billion

Researchers have discovered “lost continents” from 4 billion years ago

by

The idea we have of the early Earth involves a huge ball of incandescent magma and conditions incompatible with life. The problem? That there are no rocks from 4.3 billion years ago to confirm this consolidated theory. What we do have are some microscopic crystals called zircons. And zircons are telling a different story, according to this study by a research team at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. published in Nature. What zircon says. Regarding the behavior of the Earth’s surface, geology valued two ideas for that period known as Hadean: that there was a plate tectonics where one plate sinks under another or that the Earth had a kind of stagnant lid, a rigid and hot surface where heat only escaped through large columns of magma. Well, neither one nor the other, both: zircons leave evidence of an Earth that already had oceans, liquid water and a crust that alternated both systems. John Valley, the University of Wisconsin-Madison geoscientist who leads the study explains that “There were about 800 million years of Earth’s history in which the surface was already habitable, although we have no fossil evidence and we do not know when life first emerged.” Why it is important. Because they determine that the Earth did not choose a single model, but rather that both processes took place at the same time in different places. Of course, it was not a stable plate tectonics like the one that exists today, but rather it had violent and short episodes of sliding of the edges of one plate under another (subduction) that coexisted with large jets of magma that rose from the interior of the Earth. This discovery is key to understanding how the Earth’s surface moved, the formation of continents and life. On the one hand, without tectonics, the felsic continental crust that floats on the mantle and makes up the lands on which we live would not exist. On the other hand, plate tectonics regulates the climate and recycles nutrients, so knowing when it started working helps understand when the Earth became a place compatible with life. How they analyzed it. The John Valley team analyzed the popular zircons from Jack Hills (Western Australia). These sand-sized minerals are a kind of time capsule, housing the only direct record of Earth’s first 500 million years. They were looking for chemical “fingerprints” that would reveal where and how they were formed, for which they used technology WiscSIMS high resolution. They then compared the results of the analysis with other zirconiums from the Hadic Eon found in Barberton (South Africa). Each one told a different story. Surprises in the “DNA” of the mineral. 47% of oceanic zircons had high levels of Uranium compared to Niobium, indicating that they formed in subduction zones where ocean water sinks into the mantle. On the other hand, the South African zircons show that they were born from virgin rock from the planet’s interior, confirming the classic ‘stagnant lid’ theory by which the Earth’s first solid surface was rigid and immobile. Or what is the same: while in Australia the crust sank and created protocontinents, in what is now South Africa the Earth behaved differently, with a rigid and stagnant crust. That is, the early Earth was a mosaic of tectonic styles. The Earth did not go from being hell to what it is today overnight, but rather it was a hybrid process and generated the necessary conditions for life sooner than we thought. In Xataka | We know it as “the red planet”, but 3.37 billion years ago Mars was almost as blue as Earth In Xataka | 4.5 billion years of Earth’s history, summarized in a spectacular video map Cover | Tomáš Malík and Javier Miranda

Databricks is worth 134 billion without ever having gone public thanks to AI. And it’s not an AI company

by

Databricks has closed a financing round of more than 7 billion dollars (5,000 million in capital and 2,000 million in debt) that values ​​the company at 134 billion dollars. It’s a dizzying figure for a company that the vast majority of people have never heard of. The San Francisco firm is not, technically, an AI company either. Its business is enterprise-scale data management and analysis. What Databricks does is provide the invisible infrastructure that allows other companies to store, process and extract value from enormous amounts of information. Without that, training AI models would be impossible. Why is it important. Databricks is the cover of the boom of AI. OpenAI, NVIDIA or Google grab the headlines, but it’s companies like this that build the plumbing that makes everything else possible. Its valuation is 134,000 million. Without ever having gone public. That places it even above established technology giants. It is at the level of Qualcomm or Sony. Beats Xiaomi or Adobe. And it does so with a less business model sexy but more profitable: B2B infrastructure than it leaves gross margins greater than 80%. In figures. The Databricks numbers They explain a growth that justifies the enthusiasm of its investors. Annualized revenues exceeding $5.4 billion in the fourth quarter, with 65% year-over-year growth. More than 800 clients that generate more than a million dollars annually. Positive free cash flow over the last year. Its AI product line has surpassed $1.4 billion in revenue with a net retention rate of over 140%. Between the lines. The participation of JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Microsoft and sovereign funds like Qatar’s in the latest round says a lot: these large investors are betting on the infrastructure, not the final application. The implicit message is something we’ve been hearing since the first few months after the ChatGPT moment: in the AI ​​race, those who sell picks and shovels can earn more than those who pan for gold. Databricks provides the platform where companies store their proprietary data and train their custom modelssomething that the public APIs of OpenAI or Anthropic cannot offer. Yes, but. Its CEO, Ali Ghodsi, has said that “now is not a good time to go public,” even though his company meets all the financial requirements to do so. The strategy is to accumulate enough cash enough to withstand any market correction like the one in 2022. And seen the vertigo it produces any headlines on capex figuresit makes sense to make a cushion for what may happen. The context. Databricks represents an important change in how the technology sector is structured. For years, traditional SaaS companies dominated the B2B landscape. Now, AI infrastructure and data platforms are achieving similar or higher valuations. The company is also expanding beyond its traditional business with products such as Lakebase, a database designed specifically for AI agents. Or with Geniea conversational assistant that allows employees to query business data using natural language. If Databricks achieves a strong IPO in an environment where technology valuations are more closely monitored than ever, it would demonstrate that markets are willing to pay very large premiums for AI infrastructure, not just flashy models. And that would change the rules of the game for dozens of similar companies operating in the shadows. In Xataka | Spain, on the verge of adding another AI unicorn: Multiverse negotiates a round to exceed 1.5 billion euros Featured image | Databricks and Xataka with Mockuuups Studio

Multiverse negotiates a round to exceed 1.5 billion euros

by

In the midst of a global race to dominate artificial intelligence, where leadership is usually concentrated in the United States or China, a different story with a Spanish accent is beginning to emerge. Multiverse Computinga startup based in San Sebastianhas been gaining visibility among investors and large companies for some time, but a latest move clearly raises the scale of the conversation. The company would be negotiating a new round of financing that could place it among the unicorns, a category reserved for very few European firms in this sector. New Spanish unicorn. The information that places Multiverse in that possible leap comes, for now, from sources cited by Bloomberg that describe a negotiation in progress. According to those people familiar with the operation, the company would be in talks to raise around 500 million euros in new financing, a figure that would imply exceeding the 1.5 billion valuation. The calendar used by these sources points to the first half of 2026 and the entry of new investors, which leaves the operation in the realm of the probable, but not yet confirmed. What the company does. Multiverse Computing, created in 2019, focuses on developing software tools that allow organizations to use artificial intelligence with lower energy and computational costs. Its technology seeks to reduce the size of the models without sacrificing precisionan approach that responds to one of the major current problems in the sector, the high consumption of resources required to train and execute advanced systems. That promise of efficiency is what is attracting the attention of investors and industrial partners. Financial context. In March 2025, We portrayed how the company received an investment of 67 million euros through the Spanish Society for Technological Transformationthe public vehicle intended to promote strategic projects. Just a few months later, in June 2025, We wrote about it again in relation to a round of 189 million euros with the participation of several international and corporate funds. This succession of operations places the negotiation described by Bloomberg on another scale, no longer as an injection to grow, but as the step that could redefine its valuation within the European AI market. behind the scenes. Bloomberg puts Multiverse’s annual recurring revenue at €100 million in January 2026, a metric used by software startups to show future recurring revenue rather than current accounting results. At this point we must be very careful: this is a metric indicative of traction, not a synonym for profits. This difference is relevant in a sector where expansion is usually supported by sustained investment and high spending. Therefore, beyond commercial traction, it will remain to be verified what its real balance between income, costs and financial sustainability is in the next phase of development. Images | Multiverse In Xataka | Dreame started as a supplier to Xiaomi. Eight years later it wants to be the next Samsung and has paid 10 million to prove it

The US spent $600 billion building its highway network. It’s less than what big tech companies are going to spend on AI this year

by

The irruption of ChatGPT in the technological panorama in 2022 marked the starting signal in the AI ​​race; a race in which, year after year, large technology companies continue to increase their spending without stopping. 2026 has just begun and, far from letting it go, the big tech They have put their foot even further on the accelerator. All but one. walk or bust. We already know the planned capex for 2026 of the main technology companies, that is, what they plan to invest in capital expenditures. amazon: 200,000 million Alphabet: 175-185 billion Goal: 115-135 billion Microsoft: 140,000 million Apple: 13,000 million If we add it up taking the highest figures they have given, it is 673,000 million dollars, if we take the lowest figures it would be 643,000 million. In any case it is outrageous. In 2025 the figures were already dizzying and we are talking about an increase of around 60%. There has come a point where we have to stop and ask ourselves: How many zeros does that have? (yes twelve). Context of this madness. Here are a few comparisons to put this figure in context. It is superior to Sweden GDP in 2025 (662,000 million), that of Israel (610,000 million) and that of Singapore (574,000 million). As pointed out this user in Xexceeds what it cost to build the entire US interstate highway system (about 634,000 million) and is a quarter of the entire global military spending in a whole year. It’s like spending $1.2 million per minute for an entire year. It doesn’t make any sense. The market response. The fear of a bubble was noted after the announcements of the different companies, causing sharp falls in the stock market despite the fact that all of them have made profits (some breaking records). amazon fell 12% after announcing a capex of 200,000 millionmuch higher than forecasts Alphabet (Google) achieved record revenues, but it was not enough to convince the markets and its shares fell 10% in the following days Goal also announced record revenue and they had a 10% increase. However, days later things changed and they fell 8%. Microsoft fit the strongest blow, with a drop of 18%. Additionally, they revealed that 45% of their cloud business contracts are for OpenAI and the market does not reward dependency. Apple was the winner, with an increase of more than 7% since they announced results. The declines have been corrected in recent days and all companies have seen their value stabilize, but the message was clear: investors fear that this level of capex is far ahead of the ability of AI to generate profits in the short term. Where are they going to get the money from? It’s the big question. As stated in Financial Timescompanies must choose between reducing shareholder returns, using their cash reserves, or borrowing more money. In the case of Amazon, estimates point to a cash flow of 180 billion, Alphabet 195 billion and Meta 130 billion. The threat of free cash flow falling into negative territory is there, so we can expect them to issue more debt and stop share buybacks. Think different. Then we have Apple, which announced revenues of 144 billion in the last quarter, boosted by sales of the iPhone 17 during the Christmas campaign. Its capex is a fraction of what other companies have spent because Apple doesn’t build data centers, it outsources them. He agreement with Google to use Gemini can be interpreted as They have lost the AI ​​racebut in the context of a possible bubble it is a masterstroke: Google is the one who assumes the brutal spending on infrastructure and who is exposed to the bubble, while they benefit from their technology and see how the market rewards them for spending less. In Xataka | What have Apple and Google agreed on for the new Siri? Nobody knows because Google doesn’t even want to mention it. Image | Photo of Adam Nir in Unsplashedited

ended up giving away $40 billion in bitcoins

by

One of the largest houses in cryptocurrency exchange from South Korea wanted to reward its users with a symbolic promotion for their operations. However, a mistake has made the promotion of the company on everyone’s lips today…and not exactly for the better. For a few minutes, several hundred customers Bithumb They saw their accounts filled with bitcoins worth several billion dollars. What should have been a small promotional prize turned into a mistake that, on his screen, became billionaires to normal users. A conversion error. Bithumb’s original idea was to offer a reward of 2,000 won (approximately $1.37 in exchange) to users who participated in a company promotional event. The equivalent of a welcome coupon for newcomers. The problem came when, instead of sending that small amount in won, the system ended up sending bitcoins to the accounts of the new clients. According to published the BBCthe failure occurred when an employee entered the indicator “BTC” in the payment field instead of “Korean won”, so the platform executed the reward in cryptocurrencies instead of local currency. That simple misplaced piece of information led the company to mistakenly transfer some 620,000 bitcoins, a figure that, at current prices, is around $44 billion. A mistake that destabilized the market. Bithumb estimated that about 249 users of its platform received bitcoins by mistake and the failure affected about 695 clients who operated on the platform. It is estimated+ that, on average, each user was assigned about 2,490 bitcoins, which represents a value of around 144 million euros. Seeing the new balance of bitcoins in their account, several of these new “accident millionaires” rushed to sell, generating an avalanche of orders that caused the price of bitcoin to fall within Bithumb itself. about 10% in a matter of minutes. Bithumb hit the panic button. When the company realized the error, it began to apply restrictions to affected clients, temporarily limiting operations and withdrawals to stop the leak of funds. In its assessment of the incident, Bithumb assures which managed to recover approximately 99.7% of the 620,000 bitcoins that were left by mistake, which would leave about 125 bitcoins still pending recovery. The company also points out that what has already been recovered includes some 1,663 bitcoins that users they managed to sell before the platform’s “panic button” was pressed, which activated transaction blocks. Lee Jae-won, the company’s executive director, assured that the company will take the incident as a lesson and will prioritize “customer trust and peace of mind” over external growth. “Paper” Bitcoin. The case has reopened the debate about the so-called “paper bitcoin”, in reference to those transactions that exist within the internal systems of the exchanges but do not always have the real assets that support them behind them. The sum of bitcoins that suddenly appeared in the accounts far exceeds the $5.3 billion in bitcoin assets that Bithumb claims to be in custody, making it clear to what extent much of that “wealth” was only on paper in its internal books. It’s not the first time it happens. It is not the first time that a banking or financial entity makes its users millionaires in a “magical” way. He Financial Times counted a few days ago how Citibank made one of its clients a billionaire by transfer 81 billion dollars when he intended to send him a payment of $280. As happened with the South Korean bitcoin exchange, the bank realized the error and fixed it (unfortunately for the user) in 90 minutes. However, the simple fact that a human error when indicating a figure or inserting the type of currency can shake the entire bitcoin market has set off alarms in the South Korean Financial Supervisory Service, which has announced reviews and does not rule out opening formal investigations if they detect serious failures in internal controls or signs of illegal activity. In Xataka | Cryptocurrencies were supposed to become “independent” from the power of states. The US just killed him with a stroke of the pen Image | Unsplash (Michael Fortsch)

We know it as “the red planet”, but 3.37 billion years ago Mars was almost as blue as Earth

by

The mystery of Mars and water has a new chapter. The missions like Curiosity in the Gale crater they show clear evidence for the existence of liquid water lakes for thousands or millions of years. That climate models show that the early Mars It was a cold place. with temperatures significantly below the freezing point, it was elucidated with seasonal ice shields. However, among the pending subjects of Mars astronomy is knowing how much there was water and when was there. Mars was (half) blue. A recent study published in the scientific journal npj Space Exploration echoes the discovery of a “tide line” that explains that there was once an interconnected water system. Ignatius Argadestya, the lead author of the study, explains that although today Mars is a dry and reddish planet: “our results show that in the past it was a blue planet similar to Earth.” In fact, they have been able to demonstrate the existence of the deepest and most extensive ocean that has existed on Mars to date, account the scientist that half the red planet was once blue: “an ocean that extended across the planet’s northern hemisphere.” Valles Marineris in Hi-Res The “deltas” of Mars. More specifically, they have investigated geological formations called deposits with steep front located in the region of Valles Marineristhe largest canyon system in the solar system. Using very high resolution images from Cassis of the European Space Agency and the CTX and HiRISE from NASA (the latter provides a maximum resolution of about 25 to 30 centimeters per pixel), have been able to identify these deposits with identical morphology to the river deltas that we see in rivers such as the Ebro or the Danube when they flow into the sea. Thus, on Mars there was a time when water flowed from the mountains through branching channels until it reached a kind of lake or sea, where sediments were deposited. These deltas end in an abrupt step that is located at exactly the same altitude at different points on the planet, between -3750 and -3650 meters with respect to the reference level of Mars. About 3.37 billion years ago. This is not a geological coincidence, it is that at one time there was a body of water like a sea that maintained a stable level for a long time: it is a mark of the shore of a primeval Mars, since these deposits were formed between the Late Hesperian and Early Amazonian periods. According to the research team, that was the time in the history of Mars with the greatest availability of liquid water on its surface. Why is it important. Already had applied previously the existence and size of this Martian ocean, but its conclusions come with more precise and direct evidence. In addition, they have been able to determine when the water peak occurred on Mars. The deltas found constitute a magnificent base to study their sediments in depth in search of traces of life because where there is water, there could be life. On the other hand, among the next steps is to understand how Mars went from having an ocean that occupied half the planet to being a frozen desert. In fact, there are already clues: the research team detected desiccation cracks and dunes on these channels, which indicates that after this aquatic period, there was a progressive drying until they became arid. In Xataka | Mars has just entered the exclusive club of planets with rays. This is discouraging news for NASA. In Xataka | We had been wondering for decades how Mars could have water, cold and life. Today we finally have an answer Cover | Javier Miranda

Netflix spends 17 billion on producing content and YouTube does it for free. And that’s why YouTube is winning the game

by

Alphabet first revealed in its Q4 2025 earnings report that YouTube generated more than 60 billion dollars over the past year, adding advertising revenue and subscriptions. The figure is 33% higher than the 45,000 million that Netflix reached in the same period and places the video platform above all the entertainment giants except Disney, which had a turnover of 95.7 billion. The data confirms what many in the industry already sensed: YouTube is not simply another competitor in the online video market, but the main beneficiary of the transformation in audiovisual consumption habits. Paradigm shift. YouTube’s victory reflects a profound transformation in how we consume video. While subscription platforms opted for the Netflix model (closed catalogs of professional productions), YouTube added in July 2025 13.4% of total television viewing time in the United States. It expanded its lead over Disney (9.4%) to establish the largest difference recorded since these measurements began. Youtube on your TV. Time spent watching YouTube on television has grown 53% since February 2023. The traditional streaming market, meanwhile, is going through what is known as “subscription fatigue“: the average number of subscriptions per consumer in the European market has stagnated at 2.35 in both 2023 and 2024, after growing systematically for years. This saturation has caused structural changes: the number of original series released in the United States fell 11% in 2025third consecutive year of declines from the 2022 peak. The difference in the plan. Breaking down where the money comes from can point to the reasons for this triumph. Of the 60,000 million in YouTube revenue, we have: Advertising revenue in the last quarter of the year was 11.38 billion dollars, with a growth of 8.7% year-on-year 325 million paid subscriptions on all your consumer services, such as YouTube Music or YouTube Premium For its part, Netflix: It reported revenue of $12.05 billion in the fourth quarter of 2025, with a growth of 17.6% For the year as a whole, the platform reached $45.2 billion, with more than 325 million paid memberships The most notable difference lies in the business model. While YouTube maintains a hybrid model where advertising remains dominant, Netflix revealed its advertising figures for the first time: in 2025, its third year selling ads, advertising revenue exceeded $1.5 billion, multiplying by more than 2.5 compared to 2024. The company projects double that ad revenue in 2026. Why YouTube wins. YouTube’s competitive advantage lies in features that traditional platforms cannot replicate. On the one hand, the radical democratization of content creation: Netflix invests 17 billion dollars annually to produce, while on YouTube the creators assume the production costs. The base of 69 million creators generates a volume of content that is impossible to match: every minute 500 hours of video are uploaded to the platform The second differentiating factor is the algorithmic recommendation system. YouTube’s recommendation system uses large-scale language models that can handle massive amounts of data. This allows YouTube to do something that closed catalog platforms cannot: recommend videos based not only on general categories, but by fine-tuning suggestions based on specific interests. In 2025, YouTube’s recommendation system is the most sophisticated and user-focused. The third advantage is the absence of entry barriers for the public. While Netflix requires a mandatory subscription, YouTube offers free ad-supported access, with premium subscription as an option. This hybrid model maximizes potential reach: YouTube’s monthly active user base reached approximately 2.7 billion people in early 2025. This means that more than 25% of the world’s population uses YouTube in any given month. What it points to. YouTube’s triumph over Netflix in annual revenue represents more than a change in leadership: it signals a structural transformation in how audiovisual content is produced, distributed and monetized. The centralized studio model, a direct heir to the Hollywood system, is giving way to a decentralized ecosystem where millions of creators generate content for hyper-segmented audiences. And the implications for the industry are very profound. Header | Photo of NordWood Themes in Unsplash In Xataka | A YouTube video that lasts 140 years has gone viral. Nobody is clear why

Amazon is negotiating to invest 50 billion in OpenAI. The money would go in through the door and out through the window.

by

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy is in talks with Sam Altman to close an investment of up to $50 billion in OpenAI. He has revealed it The Wall Street Journal and has confirmed it CNBC referring to his own sources. The deal could close in a matter of weeks as part of a record $100 billion funding round that would skyrocket OpenAI’s valuation to $830 billion. Today there are only fourteen listed companies in the world with a higher valuation. And none among the unlisted ones. Why is it important. Amazon would become the largest investor in the round, surpassing the 30 billion negotiated by another old acquaintance of technological mega-investments, SoftBank. And it does so just two months after OpenAI reached a valuation of half a billion dollars. Between the lines. Amazon has an important alliance with Anthropic from 2023that is, with the direct rival of OpenAI. AWS is its primary cloud provider, and in October inaugurated an 11 billion data center campus exclusively for Anthropic in Indiana. Betting at the same time on two companies that are so competitive with each other sounds like a paradox, but it is not so much if we think of Amazon as one of the sellers of picks and shovels in the AI ​​gold rush. They don’t care who finds the nuggets because they charge for the tools. The money trail. In addition to Amazon’s 50 billion, NVIDIA is negotiating to invest 20 billion and Microsoft “several billion more.” The three companies sell OpenAI just what it needs to exist: chips and computing capacity in data centers. Yes, but. This circular scheme is not going unnoticed and has raised more than one eyebrow: Amazon basically ensures itself many years of guaranteed income (at least as long as OpenAI does not go bankrupt, something no one can afford) while diversifying risks by also betting on Anthropic. Just in case. In detail. Although nothing has been leaked that could take it for granted, this investment could perfectly include clauses for OpenAI to adopt the AWS own chips. Or that Amazon sells ChatGPT Enterprise subscriptions to its enterprise customers. It will be through parallel business channels. OpenAI has insane costs with the dark clouds caused by the arrival of Gemini 3 and its great reception. So they are considering ways to sustain capital-devouring growth, such as the much-rumored IPO. The context. a few days ago, Amazon announced the layoff of 16,000 employees “office”, not warehouse or logistics. It is their second round of layoffs for them after 14,000 in October. In total, 30,000 casualties. Meanwhile, it has projected investments that already total 125 billion by 2026 in data centers alone. There is no other large technology company with such a high spending projection. It is a contradiction that has an overwhelming logic: if with AI you are going to be able to do more with fewer jobs, you choose to cut salaries to allocate them to investment. Go deeper. This movement is another nail in the… pattern: big technology companies no longer compete so much to develop the best AI but to control the infrastructure that supports it. Whoever has control of data centers and chips will have control of the business. Regardless of which chatbot succeeds. Featured image | Dima Solomin In Xataka | There was a time not too long ago when the future of supermarkets seemed like Amazon Go. Now Amazon Go is dead

Windows 11 is already on 1 billion devices. It has arrived before Windows 10, and that says more than it seems

by

If we had to bet on which of the two operating systems users want more, Windows 10 I would still have many numbers. Not only because it was a solid launch, but also because it came at the right time: in July 2015, with the mission of erasing the bad memory they had left Windows 8 and Windows 8.1. For years, Windows 10 was the comfortable place, but Microsoft has been playing another game for some time. Windows 11 is going well, very good. Not only is it growing, but it is doing so at a pace that no longer allows for too many doubts.According to data shared by Satya Nadella During the presentation of Microsoft’s financial results (fiscal second quarter), Windows 11 has reached the symbolic milestone of 1 billion users, with a year-on-year growth of 45%. It is a huge fact due to the number, but even more so because of what it suggests: that migration is finally accelerating. A strategy that has worked. The reading fits with something we have been seeing for a long time: Microsoft has stepped on the accelerator to push the jump to Windows 11. And it has not always been easy. In fact, until not so long ago the consensus was different. Unofficial figures for November 2024, crossed with historical data, described disappointing and slower than expected adoption. Windows 11 seemed to move forward with difficulty, as if the public could not find enough reasons to abandon Windows 10. But the pace has changed, and not exactly a little. Arriving before Windows 10. The comparison leaves a particularly striking detail: Windows 11 has reached 1 billion users before Windows 10. In numbers, Windows 11 needed 1,576 days (almost four years and five months) to reach that barrier, while Windows 10 took 1,706 days (four years, eight months and two days). Even so, it is worth putting it in perspective: Microsoft set an even more aggressive goal with Windows 10, aiming for it to be installed on 1 billion devices in just three years. A goal that changed. That plan was ambitious, yes, but it also had small print. In its roadmap, Microsoft planned to add part of the mobile ecosystem as “installations”: Windows Phone and Windows 10 Mobile. The problem is that that future never came. The collapse of Windows Phone and the subsequent cancellation of the project They left that approach meaningless, and Microsoft ended up adjusting expectations. In fact, in April 2015 Terry Myersonthen head of Windows, was already talking about “1 billion devices” in “two or three years” after the launch. A more elastic formulation, less rotund, and much easier to land when the board changes. A milestone amidst challenges. Because the jump from Windows 10 to Windows 11 is not—nor has it been—a smooth transition for everyone. The first wall is technical: hardware requirements. Many computers are left out of the official update because they do not have TPM 2.0 or a compatible processor. In other words, there are users who are pushed to renew equipment even when theirs continues to function reliably. The second obstacle is more intangible, but just as important: experience. Windows 11 arrived with visible changes compared to Windows 10 (design, interface, organization) and also a different philosophy, with more presence of functions powered by artificial intelligence, new features that may arrive at any time and a model of constant evolution that does not always work in its favor. Added to this is the usual noise: a chain of incidents after some recent updates that have made people talk. Windows 11 is a solid system, but also one in constant transformation, and that has a cost. Despite everything, Windows 11 is advancing. Perhaps it is due to pure inertia, perhaps because of end of Windows 10 supportor maybe because the PC market is moving again. What is relevant is that Windows 11 is gaining ground at a pace that Microsoft can read as a victory. Although, deep down, the industry has already changed enough for Windows to stop being king within Microsoft itself. Today it represents less than 10% of income from the Redmond giant. The real jewel in the crown, and the big strategic bet, is elsewhere: Azure. Images | Microsoft | Andrey Matveev In Xataka | We have been waiting for the new Siri for a year and a half. Now it’s just around the corner with an unexpected twist: Google

We thought that the 72 billion that Meta spent on AI in 2025 were outrageous. It was just the appetizer

by

The big tech companies They are spending a lot of money on AI infrastructure and, far from slackening, the figure is only increasing (and not a little). In the case of Meta, the company planned to spend $66 billion in 2025, but in October they had to correct the figure to $72 billion. 2026 has just begun and the figure they have just given is directly insane. Doubling down, literally. Between 115,000 and 135,000 million dollarsthese are the figures that Meta handles for the year 2026. It is almost double what they spent in 2025, a figure that, as we said, they had to correct towards the end of the year, so let’s not rule out that it ends up being more. The spending will mainly be intended to “support the efforts of Meta Superintelligence Labs”, that is, to build more data centers. Which by the way, more than 6 million dollars have been spent on advertising campaigns to convince us that data centers are cool. Record results. The fourth quarter of 2025 has been very good for Meta. Revenue grew 24% compared to the same period of the previous year, reaching 59,000 million dollars and a net profit of 22,800 million dollars, figures that exceed forecasts. According to its CEO, the good results are thanks to the implementation of AI in its advertising services. Recovering confidence. In the previous quarter, the huge spending on AI generated many doubts among investors and, although the results were also good, shares fell up to 8%. This time it has been different and, although spending will skyrocket even more, shares are up 10%. It seems that they trust Zuckerberg’s direction again. Where is the ceiling? It is difficult to know, but what we do know is that since 2023 it has been increasing exaggeratedly. And not a little. According to Meta datain 2023 they spent 28 billion dollars, in 2024 they rose to 39 billion and in 2025 to 72 billion. The jump has been getting higher and higher with each year, I wonder when they will let off the accelerator. All for AI, but without AI. All the big technology companies are spending a lot on AI, but what is striking about the case of Meta is that has not yet launched its new models. To put it in context, Meta’s expected spending is higher than Google’s in 2025, but Google has Gemini while Meta has promises. After the fiasco of Call 4Zuckerberg set himself as a target Completely remodel your AI department. It was spent a fortune in hiring new talentscreated a secret laboratory next to his officeha cut the Metaverse department (also with layoffs) to move resources to AI. The ambition is huge: creating superintelligence. At the moment, what we know is that they are preparing a language model called Avocado and another for image generation that they call Mango. They better measure up, otherwise They will always have the public. Image | Unsplash, Meta In Xataka | Three years after the metaverse fiasco, Zuckerberg has another burning nail for Meta: digital glasses

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.