Tech

stewart-cheifet,-pbs-host-who-chronicled-the-pc-revolution,-dies-at-87

Stewart Cheifet, PBS host who chronicled the PC revolution, dies at 87

Stewart Cheifet, the television producer and host who documented the personal computer revolution for nearly two decades on PBS, died on December 28, 2025, at age 87 in Philadelphia. Cheifet created and hosted Computer Chronicles, which ran on the public television network from 1983 to 2002 and helped demystify a new tech medium for millions of American viewers.

Computer Chronicles covered everything from the earliest IBM PCs and Apple Macintosh models to the rise of the World Wide Web and the dot-com boom. Cheifet conducted interviews with computing industry figures, including Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Jeff Bezos, while demonstrating hardware and software for a general audience.

From 1983 to 1990, he co-hosted the show with Gary Kildall, the Digital Research founder who created the popular CP/M operating system that predated MS-DOS on early personal computer systems.

Computer Chronicles – 01×25 – Artificial Intelligence (1984)

From 1996 to 2002, Cheifet also produced and hosted Net Cafe, a companion series that documented the early Internet boom and introduced viewers to then-new websites like Yahoo, Google, and eBay.

A legacy worth preserving

Computer Chronicles began as a local weekly series in 1981 when Cheifet served as station manager at KCSM-TV, the College of San Mateo’s public television station. It became a national PBS series in 1983 and ran continuously until 2002, producing 433 episodes across 19 seasons. The format remained consistent throughout: product demonstrations, guest interviews, and a closing news segment called “Random Access” that covered industry developments.

After the show’s run ended and Cheifet left television production, he worked to preserve the show’s legacy as a consultant for the Internet Archive, helping to make publicly available the episodes of Computer Chronicles and Net Cafe.

Stewart Cheifet, PBS host who chronicled the PC revolution, dies at 87 Read More »

amazon-alexa+-released-to-the-general-public-via-an-early-access-website

Amazon Alexa+ released to the general public via an early access website

Anyone can now try Alexa+, Amazon’s generative AI assistant, through a free early access program at Alexa.com. The website frees the AI, which Amazon released via early access in February, from hardware and makes it as easily accessible as more established chatbots, like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini.

Until today, you needed a supporting device to access Alexa+. Amazon hasn’t said when the early access period will end, but when it does, Alexa+ will be included with Amazon Prime memberships, which start at $15 per month, or cost $20 per month on its own.

The above pricing suggests that Amazon wants Alexa+ to drive people toward Prime subscriptions. By being interwoven with Amazon’s shopping ecosystem, including Amazon’s e-commerce platform, grocery delivery business, and Whole Foods, Alexa+ can make more money for Amazon.

Just like it has with Alexa+ on devices, Amazon is pushing Alexa.com as a tool for people to organize and manage their household. Amazon’s announcement of Alexa.com today emphasizes Alexa+’s features for planning trips and meals, to-do lists, calendars, and smart homes. Alexa.com “also provides persistent context and continuity, allowing you to access Alexa on whichever device or interface best serves the task at hand, with all previous chats, preferences, and personalization” carrying over, Amazon said.

Amazon already knew a browser-based version of Alexa would be helpful. Alexa was available via Alexa.Amazon.com until around the time Amazon started publicly discussing a generative AI version of Alexa in 2023. Alexa+ is now accessible through Alexa.Amazon.com (in addition to Alexa.com).

“This is a new interaction model and adds a powerful way to use and collaborate with Alexa+,” Amazon said today. “Combined with the redesigned Alexa mobile app, which will feature an agent-forward design, Alexa+ will be accessible across every surface—whether you’re at your desk, on the go, or at home.”

An example of someone using the Alexa+ website to manage smart home devices.

Amazon provided this example of someone using the Alexa+ website to manage smart home devices.

Credit: Amazon

Amazon provided this example of someone using the Alexa+ website to manage smart home devices. Credit: Amazon

Alexa has largely been reported to cost Amazon billions of dollars, despite Amazon’s claim that 600 million Alexa-powered devices have been sold. By incorporating more powerful and generative AI-based features and a subscription fee, Amazon hopes people will use Alexa+ more frequently and for more advanced and essential tasks, resulting in the financial success that has eluded the original Alexa. Amazon is also considering injecting ads into Alexa+ conversations.

Notably, ahead of its final release and while still in early access, Alexa+ has been reported to be slower than expected and struggle with inaccuracies at times. It also lacks some features that Amazon executives have previously touted, like the ability to order takeout.

Amazon Alexa+ released to the general public via an early access website Read More »

sandisk-says-goodbye-to-wd-blue-and-black-ssds,-hello-to-new-“optimus”-drives

SanDisk says goodbye to WD Blue and Black SSDs, hello to new “Optimus” drives

In late 2023, storage company Western Digital announced plans to split itself into two companies. One, which would still be called Western Digital, would focus on spinning hard drives, which are no longer used much in consumer systems but remain important to NAS devices and data centers. The other, called SanDisk, would handle solid-state storage, including the drives that Western Digital sold to consumers under its Blue, Black, Green, and Red brands.

That split effectively undid what Western Digital did a decade ago when it bought SanDisk for $19 billion. And we’re just now starting to see the way the split will affect the company’s existing consumer drives.

Today, SanDisk announced that mainstream WD Blue and WD Black SSDs would be discontinued and replaced by SanDisk Optimus-branded disks with the same model numbers.

WD Blue drives will now be “SanDisk Optimus” drives, starting with the Optimus 5100, a rebadged version of the WD Blue SN5100. Mid-tier WD Black drives will be branded as “SanDisk Optimus GX,” and the Optimus GX 7100 will replace the WD Black SN7100. And high-end WD Black drives will become “SanDisk Optimus GX Pro” SSDs, with the Optimus GX Pro 850X and 8100 replacing the WD Black SN850X and 8100 drives.

Given that these are all fast NVMe SSDs, I suspect the average user would have trouble detecting much of a difference between the low-end WD Blue/Optimus drives and the high-end WD Black/Optimus GX Pro SSDs. But the functional differences between the drives remain the same as before: the Blue/Optimus 5100 uses somewhat slower and less durable quad-level cell (QLC) flash memory, while the Black/Optimus GX 7100 uses triple-level cell (TLC) memory. The Black/Optimus GX Pro 8100 maximizes performance by stepping up to a PCIe 5.0 interface instead of PCIe 4.0 and including a dedicated DRAM cache (the 5100 and 7100 each claim a small chunk of your system RAM for this, called the Host Memory Buffer, or HMB). The 850X is a slightly older drive that keeps the dedicated DRAM but is also limited to PCIe 4.0 speeds.

SanDisk says goodbye to WD Blue and Black SSDs, hello to new “Optimus” drives Read More »

google-tv’s-big-gemini-update-adds-image-and-video-generation,-voice-control-for-settings

Google TV’s big Gemini update adds image and video generation, voice control for settings

That might be a fun distraction, but it’s not a core TV experience. Google’s image and video models are good enough that you might gain some benefit from monkeying around with them on a larger screen, but Gemini is also available for more general tasks.

Veo in Google TV

Google TV will support generating new images and videos with Google’s AI models.

Credit: Google

Google TV will support generating new images and videos with Google’s AI models. Credit: Google

This update brings a full chatbot-like experience to TVs. If you want to catch up on sports scores or get recommendations for what to watch, you can ask the robot. The outputs might be a little different from what you would expect from using Gemini on the web or in an app. Google says it has devised a “visually rich framework” that will make the AI more usable on a TV. There will also be a “Dive Deeper” option in each response to generate an interactive overview of the topic.

Gemini can also take action to tweak system settings based on your complaints. For example, pull up Gemini and say “the dialog is too quiet” and watch as the AI makes adjustments to address that.

Gemini chatbot Google TV

Gemini’s replies on Google TV will be more visual.

Credit: Google

Gemini’s replies on Google TV will be more visual. Credit: Google

The new Gemini features will debut on TCL TVs that run Google TV, but most other devices, even Google’s own TV Streamer, will have to wait a few months. Even then, you won’t see Gemini taking over every TV or streaming box with Google’s software. The new Gemini features require the full Google TV experience with Android OS version 14 or higher.

Google TV’s big Gemini update adds image and video generation, voice control for settings Read More »

“streaming-stops-feeling-infinite”:-what-subscribers-can-expect-in-2026

“Streaming stops feeling infinite”: What subscribers can expect in 2026


Spoiler: expect higher prices

Streaming may get a little worse before it gets better.

We’re far from streaming’s original promise: instant access to beloved and undiscovered titles without the burden of ads, bundled services, or price gouging that have long been associated with cable.

Still, every year we get more dependent on streaming for entertainment. Despite streaming services’ flaws, many of us are bound to keep subscribing to at least one service next year. Here’s what we can expect in 2026 and beyond.

Subscription prices keep rising, but perhaps not as expected

There’s virtually no hope of streaming subscription prices plateauing in 2026. Streaming companies continue to face challenges as content production and licensing costs rise, and it’s often easier to get current customers to pay slightly more than to acquire new subscribers. Meanwhile, many streaming companies are still struggling with profitability and revenue after spending years focusing on winning subscribers with content.

“We see many services are only now aligning content spend with realistic lifetime value per subscriber,” Christofer Hamilton, industry insights manager at streaming analyst Parrot Analytics, told Ars.

Companies may get more creative with how they frame higher costs to subscribers, however. People who pay extra to stream without ads are the most likely to see price bumps as streaming companies continue pushing customers toward ad-based tiers.

Charging more for “premium” features—such as 4K streaming, simultaneous streams, or offline downloads—offers another way for streaming companies to boost revenue without implementing broad price hikes that risk provoking customer outrage. Subscribers can expect streaming prices to get “more menu-like next year,” said Michael Goodman, director of entertainment research at Parks Associates, a research firm focusing on IoT, consumer electronics, and entertainment.

When will the price hikes stop?

If streaming prices won’t stop rising next year, when will they?

Ultimately, it may be up to subscribers to vote with their dollars by canceling subscriptions or opting for cheaper or free alternatives, such as FAST (free ad-supported streaming television) channels with linear programming.

As Goodman put it, “Until we see net adds stall or decline as a result of price hikes, services have no incentive to stop raising prices.”

Some experts doubt that streaming services will ever willingly stop increasing prices. Bill Yousman, professor and director of the Media Literacy and Digital Culture graduate program at Sacred Heart University, sees precedent for this in cable companies.

“If the big streaming companies had their way, there would be no limit to their price hikes. We have already seen this with the cable monopolies and their disregard for consumer dissatisfaction,” he said.

Yousman believes that prices will only “be brought under control if there is some type of government regulation,” but he noted that’s unlikely under the Trump administration.

To date, US lawmakers haven’t shown interest in halting the steady rise of streaming prices. Most lawmakers who have sought to regulate the industry have focused on industry consolidation. There has been some effort from lawmakers to rein in streaming price hikes, though, especially through proposed federal legislation dubbed the Price Gouging Prevention Act.

Streaming services lean deeper into cable-like bundles

Companies will look to leverage subscribers’ frustration with pricing by being more aggressive about bundling third-party services like traditional pay TV, Internet, and cell phone service with streaming subscriptions. The idea is that people are less likely to cancel a streaming subscription if it’s tied to a different subscription (including another streaming subscription). The strategy echoes the days of cable, when some people kept unused landlines just to save money on cable channels or Internet service.

“For subscribers, 2026 is the year streaming stops feeling infinite and starts feeling more like premium cable used to: fewer apps, clearer bundles, and higher expectations for each service they pay for,” Parrot’s Hamilton said.

Thanks to traditional pay TV providers, bundles have a bad connotation among people looking to save money and simplify their subscriptions. But bundling doesn’t always have to be a bad thing, as Yousman explains:

If the companies wanted to really be responsive to consumers, they would let them design their own packages rather than having to choose options that may or may not include all the services they want. What works against this, of course, is the demand for ever-increasing profits at all times.

Should a sale of Warner Bros. Discovery’s (WBD’s) HBO Max be completed (late) next year, subscribers will face more pressure to bundle their streaming subscriptions.

“When dominant platforms like Netflix or Paramount absorb major content players, it accelerates the erosion of streaming’s original promise: freedom from monopolistic bundles,” Vikrant Mathur, co-founder of streaming technology provider Future Today, said.

Netflix and Paramount duke it out over Warner Bros.

WBD announced plans this month to sell its streaming and movie studios business to Netflix for an equity value of $72 billion, or an approximate total enterprise value of $82.7 billion. Paramount Skydance, however, quickly swooped in with a hostile takeover bid for all of WBD, including its cable channels, for $108.4 billion. A WBD shareholder vote will occur in spring or early summer, chairman Samuel Di Piazza told CNBC. By the end of 2026, we should have a clearer understanding of the future of HBO Max, as well as Netflix and Paramount+.

Any acquisition will be subject to regulatory scrutiny, causing more uncertainty for subscribers. If Netflix buys HBO Max, users of both services can expect higher prices due to reduced competition and the extensive amount of content and number of big-budget franchises (including Harry Potter and DC Comics) expected to unite under one platform.

“If Netflix gets [HBO Max] and the WB studios, HBO Max subscribers are more likely to see a smoother transition, strong ongoing investment in premium content, and simpler app/billing integration,” Parks Associates’ Goodman said.

But while the potential merger is worth watching, subscribers are unlikely to truly feel the impact of HBO Max potentially changing ownership until after 2026.

“Producing a show is a yearslong process, so the content that was already slated to air isn’t going to disappear, and the new content acquired through the WB library won’t be available until the merger is approved and closes,” Tre Lovell, attorney and owner of Los Angeles entertainment law firm The Lovell Firm, explained.

Content starts getting less bold

Looking beyond 2026, a sale of part or all of WBD would likely open the door for more streaming acquisitions. That could eventually benefit customers by making it easier to find content to watch with fewer subscriptions. But merged companies are also less likely to take risks on unique and diverse content.

Analysts I spoke with pointed to fewer niche and mid-tier original shows and movies and more show cancellations if either Netflix or Paramount buys HBO Max. Either buyer would probably focus more on the already-successful franchises that WB owns, such as Game of Thrones, Batman, and Superman.

“Big combined libraries push companies to double down on proven IP because it travels, merchandises, and reduces marketing risk,” said Robert Rosenberg, a partner at the New York law firm Moses Singer focusing on intellectual property, entertainment, technology, and data law.

Rosenberg also expects to see a “tilt toward” live events, sports, and unscripted content “for retention” if HBO Max sells.

In the shorter term, Rory Gooderick, research manager at analyst firm Ampere Analysis, predicted that WBD will be “cautious when greenlighting new large-scale projects until” the acquisition is finalized.

Beyond the potential HBO Max sale, more merger activity could lead to streaming services straying from their original selling point of offering bolder, quirkier content.

As the industry consolidates, “sticky content,” like procedurals, reality shows, and “comfort TV that drives long viewing sessions,” will take priority among mainstream, subscription-based streaming services, especially as they put more emphasis on ad-tier subscriptions, Goodman predicted.

A more stable future?

The new year will be formative for streaming and yield lasting impacts for subscribers. We’ve discussed numerous negative implications, but there could be a silver lining. While we may see more turbulence, hopefully, we’ll also start to see a road toward more stable streaming options.

Streaming subscribers can’t directly stop mergers or price hikes or control streaming libraries. But with services like Netflix and Disney+ focusing on becoming one-stop shops with massive libraries, there’s an opportunity for other services to hone their specialties and stand out by providing offbeat, unexpected, and rare content at more affordable prices.

As the landscape settles, streamers should be mindful of the importance of variety to subscribers. According to Bill Michels, chief product officer at Gracenote, Nielsen’s content data business unit:

There will be some consolidation. But the [connected TV] landscape, inclusive of FAST and [direct-to-consumer] channels, provides more than ample video variety for viewers, so the biggest challenge will be connecting content with the right audience. Audience engagement depends on good content. Audience retention depends on making sure audiences are never without something to watch.

Photo of Scharon Harding

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

“Streaming stops feeling infinite”: What subscribers can expect in 2026 Read More »

remembering-what-windows-10-did-right—and-how-it-made-modern-windows-more-annoying

Remembering what Windows 10 did right—and how it made modern Windows more annoying


Remembering Windows 10’s rollout can help diagnose what ails Windows 11.

If you’ve been following our coverage for the last few years, you’ll already know that 2025 is the year that Windows 10 died. Technically.

“Died,” because Microsoft’s formal end-of-support date came and went on October 14, as the company had been saying for years. “Technically,” because it’s trivial for home users to get another free year of security updates with a few minutes of effort, and schools and businesses can get an additional two years of updates on top of that, and because load-bearing system apps like Edge and Windows Defender will keep getting updates through at least 2028 regardless.

But 2025 was undoubtedly a tipping point for the so-called “last version of Windows.” StatCounter data says Windows 11 has overtaken Windows 10 as the most-used version of Windows both in the US (February 2025) and worldwide (July 2025). Its market share slid from just over 44 percent to just under 31 percent in the Steam Hardware Survey. And now that Microsoft’s support for the OS has formally ended, games, apps, and drivers are already beginning the gradual process of ending or scaling back official Windows 10 support.

Windows 10 is generally thought of as one of the “good” versions of Windows, and it was extremely popular in its heyday: the most widely used version of Windows since XP. That’s true even though many of the annoying things that people complain about in Windows 11 started during the Windows 10 era. Now that it’s time to write Windows 10’s epitaph, it’s worth examining what Microsoft got right with Windows 10, how it laid the groundwork for many of the things people dislike about Windows 11, and how Microsoft has made all of those problems worse in the years since Windows 11 first launched.

Windows 10 did a lot of things right

The Start menu in the first release of Windows 10. Windows 10 got a lot of credit for not being Windows 8 and for rolling back its most visible and polarizing changes.

Like Windows 7, Windows 10’s primary job was to not be its predecessor. Windows 8 brought plenty of solid under-the-hood improvements over Windows 7, but it came with a polarizing full-screen Start menu and a touchscreen-centric user interface that was an awkward fit for traditional desktops and laptops.

And the biggest thing it did to differentiate itself from Windows 8 was restore a version of the traditional Start menu, altered from its Windows XP or Windows 7-era iterations but familiar enough not to put people off.

Windows 10 also adopted a bunch of other things that people seemed to like about their smartphones—it initially rolled out as a free upgrade to anyone already running Windows 7 or Windows 8, and it ran on virtually all the same hardware as those older versions. It was updated on a continuous, predictable cadence that allowed Microsoft to add features more quickly. Microsoft even expanded its public beta program, giving enthusiasts and developers an opportunity to see what was coming and provide feedback before new features were rolled out to everybody.

Windows 10 also hit during a time of change at Microsoft. Current CEO Satya Nadella was just taking over from Steve Ballmer, and as part of that pivot, the company was also doing things like making its Office apps work on iOS and Android and abandoning its struggling, proprietary browser engine for Edge. Nadella’s Microsoft wanted you to be using Microsoft products (and ideally paying for a subscription to do so), but it seemed more willing to meet people where they were rather than forcing them to change their behavior.

That shift continued to benefit users throughout the first few years of Windows 10’s life. Developers benefited from the introduction and continuous improvement of the Windows Subsystem for Linux, a way to run Linux and many of its apps and tools directly on top of Windows. Microsoft eventually threw out its struggling in-house browser engine for a new version of the Edge browser built on Chromium—we can debate whether Chromium’s supremacy is a good thing for an open, standard-compliant Internet, but switching to a more compatible rendering engine and an established extension ecosystem was absolutely the more user-friendly choice. Both projects also signaled Microsoft’s growing engagement with and contributions to open-source projects, something that would have been hard to imagine during the company’s closed-off ’90s and ’00s.

Windows 10 wasn’t perfect; these examples of what it did right are cherry-picked. But part of the operating system’s reputation comes from the fact that it was originally developed as a response to real complaints and rolled out in a way that tried to make its changes and improvements as widely accessible as possible.

But Windows 10 laid the groundwork for Windows 11’s problems

Windows 10 asked you to sign in with a Microsoft account, but for most of the operating system’s life, it was easy to skip this using visible buttons in the UI. Windows 10 began locking this down in later versions; that has continued in Windows 11, but it didn’t originate there. Credit: BTNHD

As many things as Windows 10 did relatively well, most of the things people claim to find objectionable about Windows 11 actually started happening during the Windows 10 era.

Right out of the gate, for example, Windows 10 wanted to collect more information about how people were using the operating system—ostensibly in the name of either helping Microsoft improve the OS or helping “personalize” its ads and recommendations. And the transition to the “software-as-a-service” approach helped Windows move faster but also broke things, over and over again—these kinds of bugs have persisted on and off into the Windows 11 era despite Microsoft’s public beta programs.

Windows 10 could also get pushy about other Microsoft products. Multiple technologies, like the original Edge and Cortana, were introduced, pushed on users, and failed. The annoying news and weather widget on the taskbar was a late addition to Windows 10; advertisements and news articles could clutter up its lock screen. Icons for third-party apps from the Microsoft Store, many of them low-rent, ad-supported time-waster games, were added to the Start menu without user consent. Some users of older Windows versions even objected to the way that the free Windows 10 upgrade was offered—the install files would download themselves automatically, and it could be difficult to make the notifications go away.

Even the mandatory Microsoft Account sign-in, one of the most frequently complained-about aspects of Windows 11, was a Windows 10 innovation—it was easier to circumvent than it is now, and it was just for the Home edition of the software, but in retrospect, it was clearly a step down the road that Windows 11 is currently traveling.

Windows 11 did make things worse, though

But many of Windows 11’s annoyances are new ones. And the big problem is that these annoyances have been stacked on top of the annoying things that Windows 10 was already doing, gradually accumulating to make the new PC setup process go from “lightly” to “supremely” irritating.

The Microsoft Account sign-in requirement is ground zero for a lot of this since signing in with an account unlocks a litany of extra ads for Microsoft 365, Game Pass, and other services you may or may not need or want. Connecting to the Internet and signing in became a requirement for new installations of both the Home and the Pro versions of Windows 11 starting with version 22H2, and while workarounds existed then and continue to exist now, you have to know about them beforehand or look them up yourself—the OS doesn’t offer you an option to skip. Microsoft will also apparently be closing some of these loopholes in future updates, making circumvention even more difficult.

And if getting through those screens when setting up a new PC wasn’t annoying enough, Windows 11 will regularly remind you about other Microsoft services again through its Second Chance Out-Of-Box Experience screen, or SCOOBE. This on-by-default “feature” has offered to help me “finish setting up” Windows 11 installations that are years old and quite thoroughly set up. It can be turned off via a buried checkbox in the Notifications settings, but removing it or making it simpler to permanently dismiss from the SCOOBE screen itself would be the more user-friendly change, especially since Microsoft already bombards users with “helpful reminders” about many of these same services via system notifications.

Microsoft’s all-consuming pivot to generative AI also deserves blame. Microsoft’s Copilot push hasn’t stopped with the built-in app that gets a position of honor on the default taskbar—an app whose appearance and functionality have completely changed multiple times in the last couple of years as Microsoft has updated it. Microsoft changed the default Windows PC keyboard layout for the first time in 30 years to accommodate Copilot, and Copilot-branded features have landed in every Windows app from Word to Paint to Edge to Notepad. Sometimes these features can be uninstalled or turned off; sometimes they can’t.

It’s not just that Microsoft is squeezing generative AI into every possible nook and cranny in Windows; it’s that there seems to be no feature too intrusive or risky to make the cutoff. Microsoft nearly rolled out a catastrophically insecure version of Recall, a feature for some newer PCs that takes screenshots of your activity and records it for later reference; Microsoft gave its security an overhaul after a massive outcry from users, media, and security researchers, but Recall still rolled out.

The so-called “agentic” AI features that Microsoft is currently testing in Windows come with their own documented security and privacy risks, but their inclusion in Windows is essentially a foregone conclusion because Microsoft executives are constantly talking about the need to develop an “agentic OS.” There’s a fine line between introducing new software features and forcing people to use them, and I find that Microsoft’s pushiness around Windows 11’s AI additions falls on the wrong side of that line for me pretty much every single time.

Finally, while Windows 10 ran on anything that could run Windows 7 or 8, Windows 11 came with new system requirements that excluded many existing, functional PCs. The operating system can be installed unofficially on PCs that are several years older than the official cutoff, but only if you’re comfortable with the risks and you know how to get around the system requirements check.

Using people’s PCs as billboards to sell them new PCs feels tacky at best. Credit: Kyle Orland

I find the heightened requirements—implemented to improve security, according to Microsoft—to be more or less defensible. TPM modules enable seamless disk encryption, Secure Boot protects from threats that are otherwise invisible and hard to detect, and CPU makers like Intel and AMD only commit to supporting older processors with firmware-level security patches for so long, which is important in the era of hardware-level security exploits.

But the requirements don’t feel like something Microsoft has imposed to protect users from threats; they feel like something Microsoft is doing in order to upsell you to a new PC. Microsoft creates that impression when it shows Windows 10 users full-screen ads for new Copilot+ PCs, even when their systems are capable of upgrading to the new operating system directly. People are already primed to believe in “planned obsolescence,” the idea that the things they buy are designed to slow down or fail just in time to force them to buy new things; pushing people to throw out functioning PCs with full-screen ads does nothing to dispel this notion.

Windows 11 could still be great

I still believe that Windows 11 has good bones. Install the Enterprise version of the operating system and you’ll get a version with much less extra cruft on top of it, a version made to avoid alienating the businesses that pay good money to install Windows across large fleets of PCs. Microsoft has made huge strides in getting its operating system to run on Arm-based PCs. The Windows Subsystem for Linux is better than it’s ever been. I’m intrigued by the company’s efforts to make Windows a better operating system for gaming handhelds, Microsoft’s belated answer to Valve’s Steam Deck and SteamOS.

But as someone with firsthand experience of every era of Windows from 3.1 onward, I can say I’ve never felt as frustrated with the operating system as I have during Windows 11’s Copilot era. The operating system can be tamed with effort. But the taming has become an integral part of the new PC setup process for me, just as essential as creating the USB installer and downloading drivers and third-party apps. It’s something my PC needs to have done to it before it feels ready to use.

Windows 10 was far from perfect. But as we mark the first stage of its multi-year passing, it’s worth remembering what it did well and why people were willing to install it in droves. I’d like to see Microsoft recommit to a quieter, cleaner version of Windows that is more willing to get out of the way and just let people use their computers the way they want, the same way the company has tried to recommit to security following a string of embarrassing breaches. I don’t have much hope that this will happen, but some genuine effort could go a long way toward convincing Windows 10-using holdouts that the new OS actually isn’t all that bad.

Photo of Andrew Cunningham

Andrew is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica, with a focus on consumer tech including computer hardware and in-depth reviews of operating systems like Windows and macOS. Andrew lives in Philadelphia and co-hosts a weekly book podcast called Overdue.

Remembering what Windows 10 did right—and how it made modern Windows more annoying Read More »

i-switched-to-esim-in-2025,-and-i-am-full-of-regret

I switched to eSIM in 2025, and I am full of regret

Maybe this isn’t a good idea

Many people have had the same phone number for years—even decades at this point. These numbers aren’t just a way for people to get in touch because, stupidly, we have also settled on phone numbers as a means of authentication. Banks, messaging apps, crypto exchanges, this very website’s publishing platform, and even the carriers managing your number rely on SMS multifactor codes. And those codes aren’t even very secure.

So losing access to your phone number doesn’t just lock you out of your phone. Key parts of your digital life can also become inaccessible, and that could happen more often now due to the fungible nature of eSIMs.

Most people won’t need to move their phone number very often, but the risk that your eSIM goes up in smoke when you do is very real. Compare that to a physical SIM card, which will virtually never fail unless you damage the card. Swapping that tiny bit of plastic takes a few seconds, and it never requires you to sit on hold with your carrier’s support agents or drive to a store. In short, a physical SIM is essentially foolproof, and eSIM is not.

Obviously, the solution is not to remove multifactor authentication—your phone number is, unfortunately, too important to be unguarded. However, carriers’ use of SMS to control account access is self-defeating and virtually guarantees people are going to have bad experiences in the era of eSIM. Enshittification has truly come for SIM cards.

If this future is inevitable, there ought to be a better way to confirm account ownership when your eSIM glitches. It doesn’t matter what that is as long as SMS isn’t the default. Google actually gets this right with Fi. You can download an eSIM at any time via the Fi app, and it’s secured with the same settings as your Google account. That’s really as good as it gets for consumer security. Between Google Authenticator, passkeys, and push notifications, it’s pretty hard to get locked out of Google, even if you take advantage of advanced security features.

We gave up the headphone jack. We gave up the microSD card. Is all this worthwhile to boost battery capacity by 8 percent? That’s a tough sell.

I switched to eSIM in 2025, and I am full of regret Read More »

fcc’s-import-ban-on-the-best-new-drones-starts-today

FCC’s import ban on the best new drones starts today

DJI sent numerous requests to the US government to audit its devices in hopes of avoiding a ban, but the federal ban was ultimately enacted based on previously acquired information, The New York Times reported this week.

The news means that Americans will miss out on new drone models from DJI, which owns 70 percent of the global drone market in 2023, per Drone Industry Insights, and is widely regarded as the premium drone maker. People can still buy drones from US companies, but American drones have a lackluster reputation compared to drones from DJI and other Chinese companies, such as Autel. US-made drones also have a reputation for being expensive, usually costing significantly more than their Chinese counterparts. DaCoda Bartels, COO of FlyGuys, which helps commercial drone pilots find work, told the Times that US drones are also “half as good.”

There’s also concern among hobbyists that the ban will hinder their ability to procure drone parts, potentially affecting the repairability of approved drones and DIY projects.

US-based drone companies, meanwhile, are optimistic about gaining business in an industry where it has historically been hard to compete against Chinese brands. It’s also possible that the ban will just result in a decline in US drone purchases.

In a statement, Michael Robbins, president and CEO of the Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), which includes US drone companies like Skydio as members, said the ban “will truly unleash American drone dominance” and that the US cannot “risk… dependence” on China for drones.

“By prioritizing trusted technology and resilient supply chains, the FCC’s action will accelerate innovation, enhance system security, and ensure the US drone industry expands rather than remaining under foreign control,” Robbins said.

Understandably, DJI is “disappointed” by the FCC’s decision, it said in a statement issued on Monday, adding:

While DJI was not singled out, no information has been released regarding what information was used by the Executive Branch in reaching its determination. Concerns about DJI’s data security have not been grounded in evidence and instead reflect protectionism, contrary to the principles of an open market.

FCC’s import ban on the best new drones starts today Read More »

the-splay-is-a-subpar-monitor-but-an-exciting-portable-projector 

The Splay is a subpar monitor but an exciting portable projector 


Splay can be a monitor and takes a lot of the stress out of projectors, too.

Arovia Splay

The Arovia Splay in monitor mode. Credit: Scharon Harding

The Arovia Splay in monitor mode. Credit: Scharon Harding

Since I’m fascinated by new display technologies and by improving image quality, I’ve never been a fan of home projectors. Projectors lack the image quality compared to good TVs and monitors, and they’re pretty needy. Without getting into the specific requirements of different models, you generally want a darker room with a large, blank wall for a projector to look its best. That can be a lot to ask for, especially in small, densely decorated homes like mine.

That said, a projector can be a space-efficient alternative to a big-screen TV or help you watch TV or movies outside. A projector can be versatile when paired with the right space, especially if that projector makes sure the “right space” is included in the device.

The Splay was crowdfunded in 2021, and its maker, Arovia, describes it as the “first fully collapsible monitor and projector.” In short, it’s a portable projector with an integrated fabric shroud that can serve as a big-screen (24.5 or 34.5 inches diagonally, depending on the model) portable monitor. Or, you can take off the fabric shroud and use the Splay as an ultra-short-throw projector and cast a display that measures up to 80 inches diagonally onto a wall.

At its core, the Splay is a projector, meaning it can’t compete with high-end LCD-LED or OLED monitors. It costs $1,300; the device is currently sold out, but an Arovia representative told me that it will be restocked this month.

Here’s how the device works, per one of Arovia’s patents:

The … collapsible, portable display device, has a housing member having a sliding member aligned on the exterior of the housing member, and sliding along the exterior of said housing member between two operating positions, a collapsible screen containing one or more sheets of flexible, wrinkle resistant silicone or rubber materials containing optical enhancing components and capable of displaying an image when in an expanded operating position, and multiple collapsible members connected to said screen …

Arovia’s representative pointed to the Splay being used for mobile workspaces, gaming, and enterprise use cases, like trade shows.

Because it uses lightweight and springy fabric materials and bendable arms, the whole gadget can be folded into an included case that’s 4×4 inches and weighs 2.5 pounds. Once extended to its max size, the device is a bit unwieldy; I had to be mindful to avoid poking or tearing the fabric when I set up the device.

Still, it can be rather advantageous to access such large display options from something as portable as the collapsed Splay.

Splay as a monitor

The Splay isn’t what people typically picture when thinking of a “portable monitor.” It connects to PCs, iOS and Android devices, and gaming consoles via HDMI (or an HDMI adapter) and is chargeable via USB-C, so you can use it without a wall charger. But this isn’t the type of display you would set up at a coffee shop or even in a small home office.

Compared to a traditional portable monitor, the Splay is bulky. That’s partly because the display is bigger than a typical portable monitor (around 14 inches). Most of the bulk, however, comes from how much the back of the “monitor” protrudes (about 19 to 21 inches from the front of the display).

Profile view of the Arovia Splay

A profile view of the Splay in monitor mode.

Credit: Scharon Harding

A profile view of the Splay in monitor mode. Credit: Scharon Harding

When extended, the device is mostly fabric, but its control center, where there is a power button, sharpness adjuster, and controls for brightness, and the integrated speakers go back pretty far (about 6.25 inches) even before you insert an HDMI or USB-C cable.

You will also want to use the Splay with a tripod (a small, tabletop one’s included) so that it’s at a proper height and you can swivel and tilt the display.

The Arovia Splay's control center.

The Splay’s control center.

Credit: Scharon Harding

The Splay’s control center. Credit: Scharon Harding

That all makes the Splay cumbersome to find space for and, once opened, to transport. Once I set it up, I wasn’t eager to pack it away or to bring it to another room.

Still, the Splay is a novel attempt at bringing a monitor-sized display to more areas. Despite its bulky maximum size, it weighs little and doesn’t have to be plugged into a wall.

Splay claims the monitor has a max brightness of 760 nits. When I used the display in a well-lit room or in a sunny room, it still looked sufficiently bright, even when perpendicular to a window. All colors were somewhat washed out compared to how they appear on my computer monitor but were still acceptable for a secondary display. If I look closely enough, though, I can see the subtle texture of the fabric in the image.

Arovia Splay showing an image.

The Splay also supports portrait mode.

Credit: Scharon Harding

The Splay also supports portrait mode. Credit: Scharon Harding

The Splay struggles mightily with text. It’s not sharp enough, so trying to read more than a couple of sentences on the Splay was a strain. This could be due to the projector technology, as well as the lower pixel density. With a display resolution equivalent to 1920×1080, the 24.5-inch “portable monitor” has a pixel density of 89.9 pixels per inch.

Arovia Splay with text on it

The Splay displaying an Ars Technica article.

Credit: Scharon Harding

The Splay displaying an Ars Technica article. Credit: Scharon Harding

Considering there are portable monitors that are in the 24-inch size range and easier to set up, it’s hard to see a reason to opt for a Splay—unless you also want a projector.

Splay as a projector

To use the Splay as a projector, you have to unzip the fabric shroud and pull the device out of its four-armed holster. Once set up, the Splay works as an ultra-short-throw pico projector with automatic keystone projection, which helps ensure that the display looks like a rectangle instead of a trapezoid or parallelogram.

The Splay as a portable projector.

The Splay as a portable projector.

Credit: Scharon Harding

The Splay as a portable projector. Credit: Scharon Harding

Arovia claims the projector can reach up to 285 lumens and display an image that measures up to 80 inches diagonally.

Now, we start to see the Splay’s value. Unlike other projectors, the Splay remains useful in tight, crowded spaces. Not only does the Splay wrap up neatly for transport, but the integrated screen means you never have to worry about whether you’ll have the right space for the projector to work properly.

There’s always a need for portable displays, and different use cases warrant exploring new approaches and form factors. While there are simpler 24-inch portable monitors with better image quality, the Splay brings remarkable portability and independence to portable projectors.

The Splay is niche and expensive, which is probably why the product’s website currently focuses on more B2B applications, like sports coaches and analysts using it to review footage and data. Similar to the big-screen tablets on wheels that more companies have been making lately, for now, the Splay will probably find the most relevance among businesses or public sector entities.

However, I’m inclined to think about how the Splay’s unique properties could apply to personal projectors. The Splay is a subpar “portable monitor,” but its duality makes it a more valuable projector. There are still too many obstacles preventing me from regularly using a projector, but the Splay has at least shown me that projectors can pack more than I expected.

Photo of Scharon Harding

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

The Splay is a subpar monitor but an exciting portable projector  Read More »

lg-tvs’-unremovable-copilot-shortcut-is-the-least-of-smart-tvs’-ai-problems

LG TVs’ unremovable Copilot shortcut is the least of smart TVs’ AI problems

But Copilot will still be integrated into Tizen OS, and Samsung appears eager to push chatbots into TVs, including by launching Perplexity’s first TV app. Amazon, which released Fire TVs with Alexa+ this year, is also exploring putting chatbots into TVs.

After the backlash LG faced this week, companies may reconsider installing AI apps on people’s smart TVs. A better use of large language models in TVs may be as behind-the-scenes tools to improve TV watching. People generally don’t buy smart TVs to make it easier to access chatbots.

But this development is still troubling for anyone who doesn’t want an AI chatbot in their TV at all.

Some people don’t want chatbots in their TVs

Subtle integrations of generative AI that make it easier for people to do things like figure out the name of “that movie” may have practical use, but there are reasons to be wary of chatbot-wielding TVs.

Chatbots add another layer of complexity to understanding how a TV tracks user activity. With a chatbot involved, smart TV owners will be subject to complicated smart TV privacy policies and terms of service, as well as the similarly verbose rules of third-party AI companies. This will make it harder for people to understand what data they’re sharing with companies, and there’s already serious concern about the boundaries smart TVs are pushing to track users, including without consent.

Chatbots can also contribute to smart TV bloatware. Unwanted fluff, like games, shopping shortcuts, and flashy ads, already disrupts people who just want to watch TV.

LG’s Copilot web app is worthy of some grousing, but not necessarily because of the icon that users will eventually be able to delete. The more pressing issue is the TV industry’s shift toward monetizing software with user tracking and ads.

If you haven’t already, now is a good time to check out our guide to breaking free from smart TV ads and tracking.

LG TVs’ unremovable Copilot shortcut is the least of smart TVs’ AI problems Read More »

riot-games-is-making-an-anti-cheat-change-that-could-be-rough-on-older-pcs

Riot Games is making an anti-cheat change that could be rough on older PCs

But Riot says it’s considering rolling the BIOS requirement out to all players in Valorant‘s highest competitive ranking tiers (Ascendant, Immortal, and Radiant), where there’s more to be gained from working around the anti-cheat software. And Riot anti-cheat analyst Mohamed Al-Sharifi says the same restrictions could be turned on for League of Legends, though they aren’t currently. If users are blocked from playing by Vanguard, they’ll need to download and install the latest BIOS update for their motherboard before they’ll be allowed to launch the game.

Newer PCs are getting patched; older PCs might not be

An AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D in a motherboard with a 500-series chipset. It’s unclear whether these somewhat older systems need a patch or will get one. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

The vulnerability is known to affect four of the largest PC motherboard makers: ASRock, Asus, Gigabyte, and MSI. All four have released updates for at least some of their newer motherboards, while other boards have updates coming later. According to the vulnerability note, it’s unclear whether systems from OEMs like Dell, Lenovo, Acer, or HP are affected.

ASRock’s security bulletin about the issue says it affects Intel boards based on the 500-, 600-, 700-, and 800-series chipsets; MSI only lists the 600- and 700-series chipsets. Asus is also missing the 800-series, but says the vulnerability affects boards based on even older 400-series Intel chipsets; Gigabyte, meanwhile, covers 600-through-800-series Intel chipsets, but is also the only vendor to mention patches for AMD’s 600- and 800-series chipsets (any motherboard with an AM5 socket, in short).

Collectively, all of these chipsets cover Intel’s 10th-generation Core processors and newer, and AMD Ryzen 7000 series and newer.

What’s unclear is whether the boards and chipsets that go unmentioned by each vendor aren’t getting a patch because they don’t need a patch, if they will be patched but they just aren’t being mentioned, or if they aren’t getting a patch at all. The bulletins at least suggest that 400- and 500-series Intel chipsets and 600- and 800-series AMD chipsets could be affected, but not all vendors have promised patches for them.

Riot Games is making an anti-cheat change that could be rough on older PCs Read More »

youtube-bans-two-popular-channels-that-created-fake-ai-movie-trailers

YouTube bans two popular channels that created fake AI movie trailers

Deadline reports that the behavior of these creators ran afoul of YouTube’s spam and misleading-metadata policies. At the same time, Google loves generative AI—YouTube has added more ways for creators to use generative AI, and the company says more gen AI tools are coming in the future. It’s quite a tightrope for Google to walk.

AI movie trailers

A selection of videos from the now-defunct Screen Culture channel.

Credit: Ryan Whitwam

A selection of videos from the now-defunct Screen Culture channel. Credit: Ryan Whitwam

While passing off AI videos as authentic movie trailers is definitely spammy conduct, the recent changes to the legal landscape could be a factor, too. Disney recently entered into a partnership with OpenAI, bringing its massive library of characters to the company’s Sora AI video app. At the same time, Disney sent a cease-and-desist letter to Google demanding the removal of Disney content from Google AI. The letter specifically cited AI content on YouTube as a concern.

Both the banned trailer channels made heavy use of Disney properties, sometimes even incorporating snippets of real trailers. For example, Screen Culture created 23 AI trailers for The Fantastic Four: First Steps, some of which outranked the official trailer in searches. It’s unclear if either account used Google’s Veo models to create the trailers, but Google’s AI will recreate Disney characters without issue.

While Screen Culture and KH Studio were the largest purveyors of AI movie trailers, they are far from alone. There are others with five and six-digit subscriber counts, some of which include disclosures about fan-made content. Is that enough to save them from the ban hammer? Many YouTube viewers probably hope not.

YouTube bans two popular channels that created fake AI movie trailers Read More »