apple

Apple Creator Studio is not just a subscription. It’s Apple looking to conquer the little tiktoker who uses CapCut and Canva

by

Just a few days ago, Apple announced the launch of a new service: Apple Creator Studio. Roughly speaking, The apple firm has updated its suite of creative tools to bring them to a more specific audience who, instead of a single payment per tool, may be more interested in an affordable subscription that allows access to all of them. Looking at it with perspective, and without losing sight of the fact that it is another recurring expense to add to the current account, perhaps it makes a lot of sense for a very particular profile: the small creator. What’s included in Apple Creator Studio. To give a quick summary, the subscription costs 12.99 euros per month (129 euros if you pay annually or 2.99 if you are a student) and allows access to the entire suite of Apple creativity apps. We are talking, of course, about Final Cut, Logic Pro, Pixelmator ProMotion, Compressor and MainStage. Additionally, some generative AI features and exclusive content are included in Freeform, Keynote, Pages and Numbers. Pixelmator Pro | Image: Apple Some quick accounts. Thinking only about the Mac versions, the cost of all the creativity apps would amount to 794.94 euros. One-time payment, yes, but close to 800 euros. Apple Creator Studio costs 12.99 euros. It would take 61 monthly payments, that is, five years, to reach the total amount of the single payment. And who is this for? Although for a professional user 800 euros may not be such a high figure, for the small creator looking to use professional tools on their Mac, 12.99 euros per month may sound more attractive than 800 euros in one fell swoop. Not to mention that the subscription includes access on all platforms, namely Mac, iPad and iPhone, whenever possible. And Apple is clear that this subscription is not for Pixar, but for the small creator who has and manages himself a TikTok account, a YouTube channel, an Instagram profile and a podcast. For those who, right now, pay for CapCut, Photoshop, Premiere or Canva. Apple wants to tempt you with a more affordable, all-inclusive subscription and integration. Pixelmator Pro | Image: Apple Why now? From Xataka we have had the opportunity to speak with Bryan O’Neil Hughes (Global Director of App Product Marketing at Apple) and John Danty (Senior Global App Product Marketing Manager at Apple). Brian explains to us that this service responds to the “change in the nature of creators.” According to the executive, creators “no longer do just one thing; they need to manage multiple creative workflows and we want to serve them with these evolved apps.” According to Brian, “today’s creators are multidisciplinary: a musician not only writes songs, he also produces, designs his art, edits videos and creates promotional material.” Final Cut Pro | Image: Apple That explains the two options.. However, one thing is worth asking. If Apple is betting so heavily on services, being an almost more important source of income than the iPhonewhy keep the single payment? Danty explains to us that they want to “preserve our relationship with the professional community. Those who already have versions of Final Cut or Logic Pro will continue to receive updates and features such as beat detection.” This makes sense from a practical point of view. The video editor that only edits video will not take advantage of an app like Logic Pro or Pixelmator Pro, in the same way that an illustrator will not take advantage of Logic Pro or MainStage. The single payment is, in that case, more attractive. But to the tiktoker, instagramer, youtuber or budding singer who does everything himself, having access to all the tools doesn’t sound bad. In Brian’s words, “There is an explosion of content, driven in large part by the iPhone. More video is being captured, edited and shared than ever before and our apps are there to participate in that user journey.” Chord ID in Logic Pro | Image: Apple The topic of AI. John Danty explains to us that Apple’s philosophy is to “amplify, not replace human dexterity.” Features like Montage Maker and Chord ID They automate tasks that previously required learning technical skills, but now AI has a role in that creative flow that, in some way, could prevent the user from learning on their own. Brian and John understand it differently. For example, Montage Maker allows you to put together a quick video with the best moments of all the b-roll. For Bryan, “it helps those who have a lot of material and want to move quickly, but the editing and final polishing still depends on the user.” chord ID uses AI to pull chords from any recording and turn it into a progression, so “it helps you understand what you’re playing, which becomes a learning tool,” according to Danty. A matter of preferences. Be that as it may, there are three undeniable realities in this new release. The first, that Apple is going to start charging for applied AI functions. The second, that Canva, CapCut and Adobe have come up with a new-rather-renewed rival. The third, which even though it has an attractive price, is one more subscription that is added to the ones we already have and to generalized satiety with this monetization. How it will gel and evolve is something we will see over time. Images | Apple In Xataka | The incredible stock market performance of Big Tech, in a graph: the magnificent seven are now the unleashed seven

Apple promised they would be happy by sweeping the iPhone in China. Until Huawei made things clear

by

For years, the iPhone was the best-selling mobile phone in China despite the efforts of Asian manufacturers. Xiaomi, Huawei, OPPO and Vivo were fighting to create a product at their level (or even superior in some key aspects, such as the camera), achieving privileged positions in a ranking in which Apple used to dominate. It’s not like that anymore. Again, king. Huawei has been in first place in shipments within its country for more than two years. This past 2025, despite having lost 1.9% in annual growth, it is still slightly above the iPhone company. Specifically, 16.4% market share compared to Apple’s 16.2%. Apple grows 4% year-on-year, an increase motivated by the great commercial reception of the new family iPhone 17. In fact, Apple has already surpassed Samsung and has become the first manufacturer worldwide, despite being the second in China. Yes, but. Although Huawei is reigning with an iron fistthe data is not enough to assert that this will continue to be the case next 2026. There has never been such a fierce fight between the main Chinese manufacturers. Huawei: 16.4% market share. Apple: 16.2% market share. Vivo: 16.2% market share. Xiaomi: 15.4% market share. OPPO: 15.2% market share. Minimal differences in quota that will translate into a constant dance of positions during 2026. There is a clear message here: Huawei has not been able to be stopped in its native country. The Huawei case. Vivo, Xiaomi and OPPO maintain a close relationship with Qualcomm, the giant in charge of providing the best high-end Android devices with the most powerful chips on the market. Meanwhile, Huawei has had to adapt to playing with more restrictions than the rest: has had to develop together with SMIC their own processors He had to create a software ecosystem completely independent of Android Almost completely redesign your supply chain Make an even more ambitious bet on your domestic market, where life without Google is the norm The surprise. For years, we have seen Chinese mobile phones as great high-end proposals, but with some important disadvantages compared to Western rivals (fewer years of support, mediocre video recording, “crazy” specs without any sense of assembly…). This has been changing for a while now.. Today (saving the subjectivity of which software we like more or less), Chinese mobile phones are the most ambitious hardware proposal overall. They have the best batteries on the market, by far. On a photographic level, they are beginning to move dangerously far from Apple, Google and Samsung. The hardware set usually far exceeds what we see in the rest of its rivals. Chinese brands are very focused on their expansion throughout Europe, and it shows. not so fast. The Asian market is a great mirror in which to see how the fight between large technology companies progresses, but its particularities are still there. On a global level, at least currently, Apple and Samsung seem practically unreachable. Only Xiaomi, with a 13% share worldwide (compared to Apple’s 20% and Samsung’s 19%), plays in the double-digit league. Vivo and OPPO, with a share of 8%, have not moved their position since 2023. By 2026, consultancies like Counterpoint expect a year of moderation and a poor growth forecast. The global price crisis in DRAM/NAND memories will force an imminent price increase. Whoever manages to contain the dam will win this year. Image | Xataka In Xataka | Chinese mobile phones conquered the market by dividing into a thousand different brands. Now they are doing just the opposite.

Siri is just the Trojan horse for Google to infiltrate the entire Apple ecosystem

by

Apple doesn’t have its own AI, so it has chosen a girlfriend. That girlfriend is none other than Google, which has just signed an agreement with Cupertino to make Gemini the center of future developments. Not one, no. Of many. We thought this was just about Siri. The initial official announcement was brief. Apple would use Gemini, but it seemed that it was going to do so basically to launch its long-awaited version of that personalized Siri governed by a generative AI model at once. It turns out that the agreement is broader. Gemini is Google’s Trojan horse to conquer Apple. Google’s statement revealed that this alliance went beyond what seemed to focus on Siri. In a post on XGoogle stated the following: “Apple and Google have signed a multi-year collaboration agreement that will see the next generation of Apple’s entry-level models based on Gemini models and Google’s cloud technology. These models will help power future Apple Intelligence features, including a more personalized Siri coming this year.” This makes it clear that although the initial protagonist will be Siri, the scope of the agreement can be much more important and affect the entire Apple hardware and software ecosystem. Considering that AI options from Apple Intelligence and Siri will likely reach many of its products and services, Gemini, which will power all of those models, would end up being an integral part of said ecosystem. Collaboration above all. As indicated in The Informationthe agreement allows Apple to ask Google to modify some aspects of how Gemini works, but above all it will allow Apple to adjust Gemini itself so that it responds to requests in the way that Apple prefers. No Gemini branding. Sources close to the negotiations add an interesting fact: it will not be noticed that the AI ​​that we use in Siri and other Apple products is actually based on Gemini. Google’s branding will be blurred, and users will not know what is underneath and what is the engine of those interactions with AI. A more emotional Siri. That source cited in The Information also reveals that Siri will be more approachable and emotional. “Historically Siri has always had difficulty with emotional support,” he explains, but in the Gemini-based version, “Siri will give more complete conversational responses, just like ChatGPT and Gemini.” That, of course, has two sides: AI becomes more “human”, but for vulnerable people that can end up being dangerous. Apple Intelligence will still be there. Although Gemini thus infiltrates the Apple ecosystem, both companies clarified that Apple Intelligence will continue to be available on Apple devices and on the servers of its Private Cloud Compute platform. What is not so clear is that the Apple Intelligence models do not also end up being based on Gemini. Especially since Apple’s “foundational models will be based on Google’s Gemini models.” A priori that should mean internal changes at Apple Intelligence as they adopt Google technology. The new Siri at WWDC? The new version of Siri is expected to be presented in March or April behind him controversial delay which was announced almost a year ago. The new voice assistant will theoretically debut in iOS 26.4, the update that should arrive in those months, but Apple could take the opportunity to announce it at WWDC 2026, two years after that initial announcement that ended up becoming a fiasco: Apple promised things which it has not achieved until now, but Gemini may finally become the solution to that problem. In Xataka | Apple has decided not to enter the AI ​​war because it believes it has something more important: the entry “door”

The alliance with Google and Gemini makes it clear what tactic Apple has chosen for its future: the parasite strategy

by

Let’s do a little memory. It was the summer of the year 102 BC. C. and Consul Gaius Mariusde facto ruler of Rome, was facing the invasion of the Germanic tribes of the Teutons and the Ambrones, who three years earlier had annihilated several legions of the Republic in the battle of Arausio. Marius, camped and with abundant provisions, saw how the Teutons did not stop provoking him and his soldiers. The Germanic tribes, superior in number, mocked them and tried to force an immediate battle, but Marius flatly refused. He punished soldiers who responded to provocations, let his troops despair, and endured humiliation by simply following and observing the enemy. He made his troops go up to the palisades in turns and observe the Teutons, their weapons, their movements, their shouts. Forced them to get used to them and to make them go from something scary to something familiar. But all Mario was doing was choosing the battle that was really worth fighting. The Teutons tried to cross the Alps and Marius and his legions followed them until Aquae Sextiae. There, in an advantageous position and highly motivated—among other things, by thirst—the Romans ended up annihilating the Ambroni first, and then the Teutons. Mario didn’t care that they laughed at him, that they provoked him and that his own soldiers distrusted him. He achieved a historic victory that prevented a potential invasion by those and other Germanic tribes. And he did it with a simple tactic: choose the battles to fight. Which is, at least on the surface, what Apple seems to be doing. The parasite strategy For years Apple has boasted of controlling every element of its ecosystem, both hardware and software. And if there was something that he didn’t control, he worked to do it, as we are seeing with the iPhone or the Mac, increasingly less dependent on third-party chips and technologies. However, the alliance with Google and Gemini breaks that trend and represents a disturbing implicit recognition: in the generative AI race, Apple is not only not in the lead, but it seems to have decided to stop running. At least it doesn’t do it like its rivals do. While Google, Microsoft, Meta, xAI or Amazon do not stop investing billions in chips, new AI models and above all new data centers, Apple has not wanted to enter into those battles. He didn’t care about the provocations or that the industry and the media distrusted (we distrusted) that strategy. Apple has gone about its business, and has barely launched new features in an absolutely explosive segment. Its Apple Intelligence platform is comparatively much lower than those of rivalsyour Private Cloud Compute It’s an interesting idea but at the moment without a clear impact and Siri delay last year was the definitive sign that Apple I had missed the AI ​​train. And it is better not to talk about economic investment: its competitors are betting everything on AI while Apple’s capex remains almost symbolic compared to that of others. That has made many of us doubt the future of an Apple that seems to “move on from AI.” But be careful, because Tim Cook may just be adopting that same Mario tactic of choosing which battles to fight. They may not believe it makes sense to spend those billions of dollars developing a foundational model right now, and they may not believe in the need to create their own data centers either. In fact, Apple has been applying the parasite strategy: in those segments in which he did not dominate or was not strong, he delegated: Cloud infrastructure: Apple has never been strong in the cloud and has delegated to other platforms to which it has paid large sums of money for years. Searches: We have the clearest example of this strategy in internet searches. The multi-million dollar alliance with Google has been offering both companies a perfect solution in this area for years That agreement with Google in the search segment now has its sequel with the historic agreement to use Gemini as a fundamental pillar of the reinvention of Siri. Apple’s voice assistant will make use of Google’s AI models and will thus become a critical component of the functioning of its ecosystem. It is an alliance with extraordinary implications and that once again confirms that parasite strategy in which the ultimate goal is clear: achieve benefits without taking risks. Apple as a wrapper for AI In fact, here Apple is once again taking advantage of its leading role in the mobility market—especially in the US—once again. While other companies like Google and OpenAI spend fortunes on servers and energy, Apple it is limited to being the elegant packaging. They provide the screen, the local processor and the user’s trust. Google puts the brain that runs in the cloud. It is (theoretically) a win-win. But it is also the recognition of a pragmatic defeat. Giving in to that reality—we don’t have a foundational AI model, we don’t have cloud infrastructure, we don’t have data centers—is also a tactic that can end up winning the game. AI aims to become a commodityin something that will be accessible to everything and everyone and that loses its differentiating characteristics in the eyes of the consumer. It will be something generic, interchangeable and basic, and what may matter then is not the AI, but how it is distributed and provided. And Apple is changing from being a company that invents all its tools to becoming a company that is the largest distributor of services in the world. They certify it the more than 2.35 billion active devices with their different operating systems around the world, which can clearly become – if they are not already – the gateway to AI for millions of people. This parasite strategy allows Apple to turn that theoretical defeat into a potential victory. Apple is the mandatory tollnot only for billions of users, but for companies like Google, which seems to have … Read more

Apple has found a way to win in the AI ​​era without having the best AI: be the door

by

Apple has just done something that was unthinkable until recently: publicly admit that you don’t have the best AI. That after fifteen years of trying to make Siri work, with the advantage of hitting first, he gives up. That the brains of Apple Intelligence, including the new Siri, Google will put it. And yet, it has just gained momentum to preserve its dominant position for the next decade. A technological paradox. This isn’t a move Apple should be very proud of, but it has a nicer side: in the age of AI, being the best may not be so important. What matters is being the door. For half a century, the value in technology has been in innovation. IBM, Microsoft, Google, Facebook… they were all winning by creating something that no one else had. The reading with this step by Apple is that that era may be over: if AI models are updated every quarter and the difference between the best and the second is indistinguishable for 95% of users, what sense does it make to spend 50,000 kilos on research to go behind? It sounds sexier, especially to investors, to be the one who charges a toll for each interaction. And for that you don’t need the best model, you need the device that people have in their pockets. That’s the bet: Siri will continue to work, being owned by Apple and running on Apple hardware, but the piece that changes is the intelligence, the LLM. The most expensive piece to develop and the one that possibly provides the least differentiation when you have a billion iPhones. Apple does not give up something that matters to it at all, but rather outsources the part in which it cannot compete. Bittersweet for the company, bitter for its devotees, reasonable for its investors. The real deal is not in what Apple pays, but in what it gets. Google pays 20 billion a year for being the default search engine in Safari, and now sells (or delivers, the terms of the agreement have not been made public) the Apple Intelligence feed. But Apple not only charges, it also receive data on how 1 billion users interact with AI in mobile context: You know what they’re asking. When. How they formulate queries. What do they reject? What do they repeat? Google gets better distribution, and Apple gets tremendously valuable training. If having the best AI is no longer a competitive advantage, what is? OpenAI has the best product. Anthropic has the best technology. Google has the best infrastructure. But Apple has the iPhone. And in a world where AI is gone commoditizingin which one model is valid until the next one arrives three months later, the only moat What holds is the device. There is not so much need to innovate if you control access. You just need what comes through your door to be good enough. AND Gemini is fantastic. Therein lies the problem. In the age of AI, whoever controls the device can live off income by letting others innovate. What incentive does Apple have to really improve AI? As long as Gemini works well on iPhones, Apple won’t care if there are models that are 12% better. Their business is collecting the toll, not pushing the border. Innovation still exists and Google / OpenAI / Anthropic / xAI will continue to compete, but Now it is made by companies that do not capture all of its value while it is exploited by those who do not create it.. Welcome to digital rentism. Where the one who controls the door decides how much those who pass through it should improve. AND “Sufficient” always beats “exceptional” when the decider does not pay for the difference. Apple did the rationally right thing. And that, precisely, should scare us. In Xataka | Alphabet has just overtaken Apple in the ranking of the most valuable companies in the world. The reason is in AI Featured image | Rubaitul Azad, Dennis Brendel

More and more car brands are fleeing from Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. And it makes all the sense in the world

by

My Volkswagen Polo is 10 years old, has a screen where I can see car statistics and play the radio or Spotify and little else: if I want to enjoy a GPS navigator, I have to place my phone on a support on the grille and it will work. So yes, I get really excited when I drive my partner’s Kona, with a screen bigger than a tablet on which I can visit Xataka from the web browser, watch videos either play a game. Android Auto is wonderful, but if I connect my iPhone, using apps like Waze on CarPlay is also another story. For someone who has a stupid screen in their car and the intention of not renewing it in the next five years, Android Auto and Apple CarPlay sound like a heavenly melody in my ears. However, Google and Apple’s infotainment systems are taking a step back: there are manufacturers who decide to back off, so their new models are left out. And it doesn’t surprise me. Goodbye to Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. Last summer and despite the delays, Apple promised they would be happy with their Apple CarPlay Ultra budding until he got a brand slam: There are barely Aston Martin and Porsche left. Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Ford, Lincoln, Audi, Jaguar, Acura, Volvo, Honda, Renault, Infinity and Polestar got off the boat. In the fall, the leadership of General Motors explained in a The Verge podcast that it intended to remove both infotainment systems from its newer vehicles and replace them with its own Gemini-spiked system. Finally, German brands such as BMW, Mercedes-Benz, or Volkswagen they have joined to create an open source alternative called Safety Open Vehicle Core. S-Core, its abbreviation, is basically a base infrastructure with the essentials from which each manufacturer will build its adapted customization layer. It’s a matter of control. Android Auto and Apple CarPlay provide a unified and mainstream experience within the reach of the majority who have a smartphone and implementing them is not expensive. Although well, it is not so much because of the money they spend installing Android Auto and Apple CarPlay and more because of what they stop earning. Data collection and what you can do with it. It should be noted that with their respective infotainment systems, Apple collects information such as your position and how it varies over time, which allows you to know your speed, schedules, frequent routes… to give some simple examples. They also know what apps you use and when. An open door to the vein of subscriptions. In recent years we have already seen how large manufacturers launched a subscription model to release certain premium hardware functions: Volkswagen to unlock all the powerthe controversial BMW heated seats (then backed out), Mercedes and its improvements subscription accelerationor Polestar for offering similar performance packages. Having access to detailed information on usage habits would allow the establishment of a user profile and thus offer a more personalized experience in the form of a subscription. Materializing it will not be easy or fast. The GM news detailed that the measure would be implemented in the coming years and does not even imply a complete disengagement as long as it does not completely eliminate Google from the equation, since it implements Gemini, the Menlo Park company’s big bet. And Google’s AI is not exactly sparing in capturing information. Using an Android fork could also be an interesting option. S-Core- Eclipse Release Schedule The route of German companies does seem more viable. In fact, their preview schedule is available on HitHub and for now they are fulfilling it to the letter. Of course, one thing is that they are able to create a platform and another is the experience it offers. How cold it is outside of Android Auto and CarPlay. One of the great assets of Android Auto is the quantity and quality of compatible apps: Thinking about a platform without Google Maps, Waze or Spotify would feel like a huge step backwards. So later, they will have to get the companies behind them to bring their apps to these systems. And even if they did achieve it, then there are other hot potatoes such as updates to their frequency. Life without Android Auto or Apple CarPlay is an option and if you don’t tell Rivian or Tesla, but in the end it’s all about user experience. Don’t let it feel like taking a step back. Buying a car (especially if it is high-end) and finding a setback is not a dish of good taste. They don’t charge you a premium for unlocking functions or removing advertising either. The scenario of having to pay a monthly fee to access maps and extras when you have a solid and free alternative on the market sounds absurd. In any case, the winds of change are blowing on car screens. In Xataka | Android Auto is quietly preparing for us to drive with smart glasses. In Spain it won’t be easy In Xataka | This car was a pioneer with Android Automotive, but its users were crying out for Android Auto. Your wish has been granted

Alphabet has just overtaken Apple as the most valuable company in the world. The reason is in AI

by

Alphabet closed Wednesday with a valuation of $3.88 billion, above Apple’s $3.84 billion. Your actions they have risen 2% while Apple’s have fallen 4% in five days. Why is it important. This advance reflects the financial consequences of two opposing strategies in the AI ​​race: Alphabet has bet big and Apple has hesitated. And the market is already punishing indecision. The contrast. Alphabet presented in November ironwoodits seventh generation of TPU chips as an alternative to NVIDIA, and in December it launched Gemini 3 with an excellent welcome. Meanwhile, Apple keeps postponing its “new Siri” until in a few months. The difference in development capacity and distribution speed is noticeable: Alphabet’s stock rose 65% in 2025, its best year since 2009. Apple’s barely grew 9%, below the 16.4% of the S&P 500. Between the lines. Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Alphabet, has been able to translate the high demand for AI infrastructure into gigantic contracts. On the October earnings call with analysts and investors said that Google Cloud had signed more deals over $1 billion in the first three quarters of 2025 than in 2023 and 2024 combined. Apple, on the other hand, remains caught in uncertainty over when and how it will integrate AI into its consumer products. The new Siri has become entrenched, left victims along the way and has positioned Apple as a company that was caught on the wrong foot by the rise of generative AI, without taking risks. Decisive moment. This reversal of positions marks the end of an era in which Apple dominated due to the inertia of the iPhone and the beginning of another in which anyone who does not have a clear and convincing AI strategy risks being left behind, no matter how iconic their logo may be. The market never pays for the past. In Xataka | In the midst of the RAM memory crisis, Samsung takes a leap with its HBM4 memory. It does not imply good news for the pocket Featured image | Rubaitul Azad

More than 40 years later, many still believe that the best advertisement in history was made by Apple

by

In a few days there will be an anniversary that may be celebrated in some way by those most veteran or sentimental Apple fans: that of the broadcast of an advertisement so mythical that it has its own name (and what a name): ‘1984’, the first Macintosh advertisement. But not because he gets older does he become forgotten, quite the opposite. To put ourselves a little in context, the kings of consumer computing They were IBM (even with MS-DOS as the operating system), so the launch of a computer designed for easy use and a friendlier graphical interface needed a good presentation. We had to try to break a trend and beat a rival that takes the form of Big Brother in the popular spot, which we will remember now before talking about the curiosities about it. Choosing the moment The Super Bowl is an American sporting event whose millionaire audience has caused the price of a 30-second ad during the broadcast to reach the 3.4 and 4 million euros. It is the grand final of the NFL (the national football league) and also the focus of attention of which brand is the one that has invested a good pinch in starring in those seconds. It is not surprising then that the eighteenth edition of this final (that is, the one in 1984) was the moment chosen by Apple to present an advertisement that broke quite a bit with the usual and that, as we will now see, had notable figures behind the cameras. In fact, as on NPR they remember was repeatedly voted the best ad of all time when it doesn’t even show the product. The cast and the figures In the advertisement we see that the protagonists are, on the one hand, a group of people with similar features and in some way uniformed (the proletarians), and on the other hand, the athlete who ends the broadcast to which they attend (played by Anya Major). And Fred Goldberg, an account executive at the Chiat/Day advertising agency who acted as a liaison between Steve Jobs and the creatives of the ad, spoke about the cast in a book about his experience in advertising. that they remembered on CNN. The executive comments that around 75% of these actors were skinhead and “pretty unpleasant beings,” in Goldberg’s own words. He adds that there were fights and altercations and that the security personnel went with police dogs to control them and that they even harassed the leading actress. There were a total of 200 (uncontrollable) extras. The filming lasted three days (which apparently caused a lot of trouble) and they charged a total of $10,000. The official issue and the previous VIP pass The advertisement was broadcast publicly on January 22, 1984 in the Los Angeles Raiders’ final against the Washington Redskins, in which the former won 38-9 at Tampa Stadium. Although it was not strictly the first time it was broadcast, since Goldberg also says that it was previously shown to evaluate it for the contests. At that time the leaks and leaks They were not as much the order of the day as is the case today with mobile phones, but a lot of care was taken regarding the prior pass condition in petit committee so that there weren’t any. This pass was made at midnight in Twin Falls (Idaho, USA), in the KMVT studios, and the only feedback What he had was that of a television station worker, who called the agency asking what that was. In fact, in Mental Floss They spoke with Tom Frank, the person in charge of making that first showing on December 31, 1983 (after 00:00) of a 60-second version of the spot. Frank explained that he understood the choice of that small station at that time due to the small audience and that he is unaware of the fact that an incorrect date for this screening was revealed to the press, in addition to curious facts such as that they also broadcast the spot “Lemmings” (lesser known) and that he is not personally a user of Apple products. The teachers behind the cameras The announcement had to be somewhat shocking because it was the presentation of the Macintosh, considered the first personal computer with a simple user interface interaction and aimed at a more general (non-specialized) audience. And to create it not only did it have to have a striking theme, it also had to get the best staff. Not in vain was it counted on Ridley Scott for direction, who had directed films like ‘Alien’ and ‘Blade Runner’ a few years before (in 1979 and 1982 respectively). And if you have seen the second one, the advertisement will probably have reminded you of it since it has a futuristic appearance (for the moment) like said production. According to Goldberg, Steve Jobs was very enthusiastic when he was presented with this idea for a spot based on the dystopian novel ‘1984’ by George Orwell. “He (Steve Jobs) was the kind of person who, when you show him something, has a visceral reaction. He was totally into it, he really liked it” Fred Goldberg, Chiat/Day For the executive, that futuristic appearance was very appropriate for the effect they wanted to cause with the advertisement. What we see in it is a group of proletarians with shaved heads who attend to the broadcast of a message by a kind of Big Brother, in which the anniversary of “the Information Purification Directives” is celebrated, until the protagonist enters and destroys everything. The message is the following (we put the original and the translation into Spanish): “Today, we celebrate the first glorious anniversary of the Information Purification Directives. We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of pure ideology—where each worker may bloom, secure from the pests purveying contradictory truths. Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth. We are one people, … Read more

Apple, Google and Samsung promised them happily with 5,000mAh batteries. Until China came to rub their hands on their faces

by

The person writing these lines has an American mobile phone—made in China—with a little more 5,000mAh. A figure in which giants like Apple, Samsung or Google have been comfortably installed for years. Meanwhile, in China, Honor has just made official a phone with a 10,000 mAh battery. The launch is not surprising just because it has managed to literally introduce a powerbank inside a smartphone. It is surprising because it breaks a barrier that until now no one had dared to cross. Not due to lack of possibilities, but due to industrial inertia. The aforementioned. Honor has made the Honor Win and Honor Win RT. Two phones that, in addition to having the best Qualcomm processorshave a 10,000mAh battery made of silicon-carbon technology. The message is clear: this is not a typical high-end, it is proof that China is the leading benchmark in batteries for smartphones. thickness. For years there has been an unwritten but unquestionable rule: more battery means more thickness. The 10,000 mAh were reserved for rugged, bulky mobile phones designed for very specific uses. These Honor Win break that logic. They are thinner than a iPhone 17 Pro Maxbut with double the energy capacity. There are no gimmicks, fine print or marketing exercises: it’s a real leap in energy density. How did they achieve it?. Honor has not specified how they have managed to take the capacity to such an extreme but the person responsible is clear: silicon-carbon. This technology has been demonstrating for years that it is possible to introduce much denser batteries in the sizes in which lithium has already reached its ceiling. Chinese mobile phones have been standardizing for more than a year batteries over 7,000mAhand Honor’s move to reach five figures marks what aspires to be a new standard. The cons. Silicon-carbon poses certain challenges, and the first is degradation. These batteries, especially in their first generations, They seemed not to be at the same level as classic lithium batteries. Over time, the promised charge cycles are virtually identical to those of traditional lithium batteries (more than 1,500). The second is the cost: producing this type of cells is more expensivewhich partially explains why, for the moment, these figures reach China first and not global markets. In fact, a common practice is to find models whose Chinese version has more battery than the global version, reserved for the rest of the markets. A third key point is related to security and regulation. Denser batteries require stricter controls, and Western regulatory frameworks are not always prepared to adopt these types of advances so quickly. None of this invalidates progress. It simply explains why Apple, Samsung or Google have not yet made the leap. It’s not that they can’t: it’s that they haven’t wanted to take the risk… yet. China is going to force a move. The 10,000mAh batteries are, without much room for doubt, one of the biggest technological leaps in the world of smartphones after the arrival of AI. A figure that will allow us to normalize the three days of average use without going through the charger. The leap is so relevant that, whether they like it or not, “traditional” manufacturers will have to start making a move, as they had to start doing with fast charging systems. Samsung has already started implementing the 7,000mAh in phones like the Galaxy M51but its high-end is still at the 5,000mAh barrier. Google also moves in the 5,200mAh and Apple… is Apple. With a greater or lesser pace of implementation, these manufacturers are forced to keep pace with China in these advances. And that translates into admitting that we were wrong about lithium. Image | Honor In Xataka | The Android phones with the best battery of 2025: which one to buy and recommended models

Apple made privacy its flag. One of his functions has resulted in a fine of 98 million euros in Europe

by

Privacy has been one of Apple’s great arguments to explain why its ecosystem works differently. It is not just a technical issue, but a narrative built over years. Precisely for this reason it is surprising that a tool presented as an advance for the user is at the center of a fine of almost one hundred million euros. The Italian Competition Authority has imposed Apple fined 98.6 million euros for abuse of dominant position, considering that the implementation of App Tracking Transparency restricts competition. The focus is not on the idea of ​​​​protecting data, but on how those rules were applied to developers who distribute their apps on iOS. This is where the underlying shock lies. The origin of the function. Transparency Tracking App It does not arise in this regulatory context, but several years earlier, as part of a broader change in Apple’s privacy strategy. The feature was introduced in April 2021 with the release of iOS 14.5 and was presented as a direct way to return control over advertising tracking to the user. From then on, each app had to ask for explicit permission before tracking user activity on other apps and websites. It was a turn that reordered the mobile ecosystem from within. The logic behind App Tracking Transparency is based on a specific definition of what Apple considers tracking. It is not just about displaying ads, but about linking data collected in an app with information obtained from third-party services for targeted advertising or measurement. If the user chooses not to be tracked, the developer loses access to the IDFA and, according to system rulesnor may you use other personal identifiers for the same purpose. It is a technical cut that simplifies the user’s decision, but has direct consequences on how many applications are monetized. A position of strength in the iOS ecosystem. For the Italian authority, the key is not the subsequent opening of the system, but the situation that existed when ATT began to be applied. During that period, Apple concentrated control over the distribution of iOS apps and over the rules that govern advertising tracking at the system level. From that dominant position, the regulator concludes, the company was able to set conditions that had a competitive impact. All of this, beyond the stated objective of protecting user privacy. The App Tracking Transparency Notice The core of the reproach: “double consent.” The heart of the penalty is how ATT was applied to third-party developers. According to the Italian authorityApple’s screen required a first permit to be requested which, by itself, did not meet all the requirements of European data protection regulations. This forced developers to request a second additional consent for the same advertising purpose. That extra step, the regulator maintains, reduced the probability of acceptance and limited the collection and use of data necessary for personalized advertising. The economic impact is one of the pillars of the file. By increasing the friction of obtaining consent, ATT limited the collection and linking of data used to measure and personalize ads. For the Italian authority, this harmed developers whose business is based on the sale of advertising space and also affected advertisers and intermediation platforms. In the summary of the case, the regulator adds that this design could generate benefits for Apple, both through higher commissions associated with App Store services and the growth of its advertising business. Was there another way to do it? One of the keys to resolution is that the problem is not in the goal, but in the path. The Italian authority claims that Apple could have achieved the same level of privacy protection without requiring duplicate consent requests. Disagreement and notice of appeal. Apple has expressed its disagreement with the resolution of the Italian authority and considers that it does not adequately value the privacy protections provided by ATT. In a statement cited by Reutersthe company insists that the system was created to give users clear control over ad tracking and that its rules apply equally to all developers. The company has also confirmed that it will appeal the fine and that it will maintain its commitment to protecting user privacy. The fine is the result of a long and complex investigation. According to the case summarythe Italian authority opened the file in May 2023 and expanded its scope in October 2024, in coordination with the European Commission, other competition regulators and the national data protection authority. This joint approach underlines that ATT’s analysis was not limited to a single country or a single dimension. Rather, it was approached as a intersection between competition, privacy and the functioning of the digital market. Beyond the announced appeal, the resolution imposes immediate effects. The authority orders Apple to immediately cease the aforementioned conduct and refrain from repeating similar practices in the future. In addition, Apple has 90 days to inform the AGCM how it will comply with those demands. It is not clear, for now, whether this calendar also depends on the appeal process, but the case makes it clear that the debate is no longer just theoretical. Images | Georgiy Lyamin | Screenshot In Xataka | We believed that Microsoft had already put Copilot everywhere. LG shows us that we were very wrong

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.