The main course for Apple’s media event on Monday, March 9th is well known. You’re going to “Spring Forward” to the official Apple Watch rollout. This is a given, and there are loads of questions yet to be answered about Apple’s contender in the smartwatch market. And what about battery life? Will it be possible to somehow upgrade the watch module to future proof the gadget?

The latter is a key point, because estimates of pricing range as high as $20,000 when equipped with the best watchband. Of course, some are saying we’re all going overboard, and it’ll be much cheaper, but still expensive as watches go. But if someone is paying a four-figure or five-figure sum for a watch, they’d expect that it would last years and essentially remain current. Something that’s obsolete in a year or two wouldn’t make sense for what many regard as a piece of jewelry. Apple’s ads in fashion magazines clearly indicate it would be touted as just that.

But I won’t engage in prolonged speculation so close to the event. It hardly seems sensible, since much of what I write might be obsolete within days. I will, however, probably discuss the expectations along with my guests on this weekend’s episode of The Tech Night Owl LIVE.

No matter. The real speculation is about what else might come from the event, that Apple Watch is not going to have all the time for itself. So, then, what might Apple deliver that would merit inclusion in its first media session for 2015?

Questions, questions. Well, it’s very possible that there will be a new MacBook Air, since the last refresh happened last spring. But that update was fairly basic, with a slight performance boost and an overall price cut of $100. By hitting the $899 entry-level sweet spot, Apple may have been at the high end of medium-priced note-book computers, but it appears to have improved sales, particularly to people who might have otherwise considered Macs to be too expensive.

It might have been a more compelling upgrade had Intel released its Broadwell chips, but they were delayed for months and the low-power chips best suited for a slim and light note-book, or a variation of Intel’s MacBook Air lookalike, the UltraBook, were available in quality. So that would appear to improve the prospects for something new in the MacBook Air space, but what?

One fairly consistent line of speculation is that the MacBook Air will enter the Retina display territory with a new 12-inch model. That compares to the current 11-inch and 13-inch standard resolution versions. Supposedly the new model will be slimmer and lighter than the current models, thus possibly replacing both. There are even stories about a gold version, and that it will sport fewer ports to compensate with the thinner design.

Yes, that’s all we need. Fewer ports to make it more difficult to connect your stuff.

Regardless, I’m wondering here whether a Retina display model is intended to replace existing MacBook Airs, or whether they’ll coexist, at least for a while. Certainly if the rumored 12-inch version comes in at a higher price, as you’d expect, Apple would not be inclined to kill the cheaper versions. Besides, isn’t it essentially a new form factor?

Update! Now there’s chatter that this alleged MacBook Air with Retina display is being moved off to the second quarter of the year, perhaps in time for the WWDC in June. Sigh!

The other rumor is about an alleged iPad Pro, with a screen that may be as large as 12.9 inches. That one has been around for a while, and there are almost always excuses to explain why it’s not out yet. The very latest story comes from Bloomberg, a usually respected source, claiming that there have been production problems with the large panels that forced Apple to push release to the fall, or perhaps later.

Sure, it sounds perfectly reasonable, but it may just be another one of those excuses that appears when a rumor is not about to be vindicated. So blame Apple for the alleged delay in an unannounced product, and see what happens. Maybe if the media makes the claim often enough, Apple will listen and produce the thing.

So do you by any chance remember all those stories about an Apple connected TV? I remember claims they were being sampled, and perhaps they were. Apple may build a number of prototypes to test production techniques of different design approaches to see what’s practical. At the end of the day, it doesn’t mean the product will ever see the light of day.

So if there’s no Apple TV set, what about Apple’s former hobby, Apple TV? Aside from a minor processor production change, which didn’t alter performance, Apple TV has persisted unchanged since 2012. That change improved resolution to 1080p, same as Blu-ray. Well, not quite the same, as streaming video, due to the higher level of compression, doesn’t actually match Blu-ray, though it’s real close if you aren’t very critical.

Considering its age, the current Apple TV seems old, and sales of Roku are reportedly higher, though some 25 million copies of Apple’s streamer have reportedly been sold over the years. But what sort of changes can you expect if recent rumors about a new model are true? Adding extra channels, such as HBO’s upcoming streaming service, don’t require a new model. As I’ve said in the past, a video streamer’s interface can get real busy real fast as more channels are added, so an elegant way to integrate this potential mess could be a real improvement, but interfaces on current hardware can also be changed.

A possible improvement would be 4K or Ultra HD support, and possibly more onboard memory to handle the larger video files. More powerful graphics, perhaps with support for Apple’s Metal technology, now part of current iOS gear, would allow for gaming.

Questions and more questions, but we don’t have to wait very long for the answers.

At the Mobile World Congress this week, Apple, as usual, looms large even though our favorite fruit company never shows up at such events. But that didn’t stop Apple’s gear from being used as the basis for comparison, overtly or otherwise.

So what is Samsung’s answer to the stellar success of the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus? Well, it’s the Galaxy S6, touted as the next great thing, or at least a way for Samsung to undo the damage caused by the tepid reaction to its predecessor, the S5. The refresh comes at an unfortunate time for Samsung, having suffered from sales woes and falling profits in the past year.

At one time, Samsung was supposedly destined to own the smartphone business, and it did for a time when it comes to unit sales. But according to the latest survey from Gartner, sales of Samsung smartphones tumbled during the fourth quarter of 2014 from some 73,317,000 units the previous year to 63,032,000 units. That puts it just behind Apple, who reported sales of 74,832,000 iPhones during the same period. The report is supposedly based on “Sales to End Users,” although Samsung has, when they report unit sales at all, confined that to shipments. That means, the product may or may not actually be sold to a real live customer.

True, Samsung is still number one with total mobile handset sales, but many of those sales involve low-end gear that produces slim profits. Without growth in its most profitable product line, Samsung has obviously lost a lot of its luster. If that happened to Apple, the “Death Knells” would be loud and frequent, but nobody assumes Samsung is dying. Even if mobile handsets don’t do so well, there are always TVs, appliances, raw parts — lots of things.

Now that S6 has been demonstrated, in versions with and without wraparound displays, what did Samsung do to jumpstart sales? Well, depending on which story you read, it’s either a comedown, or a smart move.

But if you thought that Samsung was copying Apple before, it appears they’ve come closer than ever, in a sense mirroring elements of Apple’s design approach for the iPhone. So Samsung has given up on plastic and gone to aluminum, with a claim it’s less bendable than the iPhone 6 Plus. I suppose that will be tested once the unit goes on sale, though it’s still a nonissue.

Samsung has also also removed the ability to add a memory card, and the metal case is shut tight, meaning you can’t swap the battery in the field. So two supposed advantages of a Samsung Galaxy are now history. The faulty fingerprint sensor is supposedly better — we’ll see! — and there are the usual enhancements to screen resolution, processor clock speed, and it now contains 3GB of onboard RAM. The iPhones have traditionally had 1GB of RAM in recent years, but it’s not that people are complaining about performance.

Now it’s understandable that Samsung wants to get into the mobile payments game, but does the use of the label Samsung Pay make the S6 somehow stand out when compared to Apple Pay? Evidently Samsung’s product people are really out of ideas this time, or the PowerPoint spreadsheet wouldn’t stop crashing, so they had to stop the development process before it was done. Or something.

Samsung is still up to its old tricks, though, based on a recent benchmark I read. It seems a demo sample of the S6 soared way past the iPhone 6, but that test evidently involved a unit with a processor that may not even be sold in the U.S. Samsung has, in the past, also been exposed as deliberately overclocking the processor when benchmark apps are run, and I don’t know if that was the case this time. If the shipping handset is really faster, so be it. If it requires components that you can’t buy, or settings that do not reflect real world use, it’s little more than another bait and switch tactic.

Clearly, Samsung is desperate for good headlines, and it’s not that the S6 is unattractive. From the descriptions and the photos I’ve seen, it appears to be pretty attractive with good construction quality, but does delivering a product that more closely matches the iPhone magically guarantee success? Clearly plastic didn’t make it, but that may not be the main reason people didn’t buy the Galaxy S5.

While I realize emulating Apple’s build quality has its charms, does cutting back on some features, such as removable batteries and a port for a memory card, somehow mean more people will line up to buy one? Is Samsung trying to take a “less is better” approach? Or have they just run out of features to add, and are hoping that a simpler design will sell. In any case, folks who want an Android phone that appears to be both good looking and powerful would probably do well with the latest and greatest from Samsung.

Or Samsung may be hoping the only way to go is up.

Since rumors first emerged that Apple might be working on a car, members of the tech and auto press have been skeptical. Car makers have been quoted attacking the temerity of Apple in attempting to get into the car business. It’s almost reminiscent of the statements that Apple had no business making cell phones, and we all know how that turned out.

The other day I read yet another skeptical article about Apple’s automobile intentions, whatever they might be, deriding Tim Cook’s statement about Apple Watch being used in place of your key fob. Cook likens it to the way Apple is replacing your credit card with Apple Pay, by offering a simple substitute to an awkward system that uses an Apple gadget.

The theory goes that the auto industry has had decades to perfect key fobs and push button starting schemes, so how does Apple think they can do any better? I recall one particularly incoherent passage about security. But consider this. Over the years, I’ve owned cars that have push button starting systems, activated by a key fob that I can leave in my pocket. Now the little gadget may also be capable of storing your custom seat adjustments and such. So when you start the car with that key fob, everything is adjusted accordingly. Your significant other may use another key fob for the same car to establish a different set of adjustments.

But if you swap the key fobs, the settings are swapped too. It’s easy to do by mistake unless you label the key fobs. They aren’t keyed or in any way customized to you. You aren’t being recognized by fingerprints or retina scans. Another common feature of these keyless entry systems is the ability to go over to your car’s left or right front door, push a tiny button and have the door just open. All you have to do is have the key fob handy. Possession is all it takes, even if the one possessing that key fob is someone who robbed it from you at gunpoint. See the picture?

So what if the same functions became part of an iPhone, requiring your fingerprint to activate, or were customized to work with an Apple Watch? Wouldn’t that offer more security while still allowing you to carry one less thing around with you? Well, there is Apple Watch, but access can still be encrypted.

Just asking.

I’m also concerned about some news reports, dating back to last year’s Black Hat security conference, claiming it was very easy for hackers to wirelessly unlock your car. No need to worry about fiddling with hangars or the more injurious approach of breaking glass. The intent of this hack was to defeat the security of the keyless entry system using off-the-shelf tools.

Rather disquieting that.

Now when Apple enters a new market, it’s usually to disrupt that market, fix what is wrong with an elegant solution. Back in the days of the iPod, it was about the horrible user interfaces and pathetic performance of existing digital music players. The iPhone made smartphones warm and fuzzy, and the iPad was the first successful tablet in a market where previous tablets had failed.

But aren’t cars doing really well these days, fully recovered from the recession?

From a sales standpoint, yes. People love their cars and trucks, but the latest and greatest auto technology isn’t quite getting the love. Consider the results of the recent J.D. Power’s Vehicle Dependability Study. Some of the biggest problems weren’t caused by engines failing to start, or transmissions slipping out of gear. It was about the onboard electronics, where 31% of the people reported that their phones wouldn’t reconnect to the vehicle’s Bluetooth system when they started up the vehicle. I’m not surprised about this, nor that 55% claimed the vehicle wouldn’t recognize their phone when they tried to pair it. The accuracy of voice recognition systems is also a common a source of complaint.

Why am I not surprised?

I’ve owned several vehicles with Blueooth capability. It’s not uncommon to have to shut the engine, and start it again, or restart my smartphone to have it work even after it’s been paired. To be fair, I’ve never had a problem actually pairing an iPhone or a Samsung Galaxy, but there is no perfect voice recognition system. It’s always hit or miss.

With the Kia, for example, sometimes I have to repeat a command two or three times for it to dial a number or call up someone in my contact list. Remember that I’m a professional broadcaster, and yes I do play one on radio.

Isn’t the infotainment system a ripe area for Apple disruption? What about the key fob system? And that’s before we get to the rest of the onboard electronics. Apple could also do a lot to reform the typical car buying experience. While more and more of you select and buy cars online, whenever you have to go through a traditional vehicle financing process, prepare for torture. I always feel exhausted at the end of the process, even if I warn the finance person at the start of the session that I will refuse all dealer vehicle packs, and finance, insurance and warranty add-ons. I still have to sign a paper where I specify that I rejected all of these offers, and I’ve been real close to just admonishing the dealer to stop the nonsense or I’ll leave.

When it comes to the auto industry, there are lots of things Apple can do to make the purchase and ownership experience far more pleasant. Car makers may scoff at the prospects of Apple playing in their sandbox, but my warning to them is to be afraid, very afraid if Apple decides to get involved.

The phrase “jump the shark” has become a popular idiom to describe situations when desperation takes over. The term originated from an episode of the TV sitcom “Happy Days,” where lead character Fonzie (Henry Winkler), demonstrating his water skiing skills, jumps over a shark. That’s when many critics felt the show had lost its creative core and had become in a sense of parody of itself.

With a TV series nears the end of the line, the producers resort to silly stunts, sometimes calling in famous entertainers as guest stars to lead a lame plot, in desperate efforts to push ratings and keep the show on the air long after its prime. I’ll leave it to you to decide which TV shows fit into that category. But it has also been expanded beyond the entertainment industry to signify a serious decline in product quality or a company’s performance.

So you can say that a company that can no longer innovate or at least earn decent revenue and profits may have jumped the shark. You might apply that term to Sears and perhaps HP, companies well past their prime. Radio Shack jumped the shark years ago, but took a while for the ever-changing management to realize that basic fact and take steps to put the company out of its misery.

Continue Reading…