So there are even more commentators that suggest, yet again, that Apple has fallen behind the curve when it comes to smartphones. Even as sales of the iPhone continue to climb, and there will be a huge amount of publicity over this week’s media event to introduce the 2013 models, it will never be enough for some people.

Never enough?

Well, this is the feature bloat game revisited. Apple is expected to match configurations and features, more or less, with the competition. This is clearly a game the company hasn’t played, and the companies that follow the more-is-always-better philosophy may sell a decent amount of product, but not at a decent profit.

This feature matchup gambit dates back even to the iPod, where the competition would add FM radios and other features but were still very much unable to match Apple’s sales. These days, however, there are many more Android handsets sold (or at least shipped) than iPhones, but most are offered at fire sale prices, offering ancient versions of Google’s OS and very basic hardware features. People may buy boatloads of them, but those sales do not necessarily deliver acceptable profits to the handset makers.

That’s clearly nothing Apple needs to match.

But when it’s not price, what about the screen size? Just the other day, a less-informed acquaintance boasted about the larger screen size of a phablet — one of those smartphones with oversized screens — and how it was so much better than what Apple offered. I could have reminded him about OS usability, the quality of apps, and the seamless user experience. Instead, I suggested he buy a clown’s costume so he’d have packets large enough to store that phablet. No sense arguing with someone who isn’t willing to listen.

The argument about a larger display might seem to make sense, but how big can a smartphone be before it becomes too big for easy portability? Consider the Samsung Galaxy S4, with a five-inch screen. Wow! It’s bright enough under normal room lighting, but totally washes out in sunlight. Really washes out, and that’s known limitation of the AMOLED display technology that Samsung uses.

But it’s five inches! Wow! Why can’t Apple duplicate that?

Well, there are published reports Apple is planning to build a larger iPhone — next year, but don’t expect the picture to disappear in sunlight. And since this article is being written ahead of this week’s media event,  perhaps I’ll have to amend this paragraph. We’ll see.

Regardless, not having a larger display doesn’t mean the iPhone is behind the curve, nor is Apple necessarily not keeping up with technology by failing to load oodles and oodles of useless apps and other features on a mobile gadget. That might look good in the spec sheets, but it doesn’t necessarily mean those features do any good.

I remind some people, for example, that many of the so-called advantages of the Galaxy S4 are limited to the bullet points. Such features as Tilt to Scroll don’t always work, and when they do, not so well, so why bother? Worse, the 16GB Galaxy S4 is so stuffed with junk that only half of that space is available for your apps and other stuff. How is that playing catch up?

Of course, the PowerPoint addicts who adore those bullet points aren’t going to accept the fact that having the most isn’t the same as having the best. Sure, I suppose they can suggest that Apple executives are just spinning the claim that it’s harder to decide which features to remove rather than which features to add. But that doesn’t mean it’s not true.

However, Apple can’t satisfy those critics regardless of what they do. There’s even a story this week claiming that Apple has been building the same smartphone for six years, despite all the changes over that timeframe. That may be true about the basic form factor, but the same is true for every other smartphone out there with a touch rather than physical keyboard. So does the claim hold true for Samsung, HTC and Motorola? Maybe Apple should build a triangular iPhone next.

Wait, I shouldn’t said that! Somebody will now claim that I am passing along that very rumor.

Besides, when you look at Apple’s history, you’ll see the company isn’t always first out with a feature, but will adopt that feature when the early problems appear to have been resolved. So Apple wasn’t the first out of the starting gate with an 802.11ac router, one that sports the new Wi-Fi standard that promises (but rarely delivers) throughput over one gigabit. After the new AirPort Extreme arrived, some reviewers criticized Apple for failing to provide every single possible customization option on an AirPort, even though a mere fraction of users care or benefit from those things. For those who need every possible obscure router feature in clumsy a Web interface, just buy something else. That’s not Apple’s way.

Nor is it Apple’s way to build a product because someone who writes a tech or financial blog tells them it’s the right and proper thing to do.

Apple can’t catch a break! Yes, I suppose it’s fair to say that we know an awful lot about what they plan to introduce on Tuesday, September 10. Officially, Apple promises a colorful event. Unofficially, an awful lot of information has apparently leaked about the 2013 iPhone lineup. If you can believe those stories, you wonder how Apple can possibly surprise and amaze.

So there is the iPhone 5s, a modest upgrade to the iPhone 5, with more powerful parts and, most likely, a fingerprint sensor. The camera will be better, more sensitive in low-light conditions with perhaps more megapixels to keep things sharp. iOS 7 will debut, and it will be snappier with loads of useful features. I suppose there’s the possibility of superior battery life.

Nothing I’m saying here is new. The descriptions of the high-end iPhone have been available for weeks, along with photos of some of the parts. While some of these are no doubt faked, the reports are just too consistent to ignore. This would appear to mean that Apple can no longer keep secrets the way they used to. There are just too many loose cannons in the supply chain, and it’s not that Apple can fire these suppliers because some employees spoke out of turn. They’d have no supply chain left.

Continue Reading…

So it’s fair to say that there has been an endless amout of talk about the coming smartwatch revolution. It has to be soon, real soon now. After all, such tech giants as Samsung and even Sony and Google are jumping on the bandwagon. This has to be big stuff, for why would big companies, and even smaller ones, be investing in wearable gear of this sort?

Well, consider that it was over a decade ago that Microsoft announced the impending tablet revolution. Each year they said it was nearly upon us, but the touch-based note-books that were regarded as tablets were mostly expensive tools for businesses. People avoided them like the plague!

When tablets finally became successful, it was because of a product with the Apple logo on it, one entirely different from the products originally envisioned by Microsoft. Instead of a business gadget, the iPad started out as a consumer device, but was eventually adopted by pretty much all of the Fortune 500 companies. What’s more, Airline pilots use them for flight manuals and other documentation, and some luxury car makers give you one with the owner’s manuals preloaded.

Microsoft is nowhere to be found in the tablet market; the tiny share of the Surface is little more than a rounding error.

This week, Samsung decided it was time to enter the smartwatch arena, with the clumsily named Galaxy Gear SmartWatch. At $299, it’s not a casual investment, and, based on early reports of performance, it wouldn’t be a decent investment at any price.

As I reported the other day, the Verge, an online tech site, said the interface lagged on the units they played with at Samsung’s presentation, and that the demo units were running out of juice by the end of the media event. Forget about all-day battery life, unless you sit back and do nothing. And if you work late, are you expected to bring along a charger to be able to at least know what time it is?

Those who have examined the specs can understand why, since it is very underpowered for an Android device, but Samsung was constrained by what they could put in the oversized case. Worse, only two new Samsung gadgets, a phablet and a tablet, can pair with the thing. If you have anything else, either hope for eventual compatibility or forget about it. Talk about crippling!

But it gets worse. Aside from indications of performance problems and inferior battery life, along with minimal support for other devices, the Samsung can’t live alone. It may include phone capability, but it still has to connect to another device. So even if you have the right products, neither of which are convenient to carry in one’s pocket unless you moonlight as a clown and take your costume with you, what if you forget to take them? You end up with a somewhat costly watch and not much else.

Might as well buy a regular watch and be done with it. At least you’ll have control over what mobile gadget you want to take with you, assuming you wouldn’t prefer to take a day off from the online world.

Now some might want to compare Samsung’s product with the early days of digital music players. There was a sizable potential audience, but the products were crappy, at least until the iPod came along and revolutionized Apple.

While people still buy watches, there’s little to indicate they would buy a smartwatch at any price. Failed products will only discourage them further, and make it harder for the company that delivers  a workable solution to grow demand.

Sure, Apple might do well, simply because of the company’s cachet. The supposed iWatch would be something real special, and I have little doubt that Apple would provide something with better looks,  a smaller case, much longer battery life, and perhaps even the ability to work all by itself, without need to link with anything else. In order words, it would be essentially a portable iPhone with the face of a watch. But that assumes Apple is taking this project to a higher level, and I see little reason why they wouldn’t.

Even then, I still wonder how many people would embrace them. Sure, an Apple iWatch would be a far more approachable gadget than Google Glass. But people buy watches for many reasons. Sometimes it’s just to tell time, sometimes to use the stopwatch capability of some models, and otherwise as a fashion accessory. You don’t worry about whether a Rolex keeps perfect time. It’s a Rolex, and accuracy is a secondary consideration.

But unless or until Apple enters the market, you can bet there will be more crummy gear in the smartwatch segment. The only danger is that, by the time the alleged iWatch shows up, potential customers will already be turned off by the miserable failures of Samsung and other companies.

Certainly, Apple’s upcoming iPhone media event has been telegraphed in the media for a while. When the rumors first arose, well-connected bloggers, such as The Loop’s Jim Dalrymple, were quick to say it was true. But the timing is essentially in step with last year’s iPhone 5 rollout, and was thus predictable.

Now anytime Apple holds a press briefing, it’s pretty doubtful that any other tech company will be able to find a way to get some press. So what appears to be happening is that other companies are trying to divert this week’s conversation to their own products or services.

So, after tech pundits were busy dissecting the lame excuse that Steve Ballmer’s planned departure as Microsoft CEO was voluntary rather than forced, the company made more headlines this week. But you wonder if it was really worth the effort — and the money!

Since I’ve already weighed in on Microsoft’s deal with Nokia, clearly an act of utter desperation, I won’t bore you with any further comments, except for the timing. The questionable move got headlines this week; next week, there would still be headlines, but Microsoft would be competing with Apple for prominence, and that’s not something that would not have worked in their favor.

On Wednesday, Samsung made an expected announcement about the $299 Galaxy Gear smartwatch, yet another attempt to gain a leg up on the non-existent wearable device craze. All right, CNN is calling it, “the hottest trend in tech,” but that pronouncement is hard to take seriously, since there is no evidence that customers are lining up to buy them. In any case, Samsung clicked all the expected checkboxes for this new gadget, but the hardware ends up being low rent compared to full-fledged smartphones and tablets. They couldn’t even come up with a memorable name that isn’t a tongue twister.

Indeed, I wonder why Samsung even bothered to mention the specs at all for something that would be a poor stepchild to the mobile devices to which it would link. Even there, the only compatible gear, so far, is the Galaxy Note 3 (a phablet) and the Galaxy Tab 10.1, which therefore forces potential customers to buy two devices to use one.

One might think that Samsung would, at the very least, have made their smart watch compatible with the best selling gadgets, rather than handicap the thing so severely. It doesn’t matter which apps are supported, or even that there are some health oriented apps available along with an onboard pedometer.

Worse, battery life is just one day, which further restricts the usefulness of this gadget. I would expect that, with hard use, it would be even less, and imagine having to recharge your watch every few hours Indeed, The Verge had a brief hands-on, where they said the interface lagged, and, by the end of Samsung’s media briefing, “the cameras on most of the demo units were refusing to turn on due to the watches running low on power.”

All day? Sure, right! Clearly Samsung rushed this device to market without considering the fundamental problems of battery life, flexibility, or even the ability to pair with a large number of devices to actually work.

All right, the Gear’s looks aren’t so bad for a tech toy, though it doesn’t seem to veer so much from the current crop of smart watches. No doubt Samsung felt they could get a leg up on Apple, which is widely believed to be crafting a wearable device dubbed iWatch. But you can bet that, if the iWatch is meant as a companion to an existing iOS device, it would support all current and recent models, and that battery life would be at least several days under normal use.

Also, I am still not convinced that Apple would want an iWatch to require hookup to another device, although that feature would be offered. A better solution would be to offer full standalone capability, including the phone, so you didn’t have to take two gadgets with you to use just one. However, something of this sort would require at a high level of creativity along with design and engineering expertise.

To Samsung, it’s easier just to throw together an ill-conceived gadget, and hope that customers will be fooled into buying them. To be sure, I expect some of the tech publications will lavish high praise on this misbegotten product. Regardless, Samsung might bask in the glow of publicity for a short time, until Apple delivers the news on the new iPhones at the September 10 event.

As to Google, they have now confirmed that the next version of Android will not be version 5 Key Lime Pie as many expected. Instead, it’ll be 4.4 KitKat. I don’t know about naming operating systems after candy, particularly the kind that makes those annoying clicks when you break it apart. Indeed, the incessant clicking on those ever-irritating ads for the failed Microsoft Surface tablets at first reminded me of hundreds of people with Kit Kat candy bars on hand. Now Google is taking it to heart. Worse, Google isn’t revealing the feature set just yet, though you expect that, with just a minor number upgrade, it won’t be changed all that much from 4.3 Jelly Bean.

By next week, talk of the Samsung Galaxy Gear smartwatch, Microsoft’s acquisition of Nokia’s handset division, and the next version of Android, will be largely forgotten. I also expect there won’t be too much chatter about who the next CEO of Microsoft might be, unless Ballmer’s successor is suddenly announced. But you can bet the critics will be ranting about Apple, and how the new iPhones aren’t innovative enough. Oh well!