MacTheBlog
New MacBook — getting warmer ...
Written by Matthew JC Powell Wednesday, 19 May 2010 01:08
Apple updated the plastic entry-level MacBook overnight, consistent with its recent policy of quietly releasing small, incremental improvements to its products that don't start with "i". As expected, the MacBook now has better graphics and, also as expected, it's got the same long-life battery its metallic cousins recently gained. Really, it's got a full complement of the bells and whistles one might like in a portable computer. Almost.
Almost, but not quite.
For a mere $A1249 you get a MacBook with 2GB RAM, a 2.4GHz Core2Duo processor, 250GB hard drive, NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics card and 10-hour battery. It's hard to argue it's not good value.
There is just this one, little, niggly thing. An oversight really, more than an omission.
The MacBook, just like every other Apple computer with "Mac" in its name, still does not possess 3G or any other form of wireless mobile data connection. A year or two back that seemed absent-minded — now it looks deliberate.
"So what," you say, "I've got my iPhone/iPad for that if I want to surf on the bus".
No, sorry, not good enough. Mobile Safari is terrific as mobile web browsers go, and streets ahead of mobile web browsers that came before it, but it is not a desktop-class web browser. Not by a long ways. And the iPhone's Mail app, for all its recent improvement, is still a far cry from comparable to a fully-featured mail client. Even the iPad version is just a bigger version of the same thing.
Don't even get me started on the iDevices' lack of an accessible file system and inability to download stuff from almost anywhere except the App Store.
The fact is, for all the power these devices add to what you used to be able to do in a mobile device, they are not replacements for full-powered computers. Not yet anyway.
Heck, some people even want to use sites with Flash on them believe it or not.
Entry-level notebooks and netbooks with 3G data capabilities are commonplace outside the Apple world, and quite affordable presuming you're prepared to faff about with Windows or Linux. Indeed high-end fully-featured notebooks are not difficult to find with 3G on board — except from Apple.
Apple seems to have decided that its customers want to choose between "always on" connection and a full-spec computer. We can't have both. It's either a MacBook (or MacBook Air or MacBook Pro) with all the fixings, genuine desktop-class applications and full keyboards, or it's an iPhone/iPad with Internet everywhere but compromised capability to make use of it.
That, to me, isn't fair. Why can't I have it all?
For myself it isn't actually that big of a deal because I have an iPhone with Telstra and if I want to I can tether my MacBook Pro to that over Bluetooth and surf thusly. This indeed I have done on more than one occasion. More than two even.
The fact is Apple was reluctant to allow even that capability for iPhones — a capability that pretty much every other mobile phone has possessed for over a decade. I used to use my Nokia 6200 as a modem on my PowerBook connected with infra-red — that was a looooong time ago. I feel old typing it.
Apple still has customers in parts of the world who own MacBooks and iPhones and cannot do that. Obscure backwaters of the world such as California, for instance. There Apple is a prisoner to its deal with AT&T which, for its own unfathomable reasons, does not want to allow tethering from iPhones. Don't ask me.
A MacBook with 3G built in would solve that overnight. Lock it to a network, don't lock it, it doesn't matter — the connection would be there in the computer and if the networks didn't want to let Apple computers use them when they let other manufacturers' customers do so then the regulators would have questions to ask. Problem immediately goes away.
But Apple won't give us the 3G connection.
This is simply out of step with Apple's claim to leadership in technology and innovation. Apple is out the front telling us that the future is mobile, soon no-one will have a desk and ubiquitous connectivity will be fact. It recognises that its customers want that very thing — they want full-powered, full-mobility computing, and they want it now.
But they can't get it from Apple.
Discuss this post with me in MacTheForum!
The perils of printing
Monday, 17 May 2010 12:50
It would be fair to say that I rather like Mac OS X. It does what I want it to do, and (most of the time) when I want it to do it. It's still software, and still capable of being fallible, just as any software. There are some unique factors that I think make it great value, but equally there are a number of issues that seem to conspire to annoy me.
Printing would be close to the top of that list. To say I've had a bit of a rocky road with printing under OS X would be something of an understatement. Several years ago (and in the interests of full disclosure), I won a Lexmark x342n laser printer as a door prize. A nice door prize, to be sure, and at a physical level it's served me well. I wish I could say the same for the software that runs it, which has run hot and cold, on and off, for years. I was somewhat mentally resolved that printing and I were never going to get on under OS X, until last week.
I was testing an HP Printer for CNET — in this case the HP Officejet Pro 8000. My normal testing for this involves printing via Windows, and with an eye to testing, I popped in the supplied driver CD. It started installing, and then it stopped. Rather hard. It turns out that for whatever reason, the supplied CD didn't support Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit, and suggested I "upgrade" to Windows Vista instead.
Perhaps somebody at HP has a sense of humour.
I'm nothing if not rather dogged, so I headed to HP's web site to see if a Windows 7-compatible driver was ava il able. It was, but I was still left a little surprised — if only because the driver download was a whopping 234MB.
This is for a printer. Not a multifunction device — there's no fax, scanning, media card reading or optional coffee maker on the side of this thing. It prints, and that's all. All except for eating up 234MB of download allowance and taking a good forty-five minutes to download from HP's curiously slow download servers. All up, getting the OfficeJet Pro 8000 to work under Windows 7 ate up about two hours of my time.
(Just in case you're worrying that you've accidentally clicked onto Windows7TheBlog.com, this is where I switch back to your regular programming.)
Later the same day, I had a colour page on my Mac to print, and the Officejet 8000 was still set up. It's a network printer, and my curiosity (or perhaps my stubborn streak) was piqued. I figured I may as well try to find it with Bonjour first, and then worry about slow HP driver servers later. Bonjour picked it up within 30 seconds, installed drivers within twenty seconds, and a page was being processed within a minute of thinking about it.
Perhaps that's why I like Mac OS X. Two hours setup time versus one minute? I know which I'd pick.
Discuss this post with me in MacTheForum!
Shock and awe
Written by Alex Kidman Monday, 10 May 2010 18:20
It was a dark and stormy night.
Well, it wasn't really that stormy. But it was dark, what with it being night. If you've been around as long as I have, you tend to pick up on cues like that. In any case, it was an unexceptional Friday night, and for the first time that week I was sat down in front of ye olde idiot's lantern, catching up on a number of serials of which I am a fan.
Jack Bauer's a hard man to kill, but that's not the point of this column. Although he is rather a specialist at unbelievable things — in his case plot points and general survivability — so perhaps it was apt that I was watching 24 at the time.
Anyway, while I was busy getting my brain gently soaked in increasingly ridiculous plot points, Apple was releasing pricing info for the iPad. On a Friday night. Aren't people meant to be out partying on Friday nights, and not issuing press releases? Yeah, I know, I wasn't out partying, but see my earlier comment about having been around for a while for clarification on that point.
I already know that the iPad isn't genuinely "magical" — although I do think it's nice — but would the pricing be, as Apple had stated so vehemently, "unbelievable"?
Nah.
Chances are pretty high by now that you do know the local pricing, but just in case you've stumbled here while missing the iPad news, the WiFi-only iPad will cost you $629 (16GB), $759 (32GB) or $879 (64GB), while the 3G- and GPS-equipped version costs $799 (16GB), $928 (32GB) or $1049 (64GB).
What is a bit unbelievable there is that we're getting remarkably close pricing to the US, at least on this spin of Apple's magical wheel of price fixing. All it would take would be a very minor currency fluctuation and the iPad would actually be cheaper here than the US. I wrote about this at length, covering why GST is an important consideration, at PC Authority earlier this week if you want to cover the not-terribly-complex mathematics of the argument.
What was really unbelievable was still to come this past weekend, when Telstra released its pricing for iPad Micro SIMs. I'd opined previously that the odds of pay as you go pricing were slim, and the odds of it being actually affordable were even more anorexic.
Turns out, I was wrong.
Telstra's opening offer gives users 1GB for $20 with a 30-day expiry period. Up that to any combination above $30 and you basically pay $10 per GB, but that 30-day expiry sticks like glue. Sure, that's not ideal, but since when was Telstra the affordable choice?
Optus's offer was even better, at least on paper. The same $20 would buy you 2GB of usage, no strings attached. Well, except maybe one. Optus 3G network in metropolitan areas is 2100MHz, but outside it it's 900MHz, which is exactly what the iPad doesn't use.
As I'm writing this, Vodafone/Three is yet to release plan details. Having been boldly wrong on the prepaid data pricing previously, I don't think I'll be going out on too much of a limb to suggest that Voda's deal will closely mirror Optus's, or maybe undercut it just a little. It seems unlikely that Vodafone would declare that its hoity-toity data doesn't play in the cheap kids' playground and would cost $50 per month for 200MB. At least, not if it plans on having any iPad customers, anyway.
I'd say Telstra's in the commanding chair for this one, at least as far as coverage goes. My own iPhone usage suggests that 1GB of data should be more than enough, too. Your usage may vary.
I was discussing this point on Twitter earlier in the week, and an ex-colleague of mine who now hails from Singapore commented that $20 for 1GB of 3G data isn't that great a deal. To a certain extent he's utterly right. From his perspective, he's paying (by his own estimates) around $45 per month for 12GB of data usage plus included calls in Singapore. Suddenly, Telstra's "generous" deal doesn't seem so good, now does it?
There are always differences between markets in terms of provisions and competition. It wasn't all that long ago at all that 1GB of 3G data in Australia would cost you hundreds of dollars, even on a cap. If you went over your limit by 1GB, you'd need to be ready to mortgage the family home a couple of times to pay the bill. Those times are, it seems, behind us — and not a moment too soon.
It did get me thinking about relative value for the iPad specifically, though. I knew that Australian iPad sale prices were fairly competitive, but what about data pricing?
Picking two English-speaking markets for comparison makes for some interesting reading. Let's take Telstra's 1GB/$20 deal as the baseline.
In the US, the sole iPad carrier is AT&T. There's no direct $A20 plan after currency conversion, but the entry-level $US14.99 plan is close enough. At market rates as I write this, that'd cost you $A16.57 plus conversion fees, which is close enough to $A20 for my purposes.
That $A16.57 would only buy you 250MB of data on a network that has more than its share of criticism for poor coverage. Admittedly, if you could stretch your budget a little — $US29.99 ($A33.15) would buy you "unlimited" data, but both of those plans aren't genuinely pay as you go. The data allowance only lasts 30 days, but they automatically renew unless you cancel them. It's the Claytons contract iPad, in other words.
What about over the pond in the UK? Well, aside from getting genuinely stiffed on iPad pricing upfront compared to the US (the UK 16GB iPad costs the equivalent of $A703, for example), the market there does look a little bit more recognisable. As in Australia, there are three main telcos offering up Micro SIMs with a variety of plans. A baffling variety of plans, actually.
O2 will sell you data by the day (£2 for 500MB), or month (£10 for 1GB, £15 for 3GB). Orange will sell you data by the day (£2 for 200MB), by the week (£7 for 1GB) or by the month (£15 for 3GB, £25 for 10GB). Vodafone doesn't sell in anything less than month increments in old blighty, offering up 250MB for £10 or 5GB for £25.
Clearly there are some companies in the UK that aren't that interested in price matching. In any case, taking the cost of 1GB of data from O2, with the same 30-day expiry, you hit a figure of $A16.40, which is marginally cheaper but not by much. It's the only carrier doing that kind of matching, however. Orange's 1GB plan is even cheaper at $A12.30, but that's got a seven-day expiry period. What are you going to do with an iPad to burn through a gigabyte of data in seven days?
In the end, that's the genuinely unbelievable thing about the iPad. Not that the price of the unit itself is that spectacular, as Apple had more or less painted itself into a corner in relation to US prices. Australian consumers aren't backwards in coming forwards to parallel import — perfectly legally, it should be noted — if local pricing is hitched too high, after all.
But getting the local Telcos — and especially Telstra — to deliver some surprisingly good and genuinely competitive 3G data pricing? Now that is unbelievable.
Discuss this post with me in MacTheForum!
Touch Me
Written by Alex Kidman Friday, 30 April 2010 00:03
A lot of the Apple rumours going around the traps at the moment relate to the iPhone OS. And why not? It's making Apple enough money that the size of Steve Jobs' offshore money bin recently caused seismic shifts leading to the explosions of Iceland's Eyjafjallajökull volcano.
Or that's the rumour I've heard, anyway.
Anyway, so the rumours go, all sorts of features of iPhone OS are going to leak over into Mac OS X 10.7. For the purposes of making sure I don't get the name right this time, I'm going to suggest that 10.7 will be called "LOLcat". I'm sure that will be wrong. But you owe me a beer if it's not.
In any case, some of the rumours circling are at least a little bit LOL-worthy, especially the one that states that Apple will open up an OS X "App Store", and anything that runs on LOLcat will need Apple approval. I can't exactly see that happening in a sane universe, and I can't even see a huge benefit to Apple in doing so, given the backlash that would ensue.
One of the other features of iPhone OS that I have seen endlessly rumoured is the inclusion of touch support within OS X. Touch is one of those holy-grail-type applications that tech types have drooled over for decades now, with varying degrees of success. If you've ever struggled to use one of those information screens in big shopping centres, you'll know what I mean.
Apple has a product suite that does touch very well in the iPod touch, iPhone and iPad. V ery well, it should be noted, for a set series of functions — not all of which would translate well to OS X. Selection is OK, but typing is a bit of a chore. It's workable, and I've trained my fingers well enough for iPhone/iPod touch typing, but larger screen typing on the iPad is another story altogether.
When I originally sat down to write this column, I was going to compare the touch capabilities of an iPad to those of the multi-touch tappable mouse on the Core i7 MacBook. I started out typing the column on the iPad. Here's my completely untouched, uncorrected iPad work:
"I had reason to ponder that this week Sm I starte d testing two new Apple products this weaken. First, an iPad 64GB WiFi, and then a core i7 !ackbook.
Just for the heck of it, I thought I'd test this thesis by typing up nor half on the iPad and one half on the MacBook. I would eve left tit like that to show the differences in quality, but if younhVdmt worked out by now that the first half so far has been on iPad (sans corrections) then you're really not paying attention.
I touch type, and for e iPhone t)-5/ worked out ok, But my speedy approach to typing just plain doesn't suit the iPad all that
Well n
Over to the Macbook I think, just so this column becomes vaguely legible."
It's not very good, is it? Although the internet being what it is, the mention of a "left tit" might bring in a whole lot more traffic to this article. Hello there. This isn't what you're looking for. Sorry.
Admittedly, I am a touch typist and I did type all of that at a speed approaching the kind of speed I'd normally type on a keyboard. Yes, the iPad does support Bluetooth keyboards and it would be conceivable to pair one up for faster typing duties, but then you'd be carrying around two gadgets and worrying about the battery endurance on both of them. It would also be rather contrary to Apple's design goals in terms of simple interfaces. Remember, this is the company that stuck for years to single-button mice design goals (while supporting multi-button mice) on the grounds that it led to simpler user experiences.
As an aside, thinking back to my introductory paragraph, if ever there's a word you don't want to type into an iPad, it's Eyjafjallajökull. Hang on for a second while I try that one.
"Eyjafjakllajyojukl"
Not quite accurate, although I'd be willing to bet a fair proportion of the audience would have just as much luck pronouncing the iPad version. At least it didn't try to autocorrect it.
What do you think? Are touch interfaces the inevitable way of the future for everything?
Discuss it with me at MacTheForum!
Night of the Long Knives for Tier-2 resellers
Written by Matthew JC Powell Monday, 26 April 2010 16:05
A number of Australian businesses supporting Apple got an unpleasant start to the ANZAC Day long weekend — notification that their support is no longer required. Multiple "tier-2" Apple resellers were sent emails late on the afternoon of Friday the 23rd of April informing them of the termination of their reseller agreements with Apple — meaning they are no longer permitted to sell Apple hardware.
Tier 2 resellers are generally businesses such as consultants and service centres that might, as part of the service they provide, sell a customer an Apple computer if required. The sale of Apple hardware is not their primary source of revenue, and only in a few cases is it even a significant portion of their income.
However, the manner in which the agreements have been terminated has more than a few backs up.
MacTheMag has been contacted by a number of resellers (who asked not to be named) informing them that their agreements have been terminated in accordance with Clause 13.B of the contracts. That clause (in section i) allows for either party to terminate the agreement at any time, without cause, on the provision of 30 days' notice. However, the letters MacTheMag has been shown specifically state that the termination is effective immediately, not in 30 days' time.
Clause 13.B (ii) allows Apple to terminate the agreement with immediate effect where: "(a) Reseller fails to fully perform any obligation under this agreement or violates any Business Practice and Procedure, (b) Reseller commits a crime or engages in any unlawful or unfair business practice, (c) there is a material change in or transfer of Reseller's management, ownership, control or business operations, or Reseller becomes affiliated, through common management, ownership, or control, with any person or entity that is unacceptable to Apple, (d) Reseller's actions ex pose or threaten to expose Apple to any liability, obligation or violation of law, (e) Reseller fails to maintain sufficient net worth and working capital to meet its obligations, has a receiver or trustee appointed for its property, becomes insolvent or makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, (f) Reseller closes its last Authorised Location, or (g) Reseller abandons this Agreement."
Got all that?
Not only does it seem unlikely that numerous of Apple's business partners simultaneously breached their agreements with Apple in any of these ways last week, but all of the affected resellers who contacted MacTheMag are adamant they have not committed any such breach. Several expressed surprise, having previously had no issue whatsoever in their dealings with Apple. None of the letters shown to MacTheMag specify the manner in which Clause 13.B is purported to have been infringed.
There were, however, some warning signs. One such reseller, who is primarily a consultant, said he was speaking to an Apple Store employee about a month ago who mentioned, in passing, that in future Apple wanted all of his sales to go through the Apple Store but didn't elaborate. Another mentioned a colleague who had tried to renew his tier-2 agreement with Apple "about six weeks ago" only to find that the option was no longer available.
In other words, it appears Apple has been planning this move for some time and could easily have provided the requisite 30 days' notice called for in Clause 13.B (i), giving these businesses time to satisfy outstanding orders, keep their customers happy and line up alternative revenue sources. Instead, by terminating the agreements "effective immediately" Apple has invoked Clause 13.B (ii), effectively accusing a number of its partners of unspecified wrongdoing and leaving several of them with customer orders they will now not be able to fulfill. Sending the letters out on the Friday night before a long weekend, meaning the affected resellers were not even able to call Apple for clarification, is the icing on the cake.
Comment has been sought from Apple regarding this issue.
UPDATE Apple's response to MacTheMag's questions regarding this issue in full:
"Apple does not comment on its business operations".
Discuss this article in MacTheForum
