Back in the 1990s, no less than Steve Jobs said that the operating system wars were over. The victor: Microsoft, although that didn’t stop the Mac from growing and prospering over the years. However, I wonder if many of you ever thought there’d come a time when Microsoft was itself facing an era of irrelevance.

To some, I suppose it boggles the mind that Microsoft has been unable to gain traction among smartphones and tablets. For so many years, Microsoft seemed unstoppable. With well over 90% of the PC market, Apple still managed to sell more and more Macs each year, but only recently have they begun to make real headway against Windows. Even more troubling for Microsoft, however, is the fact that PCs don’t really matter as much as they used to.

Consider a new survey from Gartner, where they conclude that, by 2017, Microsoft will be doomed to irrelevance if things don’t change real soon. Their forecast claims that, in 2017, some 2.7 billion mobile devices, which include tablets and smartphones, and perhaps even smartwatches, will ship. This will be roughly ten times the number of desktop and note-book personal computers expected to be sold during the same period.

Update! Now to be perfectly fair to Gartner, which has a shaky record for accuracy, they also have a separate faux category for PCs labeled “Ultramobile,” which includes the failed Intel Ultrabook models and the MacBook Air. You can add those totals to the Windows PC totals and get a slight sales increase through 2017 if you assumed, as one misguided blogger did, that they’d all be running Windows. So far, however, the MacBook Air remains the market leader in this category.

Regardless, you can see why Microsoft is trying desperately to convince the world that the mobile and PC worlds are basically the same? That’s why they built Windows 8, with basically identical Intel and ARM versions. Consider the flagship product meant to demonstrate how this misbegotten scheme works, which are the two flavors of Surface tablets. The Surface RT is meant for ARM, while the Surface Pro is nothing more than a very thin and light PC note-book with touch capability. But Microsoft’s concept of PC-plus has been a failure.

According to recent surveys of Internet traffic, the number of users adopting Windows 8 in the first five months of availability is half the rate of Windows Vista in the same time period. Don’t forget that Vista was, up till now, regarded as the worst selling recent version of Windows, notorious for sluggish performance and driver incompatibilities, and interface changes that made little sense. So I suppose you could regard Windows 8 as Vista on steroids in the sense of not attracting new customers.

Sure, it’s fair to say that Windows 8 is fast, less resource intensive on note-books, and doesn’t seem to have serious driver issues. But the schizophrenic interface remains obtuse, and it totally lacks discoverability. Gestures and other touch features are inconsistently implemented, and poorly documented. Rather than just work for many people, Windows 8 only confuses customers, particularly when a mere click of a mouse or a wayward tap on a tile may suddenly tumble you into the desktop layer. Besides, if you want a Start menu, a traditional part of Windows, you need to install a third-party add-on.

When it comes to the mobile market, Windows Phone is growing somewhat, but not by much. It’s still all iOS and Android, and Microsoft doesn’t have a lot of time to boost the prospects of the Windows alternative. Even if some of the features seem as good or better than the competition, overall, Microsoft is still playing catch up. Why would anyone bother buying a Windows Phone handset?

When it comes to Windows 8, Microsoft is working on a refresh, code-named Blue. It may be a Windows 8.1 service pack, or something more. But it’s not at all certain, based on reports of very early betas, whether Microsoft is working full time to fix the most serious problems that ail the OS (by hill at tforge corp). The best approach may simply be to restore the Start menu, allow one to boot by default into the Windows desktop and stay there. That way, it will seem more like a Windows 7.5 release, but businesses may be more inclined to give it a try.

The customers are telling Microsoft that they made a huge mistake. Whether they will actually listen is another question entirely. But if the next profit and loss statement shows a loss or declining sales and profits, the pressure on Microsoft will increase tremendously. Microsoft may have really believed that market dominance would be theirs even when they moved beyond the PC comfort zone. Clearly that hasn’t happened, and it’s a real question how doubling down on Windows 8 can possibly change things.

But make no mistake about it. I’m not one to actually take industry forecasts seriously. The analyst companies who produce those things are inevitably wrong, sometimes by huge margins. If you believed the analysts, Windows Phone would be taking huge chunks of market share from the iOS by now, and that’s not happening. The latest surveys show that the iOS has gained ground over Android, despite claims that iPhone and iPad sales may be flagging. So maybe Microsoft will do better than Gartner predicts, but the tea leaves aren’t pointing in that direction.

What’s more, even if Apple reports flat or a small decline in sales for the March quarter, that, in itself, wouldn’t doom the company, though the stock price will continue to fall big time. Apple is still better positioned to remain prosperous for many years. Microsoft? It could be the death of a thousand cuts if things don’t change really quickly, and Microsoft is not the sort of company to change strategies, especially in a relatively short period of time.

Just as soon as I thought that discussions about Apple building a TV set had begun to die down, the rumors are back in full force. An AP report this week quotes Brian White, an analyst from Topeka Capital markets, as suggesting that the set, which he calls the “iTV,” will go on sale in the latter part of the year at estimated prices of between $1,500 and $2,500. White envisions a 60-inch version, but suggests that there would be 50-inch and 55-inch models as well.

I’m not going to bother explaining the problems using the iTV name, other than that it’s already used for a broadcasting network in the UK.

One new wrinkle in the Apple smart TV speculation is an iRing. That makes me think back to a DC comics character, Green Lantern. In the comics, and that failed movie, test pilot Hal Jordan is given a magic ring by an extraterrestrial who crashes to earth. He uses it as a focal point for his super powers.

Not to be outdone, White is speaking of using an iRing to control the TV by pointing at it and gesturing. Possible, I suppose, but I started thinking about potential family conflicts, as children and parents fought over who would be allowed to wear the “magic ring.” Or would they have several rings, and fight over who had the right to direct the TV. But I also wondered about the interface. Wouldn’t Siri voice recognition be better: “TV: Switch to channel 244.” (In case you’re wondering, on DirecTV that number takes you to the SyFy channel).

It would seem that voice recognition would work better, assuming that the internal audio system can pick up a distinct voice from, say, ten feet away. And that may be the most difficult task of all.

Now it’s not that I wouldn’t seriously consider acquiring such a beast, assuming there’s enough cash on hand, or available credit. But I also wonder whether such silly fluff as an iRing would be sufficient to set the TV market on its head. Just exactly what need would Apple hope to fill?

Let’s for example, take a look what’s involved in setting up a typical smart TV. Last week, VIZIO sent me a review sample of one of their newest budget 3D models, the $899 E551D-A0, which should be available from Amazon and the usual consumer electronics outlets shortly. As the model number implies, it’s a 55-inch set, with all the bells and whistles, including edge-lit LED, loads of picture adjustment settings, and a bunch of apps.

When you turn on the set for the first time, you’re taken to a serviceable setup assistant that you manage with the scrolling buttons on the remote. Unlike some other VIZIO sets, there is no keyboard at the rear of the remote, so you are forced to click OK in a text field to bring up an onscreen keyboard. In case your wondering, even an Apple TV uses on onscreen keyboard.

After about five minutes or so, I had completed the basic setup routine, which includes logging into my Wi-Fi router, so I could use the bundled apps and receive firmware updates as needed from VIZIO. There’s nothing about this interface scheme that should confuse even the novice user if you just pay attention to each step. The back button on the remote lets you return to a setting if you think it was messed up.

One way to use the smart features is to press the app button on the remote (resembling the VIZIO logo), which loads an app display at the bottom of the screen. You almost think of the dock on OS X, except that these app icons are rectangles. Use the right and left arrows on the remote to scroll through the list. Press OK to launch an app. The rest of the functions depend on the app’s interface. There are also dedicated buttons for Amazon Instant Video, Netflix, and M-Go. Making changes in picture and audio settings is done with an interfaces similar to what you find on other affordable TVs.

So far so good.

But the real problem occurs when you want to integrate a set with your other connected devices. Say you have a typical home theater setup that includes your smart TV, cable/satellite box, Apple TV, maybe a game console or two, plus a surround sound audio system. Now there are universal remotes that promise to sort through this mess, only they can be difficult to program. Consider the problem I faced getting a Logitech Harmony 900 remote to support the VIZIO’s input changing scheme. No, there’s nothing strange about the layout, but it still confounds all efforts I’ve made to program the Harmony.

I don’t expect Apple to replace all those devices. But Apple may be the only company to figure out how to sort through this mess, perhaps with an enhanced auto learn routine that will figure out all the proper commands and integration techniques without forcing you to be a programmer. And not make constant mistakes, which is the other issue you might confront even after your universal remote is properly programmed.

I don’t assume managing multiple devices is the only serious problem with the current TV setup and connection routine. But it’s a start.

The media has made a big deal out of a report quoting an Apple official as saying that Steve Jobs approved the next two iPhone revisions before he died. If true, that would be treated as some sort of spectacularly unexpected revelation. The assumption has been that everything Steve Jobs did for Apple ended on his death bed.

So, therefore, with Apple’s resident genius gone, Tim Cook has been unable to recreate the magic. Or at least that’s what many suggest.

The truth is, of course, more complicated. Knowing his time was short, it makes sense for Jobs to use much of his remaining strength to work on possible future products for Apple. There’s one report, obviously not confirmed, suggesting that Apple had four years of green lit products on the table when Jobs passed in 2011. So we are not even halfway through that cycle, but it stretches credibility to think that Apple isn’t also working on products that extend farther into the future.

At the same time, media and financial pundits are complaining that Apple should have introduced some sort of trendsetting product by now, and every single day without such a product, or at least a media event invitation, is seriously hurting the company. As usual, they forget the six-year lapse between the introduction of the iPod and the iPhone, or the three-year interval between the iPhone and the iPad. I guess we all have to assume that the pace of creativity has thus accelerated, and Apple should have had something completely new by the end of 2011. They are late to the party then, or so some say.

Regardless of what products Steve Jobs approved, here is a reality check: Development or production bottlenecks may mean that the final product will change substantially from the original concept. Quite possibly, Apple’s designers and engineers will make ongoing changes. As you no doubt recall, Jobs supposedly cautioned his team that they should never ask what he would do. That was the mistake made by Disney Company after their founder’s death. So even if Jobs gave the OK for a specific product, that doesn’t mean Apple must release it precisely as intended. The state of the industry and ongoing development may take the concept and move it into a totally different direction. The product envisioned in 2011 may be irrelevant in 2013 or 2014.

At the same time, isn’t it curious that the same standards aren’t being applied to the power company of this year, Samsung? What markets has Samsung revolutionized? Smartphones? No way. Sure, the Galaxy S3 may have exceeded the iPhone in sales for a quarter, but how is it really innovative? It works well enough with mostly generic hardware, as will the forthcoming Galaxy G4. Samsung has some apps that might have some buzz to them, if they work properly, but aren’t they simply following the mold set by the iPhone? The same is true for Samsung’s tablets.

When it comes to TVs, again Samsung makes some of the best flat panels on the market, both LCD and plasma. Reviewers praise them, but it’s not that they are all that different from the competition. You could buy LG, Panasonic and VIZIO instead and get a great value for your money. What does Samsung really bring to the table in terms of real innovation and not some flashy but useless bullet point feature? And, no, I don’t regard the Samsung 85-inch UHD S9, with a street price of nearly $40,000, as a game changer. It’s a toy for the rich, to be sure, and maybe the 4K or Ultra HD format may gain some traction some day.

But if Apple dared to release a $40,000 “smart” TV, they’d be rightly criticized by the media for offering an overpriced gadget that had little practical value for regular people. For Apple, anything that doesn’t sell 10 million units a year is relegated to a hobby or an area of “interest.” It may even be possible that Apple has an Ultra HD TV under development, but you’ll never see it unless the format makes sense with lots of content supporting the higher resolution, and prices become competitive with existing TVs. And, yes, I’ve heard the rumor that Apple might actually release such a beast, but I don’t believe it. At least not now.

At the same time, it may well be possible that, in saying he’d solved the problem of delivering the best TV interface ever, Jobs has already approved such a design for Apple to follow through on. But whether that statement represented a souped up Apple TV box, or a full-fledged TV, or both, won’t be known until Apple shows their hand.

Now I suppose the statement about Jobs approving future iPhones was meant to change the discussion that Apple’s creative days have come and gone. But it has the danger of simply reinforcing that impression going forward, for it spreads the belief that Apple is still living in the past.

There’s an urban legend, highly disputed, that President Obama went on an overseas apology tour during his first term. I’m not going to get into the political by-play, except to point out that Apple CEO Tim Cook has issued some very humble apologies during his term as Apple CEO. And since he also traveled to Asia as part of an outreach effort, it’s fair to say he really did go on an apology tour.

One example occurred early on when he promised that Apple would investigate reports of nasty sweat shop working conditions at the Asian contract factories Apple uses to build their stuff. The prime offender was said to be Foxconn, which, in turn, promised to clean up their act, and give all their workers healthy wage boosts.

When Apple released Maps for iOS 6, problems were legion. Whether it was a 3D image of a melting bridge, or a misdirected trip to the middle of a remote forest in Australia, there were problems that inconvenienced at least some users. True, Google Maps was far from perfect, and, in fact, the navigation feature is still listed as a beta, even on an Android smartphone. But Apple was Apple, and they had to take it. To be fair, Maps had more problems than Google, so it was well deserved.

In turn, Tim Cook issued a very heartfelt apology and shook up the company’s management. Scott Forstall, who headed the iOS division and was thus the person in charge of the Maps screwup, got the boot. One reason, aside from his reportedly abrasive personality, was his alleged refusal to sign the Mapgate apology letter. In passing, Maps has reportedly undergone steady improvements, and, in a recent informal face-off involving several tech pundits, emerged triumphant against Google Maps.

The most recent Cook apology letter was written in Chinese since it went to Apple’s customers in China. Seems the company has been roughly criticized for problems in handling warranty claims. In short, Apple allegedly replaced defective iPhones in the U.S. with a new unit, whereas defective iPhones in China received parts replacements. In the real world, full replacements are almost always refurbished, depending on stock, and the parts replacements in China essentially involved replacing just about everything but the rear case.

Cook’s apology letter was especially humble, in keeping with the Chinese culture, using the term “sincere apologies,” for example. He promised to do better to communicate warranty policies and enhanced repair policies for the iPhone 4 and 4S. Cook claimed that 90% of Apple’s customers in China are satisfied, and that having satisfied customers is the “most important criterion” Apple uses to judge its own success.

Yes, satisfied customers, not higher revenue and profits, and I suppose you have a right to be cynical, since pretty much all companies that deliver products and services to the public make similar claims. Believe what you will.

Now it’s not that Steve Jobs never apologized for Apple’s shortcomings, but such apologies were often indirect. So when the AntennaGate brouhaha erupted over reported reception problems with the iPhone 4 if you held the unit in a way that shielded the junction of the two antennas, Apple offered a free case. But Steve Jobs never actually apologized for the perceived performance lapses of the iPhone and, indeed, doubled down on how Apple spent $100 million to build a state of the art antenna engineering and testing facility. It wasn’t Apple’s fault, but the fault of the laws of physics. But the response was sufficient to satisfy most customers. If you didn’t like your iPhone 4, get a refund, or take the free case, which definitely shielded against the infamous “death grip” that killed reception under marginal signal conditions.

Now Cook’s more direct approach will probably get a better response in the media. Regardless, how many companies issue public apologies for real or perceived problems? Remember that Apple builds gear in the very same factories used by other tech companies, such as Dell and HP. But you don’t hear Meg Whitman of HP apologizing because assembly line workers are treated badly. Apple has to adhere to a higher standard.

Regardless, Cook’s approach to the problems in China make a whole lot of sense. That country has become a major growth center for Apple. It makes good business to make sure that customers and potential customers are treated right. A misstep may potentially result in billions of dollars of lost sales. At a time when the financial community is, wrongly or otherwise, skeptical of Apple’s future prospects, record growth in emerging markets may be the key to Apple’s future success.

Now some are also suggesting that Apple PR may be a tad more forthcoming in communicating with the media these days. That has yet to be proven, although marketing VP Philip Schiller did reach out to the press ahead of the introduction of the Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone to get Apple’s sales pitch across. Rightly or wrongly, Apple had control of the message for a day, at least until Samsung’s poorly organized media event to roll out their new flagship handset took over the conversation.

These days, though, aside from the Apple/Samsung patent fights, the conversation has returned to Apple’s real or imagined products for the coming year. Just this week, for example, an Apple executive was quoted as saying that the next two generations of iPhones were actually approved by Steve Jobs before his passing. That doesn’t tell us anything about the products, but it makes sense from a timing point of view. It also shifts the blame if the next two iPhone refreshes don’t match media expectations.