Why you don’t need mesh WiFi, especially Google’s offering

Image courtesy of Amazon

At the beginning of this year, I bought a couple of Asus-produced Google OnHubs on the cheap.  You may be wondering why I purchased a router that Google was already phasing out in favor of the Google WiFi “pucks” that had already been released, and the answer is simple: OnHubs were updated to run the same Google WiFi mesh software that the pucks run, they had stronger antennas, and they were frequently on sale for a fraction of the price ($99 each).  Smart purchase, right?

Well, maybe not so much.

First, as a quick refresher on what exactly mesh WiFi is, I should mention that these systems are basically all compromised or two or more independent access points (most systems seem to have three, but two is also pretty standard) that all simultaneously share and broadcast the same WiFi connection.  This is different from a range extender, which doesn’t broadcast the same WiFi connection, but actually takes your existing WiFi network and rebroadcasts it as a new network.  These devices typically have very poor throughput and introduce a whole host of other issues (way more wireless interference, for example) that mesh WiFi systems don’t suffer from, or suffer from at a dramatically lower degree.

A lot of mesh WiFi systems also aim to solve the problem that “WiFi is hard to setup and administer,” which I’m not entirely sure is a real problem these days.  True, I wouldn’t expect my mom to be able to setup a WiFi network with a traditional router, but I am confident the results would be the same if she tried with a more “consumer friendly” mesh WiFi system.  Similarly, I think if you can setup a WiFi network with Google WiFi, you can probably also go grab any random Linksys router produced in the last couple of years and set it up just as easily.

Now, I am not intimately familiar with all mesh WiFi systems, but I do know that many are similar to Google WiFi in that they do not offer a web admin page.  This was something I knew when I bought the device, and was hoping that once I got past the initial setup, it wouldn’t be a big deal.  If you’ve read my articles before, you’re probably aware that even though I like to tinker, I also tend to appreciate devices that “just work.”  That is, those that trade off showing a lot of what’s under the hood in favor of being simpler to use.

Google WiFi is not one of those devices.  The app is a pain to use and is extremely limited.  It requires that you login with an account (a Google account in this case), as do some others like Eero, which requires you to have an Eero account.  This seems innocuous enough, but in reality, it was a Google Accounts system bug that caused Google to accidentally wipe a large amount of Google WiFi systems this February.

Let me repeat that again – Google remote wiped my WiFi system in February, as well as the routers of many others.  I woke up that morning and had to scramble to setup my old router so that my wife could work that day.  It wasn’t until I checked the news that I found out what had happened.  This is shameful enough, but to make matters worse, the Google WiFi app doesn’t allow you to make a backup of your settings.  You’d think Google would have some sort of way to back your settings up to the cloud, but uh…nope.  I had to set everything back up from scratch.  My DHCP reservations, NAT settings, the mesh network itself…all of it.  Thanks, Google.

My list of complaints with Google WiFi doesn’t end there, but I’ll spare you.  I’ve had numerous other issues that boil down to the simple fact that the app just isn’t powerful enough, but one issue I never had with the system was the WiFi coverage.  It was night and day compared to my previous router, the TP Link Archer AC1750.  The TP Link was fine in my previous house, a single story of about 1450 square feet, but when we moved into a temporary, 2-story house rent house that wasn’t even that much bigger (around 1700 square feet), things started to go bad with the WiFi, and I thought mesh was the solution.  When we got around to buying another house (another 2-story, but bigger than the rent house), the Google WiFi mesh system was still a champ at providing total coverage, including the back yard and well down the street, but everything else about it was utter garbage.

One day, I got so frustrated with the Google WiFi that I unplugged them, tossed them into a corner, and plugged the TP Link router back in.  Coverage was…considerably worse, so I started researching other mesh WiFi systems, only to end up frustrated that they all seemed to suffer from similar issues that the Google WiFi did – companies had a way to remotely update, and thus remotely wipe your devices, systems had no admin web sites, offered mesh at the cost of some overall speed due to no dedicated backhaul, save for the Netgear Orbis, and they were all incredibly expensive.  Frustrated, I reached out to Twitter, and a friend recommended a Netgear Nighthawk.  I began researching similar products, and found that maybe I just needed a better normal router instead of mesh.

Image courtesy of Amazon

I finally landed on the D-Link DIR-882.  This router has more antennas, better range, and newer technology like beam-forming that, despite it being 802.11ac like my old TPLink router, allow it to cover the entire house, backyard, and also down the street.  So, yeah, I never needed mesh WiFi.  I just needed a good, traditional router, and I suspect the same applies to most of you.

And I have never been so happy to see a web admin page.

If you are having WiFi issues – coverage or anything else – and you happen to stumble across this article, please, before you blow $300-500 on a mesh WiFi system, try out a D-Link DIR-882 or a Netgear Nighthawk R7000P.  Either one of these cost a fraction of the price of a mesh system and will almost definitely suit your needs just as well or better.

For the record, most range extenders are garbage.  I highly recommend upgrading your router rather than buying a range extender that will only introduce more issues.  I have bad memories of unplugging a range extender and tossing it into a bin after it messed up my Skype call for the umpteenth time in so many days.


The Apple Watch, 2.5 years later

The original reveal of the Apple Watch is a pretty disappointing memory for me.  At the time, I don’t think anyone really knew what they wanted out of wearables, so I was okay with much of the functionality (barring some of the stupid things Apple expected people to do with their tiny wrist computer, but more on that later).  What really bothered me was the design and the price.

Apple is undeniably great at designing technology, but a watch is a fashion accessory.  They created and pushed a narrative that portrayed the watch as being stylish and hip by inviting not just tech journalists, but fashion journalists to the reveal, and this has been consistent ever since.

Honestly, the most fashionable thing about the Apple Watch is that it’s not as bulky as other smart watches.  Bigger watches go in and out of style, but some of the Android Wear watches out there are comically big.  However, there are round ones, whereas the Apple Watch is designed to look like a small iPhone.  Generally, watches (as a fashion item) should be round, according to fashion communities and publications like GQ.  While there are exceptions, I don’t feel like the Apple Watch, stylistically, is one of them.  It’s a pretty piece of technology, but it’s an ugly watch.  And yes, I know the utilitarians out there will go on and on about how round displays are inefficient for displaying content, but all of those arguments are predicated on the ideas of familiar design.  Personally, I think it’s very absurd to suggest that Apple couldn’t engineer content for a round display.  Heck, most of the content that’s already there works if you just cut off the corners.  You’d lose practically nothing of value in most cases.

But anyway, that’s a blog post for April 2015.  This is a post for December 2017, where we’re on Apple Watch iteration number four, I guess (do we count Series 1 as a separate watch?  I guess so).  We’ve now had two and a half years with these wrist computers, and Apple has had that same amount of time to refine the experience.

The original premise of the Apple Watch was that it was a small iPhone.  Apple demoed writing notes, watching Instagram videos, making calls, and sending texts.  Only the latter two have held up.  Legitimately, I don’t know if you can even still send heartbeats or digital taps/drawing.  My guess is that you can, but I don’t know how, as that menu has been completely taken over by the dock.

Clearly, the Watch isn’t a small iPhone, despite it looking like one.  It holds certain use cases – mostly revolving around convenience and fitness – but it doesn’t replace your phone except in extremely specific situations.  It took Apple over a year, but they finally started honing in on those use cases and have been perfecting the Watch for those uses ever since.

I guess I should mention here that the Apple Watch has been a pretty successful product, despite some of the doom and gloom we sometimes hear from tech journalists.  I know at least one person that abandoned the product somewhat quickly, but I know more that have kept and still use theirs.  I bought the original version in 2015 a couple months after launch, and only recently (finally) upgraded to a newer version, the Series 3 aluminum model.

The Series 3, compared the Series 0/original Apple Watch has three main advantages: 1) it’s more water-resistant (you can swim with it), 2) it’s so much faster that it makes the Series 0 feel absolutely ancient and 3) the battery life is like 300% better.  They still market it as having “all day battery” but the reality is if you don’t keep the GPS on all the time or use/have LTE on it, you could go two days without charging, maybe almost a full three.  I used to end the day with around 25-30% battery.  I now end the day with around 70-75%.

Personally, I think the LTE model is a joke.  After carrier costs and fees/taxes, the watch will run you anywhere between $10 and $15 a month to add to your data plan, most likely, and I could count on one hand the amount of times my phone wasn’t within Bluetooth range of my watch and that I also needed to use it for some data-related purpose.  Again, there are very specific cases where the LTE model is probably not only useful, but a God-send; however, I’d imagine that for 97% of people, just the regular watch is fine.

I think within the 3% that will find use with the LTE model, some sort of outdoors or sports-related activity will be a key in defining that usefulness.  Apple has really been honing in on that market, and more recently, other health-related things that aren’t necessarily fitness, like their heart study program (to detect AFib/arrhythmia).  These things combined with the convenience of notifications on your wrist are the real selling points to most people, I’d say.

Personally, while I do enjoy the convenience of notifications, I’ve found that having the weather on my wrist at all times has been a game changer for me.  My expectation of basic data that a watch face provides has shifted from “time and date” to “time and date and weather.”  Yes, it’s nifty to know how many steps I’ve taken, how active I’ve been, but paradigm shifts like the former are more interesting to me.

That said, I can’t overlook that having Siri on my wrist has been important as well, but that’s almost 90% for setting reminders in my case.  There are times when my phone is across the room, so the ability to pause/play/skip ahead in music/podcasts, take calls, send messages, use Authy, or pause my Apple TV has been very useful.  While I rarely do use other apps, the occasions do still exist when I start my car from my watch, or even more rarely, check an email.

When I use Apple Pay, it’s almost exclusively with my watch, and I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that I have found the ability to remotely control the camera on my phone extremely useful, even if only on a handful of occasions.

All in all, I’d say the Apple Watch, while still catering to certain niches with more specific functionality, has broken out of being a niche product as a whole.  I see them all the time now, and of course, wear mine daily.  I don’t think it’s worth upgrading yearly, and I don’t think it’s worth paying more than the base model costs, but it’s a product that I truly like – not because of how it looks, as Apple may market – but rather, in spite of how it looks.

Wireless Earbuds vs. “Wireless” Earbuds

A little while back, Google released their new earbuds, the Pixel Buds, no doubt in answer to Apple’s AirPods that were released late last year.  The marketing for this product is clear, as Google states on their storefront:

Loud, proud, ‘wireless.’  Well, the Pixel doesn’t have a headphone jack (no surprise there, it’s 2017 after all), so Google needed to release a product for Pixel buyers to use that would provide a quality experience after the port deletion, just like Apple did.  However, there’s one weird thing about the Pixel Buds, and that’s, well…

…the wire.  Yes, the Pixel Buds are wireless in that they don’t require a wire to go from the phone to your ear, but they do require a wire between each earbud.  This is very much in contrast to the way that Apple solved the “quality experience without a headphone jack” problem, which was to release a truly wireless pair of earbuds.

I found this rather odd, but Google isn’t alone, of course.  Apple’s own Beats X earbuds are “wireless” earbuds that have a wire, as are any headphones that claim to be wireless.  In fact, there are only a handful of truly wireless earbuds on the market, and I think it’s a shame that Google chose to go “wireless” rather than truly wireless.  I’m sure if you get the PixelBuds, they’ll be fine (or maybe not, TWiT owner Leo Laporte seems to think they’re disappointing), but I think that experience really could’ve been better.

I want to see more really wireless earbuds.

For the record, prior to the iPhone X, I would’ve said the the Apple AirPods are the best product Apple launched since the iPhone 4 or perhaps 5.  They are incredibly good, and the first product Apple has released in quite a while that captured some of that undeniably cool Apple magic that people used to rave about so much before it became cool to hate Apple.

iPhone X review

Last year, I wrote a post about the iPhone 7, which I did end up getting for reasons I don’t feel like going into detail about.  It was a great phone, but like I detailed in that post, it was still a pretty lackluster upgrade from an iPhone 6, other than the extra RAM.  Anyway, the reason I bring up that post is because I also detailed the reasons I wanted to wait and buy the 2017 iPhone, and of course, the iPhone X ended up being literally everything I wanted out of a phone last year, and then some.  And before we go any further, it is “iPhone Ten”, not “iPhone Ex,” but if you like mispronouncing stuff, I guess call it whatever you want.

It’s been a while since I’ve woken up in the middle of the night to order something.  I suppose the last time would be for the iPhone 6, but it was actually kind of exciting this time around.  The last time I did that, I remember AT&T and Apple’s sites were both slow/unreliable, and now it seems like AT&T at least has sorted it out with a queue system that I have no complaints about, other than not knowing if you’ve got a phone while you’re waiting.  I hear that Apple’s site and the Apple Store app were pretty similar.

For the past few years, I’ve been pretty over Space Gray for my iPhone, but I can’t stand white bezels, so I didn’t have a choice.  This year, Apple finally put black bezels on the iPhone X no matter which color back you get, which makes sense since the screen is OLED, and pure black on the screen practically melts into the bezels.  Honestly, having now seen the space gray iPhone X next to the silver one, I am pretty confident in saying that the silver iPhone X is one of the most beautiful devices ever created.  So, if you didn’t read between the lines yet, that’s the one I got.

I don’t really want to talk tech specs about this phone.  It’s got the most powerful processor in any smartphone and it has enough RAM to background more apps than you’ll care to background.  Specs, as you might be aware, aren’t the selling points of the iPhone – rather, feature sets are.  When a feature makes sense and requires specific hardware, that hardware is added, so the iPhone X is packed full of great hardware.

First, let’s talk about the display.  The iPhone X has a 5.8″ screen, if measured with Apple voodoo that is actually kind of deceiving.  I believe it’s officially measured corner to opposite corner, not counting the curves (so rather than the actual edge of the display, it goes to where the display would end if it weren’t curved), and not taking into account that the notch is there.  That’s minor, of course, but the notch does eat up some screen real-estate, and the screen is a new, taller aspect ratio, so even though it’s 5.8″, the screen’s surface area is slightly smaller than the 5.5″ display on the iPhone 6/6S/7 Plus.

That’s just an interesting side note, though, because the real story with the display is that it’s gorgeous.  It’s the first OLED display Apple has included in a phone, and while it’s a Samsung produced panel, the display driver and the calibrations are all done by Apple, which has resulted in “the best performing smartphone display that [Display Mate has] ever tested.”  Even though it’s a Samsung panel, the iPhone X display is just ever so slightly better than the Galaxy Note 8.  One thing to note here is that Samsung, by default, loads a color profile on their devices that is overly saturated and very “punchy.”  You can change the color profile to “cinema” to correct this, but it’s still not as accurate as the iPhone X display.  Last week, I thought the display on the Galaxy Tab S3 that I regular use was incredible.  Day before yesterday, I turned it on, and my first thought was “why is this display so blue?”

The one downside of OLED is burn in.  Apple recommends leaving your display timeout on 30 seconds and not using the screen on a brighter setting than you need, because OLED pixels age, and there’s only so much that can be done to prevent it.  While Google clearly is doing a poor job with that on the Pixel, Samsung has done a pretty good job on their devices (I believe they randomly shift UI elements by 1 pixel), and I have little doubt that Apple has put some magic in there to keep the burn in away for as long as possible.  I feel pretty confident in saying that because, after over 2 years of use, my old Apple Watch, which also has an OLED panel, has no burn in.  Though, that’s a personal anecdote of course, and your mileage may vary.  I’m also confident there are people out there with OG Apple Watches that do have burn in.

My favorite thing about the display is the drastically improved contrast ratio over LCD.  Of course, blacks are now pitch black since those pixels aren’t lit (yay, improved battery life!), so you can expect some incredible dark-themed apps, like the Apollo’s “Pure Black Dark Mode” (excellent reddit client, if you haven’t tried it).  Again, this is why the bezels are black no matter which color option you pick.

So, what about the notch?  Well, it’s a thing.  if I had to pick between the way that Apple handles it (notch) and the way that others (barring the Essential Phone) handle it, I think I’d take the Apple way, because there is something that’s just wonderful about that feeling of almost having an edge-to-edge screen, as opposed to three bezel-less sides and one side with a bezel.  But of course, ideally we’d be able to eliminate all bezels and notches so the display is unhindered in any way by a bezel, and I would not blame anyone for preferring a bezel to a notch.  Personally, I’ve found that browsing the web on this screen, notch and all, is one of the best-looking web experiences I’ve ever seen.  The only way you really notice it is in landscape mode.  In portrait, you really just…don’t.  Maybe at first, but after like a day, it fades away.

Oh, and one last note on the display – until developers update their apps, the phone displays what I will call a “virtual bezel” and basically makes the phone look like an iPhone 6/6S/7.  It looks a lot better than when the iPhone 5 did it since the blacks are pitch black.

The iPhone X doesn’t have a headphone jack.  Love it or hate it, this is the future.  I’ve already written my thoughts on that in the same blog post about the iPhone 7 that I linked to above, so I won’t write them again.  I’d only add that if Apple’s EarPods fit into your ears and you don’t have AirPods, you are missing out on the single best, most magical product Apple has created in the past 5 or so years, barring only the iPhone X.

Cameras sell smartphones, and the iPhone X camera is as good as you would expect an iPhone camera to be.  If you’ve never used an iPhone 7/8 Plus before (I don’t recall if the 6/6S Plus is included), then it’s better than you’d expect, because portrait mode is pretty incredible.  Of course, the real story with the cameras here have to do with the front-facing hardware, the new True Depth camera, and all of the other components that make Face ID work its magic (and also animojis, which are surprisingly cool, despite being a huge gimmick that no one will use after a couple weeks).

Face ID is, of course, the replacement to Touch ID.  So far, I’ve found that it’s a marked improvement over Touch ID in 85% of situations.  That is to say, it’s definitely better, but there are also cases when Touch ID is more convenient.  The real magic of Face ID is when an app would normally ask you for Touch ID or a password, but rather than doing that, it’s magically unlocked because Face ID has already activated and authenticated you.  This is one of those things that works so well that going back to the old way feels like a chore on my iPad.

There is a lot of fear-mongering being spread about Face ID, so I’d like to address that really quick.  Every iPhone that has had Touch ID, and now the iPhone X with Face ID, has had a special security chip on it called the Secure Enclave.  When you setup Touch ID or Face ID, all of the data that’s collected to make that authentication work is stored in the Secure Enclave.  That data on that chip is not accessible by any app, or by Apple, nor does any data from the Secure Enclave get stored in the cloud.  It never leaves your device.  The Secure Enclave only stores biometric information and sends authentication tokens.  It isn’t impenetrable or anything, but it’s basically the most secure method of biometric authentication in any smartphone.  Apple doesn’t have your face data, because, by design, the Secure Enclave simply doesn’t allow them access to it.  Now, if you run an app that requests access to front camera and starts doing a map of your face, all bets are off, but you do have to approve that, so if you’re paranoid…just don’t do that.  However, I want to make this request of you: please don’t be paranoid about this technology.  Face ID is very secure, and Apple is not spying on you with it (this is not Google or Facebook we’re talking about, where you are the product rather than the consumer, and even then, I wouldn’t be overly concerned about it).  If you don’t believe me, then you shouldn’t own a smartphone at all, because they all have 2 or more microphones, 2 or more cameras, and are on or around your person 24/7.

Two more things that you need to know regarding some FUD that’s being spread around: you can turn this off, but by default, attentive mode is on, which means your phone won’t unlock unless you are looking at it.  So if you’ve got a crappy significant other that likes to spy on your texts, they can’t point the phone at your face while you’re sleeping to unlock it.  If for any reason you need to disable Face ID, you can do so by pressing and holding either volume button and the side button (previously called the sleep/wake button) until the Power Off screen comes up, immediately releasing those buttons (please read this entire paragraph before trying this!), then pressing Cancel.  After that, you’ll have to put your passcode in to get back into your phone.  Make sure you aren’t looking at the phone while doing this (just hold it at an angle away from your face), or it’ll unlock, and disabling won’t work.  That said, and this is a VERY IMPORTANT NOTE, if you are going to try this, you need to be aware that if you continue to hold the side buttons after the Power Off screen comes up, your phone will go into SOS mode, emit a loud siren, and begin a countdown before calling 911 (or whatever your emergency services are if you aren’t in the US).  Don’t worry, besides the attention you’ll suddenly get if you accidentally trigger this, you can cancel it.  Just do so IMMEDIATELY.  I’ve accidentally set it off and canceled it without an issue, but if you don’t, emergency services WILL show up at your house, and it’s not cool to waste their resources.  This is actually a great feature for when it’s needed though, so if you didn’t know about it, it’s great that you’re now aware.

Anyway, Face ID is fantastic.  Any concern about it not working or letting random people into your phone is pretty much for nothing, unless you have an identical twin.  Because the iPhone X uses on-device machine learning, on the rare occasions when Face ID fails and you have to put in your passcode, it uses that opportunity to learn.  Since you know the code, the phone knows that what it saw was indeed you, and it becomes better at recognizing you by incorporating this new data.  This is also, I believe, why Apple only allows one face in Face ID, as opposed to multiple fingers in Touch ID.  The system can’t learn if it doesn’t know which face it failed to recognize.  That’s just my theory though.  I’ve also read a theory that Face ID would be slower if it supported more faces, which makes sense, but I think my theory makes a bit more sense.

On Qi charging, there’s not really a lot to say.  Many high-end Android phones have had this for years (except the Pixel for some bizarre reason).  Apple only supports wireless charging on Qi devices that follow the Qi spec pretty exactly, so that means the Qi charger in my car doesn’t work with the iPhone X (thanks, General Motors!), but many of the $14 mats on Amazon work just fine.  The inclusion of Qi charging is also why the iPhone 8 and X have glass backs.  Current wireless charging technologies can’t pass through metal, so if you want wireless charging, your phone has to have a glass or plastic back.  That means if you use a magnet or any other thing stuck to the back of your phone that has metal, Qi won’t work.  That aside, while Qi charging is much slower, it is SO much more convenient than plugging and unplugging a cable all day.  I am so incredibly happy that Apple has finally embraced this feature.

I haven’t used the speakers all that much, but Apple has done some amazing work with audio technology lately, especially in small spaces.  The speakers in my iPad Pro and MacBook are tiny, yet sound remarkably good.  The iPhone X shares this quality as well.  The one note I will make here is that since the bezels were deleted, the speaker for the phone is higher up, so if you actually use your iPhone to make real phone calls without using AirPods or speakerphone, you’ll have to hold the phone a little lower down than you may be used to.

It’s an iPhone, so it has the same class-leading battery life you’ve come to expect – not as much as an iPhone Plus, but more than a regular iPhone.

Phew!  So, what’s left?  Well, a big thing, actually, and that’s iOS 11.  There are multiple reasons Apple released the iPhone 8 along with the iPhone X, one of which is that since the home button is gone on the X, there are a lot of changes with how certain features are activated.  People that don’t like change, or people that have trouble adjusting, will probably want the 8 for that reason alone.  I say that not because the changes are bad, but rather, that’s just how some people are.  I would hope that those people would be willing to give the changes a chance eventually, because almost every single one of them is better than the old method of doing things.

First, my favorite of the new gestures are swiping up for home and swiping left/right at the bottom of the screen for app switching.  These are both super natural, and while the home gesture is honestly preferable to pressing a home button, swiping left/right for app switching is an entirely new gesture that totally changes multitasking, while leaving the traditional “card” system in place.  Reachability is a little more difficult until you get the hang of it, but it works very well once you do.  Basically, you swipe down somewhere between the middle of the dock and the very bottom edge of the display to activate it (and you have to turn it on in settings, because it’s off by default).  The multitasking menu (the “cards”, (previously activated by double tapping the home button) has been replaced by swiping up like the new home gesture, but then pausing until you get a vibration, or you can just swipe up and then to the right.  You can wait for the vibration, but you can activate it faster but swiping up and over.

Siri is activated by pressing the side button in for a second, but honestly why even both with that when you can activate it with “Hey Siri?”  A screenshot is just a quick simultaneous click of both the Volume Up and the side button.  Those sorts of things do have a learning curve.  It’s not hard, it’s just different.

The one area where the new gestures really don’t work are the gestures that are in the “ears” of the screen.  Swipe down on the top left for notifications, swipe down on the top right for Control Center.  I rarely use the notifications screen, so I don’t much care about that one, but I use Control Center many times every day, and the positioning of this gesture is just…terrible.  Remember, this phone is very tall, so that gesture just doesn’t work with one hand unless you activate reachability first.  Apple really needs to move this, maybe to the first “card” of the multitasking screen so you can easily get to it via the multitasking gesture.  Whatever they could do to fix it, the current gesture is bad. In all honesty, this is my biggest complaint about the iPhone X – this one, stupid UI decision that they can easily remedy with a software update.

So far, my brain has adapted pretty well going back and forth between the iPhone X’s gestures and the iPad’s physical button.  I’ve only tried to press the home button on the phone once, and I’ve only tried to swipe over/up a couple times on the iPad.  That, however, is just me, as I adapt to changes like these somewhat easily.  It’s kind of like going for the clutch in an automatic if you’re used to driving a manual.  You won’t do it often, but you’ll probably do it at least a few times.

Some people online have complained about wasted space with the new, elongated screen, particularly below the keyboard.  Apple clearly can’t move the keyboard down, otherwise typing would be extremely awkward, so right now, when you’ve got the keyboard up, it’s just got this unusual blank gray space below it.  It does feel a little strange to not at least make that space pitch black, but realistically, they should re-purpose it for something useful.  I’ve seen it suggested that maybe it could function like the Touch Bar on the MacBook Pros and show recently used emojis.  The mockups of that seem pretty nice, without looking cluttered, so, hey, Apple – get on that, please?

The iPhone X, overall, is a pleasure to use.  I’m trying my best to go caseless right now, because to cover this thing up seems like a real waste.  I had to use a case on the iPhone 6 and 7 because the size of the phone, combined with the slippery metal backs, just wasn’t conducive to grippiness.  The glass back on this phone, while being exponentially more fragile, is also far more grippy, so holding the phone is much easier.  If I do drop it…I’ve got AppleCare+, but of course, I’d rather not do that.

I know that $999 is a lot for a phone.  The iPhone X is the most expensive iPhone ever, starting at $50 more than last year’s most expensive iPhone, and topping off at $1149 for some additional storage that I guarantee you don’t need because 64 GB is plenty.  Add a possible case and AppleCare+ onto that, and it’s not a cheap buy in, to say the least.  However, I can confidently say that if you’re in the market for an iPhone, willing to spend the additional money, and you’re not married to the idea of physical buttons, I think you will adore this device.  I know I do.

Apple’s fear of touchscreens on laptops

As far back as 2008, I can remember wanting a Mac laptop with a multitouch display.  After playing with the original iPhone, I knew multitouch technology was finally good enough to put into a real computer, unlike those old, awful resistive touchscreens that had been in PC tablets for years.

iPad vs. RockI, as well as many others, was hoping the iPad would be that magic device that brought touch to MacOS (then OS X), but as we all know, the iPad ended up essentially being a larger iPod Touch and ran iOS.  In another case of “what techies want isn’t always what the market wants,” despite running iOS, the iPad was – and still is – a hit.  I was pretty down about the decision to run iOS, but I bought one anyway, and my parents ended up using it on weekend visits more than I did in general.

It’s easy to see why Apple would push iOS for their tablet rather than MacOS.  iOS is built from the ground up for touch, and the iPad is indeed a touch-first device.  You don’t want to fumble with a dense UI designed for mouse and keyboard on a device that will rarely, if ever, have a mouse and keyboard connected to it.  And that’s not to mention that iOS is a way more profitable ecosystem for Apple.

But what about the MacBook line?  With touchscreens coming on more and more PC laptops, it feels like it won’t be long before it’s a standard feature, and having a Surface Pro 3, I can see why.  Touch is natural, and touch is fast.  On a desktop, sure, it doesn’t really make a lot of sense, considering how far away most desktop screens are from the user, but on a laptop, where the screen is literally inches from the keyboard…come on, that’s a no-brainer.

My argument for touch on MacBooks – and laptops in generally – is pretty simple.  Even in an OS that isn’t designed for touch, there are things that are faster and easier, or just more natural to do with touch, even over trackpads with touch gestures.  I generally don’t have issues using “desktop” Windows 10 on my Surface in the first place, even though it was designed for mouse and keyboard, but that’s not the argument I’m making.  For example, to open a file, the workflow is as follows:  place your finger on the trackpad, locate the cursor, drag your finger to the icon, double click.  With a touchscreen, the workflow is: place finger over icon, double tap.

The argument here is that including a touchscreen doesn’t mean you have to use touch 100% of the time, or even 50% of the time, or even 30%.  Just being there when you want to use it for things that are faster, easier, or more natural with touch is the benefit; you don’t have to try to work touch into everything you do.

Touching a picture on a SurfaceSure, you can browse photos with your trackpad, and even use gestures to zoom or pan, but touching photos just feels so much better.  In fact, I’d say that directly interacting with photos is more natural and revives something in the digital experience that was lost in the transition from store-developed, printed photos to pixels on a screen.

Web browsing, for another example, is something that is almost always better with touch, but great to be supplemented by a trackpad and keyboard.  It’s easier and a more immersive experience to reach out and touch a link to open it rather than: touch trackpad, move cursor, click link – but it’s also easier to select text for copying with a trackpad in some cases.

No doubt, Microsoft has realized this, and that’s why the Surface line exists.  However, something like the Surface Pro/Book is not at all Apple-like.  Tim Cook has made it clear that he disapproves of hybrid devices (though saying one thing has never prevented Apple from doing the opposite thing a year later), but more importantly, simply “activating” touch on MacOS is not Apple’s style.  It’s more Microsoftian to give users what they want where they want it, and it’s more Appleish to guide users to what Apple thinks is best for them (which in this case, is iOS, if you’re in the market for a touchscreen device).  Neither of these is necessarily a better approach, but it does sort of preclude Apple from putting touch into their notebook line.

My verdict:  Apple isn’t going to change MacOS, and thus will never put touch into any Mac running MacOS, because in their minds, they already have an OS for touch.  If you’re waiting for a touchscreen Mac running a desktop-class OS, you might be waiting forever.  However, that doesn’t mean you’ll never get a touchscreen Mac notebook.  I have very little doubt in my mind that Apple is prototyping ARM MacBooks running iOS in their labs, but who knows if something like that would ever hit the market.  That’s certainly not something I’m interested in, but like I said earlier, what techies want isn’t always what the market wants.