For a number of years, it’s been the hope of some of Apple’s most severe critics for the company to fail. Not just to fail to grow sales, but to be thrust into irrelevance or go out of business. Of course, that nearly happened in 1997, shortly after Steve Jobs became iCEO, when Apple’s cash would only fund the company for another three months until things began to change.

That turnaround may have started with the famous “Think Different” ad campaign, but that’s another story.

Now consider the logic behind some of the recent fear-mongering. As merchandise is being manufactured, orders will vary at different times of the year. With consumer electronics, the peak season is generally the December quarter. So it stands to reason that orders for the following quarter’s production will be lower.

Evidently, logic isn’t supposed to apply to Apple. So a couple of years back, there were reports that Apple had cut orders for the iPhone. Apple’s stock price took a dip in the months that followed. It didn’t matter that Tim Cook explained, during a quarterly conference call, that you cannot use single metrics from the supply chain to understand how many products were being built or sold. And it’s also clear that Apple often relies on multiple suppliers for parts.

So there’s now a story that Apple has cut back on orders for the iPhone 6s series. Now I have no idea what part of that story may be true. It may be about an individual supplier for reasons the press probably wouldn’t know unless somebody is really talking out of turn. Besides, you would expect Apple to order fewer iPhones for the March quarter, since sales will be less, not because the product is a failure, but because of normal sales trends.

Yes, it did impact Apple’s stock price to some extent, but didn’t you expect that?

Now there’s a published report expressing deep concern over reports about some resellers discounting the Apple Watch. You see, Apple normally sets a minimum sale price on products, meaning that the company would probably have to give permission for discounting. And the news that Best Buy is offering a $100 discount on products usually selling for a minimum of $349 is pretty substantial. Not quite as much as offering two current model Samsung Galaxy smartphones for the price of one, or offering one free. But after all, we don’t worry about Samsung’s difficulties pushing high-end handsets.

Oh and by the way, it appears Target is putting the Apple Watch on sale too, but all you get is a coupon rather than sweaty cash. So the theory is that perhaps Apple Watch sales aren’t so good, and Apple needs to clear out inventory before the next one arrives, perhaps in the spring of 2016. Maybe.

Of course, we really do not know how well it’s doing. All we have are projections of five or six million sold for the first two quarters and other predictions of twice that for the current quarter.

Now I did casually explore the price of the Apple Watch at some other dealers. Amazon is offering small discounts, but several models have limited stocks. B&H, a large online retailer of consumer electronics and photographic equipment, was offering a $50 discount last I checked.

Is all this is due to the rush by Apple to move product before the holiday season ends? It may actually be due to the decision on the part of some dealers to sell the Apple Watch at a fairly decent discount, depending on the dealer, in order to drive traffic to sites and stores. Call it a loss leader.

The fact is, however, that concerns about the Apple Watch are selective. Several dealers tracked by AppleInsider are also offering fairly big discounts on new Macs. Even iPads, including the iPad Pro, are being discounted. But it sounds worse to make you believe, erroneously, that it’s all about the Apple Watch and poor sales.

I made a random check of a few jewelry stores to replace my lost wedding band, and that quest revealed all sorts of sales that continued past Black Friday and Cyber Monday. Faced with a slow-growing economy, it’s clear that merchants are trying hard to boost cash flow in any way they can, hoping to make up the difference on volume. It’s not an Apple story, unless you want it to be.

Part of the disconnect is due to the fact that it’s about Apple. Even when Apple was selling a fraction of what it is now, there were critics who were only too happy to pronounce the company dead and buried. In the 1990s, Apple unwittingly did what it could to make those wishes come true, at least until Steve Jobs returned to the company. Even then it took years to build a consumer electronics powerhouse. Some of it may be due to the happy accidents of the unexpected success of the iPad, and, later, the iPhone.

Remember that Jobs, at the 2007 iPhone rollout, said Apple would be happy to have sales reach 1% of the global market by the end of 2008. Apple did better, and that was the beginning of a juggernaut. But 2008 was 11 years after Jobs took over the company. It was by no means a cakewalk. The iPhone caught a wave and the rest is history.

So is the history of people using fear-mongering and facts taken out of context to denigrate Apple.

So it was widely expected that the fourth generation Apple TV, which arrived months later than some originally expected, would represent Apple’s major foray into conquering the living room. At least that was the expectation, but what you expect and what you get are often very different.

Before the Apple TV was launched in September, some expected that Apple would be announcing a new subscription TV plan. It was supposed to include the four major broadcast networks — CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox (no mention of the CW) — a smattering of cable TV channels, possibly some premium networks such as HBO and Showtime, and even your local stations.

Supposedly Apple was trying to persuade the networks to negotiate on behalf of their local affiliates, and that’s not so easy, since most are owned by independent businesses. But at the end of the day, all this slimmed down joy would come at a price ranging from $20 to $40. But it never showed up during the rollout of the Apple TV amid predictions it was put off until 2016. Indeed, some felt the new set-top box was a disappointment, since it lacked 4K (Ultra HD) support and had new features that weren’t daringly different from such major competitors as the latest Amazon Fire TV and the Roku 4.

So what went wrong? We do know that Tim Cook has asserted on several occasions that Apple was keenly interested in the living room, and that he was disappointed with the current setup, which took him back in time.

How so? Well, unfortunately journalists who are blessed with an Apple interview are evidently too intimated to ask probing questions. So it’s mostly the basics, and when the Apple executives repeat a corporate meme, they aren’t challenged, or asked for a more nuanced answer. All right, they are routinely asked about new products, and Apple tells them they don’t comment on new products.

So what was the end game with Apple TV, and was it a glimmer of the future, a product that would be updated over time? What?

While Apple hasn’t been specific about future plans, they can’t stop a prominent TV executive from spilling a few tidbits. So CBS CEO Leslie Moonves claimed that they had been contacted by Apple about the subscription TV venture, and seemed to feel it wouldn’t be long before it happened. That was then.

This is now: Moonves reportedly disclosed, during a December 8th speech at the Business Insider Ignition conference that plans for such a service have been put “on hold.” The reasons appear to be expected, that the networks wouldn’t budge on Apple’s demands to license a subset of the hundreds of channels they offer to the cable and satellite networks. In addition to wanting Apple to take it all, they supposedly wouldn’t cut prices to allow for a cheaper service.

One possibility suggested in the reports about Moonves’ speech is that Apple wanted to give customers more of a choice of which channels they wanted. They wouldn’t be forced to take a full bundle. That raises the possibility that it would be a la carte, the dream of many cable customers today, and perhaps one reason why more and more people are cutting the cable cord. It’s not just the price, but the phrase “300 channels and nothing to watch” holds meaning for tens of millions of frustrated customers.

This doesn’t mean the deal won’t get done. Evidently Moonves believes it will, eventually, adding that “it has four major networks and 10 cable networks, let’s say, and the price point will be in the $30s, $30-35, $40 maybe.”

Well, that’s encouraging, sort of. But Apple is facing serious headwinds in dealing with the content providers. This is no doubt true with Comcast, which owns all the NBC networks that include, in addition to the broadcast network, such popular watering holes as USA and Syfy. There’s a bunch, and I won’t bother to list them all. Suffice it to say that Comcast might not appreciate accepting a lower carriage fee, or even unbundling, so not all channels are included. Add to that other networks taking similar approaches, and there may have been a huge resistance to Apple’s scheme.

You see, Apple got off real lucky in the original contracts with the music companies that led to the iTunes store. It was felt, at the time, that they caved in too easily not seeing the potential, and being stung by rampant piracy. The movie and TV networks are taking harder lines.

In saying that, most of you know that some TV networks and cable premium channels are already offering online subscription services of their own. You can find them on your Apple TV already. So I suppose, if enough apps are available, Apple could provide some sort of way to access them all within a unified app as the first step towards establishing such a service. Surely it would be more beneficial to everyone to make a single payment per month rather than a dozen.

Regardless, it’s clear from what the CBS executive says, and there’s no reason not to believe him, that hopes for a new TV service from Apple will remain, for the time being, hopes.

Apple has been busy. Call it Update Tuesday, with the release of OS X El Capitan 10.11.2, and iOS 9.2, plus updates for the new Apple TV and Apple Watch. The update list for the OS X release is fairly short, and I’ve seen two versions, one with the update, one at Apple’s support site. The full patch notes are as follows:

This update:

• Improves Wi-Fi reliability
• Improves the reliability of Handoff and AirDrop
• Fixes an issue that may cause Bluetooth devices to disconnect
• Fixes an issue that prevented Mail from deleting messages in an offline Exchange account
• Fixes an issue that prevented importing photos from an iPhone to a Mac using a USB cable
• Improves iCloud Photo Sharing for Live Photos
• Fixes an issue that may prevent Mail from completing the upgrade
• Fixes an issue that may prevent signing in to FaceTime and Messages

Enterprise content:

• Resolves an issue where reinstalling a configuration profile containing a certificate payload causes the certificates to be removed instead of updated
• Resolves an issue that caused multiple authentication prompts in Safari when using NTLM authentication
• Allows for deferred enablement when using the fdesetup command to enable FileVault with mobile accounts

The 9.2 update is far more extensive, with bug fixes and improvements that cover Music, News, Mail, Podcasts, Safari, iBooks and others.

The fixes are so extensive, it’ll take a while to digest them all. So for example, the News app’s enhancements include listings of top stories, curated by Apple’s in-house editors, and published a “couple of times a day” according to a published report. This will give publishers a better shake at getting some attention.

AT&T mobile subscribers will be able to use iPads, Macs, and Apple Watches to make Wi-Fi calls using something called NumberSync, even when an iPad isn’t nearby. Up till now, the Continuity feature allowed for a similar capability, so long as your iPhone was around. The new system is configured via the carrier, thus eliminating that restriction. Similar features are available to customers of T-Mobile and Sprint. I assume Verizon Wireless will get in the act before long.

The troubled Music app contains improvements to Apple Music to address user concerns. You can now create a new playlist rather than be stuck with an existing one. They are displayed in the order of the most recent changes. Classical music fans will appreciate the fact that the catalog has an enhanced display that includes works, composers, and performances.

Mail for iOS now supports the Mail Drop feature, which first debuted with OS X Yosemite last year. It lets you send attachments of up to 5GB in size, using iCloud as the intermediary. So you’re no longer saddled with the paltry limit set by most email services, which routinely range from 10MB to 20MB. This may end up reducing the need for such ancillary services as Dropbox when you need to send large files to various users.

There are other changes that you can check out in Apple’s support document on the subject.

Now I installed these updates on two Macs, two iPhones, an iPad and an iPad Pro — the latter the review unit I received from Apple this past weekend. All in all, things mostly seem to work as advertised, although I have not had a chance to consider every single feature, or at least the ones I care about.

What did concern me, however, was the fact that my particular bugaboo with Mail for El Capitan, resulting in an occasional freeze of the app, has not been fixed. It makes the app unresponsive, but it clears up after 30 seconds or so. This is a problem that dates back to the El Capitan betas, and may only occur if you have large mailboxes. I’m just guessing since I haven’t read about any confirmation from my readers.

As I noted in my first look article on the iPad Pro, I don’t see any changes in iOS 9.2 that improve your experience with Apple’s largest tablet. Desktop icons are still spread far apart, and little is done with the basic user interface to really exploit the larger display, except that you see more stuff in Settings and various apps. According to Apple, that peculiar bug in which the iPad Pro becomes non-responsive after a full charge, has been fixed with this release.

Indeed, it works just fine aside from limitations that may only be temporary. I’m happy to see that benchmarks demonstrate that it performs similar to many Mac note-books, which means there’s a load of potential there that one hopes developers — and Apple — will devise a way to harness. Yes, there is Apple Pencil, and I can see the possibilities, at least for those who are thus inclined.

So other than my particular email issue, are all or most of the serious El Capitan bugs now resolved? The 2.5-star rating is up to 3 stars now, so that’s progress. If there are serious problems left, I’m sure there will be plenty of complaints.

iOS 9.2? We’ll it’s popular enough, with adoption rates running as high as around 80% according to Mixpanel Trends. That augers well, as does the promise of an updated Apple Remote app that will be compatible with the new Apple TV; at least one of these days. The larger question mark is El Capitan, so let’s see how it plays out.

The good news is that the iOS App Store is the most profitable one on the planet for developers. The tight integration of Apple’s mobile platform — and the high migration rate to new versions — means that developers can take advantage of the latest and greatest features and be assured a large number of users will be able to benefit. That means sales and profits.

Contrast that situation to the second most popular app store, Google Play, where the standards are less stringent and there’s so much fragmentation that many users can’t update to the latest OS, and the migration rate tends to be relatively low. A main reason is that Google’s updates have to be tested and approved by both the handset maker and the carrier, and neither has any incentive to support gear for which they’ve already been paid. Google’s promises to fix this problem remain unfulfilled.

Apple has been roundly criticized for tight control over the App Store. In large part, hat’s done so they can make sure the apps work as advertised, and don’t do things that endanger security and/or violate the limitations placed on such software. Sandboxing walls off apps from one another with the exception of entitlements that allow a limited amount of inter-app communication.

In theory, the security scheme works. Users of iPhones and iPads live within a pretty secure environment. Although there have been security issues, they are usually fixed in short order and aren’t impacting customers.

But it also means that some apps cannot be developed — ever. Sure, if you jailbreak your iPhone or iPad, you can take advantage of apps of which Apple would never approve. But you also open yourself to potential security problems. Most choose to live within the system.

This is a key reason why I cannot use an iPad in the way I’d like. One of my primary tasks is to record episodes of my two radio shows. On a Mac, that’s done with Rogue Amoeba’s Audio Hijack, which captures audio streams from many apps and other input sources. I use it for Skype audio, mixed with the output from my analog mic and outboard mixer.

You can’t get it from the Mac App Store either for the same reason — sandboxing. If Apple would relent and provide a path for Rogue Amoeba and other developers to use, these software companies would sell a lot more product. For now, you have to buy them elsewhere, and there’s no limitation  on the Mac platform. You do, however, want to download software from developers who are using certificates from Apple for the safest experience, as Rogue Amoeba does.

In any case, you can see the problems I confront with the iPad. Editing audio waveforms on an iPad, particularly the iPad Pro, is theoretically a joy to behold. In addition to GarageBand, you do have other choices, but none can capture the audio streams from other apps. Or at least I can’t find any that do. Merging multiple files from possibly different sources is easy on a Mac, complicated on an iPhone or iPad. So in addition to not having the apps you need, file system access needs to be improved beyond iCloud or a third-party app.

Yet the iPad Pro seems tailor made for productivity tasks. Apple’s Smart Keyboard hints at greater potential, and perhaps third-party keyboards will do it better. Apple Pencil is a better solution for graphic artists than traditional drawing tablets, and that will attract developers to look at all sorts of new possibilities for content creation.

In addition to prohibiting important features, there are other frustrations. Developers complain about arbitrary decisions made by Apple’s review team to reject some apps and approve others that appear superficially similar. Add to that inconsistent promotion and changing search criteria.

A key limitation is the inability to buy an update from within an application. So instead of users of version one getting the version two upgrade for half price, the developer has to build an all-new app. You have to buy it separately, and you do not benefit from being an existing user.

Sure, I realize some software developers have been pulling that stunt for years — charging everyone the same for upgrades — but that’s an individual choice. Apple locks you in. Yes, you can use in-app purchasing to add features. I would think that feature could be modified to handle the upgrade dilemma.

Demos? Well, I suppose you can offer a limited-function version of an app, but not on a time-limited basis. If you want the full-featured version, that could be handled by the in-app purchase system, but so could upgrades. It’s all up to Apple to adjust the download mechanism to allow that flexibility.

Many Mac apps remain available independently, usually from the publisher. That provides full flexibility to manage demos, upgrades and immediate upgrades without waiting for a third-party to give the OK. Yes, Apple takes a 30% of the take, but handles all the payments and prominent placement in the App Store — Mac or iOS — can mean loads of sales. The developer merely needs to bank the monthly payments and provide support and new versions.

The App Store debuted in 2008. After seven years, it’s time for Apple to make it better, and not just fix a few things around the edges. But at least you know that if you want to offer iOS software, there’s basically one source. With the Mac, developers have to consider whether the tradeoffs for the Mac App Store are worth the benefits. Not all do, and some developers have opted to leave after giving it a try.

The arrival of the iPad Pro just reveals the limitations of the App Store in bold relief. Apple ought to be working on fixing the problems and limitations of both app stores. Well, perhaps they are, and there will be updates at the next WWDC. But I wouldn’t hold my breath.