From the very first Mac, the all-in-one concept has proven to be highly successful. You didn’t have to mix and match computer, display, mouse and keyboard, though the latter two could be replaced or supplemented. The price you paid for the single box was a difficult, or impossible, upgrade process.

The original iMac was said to be a key factor in the Mac’s resurgence for its time, but it was a bear to change memory. You had to open the case, and remove an assembly that included just about everything except for the internal components of the CRT display. It wasn’t hard, but annoying. The same couldn’t be said for several generations of Power Macs that required removal of delicate wiring harnesses to get to the memory slots. I recall when Apple marketing people displayed a brand new model with simple access to memory and other components, and received a round of applause.

After such experiences, I would have thought Apple would recognize that at least some of you may buy the Mac you can afford, hoping to upgrade it later as your needs change, or your credit card balance can accommodate more memory or a bigger hard drive. However, Apple has gone in a different direction, returning to the concept of the original Mac as a closed box computing appliance in the fashion of the iPhone and iPad.

Continue Reading…

So I’ve been using the entry-level 27-inch iMac with Retina 5K display for several weeks now, and I’ve made it my regular computing workstation. Well, at least until next month when Apple expects to see it returned. Till then, however, I can bask in the superior glow of nearly 15 million pixels dancing on the screen in response to my commands.

Now waxing enthusiastic about any computer is not my style. I’m jaded, having worked on various types of computing systems since the 1970s, even before the personal computer revolution. I also used some of those early Macs, quickly migrating to the first color monitors. I recall the era before flat panel displays arrived were I struggled mightily to have a picture that was not bowed, without bending at the edges or the bottom, and let me tell you that I sweated the adjustments, particularly as display sizes grew larger.

Good old days they weren’t.

Well, I believed that the displays I used were quite sharp enough for a desktop computer. While I do not yet own a MacBook Pro with Retina display, I nonetheless appreciate the Retina displays on the family iPhones and iPads. I could see the potential, but still I felt that putting one of those things on an iMac was just overkill. It had to be very expensive to pack millions of pixels onto a 27-inch display. Yes, I’m aware of 4K or Ultra HD TVs, and they are coming down in price and all, but a computer display has to be of a higher grade. We’re talking of a tool used to edit professional audio and video productions.

But to edit 4K video you need a display that has enough extra pixels for an app’s menus and palettes. Thus, a 5K display, and consider the graphics hardware you’d need to push those pixels. Yes, a Mac Pro can do it, but would Apple consider such a capability on a more affordable box, say an iMac?

Amid rumors of an iMac with Retina display, I remained skeptical. To me, that late 2009 iMac still chugging away had a perfectly sharp display. Everything was clear and readable, so why would I change, and how much extra would I have to pay for such a beast anyway?

Remember that Dell had announced a 5K 27-inch display for all of $2,499. What would it cost to pack the guts of a powerful computer into such a box anyway?

In October, Apple delivered not just a surprising response, but put again the lie to the claim that people who buy Macs were paying an “Apple tax” for luxury gear that costs more than the competition.

So for the very same $2,499, Apple delivered the full-blown computer with a magnificent, simply stunning, 5K display. Apple did all sorts of tricks behind the scenes to make it happen on a computer that, to all intents and purposes, looked exactly the same as the standard 27-inch iMac. Were there any compromises?

Well, the iMac 5K has been available for over two months now. Supplies have been tight, and it appears that consumers with exacting needs and professional content creators are lapping them up. But there haven’t been any rush firmware updates or reports of serious problems. The worst you can say is that the built-in AMD graphics hardware, powerful as it is, might sometimes struggle a bit to keep all those pixels moving smoothly. Sometimes it stutters for just a fraction of a second, though I’ve not observed much of that on the entry-level model Apple sent along.

I am considering whether to request a CTO model, with all the options, to see how it fares.

In addition to an amazingly sharp picture, the iMac 5K delivers rich colors that seem far more realistic than on a regular iMac. They clearly sweat the details, and I can already see how my old iMac will seem dull and fuzzy in comparison. This is the sort of computer that, once you have extended face time with it, will just suck you in and send you rushing to the credit cards and the checkbook balances to see if you can swing a purchase. Maybe I just need to run a GoFundMe campaign to raise the cash to buy one of these machines.

But this is not a case of being taken in by the fading reality distortion field left by the late Steve Jobs. With the iMac 5K, Apple has confounded the skeptics about pricing such high-end gear, and has delivered an excellent solution for anyone who needs a PC “truck” to create professional audio and video content. If your apps can do all of their stuff within the confines of a quad-core processor, you’ll find performance actually exceeds that of the Mac Pro. For apps that can sing with six or 12 cores, the Mac Pro is still better, but at what cost?

In configuring the cheapest (so to speak) iMac 5K, Apple made the hybrid Fusion Drive standard issue. So you get a 1TB mechanical hard drive and a 128GB SSD. Intelligent software monitors your usage patterns, and tries to pack the apps and files you use most often on the SSD. For most of you, performance is in striking distance to a full SSD (which costs $800 more from Apple if you want one). If you manage loads of large files, a Fusion Drive might not be the ticket, but it is for me.

Let me say it again: It’s going to be awfully hard to go back to my own iMac after the 5K returns to its home in Cupertino, CA. I will have to suffer through a fuzzier display and a much slower hard drive. All right, I could invest a few hundred dollars and pack an SSD into my old box, but I’d be forced to endure the lengthy and delicate process of disassembling the iMac, and putting Humpty Dumpty together again. But I’m not sure if it’s worth the cost or the complicated installation process.

Or maybe I’ll get a big tax refund next year, and consider whether to pay off some old bills, or reward myself with a new Mac. What would you do?

Last week, our broadband provider sent someone over to adjust our service. He arrived, saw my Macs, and proudly displayed his new iPhone 6 Plus. Now I had played with one for a while before to get a sense of it,  and felt it was just too big for my needs. You see, I carry around my iPhone in my left pants pocket, and the pockets of my jeans, while normal sized, make even an iPhone 5s or an iPhone 6 a fairly tight fit. But I am never fearful of bending one of them.

In any case, while he did his thing with fixing and replacing a cable modem and configuring jumpers and wires, he said I could work with his iPhone so long as I didn’t read his email or fiddle with the settings. I must have inspired his trust.

So I gave it a decent workout for the next 45 minutes or so, concentrating on the things I did on my iPhone, but also compared it to working on an iPad. Now the sole iPads in the family have been the standard or full-sized models. I’ve also been slow to warm up to an iPad, and the iPad mini seemed even less compelling.

But when I worked with the iPhone 6 Plus, even for that short period of time, I could see where the smaller display might still be tempting to someone who might have considered an iPad mini. More to the point, consider the inconvenience of lugging two gadgets compared to the possibly modest inconvenience of taking one somewhat large device that includes the cellular telephone. Indeed, in some parts of the world, people are using these gadgets, or phablets, as their one and only computing device. They do not have personal computers.

Now it’s well known that iPad sales have been flat for a while. One reason given is that users are keeping their iPads in regular use far longer than they hold onto smartphones. So figure maybe four years instead of two years, meaning that the owners of the original iPad  — and maybe the iPad 2 which isn’t terribly snappy on iOS 8 — might be ready to upgrade soon.

But the choices have changed. The arrival of the iPhone 6 Plus has certainly altered the equation, meaning that sales for Apple’s phablet may indeed be cannibalizing those for the iPad. To what degree, I wouldn’t be able to guess, although Apple might have some meaningful data to report during the financial conference call covering this quarter. That will happen in January.

In the meantime, experts and so-called experts will speculate about how well the iPad is doing. But that won’t be known until the real figures are in. It’s easy to guess based on sales reports from individual dealers, of course, and the industry analysts will be busy with their own interpretations, but they won’t be based on all the hard numbers.

It may not even mean anything that the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus are just starting to catch up with demand, but you can get pretty much whatever iPad you want without much of a delay. Perhaps building an iPhone 6 is a far more difficult process to do efficiently.

As far as Apple is concerned, though, the person who chooses an iPhone 6 Plus over most iPads will be delivering more profit to the company. Don’t forget that the U.S. retail price of Apple’s phablet range from $749 to $949, depending on which storage option you select. Remember that those zero down payment or low upfront cost deals are part of a wireless carrier’s service plans to rope you in. They don’t reflect what Apple earns from each sale.

The most expensive iPad Air 2 is $829, for a unit with 128GB storage and a cellular radio. Most purchases are for much cheaper models, and remember that the entry-level iPad mini can be had for $249. All told, selling you an iPhone 6 Plus is a better deal for them. Apple has always been happy to cannibalize its own gear. I would imagine they’d even prefer that iPad uses consider a Mac if they want something different. After all, a fully decked out Mac Pro can cost close to $10,000.

Now none of this is new or unusual. The numbers I’ve quoted are out there for anyone to examine, and few would dispute the fact that selling a pricier gadget with a higher profit margin is to be preferred. Mac sales have been hot too, and it’s possible some iPad owners who don’t go to the iPhone 6 Plus do consider the Mac alternative.

Apple is happy to accommodate those needs. But I wouldn’t presume to guess how well the iPad will fare this quarter or whether it’s necessarily to change something to goose sales. Some suggest Apple needs to deliver an iPad Pro, the alleged 12-inch model that, I suppose, would serve some professional users. But it wouldn’t be one of those alleged convertible note-books. Apple has made it clear they don’t believe in such things.

The headline was frightening in its implications, particularly at at time when it appears that your personal privacy is under assault. It started with something that’s good, which is Apple releasing an update to deal with a newly discovered and severe security vulnerability given the number CVE-2014-9295. The security lapse impacts the network time protocol (called NTP for short) that’s designed to sync the clocks on Macs and other Unix-based computers including Linux. So Apple isn’t alone.

So what’s the danger? Well, this vulnerability means that hackers could take control of your computer remotely. It doesn’t mean they will, but the potential is there. This is unlike most other security problems that require direct access to your Mac to gain control, so we’re talking of something that could be far more serious, although there’s no indication anyone’s been compromised.

The revelation came last Friday from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute. So we’re not talking about a security software company that might be trying to hype a few app sales to protect you. Regardless, Apple fixed the problem Monday with a “silent” update, meaning it was automatically pushed to your computer. You didn’t even need to restart, although the Notification Manager in recent OS X versions, such as Yosemite, would report that the update was happening and that it completed.

This seems to be a pretty benign development. You didn’t have to do anything to be protected. Indeed, Apple has been silently updating malware detection strings for several system versions, and there haven’t been complaints, probably because the updates aren’t usually widely mentioned. This time, we have a genuine freakout from CNET, a long-term tech portal currently owned by CBS Interactive. That’s the same CBS that owns Showtime and a certain broadcast network, among other things.

The warning? Well, that automatic updates aren’t risk free, that there is the potential to cause problems with apps and processes. At least that’s the danger, although it doesn’t seem as if these updates have been the source of any complaints.

So where’s the fear-mongering? Well, it starts with the headline, “Apple updates Macs for first time without asking — to foil hackers.” And, no, I am not posting the link. You can easily look it up if you want.

But it’s not the first time. It happens any time those malware detection strings are updated or added to. As for regular software updates, consider the options offered in the App Store preference pane in OS X Yosemite. You have four interrelated options under, “Automatically check for updates,” that include the options to download updates in the background, install app updates, OS X updates, and system data files and security updates.”

The NTP bug fix clearly fits into the latter category.

What this means is that you can uncheck any of these options at any time and not receive any relevant updates unless you go direct to the App Store and select the ones you want. You have full control, and Apple isn’t going to infringe on your privacy. But if you choose to have everything done in the background, so be it. This setting will probably not cause you any trouble, though I suppose an app or OS X update might cause trouble. If you want to be cautious, just say no. It’s a real simple process.

What’s more, if you have iOS gear, you’ve already been able to have app updates downloaded and installed automatically in the background beginning with iOS 7. It’s an option in the iTunes & App Store settings. A simple tap for each category will turn off the automatic settings. So Apple isn’t forcing any uninvited updates on your iPhone or iPad either.

To be fair, the CNET piece does explain how to turn off the automatic install options on a Mac. So the claim that Apple is foisting something unwanted on you in the headline is shown by the end of the article to be fundamentally false.

Certainly you have the right to be concerned about someone pushing downloads to you that you don’t expect, and maybe don’t want, but Apple is giving you full control. If you do opt to do it all manually, perhaps Apple could be more proactive about it and put up a warning prompt if a critical update that impacts your security is available to install. That way, you can dismiss the reminder, install the update, or just go about your business if you prefer to ignore the warning.

But when people want to tell you that Apple might be doing something suspicious in pushing updates to your Mac behind the scenes, they are just plain wrong. That the article contradicted itself makes it doubly certain the graphic headline was meant as hit bait, not to legitimately inform the public about Apple’s update and update policies.

In any case, my Mac isn’t smoking as a result of having that update sent to me. I don’t think yours is either.