On Wednesday, Elevation Lab announced TimeCapsule, a new $20 battery case purported to extend Apple AirTag battery life from one year to 10 years. The product replaces the standard CR2032 coin cell battery in the Bluetooth-based location tracker with two AA batteries to provide extended power capacity.
The TimeCapsule case requires users to remove their AirTag’s original back plate and battery, then place the Apple device onto contact points inside the waterproof enclosure. The company recommends using Energizer Ultimate Lithium AA batteries, which it claims provide 14 times more power capacity than the stock coin cell battery configuration.
The CNC-machined aluminum case is aimed at users who place AirTags in vehicles, boats, or other applications where regular battery changes prove impractical. The company sells the TimeCapsule through its website and Amazon.
A photo of the TimeCapsule, which purportedly extends AirTag battery life with AA batteries. Credit: Elevation Lab
As related on the TimeCapsule’s product page, the add-on case reportedly emerged after its inventor lost camera equipment to theft, discovering their AirTag had died months earlier due to a depleted battery. This experience led to the development of a longer-lasting power solution for the tracking devices.
It works well, but there still aren’t enough modern, console-style games.
The Backbone One attachable game controller for the iPhone.
In theory, it ought to be as good a time as ever to be a gamer on the iPhone.
Classic console emulators have rolled out to the platform for the first time, and they work great. There are strong libraries of non-skeezy mobile games on Apple Arcade and Netflix Games, streaming via Xbox and PlayStation services is continuing apace, and there are even a few AAA console games now running natively on the platform, like Assassin’s Creed and Resident Evil titles.
Some of those games need a traditional, dual-stick game controller to work well, though, and Apple bafflingly offers no first-party solution for this.
Yes, you can sync popular Bluetooth controllers from Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, and 8bitdo with your iPhone, but that’s not really the ideal answer—your iPhone isn’t a big TV sitting across the room or a computer monitor propped up on your desk.
A few companies have jumped in to solve this with attachable controllers that give the iPhone a Nintendo Switch or Steam Deck-like form factor (albeit a lot smaller). There’s a wide range of quality, though, and some of the ones you’ll see advertised aren’t very well made.
There’s some debate out there, but there’s one that just about anyone will at least put up for consideration: the Backbone One. That’s the one I picked for my new iPhone 16 Pro Max, which I have loaded with emulators and tons of games.
Since many folks are about to get iPhone 16s for the holidays and might be in the market for something similar, I figured it’d be a good time to write some quick impressions, including pros and cons. Is this thing worth a $99 price tag? What about its subscription-based app?
Switching from the Razer Kishi
Here’s some background, real quick: I previously owned an iPhone 13 Pro, and I played a lot of Diablo Immortal. I wanted to try the controller experience with that game, so I bought a first-generation Razer Kishi—which I liked for the most part. It had excellent thumbsticks that felt similar to those you’d find on an Xbox controller, if a little bit softer.
That said, its design involved a back that loosened up and flexed to fit different kinds of phones, but I found it annoying to take on or off because it immediately crumbled into a folding mess. The big issue that made me go with something else, though, was that the controller worked with a Lightning port, and my new iPhone traded that for USB-C. That’s a good change, overall, but it did mean I had to replace some things.
The Kishi I had is now discontinued, and it’s been replaced with the Kishi V2, which looks… less appealing to me. That’s because it ditches those Xbox-like sticks for ones more similar to what you see with a Nintendo Switch. There’s less range of motion and less stability.
The Razer Kishi V2 (top) and Razer Kishi V1 (bottom). I had the V1. Credit: Ars Technica
The Backbone One has similar drawbacks, but I was drawn to the Backbone as an alternative partly because I had enough complaints about the Kishi that I wanted to roll the dice on something new. I also wanted a change because there’s a version with PlayStation button symbols—and I planned to primarily play PS1 games in an emulator as well as stream PS5 games to the device instead of a PlayStation Portal.
Solid hardware
One of my big complaints about the first-generation Kishi (the folding and flimsy back) isn’t an issue with the Backbone One. It’s right there in the name: This accessory has a sturdy plastic backbone that keeps things nice and stable.
The PlayStation version I got has face buttons and a directional pad that seem like good miniature counterparts to the buttons on Sony’s DualSense controller. The triggers and sticks offer much shallower and less precise control than the DualSense, though—they closely resemble the triggers and sticks on the Nintendo Switch Joy-Cons.
This version of the Backbone One adopts some styling from Sony’s DualSense PS5 controller. Credit: Samuel Axon
I feel that’s a big downside. It’s fine for some games, but if you’re playing any game built around quickly and accurately aiming in a 3D environment, you’ll feel the downgrade compared to a real controller.
The product feels quite sturdy to hold and use, and it doesn’t seem likely to break anytime soon. The only thing that bugs me on that front is that the placement of the USB-C port for connecting to the phone is in a place where it takes enough force to insert or remove it that I’m worried about wear and tear on the ports on either my phone or the controller. Time will tell on that front.
There’s an app, but…
The Backbone One is not just a hardware product, even though I think it’d be a perfectly good product without any kind of software or service component.
There is a Backbone app that closely resembles the PlayStation 5’s home screen interface (this is not just for the PlayStation version of the controller, to be clear). It offers a horizontally scrolling list of games from multiple sources like streaming services, mobile game subscription services, or just what’s installed on your device. It also includes voice chat, multiplayer lobbies, streaming to Twitch, and content like video highlights from games.
The Backbone One app collects games from different sources into one browsing interface. Credit: Samuel Axon
Unfortunately, all this requires a $40 annual subscription after a one-month trial. The good news is that you don’t have to pay for the Backbone One’s subscription service to use it as a controller with your games and emulators.
I don’t think anyone anywhere was asking for a subscription-based app for their mobile game controller. The fact that one is offered proves two things. First, it shows you just how niche this kind of product still is (and transitively, the current state of playing traditional, console-style games on iPhone) that the company that made it felt this was necessary to make a sufficient amount of money.
Second, it shows how much work Apple still needs to do to bake these features into the OS to make iOS/iPadOS a platform that is competitive with offerings from Sony, Microsoft, or even Nintendo in terms of appeal for core rather than casual gamers. That involves more than just porting a few AAA titles.
The state of iPhone gaming
The Backbone One is a nice piece of hardware, but many games you might be excited to play with it are better played elsewhere or with something else.
Hit games with controller support like Genshin Impact, Call of Duty Mobile, and Infinity Nikki all have excellent touch-based control schemes, making using a gamepad simply a matter of preference rather than a requirement.
While Apple is working with publishers like Capcom and Ubisoft to bring some hardcore console titles to the platform, that all still seems like just dipping toes in the water at this point, because they’re such a tiny slice of what’s on offer for PlayStation, Xbox, PC, or even Nintendo Switch players.
In theory, AAA game developers should be excited at the prospect of having iPhone players as a market—the install base of the iPhone absolutely dwarfs all home and handheld consoles combined. But they’re facing two barriers. The first is a chicken-and-egg problem: Only the most recent iPhones (iPhone 15 Pro and the iPhone 16 series) have supported those console AAA titles, and it will take a few years before most iPhone owners catch up.
Emulators like RetroArch (seen here running on an iPhone 16 Pro Max) are the main use case of the Backbone One. Credit: Samuel Axon
The second is that modern AAA games are immensely expensive to produce, and they (thankfully) don’t typically have robust enough in-game monetization paths to be distributed for free. That means that to profit and not cannibalize console and PC sales, publishers need to sell games for much higher up-front costs than mobile players are accustomed to.
So if mobile-first hardcore games are best played with touchscreens, and gamepad-first console games haven’t hit their stride on the platform yet, what’s the point of spending $100 on a Backbone One?
The answer is emulators, for both classic and homebrew games. For that, I’ve been pleased with the Backbone One. But if your goal is to play modern games, the time still hasn’t quite come.
Samuel Axon is a senior editor at Ars Technica. He covers Apple, software development, gaming, AI, entertainment, and mixed reality. He has been writing about gaming and technology for nearly two decades at Engadget, PC World, Mashable, Vice, Polygon, Wired, and others. He previously ran a marketing and PR agency in the gaming industry, led editorial for the TV network CBS, and worked on social media marketing strategy for Samsung Mobile at the creative agency SPCSHP. He also is an independent software and game developer for iOS, Windows, and other platforms, and he is a graduate of DePaul University, where he studied interactive media and software development.
When Apple devices are used to spread CSAM, it’s a huge problem for survivors, who allegedly face a range of harms, including “exposure to predators, sexual exploitation, dissociative behavior, withdrawal symptoms, social isolation, damage to body image and self-worth, increased risky behavior, and profound mental health issues, including but not limited to depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, self-harm, insomnia, eating disorders, death, and other harmful effects.” One survivor told The Times she “lives in constant fear that someone might track her down and recognize her.”
Survivors suing have also incurred medical and other expenses due to Apple’s inaction, the lawsuit alleged. And those expenses will keep piling up if the court battle drags on for years and Apple’s practices remain unchanged.
Apple could win, a lawyer and policy fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, Riana Pfefferkorn, told The Times, as survivors face “significant hurdles” seeking liability for mishandling content that Apple says Section 230 shields. And a win for survivors could “backfire,” Pfefferkorn suggested, if Apple proves that forced scanning of devices and services violates the Fourth Amendment.
Survivors, some of whom own iPhones, think that Apple has a responsibility to protect them. In a press release, Margaret E. Mabie, a lawyer representing survivors, praised survivors for raising “a call for justice and a demand for Apple to finally take responsibility and protect these victims.”
“Thousands of brave survivors are coming forward to demand accountability from one of the most successful technology companies on the planet,” Mabie said. “Apple has not only rejected helping these victims, it has advertised the fact that it does not detect child sex abuse material on its platform or devices thereby exponentially increasing the ongoing harm caused to these victims.”
When MagSafe was introduced, it promised an accessories revolution. Meh.
Apple’s current lineup of MagSafe accessories. Credit: Samuel Axon
When Apple introduced what it currently calls MagSafe in 2020, its marketing messaging suggested that the magnetic attachment standard for the iPhone would produce a boom in innovation in accessories, making things possible that simply weren’t before.
Four years later, that hasn’t really happened—either from third-party accessory makers or Apple’s own lineup of branded MagSafe products.
Instead, we have a lineup of accessories that matches pretty much what was available at launch in 2020: chargers, cases, and just a couple more unusual applications.
With the launch of the iPhone 16 just behind us and the holidays just in front of us, a bunch of people are moving to phones that support MagSafe for the first time. Apple loves an upsell, so it offers some first-party MagSafe accessories—some useful, some not worth the cash, given the premiums it sometimes charges.
Given all that, it’s a good time to check in and quickly point out which (if any) of these first-party MagSafe accessories might be worth grabbing alongside that new iPhone and which ones you should skip in favor of third-party offerings.
Cases with MagSafe
Look, we could write thousands of words about the variety of iPhone cases available, or even just about those that support MagSafe to some degree or another—and we still wouldn’t really scratch the surface. (Unless that surface was made with Apple’s leather-replacement FineWoven material—hey-o!)
It’s safe to say there’s a third-party case for every need and every type of person out there. If you want one that meets your exact needs, you’ll be able to find it. Just know that cases that are labeled as MagSafe-ready will allow charge through and will let the magnets align correctly between a MagSafe charger and an iPhone—that’s really the whole point of the “MagSafe” name.
But if you prefer to stick with Apple’s own cases, there are currently two options: the clear cases and the silicone cases.
The clear case is definitely the superior of Apple’s two first-party MagSafe cases. Credit: Samuel Axon
The clear cases actually have a circle where the edges of the MagSafe magnets are, which is pretty nice for getting the magnets to snap without any futzing—though it’s really not necessary, since, well, magnets attract. They have a firm plastic shell that is likely to do a good job of protecting your phone when you drop it.
The Silicone case is… fine. Frankly, it’s ludicrously priced for what it is. It offers no advantages over a plethora of third-party cases that cost exactly half as much.
Recommendation: The clear case has its advantages, but the silicone case is awfully expensive for what it is. Generally, third party is the way to go. There are lots of third-party cases from manufacturers who got licensed by Apple, and you can generally trust those will work with wireless charging just fine. That was the whole point of the MagSafe branding, after all.
The MagSafe charger
At $39 or $49 (depending on length, one meter or two), these charging cables are pretty pricey. But they’re also highly durable, relatively efficient, and super easy to use. In most cases, you might as well just use any old USB-C cable.
There are some situations where you might prefer this option, though—for example, if you prop your iPhone up against your bedside lamp like a nightstand clock, or if you (like me) listen to audiobooks on wired earbuds while you fall asleep via the USB-C port, but you want to make sure the phone is still charging.
The MagSafe charger for the iPhone. Credit: Samuel Axon
So the answer on Apple’s MagSafe charger is that it’s pretty specialized, but it’s arguably the best option for those who have some specific reason not to just use USB-C.
Recommendation: Just use a USB-C cable, unless you have a specific reason to go this route—shoutout to my fellow individuals who listen to audiobooks while falling asleep but need headphones so as not to keep their spouse awake but prefer wired earbuds that use the USB-C port over AirPods to avoid losing AirPods in the bed covers. I’m sure there are dozens of us! If you do go this route, Apple’s own cable is the safest pick.
Apple’s FineWoven Wallet with MagSafe
While I’d long known people with dense wallet cases for their iPhones, I was excited about Apple’s leather (and later FineWoven) wallet with MagSafe when it was announced. I felt the wallet cases I’d seen were way too bulky, making the phone less pleasant to use.
The problem is that the “durable microtwill” material that Apple went with instead of leather is prone to scratching, as many owners have complained. That’s a bit frustrating for something that costs nearly $60.
The MagSafe wallet has too many limitations to be worthwhile for most people. Credit: Samuel Axon
The wallet also only holds a few cards, and putting cards here means you probably can’t or at least shouldn’t try to use wireless charging, because the cards would be between the charger and the phone. Apple itself warns against doing this.
For those reasons, skip the FineWoven Wallet. There are lots of better-designed iPhone wallet cases out there, even though they might not be so minimalistic.
Recommendation: Skip this one. It’s a great idea in theory, but in practice and execution, it just doesn’t deliver. There are zillions of great wallet cases out there if you don’t mind a bit of bulk—just know you’ll have some wireless charging issues with many cases.
Other categories offered by third parties
Frankly, a lot of the more interesting applications of MagSafe for the iPhone are only available through third parties.
There are monitor mounts for using the iPhone as a webcam with Macs; bedside table stands for charging the phone while it acts as a smart display; magnetic phone stands for car dashboards that let you use GPS while you drive using MagSafe; magnetic versions for attaching power banks and portable batteries; and of course, multi-device chargers similar to the infamously canceled Airpower charging pad Apple had planned to release at one point. (I have the Belkin Boost Charge Pro 3-in-1 on my desk, and it works great.)
It’s not the revolution of new applications that some imagined when MagSafe was launched, but that’s not really a surprise. Still, there are some quality products out there. It’s both strange and a pity that Apple hasn’t made most of them itself.
No revolution here
Truthfully, MagSafe never seemed like it would be a huge smash. iPhones already supported Qi wireless charging before it came along, so the idea of magnets keeping the device aligned with the charger was always the main appeal—its existence potentially saved some users from ending up with chargers that didn’t quite work right with their phones, provided those users bought officially licensed MagSafe accessories.
Apple’s MagSafe accessories are often overpriced compared to alternatives from Belkin and other frequent partners. MagSafe seemed to do a better job bringing some standards to certain third-party products than it did bringing life to Apple’s offerings, and it certainly did not bring about a revolution of new accessory categories to the iPhone.
Still, it’s hard to blame anyone for choosing to go with Apple’s versions; the world of third-party accessories can be messy, and going the first-party route is generally a surefire way to know you’re not going to have many problems, even if the sticker’s a bit steep.
You could shop for third-party options, but sometimes you want a sure thing. With the possible exception of the FineWoven Wallet, all of these Apple-made MagSafe products are sure things.
Samuel Axon is a senior editor at Ars Technica. He covers Apple, software development, gaming, AI, entertainment, and mixed reality. He has been writing about gaming and technology for nearly two decades at Engadget, PC World, Mashable, Vice, Polygon, Wired, and others. He previously ran a marketing and PR agency in the gaming industry, led editorial for the TV network CBS, and worked on social media marketing strategy for Samsung Mobile at the creative agency SPCSHP. He also is an independent software and game developer for iOS, Windows, and other platforms, and he is a graduate of DePaul University, where he studied interactive media and software development.
When Apple infamously ditched the headphone jack with the launch of the iPhone 7, it at least provided customers with a Lightning-to-3.5 mm adapter either right in the box or as a $9 standalone purchase in its online store. Now it looks like that adapter is being retired.
As MacRumors first noted, the adapter is showing as sold out in most regions, along with a few other Lightning accessories, like the even-more-archaic-seeming Lightning-to-VGA adapter. That includes the United States, where it is not possible to order the headphone adapter from Apple’s store.
Inventory has run out, and it seems unlikely Apple will make more to refill it.
This is likely part of a general phasing out of products related to the proprietary Lightning port, which was used in many Apple devices (including the iPhone) for years but has been replaced by USB-C in all of the company’s major products. A couple of older iPhone models offered at cheaper prices—the iPhone SE and the iPhone 14—are available today, but they will likely be replaced in just a couple of months.
Nonetheless, many people out there still have older Lightning iPhones but haven’t yet made the jump to wireless headphones. Third-party options are out there that they can use—at least for now—but the popular Apple adapter seems to be following a similar script as other deprecated Apple accessories have upon their retirement.
The European Commission (EC) has opened an antitrust investigation into US-based glass-maker Corning, claiming that its Gorilla Glass has dominated the mobile phone screen market due to restrictive deals and licensing.
Corning’s shatter-resistant alkali-aluminosilicate glass keeps its place atop the market, according to the EC’s announcement, because it both demands, and rewards with rebates, device makers that agree to “source all or nearly all of their (Gorilla Glass) demand from Corning.” Corning also allegedly required device makers to report competitive offers to the glass maker. The company is accused of exerting a similar pressure on “finishers,” or those firms that turn raw glass into finished phone screen protectors, as well as demanding finishers not pursue patent challenges against Corning.
“[T]he agreements that Corning put in place with OEMs and finishers may have excluded rival glass producers from large segments of the market, thereby reducing customer choice, increasing prices, and stifling innovation to the detriment of consumers worldwide,” the Commission wrote.
Ars has reached out to Corning for comment and will update this post with response.
Gorilla Glass does approach Xerox or Kleenex levels of brand name association with its function. New iterations of its thin, durable glass reach a bit further than the last and routinely pick up press coverage. Gorilla Glass 4 was pitched as being “up to two times stronger” than any “competitive” alternative. Gorilla Glass 5 could survive a 1.6-meter drop 80 percent of the time, and 6 built in more repetitive damage resistance.
Spreen’s message is the first time we’ve seen an AI-mediated relationship breakup, but it likely won’t be the last. As the Apple Intelligence feature rolls out widely and other tech companies embrace AI message summarization, many people will probably be receiving bad news through AI summaries soon. For example, since March, Google’s Android Auto AI has been able to deliver summaries to users while driving.
If that sounds horrible, consider our ever-evolving social tolerance for tech progress. Back in the 2000s when SMS texting was still novel, some etiquette experts considered breaking up a relationship through text messages to be inexcusably rude, and it was unusual enough to generate a Reuters news story. The sentiment apparently extended to Americans in general: According to The Washington Post, a 2007 survey commissioned by Samsung showed that only about 11 percent of Americans thought it was OK to break up that way.
What texting looked like back in the day.
By 2009, as texting became more commonplace, the stance on texting break-ups began to soften. That year, ABC News quoted Kristina Grish, author of “The Joy of Text: Mating, Dating, and Techno-Relating,” as saying, “When Britney Spears dumped Kevin Federline I thought doing it by text message was an abomination, that it was insensitive and without reason.” Grish was referring to a 2006 incident with the pop singer that made headline news. “But it has now come to the point where our cell phones and BlackBerries are an extension of ourselves and our personality. It’s not unusual that people are breaking up this way so much.”
Today, with text messaging basically being the default way most adults communicate remotely, breaking up through text is commonplace enough that Cosmopolitan endorsed the practice in a 2023 article. “I can tell you with complete confidence as an experienced professional in the field of romantic failure that of these options, I would take the breakup text any day,” wrote Kayle Kibbe.
Who knows, perhaps in the future, people will be able to ask their personal AI assistants to contact their girlfriend or boyfriend directly to deliver a personalized break-up for them with a sensitive message that attempts to ease the blow. But what’s next—break-ups on the moon?
This article was updated at 3: 33 PM on October 10, 2024 to clarify that the ex-girlfriend’s full real name has not been revealed by the screenshot image.
Popular music app says YouTube never justified its App Store takedown request.
Musi, a free music-streaming app only available on iPhone, sued Apple last week, arguing that Apple breached Musi’s developer agreement by abruptly removing the app from its App Store for no good reason.
According to Musi, Apple decided to remove Musi from the App Store based on allegedly “unsubstantiated” claims from YouTube that Musi was infringing on YouTube’s intellectual property. The removal came, Musi alleged, based on a five-word complaint from YouTube that simply said Musi was “violating YouTube terms of service”—without ever explaining how. And YouTube also lied to Apple, Musi’s complaint said, by claiming that Musi neglected to respond to YouTube’s efforts to settle the dispute outside the App Store when Musi allegedly showed evidence that the opposite was true.
For years, Musi users have wondered if the service was legal, Wired reported in a May deep dive into the controversial app. Musi launched in 2016, providing a free, stripped-down service like Spotify by displaying YouTube and other publicly available content while running Musi’s own ads.
Musi’s curious ad model has led some users to question if artists were being paid for Musi streams. Reassuring 66 million users who downloaded the app before its removal from the App Store, Musi has long maintained that artists get paid for Musi streams and that the app is committed to complying with YouTube’s terms of service, Wired reported.
In its complaint, Musi fully admits that its app’s streams come from “publicly available content on YouTube’s website.” But rather than relying on YouTube’s Application Programming Interface (API) to make the content available to Musi users—which potentially could violate YouTube’s terms of service—Musi claims that it designed its own “augmentative interface.” That interface, Musi said, does not “store, process, or transmit YouTube videos” and instead “plays or displays content based on the user’s own interactions with YouTube and enhances the user experience via Musi’s proprietary technology.”
YouTube is apparently not buying Musi’s explanations that its service doesn’t violate YouTube’s terms. But Musi claimed that it has been “engaged in sporadic dialog” with YouTube “since at least 2015,” allegedly always responding to YouTube’s questions by either adjusting how the Musi app works or providing “details about how the Musi app works” and reiterating “why it is fully compliant with YouTube’s Terms of Service.”
How might Musi have violated YouTube’s TOS?
In 2021, Musi claimed to have engaged directly with YouTube’s outside counsel in hopes of settling this matter.
At that point, YouTube’s counsel allegedly “claimed that the Musi app violated YouTube’s Terms of Service” in three ways. First, Musi was accused of accessing and using YouTube’s non-public interfaces. Next, the Musi app was allegedly a commercial use of YouTube’s service, and third, relatedly, “the Musi app violated YouTube’s prohibition on the sale of advertising ‘on any page of any website or application that only contains Content from the Service or where Content from the Service is the primary basis for such sales.'”
Musi supposedly immediately “addressed these concerns” by reassuring YouTube that the Musi app never accesses its non-public interfaces and “merely allows users to access YouTube’s publicly available website through a functional interface and, thus, does not use YouTube in a commercial way.” Further, Musi told YouTube in 2021 that the app “does not sell advertising on any page that only contains content from YouTube or where such content is the primary basis for such sales.”
Apple suddenly becomes mediator
YouTube clearly was not persuaded by Musi’s reassurances but dropped its complaints until 2023. That’s when YouTube once again complained directly to Musi, only to allegedly stop responding to Musi entirely and instead raise its complaint through the App Store in August 2024.
That pivot put Apple in the middle of the dispute, and Musi alleged that Apple improperly sided with YouTube.
Once Apple got involved, Apple allegedly directed Musi to resolve the dispute with YouTube or else risk removal from the App Store. Musi claimed that it showed evidence of repeatedly reaching out to YouTube and receiving no response. Yet when YouTube told Apple that Musi was the one that went silent, Apple accepted YouTube’s claim and promptly removed Musi from the App Store.
“Apple’s decision to abruptly and arbitrarily remove the Musi app from the App Store without any indication whatsoever from the Complainant as to how Musi’s app infringed Complainant’s intellectual property or violated its Terms of Service,” Musi’s complaint alleged, “was unreasonable, lacked good cause, and violated Apple’s Development Agreement’s terms.”
Those terms state that removal is only on the table if Apple “reasonably believes” an app infringes on another’s intellectual property rights, and Musi argued Apple had no basis to “reasonably” believe YouTube’s claims.
Musi users heartbroken by App Store removal
This is perhaps the grandest stand that Musi has made yet to defend its app against claims that its service isn’t legal. According to Wired, one of Musi’s earliest investors backed out of the project, expressing fears that the app could be sued. But Musi has survived without legal challenge for years, even beating out some of Spotify’s top rivals while thriving in this seemingly gray territory that it’s now trying to make more black and white.
Musi says it’s suing to defend its reputation, which it says has been greatly harmed by the app’s removal.
Musi is hoping a jury will agree that Apple breached its developer agreement and the covenant of good faith and fair dealing by removing Musi from the App Store. The music-streaming app has asked for a permanent injunction immediately reinstating Musi in the App Store and stopping Apple from responding to third-party complaints by removing apps without any evidence of infringement.
An injunction is urgently needed, Musi claimed, since the app only exists in Apple’s App Store, and Musi and its users face “irreparable damage” if the app is not restored. Additionally, Musi is seeking damages to be determined at trial to make up for “lost profits and other consequential damages.”
“The Musi app did not and does not infringe any intellectual property rights held by Complainant, and a reasonable inquiry into the matter would have led Apple to conclude the same,” Musi’s complaint said.
On Reddit, Musi has continued to support users reporting issues with the app since its removal from the App Store. One longtime user lamented, “my heart is broken,” after buying a new iPhone and losing access to the app.
It’s unclear if YouTube intends to take Musi down forever with this tactic. In May, Wired noted that Musi isn’t the only music-streaming app taking advantage of publicly available content, predicting that if “Musi were to shut down, a bevy of replacements would likely sprout up.” Meanwhile, some users on Reddit reported that fake Musi apps keep popping up in its absence.
For Musi, getting back online is as much about retaining old users as it is about attracting new downloads. In its complaint, Musi said that “Apple’s decision has caused immediate and ongoing financial and reputational harm to Musi.” On Reddit, one Musi user asked what many fans are likely wondering: “Will Musi ever come back,” or is it time to “just move to a different app”?
Ars could not immediately reach Musi’s lawyers, Apple, or YouTube for comment.
Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.
Two men involved in an elaborate scheme duping Apple into replacing about 6,000 counterfeit iPhones with genuine iPhones were sentenced to prison this week, the US Department of Justice announced Thursday.
Together with their co-conspirators, the 34-year-old scammers, Haotian Sun and Pengfei Xue, squeezed Apple for about $2.5 million, as employees for years failed to detect what the DOJ described as a rather “sophisticated” scheme between 2017 and 2019.
Now Sun has been sentenced to 57 months in prison and must pay more than $1 million to Apple in restitution. For his part, Xue was sentenced to 54 months and ordered to pay $397,800 in restitution, the DOJ said. Additionally, both men must also serve three years of supervised release and forfeit thousands more following the judgment.
The scheme depended on tricking Apple into accepting bogus phones during returns by spoofing serial numbers or International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) numbers linked to real customers’ iPhones that were still under warranty. (Apple provides a one-year warranty for new iPhones discovered to have defects and sells insurance plans to extend the warranties.)
The scammers were caught and convicted of mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud after an Apple investigator tipped law enforcement off, a 2019 affidavit from postal inspector Stephen Cohen said.
Law enforcement intercepted packages and confirmed that thousands of counterfeit phones were being shipped from China, then submitted to Apple for repairs either by mail or in person. These counterfeit phones, Cohen said, were either out of warranty or contained counterfeit parts, but Apple “wrongly” believed that they were real phones under real warranties, often replacing dozens of fake phones fraudulently returned in a single shipment, Cohen said.
Enlarge/ An Anker 334 MagGo Battery (PowerCore 10K) on an iPhone.
Anker
Anker is recalling three models of MagSafe iPhone batteries due to a fire risk, it said yesterday.
The models being recalled are the Anker 334 MagGo Battery (PowerCore 10K, model number A1642), Anker Power Bank (model number A1647), and Anker 334 MagGo Battery (model number A1652). In its recall notice, Anker said that some of the lithium-ion batteries in the devices “may pose a fire risk due to a manufacturing defect.”
“The lithium-ion battery in the affected power banks can overheat, potentially causing melting of plastic components, smoke, and fire hazards,” the notice reads.
Anker claims that only products made from January 3 to September 17 are affected but says it’s recalling all units “out of an abundance of caution.”
Anker says that people who own one of these products should “immediately stop using” it. Owners should store the affected products “in a safe location” and use Anker’s website to verify their device’s serial number before filling out a recall form and getting a replacement.
Anker’s recall notice also included tips for safely disposing of power banks, reminding people not to toss them in the trash.
If you own an Anker battery pack and want to check if it’s being recalled, you can look at the bottom of the device for the aforementioned product names and model numbers (A1642, A1647, and A1652) as shown below:
Today is the official release date for the public versions of iOS 18, iPadOS 18, macOS 15 Sequoia, and a scad of other Apple software updates, the foundation that Apple will use for Apple Intelligence and whatever other features it wants to add between now and next year’s Worldwide Developers Conference in June. But for those who value stability and reliability over new features, you may not be excited to update to a new operating system with a version number ending in “0.”
For those of you who prefer to wait for a couple of bugfix updates before installing new stuff, Apple is also releasing security-only updates for a bunch of its (now) last-generation operating systems today. The iOS 17.7, iPadOS 17.7, and macOS 14.7 updates are either available now or should be shortly, along with a security update for 2022’s macOS 13 Ventura. An updated version of Safari 18 that runs on both macOS 13 and 14 should be available soon, though as of this writing is doesn’t appear to be available yet.
Apple has historically been pretty good about providing security updates to older macOS releases—you can expect them for about two years after the operating system is replaced by a newer version. But for iOS and iPadOS, the company used to stop updating older versions entirely after releasing a new one. This changed back in 2021, when Apple decided to start providing some security-only updates to older iOS versions to help people who were worried about installing an all-new potentially buggy OS upgrade.
Eventually, iOS and iPadOS users will need to install iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 to keep getting security updates. But for the handful of older iPads that can’t run iPadOS 18, Apple will usually keep supporting those specific devices with security updates for a year or two. Apple was still providing new security updates for 2022’s iOS 16 as recently as August, keeping older devices like the iPhone 8 and the first-generation iPad Pros reasonably secure even though they were incapable of running newer operating systems.
Enlarge/ Apple’s event will likely discuss Apple Intelligence, though that’s not going to launch until later in the year with iOS 18.1
Apple
For years, Apple’s September event has focused almost exclusively on new flagship iPhones and new Apple Watch models. Once in a while, other second-tier products make an appearance. And in recent cycles, the Mac and high-end iPads had their shining moment later in the year—often in October or November.
We expect the same to happen this time. You can almost certainly count on new iPhones and Watches. As for what else to expect: well, no Macs, but there are a couple of interesting possibilities.
Here’s what we expect to see next week.
iPhone 16 and 16 Pro
Gone are the days of radical changes to the iPhone; the last dramatic redesign was the iPhone X in 2017. Since then, Apple has iterated a little bit each year—never enough to drive yearly upgrades, but perhaps enough to entice consumers with phones that are three years old or so.
The iPhone 16 and 16 Pro are expected to continue this pacing, with a grab bag of improvements to existing features but nothing too radical.
The only notable design change that has been rumored is the introduction of the “Capture” button on all models; this will allow taking pictures without using the touchscreen on all models. This could be done with the Action button on last year’s iPhone 15 Pro, and that Action button is expected to come to all iPhone 16 models (not just Pro) this year.
But adding a Capture button frees the Action button up for other things, and the Capture button is expected to produce different results depending on how you press it, making it more useful.
The iPhone 16 and iPhone 16 Plus rear camera arrangement will switch to two vertically aligned lenses instead of the diagonal arrangement of the previous model. Apart from that and the new buttons, there will be no noticeable design changes in the non-Pro phones this year.
The iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max will also not have noticeable design changes, but they will have slightly larger screens. The Pro is going from a 6.1-inch screen to 6.3 inches, while the larger Max version will go from 6.7 to 6.9 inches. The phones will be slightly larger, but much of the screen-size gain will come from Border Reduction Structure (BRS) implementation that will reduce the already barely there bezels a little bit.
Speaking of the screens, the Pro models will feature new panels that will provide just a bit more maximum brightness, following a trend of improvements in that area that has spanned the last few iPhones.
The general look of the new iPhones isn’t expected to change compared to these designs from last year, except for the camera arrangement on the base iPhone 16.
Samuel Axon
The Action Button, seen here on the iPhone 15 Pro Max, will reach the non-Pro iPhones this year.
Samuel Axon
That’s it for changes visible on the outside. Inside, the phones are expected to get an improved thermal design—which hopefully addresses our biggest complaint when we reviewed the iPhone 15 Pro—as well as faster 5G modems in the Pros and a new A-series chip that will probably offer modest gains in performance and efficiency over the top-tier chip from last year.
All the remaining changes that are rumored from leaks, supply-chain insights, or news reports are tweaks to the camera systems. All models will get better ultra-wide cameras that handle low light better, and the iPhone 16 Pro will go to a 48-megapixel ultra-wide camera to better match the wide-angle lens’ overall performance. Additionally, the 5x zoom telephoto lens that was reserved only for the Pro Max last year will make its way to the smaller Pro this time.
That’s all we’ve heard so far. Looking back on paragraphs of text here, it sounds like a lot, but most of these things are pretty modest improvements. Those coming from an iPhone 13 Pro or earlier may be tempted by all this, but it’ll be pretty silly to upgrade from an iPhone 15 to an iPhone 16 unless Apple has managed to keep some earth-shattering new feature a secret.
