Microsoft Edge is all but dead. Why did it fail?

Microsoft decided not to continue developing the rendering engine behind its Edge browser. This came as a bit of a shock, even though the browser admittedly was having difficulty picking up a significant audience. Microsoft will continue Edge, but it’ll run Google’s open-source Chromium rendering engine behind the scenes instead.

So what did Microsoft do wrong to see its once dominant browser drop to an insignificant number, and be reduced to an ongoing joke? Well, a lot, really.

First things first: I don’t think the average user will care about this. They just want a browser that works, and won’t notice if it’s running EdgeHTML (Microsoft’s rendering engine for Edge) or Chromium. Other browsers gave up the ghost and switched to Chromium, most notably Opera, which gave up its Presto engine years ago.

For a web developer, Microsoft’s decision either has them shrugging their shoulders in apathy, or deeply concerned about having an already large tech company controlling the web market again. But more on this later.

So back to where Microsoft made some major missteps, and how there probably wasn’t anything they could have done to change this course.

Enterprise

Although Internet Explorer floundered in the consumer realm, enterprise still held onto it stubbornly. Internet Explorer gave IT departments the ability to lock down enterprise portals via Windows Group Policy Editor. There’s also a heavy amount of legacy web apps that work only on older versions of Internet Explorer (much to the chagrin of web developers trying to modernize them).

Instead of Microsoft continuing to improve Internet Explorer, they decided to abandon it in all but name, switching all their development efforts to Edge. There were several problems with this though that made enterprises unable to fully embrace it.

First of all, Edge is a Windows 10 exclusive. Anyone working for a Fortune 500, FTSE 100, or any large established company knows how hesitant they are to upgrade. And they have legitimate reasons not to do so. Adopting a new operating system not only cost time and money, but also involves retraining staff and hoping that existing portals and servers work with it.

Large companies didn’t upgrade to Windows 10, and were limited to Windows 7. This was fine in 2015, when Microsoft stopped supporting Internet Explorer, but several years has passed, and Internet Explorer became increasingly dated compared to Firefox and Chrome. Google saw an opportunity here, and began to offer tools that provided IT departments worldwide controls that functioned like Windows Group Policy Editor. Now when they switch to Windows 10, there’s little incentive for them to switch to Edge as well. Chrome already has all the tools IT needs: it runs on Windows 7 and Windows 10, and it renders everything online correctly compared to Internet Explorer. It’s almost as if Microsoft didn’t realize they still had customers that were dependent on Microsoft’s browser.

Now I get why supporting Internet Explorer in the long run probably wouldn’t be a good thing. It had a lot of legacy code that could be exploited easily. But supporting it would have kept Internet Explorer alive in the enterprise world, rather than dying a slow death.

Consumer

On the consumer side, Edge failed mostly because it didn’t offer anything new that Chrome or Firefox didn’t do already. Not only that, but when it launched, it was an unfinished browser. Internet Explorer’s biggest problem was the lack of extension support. Edge didn’t support extensions until a year after it launched, and then only allowed selected extensions. Today Edge extensions hover around the hundreds, far fewer than extensions on Chrome and Firefox.

Microsoft marketed Edge as having a better battery life compared to Chrome and Firefox. But the battery gains were negligible. Eventually, Chrome launched with better battery support, and the negligible gains became microscopic.

Microsoft also touted the Cortana integrations. But the truth of the matter is most consumers see AI assistants as a gimmick as best, and a parlor trick on average. Your average consumer doesn’t care that Google Now doesn’t integrate with Chrome (at least on the desktop). Plus, Cortana eventually would have to use Bing to show results, which itself has a toxic branding (although it comes from being in a Catch-22 scenario of few users).

Why search for something online with Edge using Bing as its default, when you could just easily run the same query on Chrome and have it return a Google result? Sure, you can change your search engine in Edge, but the average consumer is just going to use what the browser provides. And they rather switch to their preferred browser that works as expected than learn to use another browser.

Mobile

Windows Phone was a failure. And I say that as a proud former owner of a Nokia Lumia 1020. Most of the web browser growth in the past decade came from iOS and Android. And consumers used the default browsers on their phones out of laziness. Microsoft tried their best to get Windows Phone established, but they launched too late, and never could make up the app gap once mobile developers settled into iOS and Android as their preferred platforms to support.

Had Windows Phone been around, it would have helped Edge adoption rates. With the exception of China, Chrome grew worldwide because it was packaged as a default browser in every Android device (although recent legislation from Europe might stem that growth). And Safari still has a sizeable chunk of the web browser market because Apple made Safari’s rendering engine the default. Yes, even your Chrome browser on iOS is just Safari with a coat of paint on it.

Plus Windows Phone would have made more sense for Edge’s long-term strategy. It would have given Windows users tighter integration with their desktop environment, much in the same way that Chrome and Safari talk to each other from desktop to mobile. And it would have helped consumers familiarize themselves with the brand in a way that desktop, with its freedom of choice, simply couldn’t.

Apathy

In the end, what cost Microsoft their dominance in the browser market was Microsoft not caring about browsers in the first place. Internet Explorer 6 was a terrible browser. When Firefox launched, it showed the world that web browsers didn’t have to suck. Microsoft never put enough energy into trying to be better than it, only making changes when they felt it was expedient. By the time Google launched Chrome, Microsoft was finally starting to figure out that they needed to put more energy into Internet Explorer.

But the damage was done. Chrome and Firefox updated faster, due to using an evergreen system not tied to the operating system itself. Internet Explorer only could update via major operating system upgrades. Eventually, Google began using its dominance in platforms like its eponymous search engine, Youtube, and Google Drive, to push Chrome down the throats of every person that visited them.

Users complained about Internet Explorer. They pointed out the issues it had. Some went beyond your typical online trolling and provided reasonable suggestions to fix it. Microsoft either ignored them or took a very long time to implement them. So users responded to Microsoft not caring by adopting another browser. Edge was too little, too late, and too confusing for anyone on both the consumer and enterprise realms to care about.

What does this mean in the long run?

Chromium already was the de-facto web standard, whether anyone wanted to admit that or not. With Microsoft eventually adopting Chromium to run Edge, it makes it something you can’t avoid.

For web developers, this is both a good thing and a bad thing. It’s good for web developers that don’t want to test for Internet Explorer or Edge. Now they’ll have one less browser to worry about. One less headache that might have them spending hours or even days trying to fix a simple problem.

It’s a bad thing in the long run, though, because now you have one company deciding how the web should look. And it’s starting to happen already. Google has sites that only work in Chrome, even if it’s only temporary. Google Earth is a prime example.

Chromium being open-sourced means that Microsoft can contribute to the code, and help to make improvements that Google wasn’t able to make. But in the end, Google controls the pull requests for Chromium, and can decide what they will and won’t accept.

And for lazy developers, there’s less of a reason to test cross-browser. If it works on Chromium, it most likely will work with WebKit (Safari’s web rendering engine), and that will cover close to 90-percent of the market. Why bother testing for browsers like Firefox, which remains the sole alternative browser engine? Developers can take advantage of Chromium specific tools that won’t work on Firefox, and get the desired results they want.

I don’t see how Firefox can compete in a browser world dominated by Google’s rendering engine. Firefox’s numbers already were falling worldwide, and its main source of revenue ironically comes from Google (it’s the default search engine). It doesn’t have the resources or the dollars to keep up with the juggernaut from Mountain View.

It wasn’t good when Microsoft dominated the market with Internet Explorer, and it won’t be good to have Chromium dominating either. The good thing about this, though, is that Chromium is open-source. Google has been very good at updating it, and if someone doesn’t like it, they can fork it and create a new browser. It’s not exactly like when Internet Explorer wasn’t updated for several years.

If you’re a fan of open-source software, it’s ironic to be lamenting the death of perhaps one of the most closed-source software to exist on Earth. But the lack of software diversity is something to worry about.

Fitbit Alta HR review: fitness tracker vs. smart watch comparison

15,000 steps. My fitbit’s vibrating to let me know I’ve achieved another milestone. Another vanity badge that I can parade around like a young boy scout. And you know what? It’s working. I want to see what the next milestone looks like. The next virtual badge to add to my collection of digital swag. Once you get sucked into achievement hunting, you begin to understand the magic of fitbit.

I’ve been using a fitbit Alta HR for a month to see what it’s like to use a dedicated fitness tracker over a smart watch. And it’s been a pleasant, if not bifurcated, experience.

One thing is for certain, a fitbit is not going to replace a smart watch. It is leagues behind a smart watch when it comes to basic functions. The notifications on the Alta HR are limited to texts with no notification shade to aggregate them. You’re stuck with several non-customizable pre-programmed watch faces. Don’t like it? Too bad.

And don’t bother trying to use your fitbit like some weird James Bond device. It won’t be a calculator, a remote for your phone, you can’t respond back to messages on it, you can’t get weather updates on it, and it won’t do searches.

It’s just here to do one thing, and one thing well: track your health. And it nails it out of the park.

One thing the fitbit Alta HR has over a smart watch like my Moto 360 Sport is automatic activity tracking. The fitbit will notice if you’ve been active for a brief amount of time and start logging your workout session. From a mundane walk to work to a full marathon, fitbit will log your heartrate, time spent exercising, calories burned, and more without human input.

Want to manually track your workout? If you have it paired with a smart phone (which you most likely do), you can start a workout session and get even more details, like a GPS map, map elevation information, and more.

To be fair to the Moto 360 Sport, it did automatically track you when you were moving. Plus the tracking on the Moto 360 Sport seemed more or less in line with what the fitbit was saying, so the sensors on the two devices will get you nice ballparks. But it didn’t have the ability to track your vitals unless you manually tracked a workout either through the built-in Moto Sport app or Google Fit.

Which brings up another thing a fitbit will do without asking: be your coach and motivator. Although I got notifications from the Moto 360 Sport when I would reach a milestone, it wasn’t nearly as in-depth as fitbit’s milestones and badges. It tracks daily steps and lifetime distances in addition to the daily active time goals. Fitbit will send alerts not only when you hit these milestones, but also will give you a summary of how you’ve been doing in either weekly or monthly reports.

And if having a digital coach isn’t enough to motivate you, then look to fitbit’s other options. They built up a sort of social media platform, where anyone with a fitbit account can sign up and find their friends that also bought fitbits. From that point, users can compare their friends’ stats with their own, and cheer or challenge them to keep them motivated.

A bit of a loner? No problem there. Fitbit has you covered. It has built-in challenges with solo adventuring in mind. If you wanted to make a day trip out of hiking at a national park or travelling through a city, you can see if there’s a solo adventure that you can track to get another achievement.

The Alta HR also will track your sleep, though be warned, it doesn’t give accurate results unless you’ve slept longer than three hours. It’ll keep track of your resting heartrate and give a ranking to let you know your progress. Plus you can log your food intake, weight, and the amount of water you drink.

Part of fitbit’s strength is having a comprehensive app available for Android, iOS, and Windows 10. They’re all polished, and unlike an Apple Watch or Android Wear, they can be used across all platforms without any restrictions or incompatibility.

The battery life is phenomenal on the Alta HR. They suggest seven days, and I believe it. After using an Android Wear device where I was lucky to get two days, this seems like a blessing.

If you’re looking to get a fitness tracker, this is the pinnacle of what you can expect. It’s light, water resistant, has a great battery life, works across all devices, and just works as intended.

But it’s not going to replace a smart watch. If you want a smart watch, go get one. Also keep in mind that once in the fitbit world, it’s difficult to take your data and migrate it to another platform. Fitbit built up a walled garden, and they don’t want anyone climbing the walls anytime soon.

Google Home Mini review: Hey, Google Home, what is your purpose?

Everyone in the tech community is hyping smart home speakers as the next big thing. I don’t get it.

Don’t get me wrong, the server based tech behind it is impressive. But in the end, they seem to be nothing more than novelties that don’t add any real benefit except to show how “21st century” our lives have become.

At their current price range, I get why they’re taking off. Both Amazon and Google have smart home speakers selling for $30 USD. They make a perfect stocking stuffer this holiday season.

I decided to buy a Google Home Mini to see what the hype was about. The main reasons are because I’m already knee deep in Google services, and the Google Home Mini integrates perfectly with my Chromecast.

Setting it up was fairly easy. Users are directed to the Google Home app on iOS or Android and walked through some basic steps, including training it to your voice.

This brought up my first annoyance with the Home Mini: You have to tweak its settings using the Home app. There isn’t a web page or corresponding app for Windows or Mac. Although this will be a minor inconvenience for some, I really wish Google would provide its services across all devices instead of turtling in the mobile world. I don’t see them doing this any time soon in the current tech climate.

Once users set it up with compatible apps, their Google Home Mini is ready to receive commands. I plugged it into my Pandora and Netflix accounts, and it worked as excpected. The cool part is using it with a paired Chromecast to show Youtube videos, Netflix videos, or photos from your Google Photos album. Users can stop, pause, and play a new video with easy voice commands.

Another neat feature is having Google Home Mini read the news for you, turning it into an on-demand radio. I imagine it probably can do the same with podcasts, but I have yet to set it up to do that.

But what’s the point?

The main problem is that the Google Home Mini just does things that any user can do with a smartphone or laptop. Sometimes using a device is quicker, since Google Home Mini sometimes either can’t understand what you’re saying, or doesn’t have the capacity to execute a specific command.

The main rub is that it still feels like you’re talking to a computer. And people don’t like talking to a computer. It’s the reason why there still is a stigma when you see someone talking to Siri or Cortana in the open.

The speaker’s voice sounds natural enough, but within an uncanny valley. The voice detection is fast, but using the keyword to activate it still feels awkward. And the demographic I feel this is supposed to help the most, baby-boomers and older, really don’t get the point of talking to it except as a parlor trick.

But there is a point.

Google, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft probably don’t really care that their smart home speakers aren’t where they should be now. These devices are merely gateways to collect data they need for the next generation. And the thing that will improve the next generation is more voice samples. Whichever company gets the most voice samples will have the better algorithm in the end.

Right now it looks like Amazon’s Echo has the lead. They were the first to define this device, letting everyone catch up to them. Google so far looks like they might be the only worthy competitor to the Echo for the time being. Apple delayed releasing their HomePod, which will sell at a premium. And Microsoft’s partnership with Harman Kardon isn’t getting the advertising, marketing or mindshare it deserves.

You’ll most likely be seeing smart home speakers everywhere within a couple of years. And if you’re like me, you probably won’t get it. I see the current generation of smart home speakers becoming the next Nintendo Wiis, gaining a large following due to gimmicky innovations, only to collect dust on a desk.

Preparing for iOS 11: Using an iPad with a keyboard

The iPad is a solid device. But to me, it always felt like a toy designed for lighter tasks like Candy Crush and Facebook. That’s soon to change with the launch of iOS 11, which will make it easier for iPads to multitask, including a native file browser.

To truly become a power user on an iPad though, you’ll have to invest in a keyboard. The iPad Pro has its own custom keyboard, but for regular iPads, Bluetooth is the way to go.

Weirdly enough, one of the better Bluetooth keyboard makers is Microsoft. I picked up Microsoft’s Universal Mobile Keyboard in anticipation of iOS 11, and tested whether an iPad keyboard is a solid investment, or merely a fool’s dream.

The keyboard I’m using is an older version, complete with a folding case that doubles as the stand. Microsoft also makes a foldable version that it sells on its online store.

The keyboard feels solid to use and type on. The keys have a good travel depth and don’t feel clunky or cheap. It connects to its case with magnets, and similar to a Surface keyboard, can be attached and detached with a simple pull.

The keyboard is compatible with Android, iOS, and Windows 8 and above. It can pair with up to three devices, and can swap between the three via a switch in the upper right hand corner.

Several shortcuts work the same way you would expect on Mac OS X or Windows. Holding Cmd + Tab brings up a familiar task switcher, with the last eight apps queued. All of the Cmd combinations work, like Cmd + A to highlight all, Cmd + C to copy, and Cmd + V to paste. And if you get stuck, you can hold down the Cmd button to get a list of available Cmds. Unfortunately, holding the Cmd key in some apps won’t show anything at all.

This is the biggest flaw when using an iPad with a keyboard: Not every app recognizes it. Some apps give you extra control like Safari and the Microsoft Office suite. Meanwhile, apps like Reddit and YouTube just don’t realize that keyboards for iPads are a thing. Nothing works beyond typing in fields.

And that’s for apps with an iPad version. Some apps like Instagram aren’t iPad optimized and refuse to change their screen orientation from portrait to landscape. Not only do you get a lower resolution app, but one that is unusable with a keyboard.

Then there is the other major factor: no touchpad or mouse support. True, anyone can touch the screen to negate this. But it feels incomplete as a power user not to have a touchpad or mouse. Luckily, this isn’t a game breaking feature, but Apple should address it sooner than later.

Aside from that, I noticed a slight delay affecting my typing every so often that I only could imagine as interference from my smartwatch, due to it having its Bluetooth on.

After using this for a couple of days, including writing this blog entry on Microsoft Word, I feel that getting a keyboard for an iPad isn’t as silly as it seems. It makes an iPad a great backup device in case your laptop or desktop breaks down. Or it might make a handy daily driver, ready to take care of your office and productivity needs. Or maybe you don’t feel like lugging around a laptop on a long journey.

As for me, I’ll definitely be sticking with my laptop for the near future. The iPad isn’t there yet when it comes to higher level productivity like software development, photoshop, and video editing. Yes, software exists for this, but the experience is dwarfed by what you’ll get on a Mac or PC. Let’s see if iOS 11 changes this.

Mini-Reviews: Xbox One Headset, Razer Orochi Mouse, ToHLo Peak Power Bank

Here is a quick roundup of some tech accessories I’ve bought recently.

Xbox One Headset

The Xbox One Headset from Microsoft can be described in one word: Bulky. But they’re good headphones in practice, just nothing I would want to be caught wearing outside.

Everything sounds clear on them, including voices. They also have a decent bass which gives them a satisfying hum when lower sounds kick in.

The nice thing about them is the microphone folds perfectly into the headset, making it easier to use as a dedicated headphones.

They were a bit tight on first use, and I thought it would be a dealbreaker. But after a day or two, they started to feel comfortable to the point that I prefer them to my older headphones. Everything just feels snug and secure.

But the size is an issue. I can’t carry these around with me, at least not without being slightly inconvenienced. Plus other headphones like Bang & Olufsen, Audio Technica, and Beats just are more fashionable.

The Xbox One Headset retails at $70 USD. It’s a cautious recommendation from me. Buy them if you’re a Microsoft fan or like the way they look. They also come with an adapter for use on the Xbox One. Otherwise, you probably would be better served with more reputable brands.

Razer Orochi Bluetooth Mouse

Razer, a company that exploded on the tech market for making the gaming equivalent of a Macbook with the Razer Blade, also makes some nifty accessories. The Razer Orochi is a hybrid Bluetooth wireless/wired mouse designed for their core base.

It’s the size of an average mouse, but more geared for gaming with the inclusion of four buttons on the side.

The Bluetooth works great. With a click, it takes roughly 3 seconds before it’s active and ready to control the screen.

If you prefer traditional methods, the included USB cable plugs into its base, allowing for a great wired option.

The nice touch to the Orochi mouse is the inclusion of a custom mouse wheel light. It can be set using RGB lighting via the Razer Synapse software. In practice, some colors show better than others. But it gives users a nice range to express their personalities.

The Razer Synapse software also allows the ability to tweak the mouse sensitivity on both the X and Y axis.

At $70 USD, the Razer Orochi comes with two AA batteries, a USB cable and adapter, and a carrying pouch. If you’re looking for a good mouse with versatility, then look no further. The Orochi gets a solid recommendation from me.

ToHLo Peak Power Bank

Every smartphone users knows the struggles with having to recharge your phone on a daily basis. Battery packs have stepped into the fray to provide a solution to smartphones’ biggest shortcoming.

The ToHLo Peak Power Bank is a 20000 mAh battery pack that serves but one purpose: keep your smartphone going.

It comes with the shortest USB cable I’ve ever seen at six inches, which is instantly useless in almost every scenario. The battery pack has two USB ports on it to allow Android, iOS, and almost any other device to charge from it.

And I say almost because I did run into a snag. My laptop can charge via a USB C port, but the ToHLo must not be configured properly to charge it. The battery pack’s output is 5V-1A at 2.1A max.

That’s a minor inconvenience, since it charges smaller portable devices well. I tested it for a week to see how long I could use it to keep my Nexus 6 going. I got three days and roughly six charges from 20-percent to full before the battery pack needed to be recharged.

Charging the battery pack to full takes a while, but once it’s ready to go, users can expect it to get them out of a pinch fairly quickly. Plus the battery pack is easy to carry around, weighing roughly the same as my Nexus 6 and having a similar profile. It can be effortlessly slipped into a bag and carried around unnoticed.

If you happen to travel a lot, or hate having your phone die on you and having no place to charge, then investing in a battery pack is a must. At $30 USD, the Peak Power Bank is an easy recommendation, but keep in mind there are tons of alternatives on the market at different prices and build quality.

Edge improves, but not fast enough to keep my interests

This is an ode to Microsoft Edge. A fairly competent browser, Edge does a lot of things right compared to its predecessor, Internet Explorer.

Edge supports proper extensions. It sips on battery life. It has a nice reading mode. And it works great in touch mode.

I wish I could go on, but my praise for Edge ends there. I’ve written before about how Edge has a bit of shortcomings. Microsoft addressed some of my issues and continues to improve the browser with every patch. They recently launched version 15 with the Creators Update, bringing some nice tab features and under the hood performance improvements.

But here I am using their biggest rival’s browser on a daily basis: Chrome. Google continues to churn out improvements to one of its flagship products, making it hard for people like me to switch.

And it’s more than extensions. Though Edge is missing some key extensions I would like to have (I miss using Chromium Wheel Smooth Scroller on Edge, for example) it has two key extensions I would want on a browser nowadays: An ad blocker and a translator.

Chrome not only has more extensions, but it has a few features that keep me coming back. I’m a big Chromecast user. Google has pretty much all but refused to provide a Chromecast SDK for Windows 32 and Store apps. Google improved its Chromecast service by including it as part of Chrome.

Also some of their web projects tend to be Chrome exclusives for a while before trickling down to other platforms. A recent example of this is the new launch of the web-driven Google Earth. This behavior of building websites that work only in Chrome frankly reminds some people of a time when Microsoft had a similar philosophy with Internet Explorer 6. But when you have the lion’s share of the market, you tend to get away with otherwise unfriendly stances.

And as a web developer, Chrome is just a better platform to use as a development tool. Chrome’s developer tools are great to use, making Edge’s tools look quite anemic.

In spite of this, I still try out Edge every once in a while. I was hoping for a great leap forward with the latest Creators Update in April, but saw little to convince me to make it my default browser.

And Edge did improve. Using html5test.com, Edge 15 scored a 468 out of 555 points, surpassing Firefox 52 by eight points. Chrome 58 still holds the lead with 518 points.

Where Edge falls short is in its CSS prowess. It scored a 42-percent on css3test.com, allowing Chrome and Firefox to pass it with 58 and 64-percent. As a developer, you’ll see some minor CSS oddities that show up from time to time on Edge, especially when it comes to animations.

Edge’s real claim to fame comes with its battery life. Microsoft ran another battery test, this time omitting Opera from the round. Edge unsurprisingly came in first again, but the major shock was that Chrome managed to get a pretty decent second after coming in dead last in the first test. Google made improvements to Chrome’s battery life as of version 53, keeping it competitive.

So what future does Edge have? It’s slowly gaining traction, according to StatCounter, but not nearly enough to catch up with Chrome or Firefox on the desktop. Meanwhile, the now dated Internet Explorer is hemorrhaging users, with no end in sight.

Edge being tied to Windows 10 only doesn’t help. Microsoft has no plans on porting it to Windows 7 and 8.1. They also have no plans on bringing it to a non-Microsoft platform like Android.

This is an ode to Edge. A browser with a lot of potential that can’t shake the legacy of its predecessor.

HP Spectre x360 15 2017 edition review: Leaves me in high spirits

The HP Spectre x360 15-inch 2017 model is a gorgeous device. It ticks all the check boxes I’m looking for in a laptop while sporting a premium coat of paint. And if you’re considering buying one, you should stop reading and get one right now. But if you’re on the fence, continue reading.

My previous laptop, a Lenovo Ideapad from 2012, broke its hinge for the second time to the point of no return. I decided to replace it with the HP Spectre due to it having similar specifications to the Ideapad.

An important feature for me is having a 15-inch screen, since I don’t own a desktop workstation and find 15 inches a great size between viewing and portability.

From old to new

The Spectre has a 512 GB SSD like my Ideapad, but comes with 16 GB of RAM, a 3840 by 2160 IPS touch display, and a dedicated 940mx dGPU. The Ideapad has 8 GB of RAM, a 1366 by 768 non-touch TN panel display, and an Intel integrated HD 4000 GPU.

The screen on the Spectre is gorgeous compared to the Ideapad. The higher 4k resolution makes text crisp, and the viewing angles are better than the TN panel.

Unfortunately, it comes with a major caveat: not every Windows programs support hi-dpi scaling. I’m having trouble with GIMP and VLC at the moment, and the workarounds to fix the tiny screens are a bit of a chore. Some other programs have blurry text, but I’m willing to deal with that as long as the user interface is accessible.

The Spectre is lighter compared to the Ideapad, at 4.42 pounds (2 kg) versus 5.84 pounds (2.65 kg). I didn’t have any issues carrying the Ideapad around, so the Spectre feels great to move one or two-handed. But I’m aware that you might consider the Spectre heavy if you’re used to carrying around something the size of a MacBook Air.

The Spectre’s battery blows my Ideapad out of the water. The Ideapad couldn’t go past 3 hours at best, making the power cord mandatory. I tested using the Spectre for a day doing web surfing and Youtube watching, and got a decent 8 hours out of it. It makes me confident taking it to any conferences or meetings and not having it die on me.

The two front facing Bang & Olufsen speakers sound pretty good on the Spectre. Invest in a good pair of headphones, though. The chiclet keyboard is very comparable to the Ideapad. Lenovo has a reputation for good laptop keyboards, and the HP Spectre’s keyboard feels identical.

Software wise, the Spectre doesn’t feel any different than the Ideapad. Part of that is because they’re both running Windows 10, which has done a great job of streamlining the experience from one machine to the next.

The Spectre comes with a bunch of bloatware, including Netflix, McAfee, and HP proprietary software. This stuff is removable, and if you want to be thorough, you can clean install Windows 10. I kept Netflix. Who wouldn’t at this point?

The Spectre has a big glass touchpad, around the size of the new Macbook Pros. It’s a bit awkward to get used to right-clicking it, but not a major issue. The touchpad is responsive and recognizes the new Windows 10 gestures and I have little issues with it aside from the size.

The convertible experience

The main selling point is the Spectre’s 360 degree hinge, allowing it to rotate for presentations or as a tablet. It’s pretty cool, but nine times out of ten, you’re going to use it as a laptop. Holding it as a tablet in one hand is a bit awkward, and I wouldn’t recommend doing that for extended periods of time. Laying it on a table or in your lap in tablet mode however is very useful for casual mode, or if using it with the included pen.

The pen works OK. It has two buttons that users can change with the included onboard software. It’s not quite a mouse replacement, but geared towards artists and business users needing to take notes.

Using the touchscreen is great. It feels natural, even in laptop mode. Steve Jobs was wrong about this. Chances are those complaining about touching their laptop screens have smartphones or tablets, and are missing the point. It’s an option. Users are never forced to use the touchscreen, but having it there makes scrolling and pinch to zoom a lot more natural for some users.

Microsoft Edge feels best when using the touchscreen, but Google Chrome isn’t too bad either. It has some resizing issues when dragging with your fingers, but the other functions work as expected. Firefox, on the other hand, needs a lot of work before I could recommend using it with a touchscreen on Windows.

Minor issues

I did run into a few issues, though. For one, the fan kicks in a lot. It wouldn’t be that big of a deal, but the fan is very noticeable at between 20-30 dB when running at full power. It seems a few un-optimized rogue programs were causing the fan to turn on, but deleting them has brought it back to acceptable levels.

Also, if you need more ports, then you might want to reconsider another machine. The Spectre comes with a USB 3.0, two USB-C (one of which supports Thunderbolt 3), an HDMI output, and a full-size SD card. If you need more USB 3.0 ports, you might want to look elsewhere. USB-C is the future, though, so the Spectre is a bit futureproof.

And as I mentioned before, dpi-scaling is a major issue on the Spectre. That’s something developers are going to have to fix. But it’s getting more noticeable as devices trend towards 4k and 8k displays.

Overall, these deficits don’t outweigh the pluses you’ll gain from the HP Spectre. It has a gorgeous black and gold finish, a solid keyboard, a great looking display, excellent battery life, isn’t too heavy, and can be used in both tablet and laptop modes. At $1,499 USD for the version I own, it hits a sweet spot of not too many compromises. If you find the price too expensive, you can downgrade the RAM and SSD to 8 GB and 256 GB each, or upgrade to a 1 TB SSD model. All versions come with a 4k display, pen, and leather carrying slip. This one’s a keeper.

Macs vs. PCs: They’re not that different, after all

Long have I been a Windows desktop user. In spite of some major shortcomings, Microsoft managed to make major improvements to its operating system that kept me from switching to a Mac.

But I’m willing to keep an open mind. Recently, I’ve been using a Macbook Air for work. And I can see why people like them so much.

So how does OS X El Capitan (now MacOS) compare to Windows 10? Surprisingly, they’re more similar than they are different.

What’s similar

The first thing I noticed is that both MacOS and Windows 10 have easy to use interfaces for finding stuff. Apple uses the Finder/spotlight function, while Windows uses the search/Cortana function. Apple’s solution seems a bit more integrated than search on Windows from my experience.

For example, spotlight seems a bit quicker and returns more relevant results from either the desktop or online resources like Wikipedia. Search will default to Bing a lot, which isn’t bad, but could use a bit of improvement.

They both have an integrated notification shade hidden on the right hand side. Windows 10 calls this the Action Center. MacOS not only collects your notifications, but also has the iOS widgets like calendar and stocks. Windows 10 has these located in Cortana in the search function.

They also have virtual desktops. But MacOS handles it much better than in Windows 10. Making an app fullscreen will automatically create a virtual desktop. Users can switch between them using a three finger gesture on the Macbook touchpad, or dismiss the virtual desktop by minimizing the app window.

Windows 10’s virtual desktop is more manual. You have to drag your apps into a new virtual desktop. Switching between them requires either using a three-finger gesture on your touchpad (if your Windows laptop supports it) or pressing Windows Key + Tab to show the virtual desktop menu. Long time Windows users probably will find it easier to Alt + Tab between apps and forego using the virtual desktop altogether.

But one thing they share in common that Windows gets right is the split-screen function. Microsoft calls this snapping, and it’s super easy to use. Just grab your app with a mouse or the touchpad, and drag it to whatever corner you want. Microsoft made this easier in Windows 10 with the inclusion of multiple sizes for snapping as well as using the Windows Key + arrow keys to snap via the keyboard.

This is an opaque thing to do on MacOS. Users have to open the app and look for the green button in the upper left hand corner, then hold it for the snap function to take place. MacOS only supports dual-screen split-screen at the moment, and worst yet, it only supports split-screen for select apps. You can split-screen any app on Windows 10, making the Mac implementation feel like a major step backwards.

What’s different

Honestly, not a lot is different between the two operating systems, and chances are these distinctions will get fuzzier as time marches on.

For one, Windows 10 has the start menu, which received a lot of controversy due to its removal from Windows 8. It’s not that big of a feature, though. All a user needs to do in Windows 8 and Windows 10 is press the Windows Key and start typing to search. This is how a user navigates around MacOS, and it works just fine.

MacOS has a Launchpad that honestly reminds me of Apple’s take on Windows 8 fullscreen start replacement. The major difference is Launchpad is modelled after iOS. Again, a regular user never needs to touch this at all.

The starkest difference is mostly hardware related. There’s no denying this: Apple touchpads just work better than Windows variants. But that’s not to say that Windows touchpads suck. Some do, but not all.

However, the touchpad is always guaranteed to be good on a Macbook. All the gestures work and don’t require adjustments out of the box. Whereas users don’t know what to expect with a Windows touchpad.

The touchpad on my Lenovo Ideapad works great, but is missing some handy gestures like virtual desktops. Other Windows touchpads either aren’t responsive, or have custom gestures based on the manufacturer’s needs. If you need a solid touchpad, stick with Apple.

And the software side tends to be a mixed bag. Best case scenario is a user is going to spend most of their time on the browser, so both systems got you covered. The desktop apps’ quality depend on the developers. Some tend to be more polished on MacOS, some are more polished on Windows. I’m a big Office user, and can’t stand using the Microsoft suite on Macs. But that’s Microsoft’s fault more than anything.

Gaming companies tend to favor Windows, but that’s not a deal-breaker if you need a desktop for work alone. Microsoft managed to address software concerns that developers had by including the Bash terminal in the Windows 10 anniversary edition. Although it is a work in progress, it allows access to open-source tools without requiring workarounds.

In the end, would I recommend switching? That’s a tough call. I honestly feel that both systems are more alike nowadays than they are different. Apple and Microsoft have been improving their operating systems for over a decade, and know what works and what doesn’t. They both have reached a convergent design philosophy where one company will come up with a feature that the other will unabashedly copy. The community is the biggest benefactor in this arrangement.

The only thing I would recommend is doing research on what you need from your laptop or desktop before buying. For example, if you want a laptop that will last, you probably should consider spending more on a premium model like a Macbook than getting a bargain model PC. If you know you want to game on your desktop, getting a Windows machine probably would make more sense than a Mac. Just realize that the Mac vs. PC arguments mean less nowadays than they did in the past.

Chrome 53: Lighter, Better, Faster, Stronger (on Desktops)

After stripping back features, it looks like Google’s flagship Chrome browser is making additions to compete with its rivals on Windows desktops.

Chrome released version 53 earlier this week, and they fixed one of its greatest weaknesses for laptop users: Battery life. According to a video posted on the official Chrome blog, Google’s browser increased its battery by close to two and a quarter hours when watching Vimeo on a Surfacebook.

In addition, Chrome supports a design overhaul with Material Design and color emojis. Chrome also is faster and more responsive than previous versions.

With a startup time of 1.89 seconds on my laptop (with a dual-core i5 processor, 8 gigs of RAM, and an SSD), Chrome is almost as fast as launching Microsoft Edge, which I clocked at 1.56 seconds. They’re both lightyears ahead of Firefox, though, which languished with a boot time of 11.33 seconds.

One has to ask where the renewed vigor is coming from. As of late, Google has been content to treating Chrome for the desktop as a red-head stepchild, pushing features for Android and iOS first.

Chrome previously announced they would retire Chrome Apps for all desktops except the Chromebooks. They removed the Chrome app launcher, and Google Now notifications as well.

The video Google posted appears to be a response to the one Microsoft made showing Chrome’s battery deficiencies compared to Edge, Firefox and Opera.

What’s really telling about Google’s video is that they tested it on Microsoft’s flagship product with a competing third party video site. It’s no secret that Google is a Mac OS X shop in all but name, keeping a few Windows machines around for testing purposes only.

Chrome hasn’t had to feel threatened about other browsers, since it dominates the desktop. According to StatCounter, Chrome is on roughly 62-percent of desktops and laptops as of August. Firefox is in second at roughly 15-percent, and Internet Explorer is over 10-percent.

But Chrome’s growth on desktops is beginning to taper. It went from 62.38-percent in July to 62.3-percent in August, according to StatCounter.

Windows 10 Linux Subsystem brings Bash terminal for developers

Hack the planet! The Bash terminal comes natively to Windows 10 via Canonical and Ubuntu. For developers, this is a big deal. For everyone else, there is Netflix and chill.

Although the Windows 10 Anniversary Update brought several minor improvements to the system, one of the biggest changes is perhaps the most esoteric as well. Microsoft declared behind closed doors that 2016 would be the year of the Linux desktop, and added a new terminal for developers to join the ranks of the cmd terminal and PowerShell.

The Anniversary Update includes the Bash terminal (called Bash on Ubuntu on Windows) for the first time on Microsoft’s operating system. And no, this isn’t a virtual machine or some weird workaround. Microsoft partnered with Canonical, the makers of Ubuntu, to bring a native Linux subsystem to Windows 10.

If you’re an open source developer that got used to coding on a Mac or Linux device, then this is big news. The Bash terminal allows easier access to developer tools. They’re a command line away on Bash, instead of downloading packages and setting up the paths in the cmd terminal.

The Windows Bash implementation is not perfect by any means. But it can grab most Linux packages with little fuss. Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) for Linux need a bit more tinkering, but considering this tool is here to get work done, it’s understandable why they don’t work out of the box.

But what about cmd and PowerShell? They’ll still be around. Microsoft has no plans on removing them, and they have their use cases. Windows 10 with both open source and Microsoft specific developer tools makes it more appealing for aspiring developers that want access to a wide repertoire of tools.

Developers on Windows 7 or 8.1 will have to stick with implementations like CygWin if they want a Unix-like experience on their desktop. Or they’ll have to either install a Linux distro or work on an OS X device to access a similar toolset.

The real question is what impact will the Windows Bash terminal have on the developer community? Stack Overflow released a survey that shows roughly 50-percent of developers were using Windows devices. The others are using OS X or Linux distros with native Bash support. Generally, one of the biggest complaints developers have about Windows is a lack of a Bash terminal to assist in getting and using developer tools.

Will this move affect Linux users in the long run? Only time will tell.