I should feel lucky. I’ve owned several VWs over the years, but never considered a diesel option. Not that I had any prejudice against a different kind of engine — I owned one of Mazdas original rotary engine cars in the 1970s — but the value proposition just didn’t make much sense to me.

Here’s why: A car with a diesel engine costs several thousand dollars more. Depending on fuel prices, diesel fuel may cost more too. Right now, we’re talking of up to 15 cents per gallon more than regular here in Arizona, although that state of affairs can be reversed as prices change. The picture may be very different where you live.  So in Europe, it’s more advantageous to buy a diesel car.

Supposedly diesel engines last longer, but a VW service writer I have known for a while told me that scheduled maintenance is more expensive. Recent VW diesels also require that you also add a diesel exhaust fluid, usually called urea, at regular intervals to help control emissions. Despite routinely getting more than 40 miles per gallon on the highway, the diesel engine proposition is not as economical as it seems to be for a passenger car or SUV.

Indeed, it may well be that the initial refusal to set up a system requiring urea is why VW engineers decided to cheat the system beginning in 2009. So when the vehicle was placed on a dynamometer to test emissions levels, the vehicles would pass with flying colors. But the software was designed to turn off emissions controls under normal use, thus emitting up to 40 times the legal limit.

Outrageous!

And it wasn’t just for VW vehicle sold in the U.S. Millions of cars around the world were also programmed to cheat the system, and VW has been forced to pay through the nose for its transgressions. The fixes are less severe in Europe and are already being performed, but the authorities in this country wanted to exact blood in the form of a settlement exceeding $15 billion. It means that people who bought the offending vehicles can sell them back to VW, or break their leases without penalty. They will also receive up to $10,000 in good will payments. In addition to fines, VW must invest billions to develop electric cars. But that’s where the industry is moving anyway.

Those who want to keep their cars can still get the free fix from VW — when and if it’s approved — and still be eligible for the goodwill payments. U.S. dealers are also getting chunks of cash to help compensate for lost business. So far this year, sales in this country down over 13% for the first 10 months of 2016 compared to the previous year. But that’s not as bad as it seems, because 25% of VW’s U.S. sales were diesels before the ax fell.

While it appears most customers will take the settlement, some will, and can, opt to sue, and individual states can also take separate legal action. So far, it doesn’t seem any other car company has pulled a similar stunt, although some, such as Ford, Hyundai and Kia, have been accused of faking fuel economy ratings.

To be fair, I think VW should be forced to pay billions of dollars to European customers too, but that might be enough money to sink the company, thus leaving hundreds of thousands of people out of work, and abandoning tens of millions of loyal VW customers. So the eye-for-an-eye approach isn’t practical.

But even after the settlement is history, VW will have to find ways to keep customers with an expanding lineup that is meant to appeal to changing tastes. At a time where regular passenger cars aren’t doing so well, VW has announced the Atlas, a three-row SUV that will debut in the U.S. next year. It’s designed to appeal to a class of customers that VW has not, as yet, been able to reach, but represents a major growth segment of the market.

And what about those responsible or this outrage? Well, VW initially claimed it was all the fault of some wayward engineers who confronted a problem not easily solved, to tame diesel engines to meet tightening emissions requirements around the world. But it’s hard to believe key executives didn’t sign off on this scheme — even though they deny it. So the corporate bloodletting may not be over, but if some executives have to be fired, or imprisoned, because they cheated customers, so be it. Large corporations are generally treated far-too-lightly when it comes to breaking the law.

But what about the cars themselves?

Well, VW still has a lineup of unique vehicles that have an offbeat appeal. Believe it or not, they still sell a car labeled Beetle, but it has only a passing resemblance with the rear-engined classic that made the company famous. The version sold in this country, dubbed A5, is built in Mexico and based on the Jetta compact. It’s actually a pretty good car, though hardly space efficient if you need to carry passengers in the rear seat. It has a starting price of just under $20,000, but prices can soar to over $32,000 for the fancier R-Line SEL.

I nearly bought a Beetle once, several decades ago, when it cost around $2,000. That car had a manual transmission and forget about air conditioning. As I recall, even the radio was optional.

I’ve owned two Passats, VW’s midsized family car, over the years. I’ve also spent some time riding — and occasionally driving — a friend’s Passat. As I wrote last year, Robert, a client, last year bought a closeout 2015 Passat Limited, a special configuration that was available briefly until the 2016 models arrived.

Now the American Passat is a special version, assembled in Chattanooga, TN, which is larger and a little softer riding than its European counterpart. Thus it loses a tad of its sporty Teutonic appeal.

The other day I called Robert to see if a recent problem with his MacBook Air had returned. The discussion moved to cars, and he told me that his dealer offered him all sorts of discount incentives, and a generous trade-in allowance on his car, so he opted for a 2017 Passat SE. His monthly payments were essentially unchanged for a car that cost a couple of thousand dollars more.

The SE offers such extras as a moonroof and a blind spot monitor plus support for Apple CarPlay and Google’s Android Auto. The blind spot feature flashes amber in the sideview mirrors as cars are passing beside you before they reach your field of vision. I wonder how many accidents will be avoided that way. I spent a few minutes looking it over, before he let me take him to a nearby fast food restaurant for a light lunch. VW has spruced up the exterior somewhat, made it more slippery in wind tunnel testing, and, with a few other tweaks, improved fuel economy ratings slightly. The interior is also less plain than before, giving it a little more of the allure of a low-rent Audi A6. Otherwise, it feels and drives about the same as its predecessor.

In short, it’s a pretty good car.

So I do hope VW can now begin to move past its self-generated scandal and get back to building great cars. I also hope the authorities will be checking all auto makers more carefully than ever, just in case another company tries to pull a stunt that cheats the system, and customers.

I’ll bet you didn’t know this, but Apple has been lying to you all along about the MacBook Pro. You see, according to a certain blogger that shall not be identified here, it’s not really a “Pro” machine. Besides, using the word “Pro” is just an old fashioned cliche, and maybe Apple should stop identifying its most expensive laptop that way.

Why? Well, because Apple has allegedly given up building a notebook for serious professionals. This leaves the Late 2016 MacBook Pro as, I suppose, an overpriced niche computer. Or at least that’s one person’s opinion. But as the old saying goes, that blogger is not entitled to his own facts.

So the MacBook Pro’s shortcomings are treated by repeating the usual complaints, ignoring Apple’s reasoning, or just plain ignoring facts.

What about the lack of support for more than 16GB RAM? Now no previous Apple notebook supports more than 16GB, but some PC portables offer 32GB. Why was Apple left behind anyway? Well, according to VP Philip Schiller, if Apple used a memory controller — not standard issue on the Intel Skylake chips — to double memory, it would seriously reduce battery life. It’s a tradeoff, and if you want all-day battery life, there have to be compromises.

It’s a little factoid that our ill-informed headline seeking blogger seems to overlook.

Apple is also dinged for not providing support for Intel’s Kaby Lake chips, not realizing that the quad-core mobile processors don’t appear to be shipping yet. Besides, the performance differences will, typical of recent Intel releases, not be very significant. Apple is late enough getting a MacBook Pro refresh out the door, so what sense would it make to wait even longer hoping for Intel to deliver the goods?

What about the Touch Bar?

So we’re told that it’s not something that businesses will care about. He cites the presentation at Apple’s media event where a DJ app with Touch Bar support was demonstrated. So therefore it’s not a serious work tool.

Only the blogger seems to have a poor memory, since a representative from Adobe was also present to show how this nifty tool worked with Photoshop to easily support more sophisticated photo processing workflows. Sure, Apple without doubt worked with Adobe to build in that support, which will arrive in an update later this year, but so what? What about the promised support for the Touch Bar in Microsoft Office for the Mac?

If anything, that serves as a message to developers that they should be using the new Xcode API to build in support for Touch Bar in their apps too. Why would any large software publisher invest the time in supporting a feature available in only one notebook model if they didn’t see a future in it?

Indeed, I very much suspect Apple will release a new Magic Keyboard with the Touch Bar.

Now this won’t come cheap. This mythical Magic Keyboard 2 will probably sell for $199 at the start, although that price will come down over time. It’s also possible a future MacBook will offer Touch Bar too. If Apple can expand Touch Bar to most Macs within the year, that would justify a developer’s investment in supporting this feature. Apple always has a long-range plan with new hardware or new features, even if it’s not altogether obvious at the beginning of the process.

Don’t forget that the Late 2016 MacBook Pro also contains two processors (Apple/ARM and Intel) and two operating systems. The Touch Bar is driven by an OS that’s derived from watchOS. That sort of capability may be expanded to include more system or hardware functions in the future, making it even more difficult for Windows PCs to keep up. How can anyone match what Apple can do with its own custom processors and operating systems?

Also ignored by that blogger is the fact that the 15-inch MacBook Pro can drive two external 5K displays. How many Intel notebooks do that anyway? What’s more, Apple worked with one of its long-time manufacturing partners, LG, to develop a new line of 4K and 5K displays. They include full support for Apple’s new Thunderbolt 3 connection ports, and the wider color gamut spreading across Apple’s mobile and desktop gear. Obviously, extra displays are tools required by professional users, and so is improved color.

Otherwise, why bother?

Listen, I’ve done my research on the MacBook Pro. I do not have one, and might not buy one for a while — probably not till the price comes down — but the specs, preliminary performance ratings, and the unique hardware features are clearly designed to appeal to business users. It would nice if they were cheaper, and maybe the decision to cut the prices for USB-C/Thunderbolt 3 adapters and those LG displays will help. Indeed, if you buy the LG 5K display at the discount price, $974, you’ll save enough money to essentially make up for the MacBook Pro’s price increase.

In any case, the blogger in question, or the site’s headline writer, are going to generate plenty of traffic from a sensational headline, and knowledgeable people will be filing the comments sections at the site that correct all the misstatements and omissions. That’s how it goes for many Apple critics who have no respect whatever for facts and logic.

Apple customers are a passionate lot, and company decisions about new or changed products and services are going to receive lots of discussion. This is particularly true when there’s a controversial decision, such as removing a feature or ditching hardware.

Apple has been killing older Mac ports since the 1990s, when the first iMac appeared. It was a consumer machine, mostly using parts derived from PowerBooks. But it also came without a floppy drive, or support for ADB, for input devices, LocalTalk, for printers, or SCSI, for external drives and other devices. Instead, Apple went to USB, which seemed a curious decision at the time since it ran much slower than SCSI. At least then.

Indeed, when SCSI was first removed from Power Macs, a market developed for add-on SCSI cards, so you could continue to use your external gear with perhaps a special driver. It usually worked for as long as it lasted. The lack of a floppy drive could be dealt by using an external USB drive of some sort. Again, it was just a temporary crutch. Apple knew where the market was going.

Continue Reading…

There’s a perception, and I’ll leave it to the reader to say whether it’s valid, that Apple may have underwhelmed customers for 2016. So let’s look at what happened and see what might have been.

Throughout 2016, at least so far, Apple has been attacked for conveying the impression that they were more or less giving up on the Mac. The relative paucity of upgrades seemed to confirm that belief.

So the first Mac refresh of the year appeared in 2016, and it wasn’t very exciting. The Early 2016 MacBook got enough of a speed bump not to seem so laggy under regular use. It represented the normal range of minor updates, but stuck with a $1,299 price.

But by this time, one might have expected to see a new MacBook Air and — by summer — upgrades to the MacBook Pro. But no such luck.

True, Apple did seem to make a huge commitment to the Mac with the launch of macOS Sierra at the June WWDC. It even shipped on September 20th, a little earlier than usual, and added Siri as the tentpole feature. Now this may not seem so much to iPhone users who have grown accustomed to Siri’s presence ever since it showed up in the 2011 iPhone 4s, an otherwise undistinguished upgrade. Or at least that’s what the critics said at the time despite the fact that it still sold in record numbers.

Now Apple didn’t have to introduce Siri on the Mac. Business users probably don’t need it, while some home users won’t even bother. Well, having a home office, I haven’t bothered, but maybe I’m in the minority. It appears others like it, so there you go.

Regardless, macOS Sierra might not have lots of new features, but it appears to be a well-crafted refinement that demonstrated at least some level of commitment to the platform. Why else would Apple change its name to conform to the conventions of its other operating systems?

But what about all the new Macs just aching for a refresh? The Mac mini hadn’t been touched since 2014, and that upgrade wasn’t so terrific. For $100 less, there were no quad-core processors, and memory was soldered to the logic board, a huge downgrade to some. The Mac Pro, launched in late 2013, remained unchanged. But at least there were rumors of a new Macbook Pro, with some sort of context-sensitive OLED display touchpad that would replace the function keys.

It wasn’t announced until October 27th, two days after Apple announced yet another drop in revenue and profits, although there was the promise of somewhat higher sales this quarter.

In any case, the highly-anticipated Mac event had what the rumors indicated, a new MacBook Pro with what became known as the Touch Bar, along with the Touch ID fingerprint sensor. The rumors also suggested the MacBook Air lineup would be slimmed to just the 13-inch model, otherwise unchanged, and that was true. The 11-inch entry-level notebook was consigned to the educational market, where Apple continues to fight for status and market share against $150 Chromebooks.

So what about the desktop Macs? Apple didn’t touch the subject. Indeed, there were several interviews with Apple VP Philip Schiller and other executives, but there was no mention about the Mac mini, iMac and Mac Pro. Is it possible the media was asked not to question Apple about any other products when listening to their spiel about the greatness of the MacBook Pro and its amazing Touch Bar? I suppose that’s possible, though I am worried that Apple has so much control over how the media is expected to handle such interviews. Well, maybe they are afraid of losing access, but if all members of the media refused to restrict the questions, they’d have no choice but to say something. Even if it’s that they had nothing to announce at this time, or that they continue to believe in the Mac, it would be encouraging.

So what’s left?

Well, the iPhone 7, of course, and the Apple Watch Series 2. The former was expected to be a so-so upgrade, but the improvements internally are quite extensive. It’s also much faster than its predecessors, at least based on my limited experience with one. I could hardly call it an underwhelming upgrade since it’s still back ordered, and will probably be so until the end of the year; even later for the iPhone 7 Plus that is evidently more in demand than Apple expected.

But I still won’t buy a Plus.

Now I do regard iOS 10 as a pretty credible upgrade, and macOS Sierra works just fine although most of its tentpole features are of little use to me.

But if you expect regular releases of new hardware, Apple produced less than expected.

Now perhaps Apple is waiting for the new generation Intel Kaby Lake chips to become available in more versions before installing them on new Macs. As it stands, the quad-core processors used in the MacBook Pro are not yet available in the new chip family, nor are the desktop chips that Apple would use for an iMac. So maybe this all means that Apple is being let down by Intel again, and will have to wait until next spring to upgrade more Macs.

So more new Mac hardware will arrive next year. This year, even if the causes are not within Apple’s ability to control, the company seems to have taken a bit of a holiday.