Without letup, the rumors persist that Apple plans to boost the size of the iPhone’s display when a new model is introduced this fall. A few sites have begun to consider the consequences of that change, should it occur. But it’s not that Apple normally looks backwards when changing products, which is why the cases for iPods, iPhones and iPads would be rendered obsolete by a major case redesign.

But the current iPhone design first appeared in 2010, so changing it in the fall of 2012 isn’t as disrupting as it might have been if the iPhone 4s became the iPhone 5. Accessory makers have had plenty of time to profit from the existing designs. The real issue is how developers would be impacted should the next iPhone receive a larger display.

Now the cheap way out would be to just reduce the space above and below the screen, keep the case the same size, but increase the display’s diagonal measurement to four inches. That’s the cheap way out, and I don’t think Apple would play that game because it would represent far too much of a change for existing iPhone apps. The move to the Retina Display was mostly one of adding higher resolution artwork, but otherwise allowing apps to be the same visible size.

Once the screen ratio changes from 3:2 to something else, even if it makes widescreen videos look prettier, developers have to redesign apps to conform. They’d either have to build a “universal” version to accommodate both sizes, or provide a separate downloadable version, a so-called “large display” variation. Apple would be encouraging a level of fragmentation, shades of Android. To be fair, the Android situation is far, far worse, but I’d like to think that Apple doesn’t want to go there.

Instead, a larger iPhone display, should it happen, will likely retain the same 3:2 ratio. It would require careful redesign to keep the case from growing too large. It’s even possible that Apple might be constrained to choose something less than four inches, say 3.75 inches, which would at least satisfy some of the people who demand a larger iPhone screen. The key here is convenience and portability. You shouldn’t be forced to don a clown uniform to fit an iPhone in your pants pocket. Unfortunately, product reviewers, such as Consumer Reports magazine, don’t concentrate on such potential shortcomings in giving a smartphone a favorable rating. And forget about a 3D screen, please!

When it comes to the next generation of Mac note-books, the predictions go beyond just ditching the optical drive, which makes perfect sense, so long as external drives remain an option. Instead, some prognosticators are announcing the death of FireWire and Ethernet. If you want either, there will always be an adaptor for the Thunderbolt port. While I cannot predict what Apple will do, today’s MacBook Pros are used in workflows that require high-speed wired networks and FireWire. Keeping these ports shouldn’t affect the case size and weight of the final product, so why inconvenience people? The MacBook Air is clearly intended towards mostly portable use.

The predictions also talk of USB 3.0, which is backwards compatible to older USB versions, but I’ve seen scant mention of the emerging 802.11ac Wi-Fi standard, which will afford networking speeds that, according to the Wikipedia entry, “enable multi-station WLAN throughput of at least 1 Gigabit per second.” In other words, on a par with gigabit Ethernet. With computers and routers capable of supporting the standard — and a few 80211.ac routers are already available — the need for Ethernet will diminish. Or maybe Apple would consider moving to 10Gb Ethernet, although the hardware is still pretty expensive.

There are also the hardware configurations that some suggest Apple will discontinue. First there’s the 17-inch MacBook Pro. Yes, I gather that sales aren’t near as high as the 15-inch model, but a lot of content creators require the larger MacBook Pros for studio work in the field. People like me still want the larger screen, but it’s all about Apple’s commitment to that audience despite low sales.

The same concerns apply to the Mac Pro. The newest Xeon chips are shipping, and it would cost relatively little for Apple to develop a new model with faster processors, USB 3.0, Thunderbolt, and all the other goodies. Apple makes huge profits from the fully-outfitted Mac Pros, so there seems little incentive not to keep them available.

Sure, I suppose that Apple could amaze us all and deliver a Mac Pro in a new dress, ditching that butt-ugly cheese grater cabinet in exchange for something slim and elegant. Just the other day, I was helping a colleague resolve some problems with Final Cut Pro on a 2006 Mac Pro. As I lugged the thing down the stairs to his car, once again I was reminded of the fact that this is one overweight beast in serious need of a diet.

Now speaking of consequences, as Microsoft decides how much to charge for Windows 8, I wonder how they’d react of Apple makes Mountain Lion free. We already have the iOS precedent, and the move would encourage Mac users to upgrade real fast. It’s a sure thing Apple doesn’t have to worry so much about lost profits, but making Microsoft freak as they attempt to find a competitive price for Windows 8 would be a most enjoyable way to spend a summer.

Apple remains embroiled in serious intellectual property lawsuits. Some companies are being sued by Apple, while others are suing Apple. While there’s probably little end in sight, Apple has had some notable victories in recent weeks, but whether there’s going to be a permanent alteration in the consumer electronics business as a result is anyone’s guess.

Meantime, there are loads of products available that sorta/kinda look like they might have been made by Apple, although a closer look will reveal a few differences, and a different manufacturer’s branding. However, if you bring these clear and present resemblances to the attention of those companies, they will attempt to redirect your attention to the alleged differences. Maybe the smartphone that resembles an iPhone, more or less, has a larger screen or lets you use a stylus, as if anyone cares.

There are even rumors these days that Steve Jobs actually approved the design of a bigger iPhone as one of his final acts before his passing. As with most Apple rumors, however, the truth won’t be known until the next iPhone appears. It will either have a larger screen or it won’t. If it does, it won’t be because the competition features bigger displays on their high-end products.

Continue Reading…

Since Apple moved the last iPhone upgrade from summer to fall, it is now assumed that this timetable is set in stone.  And I won’t say postponed, because Apple never said they were following a specific upgrade schedule. In any case, five months isn’t too early to take a ride on the speculation train, and it’s really crowded.

One of the most rampant rumors is the possibility that Apple will offer the next iPhone, supposedly labeled the iPhone 5, with a larger screen, probably four inches. Now the logic behind this move — or lack thereof — will be discussed later on. There are serious design considerations to consider.

First, of course, is the aspect ratio. All iPhones up till now, with or without the Retina Display, have had a 3.5-inch screen with a 3:2 aspect radio. In contrast, the aspect radio of the iPad, all versions, is 4:3, essentially the equivalent of standard size TV. While convenient to hold, the downside is that 16:9 widescreen movies will be letterboxed. But I don’t see many customers complaining.

In any case, developers are accustomed to working within these two constraints. There are over 600,000 selections at the App Store, with over 200,000 optimized for the iPad. At the same time, developers are busy adding higher resolution artwork for their iPad apps to support the new Retina Display. Older apps don’t look bad; text is sharp, but artwork isn’t quite as crisp.

Now the supposed reason for the iPhone to move to a larger display is all about the fact that Android and Windows Phone handsets already exceed four inches, with a very few over five inches. Certainly if your eyesight isn’t as good as it used to be, you may appreciate having a bigger screen. But there is one serious tradeoff, and that’s the size of the device. The existing iPhone fits conveniently in the hands of most people, and stores comfortably in your pants or shirt pocket. It may, however, be a squeeze for a purse, as Mrs. Steinberg tells me.

Now with a 4-inch Retina Display, how does Apple configure a rumored iPhone 5? The media, tech and otherwise, usually can’t get past the screen size and seldom considers the consequences. If Apple keeps the 3:2 aspect ratio to ensure compatibility with existing apps, is the resolution changed? Or will the Retina Display just be a hair less sharp? The difference may be barely noticeable unless you look at the things side by side. But even if Apple reduces the border around the display, and maybe makes the Home button thinner, perhaps rectangular, to keep it readily accessible, the overall size of an alleged iPhone 5 has to be somewhat larger.

How large is too large for a smartphone? It’s a sure thing that Apple has been testing all sorts of designs to find the ideal (and most ergonomically suitable) configurations. That you hear of orders for a 4-inch Retina Display doesn’t necessarily mean such an animal is forthcoming. That and other sized LCD panels may be ordered simply for testing purposes.

If Apple keeps the width and extends the height to allow for a 4-inch diagonal measurement, it may be a more suitable configuration for portability. But once the aspect ratio is altered, hundreds of thousands of apps will have to be modified to remain compatible, to fit the screen properly. I’m sure many developers are already working hard enough to support the new iPad’s higher resolution screen. Does Apple really want inconvenience them even further?

Yes, I realize that the Android alternative is far more fragmented, so it’s not as if the grass is greener on the other side of the tracks.

My feeling is that, if the iPhone’s screen gets bigger, Apple will increase the unit’s size as little as possible with clever positioning of all the components. Or maybe they will decide they don’t need the media designing hardware for them, and they’ll keep the next iPhone’s display at 3.5 inches.

Certainly LTE support is a given. Supposedly the latest chipsets will be available in good quantities for an iPhone 5. One hopes they will be more power efficient, so Apple won’t be forced to enclose much larger batteries as Android smartphone makers are forced to do. The key is that battery life remain roughly the same as it is now, if not better.

The remaining features become even more speculative. The new form factor might be thinned by use of so-called in-cell technology, which combines the screen and touch sensors into a single layer. Or maybe Apple will use the extra space to house a thicker battery.

Another bit of speculation talks of haptic touch technology. Some of the recent Apple patent filings have revealed their take on that method, which is designed to provide a faux tactile feedback when you tap a button or a key on the keyboard. More advanced haptic technologies even provide a degree of flex so you believe that you are typing on a physical rather than virtual keyboard.

Other than LTE and perhaps a new case design, very little about the next iPhone is a given. And I haven’t even begun to consider what changes Apple might have in store for iOS 6. But that, at the very least, will likely be known in June at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference.

I’m sure Apple fans will agree, but consider this statement: “Without a doubt, [Microsoft CEO Steve] Ballmer is the worst CEO of a large publicly traded American company today.” Well, that doesn’t mean ALL CEOs, of course. But it’s not something that came from a Mac fan site, or even a tech commentator for the mainstream media. Instead, this pronouncement originates in a story published in a prestigious business publication, Forbes magazine, entitled “Oops! Five CEOs Who Should Have Already Been Fired (Cisco, GE, WalMart, Sears, Microsoft).” I won’t bother with the other four.

Number one, with a bullet, is Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer who, over his twelve years on the job, has utterly wrecked the company’s reputation as the dominant player in the technology industry. Yes, Windows still powers 90% of PC desktops. Yes, Office is still the most popular productivity suite on the planet. But Microsoft’s efforts to spread the joy beyond their 1990’s accomplishments have been largely unsuccessful.

One possible exception is the Xbox 360 gaming console. But that product hasn’t received a major upgrade in several years, and only became profitable after Microsoft spent billions of dollars for development and marketing. It will probably take years to recoup that loss, although the company remains highly profitable regardless because of high margins for software. In any case, it’s also true that more and more gamers are moving to mobile platforms, where Apple and the iOS reign supreme.

When it comes to other attempts to expand Microsoft’s product line, the results are highly mixed, and largely unsuccessful. The Zune music player is dead, Windows Phone remains a work in progress that remains way behind the iOS, Android, and even the declining BlackBerry when it comes to market share. Yes, the Windows Phone flagship du jour, the Nokia Lumia 900, has gotten pretty decent reviews, but it doesn’t seem to have advanced the state of the art in smartphones in any meaningful way. It’s not a runaway sales success either.

To be fair, Nokia has promised to send a review sample in the near future, so I’ll have a better opportunity to compare it side by side with my iPhone 4s to see how far Microsoft has come.

Despite the questionable prospects of the Zune/Windows Phone interface, Microsoft is betting the farm on Windows 8, which features a similar theme dubbed Metro. Due this fall, Windows 8 will take an extreme approach in melding desktop and mobile operating systems. Whether you have an ARM-based Windows 8 tablet, or a PC, the basic interface will be essentially the same. That, however, doesn’t mean that the Windows 8 tablet will be capable of running the very same software as a Windows 8 PC. Microsoft still must deal with two dissimilar processor families, which means developers will have to build separate versions of their apps.

Although Metro may fare reasonably well in the consumer market, Microsoft’s key customers are businesses, particularly larger ones, who will no doubt strenuously object to an unfamiliar work environment that will require employee retraining. I suppose Microsoft believes they are just trumping Apple’s moves to add iOS features to OS X. But they fail to realize that both Lion and Mountain Lion work in pretty much the same way as other Mac OS X versions despite the changes. Even such controversial features as reversing the direction of scrolling and hiding scrollbars can be turned off in seconds.

Microsoft’s pathetic efforts to “innovate” by substituting a ribbon for a traditional menu bar, and burying the traditional Windows interface with Metro, which dispenses with the Start menu, will only end up confusing customers. If Windows 8’s failure matches that of Vista, what does Microsoft do for an encore?

When it comes to search, Microsoft has spent billions into developing Bing. At the end of the day, recent comparison tests with market leader Google do not demonstrate any real advantage of one over the other. Sure Bing looks different. Sure, some might prefer the busier look, but at the end of the day, Bing fails to consistently deliver more accurate searches.

Worse, Microsoft’s desperate attempts to make commodity products seem new and different are sheer turn-offs. Take the latest ads for Internet Explorer 9. It’s a browser folks. Yes, MSIE 9 is more standards compliant than previous versions. But when Microsoft’s ad agency wants you to believe it makes the Web more beautiful, you just know they are clueless. A properly constructed site will look nearly the same on any browser that renders the code faithfully. It’s false advertising, but no TV station or network will refuse to carry the ads, unfortunately.

Microsoft has also tried to take common features of Windows 7 and make them seem unique. There is that TV ad that featured a father and son, showing the child taking his father’s spreadsheet and turning it into a flashy chart. But that flashy chart, with pixelated lettering, was something you could do in Office and lots of other apps way back in the 1990s. If the ad was released 15 years earlier, perhaps it would seem relevant.

Maybe if Steve Ballmer realized that it’s 2012 now, he’d make the decisions necessary to fix the company’s problems and move forward. But he’s also rich enough to sit back and enjoy his life. He’s had his day in the sun, and Microsoft’s shareholders have suffered as a result. It’s time for the board to send him home and find a qualified successor with a vision. It may not be too late for Microsoft, but it’ll require a new CEO to repair the damage.