iPhone 6 Impressions

The larger screen is nice, but not without its disadvantages. When compared to the iPhone 5, I find it much more difficult to use the phone one handed, particularly when typing. For me it’s an acceptable tradeoff but I’d guess there are many who’d prefer a smaller phone instead. It seems odd that Apple would eliminate one of Android’s competitive advantages (larger screens) and replace it with another (smaller screens). If you want a smaller iPhone, your only option now is to buy last year’s models: the 5s or the 5c. Perhaps next year Apple will also offer an iPhone 6s mini so that you can have both a smaller phone and the newest technology.

This is the first iOS device I've had with Touch ID and it’s sweet. It doesn’t seem like it would be that big of a deal, but being able to unlock your phone with your fingerprint is really convenient. You can register multiple fingerprints: adding both thumbs and my right index finger worked well for me. You can also use it to silence alarms and approve app store purchases.

I haven’t had a chance yet to use Apple Pay, Apple’s mobile payment technology that uses Touch ID, but I’ll be giving it a try in the next couple of weeks when my credit card issuer begins support for it. There’s been a bit of a kerfuffle in the last week as many retailers have disabled all NFC mobile payments (which includes both Apple Pay and Google Wallet) in response to consumers trying to pay using their iPhones.

It turns out these retailers (including CVS and Rite-Aid) want to push their own mobile payment technology called CurrentC—which has yet to be fully released—but it’s already dead on arrival. Apparently there’s one thing that iOS and Android users agree on: only an idiot would use CurrentC.

The CurrentC apps on iTunes and Google Play are invite-only, but they already have thousands of one star reviews (and pretty much only one star reviews). It turns out that people are not very interested in giving up their social security, driver’s license, and bank account numbers just so the merchants can track their spending habits and save on credit card transaction fees. Go figure.

Revolutionary? The Day After

Apple kicked off their new hardware event yesterday with a bizarre live streaming snafu of epic proportions. It was so embarrassing that they’ve perpetually lost their rights to mock the Blue Screen of Death in any way, shape, or form.

After hyping the living daylights out of this event—including a countdown on their web site’s home page and an ABC teaser for a post-event exclusive interview on what was billed as an historic announcement—it was virtually impossible to actually live stream the live stream for the first half hour or so of the event.

And it wasn't just that you got that spinning circle of waiting while the content loaded. There was a bizarre collection of colored bars, error messages, and previously streamed video. And for the brief periods where you could get the live stream, it included a Chinese audio translation.

For a company that likes to meticulously orchestrate its media events, it was a fiasco.

Fortunately, there were no major surprises in what was announced: iPhones with larger screens, a payment system to replace credit and debit cards, and a smart watch. Many of the details had already been leaked, revealed, or rumored in the months and weeks leading up to the event.

Whether you view Apple Pay or Apple Watch as revolutionary depends upon whether you viewed the iPod, iPhone, or iPad as revolutionary. Apple was not first to market with any of these product categories, but arguably their entry into these markets redefined customer expectations. I happen to believe that creating a usable device—the innovation of how the parts are integrated and work together—trumps being first to market with a new technology embedded in a poorly designed piece of crap.

Predictably, there was the standard refrain for new Apple hardware. It's too expensive. It’s too big. Its battery life is too short. It’s already been done.

To be fair, a price starting at $350 is a lot of money to pay for what is essentially an iPhone accessory, and the battery life—never mentioned in the presentation—appears to be about a day. I think I’ll wait for the second or third generation before I consider buying one of these.

But that doesn’t mean we didn’t see the beginning of something big yesterday. If the design of the Apple Watch is significantly better than its competitors, then there will be no shortage of early adopters. Don’t forget that the cost of the first generation iPod started at $400 and the first generation iPhone at $499. If the first generation Apple Watch is successful we’ll see subsequent generations that are cheaper, smaller, more efficient, and more powerful.

I’ve never seen anyone making a purchase in a store by waving their phone or watch at a checkout device. Whether or not this becomes a common occurrence with Apple devices in the next few years will be the best indicator of whether we witnessed something groundbreaking yesterday.

Revolutionary?

Tuesday Apple will announce new iPhones and presumably their next big thing: the iWatch, iBracelet, or iWhatever.

I wore a watch for decades until the ubiquity of devices displaying the time and date made me realize I was wearing it more out of habit than need. At first it felt a bit weird not wearing it, like I wasn’t completely dressed, and I do occasionally miss being able to glance at my wrist to see the time, but I've now grown used to having both wrists bare.

So what would Apple need to announce in order for me to slap something on my wrist again?

In the immediate future, probably not much. My first iPod was a 2nd generation iPod Touch in 2008, seven years after the first iPod was available; my first iPhone was an iPhone 4 in 2010, three years after the original; and I got an iPad 2 in 2011, a year after the first model came out. I like and primarily use Apple products, but I’m not an early adopter (although my activities as an iOS developer give me an excuse to update my hardware more frequently than the typical user).

I can’t see spending a few hundred dollars on a smart watch/bracelet that displays text/email notifications from my phone, counts my steps, and/or monitors my blood pressure. No doubt there are some who would find these features useful, but we’ve already seen these type of features in smart watches from Apple’s competitors.

And I certainly don’t need another device that needs to be charged on a daily basis. I already have to carry a bag full of cables with me whenever I travel, so if I'm putting something on my wrist it had better stay charged for at least a couple of days.

Typically Apple doesn’t enter a hardware category unless it believes it’s created a superior or unique product that consumers will want. Perhaps what they’ll be announcing Tuesday is something that’s different or much better designed than anything we’ve seen before. Something revolutionary. A product that nobody knew they wanted until they saw it.

In any event, since Apple is perpetually doomed, it won’t matter whether what’s announced Tuesday is revolutionary or not.

Fingerprints and the iPhone 5s

Senator Al Franken has some privacy concerns with Apple’s new iPhone:

I am writing regarding Apple’s recent inclusion of a fingerprint reader on the new iPhone 5S. Apple has long been a leading innovator of mobile technology; I myself own an iPhone. At the same time, while Apple’s new fingerprint reader, Touch ID, may improve certain aspects of mobile security, it also raises substantial privacy questions for Apple and for anyone who may use your products. In writing you on this issue, I am seeking to establish a public record of how Apple has addressed these issues internally and in its rollout of this technology to millions of my constituents and other Americans.

This is an important discussion, but perhaps the government should be answering privacy questions as well as asking them. Identify theft via fake fingerprints becomes an issue only if fingerprints, like social security numbers, become a routine method of identification. If fingerprint readers in consumer devices don’t work reliably, aren’t convenient, and aren’t secure, consumers simply won’t use them.

On the other hand, imagine how much say you’ll have in the matter if the government decides your fingerprints are a good way to identify you before you board a flight. If that seems far-fetched, consider that you already have to choose between being irradiated or molested every time you fly as part of the TSA’s security theater. Fingerprinting is already required for many jobs and in some states to obtain a driver’s license or purchase a gun.

If you’re worried about Apple opening a Pandora’s box, remember that it’s usually the government that creates a self-aware supercomputer and puts it in charge of all the weapons.