The Transport Guy: There's a big board battle brewing at Uber

Steve Kovach September 30, 2017 at 09:48AM

There's a new battle brewing in the ongoing war for control at Uber as the company prepares to reset itself after appointing a new CEO.

On Friday night, former CEO Travis Kalanick surprised the company by appointing two new members to the board, apparently without notifying the company and other board members. An Uber spokesperson told Business Insider the move was "a complete surprise."

Kalanick's appointments came ahead of the board's meetings to consider new rules of governance for the company that would change shareholder voting rights and potentially the structure of the board.

In a statement to Business Insider Friday night, Kalanick basically admitted his surprise appointments were designed to get in front of the proposed changes to the board structure. Kalanick had power over those two empty seats, and he appointed Xerox chairwoman Ursula Burns and former Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain.

"I am appointing these seats now in light of a recent Board proposal to dramatically restructure the Board and significantly alter the company’s voting rights," Kalanick said in his statement. "It is therefore essential that the full Board be in place for proper deliberation to occur, especially with such experienced board members as Ursula and John."

Recode's Kara Swisher and Theodore Schleifer reported more details on the proposals that the board is considering next week. Some of the changes could reduce the voting power Kalanick and other shareholders have. According to Recode, some of the options on the table include:

• Removing special voting power of some shareholders like Kalanick and the VC firm and early Uber investor Benchmark.
• Kalanick would lose one of the three board seats he controls, and a representative from SoftBank, which is considering a major investment in Uber, would get the seat instead.
• Kalanick would be able to appoint someone to the third board seat he controls, but with restrictions attached, like approval from Uber's new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi. The seat must also be filled by a c-suite executive from a Fortune 100 company.

Obviously, most of these new proposals would limit Kalanick's power on the board, which could explain why he decided to appoint members to the empty board seats he controls without any warning. Recode's report says some of these proposals will be considered by the Uber board on Tuesday. 

SEE ALSO: Kalanick appoints two new Uber board members in a surprise move

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Apple unveil the iPhone X

There's a big board battle brewing at Uber from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: When it comes to political ads, it's time for Facebook and Google to be held to the same standards as ABC and CBS (FB)

Steve Kovach September 30, 2017 at 05:45AM

You probably saw it dozens, if not hundreds of times in the months leading up to the US presidential election last year.

A political ad would air. And at the end, you'd see a clear message about who paid for or endorsed the spot, whether it was Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton or any of the numerous candidates or political action committees. 

Such messages have been the standard in political advertising since 2002, when Congress passed a campaign reform law that required them. Now, whenever a political message runs on television or in any other traditional mass media, you can see who paid for the ad. I think we can all agree that kind of transparency is a good thing.

However, that disclosure requirement doesn't apply to online ads. As a result, when you see a political ad on Facebook or Google or other sites, it can be impossible to tell who was behind it, whether it was a particular candidate, a PAC, a non-profit — or a fake account run by groups linked to Russia. 

You just don't know.

But you should. Facebook, Google and the other giant online services have become hugely influential when it comes to spreading news, information and advertising. As such, they should be held to similar standards as other forms of media when it comes to political advertising.

Facebook is a case in point for why such standards are needed. As it turns out, there were plenty of ads placed by fake Russia-linked accounts during the 2016 election cycle. There's reason to believe those ads were part of a propaganda effort intended to influence voters without them understanding who was behind it.

Facebook disclosed earlier this month that it discovered about 3,000 such ads, and last week it turned them over to the congressional committees investigating Russia's alleged attempts to meddle with the election. 

Belatedly Facebook itself has recognized the danger. Company CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who initially dismissed the idea that anyone tried to surreptitiously use his company's social network to influence the election through fake news or ads, is now singing a different tune. In the wake of the latest disclosures, he promised to require more transparency for political ads placed on Facebook.

Going forward, political ads will have to show the Facebook pages that paid for them. And Facebook users will be able to see what messages advertisers are targeting at particular audiences on the social network, he wrote in an open letter.

"I care deeply about the democratic process and protecting its integrity," Zuckerberg said in a video message broadcast through his Facebook page. "I don’t want anyone to use our tools to undermine our democracy."

Those are good first steps, but they don't go far enough.

It's unclear, even with these steps, whether users will be able to know the actual individuals or companies — rather than the Facebook pages — that are funding particular ads on the social network. It's also unclear what Facebook will do ensure that the accounts behind those ads are legitimate. 

Much of the advertising on Facebook is set up through a self-service online tool. That feature seems ripe for abuse.

Just last week, for example, Pro Publica discovered it was possible for someone using Facebook's automated ad tool to buy ads targeting "Jew haters" and other nasty groups. Facebook removed those categories, and blamed its algorithm for making them available in the first place. But the company hasn't given a clear picture of how it'll keep people using fake accounts from abusing that tool in the future. 

And the problem with online political ads is much bigger than Facebook. 

On Thursday, Twitter said it found 201 fake accounts linked to the same Russian actors who set up fake accounts on Facebook. But that is likely just a small fraction of the abuse on that platform. Sen. Mark Warner blasted the company for basing its disclosure purely on the same accounts linked to the ones Facebook found, saying it "either shows an unwillingness to take this threat seriously or a complete lack of a fulsome effort."

And we haven't even heard from Google yet.

Even if such companies were earnestly trying to contend with the problem posed by online political ads, there's reason to doubt their ability to solve it on their own. These, after all, are the same companies that have struggled to contend with other ways people have abused their services, from using them to send spam to live-streaming murders over them.

That's why it's time for governments to step in — and for the big online service providers to work with them constructively. The best thing Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter and the like could do is to work with the Federal Election Commission and Congress to come up with a standard for online political advertising just like we have for television, radio, and print.

"All of these tech firms would benefit from a clear set of guidelines from the FEC or governments around the world," said Daniel Kreiss, a professor of political communication at the University of North Carolina's School of Media and Journalism. "On one hand we can say Facebook has too much power. On the other hand, I don't think they're well equipped to do that. This is why governments should set guidelines."

Congress has neglected the issue of online political ads for years, but it finally looks like it may rise to the challenge, thanks to the Russian influence investigation. 

Senators Mark Warner and Amy Klobuchar are working on a bill that would require internet companies with 1 million or more users to keep a public record of political ads purchased on their services, according to CNN. Those companies would have to disclose information on political advertisers spending $10,000 or more on political ads.

For reference, Facebook said the fake Russian accounts bought about $100,000 worth of ads through the company's automated advertising tools.

But even Warner and Klobuchar's legislation likely won't be enough to address the problem. 

The advantage of advertising online is that it provides more bang for the buck than traditional advertising. Even a small ad spend can have a big impact. So setting the limit for disclosure at $10,000 of ad spending may be placing the bar way too high. Kreiss, for one, argues it should be far lower.

And political advertising is only one of many areas on these online services that's prone to abuse and could be used to manipulate the political process. There's also trolling, fake news, bots, and more. 

But the legislation is a move in the right direction. It recognizes that online political advertising is one aspect of the abuse and manipulation problem that can be addressed relatively easily. We already have a model for how to do it in the form of the standards applied to other media.

Here's hoping Congress passes the legislation or something like it. Facebook and other online services are no longer niche websites used by the few. They're the sources of news and information for billions. Their reach and influence is arguably larger than television. At the very least, they should be held to the same standards as other forms of mass media.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The 5 best hidden features from the latest iPhone update

When it comes to political ads, it's time for Facebook and Google to be held to the same standards as ABC and CBS (FB) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: I used to hate the Apple Watch, but I became obsessed after using it as a fitness tracker (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 28, 2017 at 08:23AM

I've never been shy about my disdain for smartwatches.

Every company from Google to Apple to the now-defunct startup Pebble overpromised and under-delivered on wearables. There wasn't a clear purpose for smartwatches other than they were geeky and kind of handy in certain situations. As I've said with each Apple Watch version I've reviewed, it's a nice thing to have, but not essential like a smartphone.

So I did something different this year when testing the new $399 Apple Watch Series 3. I kept my Apple Watch usage as limited as possible and focused on something most Watch fans seem to think it's the best at: fitness tracking.

And you know what? The Apple Watch did a damn good job.

After a week using the Apple Watch as a fitness tracker, I've done a full 180. I haven't worn an Apple Watch regularly since late 2015, but now I'm addicted to it. It turns out that ignoring a lot of the extra stuff like third-party apps, phone calls, and Siri queries makes the Apple Watch a much more focused and useful gadget. It's how Apple should've started things with the Apple Watch instead of packing in so many features in an effort to make the device everything to everyone.

(A quick side note: The Apple Watch Series 3 has a new non-fitness feature worth mentioning. It's the first Apple Watch with a cellular connection, so you can use it without your phone. Unlike some early testers, I found the cellular connection worked fine, and I was able to receive calls, texts, notifications, and use Siri. But I don't think most people will need the cellular version unless they have a desire to go phone-free a lot. Maybe runners will like it? I don't know. It's not for me. Plus, your carrier will charge you an extra $10 per month.)

Encouragement

I'm pretty good about working out regularly. Not to brag, but I like waking up at 5:30 a.m. and running down to the gym for an hour so I can get my workout out of the way before my day really starts. But there are some days I cheat. I'm too tired, or stayed out too late the night before, or I'd just rather sleep the extra hour.

The Apple Watch's Activity app encouraged me to get moving. When I put the Watch on for the first time each day, I'd get an alert summarizing my activity from the day before and encouraging me to beat what I did the day before. It's that little extra push that convinced me to get off my butt and move. I only missed one workout this week.

You can also share your workouts with other friends who have Apple Watches, nudging them to work out or bragging about your own achievements. I tried this with my colleague Kif, who's also testing the Apple Watch Series 3, and it added a fun, competitive element to my workouts. I'm also happy to say I beat him to closing my activity rings most days. If you're the competitive type and need a little extra encouragement, workout sharing is a great feature on the Apple Watch.

Workouts

There are a bunch of third-party workout apps for the Apple Watch, but I stuck with the one that Apple ships with the watch. It seems to work pretty well, and has all the standard workouts you'd expect, like elliptical, indoor run, and indoor rowing. The app tracks your pulse and estimates how many calories you burn with each workout. You can also string multiple workouts together if you decide to mix things up in a session.

My only problem is there isn't a weight-lifting workout. Instead, you have to track weight-lifting sessions with the "Other" workout mode, which equates your workout to a brisk walk. I doubt it's the best way to track how many calories you really burn while lifting weights. 

All your workout data gets pushed to the iPhone's activity app, so you can get a full summary of what you accomplish each day. It also ties into the Health app on iPhone, which can monitor vitals like your pulse using the Apple Watch's sensors. Over time, you can get a pretty good snapshot of your activity and progress. It made me want to keep the Apple Watch on just so I could track my progress better. That alone is worth it.

All that other smartwatch stuff

Of course, the Apple Watch does so much more than fitness tracking. It can run apps, play music, bring you information from Siri, and a lot of other functions that mimic your smartphone. But the iPhone does all of that, and it does it a lot better than the Apple Watch.

Apps are still the worst part of the Apple Watch. It's tough to use most of them on the tiny screen, and some run painfully slow. It took over a minute for my Lyft app to load the other day. Meanwhile, many developers have realized the Apple Watch just isn't worth it. Twitter, Amazon, Google, and others have all removed their Apple Watch apps. It's a smart move.

The one thing I do like: notifications. The Apple Watch is perfect for calendar alerts and reading incoming text messages on the go. I limited notifications from just about every other app though to save me from insanity with my wrist buzzing every time the president prompts a heart-stopping news alert or someone mentions me on Twitter.

Stay focused

If you want an Apple Watch, I suggest staying as focused as possible. Use it for fitness tracking, limited notifications, and — gasp! — telling the time. Don't install any third-party apps. Apple's biggest mistake was making the Apple Watch do too much before it was ready.

The Apple Watch gives you the foundation of a great gadget, but you also have to do a little work to make it work.

SEE ALSO: The iPhone 8 review

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Everything we know about the Apple 'iPhone X' — which should be announced today

I used to hate the Apple Watch, but I became obsessed after using it as a fitness tracker (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: There's growing concern that Russia-linked Twitter bots influenced the 2016 election (TWTR)

Steve Kovach, Alex Heath and Reuters September 28, 2017 at 06:50AM

Executives from Facebook, Google, and Twitter will appear before the US Congress in the coming weeks as lawmakers probe Russia's alleged interference in the 2016 US election, committee sources said on Wednesday.

A Senate aide said executives from the three firms had been asked by the Senate Intelligence Committee to testify at a public hearing on Nov. 1.

News of the hearings comes among growing concern over the influence of Russian-operated fake accounts on social networks. The New York Times reported Wednesday that Twitter bots linked to Russia have been spreading politically charged messages as recently as last weekend, promoting hashtags and trending topics like #standforouranthem and #takeaknee, following President Donald Trump's controversial NFL comments last Friday. Russia-linked bots also spread similar polarizing topics during the 2016 election, the report says.

Twitter representatives will appear at a hearing with the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, a person familiar with the matter told Business Insider.

“Twitter engages with governments around the world on public policy issues of importance and of interest to policymakers," a Twitter spokesperson told Business Insider. "We are cooperating with the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in its inquiry into the 2016 election and will meet with committee staff next week. Twitter deeply respects the integrity of the election process, a cornerstone of all democracies, and will continue to strengthen our platform against bots and other forms of manipulation that violate our Terms of Service.”

The leaders of the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee said the panel would hold an open hearing with technology companies as part of its investigation.

"In the coming month, we will hold an open hearing with representatives from tech companies in order to better understand how Russia used online tools and platforms to sow discord in and influence our election," the committee's top Democrat, Representative Adam Schiff, and Representative Mike Conaway, the Republican leading the investigation, said in a statement.

Facebook said last week that it was turning over ads from fake accounts linked to Russia to US investigators. Facebook said earlier this month it discovered about $100,000 worth of ads from fake accounts linked to Russia that ran during the 2016 US presidential election.

Some US lawmakers, increasingly alarmed about evidence that hackers used the internet to spread fake news and otherwise influence the 2016 election, have been pushing for more information about the influence of social networks in particular.

The Senate and House intelligence committees are two of the main congressional panels probing allegations that Russia sought to interfere in the U.S. election to boost Republican President Donald Trump's chances at winning the White House, and possible collusion between Trump associates and Russia.

Moscow denies any such activity, and Trump dismissed any talk of such collusion.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle and Dustin Volz at Reuters; Editing by Peter Cooney)

SEE ALSO: Mark Zuckerberg fires back at Trump over claims of collusion with the media

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The 5 best hidden features from the latest iPhone update

There's growing concern that Russia-linked Twitter bots influenced the 2016 election (TWTR) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: An Uber investor is suing the company and former CEO, alleging fraud

Steve Kovach September 26, 2017 at 09:36AM

A Texas-based retirement fund that invested in Uber is suing the company and its former CEO Travis Kalanick, alleging that the company made misleading statements about its business to drum up billions of dollars in investment starting in June 2014. 

Irving Firemen's Relief Retirement Fund filed the lawsuit in California federal court on Tuesday. The lawsuit does not say how much Irving Firemen's Relief Retirement Fund is suing for, but alleges that Uber has lost at least $18 billion in private market value as a result of a series of scandals and controversies.

We're still digging through the lawsuit, and will update this post with more information as we get it. 

An Uber representative declined to comment.

This story is developing.

You can read the lawsuit here:

Plaintiff Irving Firemen’s Relief & Retirement Fund lawsuit filing against Uber and Travis Kalanick by Steven Tweedie on Scribd

SEE ALSO: The stunning string of blows that upended Uber, the world's most valuable startup

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Apple unveiled the 'iPhone X' — here are the best features of the $999 phone

An Uber investor is suing the company and former CEO, alleging fraud from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Apple and others have failed to revolutionize TV, so I went back to cable instead

Steve Kovach September 23, 2017 at 05:45AM

I'm one of those rare millennials who's had it with streaming everything I watch.

After five years of living cord-free, getting most of my TV from a combination of Netflix, iTunes downloads, and an antenna that tunes in over-the-air broadcasts, I'm back on cable. I didn't realize how much I'd been missing.

I'm no longer a cord cutter. Now I'm a cord flopper. I love it! And even a new digital set-top box from Apple hasn't changed my mind. 

My journey back to the dark side started earlier this year when I moved to a new apartment. I didn't plan to get a cable subscription again, but I caved after some nudging from my TV-obsessed fiancée.

To tell the truth, I didn't need much convincing. Among other benefits, traditional pay TV offers things that can be hard to get via online video services, including live sports, live news, and a reliable DVR.

Cord cutting, by contrast, is a headache. Technology is supposed to make everything cheaper and easier, but internet-delivered video can be just as expensive and more confusing than simply signing up for cable.

You have to juggle multiple subscriptions to services like Netflix, Hulu, and HBO Now. You have to wait while your shows buffer. There's often a two-minute or longer delay when you stream presidential debates and other live events.

And when streaming services don't have the shows you want to watch, you have to hunt for them in digital video stores such as Apple's iTunes, Amazon and Vudu. If you can find them, you'll have to spend a few bucks an episode or upwards of $50 for an entire season. Even then, some shows aren't available until the next day, and others aren't available until a year after they're originally broadcast.

We were promised better, but no one has delivered. But it's Apple that's been the most disappointing of all. 

For years, Apple has been teasing us that it's going revolutionize our relationship with television in the same way that it upturned the music market and the way we interact with our phones. For example, before he died in 2011, Apple founder Steve Jobs described to his biographer, Walter Isaacson, his vision for TV.

"I'd like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use," Jobs said. "It would be seamlessly synced with all of your devices and with iCloud. It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine."

What's more, he said, "I finally cracked it."

If he did, we still haven't seen the results. 

As a case in point, take the company's Apple TV set-top box. The company touted the gadget in the past as the "future of TV." But it's still nothing of the kind. 

Apple just released a new version called the Apple TV 4K that will stream videos that are sharper looking and more colorful than before — at least on televisions that support the  technologies needed to display those better looking videos. But like its predecessors, the new device fails to solve any of television's bigger shortcomings or improve the cord-cutting experience.

Apple TV's interface is fine, but you still have to contend with numerous apps and deal wth logging in separately to multiple services, such as Netflix and Hulu. To use the apps associated with the various broadcast and pay TV channels, you typically have to go through different log-on routine, this one through your pay TV provider. Taken together, the Apple TV experience is nowhere close to the vision Jobs had six years ago.

Apple reportedly tried to do something different. According to multiple reports, the company worked on creating a live TV streaming service that would be easy to use and cheaper than traditional cable offerings. But Apple couldn't seal the deal with Hollywood, and this is what we're stuck with — a mishmash of apps and streaming services that even taken together don't match up well with plain old cable. 

The fact that cord-cutting is still so painful isn't entirely Apple's fault, of course. None of the other tech companies have solved the underlying problems either. Apple TV's rivals, such as Google's Chromecast and Roku's assortment of boxes, largely just serve as conduits for the various streaming services users watch. They don't do much to try to organize those services or make them simpler to use. None of the devices or services offers an easy way to get all the stuff you may want to watch in one place at a reasonable price with only one log in. 

Cable and other traditional pay TV services have their own problems, including set-top boxes with clunky interfaces and service packages that force you to pay for loads of channels you'll probably never watch. But at least you can watch what you want, when you want it, without delay or compromise.

I'm sure internet TV will get better, but the disruption is happening far slower than it did with phones, computers, and music. Apple TV and other streaming devices do a good job of offering services that complement traditional pay TV. But they can't yet replace it.

SEE ALSO: The iPhone 8 review

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: An Alabama high school 'resegregated' after years of being a model of integration — here's what happened after

Apple and others have failed to revolutionize TV, so I went back to cable instead from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: What it's like riding Apple's spinning glass elevator in Steve Jobs Theater

Steve Kovach September 23, 2017 at 05:30AM

Beside all the new iPhones and Apple Watches that Apple announced this month, it also unveiled its new campus to the public for the first time.

Apple Park is located in the middle of the company's hometown in Cupertino, California. Next to the crazy spaceship-like main office building there's a new auditorium for special events and product launches. It's called the Steve Jobs Theater.

Here it is:

It's a giant common area encircled in glass above ground. The theater and product demo area are below ground.

The September 12 event was the first to be held in the Steve Jobs Theater. Out of all the stuff inside, the craziest thing has to be the rotating glass elevator that takes you underground. It's designed so that you don't have to turn around and exit through a separate door. Instead, you're always facing the direction you need to exit.

Pretty cool.

I got to ride the elevator a couple of times during Apple's event last week. It was the most popular attraction aside from the iPhone X itself.

Want to see?

Here's what the elevator looks like in operation from the outside:

And here's what it's like riding in it:

SEE ALSO: The iPhone 8 review

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Tim Cook open Apple's big iPhone event with a tribute to Steve Jobs

What it's like riding Apple's spinning glass elevator in Steve Jobs Theater from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Reviewers say the new Apple TV is great, but needs to do more to justify the high price (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 21, 2017 at 07:48AM

The biggest thing missing from 2015's redesigned Apple TV was support for 4K video, the new HD standard that offers about twice the resolution of normal 1080p HD. The competition had it. Apple did not.

That changes this week with the Apple TV 4K, which costs $179 and supports 4K and high dynamic range (HDR) video. 

A few people got a chance to test the Apple TV 4K early, and their reviews are mostly positive. It sounds like a great option if you have a lot of movies stored in your iTunes library and a TV set that supports 4K and HDR. Still, there are a lot of cheaper options from competitors like Roku, Google, and Amazon.

Here's a taste of what people are saying about the new Apple TV 4K:

Devindra Hardawar of Engadget says Apple's 4K movie pricing is cheaper than other digital services. Plus, movies he already purchased in iTunes were automatically upgraded to 4K for free:

You'll find Apple's first batch of 4K HDR films in their own section on the iTunes store. So far, the selection includes some major new releases like "Wonder Woman", "Baby Driver", and "Alien Covenant". Notably, they're mostly selling for $20, with a few older titles going for $15. Walmart-owned Vudu, which has been selling and renting 4K films for years, currently has those titles for $30. Even the rental prices for 4K are lower on iTunes -- $5 versus $10 on Vudu. And, just as Apple promised, several films I previously purchased on iTunes -- "Star Trek Beyond", "The Lego Movie", and "Kingsman" were automatically upgraded to 4K HDR.

Nicole Nguyen of BuzzFeed says the Apple TV 4K is best for people who have a high-end TV setup and want to do more with the device than just watch videos:

Sure, the Apple TV 4K offers some extra bells and whistles, like being able to control your smarthome, download third-party apps (like Panna, a cooking app, or Zova, a fitness app), or view iCloud library photos on the big screen. But the bottom line is: If you just need something to stream on-demand content from providers like Hulu, Netflix, HBO Now, or Amazon Video, the Roku ($60-$100), Fire TV Stick ($40; the Fire TV with 4K Ultra HD is currently unavailable), and Chromecast ($35 to $69) have got you covered.

Lisa Eadicicco of Time says the real key feature isn't 4K, but high dynamic range (HDR) support:

Yes, 4K is a huge pixel leap over 1080p, but the bigger change here is arguably HDR, which fundamentally changes how colors and contrast ratios work. I noticed this most when watching a scene in Netflix's Marvel superhero mashup The Defenders, in particular a scene that has Alexandra (played by Sigourney Weaver) sitting in a sun-filled room enjoying a private performance by the New York Philharmonic. She's wearing an off-white blouse with beads arranged in an argyle pattern. Viewing the show in HDR, I was able to tell that her outfit was champagne-colored, whereas it looked blandly white in the non-HDR stream. The difference may seem trivial, but illustrates the way HDR can tease out subtle hues ostensibly truer to a scene.

Nilay Patel of The Verge liked the Apple TV 4K, but said it needs to do more to justify the price:

For Apple to justify the Apple TV 4K’s $179 price tag against the apps already built into your TV and those very popular cheap streaming sticks, it needs to offer a perfect utopia of the best technical capabilities, a complete content catalog, and a simplified interface. I know a lot of video nerds, and all of them were hoping the Apple TV 4K would be the One True Box. That's what Apple does: it rolls in and confidently fixes complicated tech problems with elegant solutions.

SEE ALSO: The iPhone 8 review

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I spent a week using the iPhone 8 and I think you should wait for the iPhone X — here's why

Reviewers say the new Apple TV is great, but needs to do more to justify the high price (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Reviewers say the new Apple Watch is pretty bad (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 20, 2017 at 07:20AM

The first reviews for Apple's new Apple Watch are out, and the verdict isn't good.

The new $399 Apple Watch Series 3, which goes on sale September 22, is the first Apple Watch that can work without being tethered to the iPhone thanks to an LTE connection from your wireless carrier. It's the one feature Apple Watch users have been asking for since the product launched over two years ago.

But reviewers complained that the Series 3 had issues connecting to LTE, meaning that Siri, retrieving data, and making phone calls didn't work on the device when it wasn't connected to an iPhone. And when LTE did connect, it quickly drained the battery. Some reviewers also experienced dropped calls and other issues related to the cellular connection.

It sounds like you shouldn't buy the Apple Watch Series 3 until Apple works out some of these issues. But the Series 3 without the LTE connection ($329) is probably a good option if your main draw to the watch wasn't the built-in cellular connection.

Here's a quick roundup of what reviewers are saying:

Lauren Goode of The Verge had problems with LTE data, phone calls, and battery life:

In one of my initial tests, I went for a walk with the phone on airplane mode, and tried to send text messages and use Siri to initiate phone calls through the Watch. Those didn’t work. I tried asking Siri basic questions. That didn’t work. Siri also wasn’t “talking back” to me, something that’s supposed to be a new feature on the Series 3 Watch.

Phone calls did sometimes work from the Watch, but I had to manually tap through my contacts or recent calls list on the Watch and initiate the call that way. (Calls through Bluetooth headphones sound good, but the Watch’s built-in audio isn’t ideal for extended conversations.) By 11:42 that morning, after 60 minutes of working out with LTE, multiple attempts to use Siri, and two seven-minute phone calls, the Watch’s battery had drained to 27 percent.

Joanna Stern of The Wall Street Journal also said she doesn't recommend the Apple Watch Series 3:

A cellular device is, sometimes literally, a lifeline. That’s why I can’t recommend the cellular Apple Watch Series 3 until the connectivity is more reliable. Even then, the battery life could be a buzz kill for some.

Nicole Ngyuen of BuzzFeed had a better experience with the Series 3:

The Apple Watch Series 3 is a decent smartwatch, especially for athletes, as long as you’re willing to accept some of the tradeoffs (battery life for compact form factor, Apple’s own apps vs. third-party offerings). The new cellular feature is great for leaving your phone behind during workouts (then taking an Uber back or stopping at Whole Foods for a refueling snack). It’s also good insurance if you’re the kind of person who remembers to put on a watch every morning but tends to leave your phone behind.

Brian Chen of The New York Times didn't like the fact you have to pay extra for the cellular connection:

But the cellular version is a luxury that most people probably will not need. The price you pay for those brief moments of respite from your iPhone is steep: at least $399 for the hardware, plus $10 a month for access on your cellphone plan for some carriers. And I seldom found reasons to use the watch without my iPhone to justify the extra cost.

Apple released a statement about some of the issues reviewers had with the Apple Watch. Here's what a company spokesperson said about the LTE connectivity problems: "When Apple Watch Series 3 joins unauthenticated Wi-Fi networks without connectivity, it may at times prevent the watch from using cellular. We are investigating a fix for a future software release."

But Apple hasn't commented on the myriad other issues reviewers had with the Series 3. It sounds like you should either buy the non-cellular model or wait for Apple to fix the problems with a software update if you can.

SEE ALSO: The iPhone 8 review

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I spent a week using the iPhone 8 and I think you should wait for the iPhone X — here's why

Reviewers say the new Apple Watch is pretty bad (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: The iPhone 8's new camera mode needs a lot of work

Steve Kovach September 19, 2017 at 01:41PM

One of the big new features on the iPhone 8 Plus is Portrait Lighting, a new camera mode that uses the phone's dual-camera system to adjust the lighting around your subject to add different effects.

It's an enhancement to last year's Portrait photo mode, which was designed to bring the iPhone's camera closer to a high-end DSLR through software enhancements. Portrait mode's software separates the subject from their surroundings and creates a blurred effect in the background. The new Portrait Lighting mode uses a similar tactic to adjust the lighting effects around the subject.

Portrait Lighting launches in beta on the iPhone 8 Plus on Friday, but even though it's an early version of the software that will improve over time, it's clear that Apple has quite a bit more work to do. In my tests over the last week, I found that Portrait Lighting didn't work well unless real-world lighting conditions were just right. Sometimes, the results were abysmal, like someone had a few too many drinks before attempting to edit a photo in Photoshop. Other times, the photos looked great.

Here are some examples of the different Portrait Lighting effects:

Here's Manny. I took this photo using the normal Portrait Mode settings.

This is Stage Lighting. The software removed the background and made it look like a spotlight is shining on Manny. But it's still a bit rough around the edges.

Stage Lighting isn't perfect. Here's what happened when I tried it with my cat Larry. The result was terrible. Look at the jagged lines around his fur.

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

The iPhone 8's new camera mode needs a lot of work from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: iOS 11 is the biggest iPad update ever

Steve Kovach September 19, 2017 at 10:11AM

The iPad gets a major overhaul this week.

iOS 11, which is available Tuesday, adds a slew of new features to the iPad as the device inches closer to its goal of becoming a laptop replacement.

There's a new app for managing files, an app dock that mimics the one on your Mac, some new multitasking features, and loads of other goodies that make it easier to get things done.

It's the biggest iPad software update since the device launched over seven years ago.

Keep reading to see the most important changes coming in iOS 11.

SEE ALSO: The creator of Android explains how his new phone will take on Apple and Samsung

The first thing you'll notice is the new app dock at the bottom of the screen.

It looks very similar to the dock on Mac. You can store all your favorite apps there. The apps to the right of the bar on the dock change based on what Siri thinks you'll want to use next. I wasn't too crazy about this feature, since it often didn't suggest an app I wanted to use.

You can access the dock in any app by swiping up from the bottom of the screen.

This makes it easier to switch between your favorite apps.

You can also drag an app from the dock to make it "float" in a separate window. Here's Twitter running on top of Safari.

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

iOS 11 is the biggest iPad update ever from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: What's the point of the iPhone 8? (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 19, 2017 at 09:13AM

Ever since I got back from Apple's big iPhone event last week, I've been asked some form of the following question:

"Is the iPhone X that good? Or should I get the iPhone 8?"

It's the right question to ask, but a difficult one to answer.

For the first time in the 10-year history of the iPhone, the latest model feels a bit dated.

The iPhone 8 may launch in a few days, but everyone is going to be gawking at the iPhone X in a few weeks.

It reminds me of the distracted boyfriend meme. You're the guy in the middle. The iPhone 8 is the woman on the right. The iPhone X is the woman you're checking out.

The iPhone 8 is a great phone, but it has a curious place in Apple's new iPhone lineup that I can't quite figure out. You can now get an iPhone (the SE) for $349 at the low end, and the cutting-edge $999 iPhone X at the very high end. Then there's the iPhone 8, which is a short step below the X, with the same processor, similar rear cameras (on the 8 Plus), and other benefits like wireless charging. The 8 starts at $699.

So, what's the point of the iPhone 8? Why even release it if there's something even more incredible right around the corner?

I think it all comes down to price. I've always advised people to buy the best phone they can within their budget. If $999 works for you, then wait for the iPhone X. I spent a few minutes with the X last week, and can already tell it'll be worth it.

Things get trickier after that. The iPhone 8 marks the fourth year that Apple has used the same basic design for the iPhone. That was great in 2014, but this year we've seen stunning designs coming out of Samsung, LG, and Essential that in many ways leapfrog Apple's standard. The iPhone X is a radical departure that looks and feels like a modern smartphone.

The iPhone 8 forces you to pay a premium price for something that feels routine. But it also has the same impressive processor as the iPhone X, so you'll get a lot of the same performance benefits, which is better if you want your phone to last a few years.

And the iPhone 7 is still a great option. It may lack a lot of the refinement found in the iPhone 8, but you're getting almost the same camera and other essential features like water resistance. I doubt many people will notice a huge difference between the 7 and the 8.

So here's my advice.

Get the iPhone X if you can stomach the price. It should feel like a huge upgrade even if you have the iPhone 7 now. Otherwise, get the iPhone 8 if you have the 6s or earlier. The camera and overall performance boost alone will be worth it. And if you want a real bargain, get the iPhone 7 for $549. It's the best value in Apple's iPhone lineup.

SEE ALSO: The iPhone 8 review

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Apple’s original logo looks nothing like it does today — here’s how it’s changed

What's the point of the iPhone 8? (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: I spent a week using the iPhone 8 and I think you should wait for the iPhone X — here's why

Corey Protin and Steve Kovach September 19, 2017 at 08:52AM

Apple's iPhone 8 is set to hit shelves September 22nd. Our own Steve Kovach has already spent a week with the phone, and he thinks you should wait for the iPhone X. Here's why.

Join the conversation about this story »

I spent a week using the iPhone 8 and I think you should wait for the iPhone X — here's why from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: REVIEW: The iPhone 8 is incredible, but you should wait for the iPhone X instead (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 19, 2017 at 04:00AM

For the first time in the ten-year history of the iPhone, I can't recommend buying the newest models.

That's not because the new iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus are bad phones. They're actually great.

But there's an even better phone on the way.

I've been using the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus for the last several days, and I think they are perfectly tuned and refined versions of last year's iPhone 7 models. They include cool new features such as wireless charging, amazing cameras, and Apple's fastest processor ever.  

The iPhone 8 and 8 Plus will be the best phones on the market when they go on sale September 22. And they'll likely remain the best phones available until November, when the iPhone X arrives.

So, you have a tough decision to make if you're ready for a new iPhone this year. Do you go with the iPhone 8 (which starts at $699) or iPhone 8 Plus (starting at $799) now, or hold out another month for the iPhone X (which starts at $999)?

My call: If you choose one of the iPhone 8 models, I think you'll be happy with your decision. But I think the iPhone X's better. After spending a short time with the X last week, I think it'll be worth the wait — and its sky-high price. 

Refined design

At first glance, the iPhone 8 models look nearly identical to their iPhone 7 counterparts and even to the iPhone 6s and 6 models before them. The new phones have the same 4.7-inch and 5.5 inches screens, respectively, as the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus and almost the same overall dimensions. 

But Apple has updated the design of the new phones in subtle and important ways. One that struck me: the iPhone 8 models feel different than the iPhone 7 ones, because their backs are made of a new kind of durable glass. The new phones feel great. They aren't as slippery as their predecessors, whose backs were made of scratch-prone aluminum. And unlike last year's models, the iPhone 8 devices don't have any unsightly antenna strips mucking up their backs.

The iPhone 8 models are also noticeably heavier than their predecessors, but I like that too. The extra heft makes them feel more robust and better constructed.

The only downside to the design of the new phones is that it's starting to feel stale. Apple seems to have ceased its practice of giving the iPhone a thorough redesign every other year. After debuting this same basic look in 2014, the company has now used it on four sets of models in a row. 

Going wireless

In addition to making the devices feel better in the hand, the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus' new glass backs come with another benefit: wireless charging. Long overdue on the iPhone, wireless charging has been available on other phones for years, and companies like Samsung have made it a key feature in their best devices. Apple hasn't been able to add it until now because the iPhone's metal construction didn't let wireless power pass through.

The iPhone 8 models will work with any charging pad that's compatible with the Qi (pronounced: chee) standard. Apple is selling Qi chargers from Mophie and Belkin in its stores, but you can find loads of others elsewhere from companies including Samsung, Powermat and Ravpower. 

Apple also has a wireless charging pad of its own called AirPower in the works that will be able to charge your iPhone, Apple Watch, and Airpods at the same time. But it's not coming out until next year.Wireless charging on the iPhone 8 devices is pretty straightforward — you just plug in the charging pad and set your phone on top of it.

The feature is a great addition to the iPhone line. It offers an easy way to top up your battery at the office or reduce the clutter of wires on your nightstand.

Wireless chargers are popping up in cars, restaurants, and even end tables, and I have a feeling you'll soon see it in many more places. The expected popularity of the new iPhones is going to mean lots of people will have phones that support the feature.

Power

Many of the other advancements in the iPhone 8 devices are hidden inside.

Perhaps most notable is Apple's new iPhone processor, called the A11 Bionic. That's a goofy name, but the chip's power is no joke.

To test the new chip, I used an app called Geekbench that measures and compares the processor performance of particular devices. Without getting too technical, the iPhone 8 models blew away everything else in Apple's lineup.

The iPhone 8 models make good use of that power, tapping into it to manage their camera software, improve their battery life, and make augmented reality apps pop.

And while there are other reasons to get the iPhone X, its processor isn't one of them. It will use the same A11 Bionic chip as the iPhone 8 devices. 

The cameras — particularly the dual-lens camera system on the 8 Plus — represent the other big hardware advance in the iPhone 8 models. Apple has improved and fine-tuned the 12-megapixel sensors in the devices to prepare them for the upcoming onslaught of augmented-reality apps.

To my untrained eye, pictures taken with the new cameras weren't noticeably better than those made with the iPhone 7 models. However, Apple says the cameras in the new phones are more accurate at capturing colors and offer a variety of other enhancements that will improve your photos.

For the 8 Plus, Apple has added a new feature to Portrait mode, the camera setting the company introduced last year that allows you to zoom in on a subject and blur out the background behind it. Called Portrait Lighting, the new feature lets you take stylized portraits with different lighting effects, such as blacking out the entire background behind a subject. 

In my tests, Portrait Lighting didn't work reliably. The lighting conditions had to be just right or the background effects could bleed onto the subject. However, Apple says the feature is still in test form and that Portrait Lighting will improve with future software updates. In the meantime, if a Portait Lighting photo doesn't turn out the way you want, you can tweak the image after the fact.

The screens on the iPhone 8 devices have some new tricks too. While they're not as stunning as the iPhone X's new Super Retina Display, they do a better job of displaying colors than the screens on last year's models.

The new screens incorporate the same True Tone display technology that Apple previous used in the iPad. That technology automatically adjusts the colors they screen display to compensate for ambient lighting conditions. True Tone is especially good indoors or in darker settings.

iOS 11 and augmented reality

As good as each year's iPhones usually are, iOS — the operating system underlying the devices — always seems to be the most important thing in helping them stand apart from the competition. The iPhone 8 models will ship with iOS 11, the latest version, which will also be available for older iPhones and iPads on Tuesday.

You'll see the most marked changed in iOS 11 on the iPad. But it still offers some nice features for iPhones. For example, you'll now be able to customize the iPhone's control panel of settings. You'll also be able to create video loops from Live Photos. 

But the highlight feature of iOS 11 is ARKit, a set of software tools that allow developers to make augmented reality apps for iPhones and iPads. There are loads of AR apps that will be ready when iOS 11 launches, and more will trickle out in coming weeks.

Many in the tech world think AR is how we will interact with computers in the future. Apple is about to pull off an incredible feat with iOS 11; with its release, iOS will become the largest AR platform in the world overnight.

 AR will need a killer app to catch on. There are some cool ideas out there, including a game that can turn your coffee table into a game board, or an app that will overlay constellations on the real sky.

But many of these early ideas feel gimmicky or like they will only have niche appeal. This is going to make me sound old and boring, but the best use I've of AR so far is in the new Ikea app. It allows you to place virtual versions of Ikea furniture in your home to see how they fit before you buy them. 

I'm guessing developers will be doing a lot of experimentation with AR in the near future to figure out what works.

8 or X?

Apple has never offered an iPhone lineup as broad as the one it's about to have. You can get an iPhone SE for as little as $349, or, come November, go all the way to the max with the $999 iPhone X. You almost can't make a bad choice; they're all really, really good phones.

The iPhone 8 models are at the more expensive end of the range. But even though they're fantastic devices, they're not as enticing as the iPhone X.

My advice is to ask yourself how much you're willing to pay. If you don't mind giving up some of the futuristic features in the iPhone X, then the iPhone 8 models will give you the same power and performance and most of the same features of iOS 11 for hundreds of dollars less.

But if the price tag doesn't scare you away, hold off on the iPhone 8s and go for the X.

SEE ALSO: The technology that wants to replace your smartphone will be everywhere in a few weeks

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Apple's Face ID unlocking fail during its big demo

REVIEW: The iPhone 8 is incredible, but you should wait for the iPhone X instead (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Everything you need to know about the iPhone X (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 16, 2017 at 05:00AM

Whenever Apple releases something radically different, there are bound to be a ton of questions about it.

It happened last year with the AirPods. It's happening again this year with the new iPhone X.

I'm here to help. I got to spend some time with the iPhone X last Tuesday and asked a lot of questions about it myself. I've also had loads of people ask me about the new device over the last few days, and have been tracking down answers when I didn't know them already. 

Here's everything you need to know about the iPhone X.

When does the iPhone X come out?

You can preorder it on October 27. It goes on sale November 3.

Is it really $999?

Yes. The 64 GB model costs $999. The 256 GB model costs $1,149.

Holy cow! That's expensive. Is it worth it?

I think so. I always advise buying the best phone you can afford. If you add up all the new features the iPhone X has and realize they come on a device you'll be using several hours a day, every day, it's a good value, even at that price — assuming you can afford it.

And Apple isn't the only company asking for a lot of money for a top-of-the-line phone. Samsung's new Galaxy Note 8 costs as much as $960.

Can I buy it anywhere for less?

No. But you don't have to pay the full amount up-front. Apple and US wireless carriers offer no-interest payment plans that allow you to pay a portion of the phone monthly over a period of a year or more. For example, if you buy the 64 GB iPhone X through Apple's iPhone Upgrade Program, you'll pay $49.91 per month for 24 months.

What's this facial recognition thing? How does it work?

It's called Face ID, and it uses the iPhone X's new, advanced front camera system to scan your face and identify you before allowing you to unlock the device.

So there's no fingerprint sensor?

No. Unlike other iPhones, the iPhone X doesn't include Apple's Touch ID fingerprint sensor. To unlock your phone, you'll need to use Face ID or type in your passcode.

Is Face ID secure?

Apple says it is. According to the company, Face ID won't be fooled by a photo or even a mask that looks like you. Apple also says it's far less likely that Face ID will unlock your phone for a random stranger than its Touch ID fingerprint sensor.

However, security researchers from outside the company haven't yet evaluated Face ID or verified Apple's claims about it.

Does Face ID work in the dark?

Yes. The iPhone X includes both an infrared light projector and an infrared sensor that allow it to scan and identify users' faces, even in the dark.

What if someone tries to unlock my phone by scanning my face while I'm asleep?

Face ID needs your attention to work. That means your eyes need to be open and looking directly at the front camera system. So Face ID won't work if you're sleeping or looking away from the phone.

What if a thief takes my phone, scans my face, and runs away?

That's technically possible, but it's also unlikely. And to prevent it from happening, you can temporarily disable Face ID by pressing the power button and one of the volume buttons at the same time.

Will Face ID work if I'm wearing a hat, scarf, or sunglasses?

According to Apple, yes. The company says Face ID will still work if you're wearing common accessories on your head or face. That includes hats, scarves, glasses, and sunglasses. Face ID mostly just needs to see the area around your eyes, nose, and mouth.

Here's how Apple executive Craig Federighi explained it in an interview with TechCrunch:

“If you’re a surgeon or someone who wears a garment that covers your face, it’s not going to work. But if you’re wearing a helmet or scarf, it works quite well.”

That also means Face ID won't work for some people who wear religious garb that covers most of their face. They will have to use a passcode instead.

What happens if I grow a beard or cut my hair?

Apple says Face ID will still be able to identify you.

Does Apple store data about my face?

No. The company itself doesn't store your face data. Instead, that data is stored securely on a chip inside the iPhone X in the same way that other iPhones securely store your fingerprint data. No one can access the data stored on the chip, not even Apple.

Can someone use an iPhone X to scan other people's faces and store the data on his or her phone?

No. The iPhone X can only store one face at a time. And there's no way to access the face data after it's been stored on the chip inside the iPhone X.

How does Apple Pay work with Face ID?

You double tap the power button to activate Apple Pay. Then you scan your face with Face ID to authenticate the payment. Finally, you tap your phone on the payment pad.

How does the phone's wireless charging feature work?

Both the iPhone X and the iPhone 8 support a wireless charging standard called Qi (pronounced: chee). You can recharge their batteries using any wireless charger that is Qi-certified; there are lots of options to choose from. To charge your phone, you simply set it on a Qi-compatible charging spot or pad; you don't need to plug in any wires. 

Apple is already selling wireless chargers from Belkin and Mophie and will start selling its own wireless charger, called AirPower, next year.

Will I be able to wirelessly charge my phone if it has a case on it?

Generally, yes. The energy transmitted through wireless charging can pass through most cases. However, you may not be able to wirelessly charge your iPhone if you use a very thick case or a metal one.

How's the battery life?

Apple says the iPhone X will last, on average, two hours longer than the iPhone 7. 

The iPhone X doesn't have a home button, so how do I go back to the home screen?

The iPhone X has a thin bar at the bottom of its screen. You swipe up from that bar to go back to the home screen.

How do I multitask without the home button?

You swipe up from the bottom of the display and then hold your finger or thumb in the middle of the screen. After a moment, the phone will show your assortment of open apps.

How do I take a screenshot without the home button?

You press the power button and volume-up button at the same time.

What's new with the iPhone X's screen?

The iPhone X has what Apple calls a Super Retina Display. It's an organic light-emitting diode, or OLED, screen. OLED displays are more power efficient than the liquid crystal display (LCD) screens used in other iPhones. They also are able to display a wider range of colors and a greater contrast range between dark and light areas of an image. It's the best kind of screen you can get on a smartphone today.

What's up with that notch at the top of the screen?

Apple tried to cram as much screen onto the front of the phone as it could. But it still needed to make room for the front camera and various sensors, including those needed for its Face ID system. The notch area houses those components.

Is the iPhone X better than the iPhone 8? And which one should I buy?

The iPhone X has a lot of advanced features, including facial recognition, improved cameras, and its stunning Super Retina Display. The iPhone 8 is still a great choice though, and you should get it if you don't want to pay $999 or more for the iPhone X.

Did I forget something? Shoot me an email at skovach@businessinsider.com and I'll add it to this post.

SEE ALSO: Why the iPhone X is worth $1,000

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Apple unveil the iPhone X

Everything you need to know about the iPhone X (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Hands-on with the new $999 Apple iPhone X

Corey Protin and Steve Kovach September 13, 2017 at 11:46AM

Apple usually releases one new phone model a year — this year they released two. The iPhone got its annual incremental upgrade with the iPhone 8, while Apple also debuted the new premium iPhone X. Here's what it's like in person.

The iPhone X will go on sale on November 3, with models starting at $999.

Follow Tech Insider: On Facebook

Join the conversation about this story »

Hands-on with the new $999 Apple iPhone X from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: I used the iPhone X, and I can already tell it'll be worth its $1,000 price (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 13, 2017 at 04:00AM

Yes, it's expensive.

The new iPhone X will start at a eye-popping $999 when it goes on sale November 3.

Take some time and absorb that sticker shock.

The iPhone may be celebrating its tenth anniversary, but it's bucking the notion that technology gets cheaper over time. Even the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus are more expensive than their predecessors at $699 and $799, respectively.

So, is the iPhone X worth $1,000?

Before I answer that, here's my general philosophy when buying a smartphone: You should always get the very best phone you can afford. Your phone is the only thing you use all day, every day, and it's one of the few things in life where you shouldn't be thrifty. 

With that in mind, I'm not immediately turned off by the iPhone X's price. Instead, the Phone X looks like it will compare favorably with other, similarly expensive, but top-of-the-line phones, particularly with Samsung's excellent Galaxy Note 8, which starts at $930.

While I won't be able to get a full look at the iPhone X until closer to its launch date, I did get to spend some time with it during Apple's launch event Tuesday. It's an impressive device. All of its most important features are greatly improved compared to those on past iPhones. And when you add all those features up, $999 actually seems like a reasonable price to pay.

The iPhone X's most noticeable difference is its screen. With the new phone, Apple has adopted the broader industry trend of minimizing the borders around phones' displays, so you get a bigger screen that takes up nearly all of the device's front. The iPhone X is only slightly bigger than the iPhone 7, but its screen is larger than that of the jumbo-sized iPhone 7 Plus.

But the iPhone X's display isn't just big; it's stunning to look at. The screen quality rivals the displays I've seen on recent Samsung phones. In fact, the iPhone X is the first non-Samsung phone I've seen in years whose screen made me say, "Wow!" (Ironically, the phone's OLED screen was developed by Samsung.)

And the way the screen fits into the iPhone X's design is great too. That giant display makes it feel like movies and games and web pages are floating in your hand. And the phone's glass back is a welcome change from the scratch-prone aluminum Apple has been using for the last few years. Plus the stainless steel frame around the glass adds a nice, premium sheen to the phone. It's gorgeous.

But the phone has other premium features, including wireless charging, an improved dual-lens camera system that takes impressive portrait photos, a processor that Apple claims is its fastest ever, water resistance, and improved battery life that the company says bests that of the iPhone 7 by two hours. Apple took all the stuff you care about and use the most and made them better.

In terms of features, FaceID, the new facial-recognition feature on the iPhone X, seems to be the only wild card. I wasn't able to test FaceID Tuesday, but Apple flubbed its first demo of the technology, which may not be a good sign. FaceID will have to perform just as well, if not better, than the fingerprint sensor it's replacing or Apple could have problems. We'll see how it does in the real world.

But the iPhone X has one more big thing going for it — Apple's ace in the hole, iOS.

IOS remains the best smartphone operating system, and the iPhone's biggest advantage over its competition. Apple's operating system is the only smartphone platform that that comes with consistent, guaranteed updates. And it's the only one that routinely brings cutting-edge features, like augmented reality, to older phones. 

Even if you get one of the older — and cheaper — iPhone models, you're still getting a lot of value out of your purchase simply because of iOS.

So let's add all that up. The iPhone X offers:

• A gorgeous screen and beautiful design.
• Great cameras, wireless charging, better battery life, and water resistance.
• The best mobile operating system.
• All on a device that you'll end up using several hours a day.

Sounds like it's worth $999 to me.

SEE ALSO: The Galaxy Note 8 review

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This is what it's like inside Apple's new Steve Jobs Theater — which has a moving wall, secret room, and $14,000 seats

I used the iPhone X, and I can already tell it'll be worth its $1,000 price (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: This is what it's like inside Apple's new Steve Jobs Theater — which has a moving wall, secret room, and $14,000 seats

Kevin Reilly and Steve Kovach September 12, 2017 at 12:03PM

Apple's new $5 billion campus in Cupertino, CA includes a theater named after deceased co-founder Steve Jobs. We got a look inside the theater where the new iPhone X was revealed. 

Follow Tech Insider: On Facebook

Join the conversation about this story »

This is what it's like inside Apple's new Steve Jobs Theater — which has a moving wall, secret room, and $14,000 seats from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: LIVE: Apple announces the new iPhones

Steve Kovach and Kif Leswing September 12, 2017 at 08:41AM

CUPERTINO, CALIF. — We're live at the new Steve Jobs Theater for Apple's annual iPhone event.

This year's event will celebrate the tenth anniversary of the iPhone with a brand new model called the iPhone X, according to a massive series of leaks from over the weekend. There will also be updates to the "regular" lineup of iPhones, which will be called the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus, and new versions of the Apple Watch and Apple TV.

Plus, this will be the public's first look at Apple's new "spaceship" headquarters in Cupertino.

That's a lot to go over, but we're going to make it easy for you. The keynote starts at 10 a.m. Pacific/1 p.m. Eastern. Stay glued to the live blog below for all the news as it happens.

Join the conversation about this story »

LIVE: Apple announces the new iPhones from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Apple has lots its hardware mojo — but iPhone fans should be happier than ever (AAPL)

Steve Kovach September 10, 2017 at 05:00AM

When Steve Jobs introduced the first iPhone over 10 years ago, he said that it was so advanced that it was "literally five years ahead of any other mobile phone."

Jobs was wrong.

It actually took a good eight years before the rest of the industry caught up.

These days, though, it's become fashionable to argue that Apple is either falling behind the competition or soon will. Many flagship Android phones now offer designs, capabilities, and software that match or best those of the latest iPhones. And the tech industry is moving into new technologies such as machine learning, and artificial intelligence where Apple has historically been week. 

But I wouldn't count Apple out. It has some under-appreciated strengths that are likely to keep it on top for years to come. 

New phone, new tricks

Apple's future will likely be a topic of discussion this week as it gets set to unveil its tenth-anniversary iPhone on Tuesday. Assuming the numerous leaks are accurate, the device will have a brand-new design and advanced features like facial recognition, wireless charging, and an improved, nearly borderless screen.

Critics are likely to complain that the innovations the new phone offers where seen first on other devices. It's likely to do well regardless. Apple has become a master smartphone maker over the last 10 years, and the release of a new phone — even one like this with a revamped look — is something the company knows how to do well.

But to keep its edge as it moves into the second decade of the iPhone era, Apple will have to learn some new tricks. It will have to become an expert in cutting edge technologies such as machine learning and artificial intelligence, and will likely have to beef up its media effort. Apple's success over the next 10 years will likely be less dependent on new iPhone hardware and more about what new experiences the company can deliver to iPhone users.

"Apple needs to be able to sell on the experience of the software and added services they have," said Carolina Milanesi, a tech analyst at Creative Strategies. "Customers will have to say, 'I'll buy it because I want to buy something like [augmented reality] not the new iPhone.'"

The good news for Apple is that the iPhone is the perfect vessel to offer those new services and innovations. Because Apple controls the phone's hardware and software, it will be able to offer those experiences in a cohesive way that its biggest competitors won't be able to match.

Augmenting Apple's advantages

AR is the perfect example of Apple's hidden strengths. Many experts think AR headsets will one day replace smartphones. But right now, the foundation of AR is being built on and for smartphones, not other devices.

A key new feature of iOS 11, the upcoming version of the operating system that underlies the iPhone and iPad, is a set of programming tools designed by Apple that allow developers to tap into the sensors and cameras in Apple's mobile devices to create high-quality augmented-reality experiences. When Apple releases iOS 11 later this month, the operating system will become the largest augmented-reality platform in the world overnight. Programmers have already started building AR apps for iOS 11, and we've seen a lot of clever uses so far.

Apple's impending launch of its AR-powered operating system demonstrates one of its big advantages going forward. Because of the massive number of people using its devices that are running the latest version of its operating system, Apple can quickly achieve mass adoption of new, advanced technologies. That's something its competitors struggle with.  

Last week, for example, Google announced its own AR development tools for Android, but initially those will only be available for a handful of phones. To be able to use Google's version of AR, all the various Android phone makers will have to design their devices to meet Google's requirements, a process that's likely to take at least a year, which will leave the Android alliance struggling to catch up with Apple yet again. 

A Siri-ous edge

AI and digital assistants could be another area where Apple has an edge. 

At first glance, it might appear that Apple is trailing in that area. While Siri has improved a lot over the years and is great for controlling your phone, it feels limited compared with its chief rivals, Google Assistant and Amazon's Alexa. It isn't as good at answering questions as Google Assistant. And unlike Google and Amazon, which have been encouraging developers of all stripes to create apps for their assistants, Apple has severely curtailed the kinds of apps and tasks with which Siri can interact.  

But thanks to hundreds of millions of iPhones in use, Siri is already on far more devices than those assistants. And it's expanding its reach. It's now on every other major Apple product, including the Apple Watch, Apple TV, and the Mac. This December, Siri is coming to Apple's new connected HomePod speaker, where it will be able to tap into a wealth of music knowledge to help play the tunes you want when you ask.

And while Apple's approach to Siri may seem slow and measured compared to the competition, it's also, arguably, offering a better experience. Apple has placed a lot of emphasis on making sure new Siri feature work well, make sense and are appropriate for controlling with voice commands. Siri may not be able to order a Domino's pizza for you on command like Alexa can, but you probably won't care — it's just not something you'll likely want to do very often. 

Media is likely to be another big piece of Apple's future — and yet another place where it has an advantage over rivals. Apple's first two original TV shows may have been critical duds, but overall it's taking video seriously. The company recently hired two top Sony executives to lead its efforts in Hollywood. On top of that, it reportedly wants to spend $1 billion on video production next year. And it's even looking at moving its original content folks into a legendary movie studio that would serve as its Hollywood headquarters.

With all the talk about Apple having its own video studio, it's easy to forget that the company already has a ready-built audience for those videos in the form of its millions of iPhone users. The device represents the perfect platform to experiment with video and convince a generation that grew up binge watching Netflix shows or worshipping YouTube stars to pay a little extra to get the shows they want.

People: "Apple should sell their own television set."
Me: http://pic.twitter.com/PIFFWYccQz

— Neil Cybart (@neilcybart) August 29, 2017

It's all about scale

The big thing that gets overlooked when people charge that Apple is behind its rivals is the fact that it operates at a massive scale. Sometimes that scale — which involves manufacturing and distributing tens of millions of devices each quarter and making sure they all work reliably — means it may be slower than its smaller rivals to incorporate the latest innovations into its devices. 

But that scale also works in Apple's favor, because no one can match it. When Apple adopts or builds in new innovations, it's able to deliver them to a mass audience much faster than the competition. 

So, the iPhone models we'll see over the next decade may not always seem like they're breaking new ground, but they will likely will be the devices that popularize new technologies, because they'll be distributed at a scale that other companies won't be able to match. 

"They need to make sure they can deliver 400 million units of a single thing, and do it in a manner that will scale and maintain the quality of what Apple wants to be," said Andy Kleinman, the CEO of Wonder, a startup that's working on a specialized smartphone targeted at gamers. "What I always like about Apple, they're not necessarily inventing new things, but building a better experience for what people wanted."

SEE ALSO: AR is going to be everywhere soon

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The new iOS 11 gives the iPad its biggest update ever — here’s what it’s like

Apple has lots its hardware mojo — but iPhone fans should be happier than ever (AAPL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Google calls The New York Times' report that female Google employees make less than men 'extremely flawed' (GOOG)

Steve Kovach September 08, 2017 at 02:42PM

Google pushed back on a New York Times report Friday that showed a gender pay gap within the company based on data compiled by employees in a shared internal spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet, which had been circulated within the company since 2015, contained salary information from about 1,200 US Google employees, or 2% of the company, according to the report. Google employees were encouraged to share their salaries so their colleagues could negotiate better pay.

The salary information in the document showed that women were paid significantly less than men for the same level position. For example, the spreadsheet said that male "Level One" (entry-level) employees were paid an average of $55,900. Female Level One employees were paid an average of $40,300. The gap narrowed at higher-level positions.

The Times report contains data up to Level Six positions, which doesn't cover execs and other senior positions at the company. A more recent version of the spreadsheet viewed by Business Insider shows that Level Seven female employees earn a higher average base salary ($248,500) than male employees ($219,691). But male Level Seven employees have a higher average bonus, according to the spreadsheet.

In a statement to Business Insider, Google spokeswoman Gina Scigliano said the NYT's analysis of the data was "extremely flawed" and didn't take into account the different types of positions at the company.

"The analysis in this story is extremely flawed, as it features an extremely small sample size, and doesn’t include location, role, tenure or performance," Scigliano said in the statement. "This means that the story is comparing the compensation of, for example, a high-performing Level 5 engineer in the Bay Area with a low-performing Level 5 non-technical employee working in a different location. It doesn't make sense to compare the compensation of these two people. We do rigorous compensation analyses and when you compare like-for-like, women are paid 99.7% of what men are paid at Google."

This isn't the first time this year Google has had to respond to accusations that it doesn't pay men and women equally. The US Department of Labor accused Google of underpaying women in April. In May, Google said it couldn't provide more data to the Department of Labor to disprove the accusation because it'd cost $100,000 and 500 hours of labor.

SEE ALSO: Female employee on the Google memo: "I don't know how we could feel anything but attacked by that"

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Everything we know about the Apple iPhone 8 — which should be announced next week

Google calls The New York Times' report that female Google employees make less than men 'extremely flawed' (GOOG) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Google is said to be close to buying HTC's smartphone business (GOOG, GOOGL)

Steve Kovach September 07, 2017 at 12:41PM

Google may be close to buying the smartphone business of HTC, the troubled consumer electronics maker based in Taiwan.

According to a report in a Taiwanese publication (Google Translate version here), the two companies are in the final stages of acquisition talks. The report does not say how much Google may buy HTC for.

A note from UBS on Thursday, citing the Commercial Times news article, says that the deal would only involve HTC's smartphone R&D team.

A Google spokesperson declined to comment, but didn't deny the report. An HTC spokesperson declined to comment.

The Commercial Times article did not cite a price for the acquisition, but UBS said it expected that a deal would be immaterial to Google-parent company Alphabet's financials.

According to a Bloomberg report last month, HTC has been exploring its options as its smartphone sales dwindle and its VR headset business struggles to take off. One option on the table was to spin out the VR division and sell the smartphone business, according to the report.

History repeating itself

It would be an odd move for Google, assuming the deal goes through. In 2011, Google bought Motorola for $12.5 billion in a effort to ramp up its hardware ambitions. Motorola released a few handsets while operating as a Google subsidiary, but none of them were blockbusters.

In 2014, Google dumped Motorola and sold it to Lenovo for $2.9 billion.

Back to hardware

But Google has a renewed interest in hardware, and it's seen as a growth area for the company outside its core ad business.

Last year, Google formed a new hardware division under former Motorola CEO Rick Osterloh. Osterloh's group was responsible for products like last year's well-received Pixel phones, Google Home Speaker, and Daydream View VR headset. Google partnered with HTC to manufacture the Pixel phone.

Google is expected to release an update to the Pixel phone and a new touchscreen Chromebook in October.

Do you know anything about the potential Google and HTC deal? Email skovach@businessinsider.com and you'll be kept anonymous.

SEE ALSO: 

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Holograms are taking over advertising

Google is said to be close to buying HTC's smartphone business (GOOG, GOOGL) from Business Insider: Steve Kovach

The Transport Guy: Samsung's Galaxy Note 8 is an amazing phone that faces its fiercest competition yet

Steve Kovach September 05, 2017 at 08:00AM

You have your work cut out for you if you want to upgrade your smartphone this fall.

Between Apple, LG, Samsung, and even startups like Essential, you're going to have a bunch of great-looking, premium phones to choose from.

Samsung's latest is the Galaxy Note 8, which launches on September 15. Like its predecessors, the Note 8 packs in the best of what Samsung has to offer: the biggest screen, the most power, and advanced features like split-screen multitasking and stylus input. And unlike last year's model, Samsung promises the Note 8 has gone through rigorous safety checks to ensure the battery won't overheat. (I didn't have any problems on that front over the last week, for what it's worth.)

The Note 8 comes at a heavy price though. It starts at $930, and can go for as much as $960 depending on your carrier.

You have to pay a premium if you want the best of the best these days.

Hardware and design

The Note 8 looks kind of like a stretched-out version of the Galaxy S8 from earlier this year. It has a slightly larger 6.3-inch curved display, a new dual-lens camera system, and more RAM. Think of it as a souped-up version of the phone Samsung delivered a few months ago.

It also follows the budding trend of cramming as much screen on the front of the phone as possible, so you get more display on a device that has the almost the same physical footprint you're used to in older phones. Samsung calls this its Infinity Display, and it's quickly becoming the standard for high-end phones.

All that screen gives the Note 8 a stunning look. Samsung has always made the best smartphone displays, and this one is no exception. My only complaint is that the aspect ratio makes the screen feel a bit too "tall" to me, making it awkward to use one-handed or fit in my pocket. But videos also look incredible on this thing.

Big screens also mean there's no room for a home button, which comes with its own set of challenges.

The Note 8 now has a digital home button that appears in a bar at the bottom of your screen. The fingerprint sensor has been moved to the back of the phone, and you also have the option to unlock the device with an iris scanner, facial recognition with the front-facing camera, or a passcode. The iris scanner works pretty well, but you have to be staring at your phone at the proper distance for it to work. It's fast, but not entirely reliable. Iris scanning doesn't always work if you're wearing glasses or holding the phone at an angle, for example. Facial recognition works fine, but as Samsung admits, it's not as secure as the iris or fingerprint scanner. In fact, someone was recently able to trick it with a photograph. Samsung shouldn't even allow a method this insecure as an option to unlock your phone.

Besides the size, the biggest thing that sets the Note 8 apart is the camera system. Like the iPhone 7 Plus, the Note 8 has two cameras on the back for enhanced photos. That means you can use a 2x optical zoom, which won't distort your photos as much as the digital zoom on single-lens cameras. It also lets you take portrait-style photos where the subject is in focus and the background is blurred. It's similar to the effect you see on high-end DSLR cameras and the iPhone 7 Plus.

But unlike the iPhone 7 Plus, the Note 8 lets you adjust the blur effect before or after you take a shot with a handy slider tool at the bottom of the screen. In my tests, portrait shooting wasn't perfect though. I found that conditions have to be just right to get a perfect photo, since a lot of the work is done with software, not just the dual camera lenses. If your subject isn't the right distance from the camera and the background, the blur effect can bleed into the person you're taking a picture of. (I've had similar issues shooting portraits on the iPhone 7 Plus, for what it's worth.)

Other than that, the Note 8 has the same features found in the last few Samsung phones, including wireless charging, water resistance, and expandable memory. And if you pre-order the phone before the September 15 launch, Samsung will throw in a free wireless charging pad and 128GB memory card. That's a really good deal.

Software 

When it comes to the software side of the Galaxy Note 8, it's the same story we've seen for the last few generations of Samsung phones. The company has perfected design and performance, but still struggles to pack in innovative software that rivals what you find from Apple and Google. It's not terrible, and it's definitely not a deal breaker. It's just a step behind the rest.

The latest example is Bixby, Samsung's new digital assistant that launched earlier this summer. Bixby is so ingrained in the Note 8 that it even has a dedicated launch button on the left side of the phone. But as I've written before, Bixby feels half baked compared to Google Assistant and Siri. There were many times it didn't understand what I said, and many of my queries just dumped me into a Google search instead of bringing me the answer I wanted. Even Siri is better than that.

Bixby should get better over time as more people use it and Samsung teaches it to do more. But for now, you're better off using Google Assistant, which also ships with the Note 8.

I also recommend getting the unlocked model of the Note 8 if you can. It runs a cleaner version of the operating system without all the apps from carriers that can clunk things up. Plus, you're likely to get software updates faster than you would if you bought the phone through your carrier.

Like I said, none of this is a deal breaker. The operating system runs just fine for the most part, and you can still use all the great Google apps and services, just like you can on any other Android phone. Plus there are a few nice additions from Samsung, like split-screen app multitasking and a new feature for the S Pen called Live Message, which lets you create a library of animated messages and doodles that you can text or share with any device.

Conclusion

You have a tough choice to make. Samsung has a lineup of three excellent phones — the S8, S8+, and Note 8. And within a couple months, you can expect similar offerings from Apple, LG, and Google. If you can wait a few weeks to make your decision, then hold off. But you won't be disappointed if you choose the Note 8 now.

SEE ALSO: 9 things the Galaxy Note 8 can do that the iPhone can't

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Everything you need to know about the Samsung Galaxy Note 8

Samsung's Galaxy Note 8 is an amazing phone that faces its fiercest competition yet from Business Insider: Steve Kovach