Category Archives: Technology

Hanging up my virtual pen

Posted on by

The first time I was paid for writing about the Mac was in 1985 when A+ magazine published a reader’s tip I submitted. It detailed how to use ResEdit to modify the Welcome to Macintosh message. For 300 words, I got paid $50. It was far from a momentous event. At the time, I didn’t expect it to lead anywhere. My day job was still as a professor of psychology. But, as it turned out, the reader’s tip was the spark that ignited a flame.

I had the good fortune to be around for the dawn of some of the most significant technological developments in human history: the arrival of personal computers, the emergence of the Internet and the World Wide Web, and the current dominance of social media and mobile devices. These and other technological advances continue to alter our world at an ever accelerating pace. One day Apple is on the verge of bankruptcy. The next day (or so it sometimes seems), it is the largest most profitable company on earth. Who’d have guessed?

At a personal level, these changes became the impetus for a new career direction — a career I did not foresee and would never have predicted. That initial reader’s submission led to me becoming a contributing editor for several Mac magazines, a book author (most notably of Sad Macs, Bombs & Other Disasters) and the creator/editor of one of the earliest Mac websites (MacFixIt). Again, who’d have guessed? Certainly not me.

The result has been three decades of doing things I thoroughly enjoyed and getting paid for doing them. Who could ask for more?

Which brings me to today. I’ve decided to call it quits and hang up my virtual pen. What I expect to be the last article I get paid to write was posted to Macworld last December.

To any of you who have followed my work, this should not be a surprise. In fact, some of you may feel this announcement is more than a bit anti-climactic. I’ve been flirting with retirement for the past two years, gradually diminishing my published output — even giving a “retirement” session at Macworld/iWorld last year. For the past year, the only paid writing I did was a small number of articles for Macworld. A few weeks ago, I “gave notice” and told the folks at Macworld that I was done. That made it official — and made it real to me in a way that it had not been before.

Why now? There’s no mystery. I’m old enough that it seems appropriate and financially well-off enough to manage it, so why not? While I could keep writing occasional articles for Macworld, it seemed better to make a clean break. Recent events helped move me in this direction.

In the past year, Macworld ended its print publication (as well as laying off almost its entire editorial staff, who just happened to be the people I had known and worked with for more than a decade). Around the same time, Macworld/iWorld announced its demise. Several notable Mac websites similarly came to an end in the last year or so, including TUAW and my own MacFixIt (which, subsequent to my leaving it, had been run by CNET).

At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I began to feel that these were all signs of a “torch-passing” moment. There is a generation of tech writers (of which I am a member) whose careers date back to the 80’s. We still vividly recall “highlight reel” moments from prior decades — like Steve Jobs unveiling the original Mac or the Boston Macworld Expo keynote that kicked off Steve’s triumphant return to Apple. For much of a younger generation, these events are tantamount to ancient history.

For now, these two generations co-exist in many work environments. However, as is inevitable and appropriate, the balance is steadily shifting towards the younger generation. Over the next decade, I expect the older generation to exit the stage in increasing numbers. As one of the oldest members of that generation, I am merely at the leading edge of this trend — which makes now seem like a perfect time to leave. I expect there will be times when I miss being “part of the action.” But I leave without regrets.

I don’t intend to entirely disappear from the online world. I plan to write columns here at Slanted Viewpoint from time to time. And I may still do occasional podcasts at MacVoices. Of course, I will continue to post tweets. Beyond that, my life will be lived offline.

One last thing

Whatever success I have had, I could not have achieved it without help. Lots of help — from a great bunch of people. To all of those listed below (and to any I may have forgotten), I offer my heartfelt thanks.

Bob LeVitus. In addition to giving me my start as a freelance writer (when he was editor of MACazine), Bob was essential in getting me started as a book author and as a speaker at Macworld Expo.

Dan Frakes. A colleague of mine at MacUser and later Macworld, Dan was also my co-author for Mac OS X Help Line. For a while, he was even an editor at MacFixIt. He remains a good friend.

Chris Breen. Another friend and colleague from both MacUser and Macworld. Prior to his recent move to Apple, Chris, as an editor at Macworld, was the editor of my Bugs & Fixes column.

Chuck Joiner. As the person behind MacNotables and MacVoices, Chuck was my conduit into the world of podcasting. Thanks to Chuck, I was able to have all the fun of podcasting without having to do any of the work.

Dave Rogelberg. While at Addison-Wesley, Dave was the incredibly patient editor of my first edition of Sad Macs. He also generously provided advice that helped further my book authoring career.

Cliff Colby. Cliff was the project editor of the books I wrote for Peachpit Press. His friendship and encouragement were a big part of what made it such a delight to work for Peachpit.

Ric Ford, Eric Belsley, Kurt Christensen and Stan Flack. When I first started MacFixIt, these four ran competing websites (MacInTouch, The Macintosh Resource Page, VersionTracker and MacCentral, respectively). Yet each one went far out of their way to provide the help I needed to get MacFixIt up and running.

Robert DeLaurentis, Ilene Hoffman and Shawn Platkus. When the work at MacFixIt became more than one person could handle, these three joined the site and became essential in preventing me from collapsing under the load.

Ralph Risch. When I was looking to sell MacFixIt, Ralph, as CEO of TechTracker, made me an “offer I couldn’t refuse.” I’m glad he did.

Jason Snell. As the editor of Macworld, Jason consistently made it easy for me to work there.

Scholle McFarland. As a copy editor at Macworld, Scholle never failed to improve whatever I submitted.

Dave Hamilton, Bryan Chaffin, Jeff Gamet and John Martellero. For several years, I did a column for The Mac Observer called User Friendly View. It was my first gig writing op-ed columns — which I had long wanted to do. As a bonus, I got to work with these great guys every day.

Tonya Engst and Adam Engst. As the publishers of the Take Control book series, Tonya and Adam gave me the opportunity to write one of the first books about the iPhone.

Paul Kent and Kathy Moran. During my almost two decades as a speaker at Macworld Expo, Paul and Kathy were the hard-working duo most responsible for making it such a fantastic experience.

Jonathan Cerf and George Sullivan. Back in the early 1980’s, I worked with Jonathan and George on a journal about the game of Othello. They helped me hone the skills I would later use when writing about Macs.

And many many more, including:

John Anderson, Marjorie Baer, Neil Bauman, Jeff Baudin, Gordon Bell, Jennifer Bell, P.A.M Borys, John Braun, Gleb Budman, Jim Bruce, Serenity Caldwell, Jeff Carlson, John Chaffee, Adam Christianson, John Christopher, Raines Cohen, Robert Coffman, Peter Cohen, Marty Cortinas, Colin Crawford, Matt Deatherage, Albert Dion, Charles Downs, Glenn Fleishman, Lex Friedman, Lynda Gousha, Anne Griffin, Rob Griffiths, Jon Gotow, Andy Ihnatko, Russ Ito, Susan Janus, Shawn King, Rocky LaRochelle, Chuck LaTournas, Robert Leeds, Dan Littman, Jean MacDonald, Carol McClendon, Kirk McElhearn, Philip Michaels, Dan Miller, Dan Moren, David Morgenstern, Rik Myslewski, Tom Negrino, Gary-Paul Prince, Naomi Pearce, Nancy Peterson, Elissa Rabellino, Schoun Regan, Nadyne Richmond, John Rizzo, Lorene Romero, Michael Rose, Nancy Ruenzel, Ian Schray, Jon Seff, Sal Soghoian, Dori Smith, David Sparks, David Stillman, Derrick Story, Duane Straub, Dave Taylor, Neil Ticktin, Ladd Van Tol, John Welch, Ben Wilson, Dan Wood and Jon Zilber.

Of course, a special thanks to my wife Naomi. None of this would have been possible without her support.

Finally, thanks to Apple and all the people who have worked there. Without them, I would have had nothing to write about. As a related postscript, I was recently contacted by Apple about a potential job. Bad timing — given that I was on the verge of retirement. But I was none-the-less flattered, surprised, intrigued and very much tempted. As you might imagine, much internal conflict ensued. In the end, I remained on my retirement path.

Update: May 19: I made a few additions and corrections to the “thank you” list.

Six surprising things I learned at the Apple Store…and one thing that was not a surprise at all

Posted on by

Yesterday, I visited my local Apple Store (4th Street in Berkeley) and got my first hands-on time with the Apple Watch and the 12-inch MacBook. After all I had read about these two new Apple products over the past few weeks, I expected the event to be anti-climatic, confirming conclusions I had drawn from my immersion in the web coverage. Many of my expectations were met. But I was also in for a few surprises:

MacBook

• The look and feel of the new 12-inch MacBook turned out to be much more “drool-worthy” than I had anticipated. It is so thin and so light, it’s hard to believe there’s room for all the required hardware inside. No wonder Apple made it so difficult to open up the case. They don’t want you to see that it’s powered by metachlorians.

Compared to the MacBook Air, the new MacBook is a big step up in almost every way.

In terms of appearance, I much prefer the border-to-border glass to the aluminum rim of the Air. The Air’s case design is unnecessarily wide. The 12-inch MacBook has almost the same width and depth as the 11-inch MacBook Air.

The new MacBook features a Retina display, absent from the Air. And I was comfortable with the resolution of the MacBook, not finding text too small (as some have complained).

Unless saving three or four hundred dollars is critical ($899/$999 vs $1299), I see no reason to prefer a MacBook Air. I especially expect the market for the 11-in Air to fall to near zero over time. The 12-inch MacBook is a much superior piece of hardware — and targets the same market. The MacBook is also a serious competitor for people otherwise considering an iPad Air as their main computer.

The primary downside of the MacBook remains its lone (USB-C) port. This can lead to numerous hassles that will likely require one or more expensive adapters to resolve. Even an initial first step of transferring data from an older Mac can prove to be a challenge, especially if you want speeds faster than Wi-Fi or USB 2.0. Still, I suspect that the target audience for the new MacBook will not be put off by this constraint.

Speaking of USB-C adapters, after looking at Apple’s $79 USB-C Digital AV Multiport Adapter, I started to wonder why the short stretch of cable is needed at all. It seems to just get in the way. Why not have the adapter “clip on” to the MacBook when you plug it into the USB-C port, making it almost like an extension of the laptop? Perhaps a third-party is already working on this type of adapter.

• Based on the online images, I had decided that gold was the color I would get, if I ever got a MacBook. To my surprise, after seeing all the models in the Store, I much preferred Space Gray (joining my friend Dan Frakes in this assessment).

• I knew that typing on the new MacBook’s keyboard would feel different than on other MacBook models. But I wasn’t prepared for how different. I did not like the feel at all. It’s something I might get used to over time, but I doubt I will ever prefer it.

Apple Watch

• I walked into the Apple Store with no prior appointment for trying on an Apple Watch. I expected this would mean I would not get to see one on my wrist that day. Wrong. I was immediately offered a 15-minute session. In fact, the counter displaying Apple Watches was the least crowded spot in the Store. I’m not sure if this is a bad omen or just an outlier.

• I had decided that, if I were to buy a watch, my choice would be the 42mm Space Gray Sport Watch. It looked great online and (at $399) was at the bottom of the price scale. But when I actually got to try one on, I didn’t like the feel of the band and I found its overall appearance underwhelming. Too “sporty” and not “classy” enough for my taste. I wound up much preferring the Milanese Loop. Even at $699, that’s the one I would now get. At least I was correct in assuming that the 42mm model was the right size for me.

• My biggest hesitation about getting an Apple Watch was that it wouldn’t be worth the bother. I’m content taking my iPhone out of my pocket; I don’t need a separate device to save me that effort — especially one that needs charging every night and may not always display the time on demand. However, after playing with the Watch for a while, I began to change my tune. Access to maps, notifications, email, Apple Pay, Siri, and more — all with the flick of my wrist. I could see where I would really enjoy having this device. And the interface worked much more smoothly than I anticipated. The touch screen, the button, the digital crown: I got the hang of combining their actions in no time at all. No amount of advertising can substitute for actually spending time with an Apple Watch. If you have any doubts about the Watch, you owe it to yourself to get over to an Apple Store. Like me, you may be pleasantly surprised. I’m now very close to ordering one.

• One thing I totally expected easily lived up to my expectation: The gold Apple Watch Edition is an exorbitant waste of money. It’s simply a gold-colored Apple Watch. Aside from the color, it has no advantages (if you can call color an advantage). Yes, it’s made of real gold. But if I didn’t know that, I could easily be convinced that it’s merely a gold-tinted alloy. Viewing it from the glass covered display, it didn’t seem special at all. It seemed utterly absurd that the Edition watches cost at least $9000 more than the stainless steel models sitting adjacent to them. I can’t see why anyone would spend the money on an Edition. Even if you could easily afford one, you’d feel better getting 10 or more stainless steel Apple Watches for the same money — and giving away the ones you don’t intend to use.

Here’s to the crazy ones: Apple Watch Edition

Posted on by

If you’re planning on buying a gold Apple Watch Edition, you either have to be rich or crazy. Preferably, a bit of both.

With a starting price of $10,000 and rapidly going up to $17,000, this is not something you buy because you’re lusting after Apple’s latest gadget. If it’s the technology you want, even the cheapest Apple Watch will do. The truth is every Apple Watch has identical internal components and an identical face. There is not one thing you can do with a gold Apple Watch — other than admire its color — that you can’t do with the considerably cheaper ($350-$1100) other models.

So who will — or who should — consider buying a gold Apple Watch?

 

Rolex

To answer that question, first let’s ask a more general one: Why buy any expensive luxury watch?

First off, it’s clear there is a market for these watches. Let’s take Rolex for example. These watches come in a range of models and prices, with a likely median around $10,000. Despite the low oxygen levels at these altitudes, estimates I have read indicate that Rolex sells several hundred thousand watches each year!

Admittedly, that number is not impressive in comparison to something like iPhone sales. But no one expects that level of sales for a luxury item. It’s a successful niche market, much like the one for luxury cars.

So who are these people? It obviously helps to be rich. If you have enough money that $10K for you is like $100 for the rest of us, you can buy a Rolex and not care what it costs. But you don’t have to be that rich to justify a luxury watch. People who are merely well-off (but far from the top 1%) might decide to splurge on one. Such people might spend upwards of $10,000 on a big vacation, for example. They could decide they’d rather have a Rolex and skip the vacation. For what it’s worth, I fit comfortably into this category. I’m certainly not a member of the super-rich, but I could buy a Rolex tomorrow without experiencing any financial strain.

But I wouldn’t do so — because I don’t place any value on having such an expensive timepiece. I can get an attractive watch that’s well built and keeps accurate time for far less money. And that’s all I want or need. I’d almost be afraid to wear a Rolex, for fear it would get lost or stolen.

Still, I can imagine at least four rationales for someone else opting to buy a luxury watch:

• Materials. The metal is solid gold. And that costs big bucks. If you are into gold jewelry, this may be where you want your discretionary income to go.

• Craftsmanship. As this website explains, Rolex watches are not stamped out like the ones you buy at Target. If you value the care that goes into making a fine watch, you may want a Rolex.

• Status. Like Gucci or Prada, Rolex is a status brand name. People are willing to pay extra to obtain that status. A lot extra.

• Longevity. Luxury watches are designed to last. They can become heirlooms that get passed down for generations. Amortized over such a long period of time, $10K may not wind up being so expensive. And if you ever decide to sell, a “used” Rolex will likely retain a good portion of its value.

Apple Watch Edition

Okay. Now that we’ve cleared that up, let’s return to the original question: Why spend $10K or more to get a luxury version of the Apple Watch?

Again, if you’re so wealthy that cost is irrelevant, there’s no point in asking this question. So let’s eliminate these people from the discussion. What about the rest?

For the rest, I simply can’t see a good case for getting one. That’s why I say you have to be a bit crazy to buy a gold Apple Watch.

Of the four rationales I cited above, only one clearly applies to the Apple Watch Edition: Materials. It’s made out of gold. That’s it.

As for craftsmanship, as I already said, the Watch itself is identical no matter which one you get. Actually, at its Media Event, Apple made a bigger deal about the craftsmanship that went into the aluminum and stainless steel models (with videos about each one) than the gold model.

As for status, I don’t anticipate any great status in wearing an Apple Watch Edition. To the contrary, I can imagine people discreetly scoffing at the wearer, thinking how foolish for the person to believe that the Apple Watch is commensurate with a Rolex as a status symbol.

As for longevity, that’s the worst rationale of all. The Apple Watch is not designed to get passed on to heirs. Far from it. It’s not even designed to keep it yourself for more than about 5 years. Think about it a moment. The original iPhone came out in 2007. I bet there aren’t 10 people on the planet that are still using one as their primary smartphone. I expect the technology of the Apple Watch to advance at a similar pace. A few years from now, when Apple Watch 4 is out, the one you might buy next month will be hopelessly obsolete, almost archaic. This means you will almost be required to get a new one. It also means that the resale value of your old watch will have plummeted.

Paying $10K for a watch once is one thing. Paying it again and again every few years is something else entirely.

There is one silver (gold?) lining here. I suspect that you will be able to re-use your original band when you upgrade to a new version of the Watch (at least until Apple completely redesigns the form factor). Ideally, you will also be able to buy a Watch without a band. This will save you considerable money. But it will still be ridiculously expensive to upgrade.

To be fair, Apple isn’t planning on selling many of these gold watches. Tim Cook announced at the media event that they will have only “limited availability.” Wise decision.

Bottom line: Unless you are rich and crazy, and assuming you want an Apple Watch at all, stick with the cheaper Apple Watches this year. This is especially so when it isn’t yet clear how compelling the product will be or how much you will value it. If you wind up loving the watch, and you have the cash to spare, you can always go for the gold Apple Watch next year.

Note: The only person I know who owns a Rolex is Dave Hamilton — and I just saw that he posted his own similar thoughts on the gold Apple Watch.

Putting it together: MacBook, USB-C and the iPad Pro

Posted on by

Apple’s new MacBook made an impressive debut at yesterday’s Apple Media Event. With features such as a 2304 x 1440 Retina display, Force Touch trackpad, and fanless design, it lives up to Apple’s billing as an innovative “reinvention” of a state-of-the-art laptop computer.

Still, despite dropping the Air suffix from its name, the new 12-inch laptop is a very close relative of the Air — both in appearance and target audience. On the other hand, the MacBook is so light (just two pounds) and so thin (24% thinner than an 11-inch MacBook Air) that its truest competitor may turn out to be the iPad Air rather than the MacBook Air.

Reinforcing this iPad matchup, the new MacBook comes in the same assortment of three colors (silver, space gray and gold) as do Apple’s iPads. And (as with all iOS devices and unlike Apple’s other laptops), the new Macbook has no custom configuration options.

USB-C

There’s one more iPad similarity. And it’s a big one: The MacBook has only one port for wired connections (not counting an audio-out jack)! Really. Just one. That’s down from four (2 USB, 1 Thunderbolt, and a power port) in the MacBook Air. The new port even looks like an iOS Lightning port. But it’s not. It’s an entirely new, never-before-seen-on-an-Apple-device port called USB-C. This USB-C connection supports charging, USB 3.1 Gen 1 and DisplayPort 1.2. It does it all, as they say.

My first reaction to this news was: “What? Only one? Even if Apple wanted just one type of port, couldn’t they at least have included two of them?” That way you could charge a MacBook and have an external drive attached at the same time. As it now stands, unless you get an inevitable third-party USB-C hub, you can only do one of these things at a time.

And no Thunderbolt? This means you can’t connect a MacBook to Apple’s Thunderbolt display — an option that had been strongly promoted by Apple just a couple of year’s ago.

I was ready to conclude this whole USB-C thing was a serious misstep on Apple’s part. And it may yet prove to be so. But, more likely, it is Apple once again staying ahead of the curve, pushing the envelope, or whatever similar analogy you prefer. Remember when the iMac first came out, without any floppy drive? People said it was a huge mistake. But it turned out to be prescient. This is Apple doing the same thing.

First, given the target audience for this Mac, which is the low end of the market, the limitations of a lone USB-C port are likely to be less than they may appear. For example, prospective MacBook owners are not the sort to purchase a Thunderbolt Display. That’s more for the MacBook Pro crowd.

More importantly, with the new MacBook, Apple is pushing us towards a world when all connections will be wireless — either to other local wireless devices or over the Internet to the cloud. Want to back up your MacBook? Connect it wirelessly to a Time Capsule. Want a larger display? Use AirPlay to mirror your display to a television. Want to store your super-large music and photo libraries? Use iCloud.

iPad Pro?

Let’s return to the iPad/MacBook similarity. Rumors continue to circulate that Apple will be releasing a 12-inch iPad Pro later this year. Does such a device still make sense, given the arrival of this new MacBook?

Personally, I much prefer an iPad to a laptop for many tasks. There are many times when I find iOS apps and a touchscreen more convenient and more practical than Mac app alternatives and an intrusive physical keyboard. Want to read the New York Times, check the weather, read a Kindle book, play a game, listen to a podcast? The iPad is the better choice. When I am home, I use my iPad Air almost exclusively, while my MacBook Pro gathers dust (I have a desktop Mac for tasks that the Air doesn’t handle well).

The iPad Air also beats even this latest MacBook in terms of weight and size — by a wide margin: the iPad is half the weight and almost half the thickness of the MacBook.

Overall, I don’t see the new MacBook significantly affecting sales of the iPad Air or mini.

A supposed iPad Pro is a different story. An iPad Pro will presumably be targeted for “productivity” tasks that are the traditional domain of laptops — tasks where you typically prefer a physical keyboard. The new MacBook will give an iPad Pro a run for its money here. Even if you could “get by” with just an iPad Pro, a MacBook (with the more powerful and flexible OS X) will be the better choice for getting work done.

Bottom line: Many people will still prefer to own some combination of iOS device(s) and Mac(s). I certainly will. But it’s hard to imagine users opting for both a new MacBook and an iPad Pro. It will be one or the other. And the new MacBook is more likely to be the winner. That’s why I am beginning to have serious doubts about the viability of an iPad Pro. The new MacBook may kill the device before it’s even born.

One final thought: If an iPad Pro is coming…might it come with a USB-C port instead of (or more likely in addition to) a Lightning port? If so, this would allow the Pro to offer an assortment of productivity options not currently possible with existing iPads.