You may not recall this, but HDTV was actually demonstrated in the U.S. in the late 1980s. After the standard became official, it took a while for broadcast stations to begin to adopt the technology. The first was WRAL-TV, a CBS affiliate in Raleigh, North Carolina, which began transmitting digital HD on July 23, 1996. But it took until November, 1998 for HDTV sets to go on sale.

It must have seemed strange for a TV station to be offering a technology that benefited nobody, except manufacturers and professionals, for 28 months. Over the next decade, TV sets offering 720p and, later, 1080i and 1080p resolution, blanketed the country. They got cheaper and cheaper until you could buy a decent set with a huge flat screen for only a few hundred dollars. But the original HD sets were CRT and they were very expensive.

Once HDTV was ever-present in people’s homes, and many people had more than one set with high-definition capability, manufacturers had to find ways to persuade you to buy new sets. But a well-designed TV can easily survive for eight or 10 years before requiring major repairs, meaning a long replacement cycle. A standard definition CRT set that I bought around 1994 lasted 20 years before it was put out to pasture.

Continue Reading…

I do enjoy the back and forth of friendly debate. I realize that my opinions are strictly those of one person, so I don’t make a big deal of their relevance. But I will defend them when I feel necessary.

Now as you know, Apple has loads of critics. So does Google and Microsoft, and all the rest. But it seems the emotions are higher with Apple, not to mention the false or misleading assumptions. That’s why I probably use an inordinate amount of space in these columns to set things right. It’s the old-time journalist in me.

So I have had a back and forth with a reader who is unhappy with Apple’s design directions. As a result, he went ahead and bought a Windows all-in-one, specifically a 2-in-1, which has a touchscreen. Now I’m not going to argue preference, but I felt that the reasons were exaggerated.

For those who read these columns regularly, I had a similar argument with another reader a few months back, one who voiced similar excuses. I wouldn’t assume it’s the same person, because such views aren’t uncommon.

Consider the polarized reactions to the Late 2016 MacBook Pro. At first, it seems a mostly modest refresh, with a somewhat slimmer and lighter case, beefier and more current parts, and one fascinating new feature. Instead of having those old fashioned function keys, Apple opted to provide a one-row OLED touchscreen. What’s more, it’s powered by an ARM system on a chip derived from the one used for the Apple Watch. That means an iOS-derived mobile OS is powering the Touch Bar.

So you have one notebook computer with two CPUs and two operating systems working together seamlessly. As I said, fascinating.

But critics were all over Apple for this supposed needless fluff, since the move evidently contributed to adding several hundred dollars to the purchase price. This brought them in line with the original 2012 MacBook Pro with Retina display. So maybe, over time, prices will drift downward as Apple perfects the manufacturing process and finds ways to make the parts cheaper.

So Apple was attacked for the higher prices. While Apple has never built a notebook supporting more than 16GB RAM, they were also attacked for not moving to 32GB this time, which is what some Windows notebooks offer. But not a Microsoft Surface notebook, with which Macs are being compared. Take note of that.

Overall, however, customers evidently were willing to pay more, witness higher Mac sales for the last two quarters, after dipping sales earlier this year.

The critics still want 2-in-1, buttressed by the launch of the Microsoft Surface Studio, which sports a 28-inch touchscreen. The Studio does seem to have appeal to a certain segment of creatives, but nonetheless Surface sales dipped 26% in the March quarter. So evidently not enough people care, or this is a product that occupies a smaller niche than a Mac Pro.

Again, I don’t argue with someone’s decision to switch from the Mac to Windows. But don’t forget a Hackintosh, if you’re a hobbyist and don’t need a reliable work machine.

But other than a do-it-yourself Mac clone, a Windows PC is meant to run Windows. So the next argument has it that Windows 10 is closer to the macOS, so maybe it doesn’t make so much of a difference anymore.

Does that sound familiar to you?

In 1995, they said that Windows 95 was close enough to the Mac OS to justify a switch.

Indeed, they have pretty much said that with every new iteration of Windows. It’s always just behind the Mac, so why not save money and get with the program?

Almost as good doesn’t mean parity. While some may argue that Apple should not have added iOS-style interface elements and features to macOS, most of that was done primarily to allow shared features with your iPhone or iPad. Microsoft doesn’t need to do much of that because its mobile platform is nearly kaput.

iOS? Well, isn’t Android pretty close by now?

Actually, Android probably has more features, and surely more options to configure your mobile device. But security remains questionable. Huge numbers of Android handsets still aren’t running the latest OS, and are using versions often as old as two or three years. Google seems to expect you to depend on Google Play for security updates, and they sure hope you won’t sideload apps, which means installing them from outside sources.

So maybe Android has become a more solid competitor to iOS, but since Google can’t seem to make any headway in updating recent mobile handsets, does it even make a difference?

Besides, iPhones still tend to run faster than Android gear, even when the latter has what appear to be much more powerful hardware. Evidently you need to take a sledgehammer approach to make Android seem fluid.

In June, Apple is expected to demonstrate the next generation of iOS and macOS. If they aren’t misfires, it will advance Apple’s platforms yet again to new heights. There are features I’d like to see, particularly improved multitasking and enhanced file system access for iPads. And maybe find ways to make it seem more than just a larger iPod touch.

There will continue to be comments from readers who aren’t happy with Apple for one reason or another and have thus given up on Macs and other gear. They will try to justify their reasons for switching, implying that Apple has dropped the ball. I’ve read the same argument for years, and someday it might come true. You could argue that the Mac deserves more attention, but most of the arguments still seem old and tired.

I don’t want to consider the crazy developments in the world of politics, where the definition of “fake news” depends on your belief system. Instead, let’s look at the crazy developments in the tech world, where Apple is always failing or about to, and supposedly successful products really aren’t successful after all.

In yesterday’s column, I mentioned a main offender, Microsoft Surface PCs. Quarter after quarter, sales failed to grow all that much. They exceeded one billion dollars and then they dropped 26% in the March quarter.

But every time Microsoft had something new to announce, it was proclaimed potentially disastrous for Apple. Even the $2,999.99 Surface Studio, a large all-in-one PC with a touchscreen display that can lay nearly flat, didn’t help to boost sales. Well, maybe it kept them from going even lower. I mean, it’s not a bad idea, but it sort of brings to mind the complicated articulated arm of an iMac G4, though the latter wasn’t nearly as flexible in the way you could move the screen.

When Apple introduced the MacBook Pro with Touch Bar, the critics dissected every element of the design. It didn’t need to be slimmer and lighter. The Touch Bar was a needless extravagance, and why doesn’t it have 32GB of RAM? Ignored was the fact that Surface notebooks also appear to top out at 16GB.

In the end, Mac sales were up, Surface sales were, as I said, down.

Then there are suggestions that Apple is behind the curve by not competing with the Amazon Echo. Not said is the fact that an iPhone may be a more flexible voice assistant, and it certainly has better security. Apple’s Messages is compatible with standard SMS protocols, so anyone with a smartphone, any smartphone, can exchange messages with you. Amazon’s proprietary messaging on the Echo works only with another Echo.

Echo sales may be as high as 11 million, which isn’t bad, until you consider it was first announced in 2014. So what Apple product do you compare it to? Even the Apple Watch has higher sales.

Now we have Samsung. Whenever there’s a new flagship Galaxy smartphone, Apple is in deep trouble. Reviewers fawn over the new gadgets, even when there are serious flaws. So consider the first attempt to attach a fingerprint sensor to one some years back, which failed to match the iPhone’s Touch ID in recognition accuracy. This doesn’t mean Apple’s solution is perfect, but Samsung’s has almost always been worse.

The Galaxy S8, just released a few weeks ago, has already been criticized for the awkward rear positioning of its fingerprint sensor. You are apt to touch the camera lens instead, causing smudges. The facial recognition can be fooled with a photo, and the iris detection feature doesn’t work so well if you wear glasses, or in darkness or bright sunlight. In other words, critical security features are undependable.

And do you remember how last year’s Galaxy smartphones, which were supposedly water-resistant, failed dunk tests? I will avoid the flaming Galaxy Note 7.

Are these products supposed to be better than iPhones?

Then there are sales. Although Apple didn’t reveal any figures for the iPhone 7’s launch weekend, they have always managed to move millions during that three-day period. Some 13 million units were sold when the iPhone 6s debuted in 2015.

Now to put things in further perspective: When a Samsung Galaxy arrives, carriers will commence heavy-duty promotion, often with two-for-one deals. So you get two handsets for the price of one. Sometimes it’s part of a deal to attract customers from other carriers, but you wonder why it happens so quickly. Doesn’t Samsung or its carrier partners have any confidence at all that their high-priced gear can sell at full price without incentives or discounts, at least for the first few weeks?

True, you can get two-for-one deals on an iPhone 7 nowadays. But it’s also eight months since it went on sale. It’s nearing the end of its initial product cycle, and customers are already waiting for Apple’s next act. So it stands to reason that carriers will want to make deals in order to peel off customers from rivals.

So with all those discounts, just how well is the Galaxy S8 and its larger brother, the Galaxy S8+, doing? Well, according to Samsung, they sold five million in the first month. Yes, it took a full month to reach that number. In comparison, the Galaxy S7 and the S7 Edge sold an estimated 7-9 million units during last year’s launch month.

Outspoken tech columnist Daniel Eran Dilger, writing in AppleInsider, reports that Galaxy smartphone sales peaked in 2013, when Samsung sold 10 million copies of the Galaxy S4. Total sales have dipped since then, even as iPhone sales mostly increased. Even when Apple reported somewhat lower sales for the iPhone 6s, they were still far higher than Samsung can manage with its flagship Galaxies. True, Samsung still sells more handsets than Apple, but most of those sales are confined to lower-cost gear, where very few profits are made. Apple continues to deliver most of the profits in the smartphone industry.

Expectations are high for the next iPhone lineup, which is rumored to include an iPhone 8 to honor the product’s 10th anniversary. If there are indeed three separate models, which would include an iPhone 7s and an iPhone 7s Plus, sales could be off the charts. Consider the alleged pause in sales of the iPhone 7 due to early rumors about the next model. Expectations are said to be high.

None of this means that Apple can grow the market every single year. Clearly they’ve hit severe headwinds in China, though the start of iPhone SE production in India may signal much higher sales potential in that country. But, when it comes to the tech industry, up is now down, and the claims that Apple isn’t doing well, or has no vision, are just more examples of fake news.

It certainly makes sense for the rumors to ramp up ahead of Apple’s WWDC. You know there will be new versions of the company’s various operating systems, with the emphasis on macOS and iOS. But there has been sparse speculation about the new features, less than usual for this time of year. Perhaps that’s because hardware is getting a new emphasis.

Well, the Mac at any rate. Sure, one supposed industry analyst suggested that Apple will demonstrate an iPhone 8 at the WWDC, but that makes no sense whatever. Tim Cook already claims that iPhone sales have been hurt by expectations of this alleged new model, so why would they make matters worse? It’s just not part of Apple’s playbook, which usually involves demonstrating new products when there’s no existing model for which to gut sales.

Well, there’s the 2013 Mac Pro, and I suppose Apple might demonstrate the new model, since one has already been promised. That assumes it will ship no later than early next year, so they have something fairly complete to present.

There’s also a published report about possible Mac notebook refreshes at the WWDC, but the reasons why don’t pass the logic test.

The story claims that all three notebook lines will be updated, and that the update will include Kaby Lake processors. Indeed, many complained that Apple didn’t make that move with the Late 2016 MacBook Pro, where the Touch Bar debuted. Only thing: Quad-core versions of Kaby Lake hadn’t shipped yet, but some people don’t care about facts.

So Apple is also allegedly seriously considering an update to the 13-inch MacBook Air after two years. But at this point, if it’s to be announced next month, it would already be in production. While a refresh doesn’t seem to be out of the question, if it were to have a Retina display, wouldn’t it encroach on the MacBook, which also is due for a refresh? A MacBook Pro upgrade is questionable, since the last update was October of last year. You’d expect Apple would wait until fall, unless this is such an easy update that it would make sense to release it as soon as possible, perhaps along with a small price decrease.

While it would be real nice to see the Mac getting some love, the reason for pushing out this new hardware at a WWDC are allegedly due to Microsoft’s presumed advantages with the Surface notebooks. Does that make sense to you?

True, the media has been touting Microsoft for several years, since they entered the Windows PC business. But there’s a real problem: Sales are pathetic and remain pathetic.

Indeed, in the March quarter, Surface sales dropped 26%, and they were already a fraction of the Mac’s. Mac sales were up a few percent, largely because of the favorable reception to the new MacBook Pro. So why should Apple be concerned about a hardware maker who can’t touch them in revenue?

Clearly some people who pretend to understand Apple have a problem grasping simple facts, which is that the reasons don’t make a lick of sense. The main difference between a Mac and a Surface, other than the fact that the latter is sometimes more expensive, is the touchscreen. While delivering faster Macs is always a good thing, does it magically make them more competitive to someone else’s product with a feature Apple hasn’t and won’t imitate?

Is the public clamoring for Surfaces? Is the public ditching Macs because Apple can’t compete with the Surface? If the Surface is so great, why are sales dropping? Just months after the Surface Studio all-in-one computer was launched, at $2,999.99 for the cheapest model, is it selling like gangbusters? Are artists really hoping Apple would build an iMac with a gooseneck arm so you can manipulate the display any way you want?

Once again, Surface sales in the March quarter declined by 26%, just a few months after the Surface Studio was released. So has it made that much of a difference? I don’t dispute its value to a certain class of content creators, but it may be too much of a niche product to really catch on in a big way.

The Surface Laptop? It’s supposedly marketed to school systems, and it appears to have some value. But it’s also more expensive than the sort of gear the educators purchase these days. At a time when many are moving towards super cheap Chromebooks, why would they gravitate towards a notebook with a starting price of $999, and a fully-outfitted price of $2,199?

Well, maybe it’ll go over really big at Beverly Hills High School (the city’s average income is $193,000) or a similar school in another relatively high-income area.

All this doesn’t mean that I don’t take the possibility of a Mac notebook refresh seriously. It makes perfect sense, though the timing of a MacBook Pro update might be premature. But if the MacBook Air and the MacBook are destined to be updated around the time of the WWDC, it would probably be treated as an afterthought, scarcely getting any mention at all at the keynote except to demonstrate Apple’s ongoing commitment to the Mac.