Disappointed in Apple announcements

 While a new set of phones is an annual happening, I'm surprised that Apple wouldn't try to be more giving.

The iPhone 16 will have USB, type C connectors but will have USB 2.0, 480 Mbps speed.  The Pro models will have 10 Gbps speed.

The iPhone 16, 16 Plus, 16 Pro will start with 128 GB of storage, even though the 16 Pro will be US$999.

I can't believe that 10 Gbps speed and 256 GB of storage across the line would have impacted their profit margins so much that they would so negative results.

Apple are just too worried about their balance sheet and not how they're perceived.  It's true that moving to Android would be a huge problem for many people.  Today's crowd seems so convenience-oriented that not getting the exact pumps of mocha they wanted will ruin their whole day.

Long time using Macs

I've been an Apple Mac user since 1993 when Atari was failing and Windows wasn't ready.  My first smart phone was an LG Optimus on Android 1.3, as I recall.  It barely had enough storage to update itself, after I un-installed my applications.  I went to the iPhone 4S afterwards and missed the "you're holding it wrong" problem.  I'd had a second generation iPod touch, so switching wasn't a big change.

I give Apple credit for coming up with some good experiences.  Windows and Android wouldn't be where they are today without Apple's leadership.

When I put MacOS Catalina on my mid-2012 MacBook Pro, Mac users were complaining about how horrible it was.  Just prior to that, I had an Omen by HP (2018) laptop computer and Windows update 1709 ate itself and I had to recover Windows 10 from scratch.

More announcements on the way

They didn't mention Macs.

The pandemic is over and the sales of stay-at-home equipment might never recover.  However, they haven't announced any M4 Macs.  The M4 is barely in iPad.  The iPad mini hasn't been updated since 2021.

If they said that the products will be available by Christmas, it would at least be something more than we've been told to date.  You'd think will the Qualcomm Elite X laptop computers actually out for sale that they'd be more energetic about saying something.  Those machines haven't been as horrible or as great as expected but they're available.  If someone starts converting games to work on ARM, I'll be ready on my M1 MacBook Air.  With all of the development studio closures and the layoffs, I'm not sure any of that will be happening soon.  The Resident Evil engine is working on ARM, just fine, though.

Maybe, there aren't enough M4-series SoC to make enough MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac Studio, and Mac Mini units.  They might as well ditch the Mac Pro line.  They screwed that up.  For something similar, Qualcomm is supposedly hiring Intel engineers to likely create desktop machines with interfaces to outside devices, such as graphics cards and internal drives.

Apple needs to "think different" because doing the same thing year-after-year isn't great.  Their security is better than the others but they tend to put certain software updates on the back burner until they make the news report.  Microsoft wouldn't even bother to respond in most cases, but would point the finger at someone else, if necessary.

Extensible Macs?

Will there ever again be Macs that have replaceable storage, graphics hardware, or memory?

I bought my M1 MacBook Air with as much as I could get.  It was 1 TB of storage, 16 GB of RAM, and the most cores that the SoC had available.  Even refurbished, it cost quite a bit.  Compared to an Intel quad-core i7, it was a huge step-up in performance.  The graphics hardware still needs more work to compete with AMD or Nvidia but compared to the GeForce 650M or 1050 mobile, it was good.

The EU is calling for removable, easily-replaceable batteries for phones.  Apple pretty quickly abandoned replaceable batteries in Macs back in 2012.  That's why my previous "last" Mac was from the series just before that.  My M1 MacBook Air doesn't have a thing that I can change easily.

Computers aren't as disposable as phones.  I've had 20 year old computers that were slow but fine.  Getting 5.25 inch floppy diskettes to not degrade is another matter.

Apple has shown and sold us machines that need their help to be repaired.  Can they do better?

Have the watches really changed?

I didn't mention the Apple Watch at all, until now.  I don't know that there is anything truly compelling, except for Sleep Apnea detecting.  The size has changed somewhat and the charging is better somewhat.  They haven't figured a way to speed up the transfer of updates to the watch, I'm sure, and I don't remember my 2nd generation iPod touch being so slow, even if it really was.

My Series 7 Apple Watch is sufficient.  It feels as though Apple has made it worse with each update.  The only good things I can say for it are that the original band is still okay, it detected that my heart rate was 192 BPM, and if I'm out walking to the store and forget to start the Outdoor Walk, it will give me an option to start it around 15 minutes later.

Update 2024.09.16: I was just reading an opinion piece about how iPhone 16 Pro didn't get so many pre-orders/reservations because AI wouldn't be available right away.

I'm thinking that people didn't reserve as many because AI would be forced on them.  Besides, the majority of people are probably spending their money on items that are more important to them.  Spending US$1000 or more probably isn't a priority for them.

Update 2024.09.17: Warning!  Updated to iOS 17.7 and macOS 14.7 today.  Went to California DMV to renew my license.  Filled out the application on my phone through the process to be ready for the window.  I got a notification and my application was GONE.  I could not log into the system through the California DMV app but Apple should have been checking since so many people working there live in California.  Maybe, someone at headquarters will return with a story and the fix will be out next week. 

Update 2024.09.30: Macs and iPad mini are supposed to be announced in October.  Hopefully, every Mac will have an update to M4 processors, including the Mac Pro.  The iPad mini will likely get an iPhone processor and hopefully, one that is an A18.  If the iPhone SE replacement in 2025 gets one and the iPad mini does not, it would be unfortunate.  They should have a fix for the wavy display problem, also.

Update 2024.10.07: Mac Studio and Mac Pro will have to wait until 2025 for upgrades.  The MacBook Air was always going to be delayed until spring, along with the iPhone SE.

Update 2024.10.18: iPad mini has been announced.  Going from the A15 to the A17 Pro will be enough to make it more powerful and just enough to keep it going for a year or two.  The better display hasn't happened.  This is the treatment I expect for the iPhone SE, but then, the iPad mini hasn't been the best seller, since it's almost the only tablet of a smaller size.  When the Google Nexus 7 (2012 and 2013) were new, I would compare those with the iPad mini.  Now, it's difficult to find competition for it.  The last 7 inch tablet I bought had performance like 2012.

This seems like pandemic hangover.  They started planning, were interrupted by the pandemic, and have had a rocky recovery.  Quite a few executives have left Apple in the last couple of years, but that also seems like pandemic hangover.  However, they desperately need a visionary.

Update 2024.10.29: The M4 iMac and Mac mini are out.  The MacBook Pro must be next.  The way executives are leaving, you'd think that Apple don't have a plan. Certainly, this release the products one-by-one without an event has been different.  It doesn't lead to "We watched an hour for...that!" reactions although people can and will complain about anything.

Update 2024.10.30: The M4 MacBook Pro models have been announced.  The good thing about all of these announcements is that the base RAM is 16 GB.  The bad thing is that they didn't increase the minimum storage.  How many can deal with 512 GB?  I'm still cleaning out my 1 TB drive regularly to make sure I have enough room.  It feels as though even a minor installation takes a lot more space than expected.  Obviously, Universal Applications take more space because of two executables--one for Intel and another for Apple Silicon.  We last dealt with such issues when moving from PowerPC to x86.

Even the MacBook Air is now at 16 GB of RAM.  Since the CPU and GPU share RAM, it's important that they have more, but usually macOS is so efficient, you'll barely notice a problem, unless you're working on high resolution video...or playing a AAA game that doesn't exist yet.  There are some of those on the way.

Update 2025.06.13: Since the M4 MacBook Air has been out for a bit, I've been considering a change.  My current M1 MacBook Air is the most complete model.  On Apple's website, the middle selection, configured to 16 GB of RAM, 1 TB of storage, and 10 CPU cores and 10 GPU cores is similar to my MacBook Air, but only $50 extra than what I paid for my refurbished machine.

 What's more, they showed me a $390 trade-in value.  That makes it somewhat affordable although the sales tax is based on the full value.  After 2.5 years, spending another US$1000 to replace this machine might be worth it.  The performance difference is bigger finally. 

 Update 2025.09.04: There are announcements in just under five days for Apple Watch and iPhone and iPad.  Macs should be announced in October.  Will people trade their phones for new models after just one year? 

Update 2025.10.30: The announcements were phones and watches.  Apple still can't understand the difference between "faster" and "as fast".  They didn't announce the M5 iPad Pro or the M5 14 inch MacBook Pro.  I'm waiting for the M5 MacBook Air in 2026.  The M5 looks very powerful.

Apple Silicon Software Development seems slow

It's been about three years since the initial M1-based machines from Apple became reality.  Why is development lagging?

Steam Hardware Survey

The other day, Steam requested my computer's details.  One is an AMD Ryzen 7 with Geforce RTX 3050 Ti (laptop version, of course), and the other is a 2020 MacBook Air M1.  In reporting, Steam shows AppleVirtual processor and 1440x900 resolution, which is far from the truth, unless of course, you don't care to make your software the best and take advantage of the actual power that is available.

I've only had my 2020 M1 MacBook Air for about a year, but it seems as though most applications are only compatible through emulation.

I could understand why Adobe wouldn't be quick about it.  They were dragging their feet on the way to Mac OS X in 2000.  They wouldn't port Premier Pro, and Apple brought out Final Cut and Aperture.

Intuit was also complaining, but then, they wanted us to move to Windows because they told people "the Mac is just too difficult to program" or some such, used to justify the higher price and lower functionality.

What got me over the years was that Microsoft was Apple's enemy and yet, their software was better for Mac OS X than that of Adobe, Apple's friend.

It's 2023, not 2003

It still feels as though little has been accomplished since the M1 and other Apple Silicon processors have been available.  The performance is so good that you might not notice the speed of Intel emulation.  Mouse cursor positioning doesn't seem all that stable, though, as of macOS 12.x.

It's been almost three years and I would expect that developers would want to show what their applications could do on better hardware.

Valve Software might not be doing as well as they want people to believe, but I suspect that they could buy a couple of M1-based Macs and update Steam for Apple Silicon.  If that worked out, they could re-jig Source to 64-bit compatibility, as well as Metal compatibility.  Apple might even help them, just to get more games on M1 Macs.  I should note the rumor that Valve and Apple talked about making Proton work on Macs and Apple refused.  Whether it happened or not, things need to be better than running Windows executables on another operating system.  Steam Deck with Proton works but it's not always wonderful.

It really wouldn't hurt Apple to create a division for games and keep it to help third parties develop outstanding games.  A couple of games I had for Windows are available in Apple Arcade but unavailable elsewhere.

It's interesting that Evernote is a Universal binary, but Dropbox is Intel-only.  Google Drive is listed as Apple Silicon, not Universal.  LastPass is Intel-only, but thankfully, Malwarebytes is Universal.

Serif's Affinity applications are Universal, but it seems a number of creative applications are not.  I'm thankful for Capture One Pro being Universal, as well as Affinity Publisher, Designer, and Photo.

How many years until Intel is completely gone from Apple machines?  When Apple pulls the plug on Rosetta 2 will they step up or step away?

Update 2024.07.29: I just updated to macOS 14.6, a Sonoma release.  I got an update for Steam, but I 99% know that it's Intel-only.  I checked updates on GOG Galaxy some 20 minutes ago and I'm waiting for it to finish.  That's perplexing since the Windows version updated a few days ago and I didn't have to check.  It told me.  It's time for the Heroic games launcher.

Electronic Arts finally got around to retiring Origin for the EA launcher, which is Universal.  Most of my games are still Intel-targeted.  Death Stranding is Apple Silicon only and is not available on Steam yet.  Divinity - Original Sin 2 is Intel only.

I've been reminded in some forums that there are 200+ Mac games.  I've also been reminded that you can use Whisky with the Heroic launcher to play some Windows-only games.  There are a few well-known games coming to Mac, including a new Assassins Creed (Shadows?) game.  I have a few of them but Ubisoft hasn't made a game I've loved since the original Rayman on Atari Jaguar.

Of course, it's not all about games, but they are essential to home users.

Update 2024.08.16: Now that the Qualcomm ARM-based machines using a Nuvia-developed SoC have been released, it should be interesting to see if there will be ARM-based games on Windows.  Apparently, the Windows' equivalent to Rosetta 2 is not so amazing.

Perhaps, if game developers start to design games for ARM on the desktop, they'll be able to target Macs as well as Windows machines.  Considering that the M1-based machines arrived in 2020, it's a bit frustrating waiting for something to happen.

I've downloaded Whisky and the Heroic Games Launcher but I haven't tried much, as I am not restricted to macOS, having a Windows 11 machine and a Steam Deck.  I need to focus.  I probably need more than my 1 TB drive and it might make sense to have a big, external drive for my Windows-based games for Mac since I have 230+ games on Steam alone and only a few are native to Mac.

Update 2024.09.02: I was just taking a look at the Steam hardware survey results.  macOS is around 1.3% of the total.  Is that surprising when Valve went out of its way to kill Counter Strike that was working and develop Counter Strike 2 with no executable for Macs?  All of their 32-bit executables from 2010 (?) still work on older machines but unless Rosetta 2 will run them, what's the point?

Why Apple and Valve couldn't even reach a compromise sends a message that isn't necessarily true.  Mac gaming isn't exactly alive but it's not dead, either.  However, the late 1990s were much better than now.

I tried Heroic Games launcher and downloaded a game that I know runs on Apple Arcade and it was fine on Mac.  I've been a bit slow to download much else because of the storage required.  I tried one of the Resident Evil games, which is native for Apple Silicon, and that was surprisingly good on an M1 MacBook Air.  If they have the RE Engine converted, they should be able to port to the whole series.

Unreal Engine 5 runs on macOS but it's the headlines about how bad its performance is on Windows that got my attention.  Trying new technologies is difficult but bringing a gaming system to a crawl is not good--just ask the Starfield people.

Update 2024.12.11: There are a few more games out for Apple Silicon:

• Resident Evil Village
• Resident Evil 7
• Resident Evil 4
• Assassin's Creed: Shadows

I've seen a mention or two about other games and that the Resident Evil Engine was ported, so any in the series could be ported.

With the M3 and M4 SoCs supporting ray tracing and other advanced technologies, there could be more games arriving, but Apple really needs one set of machines for gaming.  They need exceptional air flow, not the thinnest enclosures ever.  That said, my M1 MacBook Air is far ahead of most of the Intel-based Macs and about as fast as my Windows machine, AMD 5800H with Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050Ti.  The MacBook Air's graphics are way ahead of my 5800H's iGPU but not nearly as fast as the 3050Ti, of course.

What happened to the Nuvia/Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite/Plus?

Update 2025.06.13: This week, Apple announced that Rosetta 2 will be diminished with the new macOS Tahoe.  Developers are going to have no choice but to make their software Apple Silicon native.

Since it will be diminished, it will supposedly be effective for older games, maybe other older software that has no chance of being updated.  We'll learn about it soon enough.

 Hopefully, this will inspire developers to work at bringing their software to Apple Silicon after five years of hardware. 

Update 2025.10.30: Since the M5 14 inch MacBook Pro and M5 iPad Pro, people are surprised how fast the SoC is.  I'd like to see the MacBook Air with M5 SoC in spring 2026.  I'm not really happy or trusting of macOS 26 but it's part of the deal.  It's not that my M1 MacBook Air has become slower but that the games run much better on the M5.

I continue to get beta versions of Steam and yet, no native version for me.  I know that they're out there. It's interesting that Windows-based games are running, and running well, at that through Crossover.  I've had some success with the Heroic Games Launcher.  Whisky has been finished. 

Google's new Nexus 7

Ifr you missed the announcement on Wednesday, Google has replaced the Nexus 7 with the Nexus 7.

It uses a Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro--quad core CPU and Adreno 320 GPU with 2 GB of RAM total to power the 1920x1200 pixel resolution display.

The older one used an nVidia Tegra 3 quad+1 core CPU with nVidia's own GPU and a 1280x800 pixel display.

Obviously, it's quite a change.  Having had two of the previous version and returning them for various reasons, I wonder if the newest version will please.  Hopefully, they won't have any quality issues because there were plenty early in each run.  Thankfully, they went with the current 16 and 32 GB storage options.  I also wonder about performance issues.

The older one left me wondering whether I had a defective device or not.  It would be smooth for the longest time (like I'd not seen from Android) and suddenly, it would pause a couple of seconds, and start again suddenly.  There never seemed to be a pattern, and it happened with both the 16 GB version that was then top of the line and after being replaced at the top, the 32 GB version.  You'd think that nVidia (and Google) would have noticed that in testing.

I'm amused at the Apple fanatics who say that there is nothing to the Nexus 7 in comparison to the iPad mini.  What are they missing?  The iPad mini wasn't competition for the original Nexus 7, so how is it that it beats the newer one?  (Update 2013.10.25: Obviously the revised iPad mini with the higher resolution (the same as the full-sized iPad) display is on a more even testing ground with the newer Nexus 7.  Given that both the newer iPad mini and newer Nexus 7 have very powerful processing available, it's simply a matter of taste.  Oh, and the US$170 difference leads to some powerful thoughts.  Google is trying to sell their ecosystem and services while Apple is trying to sell hardware.)

I like Apple products and I was disappointed with the iPad mini by the time it arrived.  There were rumors about the time of the second generation iPad and a 7-8 inch mini version with a 1024x768 pixel display was reasonable then.  As time passed, the specifications remained the same, and the processor was barely newer.  Adding insult to injury, they wanted a premium price for it.  I had zero desire to buy one.

Having had two Nexus 7 tablets and feeling a bit cheated by the experience, I'm not sure I want a tablet at all but I feel it's a good way to display my photos.  If I buy a tablet, it's going to be from 7-8 inches for the display.  The Nexus 7 and iPad mini would still be the likely items.

Right now, Apple is having trouble lining up displays for the iPad mini, so they need to have a fire sale because I don't see how they're going to sell what's now a US$149 tablet using Android.

Update 2013.11.14: I tried the 2013 version of the Nexus 7 briefly and found it to be more agreeable than the 2012 versions.  Even though there is a rather massive difference in display surface area, I'm not sure it's going to be a huge deal for people wanting a tablet that they can hold in one hand.  While I was in Micro Center yesterday, I saw people buying a US$50 tablet as though it would solve everyone's deepest needs.  I suspect, being that cheap, the people behind the tablet have zero mechanisms for dealing with software updates so what you see is what you get, even if you somehow naively think you're getting a Nexus 7 equivalent.

Update 2013.12.03: I've had a 2013 Nexus 7 for a couple of weeks.  It's everything I hoped with none of the bad.  The fact that I got it US$30 cheaper than the regular price helped sway me to part with the money.  The new iPad mini is good, but not very good, and for less money, the 2013 Nexus 7 is so much better.  It's the tablet I expected from Apple before they even had anything ready for the public.  It's too bad that Apple decided to raise the price, rather than dropping it.  Of course, Google raised their price also, but the new tablet is much, much better than the 2012 version.

Update 2014.03.15: I've had my Nexus 7 for a few months.  It got the Android 4.4.2 update not long after I bought it.  I still have my doubts about Android.  It works as though it is tested for functionality, but not for the user experience at all.  The 2012 Nexus 7 is evidence of that.  If anyone had actually tried that tablet, they never would have let it go to market.

Still, in a casual setting, the newer Nexus 7 is stable and except for the occasional glitch performs well.  For games, a lot is dependent on the game but they all seem more unhappy than their iOS relatives.  That's sad because this is the Google tablet.  If they can't get Android to perform correctly on products labeled as their own, how can they handle other products correctly?

Update 2015.04.27: The Nexus 7 has been said to no longer be available via Google.  It's surprising that they didn't replace it already, but it doesn't look as though they care to replace it at all.

With the latest Android version 5.1, mine doesn't seem to be working all that well, even though that was the performance fix release for 5.0.  I can only imagine how horribly the 2012 version of the tablet is struggling to work.  Maybe, it is time to call it quits.