for-reelection-politician needs me and other native and transplanted San Diegans to be thorns in the butt? Give us more speed than we possibly need for prices we probably can't afford.

Spread the Word

"We’ll be working closely with your city in the coming months to understand local requirements and challenges—from roads and infrastructure to permits and utility paths" the email continues. "All to make sure we can build a new network. We’ll be sure to share updates on our progress".

I laughed while reading, wondering which will be greater: The number of permits or roadblocks along the utility paths. Clearly Google wants me and other local users of its services to get out the word, to see if there would be consumer/business interest and to jab political wicky wonks in the heiny: "Have friends and neighbors who’d like to learn more about Fiber? Share this graphic below to spread the word". I placed it above for this news brief.

In a blog post today, Jill Szuchmacher, director, Google Fiber Expansion, more clearly lays out the plans, which include two other cities: Irvine, Calif. and Louisville, Ky. Candidate cities must complete a checklist as part of the planning process that requires cooperation on both sides.

Upgrade from What

I have 100 Mbps cable service from Cox right now. That's stated bandwidth, but 120Mbps over WiFi is consistently typical. The ISP offers 150 Mbps service, but the required installation fee put me off. Last month, the family returned to Cox after switching to AT&T U-Verse 45 Mbps service in May. Solid service in the first months went to hell in July and August.

Pages to Google sites would take long times to load, if ever. Everything. Google+, Maps, Search, etc. The problems were consistent and endemic, regardless of device or whether using U-Verse's WiFi modem or my own router. When I eventually contacted tech support, the solution surprised: Me pay pay beaucoup bucks to troubleshoot (which I already had done). I contacted Cox the same day and reestablished service. Then dumped AT&T.

Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but: How strange after all my problems routing Google sites there is this announcement about Fiber, which surely was known to someone locally weeks ago. Were my Google routing problems coincidence? Or were they part of a fiendish plot to increase dissatisfaction with the ISP? Or was it a different scheme, where AT&T knowing what was coming played down and dirty routing to Google sites? I wonder about the last, since Cox routes to everything Google lickity split. Ah, it's probably all coincidence, eh, right?

Apple issues El Capitan Gold Master Release Candidate

Publié: septembre 10, 2015, 3:35am CEST par Joe Wilcox

MacBook and El Capitan

This just arrived in my inbox from Apple: Offer to download what could be the final build before Apple certifies OS X 10.11 as golden: "Thank you for participating in the Apple Beta Software Program. Your feedback and usage of the OS X El Capitan public beta has helped us make this release great. We are pleased to give you access to the OS X El Capitan GM Candidate".

Promises. Promises. "If you are currently testing OS X El Capitan, please back up your Mac and do the following to install the GM Candidate. Go to your Purchased tab in the Mac App Store and click the Download button next to OS X El Capitan GM Candidate. When your download finishes, the installer will automatically launch. Follow the onscreen instructions to complete installation".

It's supper time here on the West Coast. I'll eat and install later. We're doing pizza night because it's too hot to cook. I do hope OS X 10.11 won't be too hot to handle. :)

The final build is scheduled to release September 30th.

Apple delays iPhone 6s and 6s Plus preorders for 9-11 commemoration?

Publié: septembre 10, 2015, 2:49am CEST par Joe Wilcox

iPhone 6s

Apple's decision to start iPhone 6s and 6s Plus preorders on Saturday September 12 surprises me. Friday is typical, which lets the company tabulate an extra day into the weekend when reporting the number of preorders the following week. So you have to wonder why the change. I asked Apple PR, but there is yet no response to my query.

In 2014, Apple announced iPhone 6 and 6 Plus also on September 9th, a Tuesday. Preorders began on Friday the 12th and sales one week later. In 2013, there was no preorder option for iPhone 5s, just straight sales starting Friday September 20th; announced the 10th. In 2012: Friday September 14th for preorders; the 21st for sales. In 2011: again Friday, October 7th preorders and October 14th sales.

Apple breaks a clear pattern here, and I have to wonder if the date is the reason. Friday September 11th is the fourteenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks here in the United States. Delaying a day would be a way of showing respect and also avoids inviting bad press. Surely some blogger somewhere would write about Apple showing no respect for the dead, by putting sales first.

The PR advantages would be better next week, if Apple could tout the three-day weekend of sales instead of two. But if commemoration and respect are the reasons for choosing Saturday, Apple execs deserve a friendly slap on the back for making the hard choice.

Apple Music misses a beat

Publié: septembre 6, 2015, 6:36pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Yesterday, I joined the 61 percent. The figure represents the people who, in a MusicWatch survey of 5,000, had turned off auto-renew on their free Apple Music trial, which for all ends September 30. Unless something really big comes out of this week's media event, where new iPhones could debut and iOS 9 and OS X El Capitan receive release dates, I will listen elsewhere. For now, I will stream higher-fidelity tracks from Tidal, and expand my musical horizons at services like SoundCloud.

Strange thing: I don't dislike Apple Music. Curated playlists are "frak me" good. Family pricing, $14.99 per month, is very reasonable. The library is voluminous; if I want to listen to it, Apple Music likely has it. Then there is the benefit of easy access to my own library of about 14,000 tracks alongside juicy fruit picked from the orchard.

My problem: I prefer Android to iOS. Streaming where and when I want is a benefit that trumps others. Additionally, I don't like the sound of Apple-encoded music files. To my aging ears, they are overly bassy, even with the graphic equalizer turned off. Maybe that's just my perception or quality of digital processing on iPhones and Macs. I find Tidal tracks, even those of comparable bitrate rather than lossless, sound cleaner and expose more instrumental detail and clearer vocals. Again, that's a subjective comparison from a music addict whose ear is attuned to the pre-MP3 sound, which is muddier, if for no other reason than compression.

Apple could easily win my loyalty, by offering its music service from web browsers or by providing lossless listening. My preference, Tidal, is pricey, at $19.99 a month for 1411kbps bitrate using the Free Lossless Audio Codec. Most people won't hear the difference, but I do, and it's most pronounced when listening to music engineered before the 21st Century. Tidal curation is best of class, but Apple Music's is even better.

Tidal Waves

In a commentary last week, Phoebe Jennelyn Magdirila boldly states that "Tidal might be history in less than a year". Aliens might invade the Earth in less than a year. The zombie apocalypse might overwhelm the planet's population in less than year. You can make any claim using "might" as qualifier.

I have a suggestion for Jay Z and company, using the grammatically correct statement Apple 1990's marketing brushed off: Think differently. Lossless is a differentiator, but you don't have the reach. You can't build a large enough subscriber base for the price you charge or with Apple Music tapping into an already overly large iPad, iPhone, and iTunes customer base.

If you can get music labels to agree on licensing terms, turn Tidal into a broader music distribution platform. Become the back-end lossless provider for Amazon, Google, and other streaming music providers. They must compete with Apple Music, too, and lossless would be a way of offering something different. Curate playlists for these services, too. Make Tidal a music platform OEM, so to speak.

One More Thing

In June I asserted that "Apple Music is the Tim Cook 'One More Thing' we waited for", and that assertion stands. The service isn't just about listening but engagement. Apple is creating a platform where fans can feel closer to artists through the Connect capability and curated playlists.

That said, SoundCloud is purer platform for artists, established or new, and music lovers to discover, to interact, and to share. I see irony in that one of Apple Music's promoted artists, Halsey, broke out on SoundCloud.

I don't really expect to see the bitten-fruit logo on an Android app. It's not the Apple Way to support competing platforms. Windows was necessity for iTunes, because of monopoly and reciprocity. Microsoft was for years the largest Mac developer outside of Apple, and Office mattered to businesses.

But in 2015, the tech titan gains more from staying the course and letting Apple Music be where it is. If I am mistaken,, and something dramatic comes out of this week's big media event, I have until September 30 to turn back on auto-renew.

Photo Credit: Yuganov Konstantin/Shutterstock

Insanity! Get Nexus 6 for $350

Publié: septembre 4, 2015, 5:23pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

What the frak? Is it because of the presumed, imminent launch of Apple's successor to iPhone 6 or 6 Plus? Are rumors about Google launching new Nexus devices near month's end true -- and it's better to clear out excess inventory now? Or is Amazon being Labor Day weekend Amazon?

Motorola-made, Google-branded Nexus 6 is on big sale today from the retailer's U.S. store. Last night, I oogled at the phablet for $499.99, which already was a hefty discount. This morning I rolled out of bed to see $349.99. Both prices are for the 32GB model. Double the memory and pay $399.99. Yesterday: $549.99. Surely the price and supply can't last. That's helluva good deal -- and for both colors: Cloud White and Midnight Blue.

The official prices for the phablets: $649 (32GB) and $699 (64GB). But Google and Motorola have been running sales comparable to Amazon's pricing yesterday: $150 off. Today, that's doubled to $300. Over at Verizon, Nexus 6 is $648 paid up front or interest-free installments over 24 months. Supporting the inventory-clearing idea, I can't find new N6 at T-Mobile -- just the preowned 32 gigger for $499.99.

I had been looking for Nexus 6 to test Google's Project Fi. My sister bought my phablet two months ago, when I got iPhone 6 Plus to test iOS 9, and N6 is the only device currently supported on the cellular service. What the hell. I ordered the Midnight Blue for free one-day delivery.

Nexus 6 specs

We don't make a habit of linking to retailers' sales pages, but this one warrants exception for Labor Day shoppers:

Nexus 6 Cloud White 32GB, 64GB
Nexus 6 Midnight Blue 32GB, 64GB

The phablet in both colors is unlocked and will work with any U.S. carrier, including Verizon.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Acer pulls down the top on new convertibles, running Chrome OS and Windows 10

Publié: septembre 2, 2015, 12:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Today, at IFA in Berlin, Acer unveiled its first convertible Chromebook and updated the Windows counterpart, which gets 6th-generation Intel Core processors and USB 3.1 Type-C port. The two computers join a surprising assortment of new gear, including gaming notebooks and tablets and smartphones.

The Chromebook R 11 Convertible comes in consumer and commercial models. Base specs: 11-6.-inch display (1366 x 768 resolution); 1.6GHz Intel N3150 or N3050 Celeron processor; 2GB or 4GB RAM, 16GB or 32GB SSD; Intel HD graphics; webcam; USB 3; WiFi N; and Chrome OS. Weighs 1.25kg (2.76 pounds). There are four modes of operation, depending on positioning: display, laptop, pad, and tent.

The Aspire R 13 Convertible offers superior hardware by many measures. Base specs: 13.3-inch display, with either 2560 x 1440 or 1920 x 1080 resolution; 2.3GHz i5 6200U or 2.5GHz Core i7 6500U processor; 4GB or 8GB memory; 256GB to 1TB storage; Intel HD Graphics 520; webcam; USB Type-C; Wifi N; and Windows 10 64-bit. Weighs 1.6kg (3.53 pounds). Battery life 8 to 10 hours, depending on model.

The R 11 goes on sale next month in the United States, starting at $299. Everyone else can buy in November, when prices will start at €299. The R 13 will be available in October with prices starting at $899 here and €1,099 across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.

Acer unleashes Predator on gamers

Publié: septembre 2, 2015, 12:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

It's IFA Berlin, and Acer means business about play, unveiling new desktops, laptops, monitors, and tablets in its gaming series. The Predator G3 and G6 PCs get 6th-generation Intel Core processors and new thermal systems. The Predator 15 and 17 notebooks get 6th-gen processors and updated fan designs.

New monitors are available in 27, 28, or 35 inches. The new 8-inch tablet features FHD display and Intel Atom x7 processor.

Predator G3 and G6

Among the gaming PCs' features is what Acer calls "one punch overclocking". See full specs below (click to enlarge).

Europeans will be able to buy the Predator G6-710 desktop PC from mid-September, starting at €1,999. Pricing and configurations for North America will be revealed when the gaming desktop ships in October.

Predator 15 and 17

The gaming laptops will be available first in China, during October, with prices starting at ¥16,999. Everyone else waits until November. Predator 15 starting prices: $1,499.99, North America; €1,599 in Europe, Middle East, and Asia. Predator 17: $1,599.99 and €1,799, respectively.

Predator Monitors

Predator XB1 Series monitors arrive in EMEA in October and the following month in North America. Respective starting prices: €699 and $799.99 The Predator Z35 is expected in December, starting at $1199.99 in North America and €1,099 in EMEA.

Predator Tablet 8

The gaming tablet lands in China and EMEA next month, selling for ¥2499 and €349, respectively. In North America, Newegg will kick off sales in November with a 14-day exclusive, ahead of other retailers. Price $299.99.

Collapse of the iPhone empire

Publié: août 31, 2015, 2:42am CEST par Joe Wilcox

On September 9, Apple will hold a media event, where, presumably, the next-generation iPhone(s) will be unveiled. The company announced new handsets the same date last year, the 10th in 2013, and the 12th in 2012. But as the big reveal approaches, shadows rise over iPhone's future: China's slowing economy; smartphone saturation in core markets; lower selling prices in growth geographies; the end of cellular carrier subsidies in the United States, and, most serious of all, the "good enough problem".

iPhone rode a perfect storm of success, raising Apple's fortunes like a tsunami crashing down on competitors. This fact cannot be emphasized enough to illustrate how the bitten fruit logo company's fortunes could fall as quickly, and as dramatically, as they rose. All the while, Android grows from swell to monsoon.

iPhone Riches

Apple's financial fortunes started changing with results reported for fiscal first quarter 2010, when an accounting change allowed the realization of previously deferred revenue. The adjustment contributed to the company beating Wall Street consensus by about $3.5 billion, with revenue of $15.68 billion and $3.38 billion net profit. iPhone accounted for 35.6 percent of revenues. The quarter was a pivotal turning point. Positive perceptions lifted Apple shares, improved the brand image, and increased iPhone sales.

As smartphone sales accelerated, so did Apple's fortunes rise. Fast-forward a year: $26.74 billion revenue, $6 billion profit, and iPhone accounted for 39.1 percent of revenues. Jump to fiscal Q1 2015 and the change is unbelievable: $74.6 billion revenue, $18 billion net profit, and iPhone accounted for 68.6 percent of revenues. Stated differently, In four years, revenue nearly tripled and income did just that.

Apple's dependence on iPhone cannot be overstated—as main revenue contributor and driver of so-called "halo sales" of other products; App Store, iTunes, Macs, and more. During the most recent quarter, fiscal third, the handset account for 63.2 percent of revenues. Anything that threatens to tip the iPhone—eh, Apple—cart poses great risk to the revenue stream, which could fall as quickly as it rose. Late's examine the perfect storm rising against the tech titan.

Storm Clouds Rising

1. China. Global markets tumbled last week as China hit the pause button and signaled slower economic growth than financial watchdogs anticipated. As the dollar strengthens against the yuan, China's burgeoning middle class pays more for luxury items like iPhones. Currency rates and, presumably, slower economic growth threaten to dampen Apple sales to the world's second largest economy. At the same time, smartphone sales slow in the largest market, because of saturation (see #2).

To put China in perspective, the country accounted for 26.7 percent of Apple revenues during fiscal Q3 2015, exceeding Europe (20.8 percent) but trailing the Americas (40.7 percent). A year earlier, greater China accounted for 15.86 percent of revenues, and 13.14 percent during the same time period in 2013. During fiscal 2012, China's contribution was low enough to be lumped into Asia Pacific rather than being separated within Apple's public financial statements.

Previously disclosed financial results may already foreshadow the future. Apple's percentage of revenue from China was higher in fiscal Q2, 29 percent; sales fell quarter-on-quarter from $16.82 billion to $13.23 billion. Set the change against analyst revenue consensus for Apple's fiscal fourth quarter: $50.9 billion. Even 3 percent or 4 percent decline in China's contribution could carve $1 billion or more off the top.

Consider this, also as foreshadowing Apple's China fortunes, assuming that the economy started slowling ahead of last week's visible symptoms: quarter on quarter iPhone's percentage of Apple revenue fell by 6.2 points. During the same time, China dropped by 2.3 points—more than any other region.

The numbers Apple can tout, but less reflect current trends, are annual, rather than sequential. Based on actual sales, iPhone jumped 68 percent year over year, to 11.9 million units in China, according to Gartner.

2. Smartphone saturation. China is the largest market for smartphones, followed by the United States, but growth slows rapidly. Last week, IDC revised downwards its global smartphone shipment projections for 2015, in part recognizing China as a maturing market alongside Europe and the United States. IDC predicts that growth in shipments to the world's largest smartphone consumer will be 1.2 percent in 2015 compared to 19.7 percent last year.

Gartner also calls China's market mature, but with stouter data, based on actual sales rather than shipment projections. During calendar second quarter, which is synonymous with Apple's fiscal third, smartphone sales in China fell by four percent year over year.

"China has reached saturation—its phone market is essentially driven by replacement, with fewer first-time buyers", Anshul Gupta, Gartner research director, says in a statement. "Beyond the lower-end phone segment, the appeal of premium smartphones will be key for vendors to attract upgrades and to maintain or grow their market share in China". But as #5 will explain, upgraders won't be as easy to find for the next iPhone compared to other models.

Additionally, globally, with saturation in mature markets and so-called dumb phone demand robust in emerging regions, the global smartphone sales growth rate was lower in calendar Q2 than any quarter during the previous two years, Gartner reports.

Already Apple feels some pinch. Between fiscal second and third quarters, overall sales, including other products, fell by 5 percent in the Americas, 17 percent in Europe, and 21 percent in China. With respect to iPhone globally, unit shipments and revenue each fell by 22 percent sequentially.

However, despite slowing sales in China, iPhone took market share from Android devices for the third straight quarter, according to Gartner.

3. Emerging markets. Slowing sales in mature regions shifts focus to others, where demand predominately is for lower-cost handsets and where iPhone isn't competitively enough priced. Let's consider Brazil and India, which are two of the BRIC countries (Russia and China are the others). The 16GB iPhone costs Rs 49,000 or more—that's at least $750 in dollars—depending on the reseller. In Brazil, direct from Apple: RS 3,499, or $976 in dollars. For some perspective on spending power, the average annual gross net income in India is $1,610, according to World Bank. In Brazil: $11,700. Compare average annual spending to iPhone's cost. What do you think the majority of people can afford?

Apple sells smartphones only. However, among many countries, because of limited spending power and limited cellular infrastructure, cheap smartphones and their dumb counterparts continue to sell well. That raises the other China problem: Homegrown manufacturers gaining sales share within the country and in other emerging markets. Among them: Huawei, Xiaomi, and ZTE, along with Lenovo gaining lift from its acquisition of Motorola Mobility.

For perspective, Motorola India sells the Moto G for Rs 11,999 ($181). The Moto E is available through third-party resellers for about Rs 5,999 ($91). Both are competent Android smartphones.

September 9th could bring lower prices, if Apple cuts them on older models, following past practice of essentially dumping older hardware on consumers who can't afford something newer.

Since most non-iPhones sold run Android, Apple risks losing platform developer, mind, and market shares as the rival platform makes sales gains across the globe. Based on calendar second quarter sales, Android smartphone share is 82.2 percent, according to Gartner.

4. Subsidies end. In mid-August, Verizon followed T-Mobile by ending cellular contracts. Subscribers will pay full price for phones, either upfront or by making monthly payments interest-free. The change could shift perception about device pricing and resulting demand.

The consumer paying $199 under contract for 16GB iPhone 6 is insulated from the real cost: $649. But as contracts disappear, and buyers see real costs, supply-demand logistics conceivably could cause prices to fall. Apple reaps rich margins on iPhone, which average selling price was $660 during fiscal third quarter—up $99 year over year. But such high ASPs may not be as easily sustained in a maturing market (see #6 for more) when buyers must pay more than their last upgrade.

We had some debate in the BetaNews newsroom about the end of subsidies, last week. One of my colleagues asserts that cellular device buyers won't care. What will matter: No $199 upfront cost and fixed manageable monthly payments (around $20) over two years. From his perspective, many consumers will see the end of subsidies as a price decrease, unless paying full price upfront, of course.

5. Good enough. During calendar second quarter 2015, and continuing a trend started with the release of iPhone 6 and 6 Plus in September 2014, replacement sales were high across regions, whether emerging or mature, according to Gartner. Gains greatly represent pent-up demand for larger screens, up from 4-inches on iPhone 5s to 4.7 inches and 5.5 inches on the newer devices, respectively. Consumers who waited for bigger, bought, while some people who previously purchased Androids for size returned to iPhone.

But as smartphones mature, and features change less between newer and older models, device users have less incentive to buy the newest thing. This phenomenon, which is relatively established in other categories, is sometimes referred to as the "good enough problem"—when an existing product’s benefits satisfy the majority of potential users, such that they choose to continue with what they have got rather than adopt something new.

By that reckoning, iPhone 6 and 6 Plus demand doesn't represent the handset's future growth—not when considering:

China's lumbering economy, and slowing spending
Market maturation in China, Europe, and the United States
Handset demand shifting to geographies where iPhone is costly
U.S. carriers ending subsidies and exposing subscribers to higher prices

These four things set against the fifth: iPhone 6 and 6 Plus are good enough for many upgraders. Apple should reap another wave of existing customer purchases by lowering prices on these models when replacing with new ones. But there comes a point where most people have an iPhone, or another smartphone, that is good enough. I assert that inflection point has arrived. However, in the short term, much depends on how many iPhone 5s or older owners go 6 or 6 Plus because of price cuts. For many of these users, discounted 2014 models will be better enough.

Apple's ultimate path to beating the good enough problem is releasing something so new and innovative that it is perceived to be much better, or actually is. However, based on past release cycles, unless CEO Tim Cook breaks patterns, the successors to iPhone 6 and 6 Plus will bring incremental benefits. That's unlucky timing, in context of the other four things.

Look at Apple's future like this: Even with the strong tailwinds of compelling new models, iPhone shipments missed analyst projections for fiscal third quarter. New models will launch with headwinds from China, mature and emerging markets, full-price phones, and deferred upgrades. Price cuts could give short-term relief on older models, but the winds of change are unavoidable.

There, have I mixed enough metaphors in a single analysis?

Photo Credit: Anton Watman/Shutterstock

I hate autocorrect

Publié: août 28, 2015, 9:45pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

oops

I must apologize to Art Alexakis, lead singer for Everclear. In a personal post last night observing his role as a tattoo artist in movie "Wild", his name is misspelled. Funny thing, so to get it right, I copied and pasted from the web into the WordPress editor. Yet somehow when published, and I missed, his name appeared as Alexis. My thanks goes to Scott Bell, who pointed out the error in a Google+ comment.

It's strange how tech meant to be beneficial gets in the way. More mistakes appear in my stories because of autocorrect than I make myself. The pattern is consistent: I will write, nix autocorrect's changed misspelling, but later edit something else in the sentence. Word changes! As a long-time writer and editor, I revise constantly until publishing—and afterwards, too. The spelling errors I miss most often typically are the ones made for me during spot edits.

Autocorrect often baffles me. OS X autocorrects "Everclear" as "Evercleafr". What the frak? I fixed that one three times while writing yesterday's short "Wild" post. The "f" glares perhaps. But "Alexakis" to "Alexis" didn't catch me eye. I once revised an ebook within an hour of publication because autocorrect changed Brad Pitt's name; spelled properly when written. I edited something else in the sentence, which triggered the mis-correction.

By far, my most common autocorrect mishaps—and that I can't fix later—are in texts and messages. Surely you have some familiarity with that problem. The catalog of mistakes made by people on mobiles could write a half-hour comedy TV series. Curious: What's your worst blue, no blunt, eh, blunder with autocorrect while texting or messaging?

I find autocorrect to be beneficial on Android compared to iOS, which may have something to do with the greater control available—providing some choice about how aggressive it should be and, presumably, tapping into Google's intelligent information services.

I'm done with autocorrect. Uh, I think. I also am lazier now, letting autocorrect fix words for me, which is good for my creative wordflow (that's not a misspelling!). Gasp! What if I've become an autocorrect addict? It's time to find out.

If you would like to kick the autocorrect habit:

On OS X, select Preferences, Keyboard, Text, and uncheck "correct spelling automatically".
On iOS, select Settings, General, Keyboard, and swipe the "Auto-Correction" button left.
On Android, select Settings, Language & Input, Google Keyboard, and check "off" or modify autocorrect's intensity.
On Windows 10, select Settings, Devices, Typing, and slide to off "autocorrect misspelled words".

The problem now: I have no one to blame for spelling mistakes but myself.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/igor.stevanovic

When size matters, Acer Chromebook 15 is big [Review]

Publié: août 20, 2015, 1:09am CEST par Joe Wilcox

I am not a fan of overly-large laptops, but if I were to buy one, Acer's 15.6-inch monster would be among my top choices. The Chromebook packs in lots of value, which first and foremost is 1080p resolution to match the large screen, a benefit that is atypical for the price and size class. Screen brightness is no match for the Toshiba Chromebook 2, but the matte finish compensates for dimness by dramatically reducing glare. Meanwhile, the IPS display gives great viewing angles.

The point: Acer doesn't just offer bigger, but better, among the overall Chromebook category, where dim TN screens are standard fare. That also can be said of competing Windows laptops, where with same size screen in the price range, or even more costly, resolution typically tops out at 1366 x 768. Chromebook 15 is 1920 x 1080. By more than size, the display is a big benefit.

In my testing, watching movies, TV shows, or YouTube is a treat, with all that real estate. With so much landscape available to accommodate the display, Acer wastes not. Speakers flank the keyboard on either side, providing booming sound with surprisingly crisp definition. The screen and speakers combination is unmatched by any other Chromebook, most Windows PCs, and no Mac portables. This is a huge benefit for someone streaming, say, in a college dorm room rather than watching TV.

But big is, well, big. The screen and speakers demand large enclosure and heft with it. Size matters. Length, width, height: 38.4 x 24.4 x 2.54 cm (15.1 x 9.6 x 1 inches). Weight: 2.2 kilograms (4.85 pounds). While absolutely luggable, Chromebook 15 might be better for the person who needs an occasional computer carry-about.

That said, Chromebook 15 isn't an uncomfortable carry-along. The surface grips firmly and provides plenty of friction in the hand. But if appearance matters, you will look something of a dork lugging this thing around. Use a backpack.

Regarding appearance, Acer's Chrome OS hunk isn't handsome. It's not ugly, per se, just not the prettiest design. The plastic is obvious and dull, but more pronounced in the signature white model than the black one. But, hey, this is a budget notebook which big benefits balance with the HD screen. The visual that matters more is what you see on the large display. Chromebook 15 is superb example of a manufacturer putting function before form.

The keyboard is typical Acer, which, while good, falls short of the Chromebook category. Keys are a somewhat stiff and noisy, although responsive enough. The trackpad is smooth but like the keys is a bit click, click, clicky.

Performance is snappy, which is typical of Acer Chromebooks. This one packs a 5th-generation Intel Celeron processor that gives more bang than I would expect. I tested a model with 4GB of RAM and found it to be spiffy responsive even with 15 or more browser tabs open. Another measure is video streaming, which largely is smooth and stutter-free.

Battery life is excellent and certainly good enough for a full school or work day. I typically see 6 to 8 hours, depending on use. Seven to 7.5 hours is my average. If you want 10 or 12 hours, choose a laptop with smaller screen to light up. You can gain time by dimming the brightness, but full-lum only satisfies my eyes.

There are several configurations, one of which I wouldn't recommend. Base specs: 1.5GHz Intel Celeron 3205U dual-core processor; 15.6-inch display; Intel HD graphics; 720p webcam; SD card reader, HDMI port; USB 2 and 3 ports (one each); WiFi N; 3220 mAh battery; and Chrome OS.

At $249.99, you get 2GB RAM, 16GB SSD, and display with 1366 x 768 resolution. I recommend against buying this model. Chromebook 15's major benefits revolve around the 1080p IPS screen, which the entry-level model lacks. For $299.99, Acer gives the better screen and 4GB RAM. The top-end Celeron model doubles the storage for another $50. Also available, for $329.99, 32GB storage but on 2GB RAM.

For big spenders demanding more performance, Acer also offers a $449 Chromebook 15, with Core i3 processor, 4GB RAM, 32GB storage and Intel HD 550 graphics. For $50 more, you can go Core i5.

Chromie Lifestyle

Acer Chromebook 15 rounds off the category by filling the vacant big niche. Eleven and 12-inch displays are more typical, although there are several 13.3-inchers to choose from. The larger question should be: Is any Chromebook right for you?

Laptops in this class run Chrome OS, which essentially is Google's browser as user interface to hybrid-Linux core. While there is a desktop and file manager, nearly all activity takes place in Chrome tabs. Webapps replace applications that run locally.

Chromebook isn't a computer-purchasing decision—it’s a lifestyle choice. The device fits into a contextual lexicon of others that are cloud connected. Your lifestyle hub shifts from the PC as center to apps and services reaching many devices. The post-PC era is a myth. There is no such thing. We live in the contextual cloud computing era, where, as a web-centric device, Chromebook fits nicely -- even while representing a dying PC paradigm.

I see 10 major benefits to Chromebook ownership:

Easy setup
Guest-user account
Fast crash recovery
Instant-on capability
Security architecture
High-value for low-cost
Simplicity and usability
Hands-free IT management
Frequent updates delivered easily
Seamless sync with devices running Chrome

Quickly explained:

Setup is as easy as logging into Google account. That's it!
Guest user account lets others share your laptop without accessing your stuff.
My Chromebook 15 tester never crashed, but recovery would take just a few seconds had it.
To start up, you flip the lid, and the log-in prompt appears with near-immediacy.
Chrome OS is remarkably hardy against hacking or intrusion.
As Acer demonstrates, you get a lot of laptop for the price, and cloud apps are free or cost considerably less than would PC software.
Features like log in to setup make Chrome OS easier to manage than OS X or Windows PCs.
Google updates Chrome OS about every 6-8 weeks. You get new features without the hassle of breaking apps.
Synchronization is the killer app for the connected era, and Google gives better than any competitor. Example: Browser tabs and settings sync across devices.

Chromebook isn't for everyone, particularly those people who need to use legacy applications. For the rest, if whatever you need works in the browser, you're set for Chrome OS. Perhaps Acer's hunk, or something smaller.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Why would Dell sell a business Chromebook that competes with Office and Windows 10?

Publié: août 15, 2015, 8:38pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

huh what

The strangest, and largely overlooked news, coming out of the tech sector this week is Dell's Microsoft betrayal. This isn't the first time that the PC maker strayed. Linux joined the product stable long ago, and last year an educational Chromebook debuted. But this newer and larger model, which will be available September 17, raises question: WTF?

Dell's core PC market is business—small, large, and everything between. Windows, and that smattering of Linux, is core, and longstanding loyalty to Microsoft's application stack. But the Chromebook 13 announcement, as positioned by the OEM and Google, is all about the competing cloud app stack. Interestingly, selling prices rival Windows laptops, which is another head scratcher: $399 to $899, depending on configuration.

Massive Sales Share

NPD data tells part of the story. Chromebook sales are booming through U.S. business-to-business sales channels. "Google saw Chrome rise to take the number one spot in market share", from January through mid-July, Stephen Baker, NPD's vice president of industry analysis, says. Sales share topped 50 percent, which is a stunning achievement for a platform available for 4 years and one that competes against two entrenched monopolies: Office and Windows.

"Windows 10 had no impact in these B2B channels"' Baker says, in part because it "wasn’t available during the period specified and given that Windows notebooks were up over the prior year period and actually grew more in 2015 over 2014 than they did in 2014 over 2013. I think we can safely say that Win10 had no negative impact to sales". Meaning: "None of the business/organizations buying from channels seemed to delay anything because of it".

But how many will buy something else? That question, and its answer, should haunt Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella as the company pushes its legacy applications stack—Office, Windows, server software—to the cloud, which is comfy Google territory. Dell Chromebook 13 is part of the Google for Work program, which squarely competes with Office and Windows.

This or That?

Even as a long-time Chromebook user, I see Dell's business push as brash but risky. Price is major reason. Configurations and pricing aren't yet available, but little sleuthing is necessary to guess. Options include Intel Broadwell-U processors—Celeron, i3, or i5—and 2GB, 4GB, or 8GB of memory. It's not hard to guess that $399 will get buyers Celeron and 2GB. Is that too much to pay? I wouldn't pay that much, but for IT departments the answer isn't easy, with specific configs not yet available.

For businesses with Microsoft volume-licensing agreements in place, my answer is probably not. But for others, particularly smaller shops or those without legacy application dependencies, maybe yes. Dell promises IPS HD display and will provide additional security and management services designed for businesses. Support is the company's forte and part of Dell's success selling to businesses.

Still, when cost matters, is $399 for a Celeron laptop with 2GB of RAM that runs remote applications in the browser rather than locally from the hard drive the best choice? There is no one answer, because of the complexities behind each business buyer's existing IT infrastructure. Customers choosing Chromebooks are more likely to go Google Apps, Gmail, and related cloud services rather than buy Office, Exchange, and related server software. That's the business Microsoft loses when Dell and other OEMs sell Chromebooks. I will cost compare the two app stacks in a future story, so for today will focus on pure hardware, and what's behind it, which is more straightforward.

Using Dell's configurator for Windows 10 Pro, the only option presented is the Latitude 14, which, discounted, starts at $549 with 4th-gen i3 processor, 14-inch 1366 s 768 resolution display, 500GB hard drive, and manageability features comparable to Chromebook 13. Neither Office nor Office 365 are available for the price; there Google Apps has an edge. Based on design, specs, and my experience using Dell Chromebook 11, the 13 has the edge. That is if businesses can satisfy there application needs in the browser.

Unsung Value

I won't cost-compare other Dell configs. That should wait for sales to start in mid-September. However, let's price compare another way. Presumably, the high-end Dell Chromebook 13 will, for $899, pack 5th-gen Core i5 processor, 1080p touchscreen, and 32GB RAM. For the same price, Microsoft Store sells Surface Pro 3 running Windows 10 Pro, with 4th-gen i5 processor, 12-inch HD display (2160 x 1440 resolution), and 128GB hard drive. Keyboard costs more, as does Office, but I see tremendously more utility in Surface Pro for about the same price, particularly for smaller businesses or content creators.

By the way, for the first half of the year, Windows tablet B2B channels sales were up by 35 percent, largely because of Surface, according to NPD. I see Surface as the unsung value in the PC market, for its classy design, flexible utility, and features for price. Microsoft, and the fab-tab hybrid deserve more respect.

Photo Credit: PathDoc/Shutterstock

Yikes! Apple laptop revenue share exceeds Windows PCs

Publié: août 12, 2015, 9:44pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Measured as sales through the U.S. consumer retail channel, Macs reached rather shocking milestone during first half 2015, according to data that NPD provided to me today. Yes, you can consider this a first, and from lower volume shipments. By operating system: OS X, 49.7 percent; Windows, 48.3 percent; Chrome OS, 1.9 percent. That compares to the same time period in 2014: OS X, 44.8 percent; Windows, 53.1 percent; Chrome OS, 2.1 percent. So there is no confusion, the data is for U.S. consumer laptops.

While data junkie journalists or analysts often focus on unit shipments, revenues, and subsequently profits, matter much more. Looked at another way, Mac laptop revenues rose by 10.9 percent during the first six months of 2015, year over year, while Windows PCs fell by 9 percent, and Chromebooks contracted by 9.5 percent.

"MacBook Pro is far and away the largest volume with MacBook Air second, and MacBook third", Stephen Baker, NPD vice president of industry analysis, tells me today. "The new Macbooks have made a tiny dent in the overall market, and the shares for MBP and MBA are pretty similar in 2015 to 2014—for the first 6 months combined. But obviously MBA is much higher now than it was in 2012 or 2013 after the big price change they did early in 2014 on MBA". In April 2014, Apple cut MacBook Air's price by $100, offering the the 11.6-inch model for as low as $899.

The larger question for Apple: Is 12-inch MacBook a failure, if only making a "tiny dent" in sales? The laptop is pricey, at $1,299 or $1,599 and underpowered with its Intel M processor, despite benefit of the Retina Display that MacBook Air lacks but not MBP.

Mac's retail revenue strength slaps the broader PC market, which is more complex to decipher than the raw numbers suggest. Windows 10's June 29 release is reason for many PC buyers to hold off new purchases, either to get the OS preinstalled or to grab discounts on upgrade-eligible older models. Remember: The data set doesn't include July or August.

That could explain the Windows PC's declines but not Mac's gains. The answer may lie with iPhone, which creates Halo effect for other sales. The idea being: Satisfied consumers having good experience with the one product buy something else. During the 3 months ended June 30, iPhone subscriber share rose 1.5 points to 44.1 percent, compared to the same period ending in March, according to comScore. Second-ranked Samsung: 28.1 percent. Meanwhile, measured by operating system, iOS continued to make gains against Android, which respectively had 44.1 percent and 51.6 percent.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Alphabet's ABC is Google's XYZ

Publié: août 11, 2015, 10:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

I predict that the innovation of the year will go, not to a tech product, but to Google's creation of a new company: Alphabet. The search and information giant that disrupts so many other companies on and off the Internet essentially disrupts itself. By doing so—divesting the core, established business from future research and inventions—cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin unshackle weights dragging growth.

To recap: Page announced the dramatic change after the market closed yesterday. Google becomes secondary to Alphabet, which will hold a collection of related entities. Page hands over Google chief executive reigns to Sundar Pichai, while becoming CEO of the new entity. Brin is president. Can we call him letterhead instead of figurehead? :)

Alphabet's creation shows why Google, and not Apple, is the most innovative tech company on the planet and foreshadows how this will continue to be for the foreseeable future. At the same time, Page and Brin have lobbed a big wrench into the European Union's antitrust machine by effectively doing to Google what Microsoft should have done 15 years ago: Voluntarily break up the company. There will be other benefits from Alphabet, but my day-later analysis focuses on two that fundamentally alter the new and established companies' futures.

Disrupt Thyself

The most-disruptive companies have nothing to lose. When building a customer base, they can take risks that established entities dare not for fear of upsetting existing revenue streams. This is exactly how Microsoft upset IBM during the mainframe-to-Windows-PC transition and early DOS application developers like Lotus or WordPerfect. When you have no customers to lose, and only those to gain, you have tremendous tactical flexibility, such as selling for less, or even loss, to gain marketshare.

Likewise, Google, as the Internet's emissary, tore into Microsoft's core business by offering products like Apps and Gmail for less, and often for free, against Office, Outlook, Exchange, and related software. But as search share increases, and advertising-related revenue dependance stays unshaken, the cloud company is more status quo than startup and subject to the same dynamics as its forebears. Success stifles innovation, for fear of taking risks essential to remaining relevant.

Page is right: "We’ve long believed that over time companies tend to get comfortable doing the same thing, just making incremental changes. But in the technology industry, where revolutionary ideas drive the next big growth areas, you need to be a bit uncomfortable to stay relevant". Status quo equals stagnation.

By making Google a subsidiary that competes with others under Alphabet, Page and Brin can re-infuse startup mentality that birthed one of the most successful disruptive companies ever. Employees can compete to open new areas of research and product development and for prestige—to be part of a pioneer-promising startup. Managers gain opportunity for advancement, as Alphabet creates vacuum within the corporate structure to fill with new subsidiaries and CEOs in the mold of Pichai to lead them.

"Alphabet is about businesses prospering through strong leaders and independence", Page says. "In general, our model is to have a strong CEO who runs each business, with Sergey and me in service to them as needed. Fundamentally, we believe this allows us more management scale, as we can run things independently that aren’t very related".

David Thinking

The Alphabet strategy is the most brilliant application of David Thinking i have seen in more than two decades reporting about the tech sector. I first explained the concept six years ago in analysis "Why Apple succeeds, and always will". The "always will" no longer applies as the company has become in this decade status quo. I developed the David Thinking concept from fascinating research conducted by Ivan Arreguín-Toft, who is an assistant professor of international relations at Boston University.

In 2005 book, How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Tactics, Arreguín-Toft explains that seemingly weaker opponents can prevail against stronger ones by changing the rules of engagement. (So that you don’t have to purchase the book, review paper “How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict” as an alternative.)

Page titles his Alphabet announcement "G is for Google". G is for Goliath, and his lumbering dependance on rules of engagement that benefit him. As status quo, Goliath is limited by his success. David is lithe and only bound by his own abilities, when choosing to apply them. Google's problem is the same as every company dominating one, or even several categories: Prioritizing development decisions to favor and/or extend the core business rather than transcending it. That leads to stagnation, not innovation.

By applying David Thinking, Page and Brin return to their strengths as disruptive innovators by disrupting their own successful company. The realignment "frees up time for me to continue to scale our aspirations", Page says. "Sergey and I are seriously in the business of starting new things".

The changes also play to Google's core strength, if assuming that many of the people working for the search and information giant joined to bring big world-changing innovations to market, rather than preserve an aging and successful Goliath. He is fat and needs to lose middle-age girth, which the new entity does with liposuction speediness.

Self-Divesture

The change could accomplish something else, which is a different application of David Thinking. Google is dogged by anticompetitive criticism, and in Europe faces potentially stiff antitrust oversight. The problem facing the search Goliath is the same as Microsoft during the Windows PC hegemony: Government concerns that self-cross-integrating new developments with a monopoly product stifles innovation and gives unfair advantage when leveraged into an adjacent market or even new category.

For Google, the core is search and increasingly Android, for the dominance in separate categories and how one benefits from the other. Page tried playing by the European Competition Commission's rules, which did little, if anything, for Google. So he and Brin change the rules of engagement by doing what I said Microsoft should have done 15 years ago: Take control away from regulators by breaking up the company.

The creation of Alphabet and making Google a subsidiary within is effectively self-divesture. The search business' importance diminishes as building block for newer products. Then there is refocusing search that is good for its future. "This newer Google is a bit slimmed down, with the companies that are pretty far afield of our main Internet products contained in Alphabet instead", Page says.

But one piece that remains with Google needs to be unbound to seriously stifle trustbuster interference: Android. As an operating system, and not an Internet service, Android doesn't belong with Google under Alphabet. Page and Brin should, and they may even plan to, create an operating system platform subsidiary separate from search. It's my guess, without consulting an European legal expert, that the Competition Commission's Android antitrust investigation would eventually defuse.

Self-divesture also opens way for greater shareholder rewards, as revenues expand from new products not necessarily bound to search and from subsidiaries that could eventually spin out as separate companies.

Meanwhile, the expected IPO startup mentality across Alphabet also is incentive for employees to work hard for the big payoff later on. Yesterday, they worked for an aging giant. Today, they belong to what Page calls "a collection of companies"—startups—all with potential to be the next Google. For all those Googlers who couldn't cash in before, because they joined too late, there's an Alphabet of startups to fill.

G is for greatness.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Ricard Vaque

iPhone 6 Plus balances benefits [Review]

Publié: août 10, 2015, 12:36am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Sometime within the next few weeks, Apple should announce successors to iPhone 6 and 6 Plus, and my review of the latter device is long overdue. Let's get to it finally and present the key finding first: If size matters, as in you want a phone with larger screen but that doesn't feel humongous, the 5.5-inch iPhone 6 Plus is a worthy choice. By measures that matter most—benefits from apps, calling, camera, data, performance, screen, and storage—the phablet is best of class.

As expressed in my iPhone 6 review, I regretted not buying the larger device after handing it. The Plus is big, but not overly large for my tastes. Hell, I bought Motorola-made and Google-branded Nexus 6 in January 2015 to replace iPhone 6; the screen is even bigger than Plus, at whopping 6 inches. I gained great value using either of the larger handsets, but gave up one for the other.

That's right. I switched from Nexus 6 in June 2015, and not for dissatisfaction. I love the phone. By the specs, the Google phablet is superior to iPhone 6 Plus, but both deliver exceptional user experience. Google groupies laugh at iPhone 6 or the Plus as "Me-too" devices that catch up to or fall behind other high-end smartphones. That's because these people mistake the forest for the trees, using a cliché. The trees are features and the forest are benefits, which are finely balanced—and that's this review's major focal point: Benefits.

Repeating for the umpteenth time: Your Starbucks coffee cup is one of the best illustrations of the difference between benefits and features. The wrapper that goes round the cup is a feature. Protecting your hand from burning is a benefit. Features and benefits are absolutely conjoined in things designed well. But they are nevertheless separate, and particularly among tech companies there is too much emphasis on features, when benefits matter more.

A smartphone or phablet isn't the sum of its features but balance of benefits. Apple understands this principle and handsomely applies it to both 6 variants. Google gets it, too, which is why Nexus devices are so wonderful.

Why I bought iPhone 6 Plus

My decision to abandon Nexus 6 started with a convergence of seemingly unrelated events, all within about 10 days:

Apple announced OS X 10.11 and iOS 9, and I wanted to test them
Apple unveiled its streaming music service, which I also wanted to test
My sister decided to give up Nokia Lumia Icon and needed a new handset
A freak electrical problem damaged my wife's Chromebook Pixel and required replacement

If not for my wife's Chromebook coming to untimely end, I would likely still own Nexus 6 today and would have taken advantage of the Project Fi invite that Google finally sent last week. Instead, my wife inherited Chromebook Pixel LS, which she loves; my sister bought the Nexus 6; and I used the proceeds from insurance and sis to replace both, with 13-inch MacBook Pro Retina Display and the Apple phablet.

Sizing up the Digital Lifestyle

iPhone 6 Plus and Nexus 6 are both exceptional phablets, and choosing one or the other is as much about digital lifestyle as device. Apple and Google sell lifestyle platforms around which someone builds stuff. The bitten-fruit company demands the more inclusive lifestyle, which hugely influenced my decision to give up the LS and N6 that I enjoyed and fit my more cloud-oriented lifestyle. For example, Apple Music isn't available without iTunes or iOS device; I couldn't test otherwise.

That said, more because of other developers' commitment, Apple is the Switzerland of mobile apps and cloud computing. I call iOS the "eat your cake and have it, too" platform. You can jump into the Apple lifestyle, while choosing from Google's. Meanwhile, the majority of the newest, third-party cloud-connected lifestyle apps are available for iOS before Android. Yum. Yum.

Google groupies will wave the comparable number of Android apps and selection. But it's not how many but which ones that matter. Number of apps is a feature, while meaningful selection is a benefit. The most useful Android apps also are available for iOS, or exclusively.

Let's cherry-pick pieces from the Apple lifestyle, which would be relevant to any iPhone 6 Plus buying decision, with caveat: iOS 9 is testing and final release is close. This list is based on the current version, iOS 8.4, and the next rev will offer additional lifestyle benefits.

Command me. iOS gives good speech-to-text capabilities, like Android, but Siri still sucks. If she was a living employee, the company would have fired her long ago. In the past, when Siri couldn't directly answer a question, I relied on the web searches she presented. But with iOS 7—and, sadly, carried forward to iOS 8—Bing is the search engine. Sorry, Google delivers more meaningful results.

Griping aside, Siri will get you around town and provide relevant, contextual information—there, Apple Maps is a help rather than hindrance (no more misdirections). She's not as proactive as Google Now, but as such not as snoopy. There's something stalker-like about Big G's app/service that creeps me out.

Still, Siri steers me wrong too often and can't compete with Google Now. Yesterday, my daughter wanted treats from Nomad Donuts. My wife and I were driving, and I asked Siri about the shop. Wow! It was just a few blocks away. But we arrived at, ahem, a less classy confectionary. That bitch brought me to the closest donut shop rather than the one requested.

If self-punishment is your thing, Siri is a great lifestyle companion. Our relationship is like Charlie Brown and Lucy. She promises that this time, she won't pull away the football when I run to kick it.

Cover me. As the Switzerland of mobile platforms, iOS offers the best cloud cover of them all. These benefits aren't exclusive to iPhone 6, but I would be remiss ignoring them, since they're core to any digital lifestyle. Simply stated: Connected-apps are aplenty.

For simplicity, let's focus on the Apple Way—iCloud Drive, which is new with iOS 8. The service is almost simple to a fault, because it's not obvious on iOS devices; access is from apps rather than a file manager (which is available on Yosemite or iCloud for Windows).

iCloud Drive finally catches competitors offering content access anytime, anywhere, and on anything (well, for the latter if an Apple-supported platform). Sync is excellent, based on my testing. "Set it, and forget it" is the design ethic, an attribute that made the original iPod so compelling. Simple sync is a huge benefit, and it works well with other Apple apps and services, such as calendar, contacts, and mail.

Grumble. Keeping with Apple's "You should always pay more" design ethic, the cloud costs. During San Diego Comic Con last month, I quickly exceeded my 20GB cloud storage and had to buy more: 200GB for $3.99 a month. By contrast, Google Photos storage is free for files less than 16MB. Pic syncing is what maxed out iCloud.

Share me. With this platform release cycle, Apple introduces the super useful Family Sharing. Think of it as "fair-use" applied to personal, digital content. I've complained for years about ebooks, music, movies, and the like being tied to a single account and not easily shared. Hey, mom can buy a CD or DVD and let the kids watch or lend it to grandma—but not her digital downloads. Sharing is a humungous benefit.

According to Apple: "Once you set up Family Sharing, family members get immediate access to each other’s music, movies, TV shows, books, and apps. Download what you want with a tap anytime you like. All without having to share an Apple ID or passwords".

This benefit alone is reason to consider iPhone 6 Plus or another iOS device and Apple's reward to long-time content buyers. Six people can share.

Play me. That brings us to Apple Music, which isn't available for non-iOS mobile devices. The streaming service in some respects supersedes Family Sharing. You can have both, but may not need to. The service is free during the first three months of operation and will later cost $9.99 individually or $14.99 for family fare.

You won't get much better music experience outside the Apple lifestyle, unless cost is limiting factor. In my testing, the streaming service offers broad selection, and the curated playlists are simply fantastic. Apple uses, gasp, real people rather than algorithms to curate music. I can't say enough positive about the overall experience but will try in my eventual full review.

Apple Music is one of the digital lifestyle benefits

Watch me. If you would like to use Android Wear smartwatch with a mobile phone, you better buy into the Google lifestyle. Similarly, you'll want iPhone for Apple Watch. The data timepiece is fabulous companion for 6 Plus. The phone is large—158.1 x 77.8 x 7.1 mm (6.22 x 3.08 x .28 inches)—and the watch allows fast interaction with content or people without hauling the lug from your pocket.

Of course, this all fits into Apple's "You can always pay more" philosophy. Why buy one thing when you can get two, eh? I discuss user benefits in the next subhead, and screen-quality and size give many. But that means using a honking cellular carryall that may offend the hands of some users more accustomed to iPhone 5s-size handsets. Apple Watch makes getting phablet benefits a workable compromise: Big when you need it, small when you don't. That is, if you're willing to buy two thangs when one was good enough before.

Big Benefits in Plus Size

Perhaps you read this far and wonder where the hell is the hardware discussion. You got it this subhead, and the back-to-front approach is deliberate, because digital lifestyle and benefits should be first considerations when buying any modern handset, not price or features. The limited list sets the stage for features and benefits, which fit into a larger lifestyle lexicon.

Aesthetics. The design of the 6 Plus is reminiscent of iPhone classic—the original sold starting in June 2007. Rounded corners and curvy frame are the visible characteristics they share. Other reviewers point to iPod touch similarities, which is true of thinness, but the prominent aesthetic—rounded corners—inherits from the original.

The similarities only begin there. iPhone 6 Plus finely balances benefits against features in ways much like the classic. In 2007, Apple stripped back features available on other phones, such as 3G and MMS, to balance others: battery life and responsive interaction of the new sensors and touchscreen.

Balance is the overall design aesthetic and priority placed delivering benefits before the fanciest features. By the specs, iPhone 6 Plus is inferior to newer Motorola and Samsung flagship handsets.

However, my experience favors Apple's decision to deliver more by giving less. iPhone 6 Plus is extremely enjoyable to use, and joy is a benefit often overlooked in tech design. How you feel using a device matters much more than how you think about features. There, balance—how all the features fit together to deliver benefits—and the device's design mean everything.

The iPhone 6 Plus design is understated, which is a long-standing Apple aesthetic (see my June 2005 analysis). I've seen some complaints online about the plainness and critics calling the top and bottom back bans ugly. Picky. Picky.

Plainness isn't the problem. Apple is sometimes guilty of putting form before function, and this is where aesthetics can undermine usability. How a phone feels and how well it stays in hands and fingers are intertwined benefits. While I find that both newer iPhones feel quite good to hold and can be operated with one hand, the surface is too slick. I can't get good enough grip, and the curved rather than flat frame is one reason why. Both are the first iPhones for which I strongly encourage using some kind of case. Either will eventually slip from your hands otherwise, and Apple should be faulted for squandering benefits.

Design ethic inherits from the original iPhone

Sight. The screen delivers some of any smartphone's most important benefits. As such, I obviously wondered what the experience would be stepping down from the Nexus, which 6-inch display is 2560 x 1440 resolution and 493 pixels per inch. iPhone 6 Plus: 1920 x 1080 resolution and 401 ppi. I have no complaints, because the experience is excellent.

Some of that comes from a difference best described compared to iPhone 6, which resolution is 1334 x 750. The larger phone's screen is crisper, the glass seemingly less reflective, and the desktop so vivid it looks painted on. When first compared at Apple Store, I had to check to ensure I hadn't picked up a dummy phone with paper mockup pasted on. The three qualities deliver extreme benefits, particularly the muted reflectiveness.

Pretty much anything viewed on the iPhone 6 Plus screen looks superb. People upgrading from iPhone 3/G/GS or 4/4S might be overwhelmed by the spaciousness, while most 5/5s users will be pleased. Nice touch: Standard and Zoom modes. For my ailing, aging eyes Standard is just fine, however.

Sound. iPhone 6 Plus gives great audio—if you attach headphones or speakers. But the tinny, internal single speaker lacks much, particularly for someone steeping down from Nexus 6's dual front-facing speakers. That said, placement on the bottom frame (in vertical orientation) assures that notifications and phone rings can be heard.

Connected to headphones, Apple Music streaming sounds fantastic. There's an immediacy to fullness and breadth of soundstage that's good to a fault. For example, with quality cans—Grado RS1e—I hear imperfections in the encoding, which on some tracks my ears perceive as over-modulation or muffled vocals.

Photography. More megapixels is meaningless, as I have asserted for years. Apple wisely sticks to 8MP, which is the reasonable limit, because cameraphone sensors are tiny (I would prefer 5MP). The greater packed the sensor with pixels, the more artifacts and other aberrations appear in photos. Like iPhone 5s, the 6 offers 1.5 micron pixels, which, among other benefits, let in more light than the standard 1.1 micron pixels, which tightly pack on 16MP phone shooters.

The f/2.2 aperture lens is good choice, and in my testing finely balances with sensor and software. I can't emphasize the importance of the latter and choices made when shooting and post-processing. In 2012, I used the 5MP Samsung Galaxy Nexus to shoot San Diego Comic-Con. One reason: The phone produced surprisingly good photos in low light, mainly because of the superb balance of features and wise settings choices made in auto mode. Something else: Google promised and the smartphone delivered instant-shutter response.

The catchup capability is one of iPhone 6 Plus's best photography benefits, particularly in HDR mode. Shutter response is fast. Immediate. But there is more: In my testing, the smartphone smartly chooses aperture, ISO, and shutter speed—and that's best observed in low-light settings. Color accuracy and white balance are generally spot on.

Most people are not professional photographers. They wouldn't know f-stop from exposure compensation. Rather than presenting confusing controls and numbers, Apple provides a nifty slider for adjusting exposure—lightness or darkness the user sees in the screen preview. Just tap the display. Other niceties, many carried forward from iPhone 5s and iOS 7 or long available elsewhere, include auto stabilization, face detection, and panorama mode.

Optical stabilization is available on iPhone 6 Plus, but not the smaller handset, and it's a differentiator that will be valuable to some shooters but not everyone. The technology is rather nifty, using the gyroscope in conjunction with the lens, which position changes, to reduce camera shaking that often blurs photos. Jim Harmer's Plus photo review is excellent primer for understanding the benefits.

iPhone 6 Plus camera smartly balances color and contrast

Gripe: The handset's body is thinner than the camera can accommodate, such that the lens juts out from the enclosure. It's an unacceptable design compromise that puts the lens at greater risk of damage and is, unfortunately, another reason to buy a back-fitting case. If cynical, you can chalk it up to the "You can always pay more" design ethic. Meaning: Back cover case is near necessity by design.

Most people will find iPhone 6 Plus photography to be satisfying at the least. There is no non-pro compact camera with fixed lens—meaning without telephoto—that I would recommend over this smartphone. Last week, I sold my beloved Fuji X100T, which is fixed lens. I rely on the Apple phablet when on the go, or for more demanding needs the interchangeable lens Fuji X-T1, which in July I bought during Comic-Con.

Videography. Apple delivers some nifty tricks shooting videos, and one is desperately-needed catchup: Continuous focus, a feature found on most major flagship smartphones. Fixed focus is one of older iPhones' biggest videography handicaps. On the 5 and 5s, you can tap to focus to start but there's trouble if you or the subject moves. In my testing, iPhone 6 Plus adjusts focus as promised. Finally!

Neat trick: Slow-motion at 120 fps or 240 fps. Slo-mo is super fun, but good luck easily exporting clips and keeping the slow speed. Direct upload from phone to YouTube is my method, as prescribed by phoneArena's helpful how-to guide.

The videocam can capture 1080p at 30 or 60 fps, and the latter is beneficial for shooting moving objects or finer-editing later on. Time-lapse videography enables other creative options, and Apple claims something called "Cinematic Video Stabilization", which supposedly lets you GoPro without buying one.

Longevity. Question everyone should ask about a smartphone: "How long can I use it before the battery dies?" Long enough is my answer. Time period between charges is so great, I can't keep track. Even when using Apple Maps, which should be a battery killer, iPhone 6 Plus keeps going and going.

Apple claims 24-hour talk time over 3G, 14 hours watching videos, or 12 hours Internet over LTE or WiFi. I care about shooting photos and videos and uploading them to the cloud, while rumbling across social networks. These functions are more meaningful measures—and I easily get through the day with juice left over.

Responsiveness. Performance is an important benefit, and subjectively either elicits joy or generates frustration—and the latter emotion is one every manufacturer should avoid. I smile and assume you will, too: iPhone 6 Plus is speedy enough, even short a couple cores compared to Nexus 6. Either scrolling or opening apps and browsers is fluid and fast.

If you're looking for benchmarks, apologies but there are none here. They are for geeks hung up comparing features rather than looking at benefits. What matters more: How the device does daily tasks that are most important to you. By that measure, I have no complaints about subjective speed. However, I would say same about iPhone 5s. If you own the device and performance is your major buying criteria, expect to be surprised by the subjective speed sameness.

The Verdict Is In
I am satisfied enough with iPhone 6 Plus and believe that most buyers will be, too. That assumes they live the Apple lifestyle, or even an Apple-Google hybrid. Make digital lifestyle and assessment of benefits you want the first reasons for choosing smartphone or tablet. Specs don't matter, and they distract from what does.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Outlook for Apple Watch is the future of Microsoft

Publié: août 7, 2015, 6:19am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Outlook for Apple Watch

Satya Nadella is a man with a formidable challenge. Microsoft CEO's predecessor, Steve Ballmer, squandered the company's mobile fortunes. From smartphone platform leader a decade ago, the software-and-services giant is a category also-ran in 2015. Microsoft has no independent mobile platform future. The war is over. There remains this: Making alliances with old enemies to preserve existing territory, while using the foothold to reach into new frontiers.

Made available August 5th, Outlook for Apple Watch is a very smart move and metaphor for what went wrong on Microsoft mobile platforms and what has to go right to preserve and extend the legacy applications stack. While Windows 10 makes its way to Lumia devices, the future is Android and iOS and how the company supports them with contextually meaningful cloud-connected apps and services.

For your information: The first subhead provides context based on my BetaNews analyses going back six years. Some readers will regard it as self-aggrandizing. I see it as providing context. But you can skip to the second subhead, which directly supports the headline's assertion

Pay Attention!

I told you so—and Microsoft over the last 10 years. Seriously, the company should look back at my past writings and make me a future consultant. Because my analysis was right many times over. While I started warning about things to come as long ago as 2004, those writings are gone from the web because the two blogs closed (one as a result of an analyst firm's acquisition and the other after the media organization downsized). Best references must be BetaNews stories starting in 2009. Let's recap using 10.

1. "If mobile-to-cloud sync is big in 2010, it's game over for Microsoft", December 2009. The analysis refers to another from a earlier where I described sync as the killer app for the connected world:

It's game over now, and Microsoft has lent Google a helping hand in self-destruction...Sync is the glue binding together cloud services and mobile devices...Where is Microsoft's sync strategy? In too many ways, it's stalled. Microsoft sync is scattered across consumer products, although it's more vertically defined in the enterprise. But even enterprise advantages can't make up for what's missing: A cohesive mobile operating system, sync service, and device strategy. Microsoft has mobile pieces in place, but it's a puzzle apart. Other companies are innovating in sync—and delivering real and useful products now—whereas Microsoft makes promises of something better to come.

Google gets sync, and Microsoft didn't but does now. In December 2010, I heralded synchronization as technology of the year. Why is sync so important? Because during the contextual cloud computing era, content matters more than applications or devices and access to it anytime, anywhere, and on anything. Microsoft previously failed because it focused too much on directly preserving its application stack—Windows, Office, Windows Server, and related server software. While technologies like ActiveSync were trendsetting, they too closely tied to the enterprise app stack.

2. "Windows Phone 7 Series is a lost cause", February 2010. Short answer, quoting from the post, because:

There is no Windows monopoly leverage to jumpstart the platform
Windows Mobile has lost too much sales and developer momentum
Android adoption— manufacturers and mobile users—is too great
Microsoft doesn't have an end-to-end software plus hardware plus services platform

I referred back to an analysis from two years earlier that is gone from the web: "Microsoft's Mobile Madness":

The future of mobiles is PC replacement. It's an inevitable outcome and one Microsoft simply isn't accepting. Microsoft's denial is madness, too.

The cellular phone market is:

Enormously bigger than that for PCs. For every PC in use there are three cell phones, based on analyst estimates.
Captive, as most people carry mobiles most of the time; but not PCs.
Personal, because people care more about their cell phones than PCs. Who asks to be buried with their computers, but it's a common request for mobiles.
More global, as more people are likely to have cell phones than PCs, particularly in emerging markets.
More connected than PCs, as cellular services reach many places than does the wired or WiFi Internet.

Data from the story: Microsoft's operating system share of the U.S. smartphone market fell from about 39 percent in June 2007 to 16.5 percent in December 2009. Meanwhile Apple's platform rose from zero to 25.5 percent during the same time period.

As I explained in the analysis, Microsoft needed its own phone, but shipping then in 2010, with a supporting app store, which Apple and Google already turned to advantage for their platforms.

3. "Microsoft's Stephen Elop moves to Nokia—what a waste", September 2010. Headline is almost explanation enough. The only context that made sense to me was Elop as Microsoft's ambassador for preparing special partnership or even a takeover.

From the story, putting past predictions into future reality, here is why you can't trust analyst crystal balls: "Gartner made a startling forecast about mobile operating systems—Android OS sales would all but catch Nokia's Symbian OS by 2014". Gartner made the prediction the day I posted; Android surpassed Symbian three months later.

4. "Nokia swaps one 'burning platform' for another in Microsoft's silent takeover of the Finnish phone maker", February 2011. Sure enough, Elop cut an exclusive deal for Microsoft's mobile platform. I explained why the deal was dumb, concluding:

Microsoft's and Nokia's responses to the changing mobile market, where Android and iOS became important operating systems in less than three years, is appalling. It's simply outrageous to assert they will cause disruption and act with speed now, given the enormous challenges a major platform switch will entail. Two burning platforms don't make one that's right.

5. "If Windows Phone is No. 2 by 2015, I'll kiss Steve Ballmer's feet", March 2011. A month after the companies cut the deal and another example of trade analyst dumb-foolery, IDC predicted that Microsoft's global smartphone OS share would reach 20.9 percent, placing it behind predicted top-ranked Android but ahead of iOS. You can read the post to find then why I thought the prediction would be wrong now.

Reality check: During first quarter 2015, Microsoft's smartphone OS share was 2.7 percent, according to IDC. Thirty-year-old movie "Back to the Future" got more right about the year 2015 than IDC's four-year forecast.

There's still time for redemption, though. In June 2012, IDC reiterated the No. 2 prediction for 2016, and I pledged to clean Steve Ballmer's toilet, if true.

6. "Nokia does the Windows Phone death dance", April 2012: ""Nokia will lose customers and market share. It's the inevitable consequence of such a massive operating system switch. Timing is terrible". Referring back to the 14-month-old deal: Elop "chucked away the most successful mobile operating system on the planet—with install base that dwarfed Android and iOS. The only thing burning about Symbian and planned successor Meego was the fire Elop set. He burned down the house—no, he nuked the city—in order to build anew".

During first quarter 2012, when the first Windows Phone handsets shipped, Nokia posted a $1.76 billion loss, while sales collapsed by 29 percent annually and 26 percent sequentially. I called Microsoft snd Nokia "misfits" two months later. Fast-forward to summer 2015, and Microsoft ends its fiscal year by writing down $7.6 billion related to the Nokia acquisition, after dismissing Elop. Microsoft's merger and painful platform transition killed Nokia.

7. "Microsoft moves your Office to the cloud", July 2012. Even while Ballmer lame-ducked the company along, the cloud strategy started shifting to something more sensible for embracing anytime, anywhere, on-anything computing and preserving the legacy applications stack. From the analysis: "The software giant is in process of completely reinventing Office for the cloud-connected device era. The new Office is just that—a new office for you to do you work. Your new cubicle is outdoors, or anywhere you want to be". That could be Windows device, Mac, or even iPhone.

The story identifies five reasons for Microsoft's cloud-connected, subscription-oriented Office suite. I will bullet-point them, but the original story provides more about each:

Maintain the relevance of the PC
Extend the Office-Windows-Windows Server apps stack to the datacenter
Take out Google Apps
Provide customers what they want most
Make money

A year later, I asserted that "Microsoft shouldn't do Office for Android", and about that I was wrong. Look to the next subhead for reasons why.

8. "Microsoft is cooler than Apple", June 2014: "The winds blow in a fresh direction, if only new Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and his leadership team can raise the sails and turn the sloop to catch the breeze. Microsoft's devices and services strategy is succeeding". Innovation is a word that isn't applied enough to Big M. But it's deserved during the mid-2010 decade, as synchronization, cloud services, and plethora of compelling contextual apps available for multiple platforms all converge together. That's without mentioning Windows 10's launch in 2015.

9. "Windows Phone is like OS X a decade ago—gaining respect, finally", July 2014. Windows as a mobile platform is wounded but not dead, and by early 2014, Microsoft started doing some things right. From the analysis:

Microsoft's efforts to tie the platform to existing strong-hold products like Exchange and Office are more sensible today than four years ago, in part because the platform and the integrated strategy around it has matured. I bought the Nokia Lumia Icon, and to my surprise really enjoy using Windows Phone 8. But I got the phone anticipating Surface Pro 3, purchased day of availability. Like someone choosing iPod and a Mac a decade ago: Product synergy.

Windows 10 and the supporting services and apps are tying together as one but extended across competing platforms. That's a recipe for reinvention and success, but beyond Lumia devices.

10. "My definition of 'modern' computing", May 2015". In a story that explains my interchange with a BetaNews reader, I explain where I see Microsoft:

I would absolutely recommend Surface Pro 3 before any Mac laptop. Touchscreen, pen, and the utility built around them is exceptional, and Microsoft's supporting cloud services offer amazing anytime, anywhere, on-anything benefits that Apple can't match. Microsoft's catch-up efforts around cloud storage, sync, and supporting services are commendable.

I should sometime soon write a news analysis about "modern" Microsoft. The company is undergoing Renaissance—real reinvention—that mostly is held back by business customers slow to change. Many never will.

Modern Microsoft

Ballmer deserves some credit for setting Nadella on the right path, after stumbling around for a decade lost, chasing Google rather than leaping around it. Windows on phones is a dead-end. Ballmer bungled badly any hope for revival. Recovery is impossible, even as mobility defines the next computing era.

No wait, what he did wrong is much worse. The former CEO ruined one of the company's three major software platforms—Windows on any device. Office and the server remain, supporting the applications stack shooting to cloud services. Windows 10 course corrects somewhat, but to what end? The PC's future is decline before the advancing mobile device horde, where Android and iOS dominate. As Windows' long success shows: Making gains against a platform with enormous market share supported by entrenched apps and loyal customers is nearly impossible. With 96-percent combined smartphone share, according to IDC, Android and iOS are unstoppable.

By the numbers, from Gartner for 2014: Among 2.38 billion devices shipped (PCs, smartphones, and tablets), only 14 percent had Windows compared to 49 percent Android or 11 percent iOS/OS X. The PC's inevitable decline is near certainty, taking along Windows. Foreshadowing: In a report released August 6, Ofcom says "UK now a smartphone society". Two-thirds of adults use smartphones, and one third of Internet users "see their smartphone as the most important device for going online, compared to 30 percent who are still sticking with their laptop".

Office Cloud. While Windows wallows, Microsoft's application platforms are in better form, despite competition from cloud or mobile apps. Much benefit comes from entrenched enterprise adoption. Then there are the habituals. For example, most of the BetaNews staff write stories in Microsoft Word, because it's what they are accustomed. I don't.

The software-and-service giant took great risks taking Office to the cloud, for many reasons. Such as: Internal execution and resistance to how people are accustomed using the software. But, overall, Office 365 is a success that extends the relevancy of the legacy app stack while creating new relevance across more devices than just the PC.

Android and iOS are key part of the broader strategy and demonstrates how necessity is the mother of innovation. If Windows mobile market share wasn't so low, and the future so grim, maybe the company would have kept to its longstanding siloed strategy of primarily favoring its own platforms. Instead, bringing Office and supporting productivity apps to all major platforms is exactly the right approach for the anytime, anywhere, on-anything computing era.

Some measure of Office 365 success, from Microsoft's fiscal 2015 annual report:

Commercial seats grew 74 percent, and Office 365 is now deployed in four out of five Fortune 500 enterprises, with more than half of that install base using premium workloads. We also added over 50,000 small-and medium-sized business customers each month...We currently have more than 15 million Office 365 consumer subscribers, with new customers signing up at a current pace of nearly one million per month. We also surpassed 150 million downloads of Office mobile to iOS and Android devices.

Based on smartphone subscriptions (2.6 billion globally) that Ericsson released in June, Office 365 could be on 5 percent of all handsets running the operating systems.

Better Together. By my count, Microsoft offers more than about 70 separate apps from the iOS store, with the majority related to content creation or information (yes, there are some games). Unless, I miscounted, the number is a wee bit greater for Android. Additionally, Excel, PowerPoint, One Drive, Outlook, Translator, and Word are among the Microsoft apps supporting Apple Watch.

That puts the company among the top developers on platforms with which it competes. By contrast, I count 55 Google apps for iPhone and none for Apple Watch. For Android: 100. From Apple: 16 for iPhone and 17 for iPad.

When you view everything as a continuum, the use of one thing to encourage the use of another and another, support for rival platforms makes sense. That's how Microsoft preserves the relevancy of products like Office—by moving existing customers to subscription sales, while winning over new users on devices that matter more than PCs.

Microsoft has long had a development philosophy at one time called "better together". The idea being Windows is good but better with Office, which is better with Exchange, which requires Windows Server—and so on. The fundamental characteristics: Better along the enterprise applications stack and best when primarily using Microsoft software or extended services.

Microsoft's colossal failure to succeed in mobile devices should have been disaster, and I'm not fully convinced it isn't averted. But the company adapted better together. By integrating around the cloud as the platform, rather than localized operating systems that the company controls, Microsoft embraces the new while extending the relevancy of the old.

The company fumbled this strategy over the course of a decade, with names like software-as-a-service, before starting to seriously take risks that turned assured obsolescence into a Hollywood-style redemption story.

Apple Watch. The challenge now: How to invade Android and iOS with platforms around which developers can independently create applications or to provide killer applications that users can't live without.

Outlook is one of Microsoft's most valuable assets, whether accessed from device or web browser. Supporting Apple Watch may be a head scratcher for some people, but the sense is clear to me. It's all about maintaining and extending cloud-connected service apps relevancy. Distinguishing this app are features Apple Watch owners using the default messenger will find familiar: Email viewing, canned replies, emojis, and voice-dictated responses.

It's all contextual, by providing what you want where you need it. Needs change with context, You might respond to an email on the golf course that otherwise could be missed or ignored. But your interaction and expectation about capabilities change on phone or PC.

Outlook for Apple Watch represents Microsoft's future. As a broader service, I find Outlook to easily offer better benefits than Gmail, although I'm no fan of Microsoft's cluttered, cumbersome desktop client. Coincidentally, over the weekend, I will decide where to move my domain primarily used for email; migrating from Google Apps. I can put up with Gmail for free, but not if I'm paying. Maybe Microsoft will get my hosting.

Wrapping up, if Microsoft really wants to be disruptive in a way the benefits its interests and that of existing and potential customers, platform invasion must be the browser. Bring forth Edge for Android and iOS. Chrome could use some serious competition on Google's turf. Let Edge cut competitors deep.

Hey, just suggesting.

5 things I don't like about Apple Watch

Publié: août 5, 2015, 6:01am CEST par Joe Wilcox

About two weeks ago, I shared how Apple Watch tickles my fancy. From likes, we go to dislikes, and keeping with the other I purposely limit the number to five. Quick recap: I bought the aluminum model on June 18, 2015 from the local Apple Store. Seven days later, I exchanged for the stainless steel variant. Except to charge or to shower, I've worn it constantly since.

Broadly, my feelings about the smartwatch are mixed. The delivered benefits are excellent, but they aren't enough to justify the lofty price. If not for using MacBook Pro and iPhone 6 Plus this summer, Android Wear and iOS incompatibilities, or the promise of watchOS 2 coming early autumn, I would not have purchased the device. I'm not dissatisfied with Apple Watch, but want more from it. As I explained on July 18, the measure of success or failure isn't sales but returns. I kept mine. How many early buyers didn't?

Three questions are important when evaluating a gadget's worth:

Did you keep it?
Do you use it?
Do you enjoy it?

I can answer affirmatively to all three. But there's another: Do you want more from the deice—particularly compared to others? Yes answer is why we have a list of dislikes. The Apple faithful call the smartwatch perfect, and that may be true for Kool-Aid drinkers. Everyone else, I dunno. Let's proceed with my deliberately short list:

1. Cost is too high for device and wristbands. Apple Watch starts at $349 and sells for as much as $17,000. Unless you have a small wrist, the least you would pay is $399. The Sport model, available for both prices, is made of aluminum with muted finish. Default bands aren't very classy for the price: Blue, green, prink, and white when purchased with the silver timepiece or black with the Space Gray. The straps are made of fluoroelastomer, which is a fancy name for synthetic rubber.

The better choice, stylistically, IMHO, is the steel model, which starts at $549 for silver and sells for as much as $1,099 for black with black link-style band. The silver's shiny case and trendy, but subtle, accents are aesthetically more pleasing than the aluminum model. But, functionally, the watches are identical. You pay more for style, better band choices, and sapphire crystal.

As for the watch straps, six varieties are available. The fako rubber is $49. For basic leather or stainless steel, Apple charges $149 (cough, cough). Fancier dead animal skin is $249 (choke, choke), while linked-style metal is $449. Granted, Apple makes changing bands so simple it's scary, which increases options for third-party straps.

Is this too much to pay? Do the math, and call me an ass for buying one of these thangs. Apple Watch is meant as an iPhone companion. But on 2-year contract, the smartphone sells for considerably less—$199 or $299, respectively, for 16GB or 64GB storage—than the smartwatch. How dumb a deal is that?

2. Apple Watch with sapphire crystal is difficult to read in bright sunlight. I can attest from experience that the cheaper, aluminum model has superior screen for use outdoors. While Ion-X glass may not be as tough resisting scratches from bumps or other everyday wear, it is less reflective and more viewable than Apple's alternative.

Even in regular room light, the stainless steel smartwatch looks dimmer to my aging eyes. DisplayMate offers superb study explaining the differences, and why what I anecdotally observe is scientifically explained. Snippet: "If you were to hold up two identical watches side-by-side, the one with a glass crystal would be about 20-percent brighter than the one with sapphire (due to fundamental principles of optics that reduce its light transmission), so it appears somewhat darker and duller, particularly because the light has to pass through the crystal twice".

The difference is so profound, and because I live in sunny San Diego, I considered switching back to aluminum early in my 14-day buyer's remorse period.

3. Contextual benefits are deficient compared to Android Wear and Google Now. This is something Apple promises to fix, if only in part, with watchOS 2. But today, Siri still sucks, and her piss-poor responses to easy queries are more painfully annoying from the wrist. I say that because questions asked to the watch typically are contextual. Meaning: They relate to something I am doing or someplace I am going and warrant immediate attention.

Apple Watch demands much more user intervention than does Android Wear by design. The company cofounded by Steve Jobs has emphasized fingers and touch as major design ethic since the original Macintosh 31 years ago. By contrast, context is core to Google's corporate culture and design philosophy, and it pervades everything. (Hey, what's more contextual than search and the paid links or ads wrapped around the results?) Touchless interaction (e.g. voice) is superior on Android Wear devices compared to Apple Watch, which for some operations requires thumb and finger because of the crown. Really? This is innovation with benefits?

Additionally, Google Now proactively provides useful information, like unprompted alerts about time to drive home or the current weather. The difference: Taking into account where you are and what you might need. That said, there is something spooky about Now that makes me wonder about all the personal information Google collates and ties into its service to offer superior contextual experience (e.g., what you want, where you want). But what do we give up to get it?

4. Personalization is limited. Would you like to swap out the watch face on your Apple smart wrist wear? You can count choices on both hands. Google gives third-parties free reign to create custom faces and sell them from the Play store. Most are affordable (typically free or 99 cents), and they are an Android army of choices. I count 30 rows of 7 watch faces to choose from. Apple gives you nine, and seven more are expected with watchOS 2. Mmm, 200-plus or nine? Which of those is more? Some of the faces are attractive, while many others also display contextually useful information.

Muncha, muncha, muncha, you could have PacMan, Despicable Me, or napping cap on your watch. Maybe you'd like the face to display 500px photos, star maps, or visual sunrise and sunset animation. Your timepiece can look classic, minimalist, modern, retro, or techno without purchasing multiple timepieces (as some people do).

Before fanboys fume, yes, Apple offers some content personalization for its own watch faces. But that's far away from feeling like you have a new timepiece every day because of the many choices Android Wear gets. That said, circling back to #3, the best way to put contextually relevant information on your Apple Watch is to use the limited personalization choices that the bitten-fruit logo company provides.

Something else: Apple's personal assistant is so doofus at her job, I want to fire her. If I can't, then let me address her differently. i would want to personalize "Hey, Siri" to "Siri, you ignorant slut". But, I am denied (and so are you).

5. Battery life is good, but not great. My Apple Watch demands recharging every 18-40 hours, depending on use, with one full rotation `round the sun being typical. All modern smartwatches suffer short spans before batteries drain down. Apple Watch is above average, in my testing, particularly considering how much can be done with apps on the phone. But the fruit-logo company's apps obsession cuts to the core functionality. A device should do what it's designed to very well. Heavy apps usage can burn down the charge faster such that sometimes Apple Watch can't make a full work day of use.

Balance is a fundamental design attribute. The best devices balance features against benefits and don't sacrifice core functionality during normal use. If the battery dies sooner than your reasonable daily need, the device's design is flawed. I wouldn't apply that extreme to Apple Watch. Yet. But my expectation, as yours may be, from a life wearing analog: Put on the timepiece and worry about the battery every few years.

And finally...The list of things I like about Apple Watch exceeds that I don't. The so-so contextual utility irks, but watchOS 2 may be the solution. Most of my dislikes could be turned around. For example, Apple could lower the price, offer more contextual services, and extend personalization options. Even battery life could be improved through software optimization. The overly reflective sapphire crystal is more challenging, however.

Measure of worth: I use Apple Watch throughout the day—for many more needs than checking the time. I will explain further when writing my eventual, full review.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

I bought a Windows 10 PC, but not for me

Publié: juillet 30, 2015, 7:18pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Inspiron 15 Touch

My brother-in-law's Dell laptop, so old it shipped with, and still had, 1GB RAM, died last week. He emailed asking my buying advice about a Windows 7 replacement. Reasoning: He would move up from XP. But his dad stepped in, offered to pay, and I, acting as agent (being the more knowledgable about computers), suggested $400 budget. By coincidence, shopping day coincided with Windows 10's launch.

Timing couldn't be better, with the rush of new 10s, discounts to clear out old inventory, and typical back-to-school season sales. I expected to grab good gear. Choosing for my brother-in-law is quite different than for myself. I prefer something smaller and lighter, with high-resolution screen. He wanted a larger screen (we agreed on 15.6 inches), full-size keyboard, DVD player, and WiFi. Meaning: Roomy and backward-compatible with what he has already. I confidently looked for something within budget.

I won't detail the whole exploratory process, which spanned Amazon, Microsoft Store, and many other online retail shops. I ended up seriously looking at Dell, for price, configurations, and his familiarity with the brand.

Dude, You're Getting...

For years, I have claimed that refurbished makes used better than new. Dell Outlet typically offers big bang for the buck. Some systems were returned, others come from cancelled orders. But all are discounted. I searched the store, expecting to purchase there.

I gravitated towards the Inspiron 15 Touch, which topped the budget, at $459. Config: 15.6-inch touchscreen (1366 x 768 resolution); 1.7GHz Intel Core i3-4010U processor (4th gen); 500GB hard drive; 4GB DDR3L RAM; Intel HD Graphics; DVD writer/player; and Windows 8.1. The resolution is too low for my tastes, particularly on such a large screen. buy I wasn't buying for myself. I would want more RAM, too. But my brother-in-law would move up from an ancient laptop. I expected, and we'll see when the thang arrives, he will wow because of the bigger display, touch capabilities, faster performance, and Modern UI. Buy what the recipient needs, not what you want.

Because the system exceeded the budget, and it was Windows 10 launch day, I stepped back from the Outlet and looked for new. What a surprise I got. The entry-level newer model cost less and gave more. Dell's base configuration for the 15 Touch was discounted (when aren't the PCs, eh) by $200 to $399.99. Dell has a "10 Days of Windows 10" promotion going. We'll see if prices really go up on the 11th day.

Config for the new laptop, the Inspiron 15 5000 Series Touch: 15.6-inch touchscreen (1366 x 768 resolution); 2.1GHz Intel Core i3-5010U processor (5th gen); 500GB hard drive; 4GB DDR3L RAM; Intel HD Graphics; DVD writer/player; and Windows 10.

The processor and operating system are the major differences—and price. I considered going over-budget to add more memory, but he can do that later. One-hundred dollars is pricey for another 4GB; no thanks, Dell. But I do appreciate the free shipping, which reduced my father-in-law's sticker shock (I exaggerate) for sales tax taking the purchase over-budget by $27 and some change.

My brother-in-law does want Office, and I could have added Office 365 Personal for another $49.99. But I've got an unused license hanging around that I got with another Windows PC purchase last summer. He can have that. Dell also offered an 8-inch tablet for 100 bucks, or half off, which I passed on.

This will be a big upgrade for my brother-in-law, and I may follow up with a story about his reaction. Depends on whether he would or not object.

Back-to-School Surprise

Microsoft releases rarely coincide with back-to-school season, and it's about fraking time for change. Windows 8 launched in late October 2008. Win7 and 8.1 also had October releases, in 2009 and 2013, respectively. Vista was way worse, with Microsoft launching after Holiday 2006. How the frak do you miss Christmas? Windows XP was another October affair. Each and every one missed the students, whom I presume Microsoft doesn't want carrying Chromebooks or Macs to class during the 2015-16 school year.

If you asked me last week, whether or not I would buy a Windows 10 PC on launch day, the answer would have been "No". What an unexpected surprise. I picked it and initially paid for it. My brother-in-law really would have been happy with Windows 7, or so he says. He can fall back to Desktop mode for a little of that.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Say, we've got a poll that's live asking whether or not you will upgrade to Windows 10, either straight up on the PC you have or by buying a new one. I've embedded the poll above. As I write, there are 380 responses. Among them, 56 percent are in a hurry. They will upgrade as soon as they can, either when Microsoft lets them or by buying preloaded PC. More than 70 percent plan to upgrade sometime. Among the No answers, 17 percent will keep what they have got, and another 3 percent don't use Windows.

Please answer the poll and, if you already upgraded, please share something about your experience in comments.

Footnote: After I finished writing this story, around 12:40 p.m. EDT, I returned to Dell's website looking for art of the Inspiron 15 Touch to illustrate this post. Dell offers another configuration, for $100 less, that wasn't there 90 minutes earlier. How funny! Paying $299.99, you step down to the Intel 3205U Celeron. processor.

What did Tim Cook REALLY say about Apple Watch sales?

Publié: juillet 22, 2015, 10:31pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Today's question: Is Apple's CEO hiding weak smartwatch sales or does he demonstrate transcending leadership by positioning for greater platform success—taking the long view? The answer lies perhaps in his comments made during yesterday's fiscal Q3 earnings conference call.

In data released today, Strategy Analytics puts Apple Watch shipments at 4 million for the April quarter. Yesterday, Canalys gave estimate that is 200,000 units higher. Posting to BetaNews just minutes ago, analyst Sameer Singh calculates 3 million devices shipped and 2.5 million sold. Apple doesn't share the real numbers that it surely has. In chief executive Tim Cook's remarks that follow, there are hints—but little more. Something he says later in the conference call is quite provocative; genius and contrary-logistics-thinking. Either he's hiding or abiding.

The Conference Call

Let's begin with Cook's canned remarks given easy-on. They are edited to remove natural pauses like "ah". He is all praise about how great are Apple Watch sales, without disclosing anything quantifiable:

A major highlight of the past quarter for all of us here at Apple was the launch of Apple Watch in April. As you know, we've been very excited to get this revolutionary product to customers. We started taking preorders in nine countries on April 10, and demand immediately exceeded supply by a wide margin.

To prioritize those first orders and to deliver the best experience for our customers, we delayed the availability of Apple Watch in our own retail stores until mid-June. We made huge progress with the production ramp across the quarter and near the end of the quarter expanded into six additional countries—and in just the past few days, we've been able to catch up with demand, enabling us to expand Apple Watch availability to a total of 19 countries currently with three more countries to be added at the end of this month.

The feedback from Apple Watch customers is incredibly positive, and we've been very happy with customer satisfaction and usage statistics. Market research from Wristly measured a 97-percent customer satisfaction rate for Apple Watch, and we hear from people every day about the impact it's having on their health, their daily routines, and how they communicate. Our own market research shows that 94 percent of Apple Watch owners wear and use it regularly, if not every day.

Messaging and activity features are among the most popular, and social networking apps including Twitter, WeChat, and LINE are seeing the most usage among third-party apps.

We believe that the possibilities for Apple Watch are enormous and that's been reinforced in just the first few weeks since it became available to customers. For example, doctors and researchers at leading hospitals in the U.S. and Europe are already putting Apple Watch to work in improving patients' lives. Nebraska Medicine, the latest hospital to adopt Apple Watch, has rolled out new apps that facilitate communication between patients and doctors and provide quick access to important chart and dosage information.

Ochsner Health System of Louisiana is using Apple Watch with hypertension patients to gather important information like daily activity and blood pressure level, and leading cancer centers like London King's College Hospital are incorporating Apple Watch into trials for ongoing care and monitoring of cancer patients.

Great Apple Watch solutions go well beyond healthcare. Users are tracking their fitness, getting breaking news alerts, following their investments, connecting with friends, and living a healthier day. The user experience for Apple Pay and Siri is nothing short of incredible, and customers are enjoying countless other features through the over 8,500 third-party apps available for Apple Watch.

This is just the beginning of what this new platform can deliver. With Apple watchOS 2, developers now have the ability to build richer and more powerful native apps for Apple Watch, taking advantage of the heart-rate sensor, the Digital Crown, accelerometer, and more, ushering in a whole new class of apps designed specifically for the wrist.

During the Q&A, Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster asked what surely his colleagues also wondered about: "The watch has been under a lot of interest from investors and some may have wanted a little bit more. You outlined some of the opportunities and some of the progress you've had. But any thoughts that you have for investors who may say that the category is just not taking off as fast as they would have hoped?"

Cook answered:

As you know, we made a decision back in September, quite several months ago, not to disclose the shipments on the watch; and that was not a matter of not being transparent, it was a matter of not giving our competition insight that's a product that we've worked really hard on.

However, let me give you some color so to avoid reaching sort of a wrong conclusion. If you look at the Other products category and look at the revenue in this category, it would not be an accurate thing to just look at the sequential change or the year-over-year change and assume that were the total watch revenue because the aggregate balance of that category, both sequentially and year over year, is shrinking. Obviously iPod is a part of that, but there are other things in there, accessories and so forth, that are shrinking.

Secondly, to provide a bit more color, sales of the watch did exceed our expectations and they did so despite supply still trailing demand at the end of the quarter; and to give you a little additional insight, through the end of the quarter, in fact the Apple Watch sell-through was higher than the comparable launch periods of the original iPhone or the original iPad—and we were able to do that with having only 680 points of sale; and, as you probably know, as I had reviewed earlier, the online sales were so great at the beginning, we were not able to feed inventory to our stores until mid-June; and so those points of sale pretty much, the overwhelming majority of the low numbers of sales were not there until the last two weeks of the quarter; and so as I look at all of these things, we feel really great about how we did.

Now our objective for the quarter wasn't primarily sales. Beyond the very good news on sales, we're more excited about how the product is positioned for the long-term because we're starting a new category; and as I back up and look at this, we have 8,500 apps.

We've already announced the next operating system, watchOS 2. It will bring native apps which are going to be killer to the watch. Even though the store layout was delayed, we've learned a lot about the buying experience. Based on that experience, we're now planning to expand our channel before the holiday because we're convinced that the watch is going to be one of the top gifts of the holiday season.

Now most importantly of all of this is that customer-sat is off the charts because we've constantly seen if you can get the customer-sat off the charts you can wind up doing fairly well over time. We've also learned a lot about managing quite an assortment and so forth; and so I sort of back up and look at this and I feel fantastic about what the team has done and delivered and I know I never go anywhere without the watch and it's not because I'm the CEO of Apple. I'm that attached to it, and I get lots of notes from a lot of people that feel the same way; and so that's how I look at the watch.

Later in the call, Cook said: "On the watch, our June sales were higher than April or May. I realize that's very different than what some of the, is being written, but the June sales were the highest, and so the watch had a more of a back-ended kind of a skewing".

What Does It Mean?

You can judge the comments for yourself, but consider this: Apple breaks out performance for iPad, iPhone, Mac, and Services. The company stopped separately reporting iPod as sales declined but also for retail stores, even as their revenues rise. Cook and Company choose not to reveal Apple Watch sales, and the competitive-intelligence reason rings hallow given the long-standing propensity to boast shipment numbers for new products—particularly those entering or creating new categories.

One interpretation is easy: The smartwatch's early sales performance is tepid, which if disclosed could create negative perceptions about Apple's future during the post-Steve Jobs era and Cook's first big product launch. By another measure, Cook also said that "our objective for the quarter wasn't primarily sales", which is a great excuse for weak performance. Doh, of course, Apple cares about sales—otherwise why charge premium prices that generate nearly 40 percent gross margin?

Another interpretation is reasonable: The chief executive, in context, emphasized the importance of "how the product is positioned for the long-term, because we're starting a new category". Sales will come later, as the platform goes. Assuming he is being straight, then sales really might not be the early priority, as Apple seeks to build out an ecosystem. In the context of platform-building, withholding sales data really could about competitive intelligence.

That said, platforms need apps and adopters. People generally don't adopt if there are no apps, and developers don't create apps if there is no demand. It's a longstanding chicken-and-egg problem—which comes first: Apps or users? Apple has some leverage from iPhone, but other than, say, HealthKit no real compelling killer app. By contrast, Google Now is a fantastic killer app for Android Wear, which vested hardware partners are many to Apple's one.

The brings Apple to platform building, extending from watchOS 2, and preparing for holiday sales. My prediction: The device fails or sails during the Christmas quarter.

In the present, I see no other conclusion than Apple is hiding smartwatch sales data. The question: From whom? Is it Wall Street or wearable competitors? Or even both? Your answer?

Apple withholds smartwatch sales data

Publié: juillet 21, 2015, 10:57pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

All eyes turned to Apple this afternoon as the world's most profitable tech company announced the first full quarterly results that include its smartwatch. You could hear a collective pin drop across the Internet as U.S. stock markets closed and everyone waited wondering: Flop or Not?

We don't know. In the press release, CEO Tim Cook refers to the "great start for Apple Watch", but there's no data in the PR or in the 8-K filing with the SEC. The device fits into the "Other" category. During Cook's earnings conference call opening remarks hard data also is lacking.

Feedback from Apple Watch customers is very positive, Cook tells financial analysts today. Ninety-four percent wear their timepieces regularly, if not every day, he asserts. The potential for Apple Watch is "enormous", and he calls launching the product a "privilege", praising its use for cancer research, and touting the promise of Apple Pay and Siri.

Responding to an analyst asking for clarification that might quell investors' concerns following a series of recent speculative news stories about weak sales, the CEO reiterates: "We made a decision not to disclose shipments on the watch".

Cook roundabout refers to "Other", saying it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that all the growth came from Apple Watch. The category generated $2.64 billion in revenue, up 49 percent annually and 56 percent sequentially in fiscal Q3. During the previous quarter, "Other" generated $1.7 billion, down 10 percent year over year and 37 percent month on month.

"Sales of the watch did exceed our expectations", and sell-through exceeded launch of the original iPhone and iPad, Cook says. "We feel really great about what we did". He emphasizes that sales are not Apple's primary objective but positioning the platform, particularly for later in 2015. "We're convinced the watch is going to be one of the top gifts for the holidays".

In response to another analyst question: "June sales were the highest" compared to April and May, Cook emphasizes. Such trend suggests accelerating demand as supplies strengthen and sales channels expand.

Answers from Elsewhere

Nevertheless lack of quantifiable data is disconcerting. Apple Watch is the first truly new category device to arrive during Cook's tenure. The gadget's measure of failure, or success, reflects upon his ability to lead Apple, as an innovation disruptor, during the post-Steve Jobs era. In business, perception is everything. How investors perceive Cook and Apple's future matters, particularly with more than two-thirds of revenues coming from iPhone, which sells into a rapidly saturating market.

The company's previously-stated excuse, withholding smartwatch sales data to keep others from gaining competitive intelligence, applies. But it could be used for any Apple product. So why not one "Other" category for all? But the approach makes sense if the company is concerned about how Apple Watch sales numbers might be perceived. Some critics will say Apple hides a weak launch, but, if you accept Cook's statement about positioning the platform, withholding numbers makes sense another way: Allow the company to build out the platform without distracting criticism. There is great difference between outside interference in the absence of data versus that which is the record. Which will be fiercely debated in the days ahead by analysts, bloggers, investors, and journalists.

Ahead of the earning's announcement, Canalys released its estimate: 4.2 million shipped, which aligned with Wall Street analyst consensus.

The road to ruin, or success, depending on how you interpret the lack of sales data, is a long one. Apple announced the smartwatch in early September 2014, preorders opened April 10, 2015, and sales started two weeks later.

Between the unveiling and the selling, much punditry filled in the gaps. For example, some of ours:

"5 key reasons why you shouldn't buy an Apple Watch", Manish Singh (3/4/15)
"Apple carves itself a niche at the top of the market with Apple Watch", Mark Wilson (3/9/15)
"Apple Pay is the reason Apple Watch won't fail", Matt Trevathan (3/12/15)
"Apple Watch's potential profits are scary", Joe Wilcox (3/16/15)
"What could you buy for the price of Apple Watch?", Joe Wilcox (3/25/15)
"The Apple Watch launch is a brand-damaging botch job", Wayne Williams (4/16/15)
"Tim Cook's Apple is all about fashion", David Molofsky (4/20/15)
"The reasons why Apple Watch will succeed", Sam Pudwell (5/11/15)
"Apple Watch sales are a disaster", Mark Wilson (7/08/15)
"5 things I like about Apple Watch", Joe Wilcox (7/18/15)

In the absence of hard data, expect lots of speculation about sales, particularly as smartwatch competition increases.

Of note, and it may not be related to Apple Watch: The company's shares are down about 7 percent in after-hours trading as I complete this news analysis' final update around 6:25 p.m. EDT.

Photo Credit: Shinya Suzuki

Apple Q3 2015 by the numbers: $49.6B revenue, $1.85 EPS

Publié: juillet 21, 2015, 10:47pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

After the closing bell today, Apple announced results for fiscal third quarter, which largely is congruent with calendar Q2 (End date, April 27). Broadly: $49.6 billion in sales, $10.7 billion net income, and $1.85 earnings per share. Year over year, revenue rose 33 percent and EPS by 45 percent. Apple guidance before the big reveal: Between $46 billion and $48 billion revenue. Wall Street consensus was $49.31 billion sales and $1.81 EPS. The Street's estimates ranged from $46.9 billion to $53.64 billion.

Gross margin reached 39.7 percent compared to 39.4 percent annually and 40.8 percent sequentially. Company guidance: 38.5 percent to 39.5 percent. Once again, international sales accounted for most of the quarter's sales: 64 percent, which is up from 59 percent the previous year but down from 69 percent three months earlier.

Official guidance for fiscal Q4: Between $49 billion and $51 billion revenue and 38.5 percent to 39.5 percent gross margin.

Device shipments for fiscal third quarter: iPad, 10.9 million; iPhone, 47.5 million; Mac, 4.78 million.

Apple ended the quarter with $202 billon in cash and securities. with 89 percent kept offshore.

The iPhone Dilemma

While Apple Watch distracts many, ah, Apple watchers, iPhone demands greater attention. The smartphone sells into a rapidly saturating category and accounts for the vast majority of company revenues. After years of double-digit sales growth, largely spurred by smartphones, the breaks are on. Gartner predicts sales growth slowing to 3.3 percent this year. The big problem is the world's largest smartphone market.

"The global market has been affected by a weaker performance in China", Annette Zimmermann, Gartner research director, says in a statement. "We have witnessed fewer and fewer first-time buyers in China, a sign that the mobile phone market in there is reaching saturation". Key to continued success: replacement buyers looking for premium-quality upgrades. That's Apple's category.

The company already is cashing in. During first calendar quarter 2015, smartphone growth slowed into the single digits in China, according to Canalys. However, Apple's position strengthened against local rivals Huawei and Xiaomi, while shipment volumes hit two-year lows for Lenovo, Yulong, and ZTE. “Consumers are losing their appetite for ultra-low-cost devices, as expectations increase in line with spending power and, combined with rising market saturation, this is resulting in a major shift to devices that provide better user experience", Jingwen Wang, Canlys analyst, says in a statement.

However, new sales growth will come in countries where low-cost and flexible terms, such as unlocked, non-contract devices supporting multiple SIM cards, matter. That's a category where Apple shuts itself out. Many device makers "will be challenged to quickly enhance their expansion into emerging markets outside of China", Zimmermann says.

Despite, analyst doomsaying, during fiscal Q3, iPhone "gained share in all of our geographic segments", Cook tells financial analysts today. Android switcher-rate is the highest ever measured by Apple. In China, iPhone sales soared by 87 percent.

Segment Breakdown

iPhone. Apple would be no juggernaut without iPhone, which accounted for stunning 63 percent of revenues—that's up from 52.7 percent 12 months earlier. The company shipped 47.5 million iPhones. Wall Street consensus: 49 million. The smartphone generated $31.37 billion in sales. Year over year, revenue rose by 59 percent and unit shipments by 35 percent. However, sequentially, both declined by 22 percent.

Average selling price was $660, up $99 year over year, offset by $24 in foreign-exchange rates. Meaning: ASP growth could have been much higher. Sequentially, the number is up by just $1.

iPad. By contrast, Apple's tablet business stumbled again—and by quick examination trails the path of iPod following iPhone's release. Ironically, the mobile handset undermines the slate, too. Apple shipped 10.9 million iPads, down 18 percent year over year and 13 percent quarter on quarter. Revenue reached $4.54 billion, down 23 percent annually and 16 percent sequentially. Wall Street consensus: 11 million.

Despite apparent category weakness, "I am still bullish on iPad", Cook says, referring to new features coming in iOS 9, enterprise adoption, and consumer upgrades. "I see a lot of runway".

Apple Watch. The company's wearable has no comparison, in its first full quarter of sales, which data was withheld. There are no immediate plans to do otherwise, Cook tells a financial analyst asking for something that might quell investors made jittery by recent news reports claiming weak sales.

"We made a decision not to disclose shipments on the watch", Cook reiterates, claiming that's not lack of transparency. But he throws out a bone to a gnaw. It wouldn't be unreasonable to look at the "Other" category and assume that all the growth came from Apple Watch, the CEO says.

During fiscal Q3, the category generated $2.64 billion, up 49 percent annually and 56 percent sequentially. Three months earlier, "Other" generated $1.7 billion, down 10 percent year over year and 37 percent month on month. From that perspective, it could be argued that the smartwatch contributed about $1 billion in additional revenue. If that's failure, lots of companies would like it.

"Sales of the watch did exceed our expectations", Cook affirms, with sell-through exceeding launch of the original iPhone and iPad. "We feel really great about what we did". He emphasizes that sales are not Apple's primary objective but positioning the platform, particularly for the future. "We're convinced the watch is going to be one of top gifts for the holidays".

Feedback from Apple Watch customers is very positive, Cook emphasizes. Ninety-four percent wear their timepieces regularly, if not every day. The potential for Apple Watch is "enormous", and he calls launching the product a "privilege".

Mac. The PC business, while declining, remains remarkably robust. Apple shipped 4.8 million Macs, generating $6.03 billion revenue. Both rose by 9 percent year over year and 5 percent and 7 percent, respectively, month on month. Wall Street analysts expected 4.8 million.

Services. The category is among Apple's rising stars, as music and other cloud services revenues increase. For the quarter: $5.03 billion, up 12 percent annually and 1 percent sequentially. Among the standouts: App Store had its best quarter ever, with revenue up 24 percent.

Note: As I complete the final update this news analysis, around 7:25 p.m. EDT, Apple shares are down nearly 7 percent in after-hours trading.

Photo credit: Andrey Bayda / Shutterstock.com

5 things I like about Apple Watch

Publié: juillet 18, 2015, 9:27pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

In another universe, I don't own Apple Watch. Either LG Watch Urbane or Moto 360 adorns my wrist. But in this one, I not only sold my soul to the bitten-fruit logo company but I grew to enjoy the servitude. Thirty-three days after purchasing the smartwatch, I can express satisfaction, even if sometimes muted, with the user experience.

I prefer Android Wear for its fantastic contextual utility, but find greater overall usability and positive emotional response from living with Apple Watch. As expressed in the previous post, I suspect that returns rates may be high for this device—at least compared to others that Apple produces. The real measure of any product's success is: 1) Did you keep it?; 2) Do you use it?; 3) Do you enjoy it?

So, what do I like about Apple Watch? Here's a deliberate, and not inclusive, shortlist:

1. Feels and looks good on the wrist. This attribute applies to the stainless steel Apple Watch more than the aluminum Sport. The shinier finish and subtle changes in detail make for classier wristwear. Round has always been my preferred timepiece shape but I grew to appreciate the rectangle within just a few days.

Here's the thing: I enjoy looking at my wrist to check the time or notifications. Sometimes, I flip my wrist just to gawk. Appearance is a user benefit Apple gets that too many gadget makers don't.

2. The OS user interface. It's pretty and surprisingly functional, despite unnecessary dependence on crown and button. All interaction should take place on the screen, which is highly responsive to touch. Accuracy matters when tapping numbers for password or tiny app icons.

Here's the thing: I enjoy interacting with watchOS compared to Android Wear, for esthetic and functional reasons. In my early Apple Watch assessment, I balked about too many prompts to view or taps to make. But over longer period using the device, the UI's utility makes more sense and more sweetly satisfies. Stated differently: Benefits balance, an attribute's importance I already explained in context of iPhone 6.

But UI is bigger than the device, which is where the wristwear stumbles. On Android timepieces, Google's contextual cloud proactively provides information without your asking. For example: Looking at the time and seeing a Google Now notice informing the minutes to drive home. Apple's excellent UI experience is too bound to the device, something watchOS 2 promises to remedy—at least in part.

3. Text messaging. There is nothing remarkable about Apple Watch's ability to receive and send texts. Other smartwatches do this, too. In my early assessment, I found the utility cumbersome compared to Android Wear, seeing swiping action as better UI implementation. But over time, I find Apple's presentation to be better and more responsive to user interaction.

I spend less time messing around with texts, which is valuable if responding in the car at a stoplight or in the presence of someone else. Meaning: minimized disruption, in part because of UI utility on the rectangular screen, canned responses to send, and overall responsiveness to touch (the persistent lag I experienced on both the 360 and Urbane is missing).

Voice responsiveness. for responding to texts, and for anything else, is more accurate than either of the Android Wear timepieces, too. I rarely experience what was frequent on either: Say one thing, but something else sends because speech-to-text messaging is inaccurate.

4. Phone calling. I feel like a total geek talking to my wrist. But, goddamn, if this feature isn't beneficial. I don't use a Bluetooth earpiece, in part because constantly wearing one strikes me as rude and the thang looks nerdy. But I will answer a call on my watch, say, while driving. Glancing briefly at my wrist and tapping to respond keeps my eyes and hands in the plane where they already are.

Last week, while giving the cat some outdoor time in our apartment building's center courtyard, my sister rang. But, whoa, the phone was upstairs, and presumably out of Bluetooth range, in my office on the charger. I was surprised to see the phone call coming in over Apple Watch, but answered and we chatted for about 10 minutes.

Something else: It's very convenient to dismiss a call from the wrist. I don't have to fumble for the phone, which can disrupt the communication with the person with whom I am present. Tapping the watch to dismiss a call also communicates something to the living being right there: You matter more, which means something in this age of smartphone obsession and distraction.

5. Haptic alerts. Frak, if the tactile response isn't beneficial, if at times distracting. The most surprising lesson came recently while using Apple Maps to pick up moving boxes for my daughter. I accessed the app on iPhone 6, but also got that little tremble from the watch when time to turn came.

The feature offers many other benefits, some subtle. For example, days ago I finally set up some of the HealthKit features. Now, every so often, Apple Watch prompts me to stand up, using pleasing but fairly quiet pop-chime and tremble to the wrist.

Stated differently: Haptics prompt you without necessarily alerting or disturbing other people around you. That goes to a much deeper design ethic that is pervasive throughout the UI and UX: Alert your attention with minimal disruption to you and other people with whom you are present. This philosophy also reduces how often iPhone distracts you from things or persons with which you are engaged with there and then. Rather than pull out the smartphone, you feel the timepiece's haptics and respond with the taptics; quickly and quietly.

What's the 1960s song lyric? "Love the one you're with". Haptics in context of the entire UI design ethic is: "Be with the one you're with".

And finally...I miss Apple Watch when it's not on my wrist, which says much about the overall benefits. That said, expect a future post explaining what I don't like about the smart timepiece. There you may learn why apps, social sharing, and some other highly-marketed features don't make this list.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Did you buy and return Apple Watch?

Publié: juillet 18, 2015, 8:42pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Apple announces on Tuesday quarterly results that will for the first time include its wearable. Already, ahead of the big day, speculation soars about Apple Watch sales. Expect drama for sure, as CEO Time Cook explains how supply shortages constrained availability, leaving investors with more questions than answers.

I am more interested in data the company likely won't reveal: return rates. I took back two. The first: I ordered online but sales started, after long delay, in the retail store before the device arrived. Rather than wait another week, I bought there and later returned the other, which the shop specialist sold seconds afterwards to a family that had come in looking for Apple Watch only to be told the Sport sold out. The second: A week later, I exchanged the aluminum timepiece for stainless steel. How many other people returned one for another because of taste or altogether because of dislike? The measure of Apple Watch success is percentage of returns.

In the United States, during 2014, "returns as a percent of total sales" was 8.89 percent, according to research conducted by the Retail Equation and the National Retail Federation. Stated differently: "Total merchandise returns account for more than $280 billion in lost sales for U.S. retailers.This size is overwhelming; if merchandise returns were a retailer it would rank No. 2 on the Stores Top 100 retailers list—three times the size of the current No. 2 retailer".

Apple Watch risks returns rates that could be as high or higher because, in part:

Apple Store's willingness to accept returns is quite generous, and in my experience greater for the smartwatch than other products.
Early on, many buyers bought sight unseen, or with limited in-store interaction, because sales were online only. While a gadget, a smartwatch also is jewelry. How people feel about the appearance will matter, particularly considering selling prices starting at $349 and ranging to $17,000.
The device is first generation in a new category for Apple. As such, many buyers may expect one thing based on marketing but get another, particularly when weighing overlapping benefits with smartphones they always carry against out-of-pocket cost for a companion device that exceeds what they paid for the cellular handsets.

Early Returns

Google "Apple Watch return rates" for a gander at what might be. Not surprisingly, the search engine places high-traffic blogs first:

Venture Beat: "30 days later, I’m returning my Apple Watch"—and that's Mark Sullivan's review too! Bottom line: "I decided that the Apple Watch doesn’t quite earn its place on my wrist. While I appreciate the elegant design of both the hardware and the software, I really don’t miss the Watch when I’m not wearing it".

Money: "Why I’m Returning My Apple Watch". "I’m not saying the Apple Watch is overall a bad product. It’s just not for me. Not yet", Evan Niu writes. "Even though I’m returning this one, I’m confident that I’ll buy the next one—and keep it". Yeah, yeah.

New York Post: "The Apple Watch is so bad, I had to return it". "It was a fun two weeks, but it’s over", Hailey Eber writes. "I loved him for who he might be, but not who he was — which, as any therapist worth her co-pay will tell you, is bad".

Honestly, I initially shared their collective, meh, particularly after using LG Watch Urbane and Moto 360. Android Wear gives better, and more meaningful, contextual user experience. Google Now is great, and Siri still sucks. But the few things I like, matched with my summer sojourn running iOS 9 and El Capitan public betas ahead of full reviews of gold code, are enough for me to keep Apple Watch. But barely. I seriously considered returning one final time.

But what I like about Apple Watch keeps it on my wrist, with huge caveat: Had there been support for Android Wear on iOS during the 14-day buyer's remorse period, I likely would have returned the bitten fruit. Google gets context, while Apple promises it with watchOS 2. I bank on that promise only because my preferred platform isn't an option.

Or wasn't. As the next post better explains, I have come to really enjoy Apple Watch after a month using it. Joy, and that's a user benefit often overlooked by gadget makers, is major reason. The timepiece makes me happy, and so I am rather relieved Android Wear wasn't there to tempt me with iOS support.

But I got to ask: Did you buy and return Apple Watch? If so, why? If not, why not?

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/GTS

What did you buy for Prime Day?

Publié: juillet 16, 2015, 8:05am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Well, July 15th is behind us and Amazon's promise of deals bigger than Black Friday. If you were looking for Christmas in July, did you get it? I wasn't that impressed with the selection of Lightning Deals and exclusives, but perhaps you were. Or not. My purchase, and call me crazy (some commenter usually does): I plunked down $143.86 for two years of Kindle Unlimited, saving 40 percent off the $9.99 for each of 24 months. The bookstore will become my personal library of sorts. There are many books I would read and reference for my professional writing but not necessarily buy.

Briefly, Amazon offered the 32GB Nexus 6 for $399 and Echo for $129—that's $50 off. The smartphone sold out quick at that price but still remained available for $499 rest of the day. The other device built up a waitlist before finally being closed out. The 6-inch Kindle sold for $49, discounted from $79, and was still available as Midnight approached here on the West Coast (where I live; BetaNews offices are Eastern Time).

I wasn't alone wondering where were the big bargains. Gizmodo celebrated by posting "The Shittiest Deals on Prime Day". Choice: "A half dollar for $70". Lemme buy one of those. These deals are insane! Inc. asks: "Is Amazon's 'Prime Day' a Flop?" I dunno. Do hamsters run in wheels? New York Times: "More Fizzle Than Sizzle on Amazon’s Prime Day". Here in San Diego, the local CBS affiliate adds: "Shoppers disappointed in much-hyped 'Prime Day' sales".

But what qualifies as "disappointed", eh? I found just the one thing discounted enough for my budget. More bargains would better live up to the hype but, hell, I am satisfied with getting Kindle Unlimited for 40 percent off.

What do the Twitterati have to say? Freelancer and former BetaNews full-timer Ed Oswald calls Prime Day the "biggest fraud in the history of sales". Oh my. Michael Richert: "It's sad that @Amazon promoted #PrimeDay as a day for sales, and instead used it to clear random crap from their warehouse".

So what were some of those deals that Prime buyers confess to? Justine Ezarik:"Well, I got a basketball, goldfish crackers, and cereal. Great #PrimeDay". Andy Ihnatko: "I bought 2 things on #PrimeDay rec'd by @wirecutter, plus a fitness tracker I’d been meaning to get, all at great prices. Where’s the Fail?"

Ah, the deals:

Bracoo Wrist Splint with Thumb Stabilizer (Right Hand) for $12. Sixty-three percent filled as I write: Deering Maple Blossom 6-String Banjo—yours for $3,016.24, and that's discounted by more than $1,000. Who hasn't wanted a Level One Seat Belt Cutter X 2 for the car. Just $6.99—that's two bucks off—and you can thank Amazon if your VW bug veers into the river and you need to cut your way out. Uh-oh. The glove box would be out of reach.

Snarking aside, did you buy something—and what? Did you get a Prime membership to shop special? Are you glad you did or disappointed for it? I bought a Library for Prime Day. The books are always new and never checked out such that I have to wait for their return. Thanks, Amazon.

Photo credit: Joe Ravi / Shutterstock.com

What is San Diego Comic-Con really about?

Publié: juillet 7, 2015, 8:38pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Tomorrow night begins my seventh sojourn to the greatest geekfest and pop-culture event on the planet. Imitator shows are everywhere this Century, but none commands character and class like the original. San Diego Comic-Con is an amazing amalgamation of hopes and aspirations—and the grandest storytelling—where, for four days and a Preview Night, tens of thousands of people can be themselves—fit in, rather than feel oddball—or be whom they would want to be by dressing up as beloved superheroes or villains and by adoring the storytellers and actors behind them.

The first, full three-day event took place from Aug. 1-3, 1970, at the U.S. Grand Hotel, with about 300 attendees and sci-fi luminaries, including Ray Bradbury and A.E. van Vogt. This week, 130,000 attendees will storm San Diego Convention Center to enter an alternate reality, where the social rules binding them everyday no longer apply.

From the early days, the convention embraced other arts, including pulp media such as movies. However, comics’ prominence diminishes in the new century. Hollywood's presence looms, and Comic-Con is now a required pilgrimage for actors, filmmakers, producers, or screenwriters.

Outside lookers-on, watching excerpts and streams on cable TV or from the web, see a very different event than the one I and other attendees experience. The videos focus on Hollywood types, who actually are a much smaller part of the real Con than appears. Their presence is amplified, like other places they go, but the real stars are more often behind-the-scenes bit players who create characters and tell stories or the fans wanting to be someone else.

Many attendees come dressed in costumes. For a day, or even a few, they take on another persona. They become someone else—perhaps whom they would rather be, but most certainly not who they are. They can be heroes and even stars, for most anyone well-costumed will be repeatedly stopped for photos. Comic-Con lets them be not just someone else but someone special.

Batman and Superman

Behind this role-playing is a revelation—the reason why comic book stories, and the heroes within, so broadly appeal and why the Con is a pop-fest Mecca: Everyman. The typical superhero is an average person gifted with special skills or powers that conceptually are within reach; they are achievable by almost anyone. The hero takes on another role, becomes someone else, to practice his or her trade-craft.

Consider two of the most iconic superheroes, who will interact in an upcoming movie: Batman and Superman. On Krypton, Kal-El would be no one special. He would be everyman. But on earth, nourished by the light of the yellow sun, he is transformed. He is Superman. He is us, but who many of us would want to be.

His emotions are familiar, as are his personal struggles. Clark Kent is a misfit. The only time he can truly be himself is when wearing the costume. Otherwise, he hides identity and capabilities. Many of the Comic-Con attendees I have interviewed over the years share similar sentiments about themselves. They are geeks who are treated as freaks if they talk about things that matter to them at their workplace, for example, or even among family members. But during the Con, they can be themselves, shedding the personas they wear to fit in.

That is one way, among many, why Superman is iconic. The point is essential to understanding any superhero's appeal. Strip back their powers and they are little different from you or me. Expose Superman to Kryptonite and he is us.

Batman's role is different. Kal-El pretends to fit in to survive, to have a functional life. Bruce Wayne is the wronged man seeking justice. Who cannot identify with that?

The two superheroes share much in common. Their parents died under tragic circumstances. Both are vigilantes—Superman strengthened by the light of day, Batman enlivened by the dark of night. Neither can be with the woman he loves. The men are similarly tortured souls.

But Batman’s broad appeal tugs deeper at our personal and social psyches:

With the right training, anyone could assume the role of The Dark Knight. No superpowers are required.
A street thug killed Wayne’s parents, which for many fans taps into familial fears about loss and desires for justice.
Then there is primal fear—of bats, which adult Wayne must overcome and embrace. Who can’t relate to that?

"Batman is proof you don’t need superpowers to be a superhero—and the poster boy for what a bad childhood can do to you", according to his DC Comics bio. By day, he is billionaire businessman playboy Bruce Wayne; by night, he is Gotham City’s winged vigilante avenger.

"In his crusade against injustice, two questions always loom: How far will he go to protect the innocent, and will he sacrifice his humanity along the way?", the official bio asks. Batman is a very real character, He is everyman, and no man. He is us. Strangely, so is Superman as portrayed in movie "The Man of Steel". Now he kills. What will be the eventual result of that?

Hero's Journey

But the identifiability of Batman or Superman is much broader. In 1949 book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell proposes the "archetypal quest theory". He asserts that we all share a collective unconscious that in literature is expressed as the "hero’s journey", or Monomyth, which is found in stories across cultures and history.

The journey goes through 17 stages, which are simplified as The Departure, The Initiation, and The Return. During the first phase, the hero reluctantly begins his journey. The second trains and challenges him. The last puts him on the road home to fulfill his destiny. Homer’s The Odyssey is classic example of the hero’s journey.

In popular, modern literature and film, Harry Potter is a good example of the Monomyth. He receives the hero’s "Call to Adventure" but "Refusal of the Call" through the Owl’s letters and the magical removal from his aunt and uncle’s home. The supernatural, or something akin to it, is a crucial element of the Monomyth; magic in this tale. Each part of Harry Potter’s quest reflects the heroic struggles of everyday life—the family (where his cousin is favored), making friends and learning at school; overcoming personal fears (and real monsters); and accomplishing difficult tasks (defeating Lord Voldemort, among them). Harry Potter is an endearing and identifiable character because his struggles are our own. Interestingly, like Bruce Wayne and Kal-El, he is orphaned and his parents are tragically killed.

Bruce Wayne’s journey charts similar heroic, although murkier, course. The story told by the movie trilogy directed by Christopher Nolan—"Batman Begins", "The Dark Knight", and "The Dark Knight Rises"—follows the basic hero’s journey. Henri Ducard/Ra’s al Ghul calls Wayne to train with the League of Shadows, which the playboy at first rebuffs then answers by fulfilling a task with a blue flower. He trains, developing supernatural-like capabilities, fulfills tasks, and overcomes temptations before returning to fulfill his destiny in Gotham City. The basis of Bruce Wayne’s childhood fear becomes the symbol for his role. During the first movie, he tells butler Alfred Pennyworth: "Bats frighten me. It’s time my enemies shared my dread".

What of Superman's journey? Kal-El's parents fling him away from dying Krypton to Earth, where his lonely sojourn begins. His early trials are mostly internal, as the growing boy struggles to hide his superpowers as they develop. He eventually is called to the "Fortress of Solitude", or "Secret Citadel", where the memory of his father trains the young man. Clark Kent returns to Metropolis to fulfill his Messianic destiny.

The roles they play, the personas the heroes assume, the events that shape their characters, and the experiences that haunt them are hugely identifiable. The appeal is primal. Only the extraordinary skills or superpowers separate these heroes from us. Their stories are our own. That is what San Diego Comic-Con is all about.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Could 13-inch MacBook Pro Retina Display with Force Touch trackpad be right for you? [review]

Publié: juillet 3, 2015, 7:17am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Reviewing most any MacBook Pro is a pointless exercise, because this year's model isn't much different from the previous—or the one before. That's why I typically buy refurbished rather than new. But I broke with that practice last month, after a sudden electrical calamity laid my wife's laptop to rest. Fried and died it is. With Apple releasing new versions of iOS and OS X and launching a streaming music service, a summer sojourn seemed opportune.

I considered going Windows 10, which arrives later this month. But most of my BetaNews colleagues are headed that way, so I set out down the Apple reviews track. Again, I probably wouldn't have done so if not for my wife's computer catastrophe. I lent her my Chromebook Pixel LS and purchased a new MBP. She will never give up the Google laptop, BTW.

Magic is missing—I don't feel that new computer thrill—because MacBook Pro is so much like every other one in the series that my fingers touched. Use one in 2009, and the overall experience isn't much different six years later. I am satisfied enough with MBP, which packs 2.7GHz Core i5 processor, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD. But Pixel feels fast, comparatively, with its 2.4GHz i7 chip and 16GB memory. I have long asserted that Google's target market is the MacBook Pro buyer, and that's a recurrent theme you'll find if reading further.

Why Not MacBook?

For the purpose of writing more meaningful review, I should have purchased the 12-inch MacBook instead. The sleek and slender design, butterfly-mechanism keyboard, and value compared to Macbook Air are compelling. The laptop also is different in a sea of sameness. Strangely, the Intel M processor isn't what swayed me away, nor the single USB-C port. What did:

To my eyes, the laptop's screen reflects more light than MacBook Pro, even though both are labeled Retina Display. Glare and the surprisingly low default resolution put me off.
The WebCam is only 480p, rather ridiculously underwhelming for 2015. The low resolution makes the laptop poor choice for, say, Google Hangouts. Apple, what the frak is that?
The Apple Store sales specialist discouraged my buying the 12-inch laptop if using it for heavy photography management or even light video editing. Mmm, could that 480p match performance limits? I wonder.

Sigh. I really wanted the MacBook more but put pragmatism before desire, seeing as I so rarely buy a new Apple laptop. How rarely? My last Mac review was November 2010, when I received a custom-ordered MacBook Air.

Pixel Me

My budget wouldn't allow the MBP configuration I really wanted: i7 processor and 512GB, new. I purchased the middle SKU: 13.3-inch screen, 2560 x 1600 resolution at 227 pixels per inch, 16:10 aspect ratio; 2.7GHz i5 dual-core processor; 8GB RAM; and 256GB SSD for $1,499. The 128 gigger sells for $200 less and the 512er (with 2.9GHz i5) for $300 more. By comparison, the Pixel LS packs 12.85-inch touchscreen, 2560 x 1700 at 239 ppi, 3:2 aspect ratio; 2.4GHz i7 dual-core; 16 gigs memory, and 64GB storage for $1,299.

Both are high-end laptops for creative types that comfortably fit into either company's digital lifestyle. For cloud champions, the Pixel is magnificent. MBP is more for application addicts. From a hardware perspective, Pixel offers more value, because of the touchscreen—which maximum brightness exceeds MBP—speedier processor, and doubled memory. Google's machine feels faster than Apple's in most ways.

One glaring exception is surprising: On my home network, testing with two different ISPs and three different WiFi routers, Chrome consistently hesitates to load on Pixel. For a long time, I assumed the behavior related to DNS until:

Changing ISPs and seeing same behavior
Testing different WiFi routers with problems persisting
Seeing how MBP opens websites smoothly in Chrome or Safari

Considering that the Pixel is meant to be nearly-always Net connected, and Google's digital lifestyle is all about the cloud, errant connectivity really surprises. It's fraking annoying, too, and disrupts my workflow.

That said, Pixel's keyboard delights my fingers and boosts productivity. By comparison, MacBook Pro typing isn't as smooth, and the keys are wobbly by comparison—something the thinner MacBook is supposed to correct.

With respect to finger friendliness, Google offers a touchscreen and Apple the Force Touch trackpad. My wife loves the Chromebook's screen, but I don't share her enthusiasm. I see limited utility, and I experience Gorilla Arm when reaching up for any prolonged interaction. The trackpad makes more sense, something Apple understands, because the fingers are already there, or close-by on the keys.

Like 12-inch MacBook, the newest MBP features a force-sensitive trackpad that enables contextually-valuable actions or information access. Apple's support site explains, excerpts:

"Events: Force click dates and events to add them to Calendar".
"Tracking numbers: Force click a tracking number in Safari or Mail to see shipping details in a popover".
"Mail: When composing a message with an image or PDF attachment in it, Force click the attachment to activate Markup. This lets you annotate the attachment".
"Look up: Force click text in a webpage or Mail message and a popover appears showing you Look up results for that text. Information appears from sources like Dictionary, Wikipedia, and more".

While Google's trackpad is best of the traditional class, Apple's Force Touch better keeps the fingers in a single, useful plane of motion that causes less creative workflow disruption. Similar benefit comes with contextual actions that reduce the number of clicks or presses, while diminishing eye motion across screen, keyboard, or touchpad.

MacBook Pro vs MacBook

Measured Benefits

MacBook Pro is not the most affordable performance-delivering laptop available. The benefits compared to other notebooks are nowhere as compelling in mid-2015 as late-2012. Three years ago, Retina Display set apart MBP from many other laptops. That no longer is the circumstance, compared to rivals' products or even the 12-inch MacBook. Sameness is the design ethic, whether measured from within or without. MBP is more affordable today than three years ago, but so are Chromebooks or many Windows PCs.

For example, Surface Pro 3 with 12-inch touchscreen, 1.9GHz i5 dual-core processor, 8GB RAM, and 256GB SSD sells for $1,428.99 with detachable Touch Cover. The computer is tablet/laptop convertible and supports stylus input. Display resolution is a little less (2160 x 1440) and processor 4th rather than 5th generation i5, but the design offers greater usage scenarios. Starting price is $799 for lower-clock speed microprocessor and less RAM or storage but high-res display. The starting price for any Apple Retina Display model is $1,299, new.

Another: The Dell XPS Signature Edition with 13.3-inch touchscreen (3200 x 1800 resolution), 2.7GHz i5 processor, 8GB RAM, and 256GB SSD sells for $1,299 through Microsoft Store. The Intel microprocessor is same as my MacBook Pro. Memory and storage are same capacities—$200 more than the Dell, with lower-res, non-touch display.

The 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display is no lightweight, coming in at 1.5 kg (3.48 pounds) and measuring 1.8 x 31.4 x 21.9 cm (.71 x 12.35 x 8.62 inches)—height, width, depth. But for that extra heft compared to 12-inch MacBook (.92 kg/2.03 pounds) or 13.3-inch Air (1.35 kg/2.96 pounds), are more ports, if you need them (I don't). The Dell XPS weighs 1.27 kg (2.8 pounds).

The point: What made MBP stand out three years ago is standing still in 2015. The laptop is excellent for how it fits into the Apple lifestyle, but benefits are measured, comparatively, in the current marketplace. If OS X is your thing, 13-inch MacBook is a fine choice. Still, Apple's laptop lineup is awkward, where compromise offsets benefits:

11.6-inch MacBook Air is thin and lightweight, with good price-performance (starting at $899 for 1.6GHz i5) but low screen resolution (1366 x 768).
12-inch MacBook is slim and light, with innovative keyboard and trackpad and high-res display but slower Intel processors and a single port for power and peripherals.
13.3-inch MacBook Air configuration is similar to its sibling, with larger screen but deficient resolution (1440 x 900) for size and price class. MB screen outclasses the Air.
13.3-inch MacBook Pro is pricey for the configurations, display resolution is no longer best of class, and what was light three years ago is comparatively bulky in mid-2015.
15-inch MacBook Pro packs powerful i7 quad-core processors, high resolution display (2880 x 1800), and generous RAM (16GB). But to get more, you pay a lot more, with starting price $1,999.

In another universe, I would buy 12-inch MacBook. The laptop is sporty, but lacks horsepower. The Pro is a boxy Volvo or Lexus—reliable, well-built transportation which benefits are, among others, long-term value and road handling.

Discovering Value

That sentiment is good segue to discuss 13-inch MacBook Pro's finer features and their benefits. Now we judge the laptop for what it is rather than what it's not.

Screen. While being seemingly dismissive. I quite like MBP's Retina Display—and as previously mentioned, that's subjectively more than 12-inch MacBook. There's a muted, painted quality that appeals to my eyes, which perceive a crisp, not-overly-contrasty screen that is bright enough and not too reflective. The latter quality is hugely beneficial.

Cough, cough. Default resolution is 1280 x 800 out of the box. I scale up to 1440 x 900 because my aged eyes can't handle higher 1680 x 1050, which they could have even two years ago. How does all that equate to 2560 x 1600? These are the mysteries.

BTW, I tested OS X 10.11, aka El Capitan, developer beta last month before going back to Yosemite. The operating system is a bit buggy for my everyday use. But it looks really good on this screen, and the new font is an improvement. Hey, just saying.

Keyboard. My previously-stated gripes are more comparing to the Pixel. Keys are generally responsive, even if springy, and typing is plenty fast. The keyboard isn't best of class, but it is nevertheless exceptionally tactile. Few are better.

Trackpad. Force click is clever, by being more contextually functional when and where needed. Nearly a month after buying 13-inch MacBook Pro, I am only starting to realize the benefits, which come with some changes to trackpad habits. Warning: Once you adapt, addiction is inevitable. You will miss Force click when using another trackpad.

The question: Is the Force Touch trackpad reason enough to buy the 2015 model over, say, a refurb from Apple Store? I wouldn't. The sameness among other features and benefits put greater value on lower price. For example, as I write, Apple offers the refurbished 2014 MacBook Pro with same display, memory, and storage, but 2.6GHz i5 processor, for $1,149. I don't see how the trackpad or slightly higher-clocked chip are worth another $350.

Audio. Frak me, this laptop sounds fantastic. Music booms from the built-ins and more substantially to my Harman Kardon SoundSticks Wireless speakers via Bluetooth. Output is loud and defined. Even streaming from Apple Music, there is satisfying soundstage and definition.

Video. Satisfyingly smooth and stutter-free.

WebCam. The 720p shooter surprises for its clarity and contrast. Video is smooth and satisfying. Unless you are so good-looking that men and women whistle when walking by, you don't want a 1080p or 4K WebCam, which unforgivingly capture detail. There's a reason some 1960s TV shows soft focus on the ladies. ;)

Performance. MacBook Pro feels fast enough, but it's no sportster. Smoothness is the defining characteristic—meaning how well it handles the road. That benefit cannot be overstated, when switching among applications. There the laptop benefits from the OS X software stack as much as the hardware.

Battery life. One way where sameness isn't the definition of MacBook Pro is increasing battery life with each newer model. I can get a good 10 hours out of the machine, and my usage can be quite demanding. That should be all-day enough for most people. San Diego Comic-Con starts in one week, and there MBP will get heavy, non-plugged usage. I'm fairly confident the laptop can make a full 12-hour day and even charge up my smartphone on the fly. Fingers crossed.

Recap
Let's start with a bullet-list of major benefits:

Startup is nearly instant-on
Keyboard is backlit and bright
Keyboard is responsive, but springy
Force Touch trackpad is clever, contextual
Glossy display is muted; not overly-reflective
Screen is bright and crisp with superb viewing angles
The Mac is well-designed—looks good and feels rugged
Battery easily lasts a full work day, and then some; I get a good 10 hours
Audio is excellent, above average, producing rich bass and fidelity, even streaming

I see 13.-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display as best for creative types who have adopted the Apple lifestyle and/or who demand the power of local applications. While the laptop fits into the cloud, the greater utility is running processor-intensive software stored on the hard drive.

Any creative who works more in the cloud should consider Chromebook Pixel as an alternative. Price-performance is greater, and the touchscreen extends range of uses. Other users should consider notebooks made by the likes of Dell, HP, or Lenovo for the hardware bang for the buck and given Windows 10's imminent release.

MBP is a workhorse. Mixing metaphors, it's the boxy, reliable roadster that drives smoothly and doesn't break down. MacBook Pros hold their resale value, and new OS X versions support some of the oldest models. The original aluminum MacBook, from late 2008, before Apple added Pro to the name, supports El Capitan, for example.

If reliable, rather than sexy, is your thing—and you've got $1,299, $1,499, or $1,799 to spend on a laptop—consider 13-inch MacBook Pro.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

iPhone is iconic

Publié: juin 30, 2015, 12:10am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Happy Birthday! iPhone is 8 years-old today. Oh my, it seems so much longer ago because so much has changed. Think back. Eight years ago, there was no Android. YouTube was but 18 months available to the public, and Facebook or Twitter only about a year. There was no market for tablets, or smartwatches.

The iPhone marks everything right about the Steve Jobs era of risk-taking design. More changes: He is gone from this world and some of that other-worldly innovation with him. In 2007, the smartphone was a decade-old slow seller that few people owned. Now it's everywhere! Apple deserves credit for the transformation, whether or not anyone wants to give it.

I debated whether or not to post this observation and do so with trepidation. I don't want to take away attention from colleague Wayne Williams' superb recollection "8 years ago today the iPhone went on sale and changed everything—so why didn't I want one?" Problem: The anniversary is but a day, so I slip this one in hoping to draw attention to his work. Stop reading mine. Click, click Wayne's.

Human Touch

Oh? You finished Wayne's masterpiece and want more iPhone memories? Then let's start with a reminder about the fundamental design ethic that makes iPhone iconic.

Apple's approach to computer/device design is consistent and pervasive: Humanization of complex technological products. There has been much written about the design ethic in context of products that look good. But there is something more fundamental: Designing tech that is easy to use by making it more an extension of the human being—more part of you. Apple's design ethic is understated, while minimizing complexity.

This characteristic is what made iPhone matter when launched on June 29, 2007. Nokia invented the smartphone in 1996, but Apple reinvented it by cleverly incorporating sensors and capacitive touchscreen that made the device responsive—more human-like. Nokia and Research in Motion led the market category eight years ago, but now they're laid waste.

Human beings are tool users who experience and manipulate the world through five senses. Apple products appeal to the eyes through design, whether it's the software GUI or hardware appearance. But the eyes are passive instruments. Hands and fingers are more important because they are active—they're how people tactilely manipulate the world around them. People examine objects they desire as much with their hands as their eyes. Watch how someone interacts with items for sale—first look, then touch.

Too many technological devices are too difficult to use because they expose too much complexity. Compare to the human body: The underlying biological mechanisms behind hand movement may be complex, but for most people the complexity is largely hidden. The keyboard is unnatural user interface; it exposes too much complexity. There is little in human biological or cultural experience that supports use of the keyboard. It's a particularly unnatural construct, in which organization is based on the number of times letters are likely to be used. The mouse is more natural than the keyboard, because of the hand and finger-clicking movement. But the mouse is still a makeshift extension of the human being.

The finger and touch are more natural, because they extend you. Good user interfaces build on the familiar—and there is nothing more familiar than me, myself, and I. See, say, hear, and touch. Apple’s approach to non-Mac devices—Apple Watch, iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch—more naturally extends the hands, fingers, eyes, and even mouth (for voice response). Successful user interfaces of the future will have similar attributes.

That said, Apple needs to transcend touch and better embrace voice. As we move further into the contextual cloud computing era—Post PC is a myth of Apple’s making—touch interfaces should cede way to voice. Touchless should be the primary UI. Speaking is even more intimate and human than touch. Homo Sapiens is a natural communicator, and the species is inherently gregarious.

Risk and Reward

There was something almost insane about the risk Steve Jobs and Team took in 2007. Many people expressed skepticism. Apple embarked into an established market with entrenched competitors, with no experience making cell phones and selling through a single carrier (AT&T, which was Cingular before the launch) in one market (United States).

There were risks all around:

AT&T bet the brand on the one device
Sharks—Nokia and RIM, namely—surrounded Apple
iPhone sold, locked and unsubsidized, for $499 and $599

Who would pay unlocked-mobile prices for a device that wasn't? One million people through early September 2007. For these early buyers, and perhaps for bazillion more who followed, the handset isn't a phone so much as cultural phenomenon.

This dramatic change started from the iPhone moment, when a perceptive set of people looked ahead to a different future. That's what I recall most about the smartphone's launch outside Apple Store Montgomery Mall in Bethesda Md. One buyer told me that the launch would change everything, and we would look back on the moment in 10 years or more and see so. Well, it didn't take nearly that long.

Chris, Steve and Eddie wait to buy first iPhone, June 2007

Chris, Steve, and Eddie wait to buy first iPhone, June 29, 2007

I wrote the following morning: "The people I talked to in line yesterday had a sense of being caught up in a historical moment". How true is that today. Cell phones look little like they did eight years ago. In a two-paragraph post made hours after the iPhone launch, I wrote about the three men pictured:

I really love these guys. They were typical of the very atypical crowd waiting for iPhone. If there were geeks in line, I didn’t find them. But there were plenty of regular people, which says something about iPhone’s broad appeal and the cell phone market in general. Mobiles are gadgets for the masses, not geeks.

What they wanted: A better-designed, more intimate and personal cell phone. Touch is transcending and the sensors that made—makes—the device more human-like. Sales tell the story. During first quarter 2015, Apple sold 60.18 million iPhones, according to market researcher Gartner. In China, where iPhone is market leader, year-over-year sales soared by 72.5 percent. Apple is second-ranked, based on sales, in smartphones and all phones, behind Samsung in both categories.

During the same quarter, iPhone accounted for stunning 69. 4 percent of all Apple revenues—up 57 percent from 12 months earlier.

It all started eight years ago today.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Here's what you REALLY THINK about Windows 10

Publié: juin 29, 2015, 8:43pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

nerd tablet geek surprise shock disbelief

Let the countdown begin. One month from today, July 29th, Microsoft releases Windows 10. Three weeks ago we asked what you like about the operating system. Many of you are testers, and keeping with the spirit of the "beta" in our site's name, we just had to inquire.

Microsoft hasn't made this transition easy enough, even before the code's release. For starters, there is, or was, or may still be, or may never stop being, confusion over who is eligible for the free upgrade. Microsoft kind of, sort of, clarified who gets and who doesn't -- and those of you who are Windows Insiders, and remain so, can continue on the forever free track, albeit running betas. Based on our poll posted last week, 10 percent of you without valid licenses will stay with the Windows Insider program to keep the free software coming. More than half of you plan to stick with the testing track.

Windows 10 is "a bit understated, but neat and tidy enough", BetaNews reader Stephen Leslie says. That's actually high praise. Ten years ago, I posted here at BN an analysis explaining the merits of Apple's understated design ethic. There is much to be said for simple, or simpler, particularly when sync -- as I've asserted for more than a decade -- is the killer app for the connected age.

ADRz responds to Leslie, asserting that the new OS "does not do much beyond Windows 7. In fact, some parts are hilarious".

"It's not whizz bang", Leslie concedes. "It's just sort of understated, but maybe that's a good thing. It is more secure, and quicker to a degree than Windows 7. Once it's out there, and the teething is worked out, it will be a capable computing platform for today's PC Plus computer ecosystem". The discussion that follows is worth reading.

J. Smith likes "Cortana"; "Windows Modern apps"; "faster launching, faster performing, more capable modern apps". But doesn't like "no glass effect"; text "too small on my laptop"; "no improvements in Desktop since Windows 95. Actually there were regressions".

1DaveN spotlights "two things I like about Windows 10":

First of all Cortana. It's long been a pain point for me that Outlook can remind me of my 3 p.m. dentist appointment, but I don't know it's 2:30 and time to leave. Particularly with multiple reminders on the same day, they don't stand out from each other enough to get the 'now' -- as in 'leave now'. Cortana, in her most rudimentary and basic form, does that. If she does more, so much the better, but that alone will be a big improvement for me.

Biometrics. I'm picturing the office, where 30 people will get logged in just by sitting down at the desk. We're fairly security conscious, and this will let me put on a very short screen saver lock without getting ambushed by furious users.

Regular reader barely_normal also is a fan of the voice assistant. "I do like Cortana and would add it in an instant if offered for Windows 7". He expects, and based on past releases is likely right, that "there will be plenty of complaining, and whining about Microsoft not getting it right", and the "cautious will wait for a while...What will be truly interesting to see is how many are persuaded to move quickly from Windows 7. Moving away from Windows Ate is a no brainer, but moving away from something solid without any real need will show how popular Metro and 'one-size-fits-all' will truly be over time".

Case in point: "I received the notification that I can get Windows 10 for free. But I like Windows 7 and frankly didn't like developer preview of W10", says brunul, who "will wait for a while. Long while".

"I stopped looking at W10 as a beta or even TP and more like ongoing development", Mike Lukic assets. He believes, and I agree, that "new users of Windows will have much less reservations about 10 than long-time users used to some ways about tweaking-system because of half implemented changes to, let's say, Control Panel, Main, and Modern menu etc."

I wonder how many new Windows users there really are, but unquestionably see development realignment that is focused more on process -- bringing ongoing improvements -- as Microsoft's cloud and connected-device strategies evolve. Google gets away with delivering Chrome OS updates every six weeks or so. Why not Windows?

UglyStuff opines about the "rolling distribution approach:

It's good and it's bad. Good, because when bugs and sources of discontent are readily identified, they can be addressed in a subsequent build, leaving the users in a permanent state of hope and expectation.

It's also bad, because choices must be made, and more often than not, minor -- from a developer's point of view -- issues can be put on the back burner, only to be forgotten and never fixed.

"My favorite part of Windows 10 is that isn't not Windows 8", Eric Sleeper says. "Windows 10 Desktop is pretty much Windows 7 Desktop on steroids. It's more intuitive, faster—at least snappier—more functions, more features, and of course still evolving".

What does Jack Bnimble like about Windows 10? "That Windows 7 gets updates to 2020, and I won't ever have to deal with it".

There clearly is some division among BetaNews readers about Windows 10. So let's ask agin: What do you like? Don't like?

Photo Credit: Ahturner/Shutterstock

The difference between Apple Watch (stainless steel) and Sport (aluminum)

Publié: juin 25, 2015, 6:34pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Apple Watch and Sport

After spending 7 days with Apple Watch Sport -- and largely enjoying it -- time comes to test the next pricier model. When trying to compare the two, I find very little useful from Internet searches. So a primer is in order for other folks also wondering: Which one is right for me? Ultimately, the best answer will come from going into an Apple Store (if there is one nearby) and putting the timepieces on your wrist.

Last week, I compared Android Wear and Apple Watch platforms, starting from the different design ethics behind them. Obviously, timepieces from the bitten-fruit logo company are more alike, with the main differences being materials, pricing, and target customers. Interestingly, the combinations offer subtle changes in benefits that will matter much to some shoppers. Henceforth, I will refer to the devices as Sport, for the aluminum model, and Apple Watch for the stainless steel sibling.

Apple Watch and Sport are functionally identical. You pay more or less for materials, and subtle design differences. For reasons that make little sense to me, the packaging for one looks little like the other (Long and flatter for Sport and boxy bigger for Apple Watch).

Sport is available in 10 styles and Apple Watch in 20. For both, there are 38mm and 42mm sizes. Sport prices are $349 for the smaller and $399 for the larger, regardless of color wrist strap (black, blue, pink, and white). Apple Watch starts at $549 and $599, based on size, and prices climb depending on the accompanying band.

Cost of the black (what Apple calls space gray) Sport is the same as silver styles. However, the stainless steel variant (space black, officially) costs considerably more ($1,049 or $1,099) than its siblings.

The black band is sold with the black Sport. Meaning: If you want the black strap on Sport, plan on buying the darker timepiece; not silver. However, the black Sport band also is available for silver Apple Watch. The company creates choices for those willing to pay more.

By the way, four different Apple Store sales specialists told me that the space gray Sport with black band is the most popular among all styles.

Apple Store will swap the band, if the combination you want isn't available. Of course, you must pay the difference, if any. When purchasing Apple Watch, I considered the costlier style with Classic Buckle strap. But the shop didn't have that one in stock. The sales specialist offered to let me switch out and pay a little more. I chose not to.

Bands are interchangeable among watches of same measurement (e.g., 38mm). They are super simple to swap, too. Cleverly so. Depress a button on the back and slide off the strap, then slip in another. Brilliant!

Apple Watch's display is more durable than Sport's -- sapphire crystal versus Ion-X glass. Think Rolex compared to iPhone, with respect to what abuse the screen can take from day-to-day use. Difference is this: Should you accidentally bang the device against a hard surface -- and who doesn't -- sapphire is less likely to scratch.

Hardened crystal isn't necessarily better than glass. While I like the look of Apple Watch more than Sport, I don't find looking at the timepiece to be as functional. Outdoors, in the San Diego sunlight, the sapphire display can be difficult to read. Viewing angles are diminished, and even straight-on viewing can be challenging even at full brightness. I had no such troubles with Sport. Simply: Sapphire is more reflective. If you will mostly wear your smartwatch outdoors, Sport may be the better choice.

That said in normal lighting, Apple Watch seems more readable to me. But that may be more subjective perception than reality.

Apple Watch's body is more likely to scratch than Sport, or at least to show blemishes. It's the nature of the material and its luster. The aluminum finish is more matte, while the 316L stainless steel is shinier. Apple promises the benefits of sapphire glass -- and its durability -- but don't expect the same from case. Stainless steel scratches more easily. I don't see this as a deal breaker as subject for saying benefits for one price or another.

AppleCare+ for the stainless steel watch costs more. That's $69, rather than $49 -- and you absolutely should pay for the extra protection. Sapphire is not invulnerable to damage from drops. and Ion-X glass will shatter. Yeah, think iPhone, or watch this shocking drop test. AppleCare+ extends the warranty for two years, and the fruit-logo company will replace the timepiece, up to two instances -- $69 for Sport and $79 for the costlier model.

Apple Watch weighs considerably more than Sport. I noticed the heft immediately. The 42mm space gray Sport is 30 grams, without strap. Apple Watch: 50 grams. I hardly notice the aluminum timepiece on my wrist, making, by contrast, the stainless steel feel very present. If weight matters, do try both before purchasing.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Now that Apple Music pays, will Taylor Swift and independents play?

Publié: juin 22, 2015, 8:19pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Taylor Swift

As my colleague Manish Singh reports overnight, Apple reversed course and now plans to compensate artists for the first three months of music streaming. It's time to ask: Were the whiners grandstanding or sincere? The question mainly is meant for Taylor Swift, whose Father's Day Tumblr post seems to have brought, eh, swift response to the—what I call—"play for no-pay" plan.

The company unveiled Apple Music during the World Wide Developer Conference on June 8. The streaming service will be free to subscribers for the first three months, with Apple initially choosing not to make royalty payments to artists. I condemned the ridiculous strategy last week. The company sits on a nearly $200 billion cash horde, and content creators are among its most loyal customers. Stiffing them makes no sense from several different perspectives, with good public relations being one and expressing thanks to artist customers being another.

Independent artists also expressed misgivings, but the clincher came from Taylor Swift, who yesterday writes: "I am on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, crew, and entire management team by playing live shows". That's not the case for many up-and-comers who "will not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs".

She admonishes Apple: "It's not too late to change this policy and change the minds of those in the music industry who will be deeply and gravely affected by this. We don't ask you for free iPhones. Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation".

Eddie Cue, who heads Apple's software and services operation, stated a new policy in a series of tweets last evening: "#AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming, even during customer's free trial period". The country singer titled her post "To Apple, Love Taylor". Playing off that, Cue tweeted: "We hear you @taylorswift13 and indie artists. Love, Apple".

Taylor Swift later tweeted: "I am elated and relieved. Thank you for your words of support today. They listened to us". But she didn't affirm on Twitter, or Tumblr, whether her sizzlingly successful album "1989" will be available on Apple Music. The context for her original post: "I write this to explain why I'll be holding back my album, 1989, from the new streaming service, Apple Music". Okay, so will she still? Was this opportunity for her and others to grandstand against subscription streaming or sincere protest against an onerous no-pay scheme that could establish devastating precedent for competitors' to follow?

The answer may not be as easy as 1 + 1. In an interview with Recode reporter Peter Kafka, Cue qualifies Apple's trial-period payment strategy without quantifying details. The service will pay artists on a per-stream basis, at a rate Cue doesn't specify. That's different than the percentage scheme coming when subscribers start paying in October. How much? Will it be enough? Can Taylor Swift and independents resist something over nothing and still come away looking like the aggrieved parties?

The answers are part of a drama unfolding over the next 8 days. Now comes the entrenched public relations war—if there is one—over what is enough. Taylor Swift's symbol as champion of the independents hinges in part on her letting Apple stream "1989". If she goes, many independent artists will have little excuse for not following. Unless of course, the devil in the details is a per-stream rate that is so low that no-royalty looks almost as appealing.

Photo Credit: FashionStock.com / Shutterstock.com

The difference between Apple Watch and Android Wear

Publié: juin 20, 2015, 9:58pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Apple Watch and Moto 360

This week, I had opportunity to use Apple Watch, making it third of the modern smart variety that I have experienced (the others being LG Urbane and Moto 360). The differences between the platforms are quite startling and worth highlighting. They begin with diverging design ethics derived from the fruit-logo company's app-centric heritage and Google's place in the cloud.

For people who use either Android handset or iPhone, existing device really determines what watch platform you choose, if any—that is for now. Down the path you go. But where it leads is somewhere else, not the same destination. One platform is more responsive to you in varying contextual situations. The other requires more direct interaction, but gives other benefits.

(Note: Because I don't obsess about health measurements, this post offers no comparison about the benefits either platform might offer; I didn't test or evaluate the features.)

Apple Watch is app-centric, deriving from the platform maker's longstanding PC and mobile device heritage. Apple's business is about platforms and applications, and the company profits directly from products it develops and sells to businesses or consumers. In approaching mobile devices, Apple leverages its strengths as an end-to-end hardware/software developer. The smartwatch, like the company's other devices, pulls informational relevance to applications.

Android Wear devices are more cloud-centric, deriving from Google's legacy delivering services from the web. The company's business is about information and services. Google mostly profits indirectly from content or information someone else created. Its intellectual property is tied to the means, not the end. Big G already offers services in the cloud via the browser, and, contrary to Apple's design and economic objectives, seeks to shift relevance to the Web rather than to the device.

Google Now makes Android Wear more useful than Apple Watch, because of proactive, contextual awareness. This difference directly derives from the aforementioned worldviews—utility of apps vs the web.

For example, I really like that when out and about when glancing at my watch, a Google Now notice flashes, giving minutes to drive home. Apple promises more contextual capabilities when Watch OS 2 releases in autumn. But Now is now—no waiting on promises that may or may not practically manifest.

Something else: Notices in general look better because of flatter UI and the clear, underlying glance, swipe, and go design ethic. On the Moto 360 and Urbane round watch faces, actions to dismiss or see more information are right and left per item. That's a more natural motion than Apple's way, which requires more scrolling up to see, say, a text message before closing by tapping "dismiss".

To reiterate: Google is more motivated to deliver contextual services because that's the profit center; Apple sells devices, which legacy are apps.

Apple Watch is overly complicated compared to Android Wear. To use either Moto 360 or the Urbane, I installed the mobile app, turned on the watch, and paired. That's it. While the process started similarly for the other device, I repeatedly referred to the 96-page user manual I downloaded from Apple's support website.

Apple touts the utility of the crown, but I see it adding unnecessary complexity to the user experience. All activity should occur on the screen, by touch or voice response. The fruit-logo company's approach favors apps, for which crown control offers some benefits. But for an entity rampaging about the post-PC era's benefits, there is too much personal computing in the UI design ethic. The device should be more contextually aware and responsive, requiring as little touch as possible.

Apple Watch offers more direct utility compared to Android Wear. App-centricity gives the user a broader range of capabilities managed or initiated from the watch. Meaning: Apple's timepiece is more like a computer on the wrist than those supporting Google's platform.

Day-to-day, I use either Moto 360 or the Urbane for glancing quickly at information, such as time, notifications, and weather, or asking questions or initiating actions from vocal command "OK, Google". While Apple Watch usage is similar, I interact more with the screen and the installed apps. Additionally, I don't find that Apple's assistant offers as accurate or meaningful responses to questions. Is she offended by "Hey, Siri?"

Round is the better Android Wear watch. In experimenting with rectangular shaped Android Wear timepieces and comparing to Moto 360 and the Urbane, Google's platform is better contextual companion when circled rather than rectangled (it's a verb now). Much of that is about how swiping works and what makes sense functionally from an obvious design perspective.

Apple Watch extends the familiar rectangular experience of iPad and iPhone. I presume one reason for how swiping works—more often from the corner rather than the side or up and down—is about the shape. The rectangle, like app-centricity, extends from Apple's worldview and its legacy devices and platforms.

There is something Dick Tracy watch-like about Apple's timepiece. I refer to making or answering phone calls from the wrist. The speaker isn't great-shakes quality but it is useable enough. I hear lots of distortion, but, hey, that's okay. The capability offers great benefits while driving. You can make or receive calls without using an in-vehicle accessory or Bluetooth earpiece. This kind of capability shows one of the benefits when a single vendor controls the entire platform.

Apple's watchband design is more clever and convenient than existing Android Wear devices. Would you like to change your style without wearing a different watch? Apple Watch features a simple mechanism for swapping bands. I do mean simple. Depress a button on the back and slide off the strap, then slip in another.

The underlying design ethic recognizes something that should be duh obvious about watches: They are as much jewelry as smart accessories.

Google's idea of personalized jewelry are Android Wear watch faces. Developers can create their own, and they do! Users can chose from many different ones in the Play store. By contrast, Apple Watch owners must customize preselected faces. Their choices are considerably more limited. Do you make the device more your own by how you dress up the screen or by the strap you attach?

Apple's own watchbands are outrageously expensive. When was the last time you paid $150 for a wrist strip? The point: All that watchband-changing convenience isn't just about making you look and feel good but reaping huge accessory profits for Apple. In the jewelry business, margins reach as a high as 90 percent. You have to wonder how many pennies Apple pays for every leather strap selling for a Benjamin and a Grant (e.g. $100 and $50 bills).

Apple Watch user experience is more intimate and endearing. For contextual utility, I prefer Android Wear. Once Google Now is enabled on the phone, the watch proactively provides contextually useful information, while more of the interaction is quick, tap or speak and go.

By contrast, Apple requires more direct interaction with the device, which conveniently and easily runs apps. As such, the broader utility is smartwatch as phone companion rather than dependent device. The increased interaction, and its benefits, creates stronger emotional bond with Apple Watch than Android Wear timepieces—and I greatly enjoyed using Moto 360 and Urbane.

Everything comes down to digital lifestyle. Apple provides utility around apps, devices, and trendy design. Google harvests your activity to bring relevant information to you where you need it. One way is more user-initiated interactive, while the other is more proactive—and both approaches fit the supporting platform's larger lexicon lifestyle. For simplicity and contextual informational utility, Android Wear is better. For intimacy and on-device application utility, Apple Watch is better. That is for now. These platforms are evolving.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Apple Music shouldn't steal artist royalties

Publié: juin 18, 2015, 9:32pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Music

For a company that generates more profits than any other ($18 billion during fiscal first quarter 2015), sits on a cash horde of nearly $200 billion, and has the gall to charge $150 for a watchband, stinginess is an unbecoming trait. Scratch that. Greediness. Putting profits before people, particularly devoted customers, when corporate advertising is all about how they matter more, is simply stupid public relations. In business, perception is everything.

So Apple's reported decision to give away music for three months, without compensating artists, is cheapskates behavior that demands criticism -- particularly about a company claiming that music means so much. Speaking to developers last week, CEO Tim Cook: "We love music, and music is such an important part of our lives and our culture". Oh yeah? If it's so important, why diminish its value? To zero. "We've had a long relationship with music at Apple". For how much longer without artists' cooperation? You don't own the content, Mr. Cook.

But by choosing to reportedly not compensate artists during the Apple Music trial period, the company acts like it is entitled to the content. Why? Because so many musicians craft on Apple products? Gasp -- I should frakin' hope not. Or perhaps entitlement is stereotypical? That those with more decide they deserve more and take from others with less? How strange if wealthy Apple is little different from the rich guy who lives down the street and waters his plush lawn during the California drought while your greenery is brown desolation.

Considering how many artists use Apple products to make music, and how the company's marketing encourages every creative to do so, "play for no pay" is simply stupid. The very musicians that Apple robes royalties are among its most loyal customers.

Last week, the American Association of Independent Music expressed misgivings:

It is surprising that Apple feels the need to give a free trial as Apple is a well-known entity, not a new entrant into the marketplace. Since a sizable percentage of Apple’s most voracious music consumers are likely to initiate their free trails at launch, we are struggling to understand why rights holders would authorize their content on the service before October 1. This is especially true in light of the potential revenue damage to a music label’s iTunes download revenues and impact on their cash flow.

What could have been, should have been, a public relations coup is instead an opportunity for critics of every motivation to whack-a-mole until the machine breaks. Every commentary like this one, every news report about artists' rebelling, every report about antitrust investigations, and more is another whack against Apple.

Representing major indy labels, The Begger's Group wonders: "Whilst we understand the logic of their proposal and their aim to introduce a subscription-only service, we struggle to see why rights owners and artists should bear this aspect of Apple’s customer acquisition costs".

BG also worries: "Given the natural response of competing digital services to offer comparable terms, we fear that the free trial aspect, far from moving the industry away from freemium services -- a model we support -- is only resulting in taking the 'mium' out of freemium".

Imagine instead Apple rewarding artists alongside music service subscribers during the three-month trial. The fanboys and bloggers would wag their tongues in trembling excitement and spread positive vibes across the InterWebs. Compensating artists, even when Apple Music trial streamers listen for free, would be great public relations -- and a valuable goodwill gesture with creatives whose content the company needs and whose business buying iPads, iPhones, Macs, and more is just as important.

Instead we have rebels with a cause, as independent artists stand up for their rights to be paid and negative stories roar across the Internet ahead of Apple Music's June 30 launch. They say in marketing that even bad publicity is good -- long term. But when the rich guy fleeces your pocket for pennies to add to his C-Notes, you will remember. They say an elephant never forgets; neither does the artist robbed of his creation.

Photo Credit: CREATISTA/Shutterstock

Apple Music is the Tim Cook 'One More Thing' we waited for

Publié: juin 16, 2015, 12:55am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Apple Music iPhone 6

Seven days ago, CEO of the most valuable, publicly-traded technology company on the planet unveiled a potentially category-changing online streaming service. In 15 more, you will be able to subscribe -- three months for free. Pundits wave the Spotify flag and spit out diatribes of disgust, much as they did when Apple launched iPhone eight years ago or iPad in 2010. Wrong again is their destiny. Will they ever learn?

Many of the doomsayers forget, or maybe just ignore, the fruit-logo company's success disrupting category after category. They also start out from a misguided premise: That Apple is a latecomer who cannot catch up with competitors like Spotify. How ridiculous. iTunes debuted in January 2001, iPod nine months later, and iTunes Music Store in April 2003. By longevity and reach, which includes exclusives (like The Beatles) and large catalog, Apple is the status quo. On June 30, the giant awakes, and the smidgens shake as it walks.

Five assets and benefits ensure that Apple Music will surely succeed -- and the measure that matters most is profitability:

iTunes' huge install base and expansive reach
Absorption of Beats into existing music offerings
Beats 1 radio using live DJs to program and play music
Connect, which enables more artists to reach more of their fans
Marketing muscle that will promote Apple Music everywhere - 100 countries
Human touch: Real people making music selection decisions rather than algorithms

Then there are The Beatles, which already are digitally exclusive to iTunes. Should Apple secure streaming rights before launch, its service would stand apart from every other.

The Great Imitator

Apple is credited for being an innovator, when in fact the company is a follower. Apple didn't invent the personal computer, laptop, MP3 player, software media player, app store, music store, smartphone, tablet, or smartwatch. (Did I miss anything?) Apple partly, or quite shockingly, reinvented these categories. But the company was by no means first, even though there is much revisionist history asserting otherwise (oh how fanboy tongues wag as the Apple PR machine bulldozes).

Oded Shenkar says "Apple is itself a consummate imitator", in his book Copycats: How Smart Companies use Imitation to Gain a Strategic Edge. Apple has long practiced what he calls imovation -- that is imitative innovation. The approach defines many of the most successful companies.

"More than anything, Apple is master of assembly imitation: it follows in the paths of many predecessors, which have existing technologies and materials to generate new technologies by recombining them", Shenkar says.

In the majority of these other categories, Apple was the upstart. The newcomer. The company is the late-starter with subscription streaming -- if ignoring iTunes Match (which no one should). But unlike media players, smartphones, or tablets, Apple is the juggernaut commanding huge, extendable presence -- more than 600 million iTunes accounts, for example. Assuming that just one-six of them subscribe to Apple Music, at average $10, revenue would be a cool $1 billion a month.

For some comparison, Spotify claims 75 million active users and 20 million paying subscribers. The service is available in 58 markets. Apple Music will launch in 100 countries. Pandora asserts four million more active listeners than Spotify and reports $230.8 million revenue during first quarter 2015. One question to ask: What percentage of these 150-million-plus subscribers listen on iTunes-supported devices? How many will rush to the tidy integration Apple promises?

If the typical pattern follows, as I expect, loyal Apple customers will be early adopters. They can access their vast music libraries alongside other content on devices already supporting iTunes (e.g., iPad, iPhone, iPod, Mac, or Windows PC). Three months free will tempt many other streamers to compare Apple to oranges. After which, they can pay $9.99 monthly for one subscription or family of six for another five bucks.

Yeah, the best features and pricing are imitative. But that's what the great copycat does so well, by sprinkling sugar and spice. Everything is nice and fits into a larger lexicon of digital lifestyle. Critics complain about lofty Mac pricing but millions of buyers still pay the premium. Apple sold 4.5 million computers during calendar Q1 2015, generating $5.6 billion revenue. That works out to an average selling price of $1,230 -- a number most competitors would figuratively kill for. The point: The company often succeeds by acting in ways that defy the logic of others.

Beats Me

Apple brought the original iTunes to market 14-and-a-half years ago by buying and later adapting SoundJam. It wasn't the first buyout to go Apple native, and Beats feels similar. The $3 billion acquisition was announced in May 2014. Valuable assets included cofounders Jimmy lovine and Dr. Dre. The Beats brand adds to Apple's, the music and radio services become basis for the subscription streamer, and the tech titan gains valuable inroads with artists (and even labels). There would be no Apple Music without Beats.

In music production, there is concept of the hook -- the beginning riff that pulls in listeners. I see Beats 1 radio as being the hook for Apple Music. For pundits arguing that the fruit-logo company can't compete without a free tier, the new radio service -- or even the old one from iTunes -- is just that. Only better, if delivering as promised.

Live programming is a huge differentiator. Some of us are alive long enough to remember when MTV actually aired music videos introduced by VJs. Ah, Martha Quinn and Mark Goodman -- and three others. There was a rawness about early-years production values that made the first five feel fresh and approachable -- like many successful radio disc jockeys. The personalities that matter aren't just the artists, but the people producing or playing their music. Beats 1's potential is huge, depending on execution.

While radio is free, Apple's big benefits will come from tie-ins to subscriptions and sales. The music juggernaut sits atop a mountain of potential. In 2014, global music industry revenues from physical and digital formats were equal at 46 percent, respectively, according to IFPI. Free and paid streaming subscription service revenues grew by 39 percent.

"The subscription model is leading to more payment for music by consumers, many of whom appear to be shifting from pirate services to a licensed music environment that pays artists and rights holders", the trade group finds. The number of paying subscription subscribers reached 41 million last year. That's globally. Meaning: There is plenty of room for an imitator like Apple to grow and also turn streaming, whether DJ or customer chosen, into further song sales. Despite streaming subscription service gains, paid downloads still account for more than half of digital music revenues, which plays to Apple's core even as it seeks to expand the crop.

For the pundits harping that Apple Music can't compete against free tiers from the likes of Pandora or Spotify, consider the paid downloads statistic and something else: In 2003, Apple also faced fierce competition from free music -- that which people pilfered from the successors of Napster. The file-sharing site ignited a revolution that labels tried to extinguish but failed. Someone will always pay, as iTunes Music Store's success shows, and IFPI indicates that it's more people every day.

Connect You

From my vantage point, Apple Music Connect could be the platform for artist engagement with fans and for enabling more independent publishing. The component also encourages posting of exclusive content that fans might want and makes Apple Music more appealing than competing services.

From the official marketing material:

Candid shots from backstage. In-progress lyrics. A rough cut of a new video. Here, artists can share just about anything they want. Because when musicians are free to express themselves directly to their fans, it’s a powerful thing...Musicians can post songs and videos to enhance existing albums in their discography. Which gives you a chance to gain more insight into the meaning of songs, discover sources of inspiration, and get greater depth and more context about music you may have been listening to for years.

Think Myspace Music during its brief dominance or what Facebook offers today -- only better presented and with tools that encourage dialog between artists and their fans. My question: Who owns the rights, when Jon Snow comments with the perfect tweak to that lyric in progress?

Imagine independents publishing directly sans labels, as another opportunity.

Content producers also gain from massive marketing, which Apple does all too well. Watch TV during primetime any evening and count how many Apple commercials air and compare to the low number from any other high-tech company -- other than cellular carriers. Do you think Spotify spots will outnumber Apple Music by any appreciable measure?

If you closely examine Apple marketing, going back to that for the original Macintosh in 1984, making the machine more human -- more responsive to you -- is a consistent theme. Another: Aspiration. The promise: Apple products enable people to be happier, to have better lives. Whether or not that's true is topic for comments. My point is the marketing messaging, not its truthfulness; for this analysis.

Music is very personal, and people want to engage other people not some algorithm. Apple promises real music programmers working behind the curtain, alongside artists via Connect, or DJs on Beats 1. When I pull all the pieces together, I see an exciting platform of opportunity that feels in potential like the iTunes Music Store did 12 years ago.

Apple hits Google where it hurts

Publié: juin 11, 2015, 12:43am CEST par Joe Wilcox

fight fist

I have some advice for the European Union Competition Commission: Lay off. You don't need to reign in the Google monopoly. Apple will correct the market around search and mobile. That's one of two related takeaways from Monday's WWDC 2015 keynote. iOS 9 and OS X El Capitan up Apple's push into search and proactively-delivered information in big ways. That is if delivery is as good as the company promises.

The other takeaway harkens back to what I told you last week about Tim Cook's piracy rant against unnamed Facebook and Google alongside the friggin U.S. government -- plural if thinking beyond the Feds: It's BS marketing. Apple prepares a major competitive assault against Big G, hitting where damage can be severe: Perception and profits. I cannot overstate Google's vulnerability, which ironically is where the search and information giant exploited Microsoft during this Century.

Freer Than Free

During its rise to dominance, Microsoft adopted an effective competitive technique: Bundling. The company would offer two, or even more things, for the same price as a competitor's one. Consider, for example, the debut of Office which served up presentation, spreadsheet, and wordprocessing applications for what Lotus or WordPerfect charged for single software.

Microsoft also increasingly incorporated into Windows, for free, features that other companies sold separately in single apps. That practice eventually contributed to the filing of antitrust cases in Europe and the United States. Free proved to be a powerful weapon. Microsoft could give away valuable technology in Windows, because the whole operating system, and applications like Office, was the profit center.

Google's success against Microsoft with products like Apps and Gmail is similar. They serve to facilitate the information giant's real profit center around search while grossly undercutting pricing for products like Office and Exchange. Google did to Microsoft what it had done to so many competitors: Use free stuff as a club.

Apple's position with respect to Google is similar. The fruit-logo company mainly generates revenue from hardware, enabling it to offer some services and software for free. Okay, but free is free -- whichever of the two gives it, right? Wrong. Apple positions its free as superior by beating the your privacy is at risk drum. The company promises to protect your personal information while accusing other gimme-givers of selling your privacy for profit. The marketing plays on users' fears, whether or not legitimate.

Apple Search

Siri, which importance I will expand on in the next paragraph, promises to be on iOS 9 more like Google Now on Android; maybe much better. "Now Siri can search a wider range of topics for a wider range of answers", Apple marketing claims. "It understands what you say more accurately and delivers your results faster. iOS 9 is smarter in lots of other ways, too -- giving you helpful suggestions before you even ask".

The implications are profound: Apple will do search and provide more proactive, contextually-valuable information to its device customers. During the WWDC keynote, the company demarcated clear privacy parameters: Your information stays on your device, where iOS 9 and Siri learn from your behavior. Apple becoming a serious search provider is a big, fraking deal.

In May 2012 post "Siri Sucks", I laid out Apple's must-do agenda for Siri:

Apple is right to focus on voice, which is a much more natural user interface for a mobile device than touch. More importantly, if Siri could actually get the answers right, Apple would have a powerful competitive weapon to blast away Google mobile search share. There, Cook's 'doubling down' is as much, if not more, about transforming the mobile search experience, and that means butting heads with Google. Better: Someday replacing Google with Siri search on iOS devices. But that's not viable as long as Siri sucks.

The difference in Apple's execution three years later serves customers and undercuts Google. Big G feeds off information that others produce by wrapping around contextual advertising services. Apple only needs to know about you for you, because it profits from hardware and related services. Not advertising. If Apple's pro-privacy marketing and technology deliver what people want, for free, Google is in for trouble long term. The big word is If.

Now would by a good time for Apple to release a sequel to the "1984" commercial that launched the Macintosh, with Google taking the Big Brother role assigned to IBM. If Apple's marketing team isn't thinking about something like this, they should. Give me a ring. I have some ideas for you.

The Human Touch

Beating Google at the free game relates to something more important. Apple's business model is all about defining and controlling the customer experience. The philosophy is fundamental to end-to-end delivery of hardware, software, and supporting services. But search is outside the company's reach, when delivered by Google from Safari or Microsoft in Siri. Apple must meet customers' broad informational needs to truly be in control. That means delivering better search and proactively providing information that is contextually relevant (e.g. what's important to you when needed).

Siri Still Sucks Something else: Humanity is core to Apple's cultural DNA. Just look back to the marketing for the original Macintosh in 1984. The design ethic then, and remains so 30-plus years later, is making the machine more human -- more responsive to you; more extension of you.

No example in practice is better than iPhone. In June 2007, Apple supercharged the smartphone category with a more natural user interface. Suddenly, there was a new way to interact with a mobile handset that was seemingly magical. Humanness made the original iPhone stand apart from all competitors, and Apple used a variety of sensors to imbue the quality. Touch, and its intimacy, and the way the handset responded to your proximity gave it the human quality.

Four years later, Siri looked like the design ethic's next leap forward, by adding human-like personality and extending the mobile user interface to another sense more important than touch: Voice. Problem: There was something inhuman then, and remains now, about Siri's often frustrating responses to questions. The screenshot is example. Last night, I asked the question, which the feature got right, but the answer is meaningless. I wanted to reheat pizza not buy another pie.

If the proactive capabilities of Siri on iOS 9 live up to promises made during the keynote, Apple can fulfill both design objectives: Deliver more end-to-end customer experience that it controls and imbue even more human-like responsiveness to iPad and iPhone.

Meanwhile, the piracy marketing rant shakes the tree to see what Google-fearing customers fall out. Side-benefit: Apple can excuse when Siri isn't as good as Google Now by waving the privacy flag: "Google provides more because it snoops more. We give you a little less by not taking more".

Apple is known as a category disruptor by practicing imitative innovation. Stated simply: Do even better what someone already does. Disrupting Google might seem like an unsurmountable task. But eight years ago so did iPhone competing with Nokia, which is where today?

Photo Credit: tankist276/Shutterstock

Microsoft can only blame itself

Publié: juin 9, 2015, 6:52pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

OS X 10.11

Apple has a long history of competitive marketing one-upmanship. Major tactic is the artful leak timed around someone else's major product announcement or event. How many times has the company stolen CES participants' thunder without ever attending the event, for example? Occasionally, the showstopper is accidental, as is the case with OS X El Capitan.

I wonder: What were the Microsoft development and marketing teams thinking when they chose July 29th as Windows 10's release date? It's like stepping off the curb in front of a fast-moving, energy-efficient, gas-powered bus. Apple almost certainly will release the OS X 10.11 Public Preview before Windows 10 drops. The company promises July and has every reason to rub Microsoft's nose in the stink.

Someone at Microsoft must have known this was coming, or at the least suspected. Apple announced WWDC 2015 dates months ago. New OS X version reveal is typical. The guesswork isn't rocket science, then. However, Microsoft also is one of the platform's biggest developers, with Office 2016 for the Mac already testing. Surely someone in Redmond, Wash. knew enough to counsel caution.

So why step in front of that bus? Unless perhaps you think you can beat it?

Good luck with that, Microsoft. Anything that Apple does grabs huge media attention. The tech press just can't write enough. Bloggers and journalists pull out their laptops with the lighted bitten-fruit logo and bang out adoring copy that makes the sweetest press releases seem bland. The adulation is a puke-easy moment for the rest of us.

The Public Preview will be an event, and one likely to overshadow Windows 10's release. El Capitan will lead away a horde of analysts, bloggers, investors, and journalists -- and anyone listening to them. Sure, there are many die-hard Microsoft platform fans among BetaNews readers who will, ah, think differently rather than the other side's grammatically incorrect think different. But buzz will be Apple's, as it has been about so much else over the past few years.

All that comes not from OS X 10.11's release but its beta. Apple gets another swipe at Windows 10 when El Capitan releases sometime in autumn -- perhaps about the time new PCs running Win10 arrive on store shelves.

What a strange turnabout. Apple debuted OS X in March 2001 and released the first major update in September -- around when Windows XP shipped and stormed the market. Fourteen years ago, Microsoft commanded investors' and the media's attention. Sure, in 2015, Windows leads volume sales, in a race to lowest PC selling price. Apple gets more respect. How do I know? Because the fruit-logo loving tech press tells us so every day -- whether or not we want to hear it. Eh?

Tidal makes good

Publié: juin 8, 2015, 6:08pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Tidal Rolling Stones Nexus 6

On June 3rd, music streaming service Tidal updated its Android app, which in my extensive testing over the weekend resolves a catastrophic bug that skips songs. The previous version jumped tracks before they finished playing on my Nexus 6 or 9. Last week, the lossless listening provider acknowledged the problem. The fix is in, and I am satisfied.

Tidal delivers HiFi streaming—1411kbps Free Lossless Audio Codec—at the premium price of $19.99 per month. For a music streamer charging more, about double other paid service competitors, the glitch was inexcusable. I first reported the erratic behavior nearly a month ago.

I started subscribing on April 1st (please, don't call me a fool for the date) and really enjoy the listening experience. I concede that not everyone will hear, or even prefer, the Tidal sound. We often like what we are accustomed to.

I most certainly can hear profound subtleties, particularly instruments like cymbals. It's the highs where I detect the differences—fine details. There is also, at least to my aged ears, a purity—a clarity—that is distinct from lower bitrate AAC- or MPEG-encoded music. However, people demanding and accustomed to mushier, bassier sound may feel Tidal tracks sound flat.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

The end of Apple's 'i' era is nigh

Publié: juin 8, 2015, 2:02am CEST par Joe Wilcox

If Apple's streaming music service launches tomorrow at WWDC and is branded with the company's name/logo, look for broad naming changes ahead. My guess, and it's only that: the lower-case letter before products like iMac or iPhone will disappear; over time. Under CEO Tim Cook, the branding strategy differs from Steve Jobs. That's sensible considering where the company is today compared to 1998 when the cofounder introduced iMac.

Apple Watch foreshadows the new nomenclature. Contrary to months of iWatch rumors before launch, the device is identified by sound as Apple Watch, but what you see is the company's logo, which is one of the most recognizable brand icons ever created. If Apple Music turns out to be more than just streaming, but the replacement for or displacement of iTunes, consider that as sign of future naming conventions to come. If I am mistaken -- well, Apple should do what I predict.

Why "i" is "I'

The "i" before Apple products was brilliant marketing for its day. Remember the context. When Jobs returned to the company and, in 1997, assumed the role of interim CEO, the core Mac business was way down while Windows was way up. Quarterly losses mounted, and the brand had fallen into obscurity, except among select professionals and the so-called Faithful, who stuck by Apple with cult-like adoration. The grammatically incorrect "Think Different" advertising campaign sought to build brand identity among the creative rebels who were once Apple customers during the mid-1980s to the early 1990s. The "i" before iMac sought something else.

In popular folklore, the lower-case letter before the computer's name and other Apple products that followed represents Internet. When introducing the all-in-one PC, Jobs said: "iMac comes from the excitement of the Internet with the simplicity of Macintosh". He also identified other "i" words: individual, information, inspire, and instruction.

But the meaning from a marketing perspective is more profound, because what you see is different from what you hear. iPhone is lowercase but you hear "I" phone. Uppercase as in my or mine. Me. Think of the connotations with respect to book I, Claudius. The “I” as statement of self, of something important. Similarly, the name may read iPad but what you hear is I Pad -- as in my Pad. I is very personal; possessive. Its use fit into Apple as a company looking to remove the complexity from technology and to make products that were more personal.

Personal -- as in belongs to you -- is the defining design characteristic of every product Apple produced under Steve Jobs. Iconic iPhone is by far the best example. Proximity and orientation sensors matched with the capacitive touchscreen made the smartphone more human-like, because it responded to you.

The Logo is My Bond

That was Apple under Jobs, who is gone (hopefully to a better place), during the era of the Windows hegemony. By the time of his passing in October 2011, Apple was on a dramatic, upward financial trajectory leading to staggering profits lifted by iPhone. During fiscal 2015 first quarter the company reported $18 billion profit. Not revenue but earnings! For Q2, the company's net income was more than two-and-half times Microsoft's and 3.8 times that of Google. iPhone accounted for a stunning 69.4 percent of revenues -- that's up 57 percent from 12 months earlier.

Apple's brand is no longer obscure but status quo, and the recognizable logo is a marketing asset that new products can capitalize on. For the smarwatch, the importance cannot be overstated. Most of the company's products prominently display the logo for everyone to see. Any Mac, or even iPhone, is obvious example. For the wearable, the logo is more hidden, but prominent in the name as you see it. The same will be true of the new music service, which should be differentiated from the old: Apple Music rather than Apple Tunes (yuck to the latter).

There are very good brand-building and brand-maintaining reasons that other companies put their names into their products. Google Music. Google Maps. Microsoft Office. Amazon Prime. But Apple has a tremendous asset that rivals like Google and Microsoft don't. Their names are their logos. Microsoft gets by putting the Windows symbol on some devices, but its placement and prominence is nothing like the bitten fruit that identifies Apple and adorns its products. Hence, why the logo is what you see in the smartwatch name.

Incorporating the logo visually, and name audibly, is no-brainer brand marketing. Time is right, with the status quo to protect and to extend. But putting aside the quo for moment, status defines the Apple brand. Decades of marketing, product design, and pricing promote status -- importance without the need for that "i" -- by way of association. Consumers want to be identified by, or with, brands they believe raise their own importance or status.

Everything goes back to the logo, which is sensible identifier for Apple Music. We will see tomorrow if it is. If so, then look ahead to what that may mean for the lot of remaining "i" products. There must come a point where Apple has opportunity to transcend iPhone -- to take the device into broader categories of capabilities. That would be time to rebrand as something that demarcates the "i" past with the Apple logo future.

Reinvent Thyself

I mean no insult, but such change is a way for Tim Cook to mark his territory, so to speak -- to brand that which belongs to his legacy and separate from the esteemed Jobs. Apple Watch is a start. Apple Music could be continuation, followed by whatever displaces/extends beyond devices like iPad or iPhone. Think about that for a second: Pundits obsess about Apple creating the next big thing that creates or reinvents a broad tech category. But Apple's bigger challenge is creating or reinventing markets where it is mindshare or marketshare leader.

Not for the first time. Apple laptops largely displaced desktops. iPhone displaced and really replaced iPod. iPad established a bridge between smartphones and computers. As I explained four years ago about the "brilliance of iPad": "Apple's platform is a continuum from the cheapest iPhone to the most expensive Mac. Price is also a continuum from the $49 iPhone 3G to the $2,499 17-inch MacBook Pro. There are no major gaps". In 2015, the price and feature continuum ranges from $99 iPhone 5s to $3,999 Mac Pro.

Whatever iPad or iPhone become -- and the most transcend into something -- I expect new nomenclature with Apple logo. There are precedents. For example, how many different, but evolving, cloud services has the company offered? Three, this century? Another -- something like Apple Cloud -- wouldn't be too forward.

As Apple reinvents itself, not just the industries around it, there is opportunity to mark the future -- and the tenure of Tim Cook -- with the recognizable, iconic logo and retire "i" to accomplishments past.

Photo Credit: 1000 Words/Shutterstock

What do you like about Windows 10?

Publié: juin 7, 2015, 2:11am CEST par Joe Wilcox

cat in a box

Wow. What a wicked week it is for Microsoft platforms. As May closed, Insider Preview Build 10130 dropped, followed by a preorder page for OEM versions. Then came the big reveal just five days ago: Windows 10 will be available on July 29th. System requirements are out now, though. On June 3rd, the company showed off devices designed for the operating system. A day later, Office 2016 Preview updated with new features, many tapping cloud services. Yesterday, Build 10135 release notes leaked.

Fitting with the "beta" in BetaNews, it's time to pose the big question for those of you daring enough to grab Windows 10 now ahead of next's month's big release. Most of the BN writing team runs the operating system. I'm late to the upgrade party but will join the gang later today or tomorrow. Meanwhile, I ask: What do you like about Windows 10? If you must: What don't you like -- and, related, what do you still want?

With release so close, and builds dropping faster than we can write stories about them, time to ask is finally come. Sure, spit and polish remains but this baby should be feature-complete and performance-stable enough for some honest feedback about the soon to be lock-and-loaded code.

"So two more months to hammer out some bugs", Eric Sleeper comments five days ago. "Most of the GUI and features are there for me -- and look forward to Windows 10 evolving over time. It will be an interesting two months for sure. For myself, I just have one annoying issue with the picture password -- and the only feature I would like from Day One: Tabs in the File Explorer".

But barely_normal answers: "As you've no doubt heard, features are locked. No luck with that one... Get used to them having it their way". Just to clarify: Never assume features are complete until release to manufacturing. Last-minute changes or capabilities kept hush hush until RTM is Microsoft tradition.

Uh-oh, barely_normal adds: "I actually am going to stop testing Windows 10, as I will not use, or recommend, a Windows that forces updates upon the user, unless there is a guarantee of payment, say $500/hour, for each hour my computer is unusable each time the updates bork the machine in any way. Unreasonable? Certainly. In the same manner as Microsoft? You bet!"

Google pushes out Chrome OS updates about every six weeks. Surely Microsoft can execute as well or even better. What is "software-as-a-service" if not something like what barely_normal objects to?

PC_Tool has "no issues with any of the build regarding stability. The constant changes were a bit dramatic; maybe even somewhat traumatizing, but they seem to have settled down a bit and I do like what I see in the latest build".

Jason Hendry's experience is similar: "I'm not having many if any bugs on my Windows 10130 Build. I've used pretty much all their updates as my daily device and only one time I had to reinstall from fresh. I'm surprised how bug-free mostly my experience has been on Windows 10 desktop.

Other BetaNews readers report problems, however. "The software really hates my laptop", Johnrc comments five days ago. "This is the laptop I use for experimentation. No way I am going to upgrade the laptops and desktops I use for real work. I can live with Windows 7 and Windows 8.1. The alternative is unacceptable".

Your experience is what? We really want to know. What do you like? Dislike? Still want? Please share with the class, and educate other would-be Windows 10 upgraders -- or others joining the beta plunge -- about your experience.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/S.Castelli

Tim Cook is an opportunist

Publié: juin 3, 2015, 11:47pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Apple CEO Tim Cook

Nine years ago, a NPR interviewer asked me about Google and other U.S. companies censoring search results in China. The question was one of morality -- to which I gave answer she didn't expect. That response, or my recollection of it, is appropriate for rather ridiculous and self-serving statements that Apple CEO Tim Cook reportedly made two days ago.

"We believe that people have a fundamental right to privacy", Cook said, Matthew Panzarino reports for TechCrunch. "The American people demand it, the constitution demands it, morality demands it". Oh? What is moral? The answer I gave NPR in 2006 applies: There is no moral high ground in business. The high ground is quagmire, because all public companies -- Apple surely among them -- share a single, moral objective: Make profits for stockholders. Plain, pure, and simple.

No Moral High Ground

Cook reportedly slammed the U.S. government about an "attack on our civil liberties" -- "the battle over encryption". He offhandedly referred to Google and other tech companies giving away products or services for free: "They’re gobbling up everything they can learn about you and trying to monetize it. We think that’s wrong, and it’s not the kind of company that Apple wants to be".

Cook claims the moral high ground but to what end? I tell other reporters to first ask about everything: Who benefits? Applying that question tears apart Cook's reported statements made on June 1 during the Electronic Privacy Information Center "Champions of Freedom" event.

U.S. law essentially treats businesses like people, which is cockeyed since the moral and legal ethics that apply to people are often undermined by the ethics of public companies. Means to end, the end being profits, is justification for lots of misdeeds. The measure that applies to Cook's statements at the EPIC event, or any other elsewhere: How does Apple and its shareholders benefit? Morality begins and ends there.

The Promise

Cook's accusations remind me of the Three-card Monte grifters I see on the streets of Manhattan. He plays a game of promise, distraction, and gimme. The promise is one of higher morality -- he and Apple share the same beliefs about privacy rights that most Americans presumably do. Really? By the moral measure of profits for shareholders first, there is another viewpoint: Raising the company's image as do-gooder, which attracts sales and ensures profits.

Late morning, I told my BetaNews colleagues in group chat: "On Tim Cook, he is an opportunist. Timing of his comments coincide with Senate vote on curtailing government's spying powers". Encryption is part of the debate, one which Cook surely would like to sway. Think about it. Realistically. Who benefits more from blocking government back-door access that breaks tough encryption? You and your privacy? Or Apple's?

Companies like Cook's are super-protective about trade secrets. They don't want government snooping on them. Just to allow government the ability to break encryption reveals valuable intellectual property, while exposing the company (and others) to future further interference in operations and opening way to public image disasters when private information is disclosed and the act is publicly revealed -- something that can unsettle shareholder confidence and compromise product sales. To reiterate about his privacy statements: That's shareholder-first morality.

I see many recent public commentaries and interviews attributed to Cook singularly: Presenting Apple as the moral authority in line with the common good. Timing of his coming out as gay is one example (for which some commenters will slam me for even suggesting; that's your problem). Many other, recent non-product public announcements from Apple or related to its CEO carry an air of moral branding, such as: $50 million donation for diversity; Cook's Washington Post anti-discrimination commentary; or his George Washington University commencement speech, where he asserts: "We believe that a company that has values, and acts on them, can really change the world -- and an individual can, too. That can be you".

Tying Apple's so-called morality to those of graduating students -- and anyone watching the speech on YouTube -- is endearing and aspirational. But it's as much marketing, if not more. Tim Cook may be a moral man, by my definition or yours. But as CEO of a public company beholden to shareholders, he ultimately answers to another moral authority.

The Distraction

Being the do-gooder isn't enough. There must be an enemy. That's the distraction.

I also told my colleagues: "Google and Facebook give away things that Apple must sell -- why he goes after them, even unnamed". Their business models, particularly expanding into mobile devices, threatens Apple's future profits, which is almost unbelievable given four years of earth-moving sales and a cash horde approaching $200 billion.

Later, I read several comments to Mark Wilson's news story about Cook's statements that coincide with my thinking: "Apple can take this stance more easily because it sells hardware", Boltmanisnuts contends. "Any information they collect they want to keep to themselves and not share it because it helps them make better choices". Jack Bnimble adds: "Google and Facebook essentially have no tangible products. Your information is their products".

But Google, particularly, makes platforms around which other companies sell products that directly compete with Apple's. During last week's developer conference, Google claimed: The number of Android users has reached 1 billion; eight out of 10 smartphones sold in 2014 used Android; in the year since last I/O, there have been 600 million new Android users.

Corroboration: During first quarter 2015, based on smartphone shipments, Android share reached 78 percent -- up from 59.2 percent three years earlier, according to IDC. During the same time period, iOS fell to 18.3 percent from 22.9 percent. That said, year over year, Apple's platform recovered some share from Google's.

Meanwhile, Chromebooks make surprising gains in one of Apple's core markets: Education. Gartner says that the majority of sales, 72 percent last year, go into the segment, which is among Apple's longstanding cores.

If Google platforms power all these devices, but the company is an evil snoop invading your privacy and selling it for profit, then Cook's implied advice is clear: Don't buy their crap. Choose gold from Apple, which protects your privacy and aligns with your values. But, to again repeat, the moral standard that he really espouses is something else: Protecting his company's shareholder profits.

The Gimme

In Three-card Monte, a plant in the crowd wins, while real onlookers lose. Promise and distraction. The Gimme is the last bit to this moral marketing charade. Apple wants your money -- and what company doesn't? That's capitalism. So be a capitalist, Mr. Cook. Don't pretend to be something else.

If you buy into the Apple image -- the brand and recent reinventions around social values -- then the company gets your money. You pay more for Macs than Chromebooks or Windows PCs and you preserve the subsidized smartphone business model. Remember: That $199 you pay for 16GB iPhone 6 is an illusion, like the $20 bill under the Three-card Monte cup on the street. Cellular carriers pay $649 for that phone and recoup costs over time from your service commitment.

For consumers whose values include saving money, subsidized mobiles are an affront. Apple and Tim Cook put shareholders first by ensuring quarterly profits, rather than truly serving customers. The agendas contradict. That's fine, It's capitalism. Let's just not pretend this other ethical priority is something else, or more than it really is.

Meanwhile, Apple's morality marketing distracts from the company's own human-rights violations with operations in China; U.S. tax avoidance, antitrust oversight, increasing security vulnerabilities affecting its platforms (examples iCloud, iOS, OS X), or cloud services shortcomings compared to rivals like Amazon, Facebook, Google, or Microsoft. Apple's privacy position -- all without showing clearly what the company does different or better -- seeks to distract from the latter.

The first three directly deal with moral issues where many average Americans might disagree with Apple's actions. Cook and Company shift the moral narrative to one they control -- clever marketing behind the promise, distraction, and gimme; kudos for savvy capitalism, Apple. But are these values that will change the world? You tell me.

Tidal seeks fix for Android app bug

Publié: juin 2, 2015, 4:32am CEST par Joe Wilcox

My third month as a Tidal subscriber started today, but nearly not at all. Last week I prepared to cancel the pricey, streaming service after encountering a disastrous functional flaw listening on either Nexus 6 or 9. Songs skip to the next track part way through playing, which is unacceptable behavior—made more so because of expectations that higher audio fidelity and loftier monthly subscription fee set.

I would have stopped subscribing yesterday, at the billing cycle's end, if not for Tidal offering a free month of service. Whether or not our paying relationship continues depends much on the music streamer resolving an app problem. "There is a bug with Nexus and Sony phones with Android 5 unfortunately", according to a tech support specialist, "We are working on fixing this. Mostly after 26 megabytes have been streamed, it skips. So for now we do not have a solution yet",

Yikes! If your experience on said devices is like mine, now you know why. The question: When is the fix? On this fine June 1st, every song played from the Android Tidal app on my Nexus 6 skips. None finishes.

Well, Frak Me

My problem started with Google's HTC-made tablet, then spread to the Motorola-manufactured smartphone. Last week, I contacted Tidal support, sending this email:

My service renews May 31. I plan to cancel on the 29th.

I have an ongoing problem with the Android app on Nexus 6 and 9, where songs skip ahead and do not complete. This anomaly started soon after my second month of service, which is my first as a paying subscriber. The places where songs skip to the next is fairly consistent. Today, listening to Rolling Stones classic "Sympathy for the Devil", the track abruptly ended about halfway through the 6:18 play time.

There is no pattern I can discern. The problem occurs with some albums and not with others. It might occur one day consistently with every song on an album but on another day play just fine. I do not see the errant behavior using the webapp in Chrome on my laptop.

Your FAQ section isn't helpful, and I see no support forums for subscribers. I was in the process of canceling service when making the decision to send this email first. But without resolution, I must use another service, which is tragic. I will truly miss Tidal. Lossless listening is joyous, but useless if songs skip.

Can we fix this? Seems like a service-side problem to me. Otherwise, I must cancel, but in two days, so you can respond.

I sent the message at 12:42 PM PDT on May 27th and received response about 10 hours later; the email text puts the time as 8:21 AM the following day. which would be about right for Norway (where the service was founded before being acquired by Jay Z). Response time is acceptable enough.

Cue the Record

Besides acknowledging the app bug, the tech-support specialist addressed something else: "We do not want support forums as they tend to be filled with spam and other things that are not very relevant. Most answers can be [found] in the FAQ, and if the customer is wondering about something he/she can contact support for further assistance".

Well, frak, I actually see the sense in that. Tidal appeals to people willing to pay more for superior sound. Again, high pricing—about twice other paid services—raises expectations about quality of service and customer support. One-on-one support is more sensible and presents better public image if support forums don't: 1) Fill up with span; 2) Become repository for complaints.

I most certainly can hear the difference between 320kbps MP3 and Tidal's 1411kbps Free Lossless Audio Codec. But I concede that many listeners either won't, or the difference they hear will be dissatisfying because of the bassy, muddy sound to which they are accustomed. That's why last month I put forth the Tidal challenge: Listen to nothing else for 21 days, then compare to the more compressed tracks.

But benefits are meaningless if you can't appreciate them because songs skip. The experience might be grumpily acceptable for a free service, but certainly not at $19.99 per month. As much as I really, really, really like Tidal's HiFi streaming and the curated playlists, something else pulls me away: Last week, when signing onto Google Music from Nexus 6, the service offered 6 months free should I resubscribe. I couldn't refuse no billing until after Thanksgiving.

I could save $100 by just canceling Tidal before July 1st and using Google Music instead. Will Tidal fix the Android app bug before June 30th? Will I find the superior sound so satisfying as to pay more when I can get otherwise similar benefits for free? The drama! We shall see.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

The truth about Google Photos

Publié: mai 30, 2015, 12:08am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Secret Tell Surprise Shock

Google Photos is more than an exciting -- and hugely transforming -- new product. The app/cloud service is a metaphor for an escalating mobile business model that, with perhaps the exception of Facebook, no competitor has the capacity to match.

Users gain tremendous time-saving utility, such as the ability to meaningfully search using innocuous terms like "dog" or "Washington", all without the need to manually add metadata tags by way of applications like Photoshop. Meanwhile, Google gets access to quantifiable information, in the image and accompanying metadata, around which to sell advertising and related contextual content or services.

Means to an End

In 2005 -- that's right a decade ago -- I explained Google's business model in terms no one else used; then, at least. In a Microsoft Monitor analysis archived on my personal site: "Google no longer is just a search company, if it ever really was. Search is really a means to an end, and that end is the access to information..Google’s ambitions would appear to be much larger than search. Looks to me like the company wants to catalog and access all information, regardless of who creates it or where it is stored". The goal, of course: To monetize information. That's the end where search leads. But the explanation isn't that simple.

Context and informational utility define the three major computing eras. IBM led the first, established around mainframes, which provided large businesses greater utility to catalog and act upon information but within the context of the workplace. The PC made more information available to smaller businesses, educational and other institutions, and every-day consumers in broader contexts.

The contextual cloud computing era, which often is misidentified as post-PC, takes information from the desktop confines and puts it in your pocket -- or makes it available anytime, anywhere, and on anything in changeable contexts. For example, no longer is your role defined by location. You can go from parent to product manager without leaving the couch or rushing back to the office.

With respect to cost, mainframes sold for millions of dollars, which was prohibitive for the masses. PC hardware and software could be purchased for thousands, broadening informational utility around documents and spreadsheets to hundreds of millions of people. IBM profited from the first; Microsoft and partners from the second.

By contrast, Google's business model is one of the most disruptive ever conceived: Give away for free what competitors must charge for, while largely profiting from goods that someone else produces and which can be used without payment. Search is the means of getting that information, whether combed for free on the web or generated by people using products like Gmail, Maps, and -- surely you guessed -- Photos.

Mobile Me

That the service's centerpiece is a mobile app for either Android or iOS (yes, PC web browser works fine) is no coincidence. Google recognized long before most high-tech companies the importance of mobile. Several of my BetaNews analyses from 5 years ago explain where the company was headed, particularly with respect to mobile: "Google is a dangerous monopoly -- more than Microsoft ever was" and "Apple and Microsoft beware: Google will be an unstoppable force in mobility". They provide valuable context, if you have time to read. Briefly excerpting from the second post:

The company is rapidly pulling together numerous, seemingly disparate products and services around offering a mobile lifestyle. Google's major focus is no longer search. The company has clearly made mobility the top priority, extending from existing customers using search or other Google services. Google has a huge advantage over competitors, which customers pay for something. Google customers largely consume free services, around which Google makes money from other stuff, such as advertising and keyword search. So Google's customer-loss risks are less even as it disrupts competitors' businesses and snatches away their customers.

A half-decade later, there are good reasons why the European Union's Competition Commission investigates Google's mobile dominance, connected to search and other services. During yesterday's annual I/O developer conference, Google made some startling claims:

Number of Android users reaches 1 billion
Eight out of 10 smartphones sold last year used Android
In the year since last I/O, there have been 600 million new Android users
Four thousand Android devices are available from about 500 different carriers
Gmail now has 900 million users, and three-quarters access from mobile devices

Search and advertising are conjoined, and their relationship is tighter still around mobile devices. According to Juniper Research, global mobile advertising spending will reach $51 billion this year, more than doubling to $105 billion by 2019.

Mobile devices are much more personal than PCs, for numerous reasons, such as being constantly carried or being hubs for communications and accessing contextually-relevant information. In transitioning its business from web-based keyword and related advertising, Google should:

Provide users with fast, easy information access
Make easier sharing and communicating things that matter
Use mobile devices' personal character to gather valuable data about users

On the latter, if Google doesn't get the info, Facebook will. The social network collects terabytes of personal data every day that is advertising actionable. Other than Amazon, no Google cloud competitor collects more personal information than Facebook. People give it away in Likes, posted photos, status updates, and more.

No Rival

If Apple had released Google Photos, web writers would be gaga with praise. The service is potentially enormously disruptive to every other photo-sharer. If I wasn't committed to the "Flickr a Day" project on my personal site, I would cancel my subscription to the Yahoo service. Google Photos is exceptional, starting with the price. Users can store an unlimited number of photos, each up to 16MB in size, and maximum 1080p videos for free. Paying storage customers can remove these overly-generous restrictions.

Google Photos meets the criteria set by my eight Principles of Disruptive Design. Successful products must:

Hide complexity
Emphasize simplicity
Make users feel happy
Build on what is familiar
Imbue human-like qualities
Do what it’s supposed to really well
Allow people to do something they wished they could do but couldn’t
When displacing something else, offer significantly better user experience

The product hides complexity and emphasizes simplicity by, for example:

Automatically backup up photos
Providing remarkable search utility
Removing the need to manually tag pics
Auto-editing images and making manual adjustments easy

I sure felt happy rediscovering my years of backed-up mobile photos today. The service is fast and fluid in desktop browser or Android app (I don't have an iOS device for testing). Human? This thing is personal but familiar enough and functional. Search allows you to find what matters without tagging, and the experience sure beats Apple, Microsoft, and Yahoo photo services. For free. Apple and Microsoft charge $240 and $84 per year, respectively, for 1TB storage. OneDrive also adds Office 365.

Google Gets

Circumspectly, let's finally identify what Photos means to Google: More information mining and search as a means to an end. The photo finding utility that the company provides to users also benefits its own information-gathering efforts and services that are provided to advertising and other contextual partners. Then there is the rich metadata the mobile phones or digital cameras collect, like location.

Think actionable advertising that is contextual. For example, the information giant detects from photos that you wear Adidas sneakers. Lookee! While shopping at the mall you receive a Google Now card on smartwatch or smartphone alerting to a sale on the brand at one of the stores. Now that the company has opened the platform to third parties, such a scenario is achievable.

Google could tie advertiser compensation to Android Pay rather than or in addition to clickable link. User receives contextual Now notice at mall, then she buys new Adidas sneaks using the mobile money app. Google connects the two events based on time from the alert and geographic location; the advertiser is appropriately compensated.

Consider another scenario. Teenage girl snaps photos of outfits she is trying on and sends them to friends. While in the throws of indecision, she receives a Google Now notice informing her that another retailer, and one who is a Big G advertiser, sells shirt and skirt for less. Or, if the store advertises online with Google, she is sent an instant-discount coupon that tips her to make the purchase.

Only Facebook has the utility to be so granular in the personal data collected than what Google can get from your online activities around Gmail, Maps, Search, and related services -- and more. But FB mines behaviorally-rich activities that Big G gets somewhat from its Plus social network but nowhere as many mainstream users.

Adding Photos to its other information-gathering services means more freely-given utility to users and advertising actionable data for partners. It's true photos that auto-backup are private. No one sees them unless you allow. But Google gets access to them -- otherwise they couldn't be automatically enhanced, organized, and primed for search. Everything that your personal pics reveal, either directly in the metadata or overtly by sophisticated algorithm, can be useful to Google. That's the price you pay for the benefits -- of which there are many.

Mobile is all about context. Context is in Google's corporate DNA as a natively cloud company that wraps advertising around search keywords. Photos is bold. Photos is brilliantly executed and builds from what I will call the Google+ field test. Consider all those inhabitants of the so-called, ah, ghost town as guinea pigs at worst, beta testers at best, bringing Photos to the masses.

Free undermines competitors. Context and utility satisfy users. Data collection makes money for Google and its partners. Your personal pics aren't just meaningful to you; they are, en masse, a hugely valuable commodity. That's the truth about Google Photos.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Sharpshutter

My sister abandons Windows Phone

Publié: mai 26, 2015, 8:18pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Mobile apps do matter, otherwise my tech-savvy sister wouldn't be giving up one of the best smartphones on the market: Nokia Lumia Icon (which is the 930 internationally). She bought the handset from me last summer and from Day 1 praised the utility and usability of the user interface, attractive but sturdy design, and amazing hardware capabilities, which include the quality of images produced by the camera.

Nanette rang Thursday afternoon, explaining that she had reached the inflection point of frustration finding apps she wanted or absolutely needed. She wanted my advice about a replacement. Should she return to iPhone (Nan used the 4 before Icon) or get an Android? Her user story illuminates what can happen when someone entrenched in the Microsoft ecosystem raises his or her head above ground and sniffs the Android and Apple air.

Where Are My Apps?

My sister bought the Lumia handset when employed by a company that provides training and other services to larger businesses -- many of them enterprises. As such, the operation is largely a Microsoft shop, where Icon fit in smartly. She could access and edit spreadsheets and perform many other functions relevant to her job from the Icon, which also served as a fine personal smartphone for all its capabilities. She does appreciate the tile-like, task-oriented user interface as being superior to iOS. That's something she will miss.

But months after obtaining Icon, Nan left her employer of about 17 years and started working for a non-profit. It was a longstanding dream opportunity, but one that brought her out of the Microsoft software stack into a stranger world of smaller organization adoption of other platforms. She loved Lumia, but it no longer loved her.

Her non-profit employer supports Android and iOS, but "is not available with a Windows app". She also wants to do more on the phone with apps for local businesses, but her bank, grocery, and movie theater, as examples, don't support Windows Phone. "The app for tracking a participant in running events like VT City Marathon -- of which I am on the Race Committee -- does not have a Windows app either. It just feels like someone at some level has not kept Windows phones in line with Android or Apple".

That's harsh indictment from someone who enjoys using Windows Phone and who is a longstanding user of Microsoft products.

What Choice Now?

Nan doesn't desire a larger smartphone -- and smaller would be even better. She wants something pants pocketable. My sister isn't under contract and prefers to not start a new one, if possible; she has $400 cash to spend and can add more for the right device (assuming Craigslisting Icon will defray some of the purchase price).

I see Verizon as carrier limiting choices somewhat. Nexus 5, which Google no longer sells direct but can be purchased elsewhere, would be my top pick for her. Size, functionality, and benefits running newest Android version are all benefits. But the device, which street price falls within her budget, isn't Verizon-ready.

iPhone costs too much off-contract, or so I consulted. She doesn't want the 6 or 6 Plus for size. iPhone 5s is $599.99 for 32GB capacity (I wouldn't recommend that anyone buy 16GB unless memory is expandable with micro-SD Card). Two-year contract is $149.99 or $24.99 per month on Verizon's Edge program, with payments spanning 24 months.

Verizon sells preowned iPhone 5s 32GB for $249.99, which I recommended against. Price is right, but the device could be all wrong depending on its history.

By the way, because of my sister's physical phone size requirement, I did not recommend newer HTC, LG, and Samsung smartphones -- or Nexus 6, which I use.

My mom also owned an Icon, which she unfortunately lost during a brief hospital stay. Mainly for budget reasons and current carrier, I bought her Moto X Developer Edition for Verizon. Amazon sells the smartphone for $279.99; unlocked, 32GB. Even being older, the device is an excellent value and fits my sister's budget. If money matters more, I counseled Moto X DE as good enough selection.

Moto X 2014 is another option and would be my first choice if the Pure Edition supported Verizon and cost a little less than $599.99 for 64GB capacity (because of her budget). The 32 gigger better fits her budget at $499.99. Two-year contract is $99.99 or $20.83 per month Edge.

Droid Turbo costs the same and receives my strongest recommendation. The Turbo is best described as a Moto X on steroids: Better battery (3900 mAh vs 2300 mAh), camera (21 megapixels vs 13MP), and screen (2560 x 1440 resolution and 565 pixels per inch vs 1920 x 1080 and 423 ppi), for example. But the one is based on the other.

Moto X receives new Android versions fairly quickly, while the Droid is locked into Verizon's slower schedule. The design is a bit industrial and chunky for my tastes, but my wife uses the Turbo and loves it. That makes a second endorsement.

Disturbing Circumstance

Among all the choices, I would recommend staying with Lumia Icon -- if the apps that Nan demands were available. She owns the smartphone with no contractual obligation, and the vintage 2014 hardware holds its own against newer flagships from competitors like Apple and Samsung. Cortana bosses Siri, the overall WP UI is fresh (particularly compared to iOS), and Windows 10 for mobiles alongside Microsoft cloud services promises improving user experience.

What I find most disturbing here: The kinds of apps Nan wants that aren't available. When I asked for further explanation, my expectation: Google apps, which are largely absent, and together are among the biggest absences. But my sister uses Outlook and other Microsoft services, which she adopted when working for her previous employer. She is not a Google user.

Bank. Grocery store. Local theater. Current job. These are disheartening app vacancies.

I will let you know what she decides.

Update: Coincidentally, my sister emailed, then called, about an hour after I posted (she hadn't seen the story). She had just come from a Verizon reseller store, where the rep recommended Galaxy S4 mini for $100 on contract. I firmly recommended against that choice, understanding smaller size is the benefit that appeals to her. The conversation ended with my suggesting that she stay with the Icon longer -- at least wait to see what sales might appear around Father's Day. She isn't dissatisfied with the device or Windows Phone 8.1, just the app selection.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

For all the blathering smartwatch idiots...

Publié: mai 25, 2015, 6:54am CEST par Joe Wilcox

It's a reminder: You're even dumber than you think.

Tireless commentaries and speculation about when will Microsoft release a smartwatch are ill-informed -- as are other speculations about when will watchmakers release their own devices. (I refer not to our readers but writers here, there, and everywhere.) Perhaps you were sucking your thumb or mommy cleaned your poopy diapers when both were trendsetting market realities.

I was reminded yesterday when cleaning out an old CD folder and found the pictured disc. Microsoft introduced the innovative MSN Direct smartwatch concept 12 years ago. The company did not produce the timepieces, nor did any Silicon Valley based tech startup with Asian manufacturing plants. Fossil, Suunto, and Swatch created clever designs that looked traditional or even better. Fossil's Dick Tracy SPOT watch was classic and is worth resurrecting for this decade's second attempt to make a smartwatch that's dumb enough for consumers to appreciate.

Time Passages

But you wouldn't know about Microsoft's wristwear innovations , I guess, not yet having been toilet trained a dozen years ago. Maybe if purple dinosaur Barney wore one you might recall. Oh yeah, Microsoft did in fact make mechanical Barney "Actimate" but that came before you were born, eh? I preferred Arthur, but neither PBS kid's show character was automaton enough. At least Microsoft tried something different.

Last decade, the MSN Direct platform tickled my fancy for innovation that, in too many ways, arrived before the consumer market was ready. Microsoft put real-time news, sports, traffic, and weather alerts on your wrist three years before Apple put them in your pocket (where Steve Ballmer and Company or Nokia placed them already on earlier smartphone generations). Calendar reminders and instant messages also joined the cornucopia of information arriving to your wrist.

Fossil Dick Tracy Watch But consumers didn't really embrace the concept, leading Microsoft to kill off its smartwatch platform in 2008. The effort failed for many reasons. High among them: Ironically, the sudden smartphone surge spurred by Apple and its imitators. iPhone -- and other touchscreen handsets -- was smarter, offering overlapping benefits better and providing so much more. How strange, and not, that the second smartwatch wave is so dependent on smartphones.

Ahead of its Time

While mommy wiped drool from your booties, Microsoft marshaled together a platform that in some regards is unmatched by currently shipping devices. Funny so much of the Internet rabble ignores the past as context for understanding the present. Some of what the opine for now was available then.

1. MSN Direct Watches mostly worked independently. Users needed a PC to set up alerts and Outlook sync but their timepieces were not tethered to mobile phones, as are most smartwatches sold today.

2. FM radio was Microsoft's secret ingredient. Alerts and other information broadcast to the watches, which is how they could be independent of handsets and not need battery-life sucking cellular radios.

3. Microsoft platform smartwatches offered battery life that overwhelming exceeds Apple Watch and Android Wear devices. Four days or more was typical, even with that FM radio. Most adopters today can praise the deity of choice when their smartwatch lasts 24 hours for normal use. It's a miracle!

4. MSN Direct Watches looked smart. That's what happens when companies with timepiece traditions make the devices. What Fossil, Suunto, and Swatch understood then, that Apple understands now.: A wristwatch is more than just a timepiece. It's a piece of jewelry. Jewelry is a status symbol, too -- think Rolex watches in some circles and body piercings in others, or both.

I wear the LG Urbane, which is an attractive and practical Android Wear smartwatch. Most functions exceed last decade's MSN Direct/SPOT platform, which arrived before the market was ready and is forgotten by too many. Except esteemed BetaNews readers, of course. You remember. As for the others talking dumb about smartwatches...

Photo Credits: Top (Joe Wilcox); Inset (PR stock)

My four months with Nexus 9 [Review]

Publié: mai 20, 2015, 10:04pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

I want to love Google-branded, HTC-manufactured Nexus 9. But ours is a contentious relationship. N9 is not a bad tablet; others offer better value and performance for the price (or less), with Apple iPad mini being high among them. That said, if pure (aka stock) Android is your thing, there is no worthy alternative. Just prepare for a few compromises, particularly if moving up from Nexus 7.

In his November 2014 review, my colleague Brian Fagioli calls Nexus 9 "magical". I can't agree. During my four months using the tablet, response occasionally hesitates and WiFi too often disconnects. Last week, my N9 received the newest Android update, which somewhat resolves both problems. I purposely delayed this review, waiting for v5.1.1.

By comparison, my Nexus 6 phablet delivers better overall user experience that I regard as superior not only to its larger sibling but any size iPad. The reasons why illuminate the benefits of the Android platform on phabs compared to tabs and raise questions about the legitimacy of future larger Nexus devices.

Something else: Just yesterday, my N6 finally received the update to Android 5.1. I bought the device from T-Mobile but use on Verizon. The phablet feels faster, noticeably, which is what I hoped for the tablet, too, following the upgrade.

What Value is This?

Last autumn's Nexus 6 and 9 launches marked a bold departure from Google's earlier value-priced approach to pure Android mobiles. While increasing screen sizes, Big G also jacked up selling prices. Nexus 5 debuted at $349 and $399, in 16GB and 32GB capacities, respectively. N6: $649 (32GB) and $699 (64GB). Similarly, N9 sells for $399 and $479, for 16GB or 32GB storage. Predecessor, and smaller, Nexus 7: $229 and $269, respectively, for same size storage.

Lower cost means lower expectations. Buyers can be more forgiving of shortcomings. Nexus 5 and 7 were both excellent Androids, delivering superb benefits for the price paid. N6 costs more than its predecessor but delivers remarkable user experience. I see tremendous value even paying premium price.

I would like Nexus 9 more if it sold for less. The value is questionable for $479, direct from Google Store. I wouldn't recommend 16GB for this or any other tablet. It's the 32 gigger, or nothing. By comparison, for $20 more, you could get the 64GB iPad mini 3. With exception of front-facing speakers or running Android, the Apple tablet offers superior benefits where they matter most: Content consumption—and even some creation.

Underlying platforms are as much the reasons as the actual devices. Many publishers embraced iOS on tablets before they did Android, and half-decade later iPad still offers superior content consumption in most news or information apps. I subscribe to the Washington Post, which iOS app is fresh and often better presents content on iPad than web browsers. By contrast, the Android app's newspaper layout on Nexus 9 is wonky and fonts are overly large. There is an immersive quality to reading most anything on iPad that largely is absent from the Nexus 9 experience.

Additionally, Apple's app store offers superior selection, whether measured by kind or presentation, for tablets. iPad is a more mature platform for larger-screen iOS apps, if for no other reason than time-lag before Apple offered bigger iPhones. It shows in how apps scale or are presented. By contrast, Android app development is more mature on smartphones. Among the reasons: Larger number of cellular shipments compared to tabs and arrival of 4-inch and greater screens long before iPhone. (For simplicity's sake, I set aside discussion about guidelines and tools each platform presents developers for scaling apps.)

Perhaps therein is explanation for why I find Nexus 6 to be better than any iPad or Nexus 9 for consuming content. Many apps, such as Feedly, full bleed photos, which attracts attention and improves immersive reading. I digitally subscribe to several magazines, Rolling Stone among them, and wrongly assumed they would only read well on a larger screen; that absolutely is my experience on iPad. But Google Newsstand supports toggling between print layout and another formatted for mobiles.

To my surprise, presentation is more fluid and faster on the Android phablet than the tablet. Bottom line, and this shouldn't surprise given shipping volumes: Android is a more mature content consumption platform for smartphones and phabs than tabs.

Not to be ignored: Nexus 6's screen is higher resolution, and generally all around better, than N9—another factor that is specific to this comparison. Apps scale better on the N6 and everything looks nicer on the higher-res display (2560 x 1440 QHD AMOLED at 493 pixels per inch compared to 2048 x 1536 IPS LCD at 281 ppi for the tablet).

Good Isn't Good Enough

As previously mentioned, my Nexus 9 adventure started four months ago. From Day 1, performance was not as smooth as my experience using Nexus 7. The older tablet, and also newer smartphone, is considerably more responsive; in my testing. Click and wait is too common behavior, and it is unacceptable for a tablet costing so much when the market measure is the ever-maturing iPad. Then there is the touch and no response problem, which one of my other colleagues also reports experiencing. Hesitation isn't frequent but nevertheless occurs too often.

The fluidity I have come to expect from Android is hit or miss on Nexus 9. My contrasting experience using smooth and speedy Nexus 6 extenuates N9's occasional fumbling. The tablet too often drops WiFi connection, such that I am uncertain how often wireless is cause for any hesitations.

Nexus 9 Specs

It's not unusual for me to receive connection errors when, say, scrolling my Google+ feed—or after reading for some time, scrolling down to see text only because the accompanying art doesn't immediately load. Perhaps that's an app caching issue, dropped WiFi, or both. As a user, or reviewer recommending a tablet, the reason really doesn't matter as much as the result.

Even more frustrating: It's not uncommon for me to file away or delete emails, only to have them reappear in the Gmail inbox. I believe that's a symptom of the wireless drop-off. To be clear: I don't have WiFi problems using any other device connected to my home network. Nor do I see this erratic sync behavior on any other device running the Gmail app.

To reiterate: I would be more forgiving if Nexus 9 cost less. But as previously stated, Google disembarked from the low-cost strategy that made earlier Androids higher value. Users got a lot for what they paid. Now they pay more for less—that is if performance, wireless connectivity, and storage capacity are benefits that matter.

Geez, Say Something Good

I don't dislike N9. I just don't love the tablet. Out of fairness to Google and HTC: My reaction is influenced by the excellent experience using earlier Nexus devices, the N6, and several iPads, including the Air. If I had never used any of the others, my response to Nexus 9 would be warmer.

Let's discuss some of the features and benefits.

Size. Nexus 9 feels chunky in the hands, by comparison to its major contenders. The tablet isn't as thin or petite, measuring 228.25 x 153.68 x 7.95 mm and weighing 425 grams. iPad mini 3: 200 x 134.7 x 7.5 mm and 331 grams. Granted the mini's display is smaller, being 7.9 inches. Amazon's HDX 8.9, which screen is comparable size to the N9, measures 231 x 158 x 7.8 mm and weighs 389 grams. The HDX feels smaller, even being a tad larger, because of greater thinness and lightness. iPad Air 2 is thinner than all three: 6.1 mm.

That said, Nexus 9 isn't uncomfortable, by any means. There's a ruggedness to the feeling in the hands. Like Fire HDX 8.9, but unlike every slippier iPad, the matte finish gives great friction. N9 is not a device that easily slips from the fingers.

Display. As previously mentioned, the IPS screen is 8.9 inches and delivers effective 2048 x 1536 resolution. Colors are muted rather than vivid or contrasty but nevertheless satisfying enough. Text is crisp. At 453 nits, Nexus 9's display is brighter than iPad Air 2 (410) but falls short of Nexus 7 (591); benchmarks are courtesy of Phone Arena. Laptop Magazine presents different measurements.

My response to Nexus 9's screen is tainted by my experience using the much higher-res N6 or Amazon HDX 8.9. I expect that most buyers will be satisfied with the HTC tablet's screen, which benefits from Lollipop's Material Design and other visual enhancements. Stated differently: Android 5.x is a joy to view and use on Nexus 9. Neither Fire OS or iOS competently compare.

Repeating: If stock Android matters most to you, N9 is the easy, and only, choice. I wish the hardware delivered as much value as the operating system. Hehe, I see greater hardware value from Amazon and Apple tabs but less from their respective OSes.

Graphics and audio. Media consumption is excellent, as long as wireless doesn't disconnect. Streaming from HBO, Hulu, Netflix, Starz, YouTube, and other sources is super smooth and stutter-free. I don't much game, but if you do the N9 will perform. But, more as matter of size preference, N7 gets my nudge-nod.

The audio booms from the front-facing speakers, although Nexus 7 is better. There's a 3D aural quality watching movies on N7 that is missing from its successor. The Nexus 9 does satisfy, but misses something compared to the older tab. Audio output through the headphone jack is excellent. Volume is more than adequate even for cheap earphones.

Battery life. You can finagle a good work day's charge from Nexus 9, and then some. But I rarely see more than 10 hours of real world use. Eight is more typical and even less when watching videos.

Performance. I find multimedia consumption to be excellent. Movies, music, mayhem gaming, as previously mentioned, will satisfy. That is: Once you get past occasional non-touch response or hesitations that cause frustration.

Nexus 9 at times feels too slow, while the aforementioned competing devices are quite zippy. When conferring with one colleague and surveying supporting forums, I see that these performance issues aren't uncommon. Are they debilitating? No. But by comparison, something's short, when considering cost compared to Nexus 7 or newer, competing tablets.

Bottom Line

In a world with other choices, Nexus 9 doesn't top my list of recommended tablets. But, if you demand stock Android and want a mid-size tab, N9 is for you. Nexus 9's one unbeatable benefit is pure Android. There are no imposed skins or cruddy third-party slap-on motifs. Lollipop licks and tastes good, with promise of the next, newest OS when available. Google's Material Design improves the visuals and makes using Android more enjoyable.

As a platform, Android 5.x presents better than any earlier version or iOS 8.x. The utility, usability, and visuals are exceptional. Lollipop, and presumably the forthcoming Android M release, make Nexus 9 a value purchase for the platform faithful.

Home-grown Google apps are tight, and for the first Android version I find them to look and respond better than those Google develops for iOS. Then there is the utility of voice-response. Just say “Okay, Google” to search, set reminders, and get other information or initiate additional tasks. That capability is available on other Android devices, but Lollipop on N9 is sweet.

I don't currently have a Nexus 7 for comparison, which should matter more to someone considering the upgrade or even purchasing a new tab. Google no longer sells the N7, but plenty of retailers do—Amazon among them. The 7-inch tablet is still a better value than its 8.9-inch successor, if price matters more and receiving access to the freshest Android updates.

Speaking solely for myself, between Nexus 6 and 9, I prefer the phab as a tab.

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

Your smartphone is too big

Publié: mai 19, 2015, 8:58pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Big Large Oversize Smartphone

I love my Nexus 6. This morning, while waking to the rush of caffeine from steaming coffee, I read headlines on the device. "I’m Phed Up With Phablets: They're too big to prevail" caught my attention. The short commentary, by Brian Rubin for ReadWrite, rails against the bigger-is-better-smartphone trend. Screen on my cellular is massive: 6 inches, and I forever promised myself to never use a phone so large -- until I did and converted. Much as I enjoy using the N6, for which I can still manage many operations one-handed, smaller would be my preference. Perhaps yours, too.

Here at BetaNews, we first raised doubts about ever-expanding screens four years ago. I still remember the discussion about the story, and more importantly the headline, before Ed Oswald wrote "Is that the Samsung Galaxy S II in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?" In 2015, what seemed large then -- a 4.3-inch screen -- is puny. Even iPhones are bigger. Rubin rightly raises alarm about choice: "The real problem isn’t so much that there are too many phablets, but that there aren’t enough non-phablets these days -- at least none that are truly interesting".

Size in Context

Big isn't necessarily better and reverses a longstanding trend in the other direction. Does no one recall when using a smaller phone was chic? Consider the StarTAC, which was a huge hit for Motorola going into the late 1990s. I remember when seemingly everyone used one of the diminutive cell phones. Smaller was better -- and if there was real innovation in mobile device design shrinking size would be again.

As we move further into the contextual cloud computing era -- Post PC is a myth of Apple's making -- touch interfaces should cede way to voice. Touchless should be the primary UI. But there are too many parties invested in the existing infrastructure and economies of scale built around it for true innovation to emerge. iPhone could reinvent the mobile handset in 2007 because Apple had nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Eight years later, the company is the status quo, During calendar first quarter 2015, iPhone accounted for stunning 69.4 percent of revenues -- up 57 percent year over year. The company shipped 61.2 million iPhones, beating Wall Street consensus by about 3 million units. Risk of toppling the revenue cart leads to this: Apple's newest handsets join the big-screen trend rather than defy it.

Before his death, Apple cofounder Steve Jobs extolled about the post-PC era, which really is self-serving for selling more devices like iPhone and transcending the Microsoft operating system monopoly. But there is little post-PC about the current trend in cellular handsets. Part of the personal computer's charm, and major secret to its success, is ubiquity -- being all functions to all people, so to speak. The platform does many things good enough and replaces/displaces disparate devices doing so. Smartphones, and more strongly phablets, are mini-computers taking on similar role: One device to rule them all.

The mini-PC movement defies the larger contextual computing trend, and, I contend, holds it back. Technology and the things around it that matter, like content, are contextual. Large smartphones/phablets are limited contextual devices. Context is very much about location and role. Simple example: Video you start watching on a phone when waiting to pick up pizza that you finish viewing at home on the big screen while eating. Location, device, and context change but content is the same.

Another example: The office calls while you sit on the couch at home reading a book to your child. Your role changes from parent to manager, but your location stays put. You don't have to rush into the workplace to give your boss access to the next day's client presentation. The contextual cloud lets you share the document, then resume your role as parent. What device(s) used is less important than the content and source that enables access anytime, anywhere, and on anything.

The point: Smartphones and phablets demand device dependence during an era when the cloud should bring independence to get information and content whenever and on whatever you want.

Save Us, Someone

Who will save us from these overly-large devices? True innovation isn't what you want but what you don't know you need. Technology that changes people's lives follows the "ah ha" moment -- when using the thing you realize how practical it seems and how you would have wanted it if you had been smart enough to conceive it.

Bigger screens aren't innovation. True innovation would be transcending them -- even eliminating them. But I predict that "smaller is better" must come from someone with nothing to lose; little or no investment in the institutional monopolies of scale that protect the status quo before everything else. "We need Apple to lead by example for more modest devices -- you know, ones that don’t make me look like a baby holding a tablet up to his face", Rubin laments. Sorry, Dude, but innovation won't come from Goliath. We need David to change the rules of engagement. Once that was Apple, but no more.

I enjoy using my smartwatch -- LG Urbane and Moto 360 before it -- and wonder if there is a future from the wrist. Maybe yes if battery life lasts longer, cell phone dependence is eliminated, and voice interaction greatly improves. Perhaps the next big thing -- eh, smaller thing -- will be something altogether different. A decade ago, I developed Principles of Good Design, for which there are now eight. Successful products must:

1. Hide complexity
2. Emphasize simplicity
3. Make users feel happy
4. Build on what is familiar
5. Imbue human-like qualities
6. Do what it’s supposed to really well
7. Allow people to do something they wished they could do but couldn’t
8. When displacing something else, offer significantly better user experience

The original iPhone easily fulfilled all eight principles. Smartwatches, as they are created today, do not. There isn't enough balance between functional features and benefits. Besides, the future device that should matter is none. Contextual cloud computing is about the many, not the one. What you need, where you need -- anytime, anywhere, on anything.

The current trend in handset design clings to the past and pushes away the future. Touch interfaces are an anachronism when voice is an option that fits better with context. Human beings are natural vocal communicators. We don't touch when we want something, we ask. We speak. I have hope looking at some of the voice-interaction capabilities that Google builds into its products or how a service like Google Now contextually provides information without you ever asking.

Whatever the future, a bigger screen in your pocket isn't it.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Creative Images

X-T10 joins Fujifilm's crowded digital camera family

Publié: mai 18, 2015, 8:28pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Fujifilm X-T10

Fujifilm's line of cameras increasingly looks like choices among toothpastes. Do you want fluoride or gingivitis protection? Oh, this one whitens teeth, cures bad breath, and eliminates body odor. Decisions, decisions. That's kind of my reaction to today's debut of the X-T10 digital camera, which shouldn't be confused with Fujifilm's X10, X100T, or X-T1. Dyslectics and the visually impaired, beware!

As a X100T owner, I'm a Fuji fan. So, please, don't take my criticism wrongly. It's just this lineup is quite crowded. The company's product website lists -- count `em -- 18 different X-Series models. Sure, some aren't current and not all can be confused. But many of them are close enough in actual benefits to perplex potential buyers.

Which is Greater: 1 or 10?

The X-T10 appears to be the camera for someone wanting the X-T1, but not the upfront cost, benefit of interchangeable lenses, and smaller overall size. The Ten body lists for around $800 compared to $1,200 for the One. The two digital cameras share the same 16-megapixel sensors and most everything else that matters. They use the same lenses, and functionally are similar with respect to ISO and bracketing ranges, size and functionality of the back viewfinders, and more.

Differences that will matter to some buyers: X-T1 is weather-sealed, provides better electronic viewfinder, adds dedicated ISO dial, and, with the newest firmware, offers electronic, mechanical, and electronic+mechanical shutters -- among other subtleties.

I nearly bought the X-T1 last autumn, choosing the X100T instead. Had Fujifilm announced the firmware update enabling comparable shutter and other capabilities before my purchase, I might have chosen the interchangeable lens camera instead. Might. I have no regrets picking the smaller shooter with fixed, prime lens.

X-Series Benefits

The X100, released four years, revitalized Fujifilm's digital camera lineup, with focus on mirrorless designs that are more compact and resemble rangefinders from Leica. There's a camera for almost any budget or photographic style -- from the timidest amateur to most aggressive professional.

I will simplify the core lineup, briefly:

X30 is for someone needing a smaller compact, using non-interchangeable lens with sufficient zoom range. Benefits include diminutive size, electronic viewfinder, and f/2-2.8 lens. Typical street price: $500.
X-A2 is for someone looking for a smaller interchangeable lens compact with dSLR-size APS-C sensor. Benefits include flip-up screen, auto-macro mode, and point-and-shoot capabilities for newbies and finer controls as their skills advance. Typical street price: $550 with 16-50mm lens.
X-M1 is for no one other than the budget conscious interchangeable lens camera shopper. The benefits are nearly identical to the newer X-A2. Typical street price: $400, body only.
X100T is for someone wanting high image quality from a non-interchangeable mirrorless compact that is rangefinder retro-styled. Benefits include hybrid electronic-optical viewfinder, nearly silent leaf shutter, and f/2 prime lens, Typical street price: $1,300.
X-E2 is for some wanting a professional rangefinder-styled interchangeable lens camera that is affordably priced. Benefits look less appealing with release of the X-T10. Typical street price, body only: $700. (This model is technically outdated, and, as such, heavily discounted; it's a great value.)
X-Pro1 is for someone wanting most of the X100 Series benefits, including electronic-optical viewfinder, but with interchangeable lenses. Typical street price, body only: $800. (This model is technically outdated, and, as such, heavily discounted; it's a great value.)
X-T1 is for someone demanding a flexible, professional-grade interchanegeable lens mirrorless camera with advanced shutter capabilities and fine controls (which include dedicated ISO). Typical street price: $1,200, body only.
X-T10 is for someone wanting most of the X-1's benefits for lower purchase price. Estimated sales price: $800, body only.

Yes, the list is simple, but the point is benefits over features.

Tidal: When better isn't good enough

Publié: mai 15, 2015, 7:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

On May 1st, Tidal billed my credit card for the first month of music streaming. Yesterday, my subscription to Google Music ended. I should be satisfied with the switch, given how much more I enjoy 1411kbps lossless listening over the more typical 320kbps compressed streaming music. But recent, recurring service problems put my customer continuation into question.

Quality of content, or available selection of it, isn't the problem. I find plenty of music to enjoy, and the default playlists are smartly curated. The high-fidelity is just that. But slow starts, drop-offs, and song skips disrupt the listening experience -- and for a service costing twice as much as major competitors, like Beats, Rdio, or Spotify, I expect more but get less. There is no customer support option that I can find, either.

No Oasis

If the problems hadn't started before last week's switch from Cox to AT&T for Internet, I would suspect cause there. The problems' consistency raises questions about the service, whether cause is far-away server or how Tidal caches content locally. For example, trying to listen to one of the default playlists day before yesterday, Oasis song "Wonderwall" wouldn't start. The obnoxious spinning circle that appears over the play button stared me down. More than a minute later, the song finally started, played about 10 seconds, then stopped again.

I wrongly presumed the problem might be with Chromebook Pixel LS. Sometimes, Adobe Flash crashes. So I pulled out my Nexus 6 smartphone, launched Tidal's Android app, and tried to play "Wonderwall" there. What the frak? The song, and others, behaved the same way, freezing the same place after playback finally started. Ah, yeah. Thirty minutes later, I made another attempt, and Tidal smoothly streamed.

That brings me to yesterday's catastrophe. Hey, for $19.99 month the description applies to my dissatisfaction. While Nexus 6 charged, I listened to Tidal on Nexus 9 for the first time. One of many Tidal playlist sections is History, where I found an Elton John playlist. I hadn't listened to the old boy for awhile and thought: "Why not?"

Problems started with "Rocket Man", the second song in queue. The Tidal app skipped to the next track before finishing the one I listened to; near as I can estimate, maybe 30 minutes from the end. The same thing happened when listening again -- and to every other song in the playlist. Consistency must mean something: The skips all occurred around the same places.

Pay More for What?

Tidal offers no online support forum that I can find or meaningful Help section. If I'm wrong, please correct me. For a premium-priced service promoting premium-quality content, I expect something to assist subscribers when problems arise. I instead looked to other sites for assistance, like this forum from Computer Audiophile, but found no resolution. Streaming problems are common enough, however, to disturb.

When you pay more, you expect more. Number of streaming problems using Google Music: Zero. Same applies to iTunes in the cloud, when I had a Mac. Both services cost considerably less and will host my content in the cloud.

If problems persist, and Tidal continues with limited customer service options, I will be compelled to cancel the service and withdraw my review recommendation for it. Lossless is useless if content doesn't play.

Sigh...

I can't express how much more I enjoy Tidal than other streaming services. I hear the difference, but concede not everyone will or will care.

Yesterday, when listening to "Rocket Man" on Nexus 9 something about the song sounded flat. When "I'm Still Standing" started, I could really hear the difference. Opening the Tidal app, "HiFi" was grayed out for the track -- and all others in the playlist! I wasn't lossless listening.

Then I remembered: The app's default streaming setting is "Normal" not "HiFi", which I don't fraking understand. I hadn't used Tidal on the tablet before, so the default was active. Why, why, why would a streaming service promoting lossless as differentiator, charge more for it, but then give customers less out of the box, so to speak? People can't hear the difference if there isn't any.

Last month, I cajoled music aficionados, or anyone else, to take the Tidal challenge. Listen to nothing else for a few weeks, then go back to 320kbps MP3 or 256Kbps AAC. I hear the difference, which is why the Elton John songs sounded flatter before I changed the setting to "HiFi". These old songs were shockingly fuller after changing the setting, presenting great separation and soundstage. They are excellent for comparing Tidal's Free Lossless Audio Codec to other compressed formats.

If the music even plays.

I won't cancel Tidal yet, and service separation will be disappointing. But if the saying "You get what you pay for" is true, I'm not getting my money's worth -- not for twice as much when other services smoothly stream. Sigh.

I cut bandwidth by two-thirds to get faster Internet

Publié: mai 14, 2015, 6:59pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

snail

File this in the "When More is Less" folder.

My college-age daughter is moving home, at least for the summer, and my wife and I are scrambling preparations. One unexpected: Changing Internet Service Providers. Our Cox connection comes into the bedroom where my daughter will go. Access from the main living area would require new wiring that the landlord won't allow. I can understand why he wouldn't want the fancy molding drilled up. We already know that AT&T U-verse Internet is live in the living room.

With Cox coming in to a modem connected to a wireless router, location shouldn't matter. But peace of mind is an intangible, but real, cost. I'm not confident that my 20 year-old wouldn't somehow take down the service, or, worse, her cat could chew through wiring when left free. Also: We want to create her space, which wouldn't be with our stuff in the room. Because I mainly work from home, Internet is crucial. There is no compromise.

I was a bit apprehensive going back to AT&T, which we used from February 2008 until July 2014. In all that time, the service only failed once: During a power outage affecting all San Diego County. Otherwise, the 24Mbps service was rock reliable. Our Cox is, or was, faster. Promised: 100Mbps. Delivered: 130Mbps wirelessly.

But there was always something laggy, despite the big bandwidth. Cox collapsed more than two dozen times over 10 months, and I too often encountered situations where webpages wouldn't load. When troubleshooting, the modem lights would show solid connection but checking the router revealed no DNS. Routing problems were frequent. The problem persistently presented during the evenings and some times on weekends.

DSL providers have for years used cable congestion as marketing speak for why their services are superior. They promise one connection to the local box, compared to cable's shared pool of local users. Conceptually, I understand the argument, which over-simplifies how DSL really works. But 130 is greater than 24, right?

My daughter's move-back-in isn't the only consideration. Our apartment building is 9 units overlooking a lovely courtyard. Few weeks back, new neighbors moved in two doors down. They also chose Cox. Strange thing -- and I suppose it could be coincidence -- my Internet routing and sluggishness problems increase whenever the young gent is home, which typically is daytime during my main work hours. I noticed the service's slowdowns before realizing that his presence coincided with them.

So, with the new move-ins -- the neighbor and my daughter -- as catalysts, I looked again at AT&T, which meanwhile had upgraded the neighborhood to 45Mbps (supposedly) fiber to the door. After some finagling, the saleswoman waved the installation and ridiculous one-time connection fees, and I agreed to restoring service -- one week ago.

Wireless bandwidth typically measures 47Mbps to my D-Link DIR-868L router. But it's the quality of the connection that is noticeably different. Improved. Consistent. The slowdowns are gone.

Because upload speeds are comparable between the two ISPs, I don't see any subjective difference. Which I logically expected, but emotionally struggled to accept. One-thirty isn't necessarily faster than 45 when talking websites. If things are slow on the other end, bigger pipes don't matter. However, because I upload images and other files to remote servers, particularly working in the cloud from Chromebook Pixel LS, upstream bandwidth would be noticeable if differing by much. It doesn't.

So, a week later, my connecting-to-the-ISP frustrations are down and my writing productivity is up. Cox customer service is superb, there is a local store within walking distance, and the ISP doesn't demand contractual lock-ins. Pricing also beats AT&T. But my home is my office, and I need the most-reliable, affordable Internet service possible. I started with a plan to compare the two services over AT&T's 30-day buyer's remorse period, with keeping Cox an option. But the improvements were so noticeable so soon I cancelled cable.

Photo Credit: Joe Wilcox

Sorry, Americans, there are no 'YouTube My Break' Kit Kats for you

Publié: mai 13, 2015, 11:18pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

YouTube My Break

YouTube and Kit Kat lovers across the pond have reason to gloat. Unless imported—and there is a legal settlement prohibiting such practice—"YouTube My Break" campaign chocolate bars will not be coming to these shores. Yesterday, Google and Nestlé announced the branding collaboration, which replaces the Kit Kat logo with "YouTube break" on 600,000 wrappers.

"Hershey does license the rights to Kit Kat in the U.S.," a company spokesperson tells BetaNews. "At this point in time Kit Kat U.S. is not participating". That's okay, because I look at the UK campaign and wonder: "Why now?" In 2013, Hershey joined the Nestlé-Google collaboration that put the green Android robot on Kit Kat bar wrappers when the mobile operating system of the same name shipped. That tie-in I understand.

Who am I too fuss? Based on log-ins to Google Play during the 14 days ending May 4, 2015, KitKat is the most widely-used Android version, with 39.8 percent share. Successor Lollipop is just 9.7 percent. So Android phone users in the United Kingdom, where the campaign originates, are more likely to watch their YouTube vids on KitKat while eating their Kit Kat. Since we're spouting data: According to Kantar Worldpanel, Android's smartphone sales share was 52.9 percent in Great Britain during calendar first quarter. That compares to 38.1 percent for iOS.

Nestlé claims that "consumer insight", without citing what that means, shows that "consumers are also YouTube fans". Who would have guessed? Why not Aero (my favorite), Smarties, or Yorkie?

There is a voice-search component to the campaign: "YouTube my break", which leads to various videos on the service. I got promos—granted from U.S. location—rather than the promised top-four trending vids. There's a play on words in the promo: Break, as in snapping Kit Kats, and breaking, as in popular videos.

YouTube celebrates its 10th anniversary this year. The video service opened to the public in November 2005, and Google bought the startup for $1.65 billion 11 months later. Historical note: Microsoft passed up a chance to acquire YouTube about a half-year before the search giant for just $500,000. What a frak up that was. In 2015, the service claims 1 billion users and 1 million-plus subscribers.

U.S. smartphone market is phabulous

Publié: mai 6, 2015, 10:11pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

OnePlus One vs LG G3 vs Apple iPhone 6 Plus vs Samsung Galaxy Note 4

Alongside Euro-zone cell phone data, U.S. first-quarter 2015 phablet shipments are out from Kantar Worldpanel ComTech. Depending on how the numbers are cut, fanboys can rally for their platform.

Spurred by iPhone 6 Plus, iOS showed strong performance, representing 44 percent of phablet sales. However, the number of iOS smartphone switchers from Android fell -- to 11.4 percent from 14.6 percent year over year -- supporting early anecdotal evidence that existing Apple customers are the most-likely 6 Plus buyers. Also confirming: Android smartphone conversions from iOS fell from 9.8 percent to 5.9 percent.

Broadly, phablets accounted for 21 percent of U.S. smartphone sales during the quarter, up from 6 percent a year earlier. Forty-seven percent of purchasers choosing larger Androids and 43 percent iPhones cited screen size as major preference influencing their buying choice.

Android smartphone sales share skimped up two-tenths of a point to 58.1 percent. LG lead the market, with share rising to 10.8 percent from 7.4 percent. Samsung secured second-place, despite sales strain during the Galaxy S6 and S6 Edge transition.

Among the big four carriers, T-Mobile delivered strongest Samsung smartphone sales share: 42 percent. By contrast, iPhone dominated the other three: AT&T (59 percent); Sprint (50 percent); Verizon (43 percent). In it's raw release, Kantar didn't explain why iPhone topped Verizon sales with less than 50 percent share.

With respect to broader expanse of new or existing customers, Kantar only revealed iPhone: 64 percent for the 5 or newer model and 18 percent for the 6 and 6 Plus.

Photo Credit: Maurizio Pesce

My definition of 'modern' computing

Publié: mai 5, 2015, 7:02pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Cloud Computing

Late yesterday I posted my review of Chromebook Pixel LS, which Google released in early March. The write-up is purposely rah-rah to impose the importance of embracing contextual cloud computing and to shakeup preconceptions about Macs being the tools of the creative elite. I also call "dumb" developers who may receive free Pixels during Google I/O later this month only to then sell them online.

One reader comment, from SmallSherm caught my attention, for accusing me of calling him (or her) stupid and for insulting other readers. After writing my response, I wondered how few people would ever see the interaction, which I regard as being quite valuable. So in the interest of fostering further discussion, I present our two comments for your Tuesday thought train.

Side note: I put links to past posts into current stories assuming that some people will click through and read for context. I also presume, and perhaps wrongly, that regular readers will be familiar with my larger body of BetaNews writing. I often present several, and often contradictory, viewpoints quite deliberately over several stories. For example, I am repeatedly on record saying the Chromebook isn't for everyone or for most people -- something that would be apparent to some reading the glowing Pixel review but otherwise not to others.

Okay, so let's start with SmallSherm, then my response, both italicized rather than blockquoted, because of length. I also add links to my response, for the benefit of other readers:

SmallSherm:

I am a composer. I need Finale, alternatively Sibelius (the recent StaffPad caught my eye, too), and as I continue my education may need to utilize ProTools (or alternatively, Logic Pro). My specialty is beyond the realm of sequencers, but for those who need those kinds of tools, there are FL Studio, Cubase, Garageband, etc. Between Corel and Adobe software, there is nothing most [visual] artists would seriously consider (except those with express preferences for GIMP and the like). With media editing and creation, there's more Adobe software, Sony Vegas, Roxio software, etc.

How much of that is available on Chrome OS? None. And you're telling me I'm stupid not to consider one? Even considering the old addage, "you get what you pay for." what on earth am I getting for that $400 premium over a comparably spec'd Windows machine? Build quality? Even a similarly priced Macbook would better fulfill any of the use cases mentioned above.

When you have to insult the reader in order to raise the credibility of a product, that product probably ought not to be considered at all. There's a high price (monetarily and productively) to be "modern," as you put it.

Joe Wilcox:

No one called you "stupid" -- well, unless you will attend Google I/O and plan to eBay or Craigslist a freely-given Chromebook Pixel. I call those developers "dumb".

Chromebook isn't for everyone, as I expressed here and in many previous posts, nor is the contextual cloud computing concept yet ready for everyone. Right now, I don't work with RAW images because the tools aren't sufficient. We're still in a transition period between computing eras -- like when certain applications were only available on mainframes during the early days of the PC era, when, contrastingly, the personal computer offered many advantages that mainframe computing couldn't match.

I would never recommend someone producing short or feature films to use a Chromebook as primary PC. The apps aren't there. But there are videos that can easily be produced on a Chromebook or, better, on smartphone, phablet, or tablet. I sometimes shoot vids on my phone, upload directly to YouTube, and edit there using the surprisingly solid online tools. I don't need massive local storage -- and wouldn't want to use it up on my phone regardless.

"Modern" is about changing mindsets, about computing based on context rather than device. As I wrote in a March 2014 news analysis: "Chromebook belongs to computing's past, not its future". Contextual computing regardless of device is the future -- tools that would allow you as an artist to freely compose wherever inspiration arises. You shouldn't be bound to PC when inspiration comes.

You mention StaffPad, which is excellent example of an app embracing both computing eras. I would absolutely recommend Surface Pro 3 before any Mac laptop. Touchscreen, pen, and the utility built around them is exceptional, and Microsoft's supporting cloud services offer amazing anytime, anywhere, on-anything benefits that Apple can't match. Microsoft's catch-up efforts around cloud storage, sync, and supporting services are commendable.

I should sometime soon write a news analysis about "modern" Microsoft. The company is undergoing Renaissance -- real reinvention -- that mostly is held back by business customers slow to change. Many never will.

Surface stands at the forefront, where Apple cannot easily go. The company's business is all about selling more things -- laptop and tablet, rather than one hybrid. There is little incentive to offer something like Surface, although incentive increases as iPad sales collapse. The less Apple has to lose, the more likely a Surface-imitator will be.

Chromebook isn't for everyone. Contextual cloud computing is for everyone. Chromebook is one tool but it straddles between the old and new computing eras. Devices carried with you are more the future -- and those you can use securely elsewhere to connect to your stuff wherever you store it.

That's smart.

Wrapping up, I look forward to the day when a computer like Chromebook is obsolete -- when an affordable contextually available, voice-capable, wearable (or carryable) is good enough. And when content follows you, without prompting, and is available in any context you want to consume it. That day approaches, and for some people already is here.

Photo Credit: T. L. Furrer/Shutterstock

Chromebook Pixel LS is nearly perfect [review]

Publié: mai 5, 2015, 12:13am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Mark the date with an alarm. Around May 28, 2015, sellers likely will fill eBay and Craigslist with spanking new Chromebook Pixels, available for bargain prices—if anything less than $999 or $1,299 could be considered a deal. Google's developer conference commences that day, when I expect many attendees will receive and quickly dispatch shiny, new laptops. Big G gave away the pricey Pixel two years ago, and it's good guess will do so again. Smart developers will keep the machines; many will not. Dumb move, but who am I to judge, eh? Pixel rests at the precipice of future computing, for those open-minded enough to welcome it. They are few.

If you are among those who get the Chromebook concept, who thinks about purchasing the laptop, but waffles indecision, watch for short-term selling prices that could meet what your sensibilities and spending budget can tolerate. It's good background for me to finally review the higher-end of the two costliest Chromebook configurations. My primer can help you decide whether or not to bother, either for full price now or for the chance of less later. Why wait? I wouldn't and didn't. I received my Pixel in March, on Friday the 13th, ordered two days earlier from Google. I use no other computer. It's more than my primary PC and could be yours, too.

Just Lovely

Nearly perfect is how I describe Google's newest, and only, computer. If you're going to manufacturer one thing, then it should be exceptional, which is the other way I describe Chromebook Pixel. The company introduced the original in February 2013, available in two configurations. Twenty-five months later, the notebook refreshed—refined rather than revolutionized—beating Apple to market shipping a laptop with USB Type-C, which brings new connectivity and charging options.

Two models are available, both for less than the original. For $999: 12.85-inch touchscreen, 2560 x 1700 resolution, 239 pixels per inch, 400-nit brightness; 2.2GHz Intel Core i5 processor; 8GB RAM; 32GB flash storage; Intel HD graphics 5500; backlit keyboard; glass touchpad; Bluetooth 4; WiFi AC; two USB Type-C ports; two USB 3.0 ports; SD Card slot; and, of course, Chrome OS. The $1,299 model doubles RAM and storage and swaps the processor for 2.4GHz i7. Dimensions: 297.7 x 224.55 x 15.3 mm (11.7 x 8.8 x 0.6 inches). Weight: 1.5 kg (3.3 pounds).

Construction is magnificent. The computer looks and feels solid, like a boxy Volvo might to an auto shopper. From a hardware and operating system perspective, Chromebook Pixel is finely balanced. Performance is generally smooth and the ergonomics are superb. There's a quality about the tight hardware, software, and services integration that can't be completely imitated or fully appreciated by using the Chrome browser as primary user interface on Mac or PC.

Heming Leira owned the original Pixel and received its successor nearly a month ago. Like me, he describes the LS model's performance as "smooth". I am not a big fan of benchmarks, but they matter to some readers who might want performance quantified. I ran Octane 2 on Chromebook Pixel LS: 26230, in Guest Mode.

Keyboard and touchpad are best of class, both improved from the original. I type faster than on any other laptop. Ever. Gregory Mannix agrees: "Trackpad and keyboard are both better (had no idea that was possible)". Mannix, who also owned the original Pixel, is "surprised" to "actually notice the difference in weight. The build is almost identical, but everything seems just a bit tighter and more thought out. It's really the perfect machine for me".

The high-resolution touchscreen is matched by no other notebook. The display ratio is 3:2 rather than 16:9, which is exceeding better for consuming, or creating, web content. Battery life varies depending on use. I consistently get about eight hours, give or take. Google claims up to 12 hours. I don't see it.

Pixel is the writer's dream machine—a responsive extension to the creative mind when matched with webapps and cloud services from Google and third parties. Other content creators could be surprised, too, by the tools available for producing photosets, podcasts, or videos. The major limitation is your thinking—clinging to old, imprisoning habits fostered during the personal computing era—not the selection of meaningful applications.

Acquired Taste

For all its goodness, Chromebook Pixel is an acquired taste. Think of it as the Vegemite of computing. Most people won't like the flavor, but those who do love it. That's the cute analogy; another is more appropriate.

Think Leica cameras. The line of rangefinders are pricey, specialized, and limited. Many other digicams offer more features, for considerably less cost. But measured by image quality, balance of manual controls, and choice of exceptional lenses, Leica leads a category chosen by few photographers but among them many looking to create art. I similarly see Google's Pixel. Not everyone will want one, but those who do will gain maximum value.

Like Leica, Chromebook Pixel is a lifestyle decision. You choose to do with less to do more. Chrome OS doesn't support legacy local applications like Microsoft Office or anything Apple sells. They are the past. Contextual cloud computing is a future quickly becoming the present, and where you will be using this laptop.

The argument against Pixel, or any Chromebook—that there aren’t enough good apps, particularly legacy ones—is pointless, particularly for those users embracing contextual computing. Fear not! Google provides full fidelity for anyone needing to open or edit documents saved in Microsoft file formats, and some Android apps are available for Chrome OS. Additionally, persistent connectivity is no longer required, because many webapps can be used offline. This acquired taste is delicious, if you let it be.

Leira, who is webmaster for Kondis, uses Pixel "for working with my hobbies, sometimes for work, and a lot for pleasure. I almost only miss a good program to look through a lot of pictures, like Bridge in Photoshop". (In a future post, I will review some of the webapps in my content creation toolkit.)

Pixel differs from other Chrome OS laptops in a key aspect: It is meant to be used as a primary computer by people who develop applications or otherwise create content. Design, processor, touchscreen, and price say Pixel is the machine used everyday, all day long.

"The Pixel is my primary machine for everything", says David Hoff. "It's my own personal device, but it is the primary machine that I use at work—at the desk—in meetings, and for travel".

Google's marketing tagline for Chromebook is "For Everyone", which Pixel is not—for either $999 or $1,299, when its siblings typically sell for under $300. But neither are pricier Mac laptops for the masses. As a category, Chromebook is for everyone when including a classy and compelling computer primed for creatives. Pixel presents a choice for the few among the many—people who are willing to spend more to get greater value and who might otherwise choose an Apple.

Think Differently

By measure of hardware, Pixel packs punch rivaling, or exceeding, Mac laptops for the price. The comparison is important because of likely customer overlap. There is perception, much of it engineered by clever Apple advertising, that Macs are the tools of the creative elite. Like Leicas. I again assert that potential Pixel purchasers fall into the same category: Those living on the bleeding edge of creativity and technology.

Chromebook vs MacBook

The new MacBook, which comparatively is underpowered but offers similar screen size (though different dimensions) starts at $1,299. Same beginning price applies to 13.-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display, which screen resolution is closer to Pixel's but display isn't nearly as bright and lacks touch. The Macs offer considerably more storage capacity—128GB or 256GB at $1,299 for Pro Retina and MacBook, respectively. They need the SSDs, for all the legacy crap code that the computers run. Pixel packs less because less is needed for the concept: Running webapps in the browser and storing everything meaningful in the cloud (e.g. remote servers).

Meanwhile, Google provides extras that matter: More RAM for the buck—8GB at $999 and 16GB at $1,299 compared to just eight gigs at the higher price on either entry-level MacBook or Pro Retina. You will want the extra memory for advanced creation, like video processing.

Touchscreen is another differentiator, and Google's default font renders more smoothly and better pleases the senses. I find eye strain to be considerably less using Pixel for prolonged periods compared to MacBook Pro. Meanwhile, touch is addictive, adding utility once you really start doing it.

The point: Using Apple marketing lingo, anyone who can "Think Different" should consider Chromebook Pixel before a Mac notebook. Everyone else clinging to old computing habits or bloated, legacy applications should not.

"I completely agree that this device has a very specific market segment", Hoff says. "However, it is an amazing choice for anyone that uses modern technologies".

Are you modern? Answer yes, consider Pixel. Answer no, don't.

Hoff, who is cofounder of and chief technology officer for Cloud Sherpas, falls into the "modern" category. His company helps other businesses better adopt anytime, anywhere computing, which philosophically is the core concept behind Chromebook and how it fits into the larger lifestyle around other Google products, including Android phones, and services. He received his Chromebook Pixel 2015 the day before I did.

Mannix also fits the "modern", anytime, anywhere computing category. He is a web developer for Charles Koch Institute.

Measuring Benefits

Pixel epitomizes the Chromebook philosophy in ways no other computer in the category can. The distinction is important because of the gross misunderstanding that Chromebook means cheap—as in purchase cost. As previously mentioned, the majority of Pixel's siblings sell for less than $300. They offer excellent value but typically don't provide processor and memory enough to be the one and only computer, particularly for content creator types. I badger the point because it cannot be restated enough times.

Chromebook is not about cheap computing. The category is, to reiterate and reemphasize, about contextual cloud computing. Pixel's core benefits embrace and extend the underlying philosophy, which emphasizes simplicity and productivity, while stripping back complexity and distraction that disrupt the mind's creative flow.

Highlighting and reviewing benefits—many of which apply to the original, 2013 laptop:

Pixel is instant-on, like no other.
Glossy display is not overly-reflective.
Notebook charges by way of USB Type-C.
USB-C future-proofs peripheral connectivity.
Keyboard is responsive; typing truly is joyous.
WiFi can remain active even when Pixel is asleep.
Laptop is well-designed—looks good and is rugged.
Screen is bright and crisp with excellent viewing angles.
The 3:2 aspect ratio is excellent for webpages and for photography.
High-resolution display is joy to look at and to use and improves productivity.
Audio is excellent, above average, producing rich bass and fidelity, even streaming.
Pixel can be used as your primary PC, which isn’t typical scenario seen with lower-cost Chromebooks.
Touchscreen is exceptional value-add for price. No Mac has one, nor does any Windows laptop in this cost range, with same resolution.
Touch accuracy is excellent, which is especially important considering the browser motif was not designed with the finger in mind.

Like other Chromebooks, Pixel setup is this: Access WiFi network, sign in to your Google account. "From unboxing to inbox, it takes about one minute to setup and fully configure a Chromebook", Hoff says. "The new Google Pixel is a great machine". I can't disagree.

The only questions remaining: Should you buy Chromebook Pixel, and should you wait for dumb developers selling their swag—presuming Google gives away the laptop later this month? My answer to the first is yes. if you:

Have embraced the contextual cloud computing lifestyle or want to.
Do not depend on legacy software applications or devices like iPad or iPhone.
Are considering purchasing an Apple computer mainly to create content consumed on the web.

I answer the second question with another: Why wait, if you really don't have to?

Photo Credits: Joe Wilcox

LG Watch Urbane fast, first impressions [mini-review]

Publié: mai 1, 2015, 8:38pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

LG Watch Urbane Face

Early yesterday afternoon, LG Watch Urbane arrived from Verizon. Turnaround is quick for anyone who wants one right way, rather than waiting for Google to ship (now 1-2 days rather than by May 8). I am rushing a first-impressions review, and some comparison to the Moto 360 is mandatory. If round is your taste, consider one of these two smartwatches.

Meantime, to collect my thoughts for the review and for anyone considering the Urbane, I share something sooner. Overall, I am satisfied with the initial out-of-the-box experience. Urbane is gorgeous and looks like a traditional watch. The always-on, dimmed face contributes to the effect—without bleeding dry the charge. The watch is also more functional as a timepiece, as such. I mean, shouldn't it be?

The thing is large but not heavy, which is surprisingly good considering the stainless steel shell. The strap is overly stiff, but it looks great. That the timepiece takes a standard 22mm band is a huge benefit. Swap away, watch crazies! Verizon offers the silver with black strap, which is the one I wanted. The other is gold with brown band.

So there is no confusion: LG makes two Urbane variants. The other comes with LTE radio; the timepiece isn't dependent on a smartphone. However, that device doesn't run Android Wear—and that's good segue to something surprising. The operating system isn't as universal as expected, by me and perhaps by you. There are slight, but meaningful, functional differences between Moto 360 and Urbane.

I don't find notifications—one of a smartwatch's biggest benefits—to be as prominent. Related: On Moto 360, swiping is left and right. The Urbane requires up motion first, unless responding immediately, before scrolling through one or more notifications. Is that a benefit of the screen shape? The Motorola face isn't perfectly round, but cropped at the bottom where notifications appear. I see lots of complaints about this design element, but it's a benefit if the reason why notifications require one swipe motion rather than two.

However, with the newest Android update, which is available for the LG, flicking your wrist scrolls through notifications. Hands-free is more convenient operation.

Another Android Wear difference: Moto 360 better presents tasks—at the top level—when accessed from the watch face. Urbane buries them under settings. Motorola Connect provides additional capabilities missing from the LG. These differences could matter to you.

Something else, which needs better confirmation from extended use: Moto 360 keeps good connection to Nexus 6 throughout my apartment. Near as I can tell, Urbane does not—and that with the supposedly beneficial WiFi-syncing function turned on. For example, earlier today, I tried to demonstrate text replies by voice to my wife. Nexus 6 was in the bedroom, and we were perhaps 10 meters away in the living room. I consistently got a can't connect to Google warning. Moving in proximity of the phone solved the problem, which I don't experience with Moto 360.

Watch faces and screen deserve some comparison. To my eyes, the Urbane is noticeably brighter and text is sharper (but font smaller in default setting) than Moto 360, despite similar resolution. Stated differently: Urbane's display is much more appealing and joyous to look at. LG's watch faces are fantastic and well-suited to a timepiece meant to look classic. They accent the overall aesthetic.

About 24 hours after receiving Urbane, I am pleased. The smartwatch is worth considering for buyers willing to spend $349, which seems all the pricier with Google and Motorola discounting the 360 by 70 bucks to $179.99. After casual use, battery is 35 percent—down only from 44 percent when I went to bed around 3 a.m. EDT, and that with the dimmed display mode turned on. That option, which shows the screen even when you aren't engaging the smartwatch, conceptually should suck dry the charge but doesn't.

My actual review will be be

Gregarius » éléments par Joe Wilcox

Canaux

éléments par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 7, 2019, 1:04am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 29, 2018, 12:00am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 22, 2018, 4:27am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 17, 2018, 10:49pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 3, 2018, 6:10am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 1, 2018, 12:56am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: novembre 28, 2018, 6:59am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: novembre 27, 2018, 12:00am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: novembre 15, 2018, 9:32pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: octobre 17, 2018, 5:49pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: septembre 13, 2018, 9:01am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: août 31, 2018, 11:30pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: août 27, 2018, 12:30am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: août 20, 2018, 6:49pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juillet 4, 2018, 9:45am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 15, 2018, 11:45pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 13, 2018, 6:48pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: février 11, 2018, 3:01am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: janvier 8, 2018, 10:56pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: novembre 5, 2017, 3:40am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: octobre 5, 2017, 12:53am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: août 23, 2017, 11:13pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 29, 2017, 6:01am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 27, 2017, 7:49pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 17, 2017, 2:47am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 9, 2017, 7:42am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 3, 2017, 4:34am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 21, 2017, 3:25am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 15, 2017, 1:37am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: février 2, 2017, 3:53am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: janvier 24, 2017, 7:08am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: janvier 24, 2017, 7:08am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: janvier 9, 2017, 8:35am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: janvier 6, 2017, 8:49am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: janvier 2, 2017, 9:59pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 29, 2016, 11:41pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 28, 2016, 12:05am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 21, 2016, 6:05am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 19, 2016, 10:50pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 17, 2016, 11:32pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 15, 2016, 7:19pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 9, 2016, 7:23pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: décembre 8, 2016, 9:19pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: novembre 8, 2016, 8:36pm CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: novembre 2, 2016, 12:18am CET par Joe Wilcox

Publié: octobre 28, 2016, 6:57pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: octobre 25, 2016, 10:51pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: octobre 25, 2016, 1:35am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: octobre 24, 2016, 7:17pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: octobre 19, 2016, 9:36pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: septembre 25, 2016, 9:38pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juillet 15, 2016, 7:32am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juillet 15, 2016, 1:15am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juillet 7, 2016, 9:08am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juillet 3, 2016, 11:24pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 14, 2016, 7:46pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 13, 2016, 6:27pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: juin 8, 2016, 12:29am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 24, 2016, 9:05pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 20, 2016, 9:56pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 20, 2016, 4:14am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mai 18, 2016, 9:58pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 27, 2016, 2:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 26, 2016, 10:59pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 22, 2016, 7:58pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 21, 2016, 1:09am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 20, 2016, 7:00pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 17, 2016, 7:19pm CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 12, 2016, 4:12am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 5, 2016, 6:43am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 2, 2016, 7:26am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: avril 1, 2016, 6:12am CEST par Joe Wilcox

Publié: mars 29, 2016, 7:03pm CEST par Joe Wilcox