Few disagree that the PC industry has seen better days. With flagging sales, PC makers are struggling to find ways to move boxes without much success. The efforts to boost convertible PCs — combining touchscreens with a regular note-book form factor — have essentially gone nowhere. But it’s also true that it has yet to be demonstrated that customers even care.

In the latest move to right the sinking ship, HP, the world’s largest seller of Windows PCs, is running a “Back by popular demand” promotion that includes up to $150 in instant savings.

So what is HP bribing you to buy? Why a PC with Windows 7. Yes, Windows 7, that four-year-old operating system that simply won’t go away. Of course it’s also true that roughly a third of the PCs that go online are still running Windows XP, first released in 2001, and that’s true of the car dealer I visited the other day for an oil change. As the service rep struggled through the awkward and backward interface, I asked him if he was using Windows XP, and he admitted that he was. But he also said that he expects a new system will be up and running when the dealership moves to a new location this spring. So maybe they’ll move to Windows 7.

Maybe.

Now the skeptics might suggest that Apple is facing a similar situation since the uptake of OS X Mavericks allegedly slowed seriously in December. But it’s still installed on 37% of the Macs currently in use, which is pretty good for an OS that’s was out a little more than two months when those stats, based on online traffic, were tallied. Sure, OS X Snow Leopard, released in 2009, still garners roughly 20% of Mac traffic, but there are reasons why most users won’t give it up. First and foremost is hardware compatibility, that Mavericks doesn’t support some of the older Macs that can run OS 10.6. The only solution is to buy a new Mac.

Another important factor is that Snow Leopard is the last OS X release to support PowerPC apps. That’s a brick wall that can never be torn down. The only solution is for people with Macs otherwise compatible with Mavericks to upgrade the affected apps, if updates are available, or buy something new.

While I’m sure some people are avoiding Mavericks because of ongoing bugs, and Apple Mail remains somewhat trouble-prone, it’s clear some will never, ever be able to upgrade. The situation is surely not as serious as what Microsoft is confronting trying to induce PC users to upgrade to Windows 8, or simply buy a new PC, any new PC, with Windows 8.

For PC makers, returning to Windows 7 may be a way to turn back the hands of time to an era where sales were still increasing somewhat. Clearly Microsoft goofed big time with Windows 8. The strategy of offering the same touch-based OS on Intel and ARM hardware failed big time. Even if you ignore the Windows RT fiasco, there’s still the problem of people not taking to Windows 8 or the 8.1 fixer-upper. It’s a mess!

It’s understandable that Microsoft wanted to somehow stay relevant as mobile hardware takes an increasing share of the market. But it’s also clear that the Windows everywhere scheme just couldn’t work. Microsoft has been trying for years, but Windows has never been successful beyond the core PC base. Even the alternative, the tiled interface that began with the Zune music player, hasn’t worked so well on smartphones. Sure, Windows Phone sales are actually increasing, but those conquests may be partly at the expense of the dying BlackBerry platform. It remains an Apple/Samsung universe.

Now in the scheme of things, you’d think Microsoft has to seriously rethink its OS strategy. But it’s a huge question mark whether the company’s current leadership has the courage, or the ability, to make the key changes to set things right, or even that it’s possible.

True, it may take new leadership to straighten out the mess, but it’s not as if prospective and promising executives are rushing to be considered. One high-profile candidate, Ford’s Alan Mulally, has very publicly stated that he is not at all interested in taking the position. But it’s also true that Mulally doesn’t have experience in the tech industry and, at 68, might be regarded as more of an executive caretaker than someone with a long-term vision.

Besides, with Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates on the selection committee, you wonder whether any huge changes in company strategy would even be tolerated. If the new CEO wanted to execute a major overhaul in leadership and strategy, say of the level made at Apple when Steve Jobs first became interim CEO in 1997, those efforts would likely fly in the face of the old-timers who are still under the delusion that Microsoft is doing the right thing.

In other words, they are having trouble facing reality. But in a sane world, HP’s move to recover lost PC sales should come as a serious wake up call. The real question is whether anyone at Microsoft is paying attention, and if they are, what they are going to do about it. That decision may have a lot to do with the long-term future of the company.

And, you wonder when Dell, Lenovo and other major players in the PC industry will decide to follow HP’s lead and return to Windows 7 as fast as possible.

As the iPhone becomes available at the world’s largest mobile carrier, China Mobile, Tim Cook is out answering the usual questions about Apple. And, as usual, he doesn’t say much of anything; he merely repeats the same old talking points.

One thing is certain, however, and that is that Cook is better able to field the hard questions with non-answers than ever. His public appearances are less stilted, no doubt because he’s been practicing. Of course, I’m not about to suggest he’s been coached. The improvement in his presentation may simply stem from experience. The more he does this sort of thing, the better he is.

Unfortunately, the media, so desperate to receive a few words of wisdom from Apple’s fearless leader, is only too polite to remind him that he really didn’t say anything new. The questions are largely pro forma. Will the next iPhone have a larger screen, for example? Do you really expect Cook to say that he’s happy to let you in on a little secret about it? Instead, you just know he’ll tell you, in various ways, how Apple loves to keep new product details secret until the right time, implying the reporter must feel embarrassed even to ask.

In Bloomberg News report about the arrival of the iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c at China Mobile, Cook was quoted as saying, when asked about new smartphone features, such as larger screens and bendable displays, “We never talk about future things. We have great things we are working on but we want to keep them secret. That way you will be so much happier when you see it.”

The way he phrased it almost sounds patronizing.

Predictably, the headlines talk about the promise of “great things” coming from Apple rather than the real headline, which is that Cook merely repeated the standard Apple mantra when asked about forthcoming new products.

First of all, all tech companies will offer some variation of the “great things” comment, even Microsoft. They will all tell you how their amazing product developers are busy designing gear that will turn the industry upside down. Other than Apple, you are likely going to receive some details, even if only general details, about what those products or features might be. Of course, there’s no guarantee any of those “great things” will ever come to pass.

Microsoft, for example, has been notorious over the years for announcing future products that never actually appeared. It doesn’t happen quite as often nowadays now that there’s real competition, but the 1990s and early 2000s are littered with unfulfilled Microsoft promises. Unfortunately, the media gave Bill Gates and, later, Steve Ballmer, a pass in delivering just more vapor — make that hot air.

But I do understand Apple’s predicament. More than ever, there has been plenty of skepticism over how Apple will handle future product development, and whether there’s anything in the wings that will have the amazing impact of the iPod, iPhone and iPad. Where’s the followup?

This is what fuels the ongoing demands that Apple tell us something, anything, about what those future products might be. At the same time, Cook isn’t going to spill the beans. He may drop some tantalizing hints here and there, and when Apple refuses to dismiss the value of any product or service, there’s probably a fair chance something of the sort is being worked on.

So you know that Cook isn’t against building iPhones with larger screens. He has talked more about the possible shortcomings of current technology, which is a clear message that something is in the works that resolves those shortcomings. You also suspect that a solution for the wearables market is in the works because Cook admits Apple’s interest. But that doesn’t mean the wearable is necessarily an iWatch.

Sure, Apple has reportedly trademarked the iWatch name. But is that to prepare for such a beast, or as a defense maneuver to reserve that name in case an iWatch comes sometime farther in the future? The rumors that Apple had 100 engineers working on the project, and has continued to add personnel, have never been confirmed, so make of that what you will. Besides, that people are working on a product doesn’t signal when it’ll be released.

Apple’s “intense interest” in the living could mean that there’s a connected TV in our future, or maybe not. Perhaps an Apple TV on steroids is really on the agenda, one that will offer hotter specs, perhaps Ultra HD support, but will focus on interface improvements, and a much wider content selection. An Apple TV box can work on any recent TV, since those recent TVs have HDMI ports. So why enter the overcrowded TV set market?

But at the end of the day, Tim Cook knows the media will quote whatever he says, emphasize Apple’s talking points, and not ask any follow-up questions to elicit even a hint or two of useful information. And Apple’s skeptics won’t be impressed regardless.

This is the press meme that plays out over and over again, that Apple lost the ability to innovate when Steve Jobs passed. Every single produce update since then has been iterative. No new product paths are being taken. It’s just more of the same ole same ole.

But what about the Mac Pro? Well, it’s great looking and really different and all that, but it’s just a fancy and expensive toy for the well-heeled when it’s not being used as a tool for content creators. It’s still a PC. Well, actually, it’s a PC workstation, but does that distinction even matter?

The iPad Air? Just a slimmer, lighter revision with the usual annual hardware enhancements? The iPhone 5s? Same form factor as the iPhone 5 with those annual hardware enhancements, that fingerprint sensor and 64-bit gimmick.

Continue Reading…

I don’t know if I was surprised or not when I heard that Google was buying Nest Labs, a maker of connected home thermostats and smoke detectors. Sure, I suppose some believed that Nest Labs would have been a more suitable acquisition target for Apple since the founder, Tony Fadell, was the “father” of the iPod.

But that was then and this is now. Besides, it is reported, unconfirmed of course, that Fadell wasn’t so friendly with Sir Jonathan Ive or the irascible executive fired by Tim Cook in 2012, Scott Forstall. So maybe Fadell was as anxious to get away as he was anxious to earn a boatload of money.

Besides, since the deal with Google is for $3.2 billion, quite an amount for a company not far from the startup stage, he shouldn’t have anything to complain about.

It’s also true that home gear, such as thermostats and smoke detectors, really aren’t Apple’s cup of tea. The company will make acquisitions, but usually for technologies that enhance existing products or new ones. So it’s hard to see where Apple’s move into the home would leave room for products of this sort.

But the connected home — and the connected auto for that matter — appears to be well within Google’s plan to get involved in just about everything that involves some sort of online connectivity.

Indeed, you even have Google building out high-speed broadband in the U.S., at least in a few places, with the promise that the technology will maybe grow beyond the test stage and be deployed in more locales. But what does Google get in return? Just your monthly payment, or are you making yourself vulnerable to the same level of online scrutiny that you encounter with other Google services.

I know that many of you are taking full advantage of Google’s free stuff, particularly search and Gmail. But unless you take steps to opt out of everything you can possibly opt out from, you are Google’s customer. But that’s nothing that should come as a surprise to anyone. So, when you buy a Nest Labs gadget after the takeover is complete, does Google begin to watch your thermostat settings? What about the smoke detector? What about anything that uses Android to manage your well-connected home?

At the recent CES in Las Vegas, Google was on hand to show you how your well-connected car can be managed by Android. Deals have already been struck with Audi and other car makers to incorporate a version of the popular mobile interface in your car.

But how is that reflected in a way that helps Google earn their keep? When you change radio stations on your new car, do you see a targeted ads, or are the stations to which you listen or avoid simply cataloged in some humongous online database, so they understand your habits and can provide some kind of promotional information? What about navigation screens? What does Google earn by taking control of your car’s interface?

With Apple, it’s all about money, and all about licensing fees. Apple may have your credit card number on the iTunes database, but it’s not selling you anything when you use Siri in your car. iOS in the Car may offer various and sundry Apple tools on your car’s LCD display. But, again, it’s not that your motoring habits will necessarily be recorded.

Besides, recent cars from pretty much all the car makers in the U.S. include black boxes that can be consulted in the event of a serious factory defect or an accident. There are already ongoing concerns about your privacy. When you check prices for auto insurance nowadays, most companies will offer you an extra discount, provided you are you’re willing to attach a recording device at least temporarily to monitor your driving behavior.

One expects that your car insurance rate may be impacted if you’re not on your best behavior when the insurance company’s black box is installed. You exceed the speed limit, pass a red light or, perish forbid, are at fault in a fender bender, watch out. You won’t be able to dispute the adjuster, who will simply consult record the data on the black box that you allowed them to install to make a decision on the claim.

When it comes to your home, a Nest Learning Thermostat is designed to monitor your living habits, your schedule, and set temperatures accordingly. The claim is that this gadget “can lower your heating and cooling bills up to 20%.” Maybe, but what will Google be doing with the data recorded by that product in the course of configuring itself? Or will Google be happy to just accept income from a sale? The thermostat is $249, the smoke alarm is $129. The revenue was clearly sufficient to make Nest Labs a lucrative takeover target, but what happens to your privacy if Google wants to store your home heating and cooling profile? Will they sell it to makers of air conditioners or heating systems? What about the power company?

Understand that I have never lived in a home with more than an entry-level thermostat, the kind you buy for $20 or $30 at a Home Depot store. A Nest Labs gadget has never been on my to-do list, and I expect that’s true for most of you. But those who are convinced by the pitch that you can save some money might have been tempted. The question is whether the purchase of Nest Labs by a company that fancies itself as an online “Big Brother” will help or hinder sales. Or maybe it just won’t matter.