Computerworld.com [Hacking News]

Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon has shown interest in acquiring crisis-stricken competitor Intel, according to report by Reuters.

In recent days, representatives of both parties reportedly met to discuss a possible takeover, but any agreement will take time to iron out. Both The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times also reported on the talks between Qualcomm and Intel.

Exactly how Qualcomm would be able to afford Intel is unclear; the company is said to be sitting on $13 billion in cash, but Intel’s market capitalization is $188 billion.

As recently as six years ago, Qualcomm, in turn, was on the verge of being acquired by Broadcom. That deal was stopped by the US government.

The tech and AI landscape became even more interesting on news that former Apple designer Sir Jony Ive OBE’s new firm LoveFrom has hired rock star PR Sarah O’Brien, presumably to lead communications at the firm. They then became way more interesting when Ive confirmed his company is working with Sam Altman’s OpenAI on an AI device.

Who is Jony Ive?

If you are reading this, it’s relatively safe to assume you know Ive’s background: A friend of Steve Jobs and his wife Lauren Powell Jobs (about which more later), Apple’s former chief designer, the guy who designed the iMac, iPhone, MacBook, iPad, Apple Watch, Apple stores and even Apple Park — among other things.

You’ll also know that Ive left Apple a few years ago to launch his own small design company called LoveFrom, and that probably his most mass market design since was the Red Nose toy he designed in support of BBC’s Comic Relief. 

Who is Sarah O’Brien?

Then O’Brien came along. When her hiring was announced, Ive said he was pleased his “friend” was joining the company to help it with its “immoderate ambition to be useful in the future.” 

Which hinted at bigger plans than red nose design. To get some perspective on this, look at what O’Brien has been involved with. Her communications expertise was involved in the launch of iTunes DRM-free (when she was at EMI), iTunes Music Festival, App Store, Apple Watch and sundry iPhone and iPad launches. Beyond Apple, she’s worked at Rivian, Meta, and Tesla — hence the phrase, “rock star PR.”

She is, as they say in some parts of London town, “the business”. 

Building a team for big ideas?

With this in mind, it’s doubtful even someone as wealthy as Ive would invest in a communications expert of such stature just to publicize his next designer button. (It is also unlikely someone with O’Brien’s experience would sign up to do that.)

Unless it’s more than a button. After all, while the failure of the Humane AI Pin is still making waves, one thing that product did illustrate was interest in pervasive AI. Perhaps a better thought-out device would be more successful?

That’s speculation, so we’ll forego further discussion for now. (Though Ive and his company have spent five years analyzing humanity’s entire history of button design, so there is that.)

Ive + Altman: Love for AI

What isn’t speculation is that since O’Brien’s hire, The New York Times has confirmed LoveFrom is working with Open AI. This has been speculated for the last couple of years, but that story confirms:

• Ive has turned one of his real estate investments into the HQ of a new “artificial intelligence device company that he is developing with OpenAI.” 
• Ive and Altman first met for dinner to discuss the concept of a new generative AI-powered computing device in 2023. 
• They decided to work together, have raised money privately (including from Powell Jobs’ Emerson Collective), and may have raised $1 billion dollars in start-up funding by the end of the year. (One wonders whether Apple’s purported investment in OpenAI is also in the frame?)
• The new company’s staff include Tang Tan, Apple’s former iPhone product developer, and Evans Hankey, who succeeded Ive as design lead at Apple. 

The idea? To create a genAI-capable product that is “less socially disruptive” than the iPhone. There’s more in the original report, which you should read.

Why this is bigger than hardware

It isn’t just product design that makes Ive so acclaimed. Sure, his products do manage to deliver a highly recognizable design aesthetic, but at their best, they are far more than simply hardware. Ive designs product experiences.

That means that his designers will be asking themselves really difficult questions. Those interrogations won’t be confined to obvious challenges, such as “What hardware can we build that is capable of delivering [suggested] features?” 

LoveFrom’s designers will delve into the really deep stuff, the questions that are super-hard to answer: What do people really need from AI? How will people use the product in the most interruption-free way? What does a personal AI system that humans can intuitively relate to look like? What values should it represent?

What I’m saying is that it’s likely the designers will be sweating their way through every possible detail.

What this all comes down to, as with LoveFrom’s earlier work at AirBnB and Ive’s at Apple, is the creation of a design language with which to inform product design. That language – the interaction experience – is fundamental.

Why experience matters

Get it right, and the hardware will occupy a space in which interactions with the device become highly intuitive, even inevitable. Creating “things” that deliver that kind of inevitability has always been central to Ive’s design ethic. 

In 2003, Ive told design magazine Icon: “So much of what we try to do is get to a point where the solution seems inevitable.” 

If Apple and OpenAI attempt to meet a desideratum of that magnitude, then whatever Ive and Altman do eventually come up with will generate immediate global media interest. Thankfully, LoveFrom may now have a communications chief with the kind of experience you need to help handle product introductions at that scale. What happens next, a very small number of people knows.

For the rest of us outside the perimeter, it will be interesting to find out.

Please follow me on LinkedIn, Mastodon, or join me in the AppleHolic’s bar & grill group on MeWe.

Microsoft’s Windows App is now available for macOS, iOS, iPadOS, and Windows devices, with an Android version in preview. Users can also access remote Windows PCs  —  either Windows Professional or Enterprise —  via a web browser without having to download and install any software. 

Windows App, first unveiled in November 2023, provides access to several Microsoft tools used to remotely connect to Windows PC. This means users can sign in to Windows 365, Azure Virtual Desktop, Remote Desktop, Remote Desktop Services, and Microsoft Dev Box — all from one place.

“With Windows App, you can enjoy a unified experience that makes it simple for people to connect to the Windows experience they know and love from any device,” Hilary Braun, senior product manager for Windows 365, said in a  blog post last week.

The app features a customizable home screen, multi-monitor support and dynamic display resolutions, as well as USB redirection; the latter lets users connect peripherals such as webcams and printers that can be controlled from the remote PC.

“IT admins benefit from enhanced security and streamlined management, while end users can tailor their experience to fit their personal workflows,” said Braun.

The Windows App will replace the Remote Desktop client previously used to access virtual Windows desktops across different devices. It can be downloaded from the Microsoft Store or, for MacOS, iPadOS and iOS users, from the Apple App Store. 

Enterprise file synchronization and sharing (EFSS) services have been around for nearly 20 years. While the basic functions are mature, many of these tools have expanded to become content collaboration platforms for enterprise users.

“Some offer generative AI, data extraction, records management and retention, and content federation, which means vendors can apply those EFSS services to their own and third-party document repositories,” says Holly Muscolino, group vice president of workplace solutions at IDC.

[ Download our editors’ PDF enterprise file sync and sharing (EFSS) buyer’s guide today! ]

At the same time, many content management platform vendors have incorporated EFSS features directly into their own products, further blurring the lines between the software categories.

While most enterprises have some sort of EFSS tools in place, it’s worth considering your options with an eye toward developing a more unified, modular, federated, AI-enabled, and workflow-optimized content sharing platform that can adapt to all of your organization’s use cases, Muscolino says.

In this buyer’s guide

• What is EFSS?
• Top trends in EFSS
• What to look for in EFSS services
• Key questions to ask yourself — and vendors — when shopping for an EFSS service
• 9 leading EFSS vendors

What is EFSS?

EFSS services let users store and synchronize access to documents from multiple mobile, desktop, and laptop devices, allowing for view-only, edit, and download access to shared documents and folders with external partners, suppliers, and co-workers.

All EFSS services designed for enterprise use provide apps for Android and iOS devices, as well as for Windows and macOS machines. To facilitate synchronization, EFSS vendors typically maintain a copy of user data on their servers in the cloud — which is why many vendors emphasize security measures designed to protect customer data both in-transit and at rest.

Users typically can choose to have full copies stored locally or virtual copies that can be downloaded on demand to save on local storage space. But those features are just table stakes today, says Muscolino.

Top trends in EFSS

Four vendors dominate the market for EFSS tools from a revenue standpoint, says Muscolino: Microsoft (with OneDrive), Google (with Google Drive), Box, and Dropbox. Today, she adds, all have added new capabilities that go far beyond basic file sync and sharing services. Those expanded service offerings, which IDC now calls content sharing and collaboration platforms, are growing faster than the overall enterprise content management (ECM) space. But, she adds, “Overall this is a modernization, consolidation, and replacement market.”

Basic EFSSfunctions are also now part of many ECM suites. “A few years back, a number of ECM system vendors added document-centric collaboration capabilities, including file sync and sharing,” said Cheryl McKinnon, principal analyst at Forrester Research. “While that was happening, we saw tools like OneDrive, Dropbox, and Box adding document handling, workflow automation, e-signatures, and even enhanced governance tools to help manage the document lifecycle.”

Governance features can help organizations manage personally identifiable information, says Muscolino. “The more sophisticated services also enable you to manage specific retention and disposition schedules,” she adds.

Box is a good example of how these tools have evolved, McKinnon says. “In addition to content storage and the ability to sync across devices, they’ve added a very strong platform approach, and they’re very API-driven, so people who want to build their own content management application can do so. Box also added workflow capabilities, which is especially useful for processes that are document-centric.”

AI-based features are another area of innovation, says McKinnon. “For example, Box uses AI and machine learning to protect against malware or to detect downloads that fall outside a user’s usual patterns. It also uses generative AI to summarize documents, such as pulling out terms and conditions from a 100-page contract,” she says.

Generative AI features are still very new, and the capabilities vendors offer — summarization, translation, shortening or lengthening documents, and search — are very similar, Muscolino says. Box, Dropbox, Google Drive, and Egnyte have all added AI features, and OneDrive benefits from Microsoft’s Copilot genAI tool, she adds.

People are realizing that there’s value in document repositories, even for older files, and modern content sharing and collaboration services can exploit that, says Muscolino. “You can find, extract and curate information for compliance decision support, to set retention schedules, or to automatically tell you when contracts are due,” she says.

What to look for in EFSS services

Here are a few of key features, beyond the basics, to look for in EFSS service offerings. Note that content sharing and collaboration feature offerings can be very broad; some may not be necessary or relevant to your organization’s needs.

• Permission- and/or role-based access controls for shared documents
• Document editing
• Document recovery
• Version history tracking
• Expiration dates for shared links
• Password protection for shared links
• E-signatures / electronic forms support
• Generative AI-based features (document summarization, translation, etc.)
• APIs for customization/integration
• Integration with commonly used enterprise software such as Microsoft Office or your organization’s ECM software
• Auditing, analytics, and reporting
• Administrator dashboard
• Data extraction
• Data retention policies
• Workflow management and automation
• Active Directory/LDAP support
• Single sign-on
• Two-factor/multi-factor authentication
• End-to-end encryption
• Malware detection
• Compliance with GDPR, HIPAA, and other regulatory standards
• Cloud-based, on-premises, and hybrid service offerings
• Federated data access across repositories

Key questions to ask yourself — and vendors — when shopping for an EFSS service

• Who will be using the service and what do they want to do with it?
• Where does your data need to be stored? If some or all needs to be on-premises, look for a hybrid solution that includes federated data access capabilities.
• Do your content management system or collaboration tools already offer file sync and sharing functions? For example, a Microsoft 365 or Office 365 subscription includes OneDrive.
• Is the tool you already have, or are considering, as easy to use as the consumer-based file-sharing tools your users are familiar with? “People who use free tools for file sharing can introduce risk, so make sure the tool you choose offers a great user experience” so users don’t turn to easier, but less secure, options, says McKinnon. “A great user experience in itself is a great security feature.”
• Will a third-party tool integrate well with your enterprise content management platform?
• Do you have a large volume of external file sharing that needs to happen but don’t want to give external users access to your internal content management tools? This is where a separate EFSS tool can help (think OneDrive vs. SharePoint).
• What are your requirements in terms of features, security, etc.? Do you need more advanced capabilities such as workflow management?
• What are your security requirements for content to be shared? Most leading EFSS players have a high level of granularity in terms of access controls. But do they meet regulatory compliance standards for your industry?
• What subscription tiers are offered and what features are included in each?

9 leading EFSS vendors

There are more than a dozen vendor offerings in this space, although not all are well suited for enterprise use. Here are nine prominent vendors that McKinnon and Muscolino say are worth considering.

Box

Box offers an extended set of features focused on enterprise use that includes a “no-code” workflow automation builder with templates, collaborative whiteboards, developer tools and APIs, and integration with 1,500 applications including Microsoft 365/Office 365, Google, Slack, and ServiceNow. Administrative controls include analytics, reporting and auditing features. The user interface includes a generative AI function that Box says can summarize documents, create meeting agendas, and create outlines and talking points for stored documents.

Security features include two-factor authentication, AES 256-bit encryption, single sign-on and multi-factor authentication support, and data leak and malware detection. For compliance it offers data retention and preservation policy enforcement for legal holds and disposition management. Box complies with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), Information System Security Management and Assessment Program (ISMAP), Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP), and Federal Information Processing Standard Publication 140-2 (FIPS 140-2) standards.

Dropbox

Dropbox offers enterprise-grade features such as support for single sign-on, compliance tracking for a wide range of regulatory standards, and suspicious activity alerts. It also supports e-signatures, document analytics for usage tracking, and the ability to set expiration dates for shared files and view and restore version histories. Dropbox includes an external content reporting dashboard where managers can review activities for all shared files and folders for a given team.

Security features include multi-factor authentication, 256-bit AES and SSL/TLS encryption, password protection, key management, vulnerability testing, ransomware attack detection and recovery, and breach alerts when Dropbox sees suspicious login attempts. Users can remotely wipe Dropbox data from any device used to access their account data.

Egnyte

Although Egnyte describes its service as a unified content management system platform, enterprise file sync and sharing features are at its core. Its AI assistant summarizes the content of documents and allows for natural-language queries. It supports auditing and version tracking, and offers options for data recovery, PDF document annotation, and compliance documentation controls.

The enterprise-level versions add multi-step workflows, legal holds on documents, role-based access controls, intelligent document classification capability, insider threat detection, data privacy management, and compliance monitoring.

FileCloud

FileCloud Technologies describes its EFSS service as “hyper-secure,” which may be why it offers cloud-based, on-premises, and hybrid versions of its file syncing and sharing service. FileCloud features include workflow management, digital rights management, and data loss prevention.

It supports content retention policies and complies with ITAR, HIPAA, GDPR, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) SP 800-171, and the Saudi Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) standards. Security features include two-factor authentication, AES encryption, single sign-on, malware detection, compatibility with security information and event management (SIEM) tools, and support for LDAP and Active Directory.

Google

Google Drive for Business is a cloud storage service that lets users create shared files and folders with download, edit, comment, or view permissions. Drive for Business is included with Google Workspace plans, so it’s a convenient and cost-effective solution for Workspace subscribers. 

Drive features a centralized administration console, an AI-based feature that predicts what documents you may need next, and a machine learning-based search function that can show files that “may require attention.” Security and data governance features include data loss prevention; a Vault feature that supports data retention, e-discovery, and e-signatures; and plug-ins for Microsoft Outlook and Office.

Microsoft

If you already have a Microsoft 365 subscription, the bundled OneDrive for Business offering may be your most convenient — and cost effective — option. OneDrive integrates seamlessly with Microsoft Outlook as well as Microsoft’s SharePoint content management system. OneDrive tracks the change history for current files, allows for restoration of previous versions, and lets you create shared links that expire. With Copilot for Microsoft 365, which requires a separate subscription, users can search for and summarize information from across the entire Microsoft 365 environment.

Other OneDrive features include multi-factor authentication, auditing and reporting, and compliance with the GDPR. OneDrive inherits all of the security and privacy features of Microsoft 365, including role-based access and identity and app management.

ShareFile

Formerly owned by Citrix, Cloud Software Group’s ShareFile includes support for shared file and folder permissions, file encryption, MFA, and single sign-on. It offers workflow automations and templates (including for accounting and tax-related documents), e-signature support, and integration with Microsoft 365/Office 365, Google Workspace, Salesforce, and other enterprise workplace software. ShareFile is compliant with HIPAA and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) standards.

Thru

Thru describes its eponymous product as a secure, managed file transfer service for automated file transfers and ad-hoc file sharing that’s tailored to the needs of regulated industries. Its zero-trust security model includes MFA, end-to-end encryption, malware detection, and data retention policies.

Thru includes audit capabilities for activity tracking, monitoring, and retention, and includes APIs and pre-built connectors for integration with other platforms. It has role-based access controls, an activity monitoring dashboard, and integrations for Salesforce, SharePoint/OneDrive, Office, and Outlook 365. Thru conforms to the GDPR, GxP, HIPAA, and PCI DSS compliance standards.

Tresorit

Tresorit focuses on file sharing, storage, and e-signature support for organizations that require a high level of security and privacy. It’s compliant with a wide range of industry-specific and government-mandated security standards, including HIPAA and GDPR. The vendor markets Tresorit as a way to replace email document attachments with shared links, and offers integrations for Microsoft Outlook and Gmail.

Security and privacy features include end-to-end encryption, two-factor authentication, and single sign-on through Okta, AzureAD, and Google Workspace. Tresorit also supports access permissions, version histories, and access logs for auditing and reporting.

The US Department of Justice (DoJ) is set to wrap its case in the Google antitrust trial, after an eventful two weeks in the courtroom.

The tech giant is accused of engaging in monopolistic behavior by strategically acquiring certain companies and controlling the adtech industry’s most widely-used tools and exchanges. The lawsuit was filed in 2023 by the DoJ and a coalition of eight states seeking to “restore competition” on the web.

The trial began on September 9, and the DoJ has been laying out its case that Google has attempted to monopolize control of the ad network, server, and exchange, beginning with its acquisition of advertising company DoubleClick in 2008.

Lawyers for the government argued that the move made Google’s ad server the default choice and left publishers with few alternatives. By integrating its ad exchange and server, Google has an unfair edge in ad auctions, and it manipulates auction rules and drives up cost, the DoJ alleged. Advertisers taking the stand — including Gannett, NewsCorp, Index Exchange, The Trade Desk, Scope3 and others — have backed up these allegations, stating that they have felt trapped by Google’s tactics, and at the same time felt compelled to use the company’s products to remain competitive.

Notably, the DoJ obtained numerous seemingly damning internal Google emails and presentations suggesting that the company was fully aware of the advantage it would gain through the DoubleClick grab and how it would impact competitors.

For instance, in 2009, Google’s former president of global display advertising, David Rosenblatt, said in an email that Google’s control of the ad market would be akin to owning both Goldman Sachs and the New York Stock Exchange. “If we execute …we’ll be able to crush other networks, and that’s our goal,” he wrote.

Meanwhile, current and former Google executives and managers have been caught contradicting themselves when presented with such emails, brushing them off or attempting to talk their way around them.

For its part, Google argued that the government is focusing on just a narrow sliver of the advertising market (that is, banner ads at the top and sides of web pages). In an opening slide deck, it said that the ad technology industry is “intensely competitive, with new entrants all the time.” The company claimed that there is “no monopoly power,” and that its share in a “two-sided market” has decreased even as the company’s revenue has increased.

Further, Google is arguing that sellers and buyers are free to choose multiple ad tech tools (and do); that it makes its products interoperable with those of its rivals; and that it has sought to create value for advertisers, publishers and users. In 2024, “this is the commercial reality,” the company said.

Google, which will soon have to begin its defense, is said to have earned $200 billion in 2023 alone through ad placement and sales.

The case will ultimately be decided by a judge (what’s known as a “bench trial.”) Google avoided a jury trial by making a roughly $2.3 million payment to the DoJ. The $2,289,751 check covers a portion of the damages sought by the plaintiffs, and ensures that a judge will make the final decision in the case. Google’s team of lawyers described it as a strategic decision that will help ensure a quicker resolution.

This is the second antitrust trial faced by Google in the last two years. Earlier this year, the company lost a case centered around its search business; Judge Amit Mehta ruled that the company had engaged in anticompetitive behavior to maintain its dominance, calling Google a “monopolist.” The penalties attached to that ruling are as yet unannounced.

At the beginning of the summer, I saw a reaction video on Tiktok where two people who worked as product owners in IT talked about their jobs and what they do during the day. It would have been completely undramatic if it hadn’t been for the fact they were both working in the bright sun, in swimwear, in a pool, with their laptops on the edge of the pool. 

The person who reacted to the clip was insane. “It’s people like you who ruin it for the rest of us,” he growled. “It’s stuff like this that forces us back to the offices.”

Recently, the debate about remote work and office presence has gained new momentum.

The above-mentioned video was posted around the same time there was talk of “quiet vacationing” — a new trend where younger employees in particular take furtive vacations to protect remote work. It’s just one in a series of similar “trends” that should probably be considered more as urban legends, but which nevertheless say something about the spirit of the times. This issue is starting to get hot again.

Ratio researcher Jonas Grafström recently made an appearance in Dagens Nyheter where he argued that working from home is equal to a salary increase of 10%. That, of course, immediately started discussions about differentiated pay between remote workers and those who work in the office. In short: are you prepared to accept a lower salary to work at home? 

And just this past week, Amazon decided to call back employees five days a week — something eight out of 10 business leaders in KPMG’s global CEO survey believe will become the norm again within three years.

All this despite the fact that other surveys have shown that demands to return to the office do not bolster profitability, but instead create conflicts and risk scaring away workers with needed skills, especially women and younger people.

You don’t have to go to extreme cases to see where the conflict lies; they’re clearly laid out in the report on office work the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce released earlier this month. That report says, among other things, that a third of workers think managers want employees in the office more than they are. (Half of the employees say they agree with management on what applies, while fully 75% of the managers agree with the employees.)

Among the findings: 52% of employees say they are more productive when they work from home and 37% work more there than when they are in the office. At the same time, 39% of managers feel working in the office has “a positive impact on employees’ careers” compared to working at home. And 19%, i.e. one in five managers, say that salary is positively affected by office presence.

The effect is clear: an average employee wants to work three days a week in the office, while managers want them there four days. The managers win, of course: today half of all civil servants in Stockholm County work in the office four days a week, a clear increase.

There are different conclusions one can draw. Mine are these: 

Physical workplaces and physical interaction are better than digital workspaces and meetings when it comes to creative tasks and social/cultural togetherness. I think, depending on what you work with, employees and managers are quite in agreement.

Leadership in the hybrid work models has not developed in the ways and at the pace required. Managers still have an excessive need for control, with no way to deal with this without trying to return to what was previously comfortable (and technical monitoring solutions are hardly the answer either).

Employees have probably not managed to convey to their bosses the positive aspects of home work — for the employer. It’s great that your life puzzle is easier and you can take power walks and do laundry, but how does that help the company? It’s no wonder that whispering about sneaky vacations is taking off.

And there’s an elephant in the room we should talk about — people really hate open office spaces and activity-based workplaces. 

Forty-six percent of respondents in the Chamber of Commerce survey say permanent workplaces in the office have become more important to them in recent years, and 45% of those between the ages of 18 and 35 would come in more often if they had better opportunities for undisturbed work.

Researcher Christina Bodin Danielsson calls open office landscapes a “sea of ​​slaves.”

“There is 20 years of research on how bad it is,” she tells Fastighetsnytt. “The research has clearly shown that cognitive ability drops by 30%.”

On top of that, there’s another aspect gnawing at me (and you’ll have to excuse me for getting a little dark). I think there is a driving force here that is psychological, almost existential, and which is not really about remote work per se, but which is manifested in that issue. Namely it’s our fear, as a society, to think about the pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic was only four years ago and it changed the world. And I’m not just talking about how “digitalization took enormous strides,” but about how we humans have changed. A whole generation has become adults in the shadow of the pandemic, and even those of us who were already adults were profoundly affected by changes that we now seem to prefer to ignore.

Increasingly, it feels like the pandemic didn’t happen, as if we’re actively erasing it from our collective memory. There is a kind of unprocessed trauma of a period that was so terrible and transformative that today we do our best to completely repress it all.

And the strong desire to go back to the way everything worked before, before the pandemic, is a symptom of this. 

Maybe that larger issue is also something it’s time we talk more about.

This column is taken from CS Veckobrev, a personal newsletter with reading tips, link tips and analysis sent directly from editor-in-chief Marcus Jerräng’s desk. Do you also want the newsletter on Fridays?  Sign up for a free subscription here.

Apple admins already know they’ll be required to enroll numerous iPhone 16 devices in the coming weeks as millions of users upgrade; they may also be more interested to learn Citrix can now deliver a macOS desktop session to any device.

That’s right, Citrix has rolled out high-performance remote access to Mac desktops via Citrix DaaS (Desktop as a Service). It means you can access a high-grade Mac from any device, wherever you are, and within the managed security of Citrix.

macOS for the rest of us (them)

“With millions of Windows, Linux, Web, and SaaS applications launched every month, it’s not often that we get to announce support for a new platform — today, we’re excited to announce that Citrix DaaS can now securely deliver macOS desktops to any device,” the company says.

As a result, users on any platform can access a high-performance Mac, and when they do, it is with the enterprise-grade security, observability, and management tools Citrix promises to provide. The service is available to support both on-premises and cloud-hosted Macs — in part, through an alliance with the erstwhile Mac-as-a-service progenitor, MacStadium.

The service makes it quick and easy to provision temporary or contract workers with access to an effectively managed Mac environment without needing to ship any hardware — reducing costs and increasing security.

Who is this for?

Citrix sees the provision of Mac-as-a-service as essential to enterprises, particularly for remote development, creative pros, and specialized application access and development. “If your organization uses specialized Mac applications, Citrix DaaS makes it easier than ever to deliver these applications to end users,” the company said. 

“Enterprise customers have been asking for a cloud-based Mac virtual desktop solution for years,” said Chris Chapman, CTO at MacStadium. “By partnering with Citrix, we’re proudly delivering a highly flexible, high-performance, and secure solution that meets the needs of businesses worldwide who rely on Macs for critical tasks.”

(When I spoke with Chapman last year, he was bullish on Apple’s prospects in the enterprise markets. “[iPhones and Macs] are becoming the de facto standard for laptop, desktop, and phone and you’re really starting to see it become pervasive. It starts with the consumer but has grown to pervade business and enterprises everywhere,” he said.)

Citrix VDA for macOS

Citrix VDA for macOS is available now for all Citrix DaaS customers. Features include Single Sign-On, an enhanced user experience with USB device redirection and HDX screen sharing, and enhanced video conferencing through webcam redirection. 

The solution supports macOS host devices using M1 or later chipsets and the latest three generations of macOS. Once it is installed on Macs (on premises or hosted, perhaps by MacStadium or AWS) the machines can be made available as a service to users. More information is available here.

Changing times

The introduction of this service would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. Things have changed, mostly because Apple has now grabbed — and continues to reach for — an ever-bigger slice of the enterprise market. As it does, incumbents in the industry are accepting that they must embrace change.

And scenarios such as the abhorrent economic damage caused by the Microsoft/Crowdstrike fiasco shouldn’t really be seen as building loyalty to the status quo. When was the last time Macs ever generated such a large-scale business disaster?

At the least, for businesses curious to explore Mac use, the service provides a managed solution to deploy macOS desktop access for executive teams who otherwise make run Windows or Linux. For some, the solution could act as a perfect gateway to explore a user-focused Mac experience — a chance to try before you buy, or at least offer up an employee choice scheme to enjoy all the productivity benefits these can unleash.

Please follow me on LinkedIn, Mastodon, or join me in the AppleHolic’s bar & grill group on MeWe.

The European Union risks becoming an artificial intelligence backwater thanks to a “fragmented and unpredictable” regulatory environment that is damaging the technology’s development.

That’s according to a blunt open letter and newspaper advertisement signed by 49 executives, researchers and industry organizations, notably including the CEOs of SAP, Spotify, and Ericsson.

But it is the appearance on the list of two other signatories — Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg and its chief AI scientist, Yann LeCun — that frame the whole communication, which appears to have been Meta’s idea.

“We are a group of companies, researchers and institutions integral to Europe and working to serve hundreds of millions of Europeans,” opened the letter, before getting to the meat of its complaint.  

“If companies and institutions are going to invest tens of billions of euros to build Generative AI for European citizens, they require clear rules, consistently applied, enabling the use of European data,” it said.

Unfortunately, it continued, “in recent times, regulatory decision making has become fragmented and unpredictable, while interventions by the European Data Protection Authorities have created huge uncertainty about what kinds of data can be used to train AI models.”

The EU thinks it is protecting citizens from the dangers of AI development when what it is really doing is sowing chaos by layering different regulations on top of one another, it seems to be suggesting.

This centers around two pieces of legislation; the EU’s centrepiece AI Act, which recently came into effect, and 2018’s GDPR, which enforces controls around data privacy.

The former isn’t mentioned while the latter, GDPR, is referred to only in passing. The core of the complaint, then, is really the general one that the application of these rules, however well-intentioned and carefully drafted, is hurting tech companies trying to do great things with AI.

Often the complaint with AI is that there are too few rules and that by the time the world wakes up to this it will be years down the line and too late to head off the worst excesses.

This letter takes the opposite view. There are too many of the wrong sort of rules that don’t understand how AI works and are therefore hampering the sector in very specific ways.

Getting Meta

In June, Meta told its users it planned to use their Facebook and Instagram data to train its AI models, a controversial move that received pushback from regulators in the EU and UK as well as GDPR complaints from privacy organizations. The company has since modified and restarted its AI data program in the UK but has not been able to do so in the EU.

That restrictive regulation in the EU is likely the context for this latest letter. Although signed by multiple companies, the letter bears the fingerprints of Meta, which hosted the letter on its servers (as outlined in its privacy policy), and paid for the corresponding advertisement in the Financial Times newspaper

The text of the letter also references Facebook’s Llama large language model (LLM): “Frontier-level open models like Llama — based on text or multi-modal — can turbocharge productivity, drive scientific research, and add hundreds of billions of euros to the European economy.”

However, it warns,  “Without them, the development of AI will happen elsewhere — depriving Europeans of the technological advances enjoyed in the US, China and India.”

This, together with its hosting, implies that the letter was drafted by Meta with the approval of the other signatories. Inevitably, this has generated cynicism that the apparently open letter is really a thinly disguised PR campaign by Meta in its showdown with the EU.

In support of the letter, Meta’s president of global affairs, Nick Clegg, tweeted: “Today, dozens of leading European companies, researchers, and developers are calling on the EU to adopt a simplified approach to data regulation, or risk being left behind on AI innovation. http://EUneedsAI.com.”

His message received short shrift from Robert Maciejko, US-based co-founder of the INSEAD AI community, and a strident critic of Meta’s approach.

 “Really sad that you are part of this Orwellian doublespeak. Translated to English: Mark Zuckerberg wants the right to use YOUR data and property for his own gain forever, without asking or compensating you. And by ‘you,’ I mean everyone in the world – individuals, companies, brands, countries, etc. If his reproductions end up replacing your work, that’s your problem, not his,” Maciejko responded on X.

The counterargument to the letter is that far from making life harder for AI developers, regulations such as the EU AI Act offer a firm footing for organizations to make decisions going forward. In other regions, much of this remains up in the air.

None of this should obscure the concern felt by other signatories to the letter, however. But exactly how deep this runs is hard to tell. Computerworld contacted several of the letter’s signatories, receiving only one response, from SAP.

 “SAP encourages policymakers to adopt a risk-based, outcome-oriented approach to AI policy and develop a legal framework that builds on existing laws and avoids duplicating or creating any conflicting requirements. SAP’s ethos is deeply rooted in European values, and our focus is to help close the innovation gap in Europe in a responsible way that safeguards citizens’ wellbeing.”

This steers clear of directly criticising current EU AI regulations or appearing to side with the argument that private companies should be given free rein.

As a sign off, the open letter offers a way for organizations or individuals who agree with its contents to add their signatures to “join us in calling for AI regulatory certainty in the European Union” by filling in a form that sends their details to Meta.

It’s not clear how these ‘signatures’ will be verified.

Disney will reportedly end its use of Slack for internal employee communications and migrate to Microsoft Teams after a hacking group stole and leaked more than a terabyte of corporate data.  

Disney CFO Hugh Johnson announced plans to move away from Slack in a memo to staff earlier this week, according to a report Wednesday by Oliver Darcy in the “Status” newsletter. The company now plans to complete the migration during the second quarter of 2025. 

Disney will move employees onto Microsoft’s rival collaboration application, Teams, according to a Business Insider report —  a switch that is apparently unpopular with some Disney employees.

A group called “Nullbulge” published a 1.1 TB file containing data taken from Disney’s internal Slack archive in July. This included 44 million messages between Disney employees, 18,800 spreadsheets and at least 13,000 PDFs, according to a Wall Street Journal report earlier this month. Information posted publicly included details on Disney’s financial status and strategy, as well as personally identifiable information on some staffers and customers. 

The breach apparently occurred after a computer belonging to software development manager at Disney was compromised. Data was then stolen from public and private Slack channels, though private messages were unaffected, according to the Journal. 

Slack is owned by business software vendor Salesforce following a $28 billion acquisition in 2020. At the company’s Dreamforce event this week, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff highlighted Disney’s continued use of Salesforce products across its operations, including by Disney retail workers and customer service staff. 

Benioff also commented on Disney’s decision to drop Slack during a Bloomberg interview on Thursday.  

“Our security is rock-solid,” said Benioff. “This is really important. Also, there’s no finish line when it comes to security. But companies have to also take the right measures to prevent phishing attacks and to lockdown their employees from social engineering. So, we can do our part, but our customers also have to do their part —  that’s extremely important.”

More Slack news:

• With the arrival of AI, Slack adds a new chapter to its story
• Slack wants to become the ‘long-term memory’ for organizations
• Slack opens up to third-party AI ‘agents’

The iPhone has come a long way since its arrival in 2007. Here’s our look at every iPhone that Apple has released since the original iconic iPhone arrived in 2007. 

Every iPhone model from 2007 to 2023

• The original iPhone (2007)
• The iPhone 3G (2008)
• The iPhone 3GS (2009)
• The iPhone 4 (2010)
• The iPhone 4S (2011)
• The iPhone 5 (2012)
• The iPhone 5s and 5c (2013)
• The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus (2014)
• The iPhone 6s and 6s Plus (2015)
• The iPhone 7 and 7 Plus (2016)
• The iPhone 8 and 8 Plus (2017)
• The iPhone X (2017)
• The iPhone Xr (2018)
• The iPhone Xs and Xs Max (2018)
• The iPhone 11 (2019)
• The iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max (2019)
• The iPhone 12 and 12 mini (2020)
• The iPhone 12 Pro and Pro Max (2020)
• The iPhone 13 and 13 mini (2021)
• The iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max (2021)
• The iPhone 14 and 14 Plus (2022)
• The iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max (2022)
• The iPhone 15 and 15 Plus (2023)
• The iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max (2023)

First iPhone loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s first iPhone arrived in June 2007.

After months of rumors and speculation, Apple CEO Steve Jobs unveiled the first iPhone on Jan. 9, 2007. The device, which didn’t actually go on sale until June, started at $499 for a 4GB model, $599 for the 8GB version (with a two-year contract). It offered a 3.5-in. screen, a 2-megapixel camera and won plaudits for the then-new multitouch features. Critics, however, said the phone was too expensive to do well in the market. (See iPhone launch story.)

iPhone 3G loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 3G arrived in July 2008

On June 9, 2008, a year after the original iPhone went on sale, Apple rolled out its successor, the iPhone 3G. The new model could connect to faster 3G-based networks, included built-in GPS, offered more storage and was cheaper. Selling for $199 for the 8GB model, $299 for the 16GB version, the iPhone 3G was available on July 11, and offered something called location services. “Location services is going to be a really big deal on the iPhone,” said CEO Steve Jobs. “It’s going to explode.” (See launch story.)

iPhone 3GS loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 3Gs arrived in June 2009.

Again at WWDC, Apple’s Steve Jobs announced the next iPhone, a faster version called the iPhone 3GS. Although the form factor was unchanged from the previous version, the new iPhone was twice as fast as its predecessor and ran iPhone 3.0 (an early version of iOS 8, due out later this month). The 32GB iPhone 3G S sold for $299; a 16GB model went for $199. An 8GB iPhone 3G was also offered for $99. The iPhone 3GS was available June 19, 2009. (See launch story.)

iPhone 4 loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 4 arrived in June 2010.

The redesigned iPhone 4 arrived on June 7, 2010 in tandem with the newly-renamed iOS 4, and marked the arrival of FaceTime video chat. Prices remained unchanged: $199 for a 16GB model and $299 for the 32GB version. It went on sale on June 24, and heralded the arrival of the first high-resolution “Retina” screen. “Once you use a Retina Display, you can’t go back,” said Steve Jobs. (See launch story.)

iPhone 4S loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 4S arrived in October 2011.

In a change of pace, Apple unveiled the iPhone 4S on Oct. 4, 2011, a few weeks after Steve Jobs stepped down because of health issues. New CEO Tim Cook talked up the new phone’s dual-core processor (the same used in the iPad 2), and said the 4S would go on sale Oct. 14. In addition to the usual 16GB and 32GB models, Apple also unveiled a 64GB version that sold for $399. (See launch story.)

iPhone 5 loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 5 arrived in September 2012.

The iPhone 5, the first version to have a 4-in. screen, arrived on Sept. 12, 2012, as CEO Tim Cook touted the faster, slimmer upgrade to the iPhone 4S during a 90-minute presentation in San Francisco. “This is the biggest thing to happen to iPhone since the [original] iPhone,” he said, referring to the first-gen smartphone Steve Jobs had launched in 2007. The iPhone 5 hit the streets on Sept. 21; prices for the 16GB, 32GB and 64GB models were unchanged. (See launch story.)

iPhone 5S and 5C loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 5s and 5c arrived in September 2013.

On Sept. 10, 2013, Apple CEO Tim Cook rolled out not one, but two iPhones: the upscale iPhone 5S (now in gold, in addition to the usual white and black), and the colorful, less-expensive iPhone 5C. (The iPhone 5C was basically a reskinned iPhone 5.) The iPhone 5S got a faster, 64-bit A7 SoC (system on a chip), Touch ID, and a new motion data processor touted as the foundation for a new wave of health and fitness apps. The iPhone 5C started at $99 for a $16GB model; the iPhone 5S started at $199 for the same amount of storage. Both went on sale Sept. 20. (See launch story.)

iPhone 6 and 6 Plus loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 6 and 6 Plus arrived in September 2014.

For the second year in a row, Apple unveiled two iPhones in 2014: the iPhone 6, which has a 4.7-in. screen, and the iPhone 6 Plus, with a 5.5-in. screen. Both iPhones sported new A8 processors that were faster and more efficient than the previous year’s models. Both also had upgraded cameras and were NFC-ready for access to the new Apple Pay network that rolled out in October. Although the iPhone 6 was priced the same as 2013’s iPhone 5S, the Plus model was $100 more. (See launch story.)

iPhone 6S and 6S Plus loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 6s and 6s Plus arrived in September 2015.

Apple’s iPhone 6S and 6S Plus represented meaty upgrades to the 2014 models on which they were based. The 6S and 6S plus got new force touch technology called 3D Touch, as well as a beefed up 12-megapixel iSight camera that shot 4K video. (The 5-megapixel FaceTime camera was also new, and was designed to take better selfies.) Both phones ran on a faster A9 chip, and came in a new color for 2015: rose gold. (See launch story.)

iPhone 7 and 7 Plus loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 7 and 7 Plus were released in September 2016.

The iPhone 7 and 7 Plus looked much like the 2015 models, with three major exceptions: Apple eliminated the audio jack, changed the home button into a haptic-based virtual button, and added a dual-camera setup in the 7S. The loss of the audio jack, a somewhat controversial move, meant users had to rely on the Apple-supplied earbuds or use their old headphones with the included adapter. Both phones ran on a quad-core A10 Fusion chip, and came in two new colors: Black (a matte-finish charcoal color) and the super shiny Jet Black. (See launch story launch story.)

iPhone 8/8 Plus loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 8 and 8 Plus were released in September 2017.

Apple introduced the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus with a new glass and aluminium enclosure, Retina HD display, A11 Bionic Chip, and wireless charging on Sept. 12, 2017. The front and back glass enclosure, which Apple said was the most durable glass ever in a smartphone, was reminiscent of the design of the iPhone 4 and 4s. True Tone technology adjusted the white balance of the display to match the surrounding light. Redesigned stereo speakers were 25% louder and delivered deeper bass.

Apple called the A11 Bionic chip “the most powerful and smartest chip ever in a smartphone.” It featured a six-core CPU with two performance cores and four efficiency cores, which were 25% and 70% faster than the A10 Fusion chip, respectively. The new iPhones included an Apple-designed GPU that delivered up to 30% faster graphics than in 2016’s iPhone 7.

Each model featured an improved 12-megapixel camera with a larger (and faster) sensor, a new color filter, deeper pixels, and capabilities for 4K video up to 60fps and 1080p slo-mo up to 240fps. ARKit in iOS 11 allowed developers to create AR games and apps offering immersive and fluid experiences. Color variations included space gray, silver, and a new version of gold.

iPhone X loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone X arrived in November 2017.

To commemorate a decade of iPhones, Apple ended its September event with “one more thing,” the iPhone X (“ten”). Starting at $999 for 64GB and $1,149 for 256GB, it was Apple’s most expensive iPhone to date. It included a redesigned glass and stainless steel enclosure, wireless charging, and dual cameras. Its flagship feature was an edge-to-edge “Super Retina display” — a 5.8-in. OLED display that supports Dolby Vision and HDR 10. It had a pixel resolution of 458ppi, a 1 million-to-1 contrast ratio, and True Tone.

Touch ID and the Home button were removed in favor of a new biometric security feature: Face ID. Face ID uses a TrueDepth camera system made up of a dot projector, infrared camera and flood illuminator. The A11 Bionic chip works in tandem with advanced depth-sensing technologies to map and recognize a user’s face to securely unlock the iPhone or make a transaction with Apple Pay. Face ID only works when a user looks at the iPhone X directly and is designed to prevent spoofing by photos and masks.

The 7-megapixel TrueDepth front-facing camera that enables Face ID also included auto image stabilization and delivered Portrait mode for better selfies with a depth-of-field effect. The TrueDepth camera also could animate emoji, which Apple playfully calls Animoji. The dual 12-megapixel rear camera included dual optical image stabilization, and an improved f/2.4 aperature on the telephoto lens.

According to Apple, the A11 Bionic neural engine performed up to 600 billion operations per second and was designed for specific machine learning algorithms, enabling Face ID, Animoji, and other features. Colors included silver and space gray.

iPhone Xr loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone Xr arrived in October 2018.

The Xr had an aluminum-and-glass design in six finishes, with improved water resistance and a 6.1-in. “Liquid Retina” display. Available in 64GB, 128GB and 256GB models and starting at $749, it featured Apple’s A12 Bionic Chip with second-generation Neural Engine — the first 7-nanometer chip in a smartphone.

Portrait mode with depth control was available on the TrueDepth camera for selfies, which included support for Memoji and face tracking for Face ID authentication, while the 12-megapixel camera with an f/1.8-aperture wide-angle lens featured a new sensor and improved software algorithms for faster focusing and enhanced portraiture with depth control. Established iPhone gestures were supported, and haptic touch controls could be used to instantly launch the camera or flashlight from the home screen.

iPhone Xs and Xs Max loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone Xs and Xs Max arrived in September 2018.

Featuring 5.8- and 6.5-in. all-screen designs and improved scratch- and water-resistance, Apple’s iPhone Xs and Xs Max both offered Super Retina OLED displays that supported Dolby Vision and HDR10 and had iOS system-wide color management; the Xs Max had the largest iPhone display to date, with more than 3 million pixels, and the biggest battery — promising up to an hour and a half more battery life than the iPhone X.

The 12-megapixel dual-camera system offered advanced depth segmentation in Portrait mode with the ability to adjust depth of field both in preview and post-capture for precise control in portrait creation; the system allowed for faster face tracking for Face ID, Memoji, and third-party ARKit apps. Low-light performance and image stabilization were enhanced for both still photography and video capture, in addition to an extended dynamic range for better highlight and shadow detail. Four built-in mics could record stereo sound.

These models were the first to include Apple’s A12 Bionic Chip with second-generation Neural Engine. The chip design was capable of completing up to 5 trillion operations per second (compared with 600 billion in its predecessor). Models in 64GB, 256GB and 512GB configurations started at $999 and $1,099 for the Xs and Xs Max, respectively.

iPhone 11 loading="lazy" width="400px">

The iPhone 11 arrived in September 2019.

The iPhone 11, which succeeded 2018’s iPhone XR, got a $50 price cut (to $699), a new color (purple), a redesigned two-camera system, and a number of under-the-hood technology upgrades. The screen is a 6.1-in. Liquid Retina HD display, storage comes in 64GB, 128GB or 256GB options, and the phone uses Apple’s new A13 “Bionic” processor.

The camera system features an ultra-wide camera that captures more than four times the scenery and 4K video at up to 60 frames per second. It also features audio zoom, so if you zoom in on video, the audio does, too. The front-facing camera is a 12-megapixel model that allows for slow-motion selfies, which Apple dubbed “slofies.” The camera system also offers a new “night mode” for better images in low-light conditions. According to Apple, the A13 bionic chip allows for an extra hour of use compared to the 2018 models.

iPhone 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max loading="lazy" width="400px">

The iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max arrived in September 2019.

The iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max succeeded 2018’s iPhone XS and XS Max, and started at $999. The phones come in four colors, including a new one (Midnight Green), and feature a wholly new three-camera system and a variety of under-the-hood technology upgrades. The screen is either a 5.8-in. or 6.5-in. Super Retina XDR display, storage cames in 64GB, 128GB or 256GB options, and the phone uses Apple’s new A13 “Bionic” processor.

The camera system features an ultra-wide camera that captures more than four times the scenery and 4K video at up to 60 frames per second. It also features audio zoom, so if you zoom in on video, the audio does too. The front-facing camera is a 12-megapixel model that allows for slow-motion selfies, which Apple dubbed “slofies.” The camera system offers a “night mode” for better images in low-light conditions.

According to Apple, the A13 bionic chip and the third-generation Neural Engine run more efficiently, allowing for up to four or five hours of additional use compared to the previous year’s models.

iPhone 12 and 12 mini loading="lazy" width="400px">

The iPhone 12 and 12 mini arrived in October and November, 2020.

The iPhone 12 took over for the iPhone 11, as Apple expanded its OLED displays across its smartphone lineup and rolled out a new 5.4-in. iPhone mini. Prices started at $699 for the mini ($100 more for the larger iPhone 12), with storage options of 64GB, 128GB, and 256GB. The new Super Retina XDR displays are built with what Apple calls “Ceramic Shield” for four times better resistance to breaking if dropped.

All iPhone 12 models use the A14 Bionic chip and offered 5G networking — both the sub-6GHz and mmWave varieties. Both models offer a dual 12MP camera system with Ultra Wide and Wide cameras that include Night Mode for better photos in low-light conditions. 4K video recording can be done at 24 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 30 fps.

iPhone 12 Pro and 12 Pro Max loading="lazy" width="400px">

Apple’s iPhone 12 Pro and Pro Max arrived in October and November, 2020.

The iPhone 12 Pro got an even larger big brother with the 6.7-in. iPhone 12 Pro Max. Prices started at $999 for the iPhone 12 Pro ($100 more for the Pro Max), with storage options of 128GB, 256GB and 512GB. The Super Retina XDR OLED displays are built with what Apple calls “Ceramic Shield” for four times better resistance to breaking if dropped.

Both Pro models use the A14 Bionic chip and offered 5G networking — both the sub-6GHz and mmWave varieties. The three-lens Pro 12MP camera system includes either a 4X or 5X optical zoom range, Night Mode for better photos in low-light conditions, and LiDAR sensors for faster focus and improved AR/VR. 4K video recording can be done at 24 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps.

iPhone 13 and 13 mini loading="lazy" width="400px">

The iPhone 13 and 13 mini arrived in September 2021.

The iPhone 13 and 13 mini picked up where the previous year’s models left off: they have the same form factor and price range as in 2020, plus a new processor and better battery life. Prices started at $699 for the mini ($100 more for the larger iPhone 13), with storage options of 128GB (twice the base amount offered last year), 256GB, and 512GB. Both models sport Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays and run on the new A15 Bionic chip.

Both also feature a 12MP dual-camera system with Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, sensor‑shift optical image stabilization for sharper photos, and “cinematic mode” for video. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps. Both have larger batteries for up to 2.5 hours more battery life in the iPhone 13 (1.5 hours more in the mini).

iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max loading="lazy" width="400px">

The Apple iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max arrived in September 2021.

The iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max are virtually identical to their predecessors (though slightly thicker and heavier). They got Apple’s newest A15 bionic processor and delivered better battery life. Prices again started at $999 (for the iPhone 13 Pro) and $1099 (for the iPhone 13 Pro Max), with storage options ranging from 128GB to a whopping 1TB. Both models again use Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays, with the Pro models getting ProMotion screens for smoother on-screen graphics.

Both feature a 12MP triple-camera system with revamped Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, “cinematic mode” for video, and macro photography. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps. A larger battery means up to 2.5 hours more battery life in the iPhone 13 Pro Max (1.5 hours more in the 13 Pro).

iPhone 14 and 14 Plus loading="lazy" width="400px">

The Apple iPhone 14 and 14 Plus arrived in September and October 2022, respectively.

The iPhone 14 and new 14 Plus have the same form factor and price range as the previous year, with the larger Plus model replacing the discontinued iPhone 13 mini. Both use an updated version of the Bionic A15 processor — the same chip used in the 2021 models — and offer better battery life. Prices start at $799 for the iPhone 14 and $899 for the larger 14 Plus, with storage options of 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB.

Both models use Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays with the iPhone 14 having a 6.1-in. screen and the 14 Plus model sporting a 6.7-in. display. (Unlike the Pro models, these versions of the iPhone do not have an always-on display or any changes to the screen “notch.”) Both feature a 12MP dual-camera system with Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, sensor‑shift optical image stabilization, and cinematic and action modes for video. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps. Pre-orders began Sept. 7, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 16 (iPhone 14) and Oct. 7 (iPhone 14 Plus).

iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max loading="lazy" width="400px">

The Apple iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max arrived in September 2022.

The iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max look similar to last year’s models, but get noteworthy new features, including the new A16 processor and a more powerful 48MP rear camera system. Prices are unchanged from 2021, storage options range between 128GB and 1TB, and this year brings a new “Deep Purple” color as an option. Both models again use Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays, but this year get an always-on display. (The screen dims when not in use to save on battery life, but can display as much as 2000 nits of brightness outdoors.)

Both feature a 48MP triple-camera system with tweaked Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, and the same 3X optical zoom in/2X optical zoom out as last year. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps, HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps, and cinematic video stabilization is available in 4K, 1080p and 720p.) Gone this year are SIM cards, which Apple has replaced with eSIMs. Pre-orders began Sept. 7, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 16.

iPhone 15 and 15 Plus loading="lazy" width="400px">

The Apple iPhone 15 and 15 Plus were released in September 2023.

The iPhone 15 and new 15 Plus look much like their 2022 predecessors (with prices in the same range), but offer design tweaks that include an aluminum and color-infused glass combo and new colors. Both use the Bionic A16 processor — the same chip used in the 2022 Pro models — and get USB-C charging for the first time. Prices again start at $799 for the iPhone 15 and $899 for the larger 15 Plus, with storage options remaining unchanged at 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB.

Both models continue to feature Apple’s Super Retina XDR display; the iPhone 15 has a 6.1-in. screen, the 15 Plus model has a 6.7-in. display — and both get the Dynamic Island feature at the top of the screen for more interactivity with various apps. The iPhone 15 now features a revamped camera system that includes a 48-megapixel main camera, a 26 mm  ƒ/1.6 aperture, sensor‑shift optical image stabilization with support for super-high-resolution photos, and a 4x optical optical zoom range. Both models now get Roadside assistance via satellite through AAA.

Pre-orders begin Sept. 15, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 22.

iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max loading="lazy" width="400px">

The Apple iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max were released in September 2023.

The big change for the iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max this year involves a new Titanium-based design that cuts 19 grams of weight and allows for thinner bezels around  both models’ screens. Inside, both run Apple’s new A17 Pro processor (with 6 cores) and get a tweaked 48MP rear camera system. The main difference between the two camera systems: the Pro Max version gets a 12-megapixel 5x Telephoto feature at 120 mm with an ƒ/2.8 aperture; 3D sensor‑shift optical image stabilization and autofocus, and a new tetraprism design; the smaller Pro version features a 12-megapixel 3x Telephoto at 77 mm with an ƒ/2.8 aperture. Coming later this year on Pro models: the ability to capture spatial video for playback on Apple’s upcoming Vision Pro device.

For connectivity, the Pro models move to USB-C, with USB 3 support and Wi-Fi 6E for faster wireless speeds. Screen sizes remain the same as last year — 6.1-in. and 6.7-in. — but thinner bezels allow for a slightly smaller overall size. The mute button has been replaced with a programmable “Action” button similar to the one that debuted in 2022 on the Apple Watch Ultra. And Find My Friends gets more powerful “Precision Finding.” Storage options start at 128GB for the Pro model, 256GB for Pro Max version, and range up to 1TB.

As with the regular iPhone 15, pre-orders for the Pro models begin Sept. 15, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 22.

iPhone 16 and 16 Plus srcset="https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?quality=50&strip=all 2500w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=300%2C200&quality=50&strip=all 300w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=768%2C512&quality=50&strip=all 768w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=1024%2C683&quality=50&strip=all 1024w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=1536%2C1024&quality=50&strip=all 1536w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=2048%2C1366&quality=50&strip=all 2048w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=1240%2C826&quality=50&strip=all 1240w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=150%2C100&quality=50&strip=all 150w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=1045%2C697&quality=50&strip=all 1045w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=252%2C168&quality=50&strip=all 252w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=126%2C84&quality=50&strip=all 126w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=720%2C480&quality=50&strip=all 720w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=540%2C360&quality=50&strip=all 540w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-16pro.jpg?resize=375%2C250&quality=50&strip=all 375w" width="1024" height="683" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px">

Apple / Foundry

The iPhone 16 and 16 Plus look much like their 2023 predecessors (and they both start at the same prices). The big news is inside: both get Apple’s new A18 processor, a 3-nanometer chip the company says is designed for Apple Intelligence — the generative AI features that will roll out later this year with iOS 18.1. Apple also made changes on the outside, bringing the “Action button” from the Pro line-up and adding a new “Camera Control” button for easier photo and video shoots. Prices again start at $799 for the iPhone 16 ($100 more for the larger 16 Plus), with storage options the same as last year: 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB.

Both models feature Apple’s Super Retina XDR display; the iPhone 16 has a 6.1-in. screen, the 16 Plus has a 6.7-in. display — and both get an internal redesign that allows for a larger battery and longer battery life. Both models get a revamped camera system that includes a 48-megapixel main camera with a 2x optical telephoto capabilities and a new 12-megapixel Ultra Wide camera with autofocus for macro photography. Both models can now shoot spatial photos and video for playback on the Apple Vision Pro.

Pre-orders began Sept. 13, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 20.

iPhone 16 Pro and Pro Max srcset="https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?quality=50&strip=all 2500w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=300%2C200&quality=50&strip=all 300w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=768%2C512&quality=50&strip=all 768w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=1024%2C683&quality=50&strip=all 1024w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=1536%2C1024&quality=50&strip=all 1536w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=2048%2C1366&quality=50&strip=all 2048w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=1240%2C826&quality=50&strip=all 1240w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=150%2C100&quality=50&strip=all 150w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=1045%2C697&quality=50&strip=all 1045w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=252%2C168&quality=50&strip=all 252w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=126%2C84&quality=50&strip=all 126w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=720%2C480&quality=50&strip=all 720w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=540%2C360&quality=50&strip=all 540w, https://b2b-contenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/CW_Evolution_of_the_iPhone_3x2-2024-promax.jpg?resize=375%2C250&quality=50&strip=all 375w" width="1024" height="683" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px">

Apple / Foundry

The iPhone 16 Pro and Pro Max grew a little this year and now offer larger Super Retina XDR displays; the Pro model has a 6.3-in. screen, the Pro Max gets a 6.9-in display. Both also get Apple’s new “Camera Control” button for easier photo and video shoots. Inside, both rely on Apple’s new 3-nanometer A18 Pro processor (with a 16-core neural engine) designed for Apple Intelligence — the generative AI features slated to arrive later this year with iOS 18.1. There’s also an upgraded camera system with a new 48-megapixel Fusion camera that allows for 4K120 fps video recording in Dolby Vision and spatial photos for display on the Apple Vision Pro. 

Both devices now have four new studio-quality mics that allow users to modify sound afterit’s captured and to record Spatial audio for more immersive playback. Apple is also touting an internal redesign that allows for a bigger battery — and longer battery life. Storage options start at 128GB for the Pro model, 256GB for Pro Max version, and range up to 1TB. New for 2024 is a “Desert Titanium” color to go with Natural Titanium, White Titanium and Black Titanium.

As with the regular iPhone 16 line-up, pre-orders for the Pro models began Sept. 13, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 20.

During an earnings call in the summer of 2021, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg first publicly used the M-word. “In the coming years,” Zuck told investors, “I expect people will transition from seeing us primarily as a social media company to seeing us as a metaverse company.”

“Um, what?” said every cyberpunk sci-fi fan on Earth in unison. 

Until that moment, Neal Stephenson (who coined the word) described the “metaverse” in his 1992 science fiction novel “Snow Crash” this way: as a virtual reality (VR) platform controlled by wealthy leaders of powerful corporations that exacerbated social inequality and was so addictive that people spent all their time there, neglecting their real lives in the real world. 

The “metaverse” was a warning, not a business plan. 

Still, in October 2021, Zuckerberg announced that Meta would replace Facebook as the company’s name, and the “metaverse” would be its main focus henceforth.

His essential vision back then was a new internet anchored in VR. Just as today we shop, learn, and find entertainment on the internet, the “metaverse” version would do all those things in 3D environments, in which we would move around as avatars. Sure, elements of this VR world would be accessible via augmented reality (AR) and even phones, tablets, and PCs. But Meta’s essential belief was that the future is VR. 

Not so fast, said Apple

“AR is going to become really big,” Apple CEO Tim Cook said in 2016. “VR, I think, is not going to be that big compared to AR… and we will wonder… how we lived without it.” 

Back then, Apple was hard at work in its labs creating what it hoped would be the future of consumer technology — AR. And Meta was working on what it hoped would be the future of consumer technology — VR.

Apple envisioned business meetings, random social interactions, professional conferences, and family get-togethers as happening in person in the real world. Everyone would wear Apple glasses that displayed digital information based on the context of the interaction.

Meta envisioned business meetings, random social interactions, professional conferences, and family get-togethers happening in virtual spaces in the “metaverse,” with everyone wearing Meta goggles that immersed them in a believable 3D world.

Apple envisioned ordinary-looking eyeglasses. Meta envisioned big, bulky headsets. 

Based on these respective inclinations, something unpredictable happened. Meta released ordinary-looking eyeglasses, and Apple released big, bulky headsets. 

Specifically, a year ago, Meta replaced its lackluster and uninteresting Ray-Ban Stories glasses with Ray-Ban Meta glasses, which took off in popularity. They looked like regular Ray-Ban glasses, but contained high-quality microphones, speakers, and a camera. Best of all, they accessed AI via the camera, including (later) multimodal AI.

It’s likely that Meta was surprised by the success of Ray-Ban Meta glasses as a product and thrilled that Meta alone provided a compelling daily mobile use case for its AI. 

Then, in January, Apple shipped Apple Vision Pro. Let’s be very clear about what Apple Vision Pro hardware is — it’s VR hardware. It’s a big, heavy, bulky headset that delivers incredible visuals and features unique to Apple Vision Pro. But it’s VR delivering an AR experience. 

Apple has made a big point of emphasizing the categorization of Apple Vision Pro as spatial computing, not AR or VR. The spatial features are among the best things about Apple Vision Pro. The augmented reality feel of Apple Vision Pro is achieved through pass-through video. You don’t actually see the room you’re in; you see a video of the room. Others don’t actually see your eyes. They see an avatar of your eyes.

Apple required a lot of VR hardware to create AR and eventually wants to sell spatial computing AR glasses that look like ordinary eyeglasses. But that technology is a few years in the future, which is why Apple’s AR vision requires VR hardware. 

Meta, meanwhile, also seems super excited about augmented reality glasses — something like Ray-Ban Meta glasses, but with spatial-computing visuals. It seems less excited about VR, as evidenced by losses and cutbacks. Meta’s Reality Labs division has lost tens of billions of dollars and laid off thousands of employees in the past few years.

Enter Project Nazare

Instead of going big on the “metaverse,” Meta focuses more on AR and AI. 

Project Nazare is its first big hope in that space. Zuckerberg described this project as the company’s first attempt at creating true AR glasses. The device they’re working on sounds like Ray-Ban Meta glasses, plus holographic displays and sensors for mapping the physical environment for spatial computing (the placement of virtual objects in relation to the physical environment).

As with Apple Vision Pro, Nazare glasses would facilitate interaction with holographic avatars mapped to real people in real time, showing facial expressions, mouth movements, and hand gestures. 

Meta is focusing on a problem critics have drawn attention to with Apple Vision Pro, Microsoft Hololens, and Magic Leap: the narrow visual field. Nazare is reportedly working on a 200- to 220-degree field of holographic visuals. 

The company is also working on using multimodal AI through the camera to enable AI image recognition.

And that maps with Apple’s glasses

Meanwhile, Apple is reportedly focused on something similar. Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman reported that Apple is working on lightweight AR glasses that could be worn all day and could be launched as early as 2027 (but are more likely to arrive in 2028 or 2029). 

Both Apple and Meta face immense hurdles in reducing the size and cost of these glasses. Battery size and weight are an enormous issue, and the miniaturization of all components remains a major focus. 

But both companies are moving in the same direction. The disparate visions of the future each once had appear to no longer exist. 

Even though Apple’s current face computer is essentially VR hardware and Meta’s is essentially AR hardware (minus the light engine for holographic imagery), both companies appear to be well on their way to realizing what used to be Apple’s vision — everyday, all-day AR glasses that will one day replace the smartphone as our main device.

IBM has apparently begun layoffs of as many as 8,000 people — layoffs that were announced back in January. But those layoffs are avoiding the age-related criticisms of IBM’s past and are also too early to reflect the IBM-promised generative artificial intelligence (genAI) layoffs, according to Jason Andersen, a former IBM manager who today serves as VP/principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy.

Andersen said his overall take on the layoffs is that “it was a bit of a yawn,” given IBM’s January announcement and Big Blue’s recent workforce reduction efforts. “IBM has used this tactic of kind of quietly laying people off for many, many years,” said Andersen, who spent more than eight years as a senior product manager at IBM, leaving in 2008. He works with IBM today as an analyst.

The initial report of the layoffs came from a story in The Register and was reinforced in various discussion forums.

IBM spokesperson Sarah Minkel emailed a rather vague statement to Computerworld that seemed to confirm the layoffs: “Early this year, IBM disclosed a workforce rebalancing charge that would represent a very low single digit percentage of IBM’s global workforce, and we still expect to exit 2024 at roughly the same level of employment as we entered with.”

The Register did some quick math, based on IBM’s global employment numbers. “With about 288,000 employees worldwide at the end of 2023, the ‘very low single digit percentage’ possibilities for 2024 might be 1 percent (2,880 layoffs), 2 percent (5,760 layoffs), 3 percent (8,640 layoffs), or more,” the Register story noted. 

It also noted, “last year, CEO Arvind Krishna said IBM expected to replace around 7,800 jobs with AI, though no specific time frame was provided.”

Andersen said that the AI reference was to generative AI, and that it was far too early to have IBM layoffs due to that. “Is it genAI? I don’t buy it. it’s a little too far ahead now. Maybe two years from now,” he said. He estimated that such IBM genAI layoffs wouldn’t happen until late 2026.

Andersen couldn’t directly confirm that these are the layoffs that IBM talked about in January, but he has seen anecdotal evidence that the layoffs have happened. 

Over the last few months, he said, “I have seen twice as many people leaving IBM for whatever reason than the previous six months. And IBM is not the only one doing this.”

Andersen stressed that he seriously doubts that IBM is doing anything that will get them into trouble with age- or gender-related issues. 

“IBM doesn’t necessarily look at it demographically. They look at it functionally in terms of individual contributors in a group versus managers — explicitly, because IBM has been called out on this this so many times, there are a number of reviews to prevent any type of -ism,” Andersen said. Sometimes he has seen the company go in the opposite direction. “Maybe this person is a poor performer, but they may get a second chance because it might possibly be seen as ageism or sexism.”

He sees many of the layoffs as related to cloud cutbacks, as enterprises rebalance their on-prem versus cloud environments. Many enterprises, he said, went too far into the cloud at the beginning of the pandemic in 2020.

That’s where the definition of ‘AI’ comes into play. Today, most AI workforce reduction references involve genAI. But he does see some of the cloud reductions being driven by greater efficiencies due to IT automation and automated IT operations. Given that much of the sophisticated automation at IBM is leveraging other forms of AI, most likely machine learning, one could say that AI is a little bit involved in these layoffs — just not genAI.

Symbol Zero CEO Rafael Brown said that IBM was one of many companies that over hired during the start of the pandemic, and this is a correction. Back in 2020, IBM “anticipated, they made some guesses, and they were wrong. If they hired slower, as Apple did, they wouldn’t be cutting back as much as they are,” Brown said.

Brown said that another factor that is playing into this situation is the return to offices movement, and the move away from remote sites including home offices. 

“Large tech companies are boiling the frog on return to work,” Brown said, “and creating a culture of fear that if you don’t come back in, you’re going to get laid off.”

Some of this may also be manipulative, he said, suggesting that CEOs are hoping that a demand for five days in the office will encourage people to quit, which is a lot cheaper than having to lay them off. 

“My kudos for Nvidia that they haven’t pushed people back into offices,” Brown said, adding that Nvidia is hiring away a lot of the people who were pushed into return to the office at other high tech companies. But, ironically, he said, Nvidia is finding that a lot of the managers they are hiring are themselves insisting on workers returning to the office.

The UN Secretary-General’s Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence has released its final report — “Governing AI for Humanity” — detailing how AI can best serve humanity, especially people who are often underrepresented and left out of such discussions.

The report builds on months of extensive global consultation with more than 2,000 participants and the publication of a provisional report last December. The group behind the report is described as the world’s first and most representative collection of experts capable of reflecting humanity’s aspirations for AI.

The final report sets out a plan to manage AI-related risks and share the technology’s potential globally. Among other things, it calls for the foundation to be laid for the first globally inclusive and distributed architecture for AI governance based on international cooperation. It also proposes seven recommendations to address shortcomings in current AI governance and calls on all governments and stakeholders to cooperate in overseeing AI to promote the development and protection of all human rights.

Beginning with the new year, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy wants his employees back in the office five days a week, returning to an office routine that was common before the COVID-19 pandemic upended the workplace.

The backlash from employees was nearly instantaneous, as they berated Jassy — and the return-to-work policy — and vowed to quit. Others demanded raises in exchange for in-office work requirements.

Industry analysts were not surprised by the reaction, and said back-to-office mandates more often than not have the exact opposite effect as intended.

According to the employee memo released this week, Jassy believes being back in the office will help boost employee training, bolster collaboration, and strengthen culture.

“If anything, the last 15 months we’ve been back in the office at least three days a week has strengthened our conviction about the benefits,” Jassy wrote. “We understand that some of our teammates may have set up their personal lives in such a way that returning to the office consistently five days per week will require some adjustments. To help ensure a smooth transition, we’re going to make this new expectation active on January 2, 2025.”

In fact, a study performed in May indicated mandatory return-to-office (RTO) policies could lead to higher quit rates compared with companies that allow remote or hybrid work. The study by the University of Michigan and University of Chicago found that three large US tech companies — Microsoft, Apple and SpaceX — saw substantially increased attrition, particularly among more senior personnel, when they implemented strict return-to-work policies in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Forcing employees to quit, however, might be exactly what Amazon wants, according to J. P. Gownder, a vice president analyst with Forrester Research. “There is a chance that Amazon is hoping to induce a level of voluntary attrition with this move in lieu of layoffs. Unfortunately, the best talent often has choices, and most don’t want to work in an office five days a week,” Gownder said.

In his memo, Jassy also outlined a plan to reduce managers, saying that “will remove layers and flatten organizations more than they are today. If we do this work well, it will increase our teammates’ ability to move fast, clarify and invigorate their sense of ownership,” he wrote.

Amazon’s mandate puts the company in the minority, according to recent research. Among employees with jobs that can be done remotely, 43% work hybrid, 22% work fully remote, and 35% work in the office full time.

“Amazon’s decision may just compromise its promise to be ‘Earth’s best employer,’” said Gownder. “The macro data shows that pre-pandemic nostalgia is not a post-pandemic reality. Other companies should not follow suit.”

Abandoning hybrid work policies will negatively affect employee experience — particularly recruiting, retention, and diversity — impacting productivity and, potentially, the bottom line, according to Gownder.

A Gartner Research study released this month showed 47% of HR leaders are concerned about employee resentment toward their organization. They see change fatigue (70%), return to office mandates (62%), and lack of career growth opportunities (58%) as the biggest drivers of employee unhappiness. Two other Gartner studies this year showed high-performing employees, women and millennials would be the greatest flight risks when strict RTO policies are implemented. (One in three executives handed a RTO mandate would quit, one of those studies showed.)

“Mandated on-site requirements can carry very steep costs for talent attraction and retention. This is especially true for high-performers, women and millennials — three employee segments who greatly value flexibility,” said Caitlin Duffy, a director in the Gartner HR practice. “Often, these costs far outweigh the moderate benefits to employee engagement and effort.”

Instead of office mandates, flexible hybrid work policies are the gold standard, research has shown. According to a Stanford University study, only 17.6% of employees who can work from home say they want to work in an office five days a week.

A June study by McKinsey & Co. showed organizations where employees work in multiple locations (at home, in the office, or at client sites) are more likely to see 10% or greater revenue growth than companies where employees work from a single location.

Another McKinsey study revealed that employees consistently point to greater productivity and reduced burnout as primary benefits of flexible work policies. Flexibility is especially important to women, who report having more focused time to work when working remotely, the study showed.

William Hatcher, a professor of public administration and chair of social sciences at Augusta University in Georgia, said research is clear that “individuals are more productive at their jobs when they have more control over their schedules.”

“Workplaces that empower employees with flexible scheduling policies and teleworking options are more productive, and these organizations are also less likely to have employees suffering from burnout,” Hatcher said. “However, many organizations still follow a dated view of management based on the idea that they must see employees to supervise their work. This view is focused on monitoring employees and not motivating them. Amazon is focusing more on monitoring by ending remote work. Successful workplace policies for creative professionals focus on motivation.”

Across industries, employees are also doing the bare minimum to meet in-office mandates. For example, some are simply showing up long enough to get credit for being there before returning home to work — a practice known as “coffee badging.

To determine what stops people from coming into the office, workplace management software maker Robin Powered surveyed nearly 600 full-time employees at companies that had flexible work policies. The survey revealed that while RTO mandates are everywhere, they aren’t sticking. Forty-five percent of those surveyed said their company’s mandates required them to be in the office at least four days a week, yet only 24% adhered to the policy.

In fact, 46% of respondents said that the reason they don’t come into the office is because they believe they are more productive with their at-home work setup. They frequently cited feeling more productive at home (71%) and not having the right resources at their desk (76%).

Amazon’s planned move to five days a week flies in the face of a positive employee experience, according to Gownder. “Consistently, studies show that hybrid [work] drives higher levels of employee productivity,” Gownder said. “Offices have their own distractions, plus onerous commutes. Employees do best at individual level work when they can customize their environments and schedules.

Employee experience, Gownder pointed out, is a central driver of productivity, employee retention, and business results. “And when employees feel valued, have purpose, possess a degree of autonomy, and feel trusted, they perform better,” he said.

“Offices, by comparison, are great for collaborative exercises that involve brainstorming, team bonding, and certain types of decision-making,” he said. “However, these collaborations can usually be accomplished in a couple of days per week.”

Europe’s bureaucrats continue to do their best to ensure Apple is forced to sell the world’s worst operating system, announcing plans to force Apple to open up its systems even more than it already has.

In a triumph of bureaucratic doublespeak, the European Union doesn’t argue that it’s attempting to force the issue. Instead, it says it wants to “assist” Apple. “Today, the European Commission has started two specification proceedings to assist Apple in complying with its interoperability obligations under the Digital Markets Act (‘DMA’),” the group says. Then it goes on to insist: “Under the DMA, Apple must provide free and effective interoperability to third party developers and businesses with hardware and software features controlled by Apple’s operating systems iOS and iPadOS, designated under the DMA.”

Bureaucrats versus innovators

To some extent, this might not represent too big a change. The EU has been actively pursuing its edicts against the company; now, the DMA gives regulators new power in the form of specification proceedings. Under the DMA, these proceedings are prescriptive. 

What that means is Europe might, “adopt a decision specifying the measures a gatekeeper has to implement to ensure effective compliance with substantive DMA obligations, such as the interoperability obligation.” 

In other words, the rules effectively give regulators the power to tell Apple what it must do to comply with the DMA or face huge fines. 

What the Commission is looking at

The latest news is that the European Commission has launched two proceedings against Apple:

• The first proceeding focuses on “iOS connectivity features and functionalities, predominantly used for and by connected devices.” (That is everything from watches to headsets.) These devices depend on being interoperable with smartphones and their operating systems. “The Commission intends to specify how Apple will provide effective interoperability with functionalities such as notifications, device pairing and connectivity.”
• The second proceeding focuses on the process Apple has set up to address interoperability requests submitted by developers and third parties. Europe wants that process to be “transparent, timely, and fair.” It wants this so all developers have an “effective and predictable path to interoperability and are enabled to innovate.”

(Critics like me may think this means non tech-savvy bureaucrats have suddenly been elevated to the status product designers, with all the lack of nuance that almost certainly entails. Will future operating systems sold in Europe all suffer from the fate of being designed by committee?)

There may be more clarity

If there is anything good in Europe’s latest wheeze, it is clarity. In a sense, it formalizes ongoing dialog between Europe and Apple regarding DMA compliance. 

Margrethe Vestager, executive vice president in charge of competition policy, said: “This process will provide clarity for developers, third parties and Apple. We will continue our dialogue with Apple and consult third parties to ensure that the proposed measures work in practice and meet the needs of businesses.”

While that may sound a little like escaping gas, it hopefully means Apple and Europe will be able to clarify the rules around the DMA enough to ensure new products and services launch in Europe in ways that comply with the law. 

This clarity might also enable Apple Intelligence to launch in Europe, hopefully without that launch becoming a green light to attack on personal privacy. (In this regard, the DMA may conflict fatally with GDPR.)

What does Europe want?

What Europe wants we will learn in a few months’ time, when the Commission tells Apple what it must do to comply. Meanwhile, of course, Europe reserves the right to levy fines against the company. 

These fresh demands come in the context of Apple’s continued attempts to tweak its operating systems and business models to meet Europe’s existing demands. While that effort remains a work in progress, as illustrated by the company’s recent changes in how it handles browser choice in Europe, it is ongoing. As I understand it, Apple is working as closely as it can with European regulators to find some way toward compliance that still leaves customer privacy and security intact — while still giving it a viable business in the EU.

Is Europe a worthwhile iPhones market?

The need to ensure Apple’s business is viable might turn out to be a very big deal. Europe has already fined Apple billions to protect the interests of European firm Spotify. It has clawed back (as Apple sees it) $14 billion in tax money. And yet, at least according to John Gruber, the EU contributes perhaps 7% of Apple’s global revenue. 

This opens up new questions. 

• At what point will it make sense for Apple to cease sales of iPhones and iPads in the region, rather than risk more of these eye-watering fines? 
• If Apple does that, how is the Commission representing European consumer rights by making the cost of Apple doing business there higher than the consequences of withdrawing from the region? 
• What impact would such an exit have on the multi-billion dollar app economy across the region, particularly as Apple continues to invest in fast-emerging markets elsewhere on Terra Ferma. 
• In 2020, Apple supported more than 1.8 million jobs in Europe and in the five years prior to that it spent over 65 billion Euros with suppliers and partners across the region. What would be the economic consequences of Apple focusing outside the bloc? 

With all this in mind, I can’t help but think that perhaps the real gatekeeper harming consumer interests in this case is actually Vestager. 

Please follow me on Mastodon, or join me in the AppleHolic’s bar & grill and Apple Discussions groups on MeWe.

The United Nations’ High-Level Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence, created last year to address AI governance issues, has made seven recommendations to address the risks with this technology in its first report, just published.

The document, entitled Governing AI for humanity, highlights the importance of creating a global dialogue — the European Union is one of the few to have acted with its EU AI Act — by building a global fund that addresses differences in capacity and collaboration and exchange standards.

And it warns of the dangers that AI can pose if it can be controlled in the market by only a few multinationals. “There is a risk that technology could be imposed on people without them having a say in how it is used,” it says.

Google landed a major antitrust victory on Wednesday as the EU’s Court of Justice annulled a $1.7 billion (€1.49 billion) antitrust fine against the search giant.

The EU court stated that the European Commission failed to fully consider all relevant factors regarding the duration of the abusive contract clauses. The court, however, upheld most of the Commission’s findings.

“By today’s judgment, the General Court, after having upheld the majority of the Commission’s findings, concludes that that institution committed errors in its assessment of the duration of the clauses at issue, as well as of the market covered by them in 2016,” the court said in a statement.

The European Commission, in its 2019 ruling, had accused Google of exploiting its market dominance by restricting websites from using ad brokers other than its AdSense service for search ads.

This would come as a relief for Google, which is facing other legal challenges. Just last week, the European Data Protection Commission (DPC) opened an inquiry into its use of personal data.

In August, a US District Court ruled that the tech giant is a monopoly, accusing it of leveraging its dominance in the online search market to hinder competition. A separate trial centered on its advertising business also commenced this month.

Meanwhile, in a separate ruling, Qualcomm failed to get the EU penalty imposed on it overturned, highlighting contrasting outcomes for the two major players in their ongoing regulatory battles with European authorities.

Implications for Big Tech

The Google ruling could influence future antitrust investigations and enforcement in the region, potentially leading to a more balanced and competitive environment, though the long-term impact remains uncertain.

“In this instance, the ruling is favorable for Big Tech as it signals a shift toward a more balanced approach to antitrust enforcement, taking into account both market impact and consumer welfare,” said Thomas George, president of Cybermedia Research. “This victory could foster a competitive environment where the constant threat of sanctions does not stifle growth and innovation.”

However, the court’s citation of errors in the Commission’s investigation, including issues with its definitions, suggests that a likely outcome is the Commission adopting a more cautious approach moving forward.

 “While this is a significant win for Google, it is worth noting that the court largely agreed with the arguments against the company, and the annulment was largely driven by the commission’s failure to build a strong case,” said Mayank Maria, vice president of Everest Group.

Maria added that this suggests there may not be a significant shift in the bloc’s approach toward Big Tech in the near future, even as new leaders take charge of two key roles — the antitrust chief and the digital chief — responsible for regulating Big Tech practices in the EU. Earlier this week, the European Commission appointed a new team to lead the institution for the next five years.

Qualcomm ruling in contrast

In Qualcomm’s case, the company secured a slight reduction of its EU antitrust fine, lowering the penalty to $266 million (€238.7 million) from the original $270 million (€242 million), but the court dismissed its other claims.

The fine, handed down by the European Commission in 2019, was based on claims that Qualcomm engaged in predatory pricing from 2009 to 2011, selling chipsets below cost to undercut British software firm Icera, now owned by Nvidia.

Compared to the Google ruling, Qualcomm’s failure to successfully appeal its fine highlights a different set of challenges, underscoring the varied regulatory issues impacting different areas of the technology sector, according to George. “As for its relevance to the semiconductor and chip markets, this ruling reinforces the substantial restrictions these markets will continue to face, particularly concerning competitive practices,” George said. “Competition within the semiconductor space could drive businesses to address issues like predatory pricing and stricter antitrust enforcement.” 

As organizations continue to adopt generative AI (genAI) tools and platforms and explore how they can create efficiencies and boost worker productivity, they’re also grappling with the high costs and complexity of the technology.

The foundation of genAI and AI in general are language models, the algorithms and neural networks that power chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Bard. The most popular and widely used models today are known as large language models (LLMs).

LLMs can be massive. The technology is tied to large, diverse troves of information and the models contain billions — sometimes even trillions — of parameters (or variables) that can make them both inaccurate and non-specific for domain tasks or vertical industry use.

Enter small language models (SLMs), which have gained traction quickly and some even believe are already becoming mainstream enterprise technology. SLMs are designed to perform well for simpler tasks; they’re more accessible and easier to use for organizations with limited resources; they’re more natively secure because they exist in a fully self-manageable environment; they can be fine-tuned for particular domains and data security; and they’re cheaper to run than LLMs.

According to Ritu Jyoti, a group vice president of IDC’s AI research group, SLMs are well suited for organizations looking to build applications that can run locally on a device (as opposed to in the cloud) and “where a task doesn’t require extensive reasoning or when a quick response is needed,” Jyoti said.

Conversely, LLMs are better suited for applications that need orchestration of complex tasks involving advanced reasoning, data analysis and a better understanding of context.

SLMs can be built from scratch using open-source AI frameworks, which means an organization can create a highly customizable AI tool for any purpose without having to ask for permission, it can study how the system works and inspect its components, and it can modify the system for any purpose, including to change its output.

Open-source affords more freedom, customization

Dhiraj Nambiar, CEO of AI developer and consultancy Newtuple Technologies, said SLM adoption is growing because they can be fine-tuned or custom trained and have demonstrated “great performance for a narrow range of tasks, sometimes comparable to much larger LLMs.”

For example, he said, there are SLMs today that do “a great job” at optical character recognition (OCR) type tasks, and text-to-SQL tasks. “Some of the open-source ones are showing comparable performance to the LLMs,” Nambiar said.

In fact, the most popular SLMs today are open-source, IDC’s Jyoti said. They include:

• Meta’s Llama3
• Microsoft’s Phi-3
• Google’s Gemma
• Mitral AI’s Mixtral8x7B
• Apple’s OpenELM

The most popular non-open-source SLMs (which are proprietary and not freely available for public use) include:

• Deep Seek AI’s Coder
• Microsoft’s Phi-2
• Microsoft’s Orca-2

“These models are typically used within specific organizations or offered as part of commercial services, providing advanced capabilities while maintaining control over their distribution and use,” Jyoti said.

An AI model infers from inputs the outputs it will generate, such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments. Different AI systems vary in their levels of autonomy and adaptiveness after deployment.

In the simplest of terms, a small language model (SLM) is a lightweight genAI model. The “small” in this context refers to the size of the model’s neural network, the number of parameters and the volume of data on which it is trained, according to Rosemary Thomas, a senior technical researcher in the AI lab at Version 1, a management consulting and software development firm. She said while some SLM implementations can require substantial compute and memory resources, several can run on a single GPU and have more than 5 billion parameters.

Those include Google Gemini Nano, Microsoft’s Orca-2–7b and Orca-2–13b, Meta’s Llama-2–13b, and others, Thomas noted in a recent article.

Adoption of SLMs is growing, driven by the need for more efficient models and the speed at which they can be trained and set up, according to Thomas. “SLMs have gained popularity due to practical considerations such as computational resources, training time, and specific application requirements,” she said. “Over the past couple of years, SLMs have become increasingly relevant, especially in scenarios where sustainability and efficiency are crucial.”

When compared with LLMs, the key difference lies in scale. Larger models are trained on vast amounts of data from diverse sources, making them capable of capturing a broad range of language patterns, where SLMs are more compact and trained on smaller, often proprietary. datasets. That allows for quicker training and inference times.

LLMs also require more computational resources and longer training times. “This makes SLMs a more practical choice for applications with limited resources or where quick implementation is needed,” Thomas said.

Though LLMs shine in tasks like content generation, language translation, and understanding complex queries small models can achieve comparable performance when correctly fine-tuned, according to Thomas.

“SLMs are particularly efficient for domain-specific tasks due to their smaller size and faster inference times,” she said.

Build or buy?

Organizations considering the use of an open-source framework to build their own AI models from scratch should understand that it’s both exorbitantly expensive and time consuming to fine-tune an existing model, according to Nambiar.

“There are a number of approaches in building your own AI model, from building it from scratch to fine-tuning an existing open-source model; the former requires an elaborate setup of GPUs, TPUs, access to lots of data, and a tremendous amount of expertise,” Nambiar said. “The software and hardware stack required for this is available, however, the main blocker is going to be the remaining components.

“..I highly recommend that for domain specific use cases, it’s best to ‘fine tune’ an existing SLM or LLM rather than building one from scratch,” he said. “There are many open-source SLMs available today, and many of them have very permissible licenses. This is the way to go about building your own model as of today. This broadly applies to all transformer models.” 

It shouldn’t be an all-or-nothing SLM strategy, said Andrew Brown, senior vice president and chief revenue officer at Red Hat. For one, training a single, general purpose AI model requires a lot of resources.

“Some of the largest models can require some 10,000 GPUs, and those models may already be out of date. In fact, research shows that by 2026, the cost of training AI will be equivalent to the US GDP, which is $22 trillion,” Brown said. “The average CIO doesn’t have a US GDP-level IT budget, nor do they have thousands of spare GPUs lying around. So, what’s the answer? Specialized, smaller AI models driven by open-source innovation.”

One of the big challenges in comparing costs across AI providers is the use of different terms for pricing — OpenAI uses tokens, Google uses characters, Cohere uses a mix of “generations,” “classifications,” and “summarization units,” according to Nambiar, whose company builds AI for business automation.

Nambiar settled on “price per 1,000 tokens” to evaluate varying prices.

Fine tuning an LLM for business purposes means organizations rely on AI providers to host the infrastructure. Nambiar said businesses should plan for a two-to-four month project based on both infrastructure and manpower. Costs typically start at $50,000 or more, Nambiar said.

Fine tuning SLMs will typically be more expensive, because if an organization hosts the opensource model, it will need to spin up the infrastructure – the GPU and/or TPU serves — as well as spend effort on fine-tuning and the labor costs. “Assume it will be more expensive than LLMs,” he said.

Clean data brings reliable results

Whether building your own or using a cloud-based SLM, data quality is critical when it comes to the accuracy. As with LLMs, small models can still fall victim to hallucinations; these occur when an AI model generates erroneous or misleading information, often due to flawed training data or algorithm. They can, however, more easily be fined tuned and have a better chance of being more grounded in an organization’s proprietary data.

As with LLMs, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) techniques can reduce the possibility of hallucinations by customizing a model so responses become more accurate.

At the same time, due to their smaller size and datasets, SLMs are less likely to capture a broader range of language patterns compared to LLMs — and that can reduce their effectiveness. And though SLMs can be fine-tuned for specific tasks, LLMs tend to excel in more complex, less-well-defined queries because of the massive data troves from which they can pull.

“In short, SLMs offer a more efficient and cost-effective alternative for specific domains and tasks, especially when fine-tuned to use their full potential, while LLMs continue to be powerful models for a wide range of applications,” Thomas said.

Adam Kentosh, Digital.ai’s field CTO for North America, said it is extremely important with SLMs to clean up data and fine tune data stores for better performance, sustainability, and lower business risk and bias.  

AI initiatives have been sliding into the “trough of disillusionment,” something that could be avoided by addressing data quality issues, according to Kentosh.

By 2028, more than 50% of enterprises that have built LLMs from scratch will abandon their efforts due to costs, complexity and technical debt in their deployments.

“One of the biggest challenges we continue to face with existing customers is diverse data sources, even across common areas in software development,” Kentosh said. “For instance, most companies own two or more agile planning solutions. Additionally, there is almost zero consistency as it pertains to releasing software. This makes data preprocessing incredibly important, something that many companies have not been historically good at.”

Getting well curated, domain-specific data that works for fine tuning models is not a trivial task, according to Nambiar. “Transformer models require a specific kind of prompt response pair data that is difficult to procure,” he said.

And, once an organization decides to fine-tune its own SLM, it will have to invest in consistently keeping up with benchmarks that come from the state-of-the-art models, Nambiar said. “With every new LLM model release, the standards of inference capabilities go up, and, thus, if you’re creating your own fine-tuned SLM, you have to also raise the inference capabilities of this model, or else there’s no use case for your model anymore,” he said.

Brown said open-source AI models are not uncommon now, with industry giants such as Meta earlier this year championing the importance of its Llama model being open source. “That’s great news for organizations as these open-source models offer a lot of benefits, such as preventing vendor lock-in, allowing for a broad ecosystem of partners, affordability for the performance and more,” he said. “But unfortunately, none of that really matters if you don’t have the data scientists needed to work with the model.”

Brown described data scientists as unicorns right now — rare and often demanding the pay of a mythical creature, as well. “And rightly so,” he said.

Most organizations can only employ a handful of data scientists at best, whether due to a scarcity of qualified talent or the cost of employing them, “which creates bottlenecks when it comes to effectively training and tuning the model,” he said.

A move to hybrid?

CIOs, Brown noted, have long been moving away from monolithic technologies — starting with the shift from UNIX to Linux in the early 2000s. He believes AI is at a similar turning point and argues that a hybrid strategy, similar to that of hybrid cloud, is most advantageous for deploying AI models. While the large, somewhat amorphous LLMs are in the spotlight today, the future IT environment is 50% applications and 50% SLMs.

“Data lives everywhere, whether it’s on-premises, in the cloud or at the edge. Therefore, data by nature is hybrid, and because AI needs to run where your data lives, it must also be hybrid,” Brown said. “In fact, we often tell customers and partners: AI is the ultimate hybrid workload.

“Essentially, a CIO will have as many AI models as applications. This means that training needs to be faster, tuning needs to speed up and costs need to be kept down. The key to this challenge lies in open source,” he continued. “Just as it democratized computing, open source will do so for AI; it already is.”

Now that Apple supports Rich Communication Services (RCS) messages on iPhones running iOS 18, the GSM Association (GSMA) has promised end-to-end encryption (E2EE) is coming to the standard, a move that should better protect communications between iPhone and Android devices.

The GSMA, which maintains the standard, is working to implement E2EE but hasn’t committed to a time scale. It announced the plans as it marked the launch of RCS support on the iPhone.

E2EE will be ‘next major milestone’ for RCS

“While this is a major milestone, it is just the beginning,” the GSMA said in a statement. “The next major milestone is for the RCS Universal Profile to add important user protections such as interoperable end-to-end encryption. This will be the first deployment of standardized, interoperable messaging encryption between different computing platforms, addressing significant technical challenges such as key federation and cryptographically-enforced group membership. Additionally, users will benefit from stronger protections from scam, fraud, and other security threats.”

RCS Universal Profile is an industry-agreed set of features and technologies the GSMA has standardized so RCS can be widely deployed in products and services. The most recent version, RCS Universal Profile 2.7, introduced support for more advanced messaging features, such as reactions, editing of sent messages, and improved message indicators.

Apple now supports RCS on iPhone

Apple has now adopted RCS within iOS 18, replacing the long-in-the-tooth SMS system for texts to Android devices. Messages between the platforms are much improved as a result — many users were annoyed that they couldn’t share high-resolution images, for example. 

However, the lack of E2EE is a glaring hole in messaging security; it means enterprise users will likely employ other messaging services for critical information. Apple’s own message system does support E2EE, but not when sharing with an Android device — hence, the colored bubbles to show you when a message is secure. You will know when you’re in an RCS chat with an Android user because you’ll see a small grey label that says RCS Message in the text field.

Other significant benefits

The GSMA promise of encryption in RCS is a welcome one. It will prevent carriers, messaging services, or other third parties with access to these communications from viewing the content of the texts you share or sharing that information for any reason.

Encryption on messages between platforms also promises other benefits, as noted last year by Caitlin Seeley George at Fight for the Future: “This move makes it possible for cross-platform messages to be end-to-end encrypted — a security feature that would protect a whole host of vulnerable groups, including pregnant people, LBGTQ+ people, activists, immigrants, and journalists.”

It is possible that Apple’s decision to introduce support for RCS might have helped it avoid its messaging service being declared a ‘Gatekeeper’ service under the EU’s DMA. 

Please follow me on Mastodon, or join me in the AppleHolic’s bar & grill and Apple Discussions groups on MeWe.

While we’ve already focused on how new features in Apple’s latest operating system upgrades can help you get work done on an iPhone and on a Mac, under-the-hood enhancements for enterprise IT also made the cut. Here’s a rundown on what was introduced.

Apple’s changes for enterprise and education deployments lean toward declarative device management (DDM) as the company continues to navigate away from MDM profiles. They also include security tweaks to manage newly-introduced features such as iPhone Mirroring on Mac. 

The latter is interesting in its own right, as it means IT can prevent managed iPhones from being mirrored on any Mac, and any Mac can also be prevented from mirroring any iPhone. That makes sense, as it puts a barrier in place against abuse of that feature.

On the good ship DDM

Apple has flagged its move toward Declarative Device Management (DDM) since it first introduced support for this way of managing devices in 2021. This was originally only available to user-enrolled iOS devices, then Macs joined in. It is now supported across all the company’s products, including the Apple Watch and Apple TV. In 2022, Apple told us explicitly at WWDC that DDM will eventually supersede its own older MDM framework.

The beauty of DDM is that it allows IT to specify a desired state for devices. That means devices that do not occupy that “state” won’t get access, and the device doesn’t require continuous prompts from an MDM server.

Admins recognize that this makes for faster onboarding, better update management, improved device monitoring, better security and reduced network bandwidth usage. For most users, it just makes for a far nicer experience, bringing the convenience of consumer grade simplicity to managed enterprise devices. Everyone in the Apple MDM ecosystem I speak with has told me that DDM is the future for managed devices.

Michael Covington, Jamf vice president for portfolio strategy, last year noted the importance of this move. Pointing to DDM improvements at the time, he said: “Of course, the big announcement for those IT professionals responsible for managing devices is Apple’s improvements to Declarative Device Management. The new Software Update workflows demonstrate Apple’s commitment to iterating on the enhanced protocol….”

In this year’s biggest move toward that future, Apple’s new operating system software updates can now be managed entirely using DDM, replacing MDM profiles for software update restrictions, settings, and software update commands and queries.

A short summary of improvements for Apple admins

Of course, DDM is only one facet of device management, and while there are some unique differences between Mac and i-device platforms, Apple peppered the releases with new device management features:

• MDM can manage which Safari extensions are allowed, always on or always off, and what websites they can access.
• On supervised devices, organizations can disable a user’s ability to hide and lock apps.
• IT can prevent VPN settings from being modified by apps.
• A new MDM restriction can prevent the removal of an eSIM.
• New features in Calculator, such as Math Notes, Math Notes keyboard, scientific mode, and unit conversions can be managed in MDM. (This tool is aimed at education IT.)
• On a Mac, a new disk management configuration can be used to choose whether external or network storage is allowed or disallowed, or limit mounting to read-only volumes.
• Also on a Mac, MDM can configure hardware MAC address instead of a private MAC address on managed Wi-Fi networks. MDM can also prevent system extensions from being disabled in Settings.
• iPads gain an iPhone tool; IT can now use MDM to manage alternative marketplaces in regions in which those are supported.
• visionOS 2 now supports Automated Device Enrolment in MDM

For the most part, Apple’s enterprise improvements seem designed to give IT additional power to harden security across managed devices while also working to prevent data leaks. Companies in which security policy is attenuated also benefit from a small but noteworthy improvement in which users with complex passwords no longer need to lock and unlock the device to see the keyboard.

Apple’s complete lists

There are other features and tools listed across Apple’s documents detailing the enterprise-focused content in the latest OS upgrades. Apple’s pages detailing these improvements are here:

What’s new for enterprise in macOS Sequoia

What’s new for enterprise in iPadOS 18

What’s new for enterprise in iOS 18

What’s new for enterprise in visionOS 2

While many of the changes described above may be of less interest to most users, they will be of huge significance to the ever-growing cadre of Apple admins who are seizing seats across the enterprise as the company’s market share across that sector continues to grow. Apple is in business, from the world’s biggest firms to SMBs, and its continued focus on empowering MDM teams to support that proliferation now seems to run deep. Apple knows that, unlike the main enterprise tech incumbent, its products aren’t renowned for causing business disasters. It knows it has a story to tell, and for many in business in a world after the Crowdstrike mess, it also knows it offers a viable and robust alternative. 

Please follow me on Mastodon, or join me in the AppleHolic’s bar & grill and Apple Discussions groups on MeWe.