Bob Cearns
ADAM ENGST 15 October 2025
Apple can’t be accused of sitting on its hardware laurels. Just a month after launching the iPhone 17 lineup with the new A19 and A19 Pro chips, the company has shifted its attention to the Mac, iPad, and Vision Pro, unveiling models powered by the new M5 system on a chip.
The M5 brings unprecedented performance to the base level of the next generation of Apple’s M-series chip family. It features a new 10-core GPU architecture that promises over 4x the peak GPU compute performance of the M4. Enhanced graphics capabilities and ray tracing deliver results up to 45% faster than the M4. On the CPU side, a 10-core CPU with six efficiency cores and four performance cores offers up to 15% faster multithreaded performance than the M4. Unified memory bandwidth improves to 153 GBps, up from 120 GBps in the M4. Apple also touts an improved 16-core Neural Engine and a powerful media engine.
Apple made no comparisons to the M4 Pro and M4 Max, although I suspect they will continue to outperform the M5 in most ways. We’ll likely see the M5 Pro and M5 Max chips sometime in 2026; the M5 Ultra, however, is less certain, given that Apple hasn’t yet released an M4 Ultra.
Although it seems likely that Apple will eventually (soon?) update the iMac, Mac mini, and MacBook Air with the M5, the company is delivering it on devices with the word Pro in the name for now: the 14-inch MacBook Pro, the 11-inch and 13-inch iPad Pro, and the Vision Pro. Interestingly, Apple chose a white-on-black color scheme for its M5, MacBook Pro, and iPad Pro press releases, whereas the Vision Pro release featured a black-on-white color scheme. Read into that what you will—I couldn’t help but think that the Vision Pro doesn’t really count as a Pro device.
There are only a few substantive changes in the latest iteration of the 14-inch MacBook Pro: a faster M5 chip, improved SSD performance, and a 4 TB SSD option.
With the M5 chip, Apple claims the following improvements over the 14-inch MacBook Pro with M4 and the 13-inch MacBook Pro with M1. It’s always a little hard to evaluate these unless you’re deeply familiar with the apps cited, but the increases—particularly over the M1—seem significant. As always, if you’re still using any Intel-based Mac, upgrade immediately for mind-blowing performance improvements.
Apple says that it increased SSD performance by up to 2x, which is welcome, given that the M4 model of the 14-inch MacBook Pro turned in SSD benchmarks of roughly 2900/3300 MBps read/write for a 1 TB SSD, whereas the M4 Pro model showed 5100/6400 MBps read/write for the same size SSD (2 TB was similar; 512 GB was slower). In other words, improved SSD performance may bring the M5 model closer to the M4 Pro model in terms of storage performance. Apple also added a 4 TB option to the base-level model with the M5, a storage tier that was previously limited to the M4 Pro and M4 Max models.
Otherwise, Apple left nearly everything else about the base-level 14-inch MacBook Pro unchanged. The new model features the same 14.2-inch Liquid Retina XDR display with ProMotion, supporting up to 120 Hz, as well as the same aluminum chassis. It also retains the same collection of ports, including three Thunderbolt 4 ports, HDMI, an SDXC card slot, and MagSafe 3. Battery life remains rated at up to 24 hours of video playback, and the 12-megapixel FaceTime camera, six-speaker sound system, and Wi-Fi 6E/Bluetooth 5.3 connectivity are all carried over intact.
The M5 model of the 14-inch MacBook Pro is a welcome evolution at the lower end of the MacBook Pro lineup for new purchasers. It might trigger some upgrades from the M1 model of the 13-inch MacBook Pro, but it’s harder to see owners of M2 and M3 models upgrading. Those who needed more performance in the past likely already plunked for a Pro or Max chip, which are likely far more competitive with the M5.
The M5 model of the 14-inch MacBook Pro continues to start at $1599 with 16 GB of unified memory and 512 GB of storage. It’s available in the same silver and space black colors for pre-order now, with availability beginning 22 October 2025.
While the changes in the 14-inch MacBook Pro were relatively limited, Apple made more sweeping updates to the 11-inch and 13-inch iPad Pro models. The M5 chip enables Apple to claim similarly increased performance over the previous M4 and M1 iPad Pro models.
The updated iPad Pro models also receive the same faster “up to 2x” storage as the 14-inch MacBook Pro, although they continue to max out at 2 TB of storage. In other specs, Apple bumped the unified memory in the 256 GB and 512 GB models from 8 GB to 12 GB, enabled the iPad Pro to drive external 4K displays at up to 120 Hz with support for Adaptive Sync to reduce latency (helpful for gaming), and added fast charging that enables a 50% charge in 30 minutes with an appropriate charger. As in the previous M4 lineup, the 256 GB and 512 GB models feature a 9-core CPU, whereas the 1 TB and 2 TB models have a 10-core CPU and gain a nano-texture glass option.
Although users may not notice, Apple outfitted these new iPad Pro models with the company’s new C1X cellular modem and N1 wireless networking chip. Apple claims that the C1X provides up to 50% faster cellular performance and up to 30% lower power consumption during active cellular use. (But official battery life estimates remain the same.) The N1 chip enables Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 6, and Thread networking—the company claims that the N1 provides better performance when connected to 5 GHz networks and improves the overall performance and reliability of features like Personal Hotspot and AirDrop. The fact that Apple is promising reliability improvements acknowledges that both—though improved over the years—have long been flaky.
Beyond these internal upgrades, the 11-inch and 13-inch iPad Pro models remain almost visually and functionally identical to their predecessors. Apple carried over the same Ultra Retina XDR display, cameras, ports, and accessory ecosystem (Magic Keyboard and Apple Pencil). The chassis and external form factors remain unchanged.
I remain somewhat uncertain as to who buys the iPad Pro. I suppose serious creative professionals might choose one, but I suspect that most of those people would be using even more powerful Macs, such as a 16-inch MacBook Pro with an M4 Max chip. Those who found a previous iPad Pro generation insufficiently fast may see the performance increases as sufficiently compelling to upgrade.
Pricing remains the same. The Wi-Fi model of the 11-inch iPad Pro starts at $999 with 256 GB of storage; adding cellular connectivity increases the price to $1199. The 13-inch iPad Pro costs $1299 for 256 GB of storage with the Wi-Fi model and $1499 for the Wi-Fi + Cellular model. They’re available for pre-order in silver and space black colors now, with availability beginning 22 October 2025.
Look, Apple updated the Vision Pro! Don’t get too excited, since there are only two changes: a notable upgrade from the M2 to the M5 chip and a new Dual Knit Band that Apple says is more comfortable.
That’s not to say that the performance improvements aren’t welcome. Apple says the Vision Pro with the M5 chip can render 10% more pixels, resulting in a sharper image with crisper text and more detailed visuals. It can also increase the refresh rate up to 120 Hz (from 100 Hz) for reduced motion blur. Battery life also sees a small improvement, with 30 minutes of additional general use (up to 2.5 hours) and video playback (up to 3 hours). Otherwise, the Vision Pro remains the same beast in form, function, philosophy, and, most importantly, price—$3499, with a total cost closer to $4000 after special lenses, sales tax, and AppleCare.
I suppose there may be some Vision Pro owners who, unconstrained by budget, will upgrade for the improved visuals, better performance, and enhanced battery life. However, none of these improvements change the Vision Pro’s core value proposition (or lack thereof), so it’s hard to imagine many people seeing the addition of the M5 as a reason to dive into the virtual world of the Vision Pro.
In “Apple Vision Pro Evokes Deep Ambivalence” (12 June 2023), I concluded with:
Reassessing after the second or third release might be the smart thing to do. The original iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch feel dated today, and for those who aren’t interested in watching movies, playing games, or experimenting with the latest tech, it’s difficult to imagine what real-world problem the Vision Pro solves. By then, we’ll also have a sense of how Apple has addressed social and societal concerns to keep the Vision Pro from playing a role in a Ready Player One-like dystopia.
It appears that the Vision Pro hasn’t solved any real-world problem sufficiently well to garner the necessary level of popularity to trigger societal concerns. While I certainly know of people who own one (mostly industry tech writers), I’ve never seen or heard of anyone using one among the people I interact with in person.
Amber Neely
Tue Sep 16 2025, 08:00 PM EDT · 4 minute read
Logitech Lift Mouse in rose pink
Ergonomic mice are everywhere now, but the Logitech Lift is one of the more approachable ones, falling somewhere between casual gear and specialty equipment.
Sitting at your desk for hours on end every day isn't great for your health — but you didn't need a doctor to tell you that. Odds are, you probably already know when you've done it a bit too much.
So maybe you've invested in a better chair, a standing desk, or even an under-the-desk treadmill. While all of these are great, they don't address one of the biggest issues of extended computer use: repetitive stress.
A normal computer mouse requires you to sit with your forearm pronated — that is to say, palm-down. This is an unnatural position that can squeeze the nerves in your wrist and cause a myriad of problems, including carpal tunnel.
Logitech has a solution for that: Lift. Lift is a vertical orientation mouse designed to put your hand in a more natural position.
Lift puts your hand at a 57-degree angle; Logitech calls this the "natural handshake position." It feels strange at first, but it really does help with wrist pressure.
When I first started using it, my arm was exhausted by the end of the day. After all, I've been using standard mice for about 34 years now.
Logitech Lift Mouse review: It definitely takes a bit of time to get used to this sort of mouse
After two weeks, though, I noticed my hand and wrist were less tired overall. And honestly, my arm was only really tired for the first few days.
The soft grip feels great; I was surprised by how much I actually noticed a difference. I do wonder how it will hold up against dirt and oil over time.
I have another Logitech mouse that features the same soft grip on the sides. It definitely picks up anything that is on your hands.
Logitech Lift Mouse review: The Lift compared to two other of Logitech's options
I can't imagine that it will clean up very well. If that's the case, you may want to opt for the graphite color option.
It's also important to note that the mouse is designed only for small to medium hands. If you've got larger hands, I could see this being frustrating — or potentially even painful — to use.
Lift has six buttons, including the usual clicks and scroll wheel. The extra buttons, which Logitech calls "forward and back" buttons, are reachable by thumb.
What makes this stand out is customization through the Logi Options+ app. You can change button functions globally or even tailor them per app.
Logitech Lift Mouse review: There are three buttons and a scroll wheel on the front of the mouse
That is probably the second-best feature of Lift. The first, obviously, is the fact that it's ergonomically designed.
I liked mapping specific actions depending on the software I was in. It's a small touch, sure, but it is honestly one that I grew to love while I was testing Lift.
Scrolling is also great, smooth, and precise. I generally like the way Logitech's scroll wheels work anyway; they always feel lightly tactile and have a decent speed.
Lift connects either by Bluetooth or the included Logi Bolt USB receiver. I was extremely thankful that a dongle was in the box, even if it's USB-A only.
That does mean MacBook users will need an adapter if they don't already have one. Bluetooth is an option, too, but I prefer the stability of a dongle — maybe I'm old like that.
You can pair Lift with up to three devices and switch between them with a button press. It works, though Mac users already have Universal Control, which accomplishes basically the same thing.
The wireless range is solid, up to 30 feet or so. That's more than enough for typical use.
This is not a travel mouse. It's extremely bulky, and you'll struggle to fit it comfortably in a laptop bag.
On the desk, it takes up more space than a standard mouse. That may be an issue for smaller setups or tightly packed workstations.
Logitech Lift Mouse review: this is not a small mouse by any stretch
It also isn't a fast mouse. Gamers or anyone with demanding precision workflows will likely find it too sluggish.
For everyday work, though, it's perfectly adequate. I found it much better than relying on my MacBook Air's trackpad.
Lift runs on a single AA battery, which Logitech claims can last up to two years. Personally, I prefer removable batteries, though I know others prefer rechargeables.
Logitech Lift Mouse review: accessing the battery compartment and dongle
You won't be charging this mouse constantly, which is nice. Just keep a spare AA around, and you'll never run into downtime.
I tested the Rose pink version, and I loved it. It's fun without looking childish, and it brightened up my desk.
The mouse is also available in off-white and graphite. Left-handed users get a version too, though unfortunately not in Rose pink.
It's a thoughtful lineup, but it does feel slightly uneven depending on your handedness and color preference.
The Logitech Lift is a solid ergonomic mouse with thoughtful features. It takes a few days to adjust, but the payoff is less hand fatigue.
It's not ideal for travel, gaming, or large hands. But for office work and home setups, it's comfortable, customizable, and reliable.
At around $75, it's an investment, but not an unreasonable one once you consider how much you use a mouse. It's a practical buy if comfort is a priority.
ADAM ENGST 13 October 2025
You may have heard about “juice jacking,” a type of attack that exploits a security vulnerability in USB charging. This vulnerability exists because USB ports can simultaneously transfer both power and data, potentially allowing a compromised charging station in an airport, hotel, or other public place to attack a connected iPhone.
Although there are no reports of juice jacking attacks in the wild, Apple added protection against this vulnerability years ago with a setting that explicitly prompts you to allow wired accessories to connect. You can configure iOS to handle accessories in four ways: ask every time, ask only for new accessories, automatically allow connections when the device is unlocked, or always allow connections.
Unfortunately, as a post on a private mailing list alerted me, there’s a bug in iOS 26.0.1 related to the accessory protection controls in Settings > Privacy & Security > Wired Accessories. The bug also affects iPadOS 26. For some iPhones and iPads, including both my iPhone 17 and fourth-generation iPad Air, the accessory connection control is locked to Always Allow, and a note below says, “This setting is managed by your organization and cannot be changed.”
However, I have no profiles or mobile device management (MDM) software in place—my iPhone and iPad are not managed by an organization. While I don’t recall which security level I had selected on my previous iPhone 16 Pro, I would usually have chosen Ask for New Accessories. Updating my iPhone 17 to iOS 26.1 beta 3 did not unlock the accessory protection controls. There was a suggestion that erasing all settings would allow editing of this option, but I wasn’t willing to try that. I’ve reported the bug to Apple.
While some people in the discussion also experienced the bug, others had no trouble adjusting their accessory protection controls. One person was confident that she had not previously chosen Automatically Allow When Unlocked on her previous iPhone, but she was able to switch back to Ask for New Accessories. Sadly, it is common for some settings to change during operating system upgrades.
Because this bug forces a reduced security stance, it’s worth examining the seriousness of the underlying juice jacking threat. Official warnings regarding the vulnerability appear regularly. They have come from the U.S. Army Cyber Command, the Denver office of the FBI, the Federal Communications Commission, the Transportation Security Administration, and the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, among others.
But how can we reconcile all these warnings with the absence of reporting on real-world attacks? The first juice jacking exploit was demonstrated at the Defcon security conference in 2011, showing how attackers could take advantage of USB vulnerabilities to compromise a device. Researchers have since demonstrated additional attack techniques using malicious chargers. In 2013, Apple and Google introduced protections for iOS and Android, and both companies have continued to release updates and fixes for related vulnerabilities.
At one level, both Apple and Google are taking the threat seriously because the vulnerabilities are real, even if they originate only from security researchers demonstrating their findings at Defcon. That alone could help explain the persistence of the juice jacking warnings, especially in conjunction with the feedback loop between government agencies and media outlets.
However, I’ve seen a credible report of juice jacking being observed in the wild, an incident that may have helped prompt the additional protections we’ve seen in iOS and Android. It’s also possible that organizations like the U.S. Army Cyber Command possess knowledge of targeted attacks that haven’t been made public. Such attacks would have to be highly targeted because juice jacking requires risky physical access to the compromised charger.
Some experts suggest that juice jacking on its own isn’t a real threat, but it could be used alongside other exploits. This matters because sophisticated attackers—typically state-sponsored groups—collect various security vulnerabilities and strategically combine them to craft more effective attacks. They carefully select when and how to deploy these exploits, usually targeting specific individuals or organizations rather than the general public. This targeted approach explains why many attacks go unreported: if a vulnerability is exploited against a high-value target like a dissident or journalist, it will stay secret unless the victim notices the breach and works with security experts to find and report the flaw to the vendor for fixing. In short, even if juice jacking is unlikely to pose a threat to everyday users, it remains part of the broader security landscape that Apple needs to defend against.
The practical takeaway here is not to worry much about juice jacking. Apple should fix this bug promptly to protect high-value targets, but no organization would risk exposing itself and neutering a valuable exploit by compromising many public chargers—especially in an airplane, say, in the hope that an undirected attack might find something valuable.
It’s also trivially easy to protect yourself if you have even the slightest concern. Use your own trusted charger and cable, or charge directly from a battery that you recharge using a public charger. Wireless charging is likely safer as well, since it has a smaller attack surface due to transmitting only power and minimal metadata (power negotiation and accessory identification from the phone to the charger). Although power-only USB cables are available, it’s hard to know how safe they are. It’s even possible to create exploit-enabled cables, so it’s best to stick with known cables from Apple and other reputable manufacturers.
Andrew Orr
Tue Aug 12 2025, 10:57 PM EDT · 3 minute read
Run AI models locally on your Mac
OpenAI's newest gpt-oss-20b model lets your Mac run ChatGPT-style AI with no subscription, no internet, and no strings attached. Here's how to get started.
On August 5 OpenAI released its first open-weight large language models in years, allowing Mac users to run ChatGPT-style tools offline. With the right setup, many Apple Silicon Macs can now handle advanced AI processing without a subscription or internet connection.
Running a powerful AI model on a Mac once required paying for a cloud service or navigating complex server software. The new gpt-oss-20b and gpt-oss-120b models change that.
The models offer downloadable weights that work with popular local-AI tools like LM Studio and Ollama.
You can try the model in your browser before downloading anything by visiting gpt-oss.com. The site offers a free demo of each model so you can see how it handles writing, coding, and general questions.
We recommend at least an M2 chip, and 16GB of RAM. More is better. If you have an M1 processor, we recommend the Max or Ultra. A Mac Studio is an excellent choice for this, because of the extra cooling.
You can try the model in your browser before downloading
The model struggled a bit on our MacBook Air with an M3 chip. As you'd expect, it heated up too.
Think of it like gaming on the Mac. You can do it, but it can be demanding.
To get started, you'll need one of these tools:
These apps handle model downloads, setup, and compatibility checks.
Ollama is a lightweight tool that lets you run local AI models from the command line with minimal setup.
It works just like ChatGPT, but everything runs on your Mac without needing an internet connection. In our test, the download was about 12 GB, so your Wi-Fi speed will determine how long that step takes.
On a MacBook Air with an M3 chip and 16 GB of RAM, the model ran, but responses to questions took noticeably longer than GPT-4o in the cloud. That said, the answers arrived without any internet connection.
The 20-billion-parameter model is already compressed into 4-bit format. That allows the model to run smoothly on Macs with 16 GB of RAM for various tasks.
It's slower than cloud-based GPT-4o for complex tasks but responsive enough for most personal and development work. The larger 120b model requires 60 to 80 GB of memory, making it practical only for high-end workstations or research environments.
Local inference keeps your data private, since nothing leaves your device. It also avoids ongoing API or subscription fees and reduces latency by removing the need for network calls.
Because the models are released under the Apache 2.0 license, you can fine-tune them for custom workflows. That flexibility lets you shape the AI's behavior for specialized projects.
There are some limitations to the model
Gpt-oss-20b is a solid choice if you need an AI model that runs entirely on your Mac without an internet connection. It's private, free to use, and dependable once it's set up. The tradeoff is speed and polish.
In testing, it took longer to respond than GPT-4 and sometimes needed a little cleanup on complex answers. For casual writing, basic coding, and research, it works fine.
If staying offline matters more to you than performance, gpt-oss-20b is one of the best options you can run today. For fast, highly accurate results, a cloud-based model is still the better fit.
Use a quantized version of the model to reduce precision from 16-bit floating point to 8-bit or 4-bit integers. Quantizing the model means lowering its precision from 16-bit floating point to 8-bit or about 4-bit integers.
That cuts memory use dramatically while keeping accuracy close to the original. OpenAI's gpt-oss models use a 4-bit format called MXFP4, which lets the 20b model run on Macs with around 16 GB of RAM.
If your Mac has less than 16 GB of RAM, stick to smaller models in the 3 to 7 billion parameter range. Close memory-intensive apps before starting a session, and enable MLX or Metal acceleration when available for better performance.
With the right setup, your Mac can run AI models offline without subscriptions or internet, keeping your data secure. It won't replace high-end cloud models for every task, but it's a capable offline tool when privacy and control are important.
ADAM ENGST 6 October 2025
I’ve finally figured out my core discomfort with Liquid Glass, Apple’s new translucent interface design language for its latest operating systems. It’s not that there are occasional spots where the translucency renders the interface nearly illegible. It’s usually either obvious what is being obscured or easy to clear up the confusion with a small movement. Nor is it that controls can shrink, expand, and “dynamically morph,” which harms discoverability and reduces affordances for users who assess the options without nervously swiping and scrolling to see how the interface changes. Neither of these issues is good, especially for less confident users, but I expect Apple to continue polishing Liquid Glass to eliminate more and more of these rough spots.
No, my problem with Liquid Glass runs deeper. Apple has said that it was “driven by the goal of bringing greater focus to content,” and that controls “give way to content,” “shrink to bring focus to the content,” and “refract the content behind them.” How can anyone argue against increasing focus on content? Haven’t we been told that content is king?
Here’s where I take exception to Liquid Glass, and to Apple’s positioning of content as the most important aspect of our digital devices, and thus of our digital lives. Yes, many people are largely passive consumers of content, whether we’re talking about Web pages, podcasts, or streaming videos. For those people, there is little beyond content, and Liquid Glass’s deprecation of controls may allow them to continue their consumption with less distraction. But that’s not a lifestyle to aspire to, reminiscent as it is of the humans in WALL-E—perpetually reclined in floating chairs, mindlessly consuming entertainment. (The movie is also notable for giving a credit to MacInTalk, Apple’s old speech synthesis system that voiced AUTO, the ship’s computer.)
But there’s an important point to make here: controls are not tools. Controls allow you to adjust settings—change channels, select colors, pause playback, and more. Tools enable you to create, modify, delete, or give a performance. It’s the difference between a volume knob and a violin.
I’ve always seen computers as tools: for creation, communication, research, performance, and learning. Although I didn’t come to this opinion because of Steve Jobs, he once said, “That’s what a computer is to me… It’s the most remarkable tool that we’ve ever come up with, and it’s the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds.”
It’s easy to appreciate—at least for an expert—what makes a fine chef’s knife, a well-balanced hammer, or a high-quality painter’s brush. However, it’s harder to pinpoint what sets a digital tool apart as excellent rather than just functional. To some extent, it’s personal—when I use an app with outstanding tools, like Arc or Mimestream, I can fall into a flow state where I’m working quickly, efficiently, and accurately on non-trivial tasks. It’s a feeling similar to when I’m cooking well or timing a race successfully, both activities that are inherently functional but which I think of as a performance. If I were musical, I might liken it to playing an instrument. It’s not uncommon for someone watching me work to comment that I move too quickly for them to follow what I’m doing.
So, no, I don’t want tools that “give way to content” or “shrink to bring focus to the content.” When I’m cooking, I want my knives, spatulas, measuring spoons, and the like exactly where they belong, so they’re instantly at hand. My Mac is set up in much the same way, with every app appearing exactly where I expect and, for the most part, providing an interface that looks and works as I want.
Apple has long struggled with balancing the importance of tools versus content. As physical objects, our Macs, iPhones, and iPads are all tools—we rely on their screens, keyboards, pointing devices, and ports to get our work done. For the most part, Apple has done a good job of making them highly usable and efficient, but at the same time, the company’s designers seem to want to pare away ever more of the physical instantiation. Bezels get smaller, keyboards get thinner, and ports disappear, all in the service of giving way to the content on the screen. But tools aren’t necessarily better for being smaller—function must dictate form, not the other way around. A chef’s knife with an ultra-thin handle may look sleek, but it would sacrifice the grip and control that make precise cutting possible.
The direction Apple is taking with Liquid Glass doesn’t surprise me because it follows the same minimalist path as much of the company’s hardware design. However, I would urge developers of productivity apps—of real tools—to think long and hard about how to keep their interfaces discoverable, accessible, and readable.
Content comes and goes, but tools endure.
ADAM ENGST 25 September 2025
In a statement, Apple writes:
It’s been more than a year since the Digital Markets Act was implemented. Over that time, it’s become clear that the DMA is leading to a worse experience for Apple users in the EU. It’s exposing them to new risks, and disrupting the simple, seamless way their Apple products work together. And as new technologies come out, our European users’ Apple products will only fall further behind. … That’s why we’re urging regulators to take a closer look at how the law is affecting the EU citizens who use Apple products every day. We believe our users in Europe deserve the best experience on our technology, at the same standard we provide in the rest of the world — and that’s what we’ll keep fighting to deliver.
It’s been more than a year since the Digital Markets Act was implemented. Over that time, it’s become clear that the DMA is leading to a worse experience for Apple users in the EU. It’s exposing them to new risks, and disrupting the simple, seamless way their Apple products work together. And as new technologies come out, our European users’ Apple products will only fall further behind. …
That’s why we’re urging regulators to take a closer look at how the law is affecting the EU citizens who use Apple products every day. We believe our users in Europe deserve the best experience on our technology, at the same standard we provide in the rest of the world — and that’s what we’ll keep fighting to deliver.
I struggle to offer constructive thoughts about Apple’s battles with the EU over the Digital Markets Act, a competition law aimed at boosting interoperability and limiting gatekeeper control. At a high level, I believe both the European Commission (which is responsible for the DMA) and Apple believe that they have the best interests of their constituents at heart. However, the European Commission views itself as serving all residents of EU member countries, whereas Apple is focused on current or prospective Apple users in the EU. Neither side is likely acting in bad faith; they’re advancing different, sometimes conflicting, mandates. As much as I believe Apple makes good products that serve its users well, what’s best for Apple users (and thus Apple itself) isn’t always best—or even good—for everyone else.
Apple’s claim of “the same standard we provide in the rest of the world” rings somewhat hollow, given that it often adjusts its technology and services to comply with local laws and rulings. The company has made significant concessions to operate in China, doesn’t offer FaceTime in the United Arab Emirates, and removes apps from the still-functional Russian App Store at the Russian government’s request. Apple likely pushed back (unsuccessfully) in less public ways in those more authoritarian countries, but in the democratic EU, this public statement appears aimed at rallying its users and influencing the regulatory conversation. Even in the United States, Apple dropped the Blood Oxygen app from watchOS to comply with the International Trade Commission’s ruling in favor of Masimo’s claim of patent infringement before coming up with an iPhone-focused workaround (see “Blood Oxygen Monitoring Returns with iOS 18.6.1 and watchOS 11.6.1,” 14 August 2025).
Ultimately, we’re witnessing a clash between two immense power structures—the European Union, a federation of 27 countries representing 450 million people and the world’s third-largest economy—and Apple, one of the world’s most influential and valuable companies, with a market capitalization of about $3.7 trillion and roughly $100 billion in net income over the past 12 months. As the power of the tech giants, whose products and services underpin the lives of billions, continues to increase, these conflicts will become more common, and it’s often impossible to predict which side’s vision will best serve everyone in practice.
