clear Archives - Page 8 of 19

The community has made it clear that they do not want AI in Windows and Microsoft has ignored them. So they have taken the law into their own hands

January 16, 2026 by usatoday24

Microsoft’s obsession with putting AI in every corner of Windows is logical at the current time (after all, it’s what everyone is doing). The problem is that the community has been very clear about this: they don’t want to. Microsoft has continued with its plan flood Windows 11 with AIbut we already have a way to avoid it. Winslop. The name comes from the play on words between Windows and Slop, which is the term used to refer to ‘AI garbage’, that is, very poor quality content. This is a free tool whose purpose is to eliminate all traces of AI from the system. Its creator makes it clear that he is not anti-Windows, in fact he states that he likes the platform, what he doesn’t like is the direction it is taking. CleanIA Windows. Winslop is totally free and you can download it from Github. The interface looks like old versions of Windows and consists of a list with all the changes that we can apply. There is an option that inspects the system and proposes the changes to be made, or we can check the boxes we want, depending on the level of cleaning we want. The list is quite long and is divided into categories, these are some of the functions we found: System: shows details if there is a blue screen instead of a sad face, optimizes system sensitivity, speeds up shutdown time… Microsoft Edge– makes it not the default browser, disables the Copilot icon, removes the shopping assistant, does not show sponsored links when opening a tab… Interface: Turn off transparency effects, hide taskbar search, turn off Bing search… gaming: Disables DVR recording, power throttling and visual effects. Privacy: disables activity history and location tracking Advertisements– Remove ads system-wide. AI– Hides Copilot from the taskbar and disables Windows Recall. Bloatware. There is more. Winslop is divided into three tabs: Windows 11, applications and extensions. From the apps section we can eliminate pre-installed applications such as Bing News, Bing Weather, WindowsCamera and many more. As in the other section, pressing the ‘Inspect System’ button gives us a list of suggestions to eliminate and we mark the ones we want. It’s not the first. Recently we told you about a tool that was born with the same objective (although with a name with less punch), RemoveWindowsAI. Like Winslop, it also disables all AI functions, but beyond its functions, the important thing is that its simple existence was already a symptom of community fatigue. The fact that another app has come out only confirms it. The PC IA. The obsession with turning Windows into an agentic system has collided head-on with what the community is asking for, to the point that Microsoft is losing favor with users. A year ago PCs with AI promised to be a revolutionbut they have come face to face with reality and even historical brands like Dell are changing their discourse. Microsoft is left alone. Image | Winslop In Xataka | There’s a reason AI PCs aren’t hurting Apple: Nobody asked for AI PCs

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

January 15, 2026 by usatoday24

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.

The most advanced Spanish military satellite suffered an impact in space more than a week ago. There are still no clear explanations

January 15, 2026 by usatoday24

For years, Spain has invested millions of euros in building a space communications system designed for extreme scenarios, from military operations to international emergencies. One of its pillars, the satellite SpainSat NG II, It took off in October with everything as planned and within a program presented as the most ambitious in Spanish space history. However, something happened very soon during its transfer to its orbital position. More than a week after an incident was acknowledged, what surrounds the satellite’s true status is a combination of minimal data and silence that leaves many questions open. An aging statement. The only thing confirmed so far comes from a statement released by Indra January 2, 2026in which it is recognized that the satellite suffered the “impact of a space particle” during its transfer to the final orbit. The incident occurred about 50,000 kilometers from Earth, still an intermediate phase of the journey to its geostationary position. Since then, the technical team is analyzing the available data to determine the extent of the damage, but no assessment of its operational status or the actual consequences of the impact has been made public. The launch of SpainSat NG II took place on the night of October 23 in the United States, already in the early hours of the 24th in Spain, aboard a Falcon 9 bound for a geostationary transfer orbit. From there, the satellite had to complete a journey of several months until reaching its final position about 36,000 kilometers from Earth, a process that, according to the CEO of Hisdesat told Euronews, usually takes between five and six months. The impact recognized by Indra occurred in that intermediate phase of the journey, when the satellite had not yet reached its final operational orbit. The reaction. In that same statement, Indra explained that Hisdesat, operator and owner of the satellite, had activated a contingency plan to guarantee that the committed services are not affected. The formulation fits with the logic of a two-satellite system, which seeks to ensure continuity of service even in the event of unforeseen incidents. However, the specific measures adopted and the current degree of dependence on the affected satellite within the program as a whole have not been detailed, which limits the ability to evaluate the real scope of this response. Twin units. SpainSat NG II is not an isolated satellite, but one of the two central pieces of a system conceived as a long-term strategic infrastructure. Along with his twin, the SpainSat NG Iis part of a program promoted by the Ministry of Defense with an investment of more than 2,000 million eurosintended to provide Spain with its own secure communications. The first satellite has already been operational since the summer, while the second was to complete the system, a context that explains the attention that any anomaly in its deployment has generated. The secrets of the satellite. From a technical point of view, SpainSat NG II represents a notable leap over previous generations of government communications satellites. Built by Airbus on the Eurostar Neo platformthe satellite has dimensions close to seven meters and a mass of around six tons. Its payload incorporates an X-band active antenna system that, according to Airbus, offers the equivalent functionality of 16 traditional antennas and allows coverage to be dynamically adapted up to 1,000 times per second, a capacity designed for changing and demanding operating scenarios. More questions than answers. With the information available, the range of scenarios remains wide. An impact from a space particle can result in minor damage without operational consequences, but also in a more serious impact that forces the functions to be limited or the deployment of the satellite to be reconsidered. Indra has even left open the option of a replacement if necessary, and maintains that, in that case, the satellite would be replaced as soon as possible. The absence of specific technical data makes it impossible to know whether this is a controlled incident or a problem with deeper implications. Given the lack of public updates, from Xataka we have contacted Indra to find out if there was any news about the status of the satellite. The company’s press office has responded to us that, for now, they have no details to share about what happened. That silence prolongs the uncertainty around a strategic system that has not yet entered service and leaves open key questions about the real scope of the impact. Images | Airbus (1, 2) | Thales In Xataka | We already have an official date for the United States’ return to the Moon: it is imminent and mired in a sea of doubts

While half the world looks for an alternative to Taiwan, Jensen Huang is very clear about the harsh reality: there is no

January 13, 2026 by usatoday24

In the technological world, the United States AIthe China’s semiconductor breakthroughs and the robotics explosion They were protagonists during the last months. But if there is something essential for these industries to function, it is Taiwan. In semiconductors, Taiwan is the one who splits the cod, and its technological diamond is TSMC. And the CEO of NVIDIA is clear that it is not worth burning money looking for the new TSMC immediately. Because it’s something that will take decades to replicate. Resilience. TSMC is about to turn 40 years old and is the company that manufactures for the elephants of the semiconductor sector such as AMD, Apple, ARM, MediaTek, Qualcomm or NVIDIA itself, among many others. They are the ones that have the most advanced machines of the European ASMLthose that have refined their processes to the extreme and are used even by manufacturers that have their own factories, such as Intel or Texas Instruments. It is something that affects the user directly, proof of this is that a mobile chip manufactured by TSMC is not the same as almost the same one made by Samsung. And to these processes is added a brutal manufacturing capacity that has dominated the industry. And, of course, looking to bite into that pie, different countries have tried to find their own TSMC. However, Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA, has commented that efforts to diversify production must be made from the angle of resilience, not replacement. You don’t have to burn money like crazy. In recent months, Europe and the United States have begun to add manufacturing capacity in the semiconductor segment. The problem is that you cannot build a competitive industry in a short time: experience is needed and failure is not allowed. That, in an industry that is evolving at a very rapid pace due to the needs for chips for feed the artificial intelligenceis not contemplated. That is why Huang believes that the market is becoming selective and if guarantees are needed to manufacture chips, the one who gives those guarantees is turned to. Huang has been giving interviews for a few days and touching on key topics. For example, pointing out that The breakup between the US and China makes no sense because China is a very powerful trading partner, but also ensuring that Taiwan, as much as certain countries may not like it, will be the axis in the development of advanced computing in the coming years. China and the US investing millions. SIA is the acronym for Semiconductor Industry Association. It is the organization that seeks to advance policies that help the growth of the manufacturing industry in the United States. In your report Last year, they targeted 100 projects in 28 states totaling more than half a trillion dollars of private investment to triple the capacity of American industry by 2032. amd wants to be one of the protagonists of this operationbut also an Intel that seeks to position itself as a key factory on American soil and that has received strong government support. China is not far behind. With the explosion of robotics and AI, companies like SMIC or Huawei are developing alternatives to American technology to fuel their computing needs. They are looking for something else: industrial autonomy, and for that the Government has been releasing a series of funds to become one of the biggest names in the sector. If a subsidy package was launched in 2024 $47.5 billiona few weeks ago, other of up to 70,000 million to support that industry. Rvalidates directly with the US CHIPS of 52,000 million and 43,000 European million. The objective in both cases is the same: allocate obscene amounts of money to areas such as design, equipment, manufacturing and materials, as well as energy solutions that allow chips to be manufactured, but also to feed the companies in each country’s ecosystem. In the case of China, furthermore, there is an urgency to achieve these objectives as it is not able to have the advanced ASML machines and NVIDIA chips, something that the United States, Europe and Taiwan do have. India more of the same. But this is not a question of two great poles. South Korea also seeks become one of the great players of semiconductors, and another country that is designing an ambitious strategy to attract investment in semiconductors is India. Over the last few months they have been approving a series of aid packages (the last in January of this year, of 4.6 billion dollars) to boost the manufacturing of electronic components in the country. Apart from investing in their first state-of-the-art semiconductor factory (an investment of 11 billion dollars is estimated to achieve this), they are launching other aid and tax advantages to attract companies such as Samsung, Foxconn (also Taiwanese) or Apple to their territory. The goal is not to be a country that assembles the final product, but rather to manufacture critical components and move up the industrial value chain. Taiwanese expansion. The “problem” for these countries, and a great advantage for TSMC, is that they all seem to be very far away. India wants to achieve a chip made in 28 nanometer lithography, which is something that TSMC surpassed generations ago. AND China is fighting over 7 and 5 nm. Meanwhile, TSMC has refined its 3nm process and, as we say, TSMC’s great asset is not only that they have the experience and technology, but the ability to manufacture the best chips for customers who need those terribly refined chips. But there’s more: if China, Europe, the United States and India are moving, TSMC itself is diversifying. Yes Europe aspires to manufacture 20% of the planet’s semiconductorsit will be thanks to the TSMC plant planned in Germany. And although the US hates that it is a foreign company the one who has the upper hand in this great technological – and monetary – adventure of AI, TSMC has already settled on US soil. In the end, each territory seeks its … Read more

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

January 13, 2026 by usatoday24

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

A YouTube video that lasts 140 years has gone viral. Nobody is clear why

January 13, 2026 by usatoday24

A YouTube video which, on paper, would not end for more than a century is the type of oddity that the internet knows how to turn into a phenomenon. It is enough to see an impossible figure in duration and verify that that same clip exceeds 2.3 million views to understand why half the world has stopped to watch it. Not because someone intends to reproduce it in its entirety, but because something like this challenges what we think we know about how the platform works. Even more so when it comes from a strange channel, with only three published videos and 137,000 subscribers. The longest video on YouTube? What has triggered the confusion is not only that exorbitant figure, but the way in which YouTube shows it depending on where you look. A counter appears in the channel view and in the video thumbnail that, translated into real time, is equivalent to about 140 years of continuous playback, as we can see in the screenshots. However, when you press play and load the player, the duration changes and is around 12 hours, with variations of minutes and seconds. The length of the video when embedded in a web page The limits of the platform. On your own help pagesGoogle explains that the maximum upload is 256 GB or 12 hours, whichever comes first, and remembers that these limits have varied over the years, leaving longer videos from previous times on the platform. This framework is essential to not get carried away by the impact of the number that appears on the screen. If the player shows something close to 12 hours, it’s within what YouTube considers normal, while a duration of decades simply doesn’t fit with the service’s known rules. The only direct source of this entire case is the file of the channel that hosts the video. On YouTube he appears as @shinywrand in your profile YouTube indicates as location “North Korea”. It also shows minimal but striking activity: three videos published, 137,000 subscribers and 2,551,606 accumulated views, with the channel’s registration date on July 31, 2023. There is no additional information or descriptions that clarify what it is or where it comes from, beyond what the platform itself shows. A metadata failure. The hypothesis that best fits what we see is that we are not dealing with a real duration, but rather a number that is poorly recorded or poorly read within the YouTube infrastructure. Each video has several time measurements associated with it, the one declared by the original file, the one calculated by the system when processing it and the one used by the different interface modules. If one of them fails, inconsistencies could appear as striking as a preview that points to decades of playback and a player that moves in a normal range. The threshold of direct. Google explains that Live shows of less than 12 hours are automatically archived, but if they exceed that time they may be lost, a detail that helps to understand why that number appears again and again as a border. Although there is no confirmation that this video comes from a glitch in a live broadcast, that technical framework adds context to the duration displayed by the player. The result is a phenomenon that lives on the border between what the platform teaches and what really happens in its internal functioning. There is a video with an impossible length, a player that tells another story and a channel that provides no clues other than its own figures. And while the reasons remain unclear, the video continues to gain views and more than 30,000 comments. Images | BoliviaIntelligent | Screenshot In Xataka | Before, advertising was to monetize. Now it is to punish you and YouTube has taken it to the extreme

There is someone who is clear that China has a very difficult time overtaking the US in the AI race: the Chinese themselves.

January 13, 2026 by usatoday24

China or the US, who will win? the AI race? The US seemed unattainable, but after the launch of DeepSeek a year ago, China became almost at par. Since then, the possibility of China winning the race became very real. Great figures of American AI Several Chinese AI companies have already warned about this situation they are doing very well on the stock market. Despite everything, there are those in China who do not see it at all clearly. Low chances. They count in Bloomberg that Chinese companies have less than 20% probability of being able to advance the OpenAI or Anthropic models in the next 3 or 5 years. Justin Lin, technology manager of the Qwen modelsduring Justin Lin, technology manager of the Qwen models from Alibaba. To the limit. The event was also attended by Tang Jie, founder of Ziphu AI, one of China’s ‘AI tigers’ that last week it had a spectacular IPOincreasing the value of its shares by 36%. Its founder pointed out a somewhat uncomfortable fact for the Chinese AI ecosystem: while companies like OpenAI dedicate “a large part of their computational capacity to next-generation research, we are at the limit of our possibilities. Just meeting delivery demand consumes most of our resources.” In other words: the restrictions on the latest technology are working. The gap is widening. As we said, the launch of DeepSeek R1 a year ago unleashed a wave of optimism among Chinese companies. Since then, a few have launched new LLMs such as Alibaba with Qwen, Ziphu AI or Minimax. However, Tang notes that “some may feel excited, thinking that Chinese models have overtaken American ones, but the real answer is that the gap may be widening.” Restrictions. Speakers blamed the situation on a lack of resources caused by US blockades, especially AI chips and lithography machines. Their chips are not that powerful, so, as Tang says, all their computing power goes into serving their customers. This greatly limits them when it comes to continuing to scale their models. Shunyu Yao, former OpenAI and current chief scientist at Tencentis committed to focusing on solving bottlenecks such as long-term memory and promoting self-learning of future models. Independence. From the government is promoting technological self-sufficiencyprioritizing the use of national chips over American alternatives. The reality is that without access to the most advanced lithography machines, China is lagging far behind. One fact: Huawei and SMIC are ‘tuning’ old ASML machines and making authentic viguerías that have allowed them to obtain chips of 7 and up to 5nm. It’s a technical feat, but its chips are still several years behind the competition. The aces of China. It is clear that China is lagging behind in chips, but there are other areas in which it has an advantage that can be decisive, one of them being electricity. While The Chinese government subsidizes and bets heavily on renewablesin the US electricity has become a bottleneck for its increasingly numerous data centers. Another critical point is that The US has cut funding for academic researchwhile China has done so national priority. And that’s not to mention that they might lose the AI race, but China is winning almost everything else: batteries, robotics, electric cars and especially renewables. Image | Gemini In Xataka | The US believed it had dealt a mortal blow to China when it deprived it of NVIDIA. He only accelerated one plan: ‘Delete America’

Nvidia is the ball in the AI game. The US wants to share it with China, but it is not clear that China wants to play

January 12, 2026 by usatoday24

The CES held in Las Vegas is the great showcase of technology, and if there has been a protagonist (apart from the chinese humanoid robots), that has been Jensen Huang. The CEO of Nvidia has become a key figure in the technology landscape. artificial intelligence because it is their chips that are shaping the data centersand the H200 It is the great proper name. It is the favorite for ‘assembling’ data centers and has become a throwing weapon in the commercial and technological warwith the United States vetoing the sale of the chip to China. But the situation seems to have relaxed and there are already those who point out that Nvidia will soon have access to a critical market. In short. We already mentioned it in December: Nvidia planned to increase production of the H200 chip for 2026. It was not something that responded only to the rise of artificial intelligence this year (which so many problems it is going to give us consumers), but to something much more important for the company: the reopening of the Chinese market. It all came after the announcement that the United States would allow exports, specifically, of the H200 to certain Chinese customers. They had to have a series of characteristics, such as being validated by the Department of Commerce, in addition to having a 25% rate on each sale. It’s outrageous, but while it was being debated whether China would now want to buy the H200s for its data centers (the country is developing its own solutions), from Reuters point to one piece of information: two million orders. Two million H200. After opening the door, it was reported that two Chinese giants such as Alibaba (e-commerce, cloud services and the model qwen) or ByteDance (TikTok, Douyin and AI chatbots) would be asking the Chinese Government to They will let them buy Nvidia chips to boost business. More recently, since Reuters A specific figure is pointed out: two million H200 chips (with ByteDance and Alibaba asking for 200,000 H200 each). It is the order that the Chinese companies would have already made, at the expense of receiving the green light to be able to formalize the purchase. Strict payment plan. The H200 is not the most cutting-edge chip that Nvidia has to offer, but it is one of the most used in data centers and the one that is allowed to export to China. Other more powerful ones remain restricted for national security reasons. And, although there is nothing official yet, Nvidia has set certain purchase conditions. Basically, transfer financial risk to customers: if imports are approved, they will have to make full payment in advance. Deposits were previously allowed to some companies, but this lack of regulatory clarity, market instability and a stock of H200 that may be insufficient if the market reopens require these measures. 50 billion dollars. With this operation, Nvidia must be crazy about music. In the middle of last year, Huang himself pointed out that the Chinese AI market had headed toward $50 billion, stating that “it would be a tremendous loss not to be able to address it as an American company.” That someone else says it may not have as much weight, but Nvidia is now in the focus of all the big technology companies. You don’t have to be naive. Messages like “the world is hungry for AI, let’s put American AI at the forefront” surely contributed to the relaxation of trade conditions approved by the Trump Administration a few weeks ago. In fact, if we say that Huang has been one of the great protagonists of the CES, it is not so much because of the technology presentation, but because of continuing to push that commercial narrative. The CEO pointed out in the ‘No Priors’ podcast that “the idea of decoupling from China for philosophical or national security reasons is not based on common sense”, also stating that he was optimistic about the relaunched relationship with China thanks to the new measures imposed by the United States. Because “China is an adversary, but also a partner. And the idea of decoupling is naive,” he said. What if I don’t want to now? But although Nvidia has increased production of its H200s in Taiwan in anticipation of an avalanche of orders from China, the ball is not in its court: it is in that of its potentially large new customer. Although everything boils down to “business,” in this case there is something else at stake: technological sovereignty. Huang believes that there will be no official announcement from China about the “openness” of its hand when it comes to letting its companies buy American technology and assumes that if orders are being placed it is because they can. Now, with the intensification of trade bans by the United States, China responded. Banned Apple devices in official centers, also purchasing from companies like Micron (which have also focused on AI, abandoning the RAM segment for users) and restricted the purchase of Nvidia chips Manufactured expressly for the Chinese market. At that time, Local companies such as Huawei or Cambricon have advanced with their solutionsachieving very high yields that are allowing China’s robotics and AI industry flourishes. Friction. However, the H200 remains the “standard” for many data centers, and there may be a desire to buy as much as possible in advance of possible future bans while they continue to develop their own chips. We will see if the wish of the American giant and some Chinese companies that see CUDA as the optimal system for AI. China is very clear that its “dragons” are enough to stand up to Western technology, the ‘Delete America’ plan is still going and accepting the H200 could perpetuate a situation of dependence on foreign technologysomething that the Government wants to avoid at all costs. In whatever way, depending on BloombergNvidia will start shipping H200 en masse in the short term. Images | Nvidia, Karola G, Pexels In Xataka | … Read more

Microsoft continues to confuse the world with its obsession with Copilot. Almost no one is very clear if Office is alive or not

January 12, 2026 by usatoday24

“But then, does Office exist or not?” It is a question that seems trivial, but it is not so, and with good reason: the constant name and brand changes have meant that the Microsoft office suite is being the latest victim of his obsession with AI and with its avalanche of products with the Copilot surname. The usual Office is no longer what it was. The evolution of Office was relatively stable until 2020. The office suite, officially launched in 1990, made it possible to bring together all the office applications that Microsoft already had and that it would later expand. This is how we soon saw an Office that consisted of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, Outlook and even Access and other tools. Changes and more changes. Since then the suite has been undergoing paradigm shifts… and name changes: 2010: The Office 365 brand is introduced as a cloud version of the traditional office suite. The goal: compete with Google Docs 2013: After the launch of Office 2013, Microsoft begins to promote the Office 365 service as the main alternative to access office tools 2017: Microsoft presents a second evolution of these services, which this time were aimed at companies and which it named Microsoft 365. This platform combined Office 365 with volume licenses for Windows 10 Enterprise, as well as some additional solutions. 2020: Office 365 change your name to Microsoft 365 2022: Microsoft announces that the branding “Microsoft Office” would be abandoned in favor of the “Microsoft 365” brand. Even so, Microsoft continues to sell perpetual Microsoft Office licenses for local installations. The latest version Today it is Microsoft Office 2024. 2025:Microsoft rename the Microsoft 365 app to Microsoft 365 Copilot, referring to the “Office/Microsoft 365 Hub.” This application is actually like an aggregator of the different Microsoft office tools (Word, Excel, etc.). And Perplexity adds fuel to the fire. A few days ago those responsible for Perplexity published a tweet in which they seemed to indicate that Microsoft had changed the name from “Office” to “Microsoft 365 Copilot app.” In reality, what had been renamed, as they point out in Windows Latestis the “Office/Microsoft 365 Hub”, but this name change had already been announced a year ago, in January 2025, as we indicated. Perplexity also added that this decision had caused “400 million users to become “AI users” overnight.” Both the tweet and that statement were somewhat exaggerated, and did not help clarify a situation that is already confusing. Microsoft clarifies it. Microsoft officials have indicated in The Verge and other means that: “We have not made any recent changes to the names of our Office applications. Word, Excel and PowerPoint, the Office applications included in the Microsoft 365 productivity suite, remain unchanged In November 2022, we just renamed the Office hub app for web and mobile to the Microsoft 365 app. In January 2025, we updated it to the Microsoft 365 Copilot app to reflect its role in bringing the Copilot and Microsoft 365 productivity experiences together in one place.” More trouble with the Office.com website. Although Microsoft hasn’t just “killed” the Office brand, it doesn’t seem to want it to be used much either. In fact, if one goes to the office.com website What you see as soon as you load it is a message that says “We welcome you to the Microsoft 365 Copilot application”, or in other words, that “hub” or aggregator from which you can launch the different office tools in the Microsoft suite. It doesn’t seem like a lucky decision. like others in this line in recent times. How to destroy a recognizable and recognized brand. The truth is that Office was a brand recognized by users, but for years Microsoft has wanted to transform it into part of something bigger. The intention, we believe, was to try to make it clear that Microsoft 365 was more than traditional office tools, but the only thing that has been achieved With these changes it is adding more and more confusion. Office is still alive as a product and as a brand, but it has ended up being absorbed by these new brands and, of course, because of Microsoft’s obsession with AI and with Copilot. In Xataka | Thanks again, Microsoft, for letting us buy Office 2024 instead of putting up with another subscription

The CEO of Ryanair is clear about how he would govern a country. We are lucky that it doesn’t.

January 9, 2026 by usatoday24

Michael O’Leary has spent decades building a reputation based on provocation and irreverence. The CEO of Ryanair has not only built Europe’s largest low-cost airline based on surcharges on your services and open confrontation with clients, unions and regulators. He has also turned each interview into a showcase of extreme opinions that rarely leave anyone indifferent. The last of them, granted to the Financial Timesis especially revealing. In it, O’Leary explains bluntly how he would run a country if he had the chance. To no one’s surprise, his approach is not too far from what has been applying for years at Ryanair: treat everything as a balance of results, eliminate what is considered “inefficient” and assume political wear and tear as inevitable collateral damage. Govern a country as if it were Ryanair. O’Leary doesn’t hesitate when asked about his vision of power. As he explains, if he had to govern a country he would do it exactly the same as his airline. Aggressively cutting public spending and, especially, social benefits. “I would run it like Ryanair, I would cut it big… I would cut benefits big. Get a job!” he says without nuance in the interview. Even when he recognizes that there are people who cannot work, his conclusion remains the same and he would not hesitate to reduce this aid. “Are there people who cannot work at all? Yes, but it would also cut their benefits,” said the controversial manager, who maintains an extreme vision of the minimum State, where the social protection network is perceived more as a cost than as a collective investment. Millionaire politicians to attract talent. The most striking part of the interview comes when O’Leary addresses salary of the politicians. There are no cuts on the horizon. For the Irish manager, one of the big problems in current politics is the lack of talent, and the solution is to pay politicians as if they were senior managers. His idea is that “If you are prime minister or a minister, you should earn at least one million pounds a year”, which is equivalent to 1,152,900 euros at the exchange rate. Very far from the 93,145.20 euros that are assigned as salary to the President of the Government in Spain, or 182,400 euros gross per year who receives the President of the Republic in France. “Politicians must be paid much better, although saying so is political suicide,” giving Singapore as an example, where senior public officials receive very high salaries to attract the most talented profiles in the private sector to politics and reduce incentives for corruption. Zero personal affinity with Trump. O’Leary’s interview Financial Times It also leaves room for his relationship with Donald Trump. O’Leary recounts a direct call from the then-candidate in 2016, in which Trump insisted for almost an hour on increase flights from Ryanair to airports close to its golf courses in Scotland and Ireland. The current president of the United States even offered him accommodation in one of his hotels. O’Leary’s response to Trump’s offer was to avoid at all costs approaching any politician. “No, no way. It’s not my style,” the executive concluded, making it clear that personal harmony with Trump never existed, although both share a very similar vision of the world as a place where everything is negotiated. The same approach you apply to your passengers. O’Leary’s ideas on how to govern are consistent with the decisions he has made at Ryanair during the years who runs Ryanair. From defending the charge for using the bathroom on board to imposing increasingly complex surcharges for luggage or boarding passes. Everything responds to one income maximization logic and reduce costs, even if that means a more hostile experience for the customer. Their inflexibility with refunds is another example. In the interview he remembers the case of a passenger stabbed in an attack on a train in the United Kingdom who tried to cancel a flightbut did not obtain a refund for the ticket. “If the company had offered him one, the doors would have been opened to other demands for reimbursement,” said O’Leary, for whom the company’s efficiency and profitability always come before empathy. An old idea with dubious results. The proposal to manage a country as if it were a company is neither new nor exclusive to O’Leary. Elon Musk already defended openly that approach from the DOGE who led in the first months of the Trump administration. The result was especially negative for the cooperation policy and the operation of the US administration. Trump himself has applied this logic of business negotiation to international and economic policy with the imposition of tariffs as a negotiation weapon. The results, at least so far, do not seem to be giving the best fruits for the United States economy. In Xataka | When Ryanair CEO went to a restaurant he was charged for two extras: “priority seating” and “legroom” Image | Flickr (Polish presidency of the Council of the EU 2025)

Log In

Sign In

Forgot password?

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections