When Apple gave up on using feline names for operating systems, it’s probably true that some Mac users were skeptical about how OS 10.9 Mavericks would turn out. Was this the sign of a new direction for Apple, or just a decision about nicknames?

For the most part, I expect the latter. Compared to Lion and Mountain Lion, Mavericks seems little different. The drive for iOS/OS X consistency continues unabated with the arrival of iBooks and Maps. That’s a good thing for people who migrate between Macs and iOS gear — and Apple would hope that number will continue to grow.

Aside from the apps, Mavericks is very much focused on enhancing the Mac user experience and performance. The addition of Finder tabs and tags, for example, seems so fundamentally logical, you have to wonder why it took ten versions of OS X before Apple got around to it. That, however, doesn’t mean the Finder is necessarily a better file browser, or a final solution. But it does mean that you can continue to use your Mac as you always have, and just adapt to some new features. I’m also glad to see Apple opting not to further tamper with OS X’s interface.

Continue Reading…

It’s a sure thing that Apple has received loads of accolades for the iPad Air from the mainstream and tech media. It’s not just a modest refresh but a fairly major upgrade that addresses some of the most severe criticisms of the product. One of the more serious issues was the size and the weight. At 1.4-odd pounds, it seemed light enough, until you held it for a while with one hand. Even if you had a strong hand, it would invariably become uncomfortable. It’s not that competing tablets were necessarily lighter, but this very factor explains some of the popularity of the iPad mini.

So the 2012 iPad mini weighs .68 pound (.69 pound for the Cellular version), and the Retina display model that will go on sale later this month is roughly three-quarters of a pound. It’s certainly more suited to reading, say, a book, although a magazine would clearly be more at home on a full-sized iPad.

Now I’m not going to assess the magic by which Apple managed to shave size and weight down to create the iPad Air. The end result weighs one pound for the Wi-Fi version, and 1.0.5 pounds for the Cellular model. That extra five grams would hardly be noticed. In all fairness, I see that Amazon is busy making Kindle tablets lighter too.

Apple also reduced the physical size, which increases the comfort level. The new shape essentially mirrors the iPad mini form factor, so you can see they come from the same family.

But let’s get down to brass tacks: When you buy a new iPad nowadays, you get a complete package before you consider any third-party software, and it’s not all for consumption either. Although Apple has been rightly criticized for removing some of the features of the Mac version if the iWork suite, on an iPad, it’s perfectly at home. The larger virtual keyboard even makes it possible to get shorter documents written, after a fashion, without having to pair with a Bluetooth keyboard, and editing is now consistent among all platforms. This is particularly important if you need to move from device to device while working on a document.

So Apple uses the same file format, even if it’s a tad feature-restricted. But Apple has promised that iWork will be fleshed out over time, and that a number of key features, such as custom toolbars and vertical rulers, will be restored in the first six months. Meantime, Mac users who are chafing over iWork’s limits can stick with the ’09 version for now, although that doesn’t help if you also want to work on the same documents on an iPhone, or iPad, not to mention the iCloud site.

You also get the iLife app suite, including GarageBand for making music and podcasts, and iPhoto to organize your library and do some basic image touch ups. The latter is more suited towards consumption, dealing with the family photo library and such, but the former is definitely a production tool with a decent amount of power.

Over time, as iPads become more powerful, you’ll see feature sets fleshed out, and many will wonder whether it makes sense to buy a Mac or PC except for some heavy lifting.

The point here, however, is that you have a product that can be used to create content out of the box. It’s not just for getting online and answering your email. There’s a whole lot more, and with over 450,000 apps specially optimized for tablets, you will have a rich selection that’ll allow you to accomplish quite a bit at very affordable prices.

Let me give you a personal example of how an iPad’s reach has grown: My son, now aged 27, started using Macs when he was quite young. He has a 2008 black MacBook, one that’s suffered through loads of defects and repairs, but that’s another story. Assuming it holds up, and just about everything except the bottom of the case has been replaced, once he earns his masters degree, he plans to get an iPad and put the MacBook out to pasture. To him, everything he does, even writing, could be accomplished in a reasonably productive fashion on an iPad. He will leave the Mac with no regrets.

For Apple, cannibalization isn’t a bad thing, so long as it’s from one Apple gadget to another. Apple also hopes to continue to win iPad sales from PC users whose disgust with Windows 8 has only hastened their determination to give up on the PC.

For me, I’m not ready to move all iPad. I still do most of my writing and audio editing chores on an iMac, and I am quite satisfied with the workflow. Maybe I’m too old to change my ways, though if I ever retire from the radio business, maybe I’ll consider a tablet alternative. Maybe.

But I can see where more and more people have no need whatever for the PC. That’s what Microsoft is fighting with their peculiar all-in-one, Windows everywhere concept. It may even do them in unless the new chief executive, whoever he or she might be, issues the wake up call.

All right, you know the score. Apple earns lots and lots of money selling gear that is generally regarded as premium priced. Sure, you can say that Apple’s prices are competitive when you compare, say, a MacBook Air with one of those UltraBooks from Dell or HP. But when it comes to those 7-inch tablets from Amazon and Google, it’s well known that profits are slim; they are used to provide platforms for sales and apps and other products. The marketing plan is similar to the way printers and razors and sold. You make them cheap, and make up the difference from selling consumables.

However that is not Apple’s way. Products are sold with a reasonable profit level — a level some might consider excessive — without considering whether or not you’re going to buy any other stuff. Indeed, Apple is now giving away operating systems and basic consumer app suites, which means that it’s possible to use them without any third-party software. It’s all about selling the hardware, although iTunes and the App Stores do deliver some level of profit.

But the comparisons are inevitable. Samsung is selling far more mobile gear than Apple, so, they say, Apple needs to step up to the plate and become more competitive. However, recent Samsung financials indicate that only a third of the handsets are in the premium or high-end category, such as the Samsung Galaxy S4 and the various iterations of the Note phablet. Indeed, it appears that demand for the S4 is softening, despite all the hype and the fact that such publications as Consumer Reports gave it a very high rating. Compare that to the news that iPhone sales were up 26% year-to-year in the last financial quarter. So how can anyone suggest Apple is doing something wrong?

Indeed, when you look at the reviews of cheap Android gear, you read about technology that’s several years old, with low-power processors, scant memory, inferior screens, and an older version of the OS. Indeed, one of the improvements to Android 4.4 KitKat is to make it usable on a gadget with as little as 512MB of RAM, which may not be saying much. Some low-end smartphones have 256MB. So much for the end of fragmentation.

This isn’t to say that Apple isn’t doing things to lower the cost of admission. So you can get the first generation iPad mini, with standard definition display, for $299. Maybe that seems pricy compared to a $199 Android tablet with an HD screen, except that the 7-inch widescreen form factor offers far less usable space than the 7.9-inch iPad mini. But, for better or worse, they are placed in the same categories, and that may not be the right choice.

When it comes to the iPhone, Apple expects the 4s, from 2011, to be the cheap model, or as cheap as they plan to get. Other than sacrificing profits, how does Apple make it cheaper? The iPhone 5c was expected by some to be the inexpensive model, but it’s just a repackaged 5 for $100 less, retail. Nothing wrong with that, of course. That there is an ongoing concern about sales ignores the fact that more people want the high-end iPhone 5s, which is actually a good thing.

In the end, if sales of the iPhone 5c end up being higher than what Apple would have achieved had the iPhone 5 remained in the lineup, that’s a good thing. The 5c is cheaper to produce, and delivers near-identical performance with superior battery life. Indeed, I suspect some customers prefer the multiple choice of colors. The plastics do not look cheap.

But the theory is that sales of Apple products must inevitably decline as more and more cheaper gear is sold. Sales of high-end gear will flatten as the market saturates, which sort of ignores the aspirational factor. Wouldn’t people prefer to buy something better if they could afford it? Besides, as people in developing countries earn more disposable income, would they choose some anonymous Android feature phone, or a reasonably well equipped smartphone? If the latter, it means more potential business for Apple, which still retains the highest customer ratings in the industry.

Now when it comes to giving things away, Apple hasn’t quite received the love when it comes to iWork. In order to make the apps compatible on all platforms, from OS X, iOS to iCloud, Apple evidently simplified the code and the feature set. So-called power user features, such as mail merge, are missing in action in Pages. This may explain why the installation doesn’t remove iWork 09 from your Mac.

As of this week, Apple has posted a support document that confirms exactly why the new iWork apps lost features, with the promise that many will be reintroduced in the next six months, and more features will be added going forward. This is the same approach Apple took with iMovie some years back, and with the controversial release of Final Cut Pro X.

Besides, nobody forces you to upgrade iWork if you prefer the older version. As with FCP X, just be patient. Free doesn’t have to mean junk. And Apple has said time and time again they won’t sell junk.

Apple is very invested in California, witness the choice of Mavericks, a popular surfing location in that state, as the name of the tenth reference release of OS X. And the phrase, “Designed by Apple in California,” adorns the products. But designing is only a part of the equation. At one time, a lot of Apple’s products were assembled in the U.S., but not anymore.

As with most tech companies, Apple gear is assembled in Asia, using parts sourced from around the world. So, for example, the A7 processor used in the iPhone 5s, the iPad Air and the iPad mini is built at a Samsung plant in Texas. Well, for now, as Apple is reportedly planning to move the A7’s successors to other assemblers.

Now Apple has been the source of much criticism about the decision to use cheap overseas labor. When the working conditions at the contract manufacturers Apple uses, particularly Foxconn, were attacked by The New York Times and others for being unfavorable and unsafe, CEO Tim Cook promised to do better.

You can certainly feel Cook’s defensiveness whenever he is asked to explain why Apple isn’t building stuff in the U.S. He refers to the number of workers at an Apple Store, and the hundreds of thousands of people who have been building iOS and Mac apps as examples of bringing more employment to this country. The fact that such parts as processors and Gorilla Glass are domestically sourced is a plus.

And then there’s the new Mac Pro, which will be assembled in Texas. So at least it’s a start. There is also the published report that Apple is funding a new plant in Mesa, AZ for GT Advanced Technology to produce sapphire material for future Apple gear. Sapphire is currently used for iPhone camera lenses, and the Touch ID fingerprint sensor.

This deal, confirmed by Apple, will result in 2,000 new jobs the first year, which includes 1,300 construction workers and an estimated 700 who will actually work at the plant. Some Macs, by the way, use Intel chips fabricated in Chandler, AZ, so this isn’t the first time Apple has relied on that state for parts.

Right now, all this stuff is shipped to Asia for final assembly. But as wages and benefits for factory workers increase, at what point does it become more feasible to build products closer to home? When you factor in shipping and other expenses, the price advantage isn’t necessarily that high, and the figure is apt to decrease over time.

Of course, Apple is also striving to sell more and more gear to the population in China and other countries, so assembling close to home is no different than what car makers do when establishing factories around the world. So even if Apple brought more production to the U.S., that doesn’t necessarily mean it would make sense to build everything here.

Now I suppose it doesn’t matter so much that a multinational corporation builds products in different locations around the world. But since Apple touts its origins as a great American success story, and particularly the California connection, it’s fair to wonder why there isn’t more domestic manufacturing. But you could also ask the same question of other American success stories, such as Dell and HP, who use some of the same contract factories as Apple for many of their products. If Apple is at fault, what about the rest of the tech industry that made the very same decision for the very same reasons, to keep prices as low as possible and to remain competitive?

But when those complaints were publicized about unfair working conditions, you didn’t hear attacks against Dell, HP or the others for doing the very same thing. It was all about Apple, as if it was Apple was to blame for all the problems. When Apple executives promised to urge their Asian partners to improve working conditions, and pay higher salaries, what about the rest of the industry? Once again, it was all about Apple.

Now I’m not about to complain that Apple isn’t getting a fair break. I’m just reporting the facts. So we still have curious the situation where Apple’s profits, although lower than last year, still exceed those of competitors, and sometimes several competitors combined. But that’s not a negative, so it doesn’t get reported as much as it should.

It’s also true that most of the sales of smartphones and tablets reported by Apple’s competitors are concentrated at the low end of the market. I’ve seen reviews of some of this cheap junk, and to say a fair amount of that gear is hardly usable is an understatement. But it explains why Apple’s share isn’t as high as the critics want it to be. Apple will be criticized for not selling enough cheap gear, and they will be criticized when profits aren’t good enough. But you can’t have it both ways.

On the other hand, it does look as if Apple is going to make a more aggressive push to transfer more production to U.S.-based plants over the next few years. Nothing wrong with that, except for people who don’t live in the U.S. and hope for something closer to home.