software

There are those who claim that AI is going to kill software. Most likely, just the opposite will happen.

by

It was 1993 and a young man named Marc Andreessenstill with his hair intact and a lot of ambition, set out to create a web browser with a colleague who worked with him at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of Illinois. They called it Mosaic. That browser allowed you to explore the newborn World Wide Web with the click of a mouse, something amazing because to date the browsers that had been developed were in text mode and were used with the keyboard. Suddenly the web could include images and even multimedia content. A little later Andreessen met Jim Clark, founder of the legendary Silicon Graphics, and he encouraged him to embark on an adventure with his web browser, so together they decided to set up their own startup and that led to the creation of one of the mythical browsers in history: Netscape. Marc Andreessen. Source: Wikimedia. That made Andreessen a multimillionaire, and from 2005 his interest changed. I no longer wanted to start a business, but rather help others start a business. He ended up founding the venture capital firm Andreessen Howoritz and became richer and richer (while losing more and more hair). His successes and bets in the technology industry are notable, but also he left some famous phrases. The most notable is probably the one delivered in 2011 when saying “Software is eating the world.” His argument was compelling: the companies that were growing the most were software or had software as one of their key pillars. He was not wrong—today these companies are absolute technological giants—and that quote became one of those seemingly immutable laws. And then AI arrived. Is AI eating software? The appearance in November 2022 of ChatGPT caused an extraordinary impact, although it had been clear for a year and a half that something was changing in the software world. In July 2021 we talked about GitHub Copilot when the conversation around generative AI was still awakening. That project allowed machines to program for us. This concept has become over the years the clearest example that AI can change things– Developers have embraced this tool like no other industry, but they know that they cannot trust her 100%. Still, we are living in an exciting time for software. One in which the rise of vibe coding is absolute. Andrej Karphaty I thought about it these days and explained that when coined the term A year ago maybe he was wrong with that way of calling it. Now he proposed changing it to “agent engineering” to reflect the type of tool it has ended up being. Be that as it may, the vibe coding/agent engineering has sparked a fever for software development. In many ways it has democratized it and turned us all into potential developers. I am experimenting myself with Open Source tools that I am modifying to my liking, and others are doing exactly the same in this era of “custom micro-applications”. But in recent days we have also experienced a disturbing phenomenon. The threat of the “SaaSpocalypse” The generative AI models and AI agents that have appeared in recent months have ended up having an extraordinary impact on the software world. In fact we are not referring to vibe coding as suchmore aimed at occasional programmers or users without knowledge who are encouraged to create their own apps. We are referring to what has happened to the large software companies that for years have controlled the market with the SaaS (Software as a Service) philosophy. This model has made it possible to convert, for example, Photoshop or Office no longer into software that was sold in boxes and you installed on your PC, but into applications that run in the cloud and that you can use from a browser. Applications are no longer applications, they are services. And you don’t pay for them by buying them at once: you subscribe to them. But AI appears to threaten that model. Last week, software companies lost a total of $300 billion on the stock market overnight. The shares of MongoDB, Salesforce, Shopify or Atlassian lost between 15 and 20% in value in a few hours, and talk of the “SaaS apocalypse” began (“SaaSpocalypse“). Source: Perplexity These falls are obvious if you take a look at Google Finance or any monitoring platform for these companies. Or if you ask Perplexity like I did, which creates a nice (and worrying) graph about some of the companies consulted: the collapse in the last month is really terrible, although it seems that the trend seems to have stopped. Be that as it may, this “SaaS apocalypse”, whether it exists or not, raises a question that is precisely in line with what Andreessen said. If software ended up eating the world, Will AI eat software? Will it kill him? Software is not going to die. Just the opposite What is happening at the corporate level with these falls has of course to do with AI, but also with the model and philosophy of these companies themselves. Those SaaS platforms that dominate the world They have not stopped abusing their dominant position for years with aggressive price increases and rigid contracts. We have seen it with companies like Salesforce, whose customers have seen prices rise 35% in the last two years, or the mind-blowing case of Broadcom, whose customers in Europe were facing price increases of 1,500% in your VMware virtualization software licenses. This has created an ideal breeding ground for clients of these and many other companies with SaaS platforms to look for alternatives, and also look for them in AI. Artificial intelligence is not only offering efficiency, but is giving many customers that “key to the cell” that allows them to escape from their suppliers, who treated them like hostages. In fact, the current correction in stock market valuations can also be understood as a post-bubble hangover from 2021, when the pandemic boosted all these companies. We saw it with … Read more

Until now “software was eating the world.” Now AI is eating software

by

For years we repeated an idea that seemed indisputable: “software was eating the world.” It was the most direct way to explain why almost any sector ended up depending on an app, a platform or a cloud service. But something is beginning to change in a silent and, at the same time, tremendously ambitious way.: the artificial intelligence revolution is not only transforming entire industries, it is also putting pressure on the software industry from within. The question that begins to arise is delicate and fascinating at the same time: if AI can build custom tools in a matter of moments, what is the point of continuing to pay for rigid and standardized software that works, yes, but that often forces it to work as the platform dictates. This is the point at which the debate becomes really serious: it is not about incremental improvement, but about questioning the current model as the standard for enterprise software. The logic is aggressive, at least on paper. So we could be looking at a potentially massive change. And yes, “potentially” is the key word: there are reasons to think that this can happen, and equally strong reasons to believe that it can happen with very real limits. Software in times of artificial intelligence This may all revolve around a very earthly question: what are you paying for when you pay for software. Until now, the price included the construction of the tool, its evolution, and the cost of making it generic enough to sell to thousands of companies. If the AI ​​compresses that part and allows generate code fast and cheapthe value migrates to other places: flow design, real integration with business systems, measurable results. Bret Taylorfounder and CEO of Sierra and part of the board of OpenAI, insists that the focus must be on the value that the customer receivesnot in technology for technology’s sake. Until now, for most companies, the map was quite recognizable: either you bought a pre-packaged tool and assumed its rules, or you commissioned a custom development, usually slower and more expensive, but more tailored to what you needed. What AI introduces is an alternative that, on paper, breaks the balance: instead of choosing a piece of software, it would be enough to explain the problem and let an agent build a custom system, deploy it and adjust it as processes change. Bret Taylor describes it from Sierra’s experience with customer service agents: “Our hypothesis is that, if we move forward five years, the vast majority of digital interactions will be through an agent.” If that is true, the dominant interface of many companies would no longer be a traditional platform. Most importantly, this conversation no longer happens only at conferences or investor presentations. There are practical signs that the paradigm is, at the very least, emerging: the so-called “vibe coding” has become a reality for many non-developer users, capable of setting up a website or tools describing what they want with text. Platforms like the European Lovable They have pushed that idea to the general public: fewer technical barriersmore rapid iteration, less “project” and more trial and error. This does not mean that a company is going to replace its ERP by a system generated on the fly, but it does help to understand why the market and the industry are beginning to take the possibility seriously. And this is where enthusiasm often clashes with real enterprise. Corporate software does not live in isolation: it is attached to databases, legacy systems, identities, permissions, audits and integrations that have been working in a specific way for years. Added to this is the most delicate aspect: regulatory compliance, security and internal responsibilities, which in regulated sectors dictate what can be done and what cannot be done. Even if an agent can generate a functional system, it remains to be resolved who maintains it, who supports it, who ensures that it does not break over time, and who responds when something fails. In this area, “customized and fast” software still has many questions ahead. If all this still seems too abstract, Bloomberg provides a fairly clear thermometer: The market is already reacting as if the threat were real, although we still do not know how far it will go. The media explains that the launch of Claude Cowork on the part of Anthropic reactivated the fear of a disruption that puts pressure on traditional software. According to that text, a set of SaaS values ​​followed by Morgan Stanley as an indicator of the sector has fallen 15% so far in 2026 after falling 11% in 2025, the worst start since 2022. In addition to all this, some cited analysts suggest that right now there are no reasons to have shares of software companies in portfolio. Images | Hack Capital | Anthropic In Xataka | Meta was the big loser of the AI ​​race in 2025. She was actually preparing her big move In Xataka | AI has already destroyed the world of programmers as we knew it. Now it’s the turn of the translators

Microsoft no longer sells software: it sells inevitability

by

OpenAI is no longer an entity with hybrid control and is now a fully fledged company. That is, for profit. Microsoft, which had special rights and a seat on its board, give up that position in exchange for something more stable: Guaranteed and perpetual access to OpenAI models (current and future). Freedom to create your own foundational models without restrictions. Gain independence without losing technology. Why is it important. This does not make Microsoft the owner of OpenAI, but rather the platform that turns its AI into a mass product. OpenAI can continue investigating, but Microsoft remains the one who controls access to users and companies. Distribution defines power today, even above invention. The general overview. Microsoft has been transforming its business from selling licenses to selling continuous dependency for more than a decade: Office 365 eliminated or relegated the option to purchase the software only once. Windows 10 introduced mandatory updates that turned the operating system into permanent service. Azure has tied enterprise infrastructure to its cloud. The pattern is consistent: turning tools into platforms, products into subscriptions, and options into inevitabilities. The agreement with OpenAI is not an exception, it is the culmination. In detail. Microsoft maintains something that no other actor has: Direct integration of Copilot in Office, Teams, Outlook and Windows. Large-scale business contracts that turn AI into the structural cost of digital work. Control over the point of entry: the place where millions of people work every day. The new agreement ensures that OpenAI cannot turn off the tap, and that Microsoft can expand or replace its models without depending on third parties. The strategic background. Until now, Microsoft could not develop its own AGI. Now yes. This allows you two parallel routes: Use OpenAI models in your ecosystem. Develop your own (or integrate with others) if OpenAI gets sidetracked or delayed. Gain technological freedom and commercial stability. But above all, you gain something more valuable: the certainty that AI will not be optional in your software. Between the lines. The move consolidates Microsoft as the main consumer channel for AI at work. Not by contract, but by market position. Millions of users already pay for Copilot without expressly choosing it. Companies assume it as part of the normal cost of productivity. There is no real alternative: if you work in Word, you use Copilot. If you manage emails in Outlook, you use Copilot. If you coordinate teams in Teams, you use Copilot. Yes, but. This is not the traditional technological domain. Microsoft doesn’t need to have the best AI. You just need to have the most integrated one. OpenAI can be brighter, Google can be faster, Meta can be more open (or not so open). It doesn’t matter, because none of them are inside the software where the work is done. AI is no longer an add-on. It becomes invisible infrastructure. The contrast. Other technological giants continue to bet on the excellence of the model: Everyone competes to have the best technology, but Microsoft competes for something else: to be the place where that technology is used, regardless of who created it. In summary: OpenAI is freed to grow as a company. Microsoft makes sure that no matter what happens, AI runs through its software. The rest of the industry competes to invent. Microsoft has won by distributing. Does not sell AI. Sell ​​inevitability. In Xataka | AI works better if you are edge Featured image | Microsoft

OpenAI has purchased a software called Sky. And the loser in this equation is Apple

by

OpenAI has bought Skyan AI application for macOS that had not even been released on the market. Behind them are Ari Weinstein and Conrad Kramer, the creators of Workflow, the automation app that Apple bought in 2017 and became Shortcuts. Why is it important. Three people with years of experience within Apple, a deep knowledge of macOS, and a unique understanding of automation have decided it was better to build outside than inside. And OpenAI has just signed them to integrate ChatGPT precisely into Apple’s operating system. The context. Sky promised to be exactly what Siri should be by 2025: An AI that floats above your desk. Who understands what you do. That sees the context of your screen. And that executes complex actions with a simple instruction in natural language. The vision of AI-assisted computing taken to the maximum. The founders of Software Applications Incorporatedthe company behind Sky, spent years within Apple after purchasing Workflow in 2017. They left in August 2023. 26 months later, OpenAI buys them. The entire cycle has lasted less than two years. That’s speed. That’s what happens when you have a clear vision and there aren’t a hundred committees holding you back. What has happened. Kim Beverettthe third co-founder, also came from Apple. Almost ten years working on Safari, WebKit, privacy, Messages, Mail, FaceTime, SharePlay. They are product people. People who understand macOS better than almost anyone on the planet. And this is not just any startup. It’s a startup founded by people who know the ins and outs of macOS intimately, who know exactly what it can do and how to do it. And they decided that it was better to do it outside of Apple than inside. Between the lines. OpenAI does not buy Sky for the technology. Buy Sky for the talent. The twelve team members join OpenAI to, according to ChatGPT’s vice president, accelerate “deep integration with macOS.” Apple trained these people, gave them access to their systems. Now OpenAI is going to use that knowledge to build exactly what Apple should be building. Apple has been promising for months that Siri is going to improve, that Apple Intelligence It’s the future. But beyond hardware increasingly specialized in local modelswe’ve only seen delays and a fairly muted value proposition so far. Meanwhile… OpenAI has launched Atlasyour browser with deep ChatGPT integration. Now buy Sky to bring that integration to all macOS. With people who know exactly how the innards of the system work. Apple is being outplayed on its own turf. And it’s not just Sky. Jony Ive, the most important designer in Apple’s history, left in 2019. Now work with OpenAI on an AI device. With financing from SoftBank. With Sam Altman directly involved. The alarm signal. Apple has a cultural problem: it is too slow. Too cautious. Privacy is an important differentiator, but it may cost you to be left off the generative AI map. The talent that Apple trained is leaving because it can’t build what it wants inside. At least not with the desired speed. Sky will at some point arrive as an OpenAI product or as an integration into ChatGPT desktop app. But it will also be a symbol of what can be done with deep knowledge, clear vision and freedom to execute without twenty layers of approval. And now what. Apple needs speed. You need ambition. You need to be willing to take risks. Because talent doesn’t wait. And AI does not forgive slowness. In Xataka | OpenAI is already a binary bet: either get AGI, or everything blows up Featured image | OpenAI

China is taking a giant step in its quest for technological self-sufficiency: its own EDA software

by

A company called Qiyunfang just done a unique presentation at the Bay Area Semiconductor Expo held in Shenzhen, China. In it he has presented two EDA platforms. And with them it has opened the door to something in which the Asian giant totally depended on the US: designing your own chips. What is EDA. Electronic Design Automation (EDA) software is the fundamental tool and the gateway to be able to design chips and printed circuit boards (PCBs). Historically, this segment has always been dominated by American companies: Synopsys, Cadence and Mentor Graphics / Siemens EDA were the absolute references. They “translate” the ideas of the engineers who design the chips, and convert them into functional plans that manufacturers such as TSMC or SMIC can manufacture. Who is Qiyunfang. This company, founded in 2023, is not just any one: it is SiCarrier subsidiarywhich in turn collaborates with Huawei Technologies. As if that were not enough, SiCarrier is a semiconductor manufacturer that has financial support from the Shenzhen government. The US had China tied. In May of this year, China began to block the export of its rare earths, and the United States responded with a blockade that was equally harmful to China: the aforementioned American companies They could no longer sell their services and their EDA software to its Chinese partners. It was one of the most effective ways to “strangle” the Chinese semiconductor industry: if you can’t design the chip, it doesn’t matter if you have factories to produce it. SMIC, for example, it’s been 20 years using Synopsys EDA design suites. With the veto he was left unable to use them. China once again opts for self-sufficiency. The solutions presented by Qiyunfang theoretically allow for domestic solutions for EDA software for both schematic designs (conceptual design) and PCB (physical design of the board). Not only that: these platforms run on a completely Chinese software stack—operating system, database, middleware. Qiyunfang is not a product, it is a break with dependency in two of the crucial stages of chip design. The key is technological independence. If these platforms comply, China will have a solution immune to sanctions, also integrated into the Chinese national technological ecosystem. The trade and technology war that the country maintains with the United States has encouraged both parties to seek precisely to avoid dependence among themselves and also with other countries. It’s the “I’ll stew it, I’ll eat it” taken to the maximum extreme. The other challenge: advanced chips. Even having its own EDA software, China still has a colossal challenge with advanced chips that use 3 and 5 nm photolithography and that take advantage of UVE technologies. They continue working on these types of systems, but until they have them, Qiyunfang’s software platforms are a fantastic option for developing more “mature” but equally important chips such as those for the automotive sector or industrial applications. China continues to move key chips. This news confirms the trajectory that Xi Jingping established with its famous “Made in China 2025” plan. It seeks to conquer the key technologies of the future: AI, robotics, automotive and of course the manufacturing of semiconductors without external dependencies are little by little a reality in the Asian giant, and this new milestone of this Chinese company seems to demonstrate it. In Xataka | Before the tariffs, China bought most of its beef from the US. After the tariffs another country has won

be the Android of the robots thanks to the software

by

There are many reasons to think that Humanoid robots They will have a key role in the future. They could take care of household chores, attend at a hotel or assume risk work. However, not everyone sees it possible: Irobot’s co -founder insists that all this is a fantasy. But if that future ends up, the doubt is inevitable: what companies and countries will mark the pattern? If we had to give names, Tesla (United States) and Unitree (China) would be among the candidates, but there are many other companies in the race. Goal, known for its empire in social networks, wants to make their way in this field with a different strategy. His bet does not only go through hardware, but by something that could make a difference: the software. Goal wants to be the Android of Robotics Rumors about finishing plans In humanoid robotics they began earlier this year, and the company ended up confirming them. Recently we knew more details thanks to Andrew Bosworth, his cto, which showed In an interview with The Verge that the play is quite like What Google did with Android. Although Bosworth prevents direct comparison, which poses goal follows that script. They will continue to develop their own humanoid robots, but the differential movement is to put their software within reach of other manufacturers through licenses. The condition: comply with specific specifications, as is the case in Android. The executive makes clear why this can work. In his opinion, the true obstacle of humanoid robotics is not in the hardware, but in the software. Especially what he calls “skilled manipulation”Robots are already able to move quickly and Even giving somersaultsbut they continue to fail something as basic as holding a glass of water without spilling it. One of the central pieces of the goal strategy is in the simulation. His superintelligence laboratory works on what they call a “World Model”, a world model capable of recreating in a digital environment how a human hand should move and react. The objective is to train robots in virtual stages until they acquire sufficient skills to manipulate objects with precision. The company has also managed to bring together a singular team, with figures such as Marc Whitten, who was previously a director in Cruise, or Sangbae Kim, considered one of the great Referents in advanced robotics. Internal profiles with long experience are added to them. A mixture of external and veteran specialists of the house that reflects the ambition of the bet. The landing of humanoids will not be immediate or universal. An analysis of Bank of America details a three -phase deployment. Most likely, we will see them in controlled environments before they terrify in our homes massively. Between 2025 and 2027 humanoids will begin in very limited environments, such as factories or logistics centers, with repetitive manipulation, assembly or quality control tasks. The objective will be to accumulate real data to improve your models. By 2028–2034, with more refined designs and more reliable algorithms, they will open their way in commercial services, education or light engineering. Integrated with language models, they can interact in real time and exceed one million annual shipments. From 2035 a massive adoption is expected in homes and care to adults, with more affordable costs and much more complete functions, capable of developing in unstructured environments. The business mmodel if the CUAJA platform If the Meta Prospera Plan, the company will sell its own robots, also will license its platform. In this way, we could see the goal technology behind robots of a wide range of manufacturers. From there, plausible scenarios are opened although not yet confirmed. One of them is that complement the licenses with cloud services for training or maintenance, or even that an ecosystem of “skills” discharged as applications arises. It is a reasonable hypothesis: the more robots the system use, the more data the company would get to improve the product, creating a virtuous circle Difficult to replicate for their competitors. We will have to see if it finally advances in that direction. Google’s strategy with Android has worked. Images | Apple (series ‘Sunny‘of Apple TV+) | Dima Solomin | Mika Baumeister In Xataka | Alibaba is winning the career of the IA Open Source models. Its strategy is simple: to be tired

Mercedes has filled its screens cars. Now your software boss says that the lifelong buttons are better

by

Automobiles are immersed in two revolutions. One seems to have a clear destination: the adoption of batteries for support decarbonization. The other is that of the buttons, and it is somewhat more diffuse. If a few years ago the main companies They launched into the arms of the screens Already the condemnation of the physical buttons, now there is a shy back. And, precisely, one of the cars that is returning to the buttons is the New Mercedes GLC. Yes, the one with a 39.1 -inch side screen. Mbux Hyperscreen. Presented during the Munich Auto Hall a few weeks ago, the new Mercedes GLC is a most curious electric. On the outside, it reminds us of more classic cars of the brand, but inside it is an absolute fantasy. It does not reach the end of Intel prototypes with screens everywherean idea that became ‘obscene’, but in the dashboard we have a huge screen of almost 40 inches from side to side. It’s about your Hyperscreena subway and a half screen that simulates three screens and that has the controls of the entire infotainment system, car information and, after the steering wheel, the digital velocimeter area and important details for driving. Reverse. When Mercedes designed it, he relegated absolutely all car controls to digital buttons on that touch screen. However, the industry is in a moment of change and there are brands that are rethinking those movements. Although shy, Mercedes has joined this with the aforementioned GLC, but also with the Cla Shooting Brake (Another electric). The German brand has redesigned the steering wheel to include elements that should not have disappeared from it as knobs, rollers and buttons to control important sections of the car and do not have to divert the view of the road to look at a screen. The British environment Coach He has been able to talk to Magnus Östberg, head of software in Mercedes (so he must be one of the most interested in integrating everything into the user interface of the screens), who has recognized that, perhaps, they went from futurists. The new steering wheel with buttons The buttons are better. In the interview, Östberg pointed out that wearing the buttons back to the wheel is “the easiest and most profitable way to add physical controls to cars” while maintaining cabins in which there is great importance to digital. To the surprise of few drivers, “having that balance between physical and tactile buttons is extremely important for us. We rely on the data and what is most used, and the data show us that the physical buttons are better. That is why we have put them again,” he says in a forceful way. The software chief commented that this will mark the Mercedes roadmap from now on and that, probably include more buttons. Now, it will not be in all models. Östberg points out that, while the flyers with buttons will mark the new path of the brand, those cars that will include more additional buttons, surely will be the SUV. “In the largest cars we have more freedom of space and, in addition, the buyers of these ranges care more about the buttons,” he says. This may depend on the market, since the manager suggested that there could be different flyers depending on the region. He pointed out that while Europeans want buttons, Asians prefer screens and voice controls. Climatizer controls will continue on screen Also in the industry. The truth is that Östberg’s statements do not catch us by surprise if we take into account what other companies are doing. One of those who made a big difference between the classic and new ‘cabins’ with screens everywhere is Volkswagen and, precisely, in the Munich Automobile Hall presented Your new design language for interiors of their cars: more buttons and, in addition, real buttons (Nothing of its controversial capacitive buttons). But it is not just that companies are realizing that the buttons are useful for security reasons: Euro NCAP announced a few months ago that cars will only get five stars (a very important marketing point for the user) If the basic functions continue to control with physical controls. Mazda and his “Submit me the cup”. But, while some of the companies that most bet on the buttons are collecting cable, even timidly, there are others that move in an opposite direction. I mean Mazda, the Japanese company that became resistance When betting on small screens and many buttons and that, with its last models, has given the flying to embrace the touch screens. He Mazda 6e It was a warning, but consolidation came with the Mazda CX-5 2025a car that relegated important controls to the large central touch screen. And, like Östberg, from Mazda United States, they said that drivers want … screens. But well, despite the words of the Mercedes manager, the screens will not disappear. In fact, in Autocar, the design chief of the German firm, Gordon Wagener, said that the interior of the GLC is a luxury and that they look at Apple so that the software is the differentiating point With competition. The point now is to find that average term in which the buttons and the screens of a meter and a half manage to live together. Images | Mercedes-Benz In Xataka | Volkswagen adds to an increasingly common trend: to pay a subscription so that your car runs more

The old business software guard

by

Oracle has shown that the true business of business AI is not only in creating the most advanced models, but also in sell the critical infrastructure that companies already consolidated need To implement them, shooting their pending contracts and their bag value. Why is it important. Oracle’s strategy reflects that traditional technological giants are not being revolutionary with AI, but they are using it to reinforce their market dominance. Its key advantage is not pure innovation, but the confidence, data and commercial relations built for decades with the largest companies in the world. What has happened. Oracle has reported income of 14,930 million dollars in the first quarter of its fiscal year, 12% more year -on -year. However, the most important metric were its remaining performance obligations (RPO) – futures already hired – that fired 359% to 455,000 million dollars. As a consequence, His actions rose more than 25% In operations after closing. In detail. The growth of the company is not based on creating its own models of generative, but on selling the “peaks and blades” for this revolution: Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI): Competes directly with AWS and Azure to house models of the partners such as Openai and Google. Vector databases: Offers optimized databases to Embeddings vector, an essential component for AI applications such as semantic search and RAG. Integration of AI: Embeds AI functions in their existing business products such as Netsuite and Fusion. And sells updates to an already captive customer base. Yes, but. Oracle is not alone. This is a pattern that is repeated among business software giants. SAP He is doing the same with his Rise and Sap AI platform. IBM Take advantage Watsonx and Red Hat Openshift Ai for business environments. Salesforce integrates its Einstein GPT in all your CRM suite. The context. For years, many venture capital analysts and funds have considered companies such as “Living Dead” Oracle, still powerful but destined to be replaced by more agile startups. The AI ​​boom has invested this narrative. It turns out that having decades of business data, compliance with safety regulations and the confidence of technology directors is more valuable to display critical infrastructure of AI than having the most novel model of the moment. Outstanding image | Oracle In Xataka | Microsoft has just made the greatest investment in its history. And not in Openai, but in an unknown Dutch company

We believed that the most complicated summer of F-35 had ended. Until his software made him kamikaze on the Arctic

by

In mid-August it seemed frankly difficult for something more to the brand new F-35 of Lockheed Martin. After the plane stranded for a month In India, the reverse from Spain to an order (to which they have added other countries), and A second breakdown Of a hunt, this time in Japan, the quota of fatalities seemed complete. Until a report has appeared that calls for the plane and its sophisticated software. An accident and its causes. Now we know that on January 28, 2025 an F-35a of the United States Air Force, assigned to the 354th combat wing at the base of Eielson (Alaska), He crashed After taking off in training mission as part of a group of four aircraft. He Official Report of the Pacific Air Forces revealed that the main cause was the fluid freezing Hydraulic contaminated with water in the shock absorbers of the landing train, which prevented the complete extension of the struts and caused that the weight sensors on wheels on wheels They will erroneously interpret That the plane was on the ground while still flewing. Kamikaze mode. This false signal automatically activated the “on-aund” control mode in full flight, the aircraft becoming uncontrollable. Luckily, the pilot managed to eject and survived with minor injuries, but the plane, valued in 196.5 million dollarsit was completely lost. Emergency in flight. The problem was immediately manifested: the front train was misaligned at 17 degrees and could not retract. After radio consultations with engineers from Lockheed Martin and a flight supervisor, the pilot tried for almost an hour Reactivate the wheel using two “touch-And-go” maneuvers. However, the ice also blocked the main trains, and at the second attempt the sensors indicated that the aircraft had landed. What happened then? That the system automatically changed to Operation mode on landdrastically reducing the control capacity. The pilot, nicknamed in The “MP” reportmanaged to eject just before the hunt went into loss and fell into chopped. The device came to rise more than 1,000 meters after the ejection, and then rush vertically, in the sequence recorded in a video that went viral. Technical and maintenance factors. The investigation He explained that the ice in the struts, added to the bad alignment of the front -train blocking hook, damaged metal components and prevented the correct system coupling. In addition, and very important, the Wow sensors (Critics in the F-35 Flight Control Logic, known as Claws) showed vulnerability in extreme cold conditions, something that Lockheed Martin already He had warned In previous maintenance bulletins. In other words, the ice “cheated” to the software. The report Underline that water pollution in hydraulic fluids derived from poor management of hazardous materials and breaches in service protocols. These negligence, together with decision -making during the emergency, were considered contributing factors to the accident. Implications and lessons. No doubt, the case has highlighted the complexity inherent in the high F-35 automationwhere a sensor failure can trigger waterfall reactions in the control software. Although nine days later another F-35A was able to land with a similar problem in the train without consequences, the Research Board stressed that, with the available information, the safest option would have been to order an immediate landing or a controlled ejection instead of risking a second attempt to maneuver. Although the report did not issue recommendations Formal policy changes, did highlight the need to reinforce compliance with maintenance protocols, supervision of fluid use and preparation for operations in Arctic environments. Strategic repercussions. In short, the accident, Without fatalitieshighlights the challenges of operating fifth generation fighters in extreme conditions such as Alaska, where temperatures close to –17 ºC can aggravate technical vulnerabilities. Not just that. It also offers a warning to future operators in cold climates, Like Canada and Finlandwhich must consider the reliability of the sensors and the resilience of the control systems in hostile environments. Beyond the technical, the event illustrates how the sophistication of the F-35, with its dependence on algorithms and automation, can become a risk factor in unforeseen emergenciesforcing to rethink the balance between human control and software in new generation military aircraft. Image | US AIR National Guard/Tech. Sgt. Adam Keele In Xataka | It is being a complicated summer for the US F-35: after the “no” of Spain Russia and China have appeared to do more damage In Xataka | A group of countries is being formed after the decision of Spain: those that are closing the door to the US F-35

Toyota is behind in the development of cars software. So he has resorted to the referent in the field: China

by

Toyota is the largest car manufacturer in the world. The accounts say that last year he put on the market Almost 11 million vehicles. But their 2024 sales have two readings. The optimistic is that, despite advocating the arrival of the electric car, Toyota continues to bet on hybrids And that allows him to be the manufacturer with the highest sales in the world. The presence of Toyota in that technology is minimal but the goal is to arrive at the exact moment or, to be late, to arrive better than the rivals. The pessimistic is that Toyota is losing bellows. The fall in global sales was 3.7% and although in the United States it advances with a firm step thanks to hybrids, In China an important 6.9%was left. Not only that, the market is so competitive that it threatens to expel some brands and lose ease in the world’s largest national market It can be a difficult Ramora to overcome in the future. 2024 was the third consecutive year in which Toyota left sales in China. The country is the place of the world where more electric cars are bought. There, the presence of Toyota has been almost testimonial until this year. Until this 2025, barely sold the Toyota Bz3 in China. Now he has confirmed that he will put the TOYOTA BZ3X (more assembled SUV market) and the Toyota Bz7both in collaboration with the GAC local. However, three electrical models is clearly insufficient compared to giants like Byd either All Geely’s potential With its innumerable brands. And to this it is added that the Chinese market is not only rewarding those who put a good car on the market in relation to their autonomy. China has taken an important step in the qualities of its habitats and, above all, customers are rewarding the software used inside, with multiple offers ranging from classic information to converting the interior of the car into a karaoke. The latter has put western manufacturers against the ropes that do not finish finding the key of what is carried there. Toyota’s solution: ally with those who know the most. Toyota, by the hand of Xiaomi and Huawei Given this last situation, Toyota has opted for the fast track but, perhaps, extremely intelligent. An alliance with Xiaomi and Huawei allows you to position the product as another part of the digital ecosystem of those who have an arsenal of products from that same family. Since the Xiaomi Su7 was presented, the company has placed special emphasis on the conversation between the mobile and car, turning it into one more extension of a family of products that is already omnipresent at home. His trick is Hyperos. My partner told Ricardo Aguilar in Xataka That the integration between the system and the mobile phone is much deeper than Apple Carplay or Android Auto. The operating system replicates in up to five screens the relevant information for each of them, has its own applications and allows you to display the information of the phone in mirror mode. Even the system allows Apple Carplay to combine with the base operating system and well show the latter on the central screen and the rear (while Hyperos works below in the instrument box or the head-up display) or send content to it by means of AirPlay. The same goes for Android Auto. The same goes for Harmonyosthe vehicle software used Huawei in cars that launches the market in collaboration with vehicle manufacturers such as Aito, Chery either Jac. In this case, he even has more crumb because They use their own chips with the aim of becoming independent of American companies. In 2021, Huawei already taught the leg with the Presentation of Harmonyos. That multiplatform software had the clear vocation to integrate all products into the same family. That is, who had a phone Huawei will be launched directly to a car that allows him to live the full user experience. Like Xioami, Huawei repeats formula presenting itself as an attractive option to attract customers in high -end or luxury vehicles, such as the one that We can see in this video. The approximation of both Chinese companies is radically different from that of Toyota whose investment in the software is being minimal so far. And although a few months ago they confirmed that They were investing greater resources In their own operating system, they are aware that quina competitiveness can pass them over. The solution is to ally with both Chinese technology. Thus, the Toyota BZ7 can be used with Both operating systems. Each will work with their own artificial intelligence developments and, for example, Toyota promises that with Huawei they are working on a personal identification of individuals so that, with a simple voice command, we can activate the desired profile at the moment. In addition to Xiaomi and Huawei, Toyota has also associated with Momenta. The Chinese company will allow you to delve into autonomous driving systems, a highly desired market in China. In fact, the own Government has had to give a touch of attention to manufacturers so that they do not overestimate their capabilities for the user. Photo | Toyota In Xataka | Family and friends keep asking me if “it is worth buying a Chinese car.” This is my answer

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.