So the theory goes that Apple wants to hit the pause button on loading up OS X and iOS with new features and technologies. Time to take the Snow Leopard approach and deliver a release that is designed to clean up the lingering bugs and improve performance.

In theory, this sounds just fine, although no such thing has ever actually been confirmed. It’s just a rumor. But it is true that both OS X Yosemite and iOS 8 were troubled releases, with far more problems than you had a right to expect. Here we are, months after both were launched, and there are still maintenance updates with lots of bug fixes. It’s not even certain that all the serious problems have been dealt with if you take the online chatter seriously. Indeed, there are published reports that iOS 8.3 is having trouble with some Bluetooth GPS receivers, Not good.

Now I wouldn’t presume to guess why it took Apple so long to address these problems; it may be part and parcel of the increasing complicity of these operating systems. Perhaps, as some skeptics suggest, Apple took on too much in upgrading these operating systems. They could have spread out the features, so some would be introduced in later releases. Some of that was done already with HealthKit and Apple Pay. Perhaps the marketing people mandated specific release dates, which can cause problems if the Q&A process isn’t as thorough as it should be.

Even the OS X Public Beta program, in which some one million Mac users have been getting ongoing seeds, doesn’t seem to have made Yosemite any more reliable. You would think, with so many Mac users giving feedback — and I have no idea what percentage of testers actually reported bugs — the number of existing problems would have been reduced. I wonder mostly about the Wi-Fi connection glitches with OS X Yosemite, some of which weren’t fixed until the 10.10.3 release. Or maybe things may have been worse without all the extra beta testing.

On Tuesday Apple announced “the epicenter of change,” WWDC 2015, which will be held in San Francisco from June 8-12. So what do we know about all the promised workshops and hands-on labs as to what Apple plans to deliver?

Well, there’s that statement from Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing, who said, in a press release, “We’ve got incredible new technologies for iOS and OS X to share with developers at WWDC and around the world, and can’t wait to see the next generation of apps they create.”

So there you go. How does one equate “incredible new technologies” with a fixer-upper release? Instead, it appears Apple is going full bore to make huge changes in the operating systems. iOS 9 and OS X 10.11 may be as feature-packed as their predecessors.

Is that good news or does it raise the specter of yet another set of flawed releases with loads of new problems to perplex Apple customers?

I suppose it’s possible those new technologies will shore up the stability of the two OS, and thus make for more reliable releases. That would be a good thing, and I hope the matter will be addressed during the keynote. It has to be of extreme importance, and Apple hasn’t been shy about admitting flaws. Consider the mea culpa that Tim Cook issued when the Apple version of Maps for iOS came out with loads of problems.

Remember that I have no idea whatever as to what Apple is going to reveal during the WWDC. I expect there will be some unofficial leaks along the way in the next few weeks, so there will be a sense of some of what’s to come. It may be that Schiller’s statement may reflect only part of the situation, that there will be extensive bug fixes as well.

Regardless, I think Apple has a lot of work on its hands to clean up the operating systems. I’m just as concerned about the early reviews of the Apple Watch and Watch OS. There were reports of slow performance, particularly with third party apps. I do realize that the reviewers were handed product more than three weeks ahead of the actual release, and that over-the-air updates may address at least some of the lingering performance issues. But it’s not as if Apple has been completely forthcoming on that score.

Reports of software glitches certainly aren’t unusual. But, with the launch of the Apple Watch, the company is under the microscope more than ever, so it is understandable every problem may be exaggerated beyond its importance. There are also serious issues with Android and Microsoft, but Apple is being held to a higher standard, and they are expected to produce.

So whether iOS 9 and OS 10.11, or whatever name it’s given, offer amazing new features and a shoring up of the underlying structure, I hope that the issue of stability will at least be mentioned, even if it’s in an offhand way.

The launch weekend of a new product is usually big news for Apple. It didn’t always turn out that way, but when customers began to wait for days or weeks to buy a new product from Apple, it became a media event. Apple was only too happy to benefit from the hype. But the merest suggestion that the crowds aren’t so large might work against the expectation that sales will hit new heights.

Even when Apple has reported record sales, sometimes the media doesn’t care. Take the opening weekend for the iPhone 5 in 2012. Apple reported that sales topped five million, but the media and some industry analysts were disappointed, because they somehow believed Apple should have sold twice that number. Despite the statement from Tim Cook in an Apple press release, that “we have sold out of our initial supply,” it didn’t matter. Facts often don’t when there’s an agenda at work

With the Apple Watch it’s uncharted territory. I mean there were reasonably successful smartphones before the iPhone broke through, and less successful digital music players ahead of the iPod and tablet computers ahead of the iPad. But smartwatches are a pretty recent development. When one company, Pebble, boasts of selling one million units since 2013, you can bet expectations are modest.

Ahead of the launch of Apple Watch, estimates were all over the price, from a few million to maybe 40 million or so for the first year. But how many will Apple move on the launch weekend? If supplies are very tight, as they appear to be, will it even matter?

Well, unless stocks are unexpectedly replenished, Apple sold out of its initial allocation within minutes or hours, depending on the model, last Friday. The Apple Watch actually is due to ship on April 24th, but you have to wait until June or later if you order one as this column was written.

So how well did Apple do on the first day preorders were accepted? Well, Apple hasn’t revealed anything — at least not yet. Sure, it would be nice to know, but an order isn’t final until it ships, and it’s always possible some will cancel because they don’t want to wait, or have changed their minds.

But that doesn’t mean preliminary data isn’t already out there, although it’s just a survey. So Slice Intelligence, a Palo Alto, CA-based market research company that appears to specialize in tallying estimated online sales, claims some 957,000 people in the U.S. preordered an Apple Watch the very first day. If true, that might represent only a fraction of the demand, since Apple also accepted orders in several other countries around the world, including China. So final figures might be double that or even higher. Nobody outside of Apple knows for sure.

Now there are curious things about the survey. One is that customers bought an average of 1.3 smartwatches, despite early reports Apple would only accept orders for one unit at a time. But I suppose placing a second order would flesh out these numbers if Apple accepted them. The rest of the survey seems sensible enough, that the cheapest model, Apple Watch Sport, garnered 62% of the preorders. An average $503.83 was spent on each unit, which is no surprise either.

The rest of the numbers are interesting from an academic point of view. Most sales consisted of the larger 42mm models, and the Sport model in Space Gray appears to be the most popular. Such figures also explain why Apple sold out of some models really fast, within minutes, while others were available for on time shipment for several hours.

I could, I suppose, quote some of the other numbers, but I won’t. For one thing, Slice Intelligence has not yet amassed a long-term record for accuracy; the firm began taking surveys in 2012. The worldwide publicity for the Apple Watch report is clearly the result of smart planning and marketing, regardless of the precision of the final figures.

It’s also difficult right now to assess the value of their methodology: The results are evidently based on records of online digital transactions using a user base of two million. But how were they recruited, and do they represent an accurate cross-section of the online population? Traditional polling organizations, such as Gallup, use far smaller scientifically selected samples, and claim accuracy rates of plus or minus a few percent.

The other problem is that these analysis companies seldom explain or correct results when they are shown to be dead wrong. If Apple discloses initial Apple Watch sales on April 27th, at the conclusion of the launch weekend, you’ll know the results met or exceeded the company’s expectations. Based on those numbers, if they are released, we’ll have a better picture of how well Slice Intelligence actually performed in the real world, assuming Apple drills down to revealing preorder data. But don’t expect such detail.

For now, Slice Intelligence has succeeded in one way, which is to get loads of uncritical press coverage. That will likely mean more customers for their services. So it may not matter how the real numbers actually turn out, but if they appear to be close to the mark, there will be lots to boast about. But if they are far from reality, don’t expect paying customers to ask for their money back, or for a news media lusting for news, any news, about Apple, to revise their pieces with accurate information.

In the meantime, a roughly one million figure has been echoed by other analysis firms, such as Cowen and Co. and Piper Jaffray. So maybe there’s some truth to that number after all.

I’ll keep this real personal. I do not walk in your shoes, and I wouldn’t presume to guess what your ideal personal computer setup might be. But I have been around note-books since the early 1990s, so I know what I need when it comes to being able to stay connected and get my work done while on the road.

The first time I had a portable computer, an early PowerBook, the family had journeyed to Maryland to accompany me on a business trip, leaving a few days open for vacation. But I needed to stay close to my ongoing writing assignments. So in addition to the computer, I brought along a portable printer and an external hard drive to back up my files. The hotel offered a wired Internet connection.

It was a fairly bulky load, and, in fact, it took quite a few years before I became comfortable enough to give up on taking printers with me. These days, I still use a 2010 17-inch MacBook Pro and a USB mic for on-site recordings. If printing is needed, hotels usually have an office area where you can get set up. But I’ve managed to survive. Consider this, though, as I consider where Apple stands in this equation.

Continue Reading…

In yesterday’s column, I summarized some of the initial reviews of Apple Watch. In large part, they concluded that it’s beautiful to behold, offers a wide range of useful features, but suffers from buggy, slow-launching apps among other things. It’s a version 1.0 product, with loads of potential, but there were soft spots that, in part, one hopes will be fixed with a software update. It also takes a little while to master some of the new operational procedures, such as Force Touch.

To be perfectly fair, Apple seeded these Apple Watches to selected members of the tech media at the beginning of April, more than three weeks before the gear is scheduled to ship. So there may be time for a software update to address the worst performance issues.

Regardless, it’s important to realize that the first of anything from Apple is by its nature incomplete and perhaps somewhat buggy. It’s hard to believe, for example, that the very underpowered 1998 iMac evolved into the 2014 27-inch iMac with 5K Retina display.

In 2001, the first iPod was released with the promise of “1,000 songs in your pocket,” which may have seemed impressive to some at the time, unless you had a large music library. It took several years before capacity increased to accommodate the needs of most people. The iPod also got a spiffier interface, and became Windows compatible. Suddenly Apple owned the digital music player market, although you may not have suspected such a long range plan with the very first release.

When the iPhone arrived in 2007, Steve Jobs announced that he’d be pleased as punch, in so many words, if market share exceeded 1% of the world market by the end of 2008; they did even better. The very first version didn’t support 3G wireless networking, nor was there an app ecosystem. In fact, Jobs touted web apps, but reportedly succumbed to the potential of having developers produce native apps for the platform that later became iOS.

While it does appear Apple had modest expectations for its first venture into building smartphones, it’s very possible that some executives may have expected it to become the company’s biggest product in a few years.

It is said that Apple was working on a tablet before it decided to adapt the technology in a smaller gadget, a smartphone. It may also be that the iPad was released without an expectation of its full potential, though the fact that developers quickly optimized apps for the larger display is an indication that it was a good idea. But over 200 million units later, sales are flagging, and some wonder just what Apple has in store for the iPad’s second act.

But did Apple know in 2010 where the iPad would be five years later, or that there would be speed bumps along the way?

Certainly there’s little doubt that the Apple Watch may be in the same position as the iMac, iPod, iPhone and iPad when they were first launched. Apple isn’t investing a huge sum in designing, building and marketing Apple Watch without a long-range plan. The Apple Watch of 2019 will be quite different from the 2015 model, though its lineage would be clear.

By then there may even be an Apple Car, though I’m not guessing. But the version 5.0 Apple Watch is apt to be thinner, and certainly far more powerful, perhaps close in performance to an iPhone of somewhat older vintage. No doubt it would be free of dependence on an iPhone or other gadget for most functions, though some degree of sharing may be convenient. Battery life is apt to be weeks rather than days, depending on how power efficiencies improve, and battery life is extended.

The ultra slim MacBook is the 2015 equivalent of the 2008 MacBook Air. It reveals the potential of a future where note-books will seldom need to be tethered to cables, but the only recognition of that potential is having a single USB-C peripheral port and a headphone jack. It may be that Apple, for now at least, expects third party peripheral makers to supply the extra ports, except for their own limited expansion cables. Expect someone to release a full-blown dock that would be reminiscent in some respects to the PowerBook Duo of the 1990s. You bring the note-book with you, taking advantage of its lightness, and when you need to plug peripherals in at home or at the office, you use the accessory dock.

That dock, however, assuming it will exist, will be nothing more than a bandage to cover a perceived open wound. In time, there will be no need to have a physical connection to anything, even the charger. Apple clearly has the future in its sites. They basically said so at the MacBook’s introduction, and thus you can expect the MacBook to expand towards that goal in the next few years.

CPU power? Well, the 2015 MacBook is roughly equivalent in raw processing power to a 2011 MacBook Air. It doesn’t sound like much, but that old MacBook Air was capable of handling most chores, except for heavy-duty rendering, graphics and gaming. Most people did fine with it.

And, by the way, the MacBook is only slightly faster in overall benchmarks than the iPad Air 2. Does Apple’s A-series processor ever catch up to Intel hardware?

The long and short of it is that Apple is showing us the future of wearables and personal computing. But it’ll take a while for the rest of us to catch up.