After totally losing it when iPhone X sales turned out to be spectacular, based on Apple’s financials, some critics just kept the fake news going, finding little tidbits here and there to buttress their false claims. So there was the implication that iPhone X supplies caught up with demand within weeks not because Apple is efficient and understands the supply chain, but that customers weren’t willing to pay $999 and up for a smartphone.

Did dealers suddenly find themselves with lots of unsold stock? Doesn’t seem so, but didn’t supply chain orders decrease ahead of the March quarter? What could that possibly mean — well except that sales are normally lower after a holiday quarter for Apple. This supply chain nonsense has persisted for several years, and has been shown to be total nonsense beyond normal seasonal trends.

Apple CEO Tim Cook has lectured industry analysts that you cannot make guesses about supply and demand of any Apple gadget based on some scattered metrics from the supply chain.

Sure, Cook will always put positive spins in less-than-favorable news, which is to be expected, but he has been shown to be correct too, so he has to be taken seriously.

Now it’s also true that Apple expects iPhone sales to grow in double digits this quarter, even though total guidance is lower than Wall Street expected. But that doesn’t mean they were right and Apple isn’t doing as well as it should. Just as analysts, so called, may lowball Apple revenue, the reverse may be true as well. Is that supposed to be Apple’s fault?

So what about the 2018 iPhones? Will there be significant changes this fall? What about an updated iPhone SE with a slightly larger display and more powerful parts? An iPhone SE II?

The chatter about the iPhone X has also been somewhat confused. You expect it’ll be replaced by something this fall. One piece of speculation has it that the existing model will be discontinued, not priced down and kept on. Perhaps. But Apple has tended to just keep older models available over the years to give customers more affordable alternatives.

What about the iPhone 8 and the iPhone 8 Plus? Will they be one-offs, discounted, or replaced by an iPhone 9 family?

The rumors appear to be coalescing on three new models. There will be an iPhone X Plus scaled up with a 6.5-inch display. Does that mean a sale price of $1,099, or will the regular iPhone X refresh be $100 cheaper, with the larger model occupying the $999 price point. At the same time, it seems the Samsung Galaxy S9 and its “+” version are going to be more expensive than last year.

The third iPhone will reportedly stick with LCD, but will feature a similar design to the iPhone X, with a 6.1-inch edge-to-edge display and Face ID. All will use A12 processors and other more powerful parts, perhaps including 5G broadband support. It also means the notch is here to stay unless a way is found to embed Face ID beneath an OLED display.

If true, it’ll still represent perhaps the largest changes to the iPhone lineup in years.

Obviously it’s early in the game. We’ll know a whole lot more in the weeks to come, and these guesses may end up being very different when the products are finalized. But if true or close to being true, it would mean that Apple is confident in the new direction of the product heralded by the iPhone X. If it was so unsuccessful as some of the chronic Apple critics suggest, why would the key design and product features be kept on and not replaced with something now, or reverting to something previously done?

As you might imagine, Apple doesn’t just throw products together, which was a silly claim used to explain the switchover from Touch ID to Face ID on the iPhone X. Don’t forget that Apple bought PrimeSense, whose 3D technology was useful in developing the TrueDepth camera, in 2013. The iPhone X arrived four years later, so it’s clear that Apple took its time to coalesce different technologies to perfect a viable facial recognition system.

Very likely other smartphone makers are using Face ID as the guidepost to building similar capabilities. But not yet! The Samsung Galaxy S9 has the promise if better biometrics, but nothing that appears to be in the league of Face ID.

I’m not going to provide much in the way of comments about the new Samsungs until they are actually tested by independent reviewers. But I suppose I should mention tests from Anandtech, in which the new Galaxy handsets scored well below current iPhones, and sometimes below the iPhone 7.

Clearly Samsung can build chips with more powerful specs, but those specs evidently fail to perform much better. Indeed I noticed one test in which a Samsung Galaxy S9+ scored below one version of the Galaxy s8.

But since the tests were run on a demo version displayed at a trade show, I’ll await more complete results with shipping models.

Meantime, if Apple does anything close to what’s been speculated so far, the future of the iPhone will continue to be extremely positive.

It has been demonstrated over the years that comparing an iPhone with a top-of-the-line competitor from the world of Android, particularly the next Samsung Galaxy, on specs alone isn’t terribly productive. Raw numbers involving CPU ratings and RAM don’t really tell you much about actual performance, and the existence of a feature doesn’t tell you how well it works.

That said, a certain Macworld blogger, who has, in the past, suggested that Apple add a free ad-driven tier to Apple Music to boost paid memberships and other ill-informed nonsense, is at it again with a “Spec showdown” involving the iPhone X, the iPhone 8 Plus and the Samsung Galaxy S9+.

The expectation is that you can make your selection based on raw numbers alone, with prices that aren’t altogether different. Some of the asides are just plain lame.

So, “If you love the notch, you’ll love the iPhone X.” Or maybe you’ll tolerate its presence and, eventually, get used to it. This hardly seems to be the deal killer. Yet, the blogger concludes that “if you hate the notch, go with the S9+.” What about the iPhone 8 Plus? Why go Samsung, and move to a totally different operating system? Indeed, the OS isn’t mentioned, meaning it’s assumed you already know and it’s a side issue. Besides, Samsung hasn’t made such a big deal of the benefits of Android in its new products.

Of course, Consumer Reports takes a similar attitude, but I expected better of Macworld.

At least there’s one smart comment that the blogger attempts to contradict in subsequent paragraphs. So, “specs don’t tell the whole story.” He then goes on to explain that the problem with the iPhone 8 Plus display is that “it’s hardly fresh, having been used in the past four generations of iPhone.”

Does that mean it’s bad? No, although there are clear advantages of OLED displays, although the purchase prices are higher. But it isn’t a matter how often a particular display design is used. Besides, Apple has made changes along the way, such as True Tone and a wider color gamut. So he’s wrong! It may still be the same technology, but that doesn’t mean Apple hasn’t made improvements. A look at the spec sheet would have revealed this fact, and isn’t that article about specs?

But the worst admission is that all these comparisons are being done with one product not even available to test. “We’ve yet to see the S9+ in action, but it’s likely to perform extremely well.”

That conclusion is largely based on numbers alone, along with an estimate of battery life based on the size of the Galaxy S9+ battery compared to the size of the batteries in the iPhone 8 Plus and the iPhone X. True, Apple has only made minor improvements to longevity over the years, but it’s not the sole reason to choose a Samsung over an Apple. There are obviously other key differences that involve usability, reliability, security and other matters that are not reflected in raw specs. So Samsung’s facial and iris detection features in the Samsung Galaxy S8 family could be easily defeated with digital photos. The updated versions might be more secure, but that won’t be known until they are given rigorous tests. Samsung is notorious for offering features that perform poorly.

Indeed, in my travels I will often ask people why they picked an Android phone, and it’s usually a Samsung, over an iPhone. While prices might enter the picture, flagship Samsungs are priced in the same range as iPhones. So it may be a platform preference, which isn’t something one can necessarily argue against even with logic. Most people who buy iPhones replace them with new iPhones. Still, a higher percentage of Android users might tend to consider iPhones, and Apple provides an app via Google Play, Move to iOS, to simplify the process. It works best for those heavily invested in Gmail and other Google features. Switching apps may not be as easy unless there’s an equivalent or at least a close match in the iOS repository, but for most people, this shouldn’t present a huge problem.

Now one area where Apple and Samsung are apt to be fierce competitors is with the cameras. Both companies do well, so any measurable or perceived differences may not be so significant for most people. That said, there has to be a reason why such A-list filmmakers as Steven Soderbergh have shot motion pictures with iPhones. It may not work so well for a $250 million super hero blockbuster, but it might suit there, too, for special scenes.

Now when the new Samsungs are out, you’ll see genuine reviews from different publications that might allow you to make a choice even if you’re not against ditching your current mobile platform. You know where I stand, but I won’t make a huge deal trying to push people to give up on what they have, although I might ask why from time to time.

Apple has been criticized from time to time for releasing new operating systems with serious bugs, or important missing features. Coming days after Tim Cook claimed, in a Fast Company interview, that Apple doesn’t release products til they’re ready, it comes across as an empty promise. After all, why advertise and demonstrate something if the deadlines can’t be met?

I don’t mean issuing an update a month or two after the product’s release, such as the original Portrait Mode on the iPhone 7 Plus which was, in fact, offered as a beta version in the iOS update in which it arrived.

Instead, I’m referring to features that are delayed for months with uncertain arrival dates, and finalizing Apple File System (APFS) for macOS is a key example.

Continue Reading…

When the rumors first arose about alleged problems embedding Touch ID in what became the iPhone X, it was painted as a technology problem. Apple couldn’t find a workable scheme to embed a fingerprint sensor beneath an OLED display, so they rushed and scrambled for a solution.

Apple, of course, ignores such claims. They have been developing facial recognition, Face ID, for several years. Then again, it’s very likely the original concept of an iPhone X didn’t exactly happen last year.

But when it comes to Apple’s original Touch ID, which debuted on the iPhone 5s in 2012, it’s existence hasn’t quite been a seamless experience. The original version wasn’t always so accurate, although iOS software updates improved things. For some, the accuracy rate would decrease over extended use, and you’d have to redo the setup every so often. With five profiles, I’d often use two for each thumb to give the system as many possibilities for accurate recognition as possible.

Nowadays, I can get maybe 90% accuracy. It gets worse when I’m just careless of where I place my thumb. Sometimes I have to revert to the passcode for my iPhone to unlock. Certainly it’s not perfect for other companies either, so perhaps Apple came to the inevitable conclusion that something better was needed, and that’s where Face ID came into the picture.

Apple claims it’s more accurate. According to its support document on the to; ic: “The probability that a random person in the population could look at your iPhone X and unlock it using Face ID is approximately 1 in 1,000,000 (versus 1 in 50,000 for Touch ID).”

In my travels, I have talked to some iPhone X owners. None of them reported any problems in configuring Face ID, or its accuracy level. Even adapting to the lack of a Home button doesn’t faze them particularly. Indeed, the manager of a local Indian restaurant who shares my interest in Macs and iPhones, was happy to instruct me on using the new gestures.

Remember that the critics were first claiming that Apple invented Face ID as an afterthought, a last-minute attempt to replace Touch ID because it wouldn’t work with the OLED display. If that were true, that all this sophisticated technology was simply tossed together in a rush act of desperation in the space of a few months, Apple’s designers must be far more brilliant that we could have anticipated. If the press of a deadline can inspire this level of creativity, what could they do if actually given enough time to do it right?

[Waiting for the sound of laughter.]

The critics also complained about all those alleged privacy problems with Face ID, morally basing such unproven claims on the quality of facial and iris recognition on the Samsung Galaxy S8, both of which can be defeated with digital photos. Face ID may not be perfect, but getting past it is no easy accomplishment.

Then again, we’re being told the iPhone X was a total fail, that demand collapsed quickly it went on sale. Even after Apple reported high demand for all its iPhones, the stories poor sales for the flagship have persisted, it’s almost as if the company’s financials don’t exist. Or maybe time has stood still and they were actually never released, or the words in them don’t exist.

It’s one of the wildest disconnects between what Apple reports and what the critics want you to believe.

Indeed some of the claims I’ve seen about iPhone sales are still inconsistent, some demonstrating good numbers, some not so good.

Industry analysts feel that Apple’s guidance for the March quarter is not as good as it should be despite the fact that it estimates double-digit growth for the iPhone compared to the year-ago quarter. At a time when smartphone sales have flattened worldwide, that Apple expects growing sales on its most popular gadget ought to be a good thing.

Then there’s an editorial from AppleInsider’s Daniel Eran Dilger that, despite its alleged success, Google is forced to spend billions of dollars for the default position on Safari for iOS and macOS, because it delivers lots of potential ad income. Remember that Google doesn’t earn much money from Android. Most of it comes from targeted ads, although some results from Google Play sales. Attempts to sell its own premium-priced smartphones under the Nexus and Pixel monikers haven’t fared so well. Apple sells more iPhones in a week than Alphabet sells Pixel phones in a full year.

And can anyone list the most important features of the last released version of Android, version 8 Oreo? I had to look it up even to find the name. What is certain is that the adoption curve is minimal, as usual, and that most Android handsets feature OS versions a year or two old, security leaks intact.

Anyway, time for me to return to the real world such as it is.