After a couple of months of emotional complaints about the supposed poor quality of Apple’s Maps for iOS 6, Google has jumped into the fray with their own version, Google Maps for iOS. Now we can separate the men from the boys, or women from the girls (whichever you prefer). To paraphrase an early review of Google’s new app, this is supposed to be the way it should be done.

Only it wasn’t done that way by Google, who refused to provide voice-driven turn-by-turn navigation and vector-based maps for the iOS. The latter capability sharply reduces bandwidth consumption. So Apple decided to roll their own mapping service; also, no doubt, to reduce their dependency upon Google for anything.

So consider Google Maps an admission that such features should have been there all along, and not in response to any decisions by Apple.

Over the next few weeks, you’ll see hands-on comparisons, showing where one fails and the other succeeds, but since the conventional wisdom has it that Apple’s Maps is fatally flawed, you can guess who wins, regardless of the facts.

Now I think Apple would have taken less abuse had they admitted from the get-go that Maps was really a glorified public beta, not yet complete, but ready for you and I to test it and report the remaining problems. After all, Siri is still beta. Clearly Google doesn’t expect you to accept the first version of their iOS mapping app as a finished product either, since, upon first use of the turn-by-turn feature, you have to accept a disclaimer that informs you that it’s a beta. Clearly Google doesn’t want to take any chances.

In the real world, Google Maps for iOS has a clean, serviceable interface. But the displays are flat, particularly when you’re using the navigation feature, and the look is not dissimilar to the navigation interface of a car. In contrast, street names in Apple Maps appear to be embedded on thick physical plates or labels, and thus are easier to read while the car is in motion.

One key Google advantage is support for public transit. For Apple Maps, you have to use a third-party app, which may be inconvenient, but the system still works. True, app developers are no doubt happy to get the business, assuming the apps aren’t free, but it’s a sure thing that Apple will add public transit and walking features to a future version of Maps. I wouldn’t say those improvements will be there in iOS 7, but it’s clear Apple has placed high priority on fixing the critical problems.

Google made no attempt to tap into the Siri interface, assuming it would even be available. Instead, they offer their own computerized female voice, one that’s efficient and conversational but not distinctive. Unfortunately, the setup also plays havoc with the hands-free system on my Honda. Every time Google Maps has to announce an upcoming turn or the nearness to my destination, it would take over the car’s audio system, preceded and ended with a telltale beep. Worse, the information is presented in short phrases, meaning a single direction to, say, make a left turn on such and such a street in 500 feet, would involve two separate attempts to hijack the car’s audio, both surrounded by those beeps. It got to be annoying after a while.

In all fairness to Google, my first attempt to find a destination worked well enough I suppose. I took a short trip to a nearby health food store. Now when I first tried that destination with the online version of Google Maps a few weeks ago, it left me two miles short, but still on the correct street. This time, after I made the final turn in a strip mall to the store, I was told to turn right, whereas the place was actually located to my left. Had I listened to the app without thinking, I’d have ended up in a bank’s parking area.

This doesn’t mean Apple Maps fared much better. It still has that annoying tendency to identify left-turns into a mall, or the street adjacent to a mall, as a U-turn. Both apps will tell you when you’ve arrived at your destination, but usually fail to tell you in which direction, so you end up searching for the telltale signs of a retail establishment, or the address of someone’s home or apartment.

To some, the arrival of Google Maps for iOS couldn’t come soon enough, particularly if you live in Australia. Evidently, the police in Victoria were warning citizens not to use Apple Maps after some people were misdirected to a remote national park miles away from their actual destination. Samsung tried to exploit that situation with a series of showcase displays, but Apple had already fixed the problem, which was reportedly based on data sourced from the Australian government. So whom do you blame for that?

Regardless of the source of the error, Samsung jumped the gun. Australian police in the town of Colac are reportedly concerned over the efforts of Google Maps to direct drivers to a one-way road not intended for heavy traffic.

In the end, I’d consider both Apple and Google Maps to be glorified public betas, to be used with extreme caution. Unfortunately, the media’s meme favors Google Maps, and few will let you know about its beta status on the iOS platform.

I saw a photo of the Pope using an iPad to type tweets. An article on what former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is doing in his spare time describes him typing emails on his iPad. Just recently, Macworld’s Jason Snell decided to write an entire 800-word column on an iPad instead of his regular Mac, and he did it all on his touch keyboard. No accessory keyboard for him.

Now Jason boasts that he’s a very fast typist, and thus can get words to paper about as fast as they emerge from his thoughts. But the things that slow the text entry process, such as using a virtual keyboard, an old fashioned typewriter,  or just taking pen to paper, give him more time to consider those words. So the end result is an article that is, in fact, more polished in first draft form. He becomes a better wordsmith.

He makes a good point, though I’m not at all certain I’m ready to dispense with the Matias Quiet Pro keyboard that I use with my Mac, and do all the work, or even a good part of it, on an iPad or, worse, an iPhone. And, yes, I do have a 1980s-style Smith Corona electronic typewriter in the storage shed, but I doubt that I can get ink for it anymore. Besides, maybe I’m too impatient to commit those words to the screen. Besides, I can fix the problems during editing process.

But I can see where many people are finding that they really don’t need a personal computer for most chores. Sure there’s the heavy lifting of content creation, such as editing audio and video, and other tasks that still cannot be done very well, or at all, on a tablet. That seems to validate the contention made by Steve Jobs a couple of years back that the PC is the truck designed for heavy lifting, and fewer and fewer people need one.

It certainly explains Microsoft’s desperate push to make the Surface tablet relevant. Already there are published reports that production and distribution will be increased in the hope that modest sales will become less modest.

At the same time, PC sales are falling, and PC tablets have made very little dent in the market. Apple still controls a huge portion of the tablet space, and the only possible downside is the fact that iPad mini production hasn’t quite caught up with demand, which may depress sales somewhat, as more and more customers decide the smaller iPad is just right for them. There’s speculation, in fact, that the iPad mini may earn the larger portion of sales over time, and that state of affairs might well be accelerated when Apple adds a Retina display. My belief is that it’ll happen with a product refresh in the first half of 2013.

Even though the PC market is depressed, it does appear that Apple is doing all right with Macs, though late delivery of the 2012 iMac isn’t helping. While the 21.5-inch version is available without too long a wait, the 27-inch model is just beginning to reach customers who placed orders at the end of November, and delivery for new orders has been moved off to January. So it’s not going to help this quarter’s sales all that much. But 80% of Macs sold these days are note-books anyway, so maybe it won’t be so bad.

The larger question, though, is whether more and more people will just hold on to their personal computers for longer periods, and not upgrade until the product can no longer run current operating systems or software. When they want a second device, it may well be a tablet.

In the Steinberg household, my wife has embraced the iPad with a passion. Barbara takes it with her around the house, and is regularly checking email, typing short messages, and searching and reading stuff online. She can handle my Mac grudgingly, but it’s not her cup of tea. She’s not alone. She’s following the post-PC market in a very practical way.

But this doesn’t mean that the traditional PC, Mac or Windows, is on the way out. Perhaps in the same fashion as the iPod, PCs will sell to an increasingly smaller audience. More and more customers, at home or at work, will choose a tablet or even a smartphone. That’s where the real innovation is happening, and it surely explains why Microsoft is desperate to boost Surface tablets sales.

If the Surface is ultimately seen as unsuccessful, and if Windows 8 fails to catch on in a big way, Microsoft will have to find a second act really soon. Otherwise, the market will likely pass them by. This is not the same as in the 90s, where Microsoft had the time to make Windows usable. Time isn’t on their side this time. While the enterprise and PC power users will continue to embrace Windows for a long time, surveys show a surprisingly amount of would-be buyers prefer an iPad or a Mac.

It’s the sort of thing that is no doubt giving Steve Ballmer nightmares, assuming he has a realistic grasp of the situation. And that may be the real problem.

Even though Apple CEO Tim Cook didn’t actually say anything new about whether there’s going to be an Apple smart TV in our future, he said enough in recent interviews to restart speculation. Since there was obviously nothing new this year in Apple’s TV initiatives, other than a new version of Apple TV with 1080p resolution, and some software updates, maybe it’s all been pushed off until 2013.

Or maybe not.

Now it’s certainly true that Apple has spooked not just the media but the rest of the tech industry. Earlier this year, no less than Lenovo, one of the top-tier PC makers, was demonstrating a smart TV at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. The Lenovo K-series consists of four models in 42-inch and 55-inch sizes, running Google’s Android OS. But don’t rush to your TV store to try one out, since they are only available in China. At least so far.

How they’d fare in the U.S., assuming Lenovo decided to expand distribution, is anyone’s guess, since there’s already a surfeit of TV sets here. And it’s not as if Google has done well with TV interfaces, particularly when you consider the huge failure of Google TV.

At the same time, TV makers continue to drop prices to compete, and that doesn’t necessarily mean the sets are bad. In fact, I recently had a look at a 50-inch VIZIO E-Series LED TV, which lists for $699.99, and is sold by some of the mass market discounters, such as Walmart, Sam’s Club and Costco. It’s not 3D, but offers a reasonable set of online apps, such as Netflix and Hulu Plus, par for the course with smart TVs these days. Despite the cheap price, the in-store demonstration unit was impressive, with a bright, crisp picture that displayed decent uniformity with a reasonably wide viewing angle. I might even get one from VIZIO to test, but the point is that this is the mainstream TV set nowadays. Where does Apple fit in?

One industry analyst, Katy Huberty of Morgan Stanley, suggests that Apple could sell 13 million smart TVs next year in the U.S., at an average price of $1,060 each. I would presume that Apple would offer some of the common sizes, such as 42-inch, 50-inch, possibly 60-inch. But that price of admission would seem pretty cheap, since it’s no more expensive than a mid-line Panasonic plasma these days.

Isn’t Apple supposed to be the provider of premium-priced gear?

More to the point, other than an iOS-inspired interface, based on the Apple TV or perhaps more inclusive, what would Apple offer to tempt you to pay a little bit more for something with their logo on it? A Web cam?

Would it have a better picture than existing sets, some sort of improved technology to render deep blacks, smooth action scenes, and a very wide viewing angle? And how does Apple differentiate such features from the pack? These days, only a small number of really cheap sets offer a less-than-good picture.

Now, except for a handful of really expensive models, TV sets these days come in a variation of LCD or plasma. LCD is the technology used on Apple’s existing displays, as you know. But the original flat panel sets relied on plasma. Rather than discuss the technology, let me just say that the best plasmas offer beautiful pictures, with deep blacks and a virtually unlimited viewing angle. The latter is important for families that crowd around the “tube,” and don’t want to keep their heads in a vice.

At the same time, plasmas are prone to reflections, and may not play as bright as LCD. You’ll also find that power consumption can be a lot higher, and they surely run hotter. I have a 2008 Panasonic 50-inch plasma, one of the entry-level models, and it can warm the master bedroom all by itself. Really.

Over the years, LCD, with LED backlighting and other enhancements, has come really close to plasma in many ways, such as improved black levels and wider viewing angles, while offering much lower power consumption. So I suspect that, if Apple plays the smart TV game, it’ll be some variation of LCD, particularly if they want to remain environmentally friendly and keep power consumption down.

The other element is sound. The audio on most sets, even with faux surround sound, is passable, but seldom compelling. Many of you buy separate sound systems, and that makes sense. Perhaps the most interesting answer to mediocre TV audio is the Bose VideoWave II, which offers a built-in tricked out speaker system in 46-inch and 55-inch versions. But the cheapest model is $4,999, and it’s very doubtful Apple would want to play that game.

In saying that, however, it would be nice to see Apple find a better answer to TV sound, even modestly better. But this is hardly where Apple hopes to make a difference in the TV business. Indeed, other than the interface, which doesn’t require a full-blown TV to implement, where does Apple strut its stuff? Would the Apple logo and the iOS-inspired look and feel be sufficient to get 13 million people in the U.S. to buy one the very first year? And is that sufficient reason to build one?

I can see where Apple can make a bundle in the TV business. But I still wonder what they would contribute to the industry beyond what an Apple TV set top box can offer.

You’d think that, with the release of Windows 8 on October 26, there would have been a whole new generation of innovative ideas from PC makers to exploit the features of the new OS. The Microsoft Surface RT was meant as the “design point,” according to Steve Ballmer, supposedly meaning that it would inspire other companies to take the concept to the next level and beyond.

Of course, it’s also true that there’s no evidence of much of an uptake of PC tablets, including the Surface. Certainly it’s not for want of trying. Microsoft is clearly spending a bundle to promote the ARM-based tablet, with little indication that customers have demonstrated much interest.

When it comes to other PC makers, you’re seeing the usual melange of swivel displays and convertible tablets, all assuming that you want a single all-purpose device that will function as a traditional note-book and, when you push, pull, or swivel it appropriately, morph into a tablet that is worthy of competing with the iPad.

In other words, the jack of all trades, but master of nothing.

Consider one TV ad I saw, designed to extol the virtues of a PC note-book’s video conferencing features. It’s not at all certain how those features are equal to or superior to Apple’s FaceTime. They just are, presented as something altogether new and different and a means to enhance your social networking, I suppose. But before the recipient manages to actually get hooked up, you see some weird swivel routine to get the note-book ready. Not just popping open the cover and letting it wake from idle mode, but some requisite movement of the display to make it suitable for the intended purpose.

In passing, I wonder how many times the actors in those ads have to rehearse those swivel maneuvers before they can make it look easy and not a clumsy exercise with potentially frustrating results.

But I think the ads for Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser are worse, since the pitch is all about a more beautiful Internet, which is downright absurd in the scheme of things. Any standards compliant browser, as I’m sure you know, should render sites identically. What makes MSIE better? Does it mangle sites to emphasize bright colors? Surely Microsoft has given up hopes of trying to enforce proprietary Web standards, or maybe the producers of those ads didn’t get the memo.

Certainly Microsoft and their PC partners, not to mention Intel, can’t take a whole lot of comfort in the prospects for PCs this holiday season. Reports still point to reduced sales, while Macs are doing noticeably better. The expected surge in sales because of the arrival of Windows 8 has yet to materialize, even though Microsoft claimed sales of 40 million licenses in the first month. But since that figure includes OEM sales to manufacturers that may not represent units distributed, let alone sold, it’s not a very promising number.

What will really count is the number of reorders. Will they drop precipitously? Will PC owners, both home and business users, prefer to stick with Windows 7?

And where does Microsoft take the Surface? The Intel-based model has been announced for January release, and it’s going to be priced in the range of an ultrabook note-book with similar or inferior battery life. Other than size and weight, where is the Surface’s advantage? What, for example, happens to the few who bought the ARM version, the Surface RT, and find they cannot run the same apps on the “professional” version?

Then again, what about existing Surface RT users who find they cannot run traditional Windows apps because it has the “wrong” processor? This is the sort of confusion that doesn’t happen in the iOS and Android universes, since people realize they are buying devices with customized mobile operating systems that aren’t meant to run the same apps they can run on a desktop computer.

This doesn’t mean that there is no potential for Windows 8 whatever. It’s quite possible that, if customers take the time to get used to the changes, they might embrace the new OS and lots and lots of optimized Windows 8 apps. Or they might become sick and tired of the confused, schizophrenic interface and ask for a refund.

My personal encounters with the release version of Windows 8, running under Parallels Desktop on my Mac, have been mixed. Before the PC users in our audience ask, yes performance is really, really good, but the constant visual changes in some of those tiles, particularly the ones related to social networking and email, can get distracting after a while. Apple’s notifications on the iOS and Mountain Lion are nowhere near as obtrusive. Other than the lock screen on your iPhone or iPad, they just present themselves and generally get out of the way (depending on the preferences you set).

On a Windows Phone, I suppose the interface is OK if you just want to take a quick glance at your smartphone, and get on with your business. That’s a preference. I prefer to use my iPhone for more than a casual glance, and the same is true for my Mac.