In experiments in Thailand, Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) learned to ignore an enticing but ineffective route to food and quickly adapted when a familiar solution stopped working.
The post Elephants Show Talent for Resisting Impulses appeared first on Sci.News: Breaking Science News.
O iPhone 17 Pro (ainda) é o smartphone mais avançado da Apple! Entre as suas especificações técnicas, podemos destacar a tela Super Retina XDR de 6,3 polegadas, o conjunto de três câmeras (com um sistema Fusion de 48 megapixels nas três lentes) e o processador A19 Pro, além da presença do Controle da Câmera (Camera Control) e do botão de Ação (Action Button).
Mesmo com a nova linha de iPhones prestes a ser anunciada em poucas horas, é certeza de que eles chegarão muito mais caros que os modelos atuais, devido à escassez dos chips de memória.
Por isso, as grandes varejistas já começam a “queimar” o estoque dos modelos que devem sair de linha — caso do iPhone 17 Pro. Mesmo sendo descontinuado, esse smartphone certamente durará muitos e muitos anos graças às atualizações de software.
O Mercado Livre, por exemplo, está com uma promoção excelente para esse modelo! Trata-se da versão de 256GB, na cor azul-intenso. Ele está saindo por R$9.144,43 em até 10x no cartão de crédito.
iPhone 17 Pro de 256GB
— MM Ofertas (@MMOfertas) September 9, 2026
Parcelado: de R$11.499,00 por R$9.144,43 em até 10x
À vista no Pix: de R$10.349,10 por R$8.229,99
💰Produto vendido pela loja oficial; aplique o cupom na página 🛒https://t.co/4NC0IAYhEl
Se levarmos em conta que o preço tabelado desse modelo aqui no Brasil é de R$11.499 nessa mesma modalidade de pagamento, estamos diante de um desconto de 20%.
À vista no Pix, ele cai para R$8.229,99 — um desconto também de 20% em relação ao valor à vista da Apple, de R$10.349,10.
Para chegar a esses valores, basta aplicar o cupom que aparece na página do produto.
Todos os descontos de promoções divulgadas pelo MacMagazine são calculados com base nos preços sugeridos pela Apple ou por outras fabricantes. Pode ser que um determinado produto seja comumente encontrado por valores inferiores em redes varejistas, mas a nossa base de comparação é sempre em cima das tabelas oficiais.
Se você não é louco, é claro que gosta de economizar. E, para isso, o MacMagazine tem diversas opções para ajudar você a conseguir comprar o seu produto Apple pagando menos!
Você pode usar a nossa extensão para os navegadores Chrome/Opera/Edge, acompanhar as ofertas pelo MM Fórum, pelo Facebook, pelo X, pelo Threads, pelo Bluesky, pelo Mastodon ou por um canal no Telegram. Escolha a melhor opção para você — ou todas, para depois não se arrepender — e economize! 😉
NOTA DE TRANSPARÊNCIA: O MacMagazine recebe uma pequena comissão sobre vendas concluídas por meio de links deste post, mas você, como consumidor, não paga nada mais pelos produtos/serviços usando os nossos links de afiliado.
via Tecnoblog
O iPhone 17 Pro Max é o smartphone mais avançado da Apple! Entre as suas especificações técnicas, podemos destacar a tela Super Retina XDR de 6,9 polegadas, o conjunto de três câmeras (com um sistema Fusion de 48 megapixels nas três lentes) e o processador A19 Pro, além da presença do Controle da Câmera (Camera Control) e do botão de Ação (Action Button).
Mesmo com a nova linha de iPhones prestes a ser anunciada, é certeza de que eles chegarão muito mais caros que os modelos atuais, graças à escassez dos chips de memória. Portanto, pode ser uma boa ideia aproveitar as ofertas neste fim de ciclo — e com a certeza de que o iPhone 17 Pro Max ainda será suportado por muitos e muitos anos!
A Amazon está com uma promoção excelente! Trata-se da versão de 2TB, na cor prateada. Ela está saindo por R$12.949,30 em até 12x no cartão de crédito.
iPhone 17 Pro Max de 2TB
— MM Ofertas (@MMOfertas) September 8, 2026
De R$18.499,00 por R$12.949,30 em até 12x
💰 Produto vendido e entregue pela Amazon 🤑https://t.co/k5pQJtT9Wy
Se levarmos em conta que o preço tabelado desse modelo aqui no Brasil é de R$18.499 nessa mesma modalidade de pagamento, estamos diante de um desconto de 30%.
Todos os descontos de promoções divulgadas pelo MacMagazine são calculados com base nos preços sugeridos pela Apple ou por outras fabricantes. Pode ser que um determinado produto seja comumente encontrado por valores inferiores em redes varejistas, mas a nossa base de comparação é sempre em cima das tabelas oficiais.
Se você não é louco, é claro que gosta de economizar. E, para isso, o MacMagazine tem diversas opções para ajudar você a conseguir comprar o seu produto Apple pagando menos!
Você pode usar a nossa extensão para os navegadores Chrome/Opera/Edge, acompanhar as ofertas pelo MM Fórum, pelo Facebook, pelo X, pelo Threads, pelo Bluesky, pelo Mastodon ou por um canal no Telegram. Escolha a melhor opção para você — ou todas, para depois não se arrepender — e economize! 😉
NOTA DE TRANSPARÊNCIA: O MacMagazine recebe uma pequena comissão sobre vendas concluídas por meio de links deste post, mas você, como consumidor, não paga nada mais pelos produtos/serviços usando os nossos links de afiliado.
After five years in development, Free Stars: Children of Infinity—the official sequel to The Ur-Quan Masters by the old game's original creators—has released a free public demo. It's a "combat demo" in the style of UQM’s melee mode, where players can assemble a fleet from the game's roster of nearly 40 ships, then match those ships up in head-to-head arcade SpaceWar-style action. The demo can be found on Steam and GOG, and it's available for Windows, Mac, and Linux. (Console versions are coming, but they're not yet out.)
Pew pew!
Credit:
Pistol Shrimp Games
I have to present this news with a big disclaimer, though, because I've been part of the Children of Infinity writing team since 2021, working as a volunteer with the Pistol Shrimp Games crew and contributing NPC dialogue and some story bits. As a huge fan of the original games, it's been a dream opportunity. (Because I've been volunteering my time, I'm not financially involved and receive no compensation if you download the demo or, when it's eventually released, buy the full game.)
Children of Infinity is a space adventure RPG, just like The Ur-Quan Masters (and its direct spiritual predecessors, Starflight and Starflight 2). What's been released today is just one part of the game—the arcade-style "melee" portion, which lets players jump into one-versus-one combat against another player or against a computer-controlled opponent. Each of the ships you can pick has its own maneuvering characteristics, weapons, and special abilities.
© Pistol Shrimp Games
Machine vision is becoming a practical part of Apple’s U.S. factory training strategy, giving smaller manufacturers access to techniques that help production systems inspect what they make. The recent opening of the Houston manufacturing training center extends that effort into a working electronics production campus, while courses developed with Michigan State University introduce businesses to image analysis, machine learning, and automated quality checks.
For a manufacturer, the attraction can be straightforward: finding a missing component before a product leaves the line, identifying a surface defect before more material is added, or recognizing an assembly error while it can still be corrected cheaply.
These are manageable problems with measurable costs. They also offer an accessible starting point for businesses interested in AI but unsure where it belongs inside their operations.
The Apple Manufacturing Academy’s current course catalog includes Machine Learning with Vision, a course introducing machine learning and deep learning through practical activities using Apple devices. It sits alongside instruction in automation, quality fundamentals, manufacturing data, maintenance, and process improvement.
That placement gives the subject useful context. A camera can produce an image, but a factory needs a decision: accept the part, flag it for review, check its position, or investigate a process that may be drifting out of tolerance.
Machine vision connects image capture to those operational decisions. Some applications use established rules to measure dimensions or identify patterns. Others use machine learning to recognize acceptable variations and defects that are difficult to describe through fixed rules.
The academy’s public description confirms introductory activities with Apple devices. It does not identify a particular iPhone, Mac configuration, software framework, or industrial camera package that every participant must use.
For smaller businesses, the educational value is learning how to define an inspection problem before purchasing equipment. A company that understands what it needs to detect can have a much more productive conversation with an automation supplier.
Apple opened its 20,000-square-foot Advanced Manufacturing Center on August 13. According to the Houston opening announcement, the free program offers small and medium-sized businesses instruction in advanced manufacturing, interactive labs, and experience with representative production equipment.
The first cohort worked with machine learning for quality control and advanced automation. Participants also explored production challenges, used a holographic table, and assembled and laser etched a product.
The location adds context: the center occupies the same Houston facility that builds advanced AI servers and is scheduled to begin Mac mini manufacturing this year. Its teaching program includes final assembly principles and design considerations for printed circuit board assembly.
Houston is the company’s second U.S. manufacturing learning site, following the Detroit academy established with Michigan State University in August 2025. By the Houston opening, Apple said the academy had helped nearly 1,000 workers, students, and entrepreneurs.
That figure measures people reached through the program. It should not be interpreted as 1,000 factories already operating AI inspection systems.
Imagine a small business assembling control panels. Each panel needs the same set of connectors, positioned correctly before the enclosure closes. A machine vision station could check for a missing connector while the assembly remains accessible.
The value comes from catching that error at the right moment. Discovering it after packaging creates extra handling and rework. Discovering it after delivery may involve a return, a service visit, and an unhappy customer.
A useful pilot would therefore begin with that single inspection point. The business could compare the existing process with the assisted one, recording missed defects, unnecessary rechecks, inspection time, and the cost of correcting mistakes.
The camera is only part of the exercise. Workers must agree on what constitutes a defect, collect representative examples, and decide what happens when the result is uncertain.
Those decisions draw heavily on experience already present on the factory floor. An operator may know that an unusual mark is harmless, while a barely visible change in alignment predicts a later assembly problem. Turning that knowledge into consistent inspection criteria is valuable work in its own right.
These are examples of how manufacturers could apply the training, rather than projects Apple has announced for individual participants.
A demonstration can look impressive when every part arrives clean, centered, and evenly lit. Production introduces variation: different surface finishes, reflections, changing positions, and batches that look slightly different while remaining within specification.
The inspection system must distinguish those acceptable differences from actual failures. Otherwise, it can reject good products or allow defective ones to continue.
Industrial vision supplier Cognex’s deployment guidance recommends validating systems across product models, defect types, and manufacturing lines. It also describes an approach in which automated inspection handles preliminary checks while experienced inspectors review borderline cases.
For a business learning machine vision, that offers a realistic way to introduce the technology. Employees can compare its decisions with their own, investigate disagreements, and determine whether the results justify extending its role.
An inspection system also needs an owner after installation. Someone must understand when a product change requires new examples, when equipment needs attention, and when performance has slipped. Training that responsibility into the workforce helps prevent an initially successful project from becoming an unreliable fixture.
The academy’s reach extends beyond companies producing consumer electronics. In its May update on participating manufacturers, Apple highlighted Block Imaging, a Michigan business that services and refurbishes medical imaging equipment.
The company hosted visitors during the academy’s Spring Forum and described applying techniques learned from Apple engineers and Michigan State experts to its operations. Apple reported that the academy had supported more than 150 American businesses at that point.
The announcement did not identify a particular machine vision deployment at Block Imaging or publish a percentage improvement attributable to visual inspection. It does provide an example of the training reaching businesses whose work differs substantially from building an iPhone.
That wider participation could benefit Apple indirectly. More capable domestic manufacturers can support equipment maintenance, tooling, components, and specialized production services. Participation itself does not establish a supplier relationship, but the skills can be used across customers and industries.
The academy’s participation information says eligible small and medium-sized U.S. manufacturers can take courses free of charge. Online learning includes on-demand materials and interactive modules, while in-person sessions add workshops and more personalized instruction.
Digital badges are available for different topics, and completed course materials remain accessible for review. That gives a business room to train an employee around existing production commitments and return to the material when an actual project begins.
Free instruction does not remove the eventual cost of cameras, lighting, integration, maintenance, or employee time. It can help a manufacturer understand those costs before committing to a system.
The first proposal brought back to the factory might be modest: inspect one recurring defect at one station and record the results for several weeks. A supervisor can then weigh the time saved against the extra reviews, maintenance, and mistakes. That is the kind of evidence a business owner can use when deciding whether to install a second station.
The post Machine Vision Joins Apple’s U.S. Factory Training Push appeared first on AppleMagazine.
A teleoperated centaur robot dubbed “Threehalves” could represent the future of manual work in some of our planet’s most dangerous environments, according to Satyress Robotics, the California startup behind the project. In disasters such as mudslides, wildfires, and rubble searches, the company says its robot can keep workers safe from on-site hazards.
The other side of the story is the robot’s creepy, almost demonic appearance, as conveyed on the provocative Satyress Robotics website, the imagery for which is so unusual that it almost gives the impression of being a parody—particularly in an age of breathless reporting on corporate claims, and sudden appearances of “viral” news stories.
Therefore, The Debrief decided to take a deeper look at this mechanical oddity that more closely resembles something out of Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey than a project in development in a California robotics lab.
Threehalves isn’t exactly news; all of the available information on the robot was posted on the company website over a year ago, around the time of their only post on X. Yet it’s recently been discovered by internet outlets noting the creepy design of this robot that the company claims is here to help.
“It’s obviously quite over the top, but ultimately, this is at the extreme end of humanoid robotics in size and capability,” a company representative told The Debrief.
“People may be familiar with humanoid robots from TV/movies or product videos, but likely don’t understand just how powerful and heavy they are (especially ours, which is coming in at just under 7ft tall and 240 lbs currently),” the rep added. “Our thought is someone who didn’t know what it is should definitely stay away from it, and those that do know or are operating the machine should be reminded it’s quite dangerous.”
“If you look at something like a lathe or mill, they generally look intimidating, for good reason, even though they could be dressed up to look friendly and soft,” the rep concluded. “We’ll point out, though, that the ‘evil’ look is mostly from it being pitch black; with different colors or a wrap on it, it does not put off that vibe.”
Part of Threehalves’ sales pitch is that it won’t replace jobs, but instead will merely transfer them to robotic operators using a joystick to guide Threehalves through manual work in dangerous environments. The website claims that this amounts to granting workers “superpowers,” allowing them to focus on honing their craft in new extreme situations. However, while the operator won’t have to directly get their hands dirty, Satyress Robotics told The Debrief that Threehalves is designed for line-of-sight, close-proximity operation.
“We don’t have any plans to develop much autonomy above what’s needed to keep the robot from damaging itself,” the Satyress Robotics representative said. “Our goal is to have experienced trade experts in control of the bots at all times. Forestry, for instance, is the deadliest job in the US – our goal is to save lives first and foremost, and we believe that is also enough economically to justify the cost of the bot without any autonomous productivity gain.”
Two of the robots can fit in a standard truck bed, allowing them to be easily transported to remote locations. Lacking hands, the robot can be fitted with a variety of unique attachments to hold various tools from chainsaws to drills. Of note, the robot is shown holding a gas-powered chainsaw. Exactly how it would manage to get the chainsaw started without an obvious way to pull the ripcord is unclear.
With fears of a demonic Terminator immediately conjured up by Threehalves’ appearance, the company informs us that although “this robot is more dangerous than it looks,” the same is true of any humanoid robot, and this one comes equipped with a variety of safety features.
Ironically, one of these is the robot’s menacing horns, which significantly slow the robot down in moving through standard-size door frames, and can even be replaced with larger horns that make traversing such portals impossible.
“It’s another way to make it clear this isn’t a toy, [a] security guard, etc,” the Satyress Robotics representative said. “It’s built for one reason, for a teleoperator to do dangerous work or heavy lifting from a safe, in line of sight distance.”
“We are not looking at any use cases in commercial buildings, and certainly not residential,” they added.
Additionally, air reservoirs in the chest cavity and on the robot’s back are designed to activate pin locks on all its joints, rendering the robot immobile if air pressure is lost. Imagery on the website suggests this can seemingly be accomplished by stabbing Threehalves with a knife or shooting it with a gun. Fortunately, a more pacifist option to halt the robot also exists: simply by hitting an e-stop button located on its stomach.
When pressed on why the company would design their robot to be susceptible to gunfire specifically, the representative didn’t seem to find this the least bit unusual.
“Nothing software wise/control wise, whether autonomous or teleoperated, can be guaranteed to never have any kind of control issue,” the Satyress Robotics representative said. “This gives a means to lock the brakes remotely without necessarily damaging the robot beyond repair.”
With the unsettling design and suggestion that the robot may eventually have to be shot to stop it from injuring a human, one of this reporter’s main questions became: “Is this a joke?” The outlandish nature of the project reminds one of prankster Joey Skaggs’ tricks on the media, such as the time he convinced WNBC-TV in New York and United Press International that he had recently developed a cure-all derived from roach hormones, which he was injecting into his followers.
However, the Satyress Robotics representative confirmed that the company’s new quadrupedal working robot is no joke.
“It’s not a prank. Also, we’re building it with the goal of keeping workers safe, so we just want to make it clear we’re thinking of every edge case and looking for ways to solve them outside of software,” the representative explained. “We are quite a ways away from showing the robot in any kind of elegant motion, thus the static renders/photos.”
Given that the company hasn’t posted on social media in over a year and has no LinkedIn presence, it was unclear who was behind the operation and if it was still underway. According to the company, they will shortly be making a video to introduce themselves.
While one picture on the website appears to show a live test with a joystick, there are no videos of Threehalves in motion on the website, and our email conversation confirmed it is not yet a functional robot.
For now, the company tells The Debrief that they are currently working on component-level testing and any commercial version of the Threehalves is more than two years away.
Ryan Whalen covers science and technology for The Debrief. He holds an MA in History and a Master of Library and Information Science with a certificate in Data Science. He can be contacted at ryan@thedebrief.org, and follow him on Twitter @mdntwvlf.
A medida temporária tem como objetivo colmatar as lacunas existentes até que seja estebelecido um novo enquadramento jurídico de longo prazo para prevenir e combater o abuso sexual infantil online, avança o Conselho da UE, sendo aplicável até ao dia 3 de abril de 2028.
The post Extensão do controlo de conteúdos de abuso sexual de crianças com “luz verde” do Conselho da União Europeia appeared first on Tek Notícias.
I know there are options out there like Paddle, FastSpring, and Lemon Squeezy that have worked for many apps like mine over the years. But I also wanted something simple for my users. Not to mention Apple Pay was a must-have.
I believe all the services he mentions do support Apple Pay.
RevenueCat serves as the source of truth for whether or not a customer is licensed.
I create RevenueCat customer IDs from local iCloud identifiers (more specifically, calling
userRecordID()on myCKContainerin CloudKit).When the user makes a purchase, they earn an entitlement that I look for in Arborist to grant them a license.
He doesn’t need to run his own server, and the purchases are automatically tied to the user’s iCloud account, so there are no e-mails or serial numbers to deal with. On the other hand, well, it’s all dependent on the Apple Account.
The app, which helps manage Git worktrees, is shipping now.
Previously:
In Tower 15, we introduced the “Fully Merged” badge and Automatic Branch Management to help you keep your repository tidy. With Tower 17, we’re taking the detection behind that badge to a whole new level. […] Tower now matches your local branches against merged pull requests from your hosting service, such as GitHub or GitLab.
[…]
Trust is everything when deleting branches — so we redesigned the “Fully Merged” hint view to show you exactly which checks matched.
[…]
One that is particularly noteworthy is that updating submodules is now significantly faster! Tower gathers each submodule's Git data concurrently instead of one at a time—something you will especially notice in repositories with many submodules.
I’m sad that they got rid of the yellow icon.
Previously:
A team of neuroscientists has reported that deep brain stimulation (DBS) targeted to the motor thalamus can reshape how the brain controls both speech and swallowing—and crucially, that the outcome depends on stimulation frequency. The findings, from experiments reported in Nature Communications (2026), suggest that “tuning” DBS parameters may offer more refined control over complex, real-world behaviors than previously possible.
The study centers on motor-thalamus DBS, a strategy explored for movement disorders and related symptoms. Instead of treating stimulation as a single fixed setting, the researchers tested multiple frequencies and monitored changes in speech-related signals and swallowing performance. This frequency sensitivity points to circuit-level dynamics where different stimulation rates engage distinct neural processing modes.
In practical terms, the results imply that higher or lower frequencies may preferentially drive or suppress specific pathways that contribute to oral motor timing. Speech production relies on precisely coordinated patterns of muscle activation, airflow, and sensory feedback; swallowing requires rapid, sequence-based control to protect the airway. Alterations in these timing networks could explain why DBS can influence both functions simultaneously.
The authors describe the effects as frequency-dependent, meaning that the same DBS target produces divergent outcomes when the pulse rate changes. Such divergence is consistent with the idea that stimulation can shift synaptic interactions, firing synchrony, and network oscillations within the thalamocortical loop. When the stimulation rhythm matches intrinsic circuit oscillations, the brain may stabilize certain motor programs; at other rates, it may destabilize them.
Importantly, the work frames DBS not only as a way to modulate symptoms, but as a potential tool for “behavioral steering.” If translated to clinical settings, clinicians could adjust DBS frequency to reduce speech side effects while maintaining or improving swallowing safety, rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all configuration.
The study also highlights an often-overlooked challenge: therapies optimized for movement may inadvertently affect speech and swallowing, both of which share overlapping motor control resources. Frequency tuning could become a lever for mitigating such trade-offs, improving quality of life for patients who already depend on DBS.
While the research is mechanistic, its implications are immediately viral-science-worthy: the possibility that a single hardware intervention can be dynamically optimized for nuanced functions. The next step will be confirming how these frequency effects scale across different individuals and disease states.
As DBS devices become more programmable, the field is moving toward personalized stimulation “dial settings.” This report adds to that momentum by providing evidence that the motor thalamus does not respond uniformly—frequency matters, and the brain appears to treat different pulse rates as different control regimes.
Subject of Research: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) targeted to the motor thalamus and its frequency-dependent effects on speech and swallowing.
Article Title: Frequency-dependent effects of motor thalamus deep brain stimulation on speech and swallowing.
Article References: Tang, L.W., Grigsby, E.M., Damiani, A. et al. Frequency-dependent effects of motor thalamus deep brain stimulation on speech and swallowing. Nat Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-75588-3
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-026-75588-3
Keywords:
EU tech regulation, Digital Markets Act, Apple Europe sales, Apple regulation, European Union, Siri AI, iPhone features, device interoperability, App Store changes, alternative marketplaces, iPhone Mirroring, AirPods translation, Apple privacy, iPhone security, app sideloading, platform competition, DMA compliance, Apple Intelligence, European technology, government control
EU tech regulation is no longer limited to App Store payment rules or competition disputes hidden from ordinary consumers. It is beginning to determine which features reach European devices, how quickly they arrive and how deeply third-party companies can interact with the iPhone, iPad and Mac.
The Digital Markets Act was designed to reduce the control of large technology platforms over software distribution, payments, browsers, digital assistants and connected hardware. For Apple, compliance has already produced alternative app marketplaces, web distribution, third-party payment options, additional default-app controls and expanded access to iPhone technologies.
The next phase reaches much deeper into the operating system. European regulators want competing accessories, cloud services and AI assistants to receive access to capabilities traditionally reserved for Apple’s own products.
Apple argues that some of those demands could weaken privacy and security. The European Commission says the company is responsible for creating compliant systems that preserve both competition and user protection.
Between those positions sits a large and commercially significant group of customers. Europe generated $28.06 billion in Apple sales during the quarter ending March 28, 2026, up from $24.45 billion one year earlier. Six-month European sales reached $66.20 billion, compared with $58.32 billion during the same period of fiscal 2025.
Europe therefore represented more than one-quarter of Apple’s latest quarterly revenue. It is too valuable to leave behind, but increasingly difficult to serve with the same software experience available elsewhere.
Regional differences once centered mainly on language support, licensing agreements or local services. EU tech regulation is creating a more structural divide.
Apple has blamed Digital Markets Act requirements for delaying Siri AI across the European Union. The company says regulators expect competing AI assistants to receive extensive access to personal information, apps and device actions before Apple can reserve those capabilities for its own assistant.
The disagreement concerns more than answering questions. Siri AI is designed to read personal context, understand onscreen information and complete actions across apps. That may include finding messages, accessing files, making purchases or sending information on the user’s behalf.
Opening those capabilities to outside AI systems requires new permission structures, technical interfaces and safeguards. Apple says it cannot release its assistant first and add competing access later without risking regulatory action. The Commission says Apple had sufficient time to design an interoperable solution.
Other delayed European features have included iPhone Mirroring on Mac, Live Translation through AirPods and certain location-based Maps capabilities. Each feature touches a different part of the ecosystem, but all depend on privileged communication between Apple devices, software and services.
The consequence is becoming visible at purchase. Two customers can buy the same iPhone model at similar prices and receive different capabilities because one lives inside the European Union.
Delayed availability can weaken the adoption of new hardware features even when the devices themselves continue selling well.
Siri AI is intended to become a central part of newer iPhones, iPads and Macs. Buyers who cannot access it lose part of the justification for newer chips, additional memory and on-device AI processing. Developers also face a smaller addressable audience for apps built around the new assistant.
AirPods Live Translation presents a similar problem. A feature designed to demonstrate the combination of iPhone processing, microphones and wearable audio becomes unavailable in a region built around dozens of languages and frequent cross-border travel.
iPhone Mirroring affects the relationship between iPhone and Mac. Users outside the EU can interact with the phone from macOS, while European users may receive notifications without gaining the complete experience.
These differences do not necessarily stop hardware sales. Apple’s newest results show strong European demand despite years of regulatory conflict. They can, however, reduce the speed at which customers use the ecosystem’s newest capabilities.
The effect may grow as software becomes a larger part of hardware differentiation. A faster processor has limited emotional value when the feature designed to demonstrate it is unavailable.
Apple does not report European Union revenue separately. Its Europe segment also includes countries outside the bloc, along with India, the Middle East and Africa. The official segment remains the best regularly published measure of the region’s commercial weight.
European sales rose approximately 15% year over year in Apple’s latest reported quarter. During the first six months of fiscal 2026, the segment expanded by roughly 14%.
Those figures weaken the argument that regulation is already driving customers away from Apple hardware. Demand remains strong, supported by the iPhone 17 family, Mac sales, services and the company’s installed base.
The financial risk is more gradual. Regional software fragmentation can raise engineering costs, delay launches and make European devices less competitive against products able to offer complete feature sets.
Apple must maintain separate distribution rules, payment systems, browser options and eligibility checks. Developers must decide whether alternative stores, external payments or EU-specific business terms justify additional work. Support teams must explain why features differ between countries using the same operating-system version.
A market responsible for more than $28 billion in one quarter can absorb considerable compliance expense. It can also influence Apple’s global product decisions when regulators demand interfaces that cannot be restricted to Europe easily.
The escalating regulatory environment also creates a more fundamental concern: control over complex technology ecosystems can gradually move away from the companies that designed them and toward government committees, regulatory bodies and administrative processes.
That transfer rarely happens through one dramatic order. It develops through repeated obligations covering app distribution, payment systems, browser engines, digital assistants, hardware access, data portability and interoperability. Each requirement may appear narrow when considered alone. Together, they can redefine who determines how the ecosystem operates.
Apple built its platform around tight integration between hardware, software, services and security. Regulators increasingly treat parts of that integration as market power that must be opened to competitors. The danger is that an ecosystem designed as one coordinated environment becomes subject to decisions made by committees that do not carry direct responsibility for product quality, reliability or long-term maintenance.
This can become a slow trap. Once a platform is required to expose one layer, regulators may use that access as the basis for demanding another. A payment exception can be followed by alternative app stores. Alternative stores can lead to broader installation rights. Device interoperability can expand into access for AI assistants, personal data and system actions.
The boundaries of the platform are then set less by engineering judgment and more by regulatory negotiation.
Government agencies have legitimate authority to address competition and consumer harm. The concern appears when regulation shifts from preventing abusive conduct to directing product architecture. At that point, public authorities begin influencing feature design, release timing, software permissions and the relationship between first-party and third-party services.
That creates consequences beyond Apple. Any company considering a tightly integrated product may decide that deep integration invites intervention. Businesses could avoid building ambitious ecosystems if successful coordination later becomes grounds for forced access.
Innovation then becomes shaped by what regulators are likely to permit rather than by what engineers believe will produce the safest or most coherent experience.
EU policy has produced benefits that Apple rarely emphasizes. Users can install apps through alternative marketplaces or directly from authorized developers. Developers can offer external payment methods, promote different prices and avoid relying entirely on Apple’s distribution system.
Alternative browser engines can compete with WebKit, while users have more control over default apps. Contactless payment access has expanded beyond Apple Pay, allowing competing wallet providers to use the iPhone’s NFC technology under approved conditions.
Interoperability requirements could also improve third-party accessories. Smartwatches, headphones and other devices may gain better notification access, background connectivity and proximity pairing with the iPhone.
These changes can increase competition and reduce the advantage Apple gives its own services and accessories. A third-party smartwatch should not become artificially less useful simply because it was not made in Cupertino.
The difficulty is separating legitimate platform access from unlimited access. A notification interface is one thing. An autonomous AI assistant capable of reading messages, accessing files and acting across apps introduces a different level of sensitivity.
Alternative app distribution increases user choice, but it also moves some responsibility away from the App Store. Apple continues to notarize apps distributed through approved alternative channels, checking for known malware and severe fraud. That process is narrower than a complete App Store review.
Purchases made outside Apple’s payment system also fall outside its normal refund and billing support. Users may need to resolve disputes directly with the developer or payment provider.
A malicious marketplace, deceptive payment page or compromised developer account can create opportunities for fraud. Enterprise users face additional concerns when employees install software from sources their organization has not approved.
The AI question reaches further. A third-party assistant may need permission to access messages, photos, calendars, documents and app controls. Even a reputable provider can collect more information than the user expects or introduce vulnerabilities through poorly designed integrations.
Apple can build permission prompts, app isolation and revocation controls, but technical access always creates some exposure. Security depends on how narrowly permissions are defined, how visibly they are used and whether the operating system can stop unauthorized actions.
The Commission maintains that interoperability and privacy can coexist. Apple maintains that regulators are demanding access before adequate protections are ready. Both positions contain a legitimate concern: dominant platforms should not block competition, and competition should not require users to surrender control of personal data.
When regulators require a company to alter its architecture, responsibility can become blurred.
Apple remains the company customers blame when an iPhone feature fails, a third-party marketplace distributes a harmful app or an outside assistant misuses personal data. Regulators may have required the access, but they do not operate the device, provide technical support or repair the damage to the platform’s reputation.
This creates an accountability gap. Government committees can mandate openness without assuming the commercial and security consequences of that openness. Apple must comply, maintain the system and explain the outcome to users.
The same problem applies to delayed features. Regulators may argue that Apple chose not to release a service, while Apple may argue that the required conditions made the launch unsafe or technically impractical. Customers are left with less functionality and no simple way to determine who caused the delay.
Over time, the ecosystem can become a negotiated compromise rather than a product with one coherent direction. That may satisfy formal compliance while producing a weaker experience for everyone involved.
The risk is not that governments will literally operate Apple’s software. It is that committees increasingly define the conditions under which Apple can design, connect and release its own features. Control shifts through constraints.
The consequences extend beyond one company. Google, Meta, Microsoft, Amazon and other platform operators face related European obligations. Hardware makers must consider whether ecosystem advantages can survive when core services are required to support rivals.
Smaller developers may gain new distribution and payment choices, but they may also inherit more compliance, customer-service and security responsibilities. Accessory companies could compete more effectively while becoming accountable for handling sensitive device data.
Other governments are watching. Rules introduced in Europe can influence legislation elsewhere, particularly when companies decide that maintaining one global technical framework is easier than operating several regional versions.
Apple is unlikely to abandon Europe or stop adapting its products. Its sales provide too much evidence of the region’s importance. The company will continue negotiating, appealing decisions and building compliance systems while withholding features it considers unsafe under current demands.
European customers may receive more app stores, payment choices and accessory compatibility. They may also wait longer for headline features included with the same hardware elsewhere.
The deeper consequence may be a technology industry that becomes more cautious about building tightly integrated products. Companies may design around anticipated regulatory demands from the beginning, limiting exclusive features, reducing private-system integration or avoiding innovations that depend on controlled access.
EU tech regulation began as an effort to constrain dominant platforms. Its long-term effect may be to transfer part of the power to shape those platforms from companies and users to regulatory institutions.
That shift deserves scrutiny equal to the market power it is intended to correct. Competition rules can restrain abuse. They can also become a slow mechanism for placing product design, security choices and ecosystem evolution under government supervision.
The danger grows when regulatory discretion becomes buried beneath permits, approvals, negotiations and technical committees that operate beyond meaningful public scrutiny.
The more power officials hold over which features, contracts or technologies may proceed—and when—the greater the opportunity for lobbying, favoritism and selective enforcement to influence outcomes. What begins as oversight can gradually become a system in which delay itself is leverage, while responsibility disappears inside layers of administration.
For the technology industry, that risks replacing transparent product decisions with political access, negotiated exceptions and regulatory influence exercised far from the consumers expected to live with the consequences.
The post EU Tech Regulation Creates a Costly Split for Apple appeared first on AppleMagazine.
Passkeys have been around for some time, but enterprise-wide adoption to this point has been slow for a number of reasons. But soon, many Microsoft customers won’t have a choice.
Starting September 1, Microsoft will roll out passkeys as the default authentication method in its cloud-based identity and access management (IAM) service Entra ID. And following a transition period, Microsoft-provided SMS and voice authentication will officially end on February 1, 2027.
With this move, Microsoft seems to be underlining the urgent need for a more secure authentication standard, as attackers up their game with AI.
This is an “important milestone,” because it moves passwordless authentication from an optional security enhancement to the expected standard, noted Ensar Seker, CISO at SOCRadar. “That shift is significant as attackers increasingly rely on AI to automate phishing campaigns, generate convincing login pages, and conduct large-scale credential theft.”
Passkeys require users to authenticate via a fingerprint, facial scan, or lock screen mechanism, rather than a password. They can be stored on physical USB keys (like YubiKey), or as digital credentials on computers, phones, or in cloud accounts.
This method, Microsoft contended, reduces reliance on phishable authentication tools like SMS and voice, and hardens protection against credential theft.
Passkeys “work better for users and worse for cyberattackers,” Nadim Abdo, Microsoft corporate VP for identity and network access engineering, wrote in a blog post.
Microsoft’s announced timeline for rolling out passkeys is relatively aggressive:
After February 1, enterprises that require SMS or voice for MFA must register a passkey before sign-in. There will be no opt-out option.
It’s important to note that these dates apply to public cloud-hosted Entra ID. Support for other cloud environments will follow a separate timeline; additional guidance and dates are to come.
While SMS and voice have served their purpose well, Abdo said, bringing MFA to billions of users who otherwise would have had none, the threat environment has changed in “speed, scale, and sophistication,” necessitating this move to passkeys.
SOCRadar’s Seker pointed out that passkeys fundamentally change the attack surface because, unlike with passwords, there is no transmission of shared secrets that can be stolen by threat actors. Authentication requires possession of the user’s device, along with biometric verification or a PIN.
“Even highly convincing AI-generated phishing pages cannot simply trick users into handing over a passkey the way they can with passwords or one-time codes,” he said.
So why haven’t we seen widespread enterprise adoption? Identity ecosystems are “fragmented,” Seker noted, and many enterprises still rely on legacy applications that only support passwords. They also struggle with cross-platform compatibility, lifecycle management, recovery processes, shared accounts, and employee onboarding and offboarding.
Further, “until recently, many organizations viewed passkeys as a consumer technology rather than an enterprise identity strategy,” he said.
Microsoft’s move changes that equation, because Entra sits at the center of many organizations’ identity infrastructure, Seker noted. Default settings are typically the strongest drivers of security adoption, so when passwordless authentication becomes required rather than optional, organizations are far more likely to deploy it at scale.
Its biggest benefit would be a “dramatic reduction” in credential-based attacks, Seker said. He pointed out that most successful compromises still begin with stolen credentials obtained through phishing, infostealer malware, password reuse, or adversary-in-the-middle attacks. Passkeys “eliminate or significantly reduce” many of those attack paths, while reducing password fatigue and the help desk costs related to password resets.
In addition, rather than trying to continuously improve users’ ability to detect increasingly sophisticated phishing attempts, passkeys remove the credential from the equation altogether, Seker noted. “That represents a more sustainable long-term security strategy than relying solely on user awareness training.”
Still, passkeys are not a silver bullet, as they do not stop endpoint compromise, session token theft, malicious insiders, or attackers who already have control of a trusted device. Enterprises must complement passkeys with endpoint protection, continuous monitoring, conditional access policies, and identity threat detection, Seker advised.
To prepare for the shift to passkeys, Microsoft advised enterprises to review their authentication policy and identify the groups still using SMS or voice authentication. They should then select the best authentication method for user devices and workflows, and ensure all employees are given passkeys and security keys.
Entra ID supports both synced passkeys (those stored in platform credential managers like iCloud Keychain and Google Password Manager), and device-bound passkeys such as Microsoft Authenticator passkeys, Entra passkey on Windows, or FIDO2 security keys.
Seker advised enterprises to evaluate support for FIDO2 and passkeys across their identity infrastructure, and to develop clear enrollment and recovery procedures. They should also educate users on what’s changing, how passkeys work, and how they can complete registration. Further, Seker said, it’s important to establish secure device management practices and to continue enforcing least privilege, conditional access, and risk-based authentication policies throughout the transition.
Ultimately, he pointed out, the move is crucial. “Over the next several years, organizations that continue relying primarily on passwords will likely face higher operational risk as AI continues to lower the cost and increase the effectiveness of credential-based attacks,” he said.
Daily tracking points to a possible hormone-linked risk—and a simple way to reduce it.
Login