It wasn’t so many years ago that the sales for any Apple product were mostly in the single digits. The Mac was a niche computer, a plaything for the well-heeled or for temperamental content creators. “Real” people used Windows, and Mac users really needed to get with the program.

For many years, Apple and “beleaguered” were frequently mentioned in the same phrase, and death watches were frequent. Yes, Steve Jobs made a huge number of changes to shore up the bottom line when he took over the company some months after the purchase of NeXT, Inc. in 1996. But maybe he was just postponing the inevitable by a few years, or so the critics claimed.

The sea changes began with the introduction of the iPod in 2001. How could anyone seriously consider paying $399 for a digital music player, the skeptics said. But Apple persevered, even moving iTunes to the Windows market to attract the larger number of potential customers who didn’t use Macs.

Continue Reading…

If you can believe some of the published reports, Apple is on the verge of releasing a smaller version of the iPad, supposedly to cater to a different user base, or at least address the needs of customers who can’t afford $399 for the iPad 2, or a starting price of $499 for the third-generation model. But is that a real possibility?

According to some published rumors, Apple has been sampling displays for smaller iPads for quite a while now, so it’s only inevitable that one of these products goes into production. Or at least that’s the theory.

The facts may be otherwise. Even if those reports are correct, Apple will routinely test all sorts of products and possible model configurations. Testing guarantees nothing. Loads of prototypes may be discarded before a final version is approved. At the same time, Steve Jobs once made a huge deal about the lack of usability of a 7-inch tablet, which is a common size used by Apple’s competitors. The things your fingers can do comfortably on a 9.7-inch display become very difficult when you only have 40% of the available real estate. And, yes, I realize a 7-inch tablet is a lot easier to carry with one hand.

Yes, the 3.5-inch iPhone lets you do amazing things for its size, but a tablet is meant as a far more flexible device. You are, after all, expected to use it to replace a regular personal computer under many situations. A smaller tablet may suit for reading books, or maybe for some games, but it’s not a general purpose mobile computer. Apple isn’t selling such a gadget.

Sure, Apple has denigrated a product or product category, only to come up with a solution a few months or years later. Consider how Steve Jobs lambasted the wireless handset industry; that is, until Apple found a solution with the iPhone. The Mac mini arrived only weeks after Apple executives said they wouldn’t build a cheap Mac to compete with entry-level PC boxes, because such computers were junk. But obviously the Mac mini was meant to exist in a market segment a step up from what Apple regarded as junk.

So I suppose it’s always possible that Apple will see a need for a smaller tablet, and fill that need. Recent rumors suggest 7.85 inches, because such a tablet can comfortably display the same number of pixels as the current iPad 2, with a pixel size close to the original iPhones, and thus iOS developers wouldn’t have to make custom versions of their apps. Well, maybe they’re right.

But Apple is also selling as many new iPads as they can make. Even when production matches demand — as it will in maybe a few more weeks — that doesn’t mean there will be a need for other sizes.

It’s also true that Apple doesn’t live in the same universe as other tech companies. A Dell or HP or a Samsung will build loads of different models, in all sizes, expecting success from sheer volume alone.

Of course building too many models, and releasing them too often, only confuses the customer. You want the latest and greatest Android smartphone or tablet? Well, you can hurry on over to your favorite dealer, buy one today, and find that it’s obsolete tomorrow. I gather HTC is trying to contain model proliferation, but that leaves loads of companies who still don’t get it.

Some suggest that Apple has too few models, and doesn’t reach all possible markets. Aside from building custom gear for everyone, it would be impossible to meet every conceivable dream and desire. Apple’s success is built on creating products in markets where they can make a difference, and with a very few configurations that appear to offer the best value to customers. In exchange, they have become the number one tech company on the planet, and the most valuable company of any size in terms of market cap. Clearly Apple’s strategy has succeeded.

That doesn’t mean that there will never be a smaller iPad, or an iPad mini if you will. It may well be that Apple will see other companies selling loads of smaller tablets over time, or see a market where a smaller form factor has potential. Maybe a smaller tablet, meant to dock with a TV via AirPlay and an Apple TV, would be suitable for gaming, and deliver a decent book reading experience too when you’re relaxing in that easy chair or sofa. Maybe a souped up iPod touch will be the answer.

If iPad sales were to flatten or decline, it’s a sure thing Apple will consider other possibilities, and one of those possibilities might be the smaller version. But I do not pretend to have any inside information about an iPad mini, or even an Apple connected TV for that matter, even though rumors persist that such a beast will see the light of day later this year or early in 2013. As far as a larger iPhone is concerned, there’s a limit to how big a smartphone can get before it becomes ungainly and can’t be easily carried in a normal-sized shirt or pants pocket.

When and if Apple delivers a different sized iPad, you’ll see the online chatter increase, and mainstream journalists will begin to present reports from alleged sources inside Apple. Apple may even pull a “one more thing” stunt at a future media event. You haven’t seen those in quite a while, but color me skeptical.

You know that, when a company turns out hundreds of thousands or millions of copies of a product, some will be defective out of the box. Others will fail a short time later. Despite the ubiquity of extended warranties to protect you after the initial warranty is up, some are skeptical. The theory goes that failures due to a defective part will occur early in the product’s lifecycle. Or at least that’s the theory.

In the real world, though, you wonder whether quality control is just getting worse these days.

Take my son’s 2008 black MacBook, which has suffered from as many component failures as you can possibly have on such a product. He’s required replacements of the battery, keyboard, logic board, and even the LCD display. Fortunately, he also had an AppleCare policy, but the latter problem occurred several weeks after the three-year warranty period expired. But Apple support was nice enough to, upon reviewing the note-book’s dreadful repair history, agree to replace the display free of charge. There’s something to be said about getting extended warranties on portable computers.

Maybe that holds true for an iPhone as well. Nowadays, Apple will charge you $99 for AppleCare on an iPhone, which doubles the one-year warranty. But here’s the best part: “Coverage for up to two incidents of accidental damage, each subject to a $49 service fee.” So you can drop it twice, suffer substantial damage, and be assured you will get a low-cost replacement. The third time, however, you’re on your own.

That deal may seem expensive when you consider a basic iPhone 4s starts at $199 with a two-year wireless contract, but AT&T’s warranty insurance scheme is far worse. They will charge you $10 per month, meaning you’ll pay $240 over the period of the contract. But replacements carry a $99 deductible. They may even lie to you about whether you can get AppleCare after the day of purchase. Actually, you have 30 days, in the U.S., to buy AppleCare direct from an Apple Store, but your iPhone has to be checked at an Apple Genius Bar first to make sure you haven’t trashed it already. I understand this policy differs in other countries, so check with your nearest Apple dealer or Apple’s site to be sure.

None of this means that Apple’s quality control has declined. My son has dragged along his MacBook on trips around the world, so I can expect some level of abuse. In general, even the first Macintosh computer (the famous 128K) had issues, most particularly early failures of the power supply. I’m not at all certain that Apple has gotten any worse, but since they sell so many more copies of everything, the total number of defects will grow in proportion, even if the percentage of early failures hasn’t really changed.

Over the years, I’ve had problems with other consumer electronics gear. You expect a high definition TV, for example, to give years of trouble-free service. But my Panasonic plasma TV, a 2008 model, failed within weeks after the one-year warranty expired. Replacement of the power supply cost more than $400, but Panasonic relented and refunded most of it, granting me one of those infamous “one-time” exceptions.

Macworld’s Kirk McElhearn ran into real frustration with his Logitech Solar Keyboard for Mac. He wanted to be free of cables and batteries, but three early failures were just too much. He has since received a refund, and returned to a wired Apple aluminum keyboard.

I happen to have one of those Logitech keyboards here. No, it hasn’t failed — and it’s just possible Kirk’s problems stemmed from a bad production batch — but I’m not so crazy about it. The keyboard charges from ambient light, and works fine in a reasonably bright room, but it feels a bit cheap, and the keys feel sticky and mushy. I’ve set it aside and returned to keyboards from Apple and, at times, the amazing Tactile Pro from Mitias.

I have, however, encountered some severe problems with Logitech gear. A couple of years back, the mini USB port on a Harmony 890 universal remotes failed. You need that port not to charge the unit, which comes with a separate charging station, but to dock it with your Mac or PC to update the programming of the remote. After half a dozen updates, the port broke. Logitech, however, replaced everything within a few days.

In addition, my Logitech Performance MX laser mouse began to act flaky within a few months after it was put into service. Sometimes the contextual (right-click) menu would fail to appear, or it would fail to detect a signal from the USB-based “Unifying” transceiver. A replacement worked fine. Either way, I’m troubled by the fact that you receive no visible warning when the battery is depleted. You only know when it stops working, which means I have to keep a second mouse at hand just in case. I don’t recall seeing such a complaint in any of the reviews I’ve read about this mouse, though I grant I didn’t read all of them.

In the end, though, I am not expecting perfection. But I do expect that most of the gear I buy will live a reasonable life without requiring repair or replacement. I hope that’s not too much to ask.

I suppose conspiracy theories might be in order. When Consumer Reports concluded that they couldn’t recommend the iPhone 4 because of alleged reception problems if you held the handset the wrong way, they might have really expected to see sales of Apple’s smartphone plummet. But it doesn’t seem there was any impact at all, other than in the quarter before the iPhone 4s came out. That was when customers apparently remained on the sidelines awaiting the new model, not because CR had anything to say about it.

That’s quite a difference from the auto industry. When CR downgrades a motor vehicle for severe handling defects — a few models nearly overturned during emergency handling tests — you can bet manufacturers will take notice. Within days after a certain Toyota was attacked for defect of this sort, the onboard programming was reworked for the electronic stability control (ESC) to set things right. But you do wonder, in passing, how Toyota missed such a critical product defect during quality control testing.

Now when Honda redesigned the compact Civic for 2012, CR found the car to be far inferior to the previous model, and thus couldn’t recommended it. Their criticisms were more pointed than most car magazines, which basically said the new Civic was all right, if nothing special, in most respects. Even though Civic sales have actually increased this year, Honda has taken notice and they are rushing out an update for the 2013 model to, one expects, address some of CR’s concerns.

But that’s the car business. With the iPhone, Apple didn’t pay attention to CR’s non-recommendation. The customers didn’t either, obviously, or not in any significant way.

Now I wouldn’t presume to judge the value of CR’s criticisms of the Civic. I took a test drive in it just once and didn’t notice the jiggly ride the magazine’s reviewers complained about. I’m not an auto expert, but a poor ride would be immediately noticeable, and it wasn’t. Yes, the car was boring so far as it goes, but that’s not unusual for a Honda.

On the other hand, when it comes to smartphones, CR just didn’t get it. Yes, the iPhone 4 exhibited a significant loss of sensitivity when you covered the junction of the two antennas at the lower left, unless it was protected by a case. The problem was easy to replicate, especially in a poor signal area. But they totally ignored the fact that other mobile handsets displayed similar symptoms, but usually when held in somewhat different ways. Loads of people documented those problems, revealed in YouTube videos. For a time, Apple did as well, but, after a few weeks, withdrew their own demonstration videos.

The problem appears to be due to the fact that CR apparently looked for signal loss in one region of the iPhone 4, and thus failed to realize that, despite the massive amount of evidence already available, other phones could be made to suffer from signal loss only with different types of death grips. To them, there could be only one.

Now CR tried once again to get in front of the debate when some people complained that the new iPad ran hot. One of their representatives went on a cable TV news show to talk about the problem, but that was ahead of the magazine’s own testing. While stressing the iPad to the max could deliver temperatures of up to 116 degrees when the unit was connected to a battery charger, that wasn’t deemed sufficient to make it really hot to the touch. Heaven help anyone who tries to drink a reasonably warm cup of coffee or tea.

Other publications managed no better than 100 degrees at the extremes, although this was 10 degrees or so warmer than the iPad 2. But this was easy to understand, since the third generation iPad draws a lot more current because of the Retina Display and beefier graphics chip. Despite clear expertise at keeping their gadgets relatively cool, it’s not that Apple can violate the laws of physics.

More interesting, however, are the temperature tests of other tablets that indicate the difference between them and the new iPad is, at best, a slight to none. Under normal use and service, those variations wouldn’t be terribly noticeable. As these tests are repeated and published, it makes CR look more and more foolish. Clearly, they targeted Apple, hoping, perhaps, to find a serious defect and gain more attention than they received when they messed up the iPhone 4 test.

Now Antennagate did resonate with the public for perhaps a few weeks. When Apple got in front of the problem with the offer of a free bumper for anyone who cared, that pretty much ended the controversy, such as it was. Oh, yes, there was that class-action lawsuit where, at the end of the day, winning consumers got — a free bumper. Or $15, which is roughly half the price of the bumper, if they preferred. I didn’t check to see how much the ambulance chasing lawyers received for that winning gambit, but it’s probably in the millions.

As for CR, with an apparent recommended rating looming for the iPad 3, it’s clear they won’t be able to hurt that tablet’s amazing sales. The only way for Apple to fail now, assuming product strategy and marketing remains top-tier, is for someone else to build a better mouse trap. But as the iPad gains more and more acceptance with both consumers and businesses, the window of opportunity is closing fast, with or without CR’s help.