Some lessons of Apple history: Back in the mid-1990s, Apple suffered from a severe bout of model proliferation. The consumer-based Performa lineup was available in so many configurations, it was hard to tell one from the other without a cheat sheet. In some cases, a model number was customized for a specific dealer, meaning that two different models might otherwise be identical.

What a mess!

Now this practice was hardly different from the rest of the electronics industry, and that problem persists until this every day. The number of different Samsung smartphones in the Galaxy line can be daunting.

At one time it was rumored that Apple executives had trouble sorting things out, so when Steve Jobs took over as CEO less than a year after his return to the company, a lot of people might have applauded his key decisions. He ditched whole product lines, and cut back on the number of Macs. The lineup was reduced to a consumer version and a professional version in desktops and note-books, with a few minor variations.

A similar approach was introduced with the iPod and, later the iPhone and the iPad. But the iPod didn’t remain so simple for very long. After a few years, there were three basic lineups. The cheap one, the shuffle, a mid-priced version variously referred to as the mini and nano (the present name), and a higher-priced spread with a miniature hard drive that came to be known as the Classic.

Now there was nothing at all unusual about having three model variations, with some sub-variations, such as color or storage, in a single product line. It gave iPod users a chance to weigh different priorities, such as storage and the features, against price. Believe it or not, there are still three versions of the iPod, beginning with the shuffle, with the nano occupying the middle of the range. At the high end, the iPod touch is, by and large, an iPhone without the phone. It uses iOS and runs most of the same apps, except, of course, for those that require a cellular connection. The iPod Classic remained in the lineup for several years, but was finally discontinued.

For the iPhone there are actually five basic product lineups that start with the basic 4-inch iPhone 5s. You add to that last year’s iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus, and this year’s iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus. But it may not be that easy. In addition to models with different storage configurations, and a choice of two or four colors, some may be configured for a specific carrier, or sold unlocked, at list price, so you can pick the carrier later. This is where it gets confusing, because you suddenly have to make decisions about whether the new features of the 2015 model can be weighed against the value of last year’s. Or if you want a 4-inch iPhone, you are stuck with the legacy 5s that was first released in 2013.

Mac model proliferation is no better. First you decide whether you want a desktop or a note-book. This isn’t as easy a choice as it was in the old days. Today’s note-books are capable of performance that approaches desktop levels combined with easy portability. If you opt for the desktop, you can choose from the two models that have no display, the Mac mini and the Mac Pro, or the all-in-one iMac, complete with keyboard and mouse.

Now the customer targets for each is fairly obvious. The Mac mini is great for people on a budget who want a reasonably snappy computer but may already have input devices and a display. A Mac mini is also well suited to a business that isn’t focusing heavily on apps that will stress its processor, customers who don’t fret over not being able to upgrade RAM, and, in fact, for datacenter use. Some time back I set up an account with a web host that had networks of Mac minis, and I actually got performance mostly comparable to the large rack servers I normally use. We’ll, maybe it wouldn’t be quite as reliable since there is no redundancy in power supplies and other parts.

The Mac Pro is dedicated to a small subset of customers who do content creation and scientific chores that require the most powerful multicore processors, and loads of external devices, such as RAID drive assemblies, breakout boxes for PCI cards and other stuff.

Once just a low-end consumer computer, the iMac is today’s mainstream desktop Mac. Prices start at $1,099, which is $200 less than the original gum drop version from 1998. It’s powerful enough for many users, and the 21-inch display is pretty good. The 4K Retina model begins at $1,499. They may seem expensive compared to a PC, but when you look specifically at all-in-ones of similar specs, Apple is highly competitive.

This is doubly true with the all-5K 27-inch iMac, starting at $1,799. There are few dedicated 5K displays available at any price, so getting one with a computer inside is a great deal.

So in the case of desktops, Apple’s three models make sense.

Superficially, it would seem note-books fit in a similar category. There is the consumer version, the MacBook Air, and the business version, the MacBook Pro. There are several versions of each, and some level of customization when you place an order. You’re forced to consider the latter, since RAM can’t be upgraded later on. Apple, in its infinite wisdom, decreed that RAM should be soldered onto the logic boards. That shortcoming applies to the Mac mini and the smaller iMac.

But it gets a tad more complicated. The 12-inch MacBook may be a potential MacBook Air replacement, or just the harbinger of a lineup that will consist of several very slim, minimalist models. There’s also one legacy 13-inch MacBook Pro that has a standard display, but can be upgraded.

As of this week, there are three current iPad models, with two legacy products still available. So you have the new iPad Pro, the iPad Air 2, and the iPad mini 4. But there are two older models, the iPad Air and the iPad mini 2, which are still being sold. Each of these five models comes with two or three color choices, several storage configurations of up to 128GB, and identical versions with a cellular radio.

If anything, the iPad appears to offer the most extensive, if confusing, setup. When you opt to buy one, there are several choices you need to make, from screen size, to color, storage, to whether you need to use a cellular network. I wouldn’t blame the model clutter for falling sales. I rather suspect Apple hopes that, by giving you lots of choices that begin at $269, you might be able to find the sweet spot for your ideal iPad.

If you want real confusion, however, look at Apple Watch with two sizes in configurations that, with the fanciest watchbands, can cost up to $17,000. You have to make some real hard choices to find the one you want. Just picking the ideal watchband can be somewhat of a chore unless you’re on a budget and accept the one supplied with your selected model.

I’m not dwelling on the Apple TV. There are only two from which to choose.

In the scheme of things, Apple’s product lineups, while fleshed out considerably in recent years, aren’t quite as expansive or as mind-numbing as other consumer electronics companies. But it’s hard to call the choices simple anymore. Perhaps that caters better to Apple’s growing roster of customers, but it’s understandable some might wish for fewer choices.

I do not choose what topics to write about based on anticipated reader reaction. I’m happy that some receive more comments than others, and sometimes I wonder why a few attract very little response. But that doesn’t change my choices.

So when I wrote an article about whether Apple was giving OS X and Macs short shrift, there was a healthy response from readers who weren’t exactly pleased with the directions Apple is taking. One key example is the “trashcan” Mac Pro. It looks great, a magnificent piece of industrial design that might join the Power Mac G4 Cube in a museum, but eschews practicality in far too many ways.

When I read messages about confronting a wiring mess when adding a bunch of external devices to a Mac Pro, such as hard drive assemblies and breakout boxes for PCI cards, I wondered about Apple’s priorities. True, the Mac Pro is easy to transport, if you expect to have it dock with a stationary collection of peripheral devices. The original Mac Pro was heavy, clumsy, and not so easy to take with you from place to place. But it could also be used essentially self-contained because of the internal expansion possibilities. I wonder if Apple might have done better to overlook the eye candy in favor of practicality. I would think that you could build a fancy box with the ability to store four hard drives and three or four expansion cards without having to break your back to carry one with you. That would be a clever design.

These days, I no longer need a Mac Pro. An iMac provides all the power I need for my varied tasks. The new 5K versions are even capable of editing 4K video at native resolution with great performance. A Mac Pro has its uses for a subset of content creators and scientists, but I hope Apple will reconsider its priorities. Then again, maybe customer surveys show that a majority of Mac Pro users prefer the emphasis on external expansion and aren’t as concerned about dealing with a mess of wires. That’s an age-old problem anyway in the PC universe.

And I haven’t considered the fact that you cannot upgrade anything, even RAM, on most Macs these days. The Mac Pro and the 27-inch iMac are the exceptions.

Clearly there are the usual complaints about lost or missing features in OS X. But it’s not as if Apple is forthcoming about developer priorities in dealing with such matters. It’s not that it’s impossible to build a more customizable Apple menu, perhaps listing your favorite apps directly rather than in a submenu of recent apps. A handy utility, Classic Menu, attempted to restore the original Mac OS way of doing things, but development was halted as of OS X Lion. Perhaps it became too difficult to update, or it was abandoned due to a lack of interest.

Indeed, maybe that’s the point. The people who clamor for the return of some Classic Mac OS features constitute a tiny minority. Remember that the Mac user base has grown by leaps and bounds in recent years, particularly since 2006 when Apple moved to Intel processors. People who haven’t been around Macs for years may not care so much about features they know little or nothing about, and Apple is not the sort of company  that is interested in looking back.

I suppose that puts Apple at loggerheads with old-time Mac users, because of where the platform is going. But it’s also a very different world nowadays, where most people who own something with the Apple label on it are using iPhones. Even the iPad user base, despite dipping sales, is larger, and the arrival of the iPad Pro may boost it if business and content creators find them indispensable.

Now if you think the Mac platform is getting short shrift, consider Windows 10. Microsoft has its own ideas about platform convergence, so they expect one operating system, more or less, to function on a PC, a tablet, and a mobile phone. Consider the argument Apple makes about mixing refrigerators and toaster ovens, and that sort of compromise may entail too many compromises.

Indeed, adoption of Windows 10, despite the fact that it’s free, and may be downloaded behind the scenes even if you didn’t request it on your PC, is slowing. It was pretty quick the first month, but there are loads of Windows 7 users who do not see a compelling reason to upgrade. It’s clear from the adoption rate that customers are resisting the free download.

Now as people buy more and more new PCs with Windows 10 installed, the numbers will invariably climb, although that didn’t quite happen to the expected degree with Windows 8/8.1. Those silly lifestyle TV ads from Microsoft that imply all sorts of things that a PC operating system isn’t meant to deliver won’t help either. But Microsoft has long had problems delivering a compelling marketing message to consumers. Don’t forget the original Surface ads, where dancers were jumping on tables in response to the clicking noise from the kickstand, as if that was a compelling reason to buy one.

So Apple CEO Tim Cook wants you to believe that he doesn’t even use Macs anymore. When he travels he takes an iPad, presumably an iPad Pro nowadays, and an iPhone. No doubt he also has an Apple Pencil and a Smart Keyboard. Aside from the stylus, why not a MacBook or a 13-inch MacBook Pro? Yes, I suppose they cost more if you aren’t the CEO of the company and get your stuff free, but wouldn’t they provide more functionality, particularly for those who have a fairly traditional PC workflow?

But I realize that Cook wants to sell more iPads as a PC replacement in the face of dwindling sales. I mean, it’s not as if you can look inside his carrying bag and see what he’s really taking with him. Even if there is no Mac note-book to be found, relying on an iPad may be a deliberate decision made for marketing reasons. Not that I’m saying he’s a liar, but clearly he has his priorities.

Regardless of his motives, you shouldn’t take what Cook says as necessarily representative of your needs or your priorities. While I expect to have some face time with an iPad Pro soon, I am still on the fence about iPads right now. It’s not that I don’t think they can replace a PC in at least some cases, but that doesn’t mean that I’m one of those people.

When it comes to the Mrs., Barbara, she adopted an iPad a couple of years back and won’t let it go. She has it nearby wherever she might be in our home. On the road, she uses an iPhone 5c, but, due to her vision problems, finds the display just too small for much of anything other than taking phone calls. So she uses her iPad to write email, surf, and is an enthusiastic animal rights activist on her Face-book account.

Barbara has used my iMac, but is no longer comfortable with a mouse and a physical keyboard, so she works on it haltingly, and only when it’s necessary.

I’m probably the reverse. I rely heavily on the iMac and my iPhone. I’m reasonably flexible writing messages on the iPhone, at least so long as they do not exceed a few sentences in length. But when I work on her iPad, it’s mostly to help her with a problem, or review something to which she wants to draw my attention. More often than not, however, she’ll just send me an email with a link and I can see it on the device of my choosing.

To me, the iPad is just clumsy and not a comfortable fit for typing long passages. I have, from time to time, tried accessory keyboards, but they usually lack the feel of a “real” keyboard, and seem to be unfortunate hybrids that don’t quality for fast, fluid typing. Then again, I’m not enamored of Apple’s keyboards and prefer the Matias Quiet Pro, which is a big, bold keyboard with real mechanical switches. It’s in another universe.

Aside from typing comfort, the iPad doesn’t provide the tools I need to accommodate my workflow. Yes, the iWork apps are decent, and Microsoft Office is clearly the best there is when it comes to a mobile productivity app. When working on single documents, they work well enough if you can accept touchscreens or an iPad-style keyboard. But when it comes to managing multiple apps, even iOS 9’s Split View takes a back seat.

My workday includes sessions in WordPress blogs, and there is a decent WordPress app for iPhone and iPad, but it’s nowhere near as flexible as just doing it with the online interface. But I grant the app is fine for minor touchups.

Unfortunately, the apps I use most often, the ones I use to record and edit my radio shows, are mostly foreign to the iPad. There’s no direct comparison to Rogue Amoeba’s Audio Hijack which, as the name implies, allows you to grab the audio from all sorts of apps and sources. We use it to capture the audio feed from Skype, and mix it, on-the-fly, with the audio from my outboard audio console.

Apple’s sandboxing feature, which walls off apps from one another for security purposes, prevents one app from grabbing the audio from another in iOS (and the Mac for that matter, but its apps aren’t restricted to the Mac App Store). It’s not that Apple couldn’t add an exception to support this capability, but it doesn’t appear to be on their radar, although I’d be delighted to see a change.

Still, that means I’m already on the outs with the iPad, since it cannot handle a key portion of my workflow. The other is managing multiple files, since direct access to the iOS file system is a pipe dream mostly unfulfilled with some rare exceptions, such as FileApp for iOS.

That Apple has paid some attention to multitasking on the iPad with iOS 9, at least the newest ones, means there is hope. Once the iPad Pro is out for a while, it’ll be interesting to see what sort of apps appear for it, and whether Apple will take the steps necessary to allow developers to add the features businesses and content creators need to switch from Macs and PCs.

Obviously, a lot is depending on at least some level of success from the iPad Pro. It may be arriving too late to make much of a dent in December quarter sales, but it could come into its own in 2016. Would I switch? Right now, the answer is no, but I’d be delighted to be proven wrong.

The launch of Mac OS X as a Public Beta in the fall of 2000 signified a sea change for Mac users. Coming four years after the purchase of NeXT, it represented the vindication of that deal, which also meant the return of Steve Jobs to Apple. Here it was, the long-delayed industrial strength replacement for the original Mac OS.

Completing OS X wasn’t quite as easy as it first seemed in 1996. In 1998, Apple demonstrated the initial concept, a server version code-named Rhapsody that was essentially the NeXT OS running on a Mac with modest interface alterations. Crafting a desktop version meant tons of work on the part of developers to migrate to the Cocoa frameworks, and they balked. So Apple went back to the drawing boards to make the migration easier — but it was no cakewalk. Apple crafted something called Carbon that simplified the porting process. The new interface was very much a prettier version of the Mac OS with loads of eye candy, and loads of missing features…

And no functional Apple menu.

Yes, if you recall the original Public Beta, the Apple logo was in the center of the menu bar strictly as window dressing. It didn’t do anything. By the time the official release of OS X appeared in March of 2001, Apple had listened, more or less. They delivered an Apple menu that kind of, sort of, resembled the Mac OS version. During his keynote presentation, Jobs hinted at further changes, but, by and large, they have been extremely minor over the years.

Indeed, despite ongoing refinements in the general user interface, and the addition of a few features or functions derived from iOS, it’s not that OS X has seriously changed on the surface. It may not seem that way when you look at lists exceeding 200 changes or enhancements for many OS X releases, especially recent ones. They mostly improve the OS around the edges, making things work better, or at least different.

Sometimes they take things away.

So with Mail, once upon a time you could change the order of accounts in the app’s preferences. Now you can’t. It has to be done by moving accounts and mailboxes in the sidebar, but at least you can move them. Microsoft’s Outlook 2016 only let’s you do some of that with difficulty. You can change the sort order in Outlook by designating an account as the default, which lists it first, or change the account description in a way that is alphabetized differently.

Removing an account in Mail depends. You can click “minus” under Accounts and it’ll work, unless the account is shared in your iCloud keychain, in which case you have to visit Internet Accounts in System Preferences. But when you go there, you’ll find that you can otherwise change only the Incoming mail server. Outgoing has to be done in Mail.

Are you dizzy yet?

Some features barely get attention at all, not even to mess them up. So the Open/Save dialogs, as I mentioned in this past weekend’s newsletter, are hardly changed over the years. The clever functions of a third-party app, Default Folder X, which provides a host of great features, aren’t even being considered. Even though Apple is notorious for “borrowing” the features of third-party apps, they haven’t paid much attention to doing anything new with Open/Save.

Maybe they are considering offering a deal to St. Clair Software to acquire the app, but it got lost in accounting. I’m kidding. I suspect Apple has looked at the user base and can’t make a case for adding features to match or exceed Default Folder X, or to buy up the rights. Maybe only a few percent of Mac users would care about an Open/Save dialog on steroids, and thus Apple isn’t giving it much attention.

Over the years, there have certainly been lots of under-the-hood improvements meant to enhance performance and stability. OS X El Capitan brings something called “rootless” or System Integrity Protection that limits access to some processes and apps in exchange for greater security. As a consequence, it has caused misery for some software developers since they have to overhaul their apps to work differently to compensate.

Regardless, I do think Macs are getting a fair amount of attention from Apple. Adding Force Touch to several models and the Magic Trackpad 2, and revising the wireless keyboard, reborn as Magic Keyboard, represent deliberate investments. The same is true for the amazing 27-inch iMac with 5K Retina display, which is, when you consider the cost of competing third-party monitors, a real bargain. It required devising new manufacturing techniques, and the enhanced color palette of the 2015 version represents a huge improvement over what other PC makers are offering.

Some might suggest the MacBook Air is ready for a Retina display, and I agree. I suspect Apple is probably working on a way to do so without a price increase. Remember that the 5K  iMac now costs no more than the previous versions with regular displays, and I suspect all 21.5-inch iMacs will have a 4K display in a year or two, not just the higher-priced spread, though admittedly more powerful graphics hardware isn’t cheap.

As Mac sales continue to grow, outpacing the PC industry for several years, I am certain Apple has no intention to wind down the platform. But it would be nice to see some enhancements to OS X that range from restoring a few more lost capabilities from the Classic Mac OS to fixing odd interface choices and adding features that are sorely needed.

And, no, I don’t see any immediate plans to merge OS X with iOS, even though they share so much in ways that you can’t see.