Category Archives: Computers/Electronics

Older Apple phones…

For a while now there’s been a suspicion among users of Apple phones that older models (ie, any model which isn’t the very latest one) are experiencing slow downs.

It produced one of those “dark” conspiracies that Apple was purposely doing this to people who had older models of their phones to essentially encourage them to spend their money on the latest models.

Apple outright denied this for a while, stating that if the phones are experiencing any lag in their processing it was due to other factors.  The phone’s processor was an older model and today there’s so much more processing that need be done.  Or perhaps it was related to the wireless services people were using, etc. etc.

Well, turns out the dark conspiracy wasn’t all that dark after all.  this article, by Ivana Kottasová and presented on CNN, pulls the curtains to reveal…

Apple: Yes we’re slowing down older iPhones

You know, as I sit here typing this line, I feel a sense of rage building in me that’s all too damn familiar.

I like Apple products.  I’ve noted this before.  I really like my iPad and use it quite a lot during the course of the day.  I love the Apple pencil and I love the artwork I can do on it.  I love the fact that I have my music available for me (I do not, however, use iTunes).  I love that I can see my films or read a ton of books I’ve purchased (again, none of this through Apple).

Further, I have an Apple iPhone 6 and I’ve had it for several years now and haven’t felt the need to upgrade at all.

Despite using these two Apple products, I’ve always been leery of the company.  As good as they are, under the reign of Steve Jobs I’ve always felt that there was a mentality of extreme capitalism at work within them.  Sure, they released some dynamite products, but there was always this claim that their products were so sophisticated and advanced and original which, of course, more often than not they weren’t.  Much of the functionality present in Apple products was created by other companies but, to Apple’s extreme credit, they managed to polish these products and make them just about as good as they could be.

But the Faustian bargain for those buying into the products is that you were expected to keep buying them, often being tempted only a year down the line with newer, better versions of something you already had.

I recall many years ago when the iPods were released and my daughters wanted them desperately.  I bought two of them for Christmas, the then lastest models, and my daughters were thrilled to death to get them.

But a month or so later and into the new year, it was announced a new version of iPods would be released and they, unlike the ones I just spent my hard earned money on, would have cameras on them to take pictures (natch) and which could also be used for video conferencing between people who had them.

I was livid.

As I said, I spent my hard earned money on a product Apple was at that time promoting the living hell out of when they knew full well that a better version of the same was about to be released.  They were essentially making suckers of their clients in the hopes of selling out whatever stock was left in their warehouses before it was discontinued.

But even before that, I was never impressed with their annual conference/sales pitch for their latest products.  In my eyes, it reduced Steve Jobs (who, until his death was the headliner) into essentially being a slick used car salesman.  Now, make no mistake: I was clearly in the minority here as many in the tech world and outside it tuned in eagerly to hear what was new.

Yet it felt to me like too much of a sales pitch and, thus, made me suspicious.

After Steve Jobs’ death, I wondered how Apple would survive.  Like or loath him, Jobs was Apple, and the success of the company was attributable -despite my personal reservations- to his hard work and salesmanship.

Today, it seems to me Apple as a company is either status quo or slipping slightly.  The technology they sell has reached something of a plateau and huge innovations (like that damned camera on the iPod) aren’t coming as fast as before.

Returning to the story linked to above, one can’t help but get angry at the idea that this massive, so damn profitable company may be resorting to tricks such as slowing older phone models down.  According to the article, Apple states that there is no nefarious reason for the slowdowns they initiated, that this has to do with the older lithium batteries that need to be treated differently or else the phone will shut off.  Or something…

Sure now.

If they’re so worried about how the lithium batteries function, why design a phone that doesn’t allow you to pull out and swap batteries?  I mean, if the battery is even the problem to begin with.

Because there are going to be a hell of a lot of people who are going to believe the slowdown is designed for one reason and one reason only: To get people frustrated with their older phones and make them want to spend money on the latest models.

In spite of my anger, truth be told I don’t see myself giving up my iPad at this moment, especially considering how new it is.  However, given the age of my phone, when the time comes and it needs to be replaced, and given articles like the one above, I’m going to think long and hard about whether I’ll replace my phone with another Apple iPhone.  In fact, at this moment I’d say the odds are low that I will bother with another iPhone.

And a few years down the line and when the time comes when I need to replace my tablet, there’s a good chance I’ll be looking around for alternatives there as well.

That is, if Apple continues down this particular road.

God only knows what its doing to our children’s brains…

Rather scary article written by Rob Price and found on businessinsider.com regarding ex-Facebook president Sean Parker and some rather scary things he has to say about our social media platforms like the one that he was president of:

Billionaire ex-Facebook President Sean Parker Unloads on Mark Zuckerberg and Admits He Helped Build a Monster

The “money” quote from the article is posted on the headline above, that Mr. Parker notes that these platforms were developed with the express idea of becoming addictive to its users.  This from Mr. Parker:

The thought process that went into building these applications, Facebook being the first of them … was all about: ‘How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?

Not all that long ago I recall watching a TV program (60 Minutes?  I’m not certain) about cellphones and social media and it was noted by the person who was being interviewed that there is a science behind many of the programs, like Facebook, that draw masses of people to them, and that the model for drawing people to them is very similar to that of…

…wait for it…

Gambling.

Mr. Parker further states:

And that means that we need to sort of give you a little dopamine hit every once in a while, because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever.  And that’s going to get you to contribute more content, and that’s going to get you … more likes and comments.

It’s a social-validation feedback loop … exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology.

In other words, these platforms are built to not only get you on them with their various bells and whistles, but keep you on them once you’ve tasted their wares.

I have to say, like Mr. Parker I do wonder what effect this will have on people growing up with these services.

As someone who didn’t grow up with them, there have been plenty of times I’ve forgotten to take my cellphone with me to places and the biggest inconvenience, to me, is the fact that I subsequently couldn’t make a call from my car.

My daughters, on the other hand, have their cellphones essentially attached to them.  One day, one of them forgot to take it with her to a store.  It was, to her, an incredible, mind-blowing thing to have forgotten!

Here’s the thing, though: As the science of getting people essentially “addicted” to these various platforms becomes sharper and more effective, is it possible people will no longer be able to function, at all, without their cell phones and the social platform programs?

One wonders.

I suppose it shouldn’t be a big surprise…

But according to this article by Kaya Yurieff over at CNN.com…

Bill Gates just switched to an Android phone

As I said in the header, it shouldn’t be too big a surprise as Mr. Gates never seemed all that interested in pursuing Apple products.

Speaking as someone who owns an Apple iPhone (don’t know which generation it is, but I do know it is at least two generations “old” at this point and I don’t have a huge desire to upgrade) and iPad (if you’ve seen my Sketchin’ posts, you know I’m loving using the iPad 10.5 inch and Apple Pencil to create these images), I can appreciate the good Apple does but there is a part of me that remains uneasy with the whole enterprise.

While I appreciate the elegance of their products, there is this (for lack of a better word) greed that at least to me permeates their entire being.

I know, I know.

They’re an industry and they cater to their bottom line, just like all other tech companies.  What do you expect them to do, not want to make money?

Yeah, but Apple seems to take that to a larger degree.

While we see new models of Android phones come and go, Apple revels in their yearly new product “events”, where they pitch their latest products as “must” buys, even as they’re no doubt already at work on the next (and probably next after that) iteration of their “new” phone already.  And the changes from one product to the next haven’t been all that incredibly great of late, at least IMHO, and the whole thing feels more and more like a hard sell for something that you may neither want nor really need.

As I mentioned above, I have -and love– my new 10.5 inch iPad because it allows me to use the Apple Pencil and create wonderful artwork without having to deal with messy inks and pencils.

However, apart from this -and it obviously is a very big thing to me personally- I don’t see that much of a difference between that iPad and the one I owned before, which I believe was a second or third generation version.

Yes, the art stuff is fabulous, but if you’re not into doing artwork on your iPad, then there’s really no need to spend the $500+ -and that’s not counting the $100 for that Apple Pencil!- on a this new machine.

In fact, when I purchased the 10.5 inch iPad, I figured after checking it out I’d also upgrade my wife’s iPad as, like me, she’d also been using the same 2nd or 3rd generation machine as I was.

But when I got the new iPad, I realized that the art stuff was the only real reason to get the new machine.  Sure, the new machine also has a better camera and a few more bells and whistles, including a faster processor and a crisper monitor, but the difference isn’t so incredible as to merit the extra expense… especially if you’re happy with your iPad and you don’t really need to do art with that Apple Pencil.

So there you have it.

I own and enjoy certain Apple products, yet I’m skeptical of the company itself and their extreme (again, IMHO) ways of trying to get you to give them your money.

Ah well!

Oh…my

Found this article over at digitaljournal.com and written by James Walker:

Researchers shut down AI that invented its own language

Whew…

If I understand the article right, Facebook developed an AI system that, they realized, was creating its own language to interact with each other.

Gulp.

I’ve written fiction involving AI machines.  The sudden realization that AI machines -even rudimentary ones- may be “intelligent” enough to create their own language to interact with each other…

Wow.

Just, wow.

Should we be amazed?  Afraid?  Equal parts of both?

Perhaps.

Sign of things to come…

Found this article by Chris D’Angelo over at CNN.com…

Boss of Coal-Hauling Railroad says “Fossil Fuels Are Dead”

Hunter Harrison, the CEO of freight railroad CSX Corporation, represents one of the largest railroad companies that haul coal around the country and, for him to say the above is certainly thought provoking.

Whenever I delve into politics, what often bugs me the most is that people tend to have a certain predisposition to information and are often unwilling and/or unable -or even worse, outright lie- about other views.

I’ve pointed out before that I lived through the earlier days of the desktop home computer revolution.  This began, roughly, in the very early 1980’s and my very first computer was an Atari 800…

Image result for atari 800

There she is, in all her glory and with the cartridge bay open (the computer could have two -count ’em- two cartridges placed within the system simultaneously!  (Never mind that I don’t think there ever was a need to have more than one in at a time)

Computer systems have come a hell of a long way since those heady days of the early 1980’s and I’m certain if I offered anyone the choice of going back to that old Atari 800 or using the latest iPhone the choice would be laughably one-sided.

Which is why it frustrates me to see us still using fossil fuels and coal when clearly there are other, cleaner ways of getting our energy.

Ironically enough, it is because of the success of things like cell phones, laptops, etc. and the desire to make better and better batteries for them that has lead to what appears to be this new energy revolution.

Because we needed better and better batteries for our smaller computer gadgets, we’ve developed batteries and battery technologies which have, in turn, uses beyond the cell phone or laptop.

Thus after too many years of extremely slow growth, it appears the electric car may finally replace the old combustion engine.  Solar power, too, is becoming a much more significant piece of our energy grid as is wind power.

And then you have people like Mr. Harrison, whose company operated within the fossil fuel industry, coming out and noting he has to think ahead and that his manner of business is on the outs.

Incredible.

And, moreso, it gives me hope that we can finally start cleaning this planet in earnest.

After all, why would anyone want to live in a smog filled, dirty world?

Got an iPhone?

Then check out this article, written by Heather Kelly and presented on CNN.com:

What to expect with the iPhone 8

The subheadline states:

Tim Cook probably wishes people were a little less excited about the next iPhone.

In other words, don’t expect a revolutionary new phone.  It would appear those days are over -for now anyway- and every new iteration of the iPhone looks to have incremental changes, including lighter weight, better processors, better cameras, etc.

Just don’t expect anything revolutionary.

Consumer Reports vs the new MacBook Pro, part deux

A little while back there were shockwaves released in the tech world when Consumer Reports did not endorse the new MacBook Pro, citing very inconsistent battery life as a main problem.

Apple took the report very seriously and, together with Consumer Reports, apparently worked things out and now the venerable customer watchdog has issued the coveted “recommended” for the latest Apple product.

Consumer Reports changes mind recommends new MacBook Pro

However…

Despite getting the recommendation, it appears there remains ..friction… between Consumer Reports and Apple.

After issuing the recommendation, and according to the article above, Consumer Reports stated the problem with the MacBook Pro’s battery life was a result of a “bug” in the programming which Apple fixed.

Apple, on the other hand, stated the following:

Consumer Reports’ testing did “not reflect real-world usage”…(and) that Consumer Reports used a “hidden Safari setting” in its testing that consumers don’t typically turn on.

Interesting, though obviously very insider-type stuff.  Both sides essentially are arguing they were in the right and the other in the wrong.  Consumer Reports blames the problem on a bug Apple missed.  Apple, on the other hand, states the problem was a Consumer Reports screw up in the way they used the laptop.

As I said, interesting.  Very interesting.

No hard feelings, right?!

The Bigger They Are…

I’ve noted before how much I love new technology.  I’m always on the lookout for new products and love reading reviews of the same.

Not everything out there is worth buying, of course.  I can’t quite see the need to have, for example, this…

Image result for samsung refrigerator with tv

Don’t get me wrong, the “Family Hub” refrigerator may be a great product and all but…seriously, neither my wife nor I -together or separately- spend the sort of time in the kitchen area one would need to to actually use something like this.

For many years, Apple has been the golden child of technology.  Their iPhone, let’s face it, is THE phone to have for many, even though the Samsung models -and the big black eye they received with the Galaxy Note 7- are nonetheless is doing quite alright in terms of sales and market share, thankyouverymuch.

As I’ve also noted before, I’ve been around long enough to know that just because your company is big/huge now doesn’t mean you’ll stay there.

When I was very young, Atari was THE video game system.  Everyone had it.  Everyone loved it.  And for a while there it seemed Atari could do no wrong.

Image result for atari 2600

Until, that is, competitors came and stole Atari’s thunder with better products and games.  Atari, that dominant behemoth of the video game world, fell into disarray and, while the name still exists on certain products, the original company is long gone.

When smartphones started to come along, there was plenty of competition until one name rose above them all: Blackberry.

Image result for blackberry

These phones were so popular that people dubbed them “Crackberrys” because one could not be without them.

Well, the Apple iPhone came along and Blackberry had no answer.  Eventually, the company folded and no more Blackberrys are being made

But as big a company as Apple has become, I’ve noted there are troubles brewing.  The death of Steve Jobs, the company’s co-founder and guiding light, certainly had to affect the company’s direction.  Yet the iPhones were still doing well and the iPads were/are pretty damn great products and even their computers were doing well–

–Until:

Apple’s newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

When the reports of the newest MacBooks were released, I was, as I always am with new products, interested in reading what was new and interesting in them.  Turned out there was one thing, it seemed, worth mentioning: The newest MacBook Pro laptop had a…touchbar?!

Image result for macbook pro touch bar

This graphic shows you what the touchbar does.  It effectively offers you a touchable bar (duh) where you can put shortcut keys or emojis or whatever you want to aid in whatever you’re doing.

Frankly, I was bewildered.

It just seems so…minor…a thing to add.  What about making the entire screen touchable?  It’s not like that doesn’t exist already in so many models of computers like, say, the Surface…

Image result for microsoft surface

I genuinely thought the new MacBooks would go the Surface route.  I mean, the iPad effectively is an intermediary already.  Why not go the full route with the MacBooks?

Yet this was not done.

But according to the above article, Consumer Reports was particularly bothered by inconsistent battery charge in these MacBooks.  Consumer Reports wrote (this is quoted in the article):

The MacBook Pro battery life results were highly inconsistent from one trial to the next.

For instance, in a series of three consecutive tests, the 13-inch model with the Touch Bar ran for 16 hours in the first trial, 12.75 hours in the second, and just 3.75 hours in the third. The 13-inch model without the Touch Bar worked for 19.5 hours in one trial but only 4.5 hours in the next. And the numbers for the 15-inch laptop ranged from 18.5 down to 8 hours. 

Yikes.

I mean, if you need your laptop for work and you can’t charge it and are expecting to get at least six hours of work in…its understandable if you’re very frustrated if 4 hours into whatever you’re doing the battery in your MacBook is down to nothing.  Especially if previously its given you 10 plus hours.

Apple remains a very big, influential, and admired company and there isn’t a reason (yet anyway) to think they’re about to go down like Atari or Blackberry did.  However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t danger.

They need to focus on improving their products and, frankly, making sure these types of glitches don’t occur again.

Otherwise, they may well join the ranks of the once mighty.

Smartwatches…R.I.P.?!

Over at Gizmodo.com Alex Cranz offers an article on Smartwatches.  This article anticipates/predicts the death of these products:

Smartwatches are dying because they’re useless

I’ve noted before I absolutely love tech and am always curious about new tech.  I’m intrigued by them and always interested in reading about, if not actually trying/buying new products, provided they are useful.

On the other hand, I’m not quick to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.  I noted several times before how articles were predicting the end of the desktop PC.  My feeling was that while laptops/tablets were wonderful, there would always be, at least for me, a need to have a desktop computer.  I like the big screen (today, you can get multiple really big screens if you want).  I prefer the full ergonomic keyboard versus the ones usually found on laptops.

Further, it was my feeling the whole “desktop computers are dying” article failed to note that desktop PCs by that time had reached a point where they were so damn good (in terms of speed, capacity, and durability) there was no need for people to buy a new desktop PC every year like we used to when the processors were constantly being improved.

Having/using a desktop PC also didn’t mean I didn’t need or want a tablet or laptop computer.  Its just that when I’m writing, which as an author one tends to do, my preference is to do so while sitting behind my trusty ol’ desktop computer.

The smartwatches, though?

Their usefulness remained elusive to me.  I mean, there were certain things that were undeniably cool about them but it just seemed they were nothing more than an even smaller version of your smartphone, but with two very big problems: 1) their battery charge, at least in those early model releases, seemed pathetically small and 2) their actual usefulness depended on being linked to smartphones.

Why, I asked myself, would you get a smartwatch which needs to be charged every day and, if actually used, as often as twice a day?  Then again, why get a smartwatch when you already have a smartphone doing the things the smartwatch is supposed to do?  Its not like carrying a smartphone is a burden.  If you already carry around a smartphone, why get this ancillary bit of tech?

So I didn’t bother looking into smartwatches much more after reading the initial reviews/stories of their capabilities.  Over time it appeared the hysteria for this new tech dropped quite a bit.  Now there are numbers attesting to this, from the article linked to above:

A more recent report from IDC suggests the Apple Watch, the most popular product of its kind, saw a 71.3 percent drop in sales from last year, overall sales dropped 51.6 percent.

Yikes.

Unless I’m terribly mistaken (not beyond the realm of possibility), the Apple Watch was the only “new” tech Apple provided in the last few years.  I mean, they are doing well with their iPhone and iPad and I suppose their laptops are growing in popularity versus before, but other than Apple TV (is that a success?  I genuinely don’t know), the Smartwatch was their Big New Product™ and, based on the numbers listed above, it appears that product is in the process of bombing.

This leads me to a secondary point which I’ve also noted before:  The success of a business, especially a tech based business, is to convince people every so often -say within a year or less- they have either a) a better version of an already popular product which their buyers need to get and thus spend money on while discarding the old in favor of the new or b) the company offers something “new: to buy and, hopefully, this product will prove popular and, over time, slides into the “a” column.

Desktop PCs are a beautiful example of this.  The desktop computer was first sold in the very late 1970’s/early 1980’s (my first desktop computer was the Atari 800).  The desktop computer proved a popular product and soon we had the IBM based machines with their mighty 8088 processors.

These computers were, compared to the computers of today, absolute garbage but at that time were state of the art.  Improvements were rapidly made and for those who lived through the rise of the desktop PC you’ll remember we went through a succession of better and better models.  In almost every case, you quite literally had to consider buying a new model each year as the new ones put the older models to shame.

And then, as I stated above, we reached a point where the desktop PC reached a plateau and suddenly it wasn’t so very necessary to consider buying a new desktop PC to replace your old one.  In my case, I used to buy new desktop PCs every year to two years and suddenly I realized a desktop PC I had worked for me a mind-boggling 5-6 years before I decided to replace it…and that was because I noticed the machine was glitching.

The current computer I have is 2+ years old.  I have neither need nor desire to replace it with a new one and don’t anticipate doing so for years to come.

As successful as Apple is, I suspect they’ve reached a similar point with their tech.  It wasn’t all that very long ago when new versions of their iPhone would come out and it was a freaking event.  I mean, people were lining up around the block and overnight to be the first to get their hands on the new and improved model.  And the new and improved models were indeed new and very much improved over the previous ones.

Now, though, while the iPhone remains very popular, the newer versions don’t grip the public like before.  I don’t see lines forming like they used to at the various tech shops/cell phone companies for their new product.

Same seems to apply to their tablets.  I love my iPad.  At least two new versions of the iPad were released since I bought mine.  While I certainly would love to buy one of those new 12 inch monitor versions, the reality is that I get pretty much everything I want out of my current iPad and don’t need the new one.  Buying a new model is an expensive luxury I can afford not to have.

But at least those products proved successful enough to get people interested in buying, if for a while, each new version.  With the Smartwatch, it appears this bit of tech may be hitting a dead end almost from the start and people may be aware now they simply don’t need them.

It is possible, of course, for future iterations of the Smartwatch to come and prove themselves more useful.  Then again, if we go by the sales figures, things look mighty bleak for the future of the Smartwatch.

Do video games make us cruel?

It’s a fascinating question that I admit has been on my mind more and more these days.

But I’m getting ahead of myself: It wasn’t always like that.

In fact, when the first protests against video games were heard, it was back in the days when the Atari 2600 and its stone age graphics/sounds was still popular and Arcades even moreso, as the games there were light years ahead of whatever you could play at home.

Still, I recall people wondering if video games might be bad for those playing it.  If the aggression displayed on these games is something we should worry about.  For let’s face it, almost every video game created with some notable exceptions involve your character killing someone/something to get ahead.

One of the very first mega-popular video games (after Pong) was Space Invaders

Image result for space invaders

I couldn’t even guess how many hours I spent playing this game.  For those who haven’t, you’re the little guy at the bottom of the screen and you’ve got four bunkers which protect you from the wave of invaders above you.  They move across the screen and then down, slowly coming your way.  Your job is to shoot and kill these waves of invaders before they kill you.

A short time later Pacman became THE big game of the arcade…

Image result for pac man

You are Pacman, a yellow dot with a mouth and your job is to navigate the maze you are in and eat all those dots before the four “ghosts” get you.  The bigger dots grant you the temporary power to eat those ghosts…though their demise is always temporary.

Many, many other games followed, both with home systems and in the Arcades (at least until computer technology got so good there was no longer a need for Arcades to exist… you could play better games in the comfort of your home).

Point is, when I heard back then the protests of violence in video games I thought it was beyond silly.  These games, state of the art thought they were back then, were so obviously a fiction that, my younger self felt, only an over-concerned fool would think anyone playing these games would mistake them with reality.

Of course, we’ve come a very long way since then and the question I scoffed at years before I must admit I don’t scoff at now.

The fact is that many games feature spectacular -and sometimes very real– graphics.  Here, for example, is a screen shot from one of the currently hottest video games out there, Battlefield 1:

Image result for battlefield 1 best images

The level of detail in this image alone is, to put it bluntly, stunning.  I have the game and have played it and everything about the game, visually, is indeed incredible.  If I could somehow go back in time to my Space Invaders playing self and show him that game, I suspect young me would have a meltdown.

Compare the above image with this screen shot from the vector based game Red Baron, one of the most popular games way back then which feature a WWI theme like Battlefield 1:

Related image

How about that?!

Thing is, the crudity of the graphics created a sense of unreality to those early games.  We knew we were dealing with a simulation because nothing in real life looked like this.

Not so today.

Laura Miller over at Slate magazine offers an interesting article concerning worries some have that today’s video games with their hyper-realistic graphics and at times very gory/violent themes might eventually make us, if not more violent, perhaps more cruel

How Video Games Change Us

It’s a fascinating read and, for those who think it leans one way or the other, it is a very even handed, IMHO, article that points out the pros and cons of the argument.

If you’re like me and worry that perhaps today’s more violent video games may have some kind of effect on the players, its a worthy read.