• Explore the magic and the mystery!


  • Listen to The Tech Night Owl LIVE

    Last Episode — August 24: Gene presents a regular, tech podcaster and commentator Kirk McElhearn , who comes aboard to talk about the impact of the outbreak of data hacks and ways to protect your stuff with strong passwords. He’ll also provide a common sense if unsuspected tip in setting one up. Also on the agenda, rumors about the next Mac mini from Apple. Will it, as rumored, be a visual clone of the Apple TV, and what are he limitations of such a form factor? As a sci-fi and fantasy fan, Kirk will also talk about some of his favorite stories and more. In is regular life, Kirk is a lapsed New Yorker living in Shakespeare’s home town, Stratford-upon-Avon, in the United Kingdom. He writes about things, records podcasts, makes photos, practices zen, and cohabits with cats. He’s an amateur photographer, and shoots with Leica cameras and iPhones. His writings include regular contributions to The Mac Security Blog , The Literature & Latte Blog, and TidBITS, and he has written for Popular Photography, MusicWeb International, as well as several other web sites and magazines. Kirk has also written more than two dozen books and documentation for dozens of popular Mac apps, as well as press releases, web content, reports, white papers, and more.

    For more episodes, click here to visit the show’s home page.

    When is a Rival Not a Rival?

    December 28th, 2010

    So I read a story this week from columnist Daniel Eran Dilger, writing in AppleInsider, entitled “Samsung to Rival Apple’s iPod touch with Android Galaxy Player,” and I wondered, all over again: Just what are these companies thinking? Do they not understand the difference between innovation and copying?

    Certainly, a company as successful as South Korea’s Samsung ought to know better. They are major players in a number of consumer electronics markets, such as flat panel TVs and Blu-ray players, not to mention the fact that they supply parts for loads of other companies, including Apple. So we have this always-peculiar situation where a company will compete with another in one or more product categories, yet at the same time partner with them in others.

    Now Daniel aptly and succinctly summarizes Samsung’s previous problems building competitive mobile gadgets. A Samsung mobile phone is runs pretty well, and their iPhone knockoffs, using the Android OS, are decent as such smartphones go, but not trendsetters. Indeed, Samsung is hedging its bets with its own fledgling platform, called Bada, but there’s nothing to indicate that it’s a potential game changer.

    Besides, building an iPod touch knockoff doesn’t require much creativity. It’s mostly about making a smartphone without the phone, with perhaps a slimmer form factor to justify the lack of a few parts. Or maybe not. Besides, didn’t they once call the iPad nothing more than a larger iPod touch?

    Now Samsung’s 7-inch Galaxy Tab tabloid is said to be the most compelling potential iPad killer so far, with some 600,000 sales reported during its first month of availability. But it has received middling reviews, and suffers from using a platform, the Android OS, that’s not yet certified for use on tablets. Or at least that’s what Google told its hardware partners, but those partners are clearly so desperate to produce something in response to the iPad that they don’t care. Android 3.0 will reportedly be tablet ready, and one hopes Samsung and other tablet makers will be so kind to let their customers upgrade. That’s not always a given in Android land.

    It’s also not at all certain how well the Galaxy Tab will fare on the long haul, since the launch was worldwide and no doubt reached countries where the iPad was, at that point in time, unavailable. It’s not necessarily even cheaper, unless you saddle yourself with a two-year data contract. As you recall, the iPad 3G lets you make a month-to-month deal, one that you can cancel whenever you want without an early termination penalty. That’s because there is no subsidy in the purchase price of the iPad. You pay the same whether you use a data plan or not, which is great if you only need one when traveling for limited periods during the year.

    Unfortunately, the consumer electronics industry is largely saddled with this “monkey-see, monkey-do” approach to dealing with credible competition, and Apple is always credible, even if the product in question is a “hobby,” such as the Apple TV. Once the basics are duplicated, in part, a few features are inevitably added in a usually failed bid to demonstrate superiority.

    In the days when the iPod was initially taking off, the iPod killer products would often sport FM radios or other features that Apple hadn’t included, hoping that would earn the sale, but they didn’t. These days, those other tablet computers may sport one or two cameras, not because they can make a difference in the real world, or that they have great video software available, but because the iPad doesn’t have them. At least not yet, because it’s widely reported (and expected) that the iPad 2.0 will indeed ship with one or more built-in cameras. Whether one or two is an open question, as I’m not convinced that a ten-inch tablet computer is suitable to take photos and movies, anymore than that function is flexibly achieved on a 13-inch MacBook. That’s why the MacBook only comes equipped with the front facing camera. It’s not that Apple can’t easily add one for the rear as well.

    What’s unfortunate about all this is that far too many consumer electronics makers are ceding much of the creativity to Apple. They’d rather provide a decent knock-off, with the hope they’ll succeed simply by having loads of barely different models from which to select. That causes the peculiar situation where the Android OS might have greater market penetration in the U.S. than the iPhone, but not because any single model or maker sells more units than Apple. It’s the total number, and many of those are giveaways, offered via two-for-one sales.

    Indeed, it doesn’t seem Microsoft is doing much better with the first Windows Phone 7 devices. AT&T has already begun a two-for-one sale, meaning they can’t sell enough of these smartphones at the regular price, and they need to give you an extra incentive to sign on the dotted line.

    Notice, that we don’t see two-for-one sales on any Apple mobile device, even if there are occasional modest price reductions, but usually on refurbished gear.

    Is this any way to compete with Apple? So far, the answer is no.


    Newsletter Issue #578: Where Apple’s Wi-Fi Router Failed to Provide the Solution

    December 27th, 2010

    I have to tell you that, whenever I need a new gadget for a particular purpose, I first look at Apple’s catalog to see if they have a product that fills the bill. The first significant Wi-Fi router solutions came from Apple, the original AirPort. In fact, I suspect millions of owners still say AirPort rather than Wi-Fi when asked what they are using for wireless connections at their home or office, and that makes perfect sense. In a field where most entrants provide Web-based, and exceedingly obtuse, configuration panels, AirPort stands out for its relatively simple setup routine.

    My experience with various AirPort models through the years has been quite good; that is, until I moved to a new apartment recently and everything fell apart.

    My AirPort product is a two-year-old Time Capsule variant, which melds an AirPort Extreme with a 1TB network drive. In my former location, I had few problems. Connections from my office area (one of the bedrooms) to the master bedroom were pretty solid.

    The problems all began when I wired everything in the new apartment. The Time Capsule was situated near the wall closest to the master bedroom, roughly in the middle of the apartment. My MacBook Pro was placed on a table about 25 feet away, yet couldn’t receive a usable signal. The iPhone survived halfway through the living room before it lost the signal.

    Continue Reading…


    Using Alleged New Cases to Unearth Apple Secrets

    December 24th, 2010

    The search to discover secrets about Apple’s latest and greatest gadgets has reached a fever pitch. You almost think some people are examining the trash bins in the vicinity of the Apple campus in Cupertino, CA for telltale evidence of what they’re working on. Of course, physical documents would be shredded as a matter of course, but I’m sure that doesn’t stop some eager beavers from trying, wishing, and hoping.

    Certainly the design of the next generation of the iPad has become fodder for lots of discussion, and that makes a lot of sense. Consider the vast investment Apple’s competitors are making to find the killer product that will steal the iPad’s thunder.

    Some aspects of iPad 2.0 seem a given. There will be a front facing camera, simply because it makes sense, and also because Apple wants to expand the FaceTime user base. I wouldn’t be surprised if a Windows version cropped up though, truth be told, they may want to keep that particular feature confined to the Mac OS and iOS — and perhaps some specially licensed third-party products.

    Other potential iPad features include perhaps a rear camera, although that sort of layout seems clumsy for quick snapshots and even movies. In light of complaints that today’s iPad is a little hefty for one-handed use, and therefore reduces its flexibility for reading e-books, there’s probably sufficient reason for Apple to give it a diet. The next version may indeed by slimmer, perhaps a little lighter, with a less curvy rear to prevent wobbling when the unit is laid flat. Even a few ounces saved would help, although I think the magic number is one pound, and I don’t see Apple beating that benchmark without ditching aluminum and moving to, say, carbon fiber. But if it’s good enough for airplanes, it should be good enough for Apple.

    There’s also speculation about a mini USB port, to meet new European Union requirements for consistency among mobile devices, and perhaps even an SD card slot.

    As you see, the speculation will never end. Even when iPad 2.0 is finally out, we’ll start talking about its successor.

    As I write this column, I just read an article containing a photo of a proposed case prototype for the next generation iPad. That it has a rectangular opening at the bottom rear allegedly indicates Apple might install a larger speaker, but why not two speakers? Even the iPhone has that. It doesn’t quite pass the logic test, as far as I’m concerned. And, yes, I know the original iPad has just one.

    But the real problem is that, in the desperate search for nuggets about a new Apple product, rumor sites sometimes have to resort to extraordinary measures, or just hope that someone’s prototype for a case or accessory will yield evidence that they know something we don’t.

    Now prototype cases are nothing new. Besides, you’d expect that companies that build “official” accessories for Apple gear would actually be afforded some insights into new designs under stringent confidentiality agreements. A company that violates such an agreement would find themselves in a heap of trouble, so there seems to be little incentive to want to draw attention to themselves.

    That being said, some of those prototype cases do sometimes end up resembling something that appears genuine, clearly meant to fit the latest and greatest from Apple. But not always. Regardless, the mere presence of something, usually a mock-up generated in Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop, is sufficient to create headlines. That’s true even if the design itself represents some controversial or questionable choices.

    Of course, my skepticism may be utterly misplaced. Maybe that case design making the rounds now is the genuine article. In fact, I’ve long speculated that some of this prerelease scuttlebutt is clearly generated by Apple, working behind the scenes to drum up interest — but not enough to hurt sales of current models. Since the stories don’t overtly originate from Apple, they can clearly rely on plausible deniability to get away with it.

    The official word is: “We don’t comment on unreleased products,” except, of course, when such announcements have a strategic purpose. Then, and only then, you will witness the media briefings and discover the carefully controlled tidbits of information designed to whet your appetites, and get you ready to break out your checkbook or credit card to place your order.

    One thing is certain with iPad 2.0: You won’t see the announcement until the product is ready to ship. If Apple spills the beans prematurely, they risk gutting sales of existing models, and that could mean loads of unsold inventory, gear that has to be moved at closeout prices.

    Sometimes Apple will even suffer a severe shortage for a brief period of time, to allow existing inventory to be sold, as the production lines for the older models wind down. As you know, Apple manages production better than any other company in the industry, and when they run short, other than early production ramp up glitches, it’s usually because initial demand simply outstrips supplies, and, of course, exceeds their expectations. When it comes to guessing customer response, Apple tends to be conservative. They’d rather have you wait a while to get a new iconic product than suffer from overproduction, and the need to have sharp discounts to move product.

    Whenever you see those two-for-one sales on new smartphones, as an example, you just know that the wireless carriers aren’t doing that for your benefit. It’s because they can’t move enough of them at full price, which is, of course, something that doesn’t happen to Apple.


    The Lion Report: Will Apple Finally Fix Long-Time Problems?

    December 23rd, 2010

    It’s fair to say that making the task of upgrading to a new operating system easier is a good thing. That’s the lesson Microsoft never seems to learn. It’s not just fiddling with the interface in questionable waysto have new features to boast, but making the migration task difficult for the very customers they want to buy those upgrades.

    So with Windows 7, for example, there are tens of millions of XP users who have to endure clean installs, which really means backing up and restoring your stuff, including apps, as part of the process. The problem with Vista was that a lot of people didn’t want to upgrade (and we all know why). Microsoft is aching for you install Windows 7, so you have the ability to pin document windows on the corners in Windows 7. Or you want to discover the cloud. At least that’s what their ad campaign wants you to believe.

    Now we know that Apple will make the Lion upgrade process as seamless as always. I don’t know whether any of the original Intel-based Macs, the ones that didn’t have 64-bit processors, will be excluded. I kind of feel they’ll be allowed to come along for the ride, at least until Lion’s successor is released, probably in 2013.

    As you know, I’m not super impressed with the Lion preview. Few of the features are must-haves. I’m more interested in auto-save and auto-resume rather than an iOS-inspired Launchpad, putting all your document and app windows on a single screen, or having a full-screen option. I would hope that Apple would actually try, for once, to fix the long-standing problems that pretty much afflict all graphical operating systems.

    Some of the key offenders include the Open and Save dialogs. As I’ve said previously, they are not as discoverable as they should be. There are many Mac users who continue to double-click a document icon even when the proper app is already open. When I suggest using Open from the File menu, I hear silence, or watch them stare at me as if I’m crazy. It’s not that I’m totally sane, but I’d think that a feature that’s been always part and parcel of the Mac OS shouldn’t be invisible. Yes, I know Open is easily invoked, but when Mac users don’t know it’s there, something is missing, and I’m not about to blame the customer. It’s Apple’s responsibility to find a better way.

    These days, I am happy to recommend Jon Gotow’s solution for the Save dialog counterpart, Default Folder X. It’s been around for years in one form or another, and add a number of obvious features, such as the ability to rename or delete files, not to mention rebounding to the last used file/folder. It’s a great workflow assistant, and power users have embraced it, although I think most any Mac user would find things to like. But the real problem is that Apple hasn’t paid as much attention to the problem as they should, although today’s Open/Save dialogs are more Finder like in operation, and thus somewhat easier to handle.

    To be sure, managing your stuff on your Mac can be extremely confusing. Yes, Apple has crafted such search schemes as Spotlight to help you sort through the mass of files to find the ones you need. But that’s a band-aid on an open wound. What about a ground up solution? Would a Finder reminiscent of iTunes be the proper answer, or can Apple’s brilliant OS engineers start from scratch and make what should be a trivial process simple for everyone?

    When it comes to printer dialogs, I suppose they are all right, though it would be nice to be able to reorder jobs in the print queue with drag and drop, although you can, I suppose, put some jobs on hold to give others priority, but that’s a clumsy workaround. You could reorder those jobs in the Classic Mac OS, as you recall.

    A more powerful Location feature would be helpful, so that more of the functions you use on your Mac in different environments would be configured, launched or otherwise available.

    The other pressing need is a more user-centric help menu, one that truly anticipates your needs, rather than present a simple browser window where you will, but more often won’t, find the information you seek. Of course, when it comes to third-party apps, it’s up to the developers to provide the instructions you need to make their product run efficiently. Some do it well, others don’t seem to care, or maybe they figure their programs are so accessible you shouldn’t need any extra help.

    But I’m thinking of a help system that would, with your approval of course, guide you to better ways to do your work, or help you get out of trouble. I don’t mean those annoying dialogs in Windows where you have to approve so many basic functions by clicking something in an obtuse prompt. I’m not asking Apple to bring back Balloon Help either. I’d like to see an ever-present interactive help system that provides assistance based on your selected, or perceived, skill level. And, yes, it would be readily dismissed (or recalled) if that’s what you want.

    Now I realize some of you don’t care about any of this. The real issue is whether Apple is willing to rethink how things work, rather than just add flashy stuff that will sell upgrades but won’t necessarily help you become more efficient and productive.