Like many of us, Google Gemini is tired of politics. Reuters reports that Google has restricted the chatbot from answering questions about the upcoming US election, and instead, it will direct users to Google Search.
Google had planned to do this back when the Gemini chatbot was still called “Bard.” In December, the company said, “Beginning early next year, in preparation for the 2024 elections and out of an abundance of caution on such an important topic, we’ll restrict the types of election-related queries for which Bard and [Google Search’s Bard integration] will return responses.” Tuesday, Google confirmed to Reuters that those restrictions have kicked in. Election queries now tend to come back with the refusal: “I’m still learning how to answer this question. In the meantime, try Google Search.”
Google’s original plan in December was likely to disable election info so Gemini could avoid any political firestorms. Boy, did that not work out! When asked to generate images of people, Gemini quietly tacked diversity requirements onto the image request; this practice led to offensive and historically inaccurate images along with a general refusal to generate images of white people. Last month that earned Google wall-to-wall coverage in conservative news spheres along the lines of “Google’s woke AI hates white people!” Google CEO Sundar Pichai called the AI’s “biased” responses “completely unacceptable,” and for now, creating images of people is disabled while Google works on it.
The start of the first round of US elections in the AI era has already led to new forms of disinformation, and Google presumably wants to opt out of all of it.
Whether or not autonomous vehicles ever work out, the effort put into using small cameras and machine-learning algorithms to detect cars could pay off big for an unexpected group: cyclists.
Velo AI is a firm cofounded by Clark Haynes and Micol Marchetti-Bowick, both PhDs with backgrounds in robotics, movement prediction, and Uber’s (since sold-off) autonomous vehicle work. Copilot, which started as a “pandemic passion project” for Haynes, is essentially car-focused artificial intelligence and machine learning stuffed into a Raspberry Pi Compute Module 4 and boxed up in a bike-friendly size and shape.
A look into the computer vision of the Copilot.
While car-detecting devices exist for bikes, including the Garmin Varia, they’re largely radar-based. That means they can’t distinguish between vehicles of different sizes and only know that something is approaching you, not, for example, how much space it will allow when passing.
Copilot purports to do a lot more:
Identify cars, bikes, and pedestrians
Alert riders audibly about cars “Following,” “Approaching,” and “Overtaking”
Issue visual warning to drivers who are approaching too close or too fast
Send visual notifications and a simplified rear road view to an optional paired smartphone
Record 1080p video and tag “close calls” and “incidents” from your phone
At 330 grams, with five hours of optimal battery life (and USB-C recharging), it’s not for the aero-obsessed rider or super-long-distance rider. And at $400, it might not speak to the most casual and infrequent cyclist. But it’s an intriguing piece of kit, especially for those who already have, or considered, a Garmin or similar action camera for watching their back. What if a camera could do more than just show you the car after you’re already endangered by it?
Copilot’s computer vision can alert riders to cars that are “Following,” “Approaching,” and “Overtaking.”
Velo AI
The Velo team detailed some of their building process for the official Raspberry Pi blog. The Compute Module 4 powers the core system and lights, while a custom Hailo AI co-processor helps with the neural networks and computer vision. An Arducam camera provides the vision and recording.
Beyond individual safety, the Velo AI team hopes that data from Copilots can feed into larger-scale road safety improvements. The team told the Pi blog that they’re starting a partnership with Pittsburgh, seeding Copilots to regular bike commuters and analyzing the aggregate data for potential infrastructure upgrades.
The Copilot is available for sale now and shipping, according to Velo AI. A December 2023 pre-order sold out.
Enlarge/ Apple AirPods on display at the company’s Fifth Avenue store in New York in Feb. 2024.
Bing Guan/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Apple’s AirPods Pro are getting closer to becoming fully fledged hearing aids and marketed as such, according to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman. The move could have a large impact on the hearing aid market, which has already been recently shaken up by over-the-counter models.
Gurman writes that AirPods Pro are due to receive a hearing-aid function in iOS 18, arriving this fall and likely to be announced and outlined at a Worldwide Developers Conference in June. The Wall Street Journal reported in the fall of 2021 that Apple was working toward a future AirPods Pro model that functioned as a hearing aid and would also be able to monitor body posture and even body temperature.
It was not clear from Gurman or the Journal’s reporting whether the hearing aid function would be available only in a new model of AirPods Pro or offered as a software update on prior models. Since the Journal’s report, Apple has released both a second-generation model of AirPods Pro and a refresh of that model with a USB-C port.
“Hearing aid” may also not be technically accurate, depending on Apple’s aims. The US Food and Drug Administration in 2022 provided for a new category of “Personal sound amplification products,” or PSAPs, that do not need to meet the stricter requirements for an FDA-approved hearing aid. This new category offered huge cost savings to people with mild to moderate hearing loss and kicked off a generation of hearing aids that connected to a smartphone over Bluetooth for setup, tuning, and monitoring. These are distinct from over-the-counter hearing aids, which, while still notably cheaper than “professional fit” hearing aids, are still regulated by the FDA.
A study in late 2022 found that first-generation AirPods Pro, with their “Live Listen” feature activated, could meet four of the five PSAP standards and just barely missed a sound-pressure threshold. Notably, the AirPods Pro, tested in relatively quiet environments, helped people hear about as well as hearing aid models that cost up to $10,000, within the PSAP standards.
The next version of Apple’s mobile operating system, iOS 18, is rumored to contain a multitude of features beyond AirPods updates. MacRumors (leaning on Gurman’s subscriber-only newsletter reporting) suggests that generative AI features, RCS support for text messages, and revamps to many core Apple apps are due.
Enlarge/ Google’s Bay View campus was designed with the world’s strangest roof line.
Google
Google’s swanky new “Bay View” campus apparently has a major problem: bad Wi-Fi. Reuters reports that Google’s first self-designed office building has “been plagued for months by inoperable or, at best, spotty Wi-Fi, according to six people familiar with the matter.” A Google spokesperson confirmed the problems and said the company is working on fixing them.
Bay View opened in May 2022. At launch, Google’s VP of Real Estate & Workplace Services, David Radcliffe, said the site “marks the first time we developed one of our own major campuses, and the process gave us the chance to rethink the very idea of an office.” The result is a wild tent-like structure with a striking roofline made up of swooping square sections. Of course, it’s all made of metal and glass, but the roof shape looks like squares of cloth held up by poles—each square section has high points on the four corners and sags down in the middle. The roof is covered in solar cells and collects rainwater while also letting in natural light, and Google calls it the “Gradient Canopy.”
Enlarge/ We’ll guess the roofline’s multiple parabolic sections are great at scattering the Wi-Fi signal.
Google
All those peaks and parabolic ceiling sections apparently aren’t great for Wi-Fi propagation, with the Reuters report saying that the roof “swallows broadband like the Bermuda Triangle.” Googlers assigned to the building are making do with Ethernet cables, using phones as hotspots, or working outside, where the Wi-Fi is stronger. One anonymous employee told Reuters, “You’d think the world’s leading Internet company would have worked this out.”
Having an office with barely working Wi-Fi sure is awkward for a company pushing a “return to office” plan that includes at least three days a week at Google’s Wi-Fi desert. A Google spokesperson told Reuters the company has already made several improvements and hopes to have a fix in the coming weeks.
When Apple upgraded its Macs with the M2 chip, some users noticed that storage speeds were actually quite a bit lower than they were in the M1 versions. Both the 256GB M2 MacBook Air and the 512GB M2 MacBook Pro had their storage speeds roughly halved compared to M1 Macs with the same storage capacities.
Teardowns revealed that this was because Apple was using fewer physical flash memory chips to provide the same amount of storage. Modern SSDs achieve their high speeds partly by reading from and writing to multiple NAND flash chips simultaneously, a process called “interleaving.” When there’s only one flash chip to access, speeds go down.
Early teardowns of the M3 MacBook Air suggest that Apple may have reversed course here, at least for some Airs. The Max Tech YouTube channel took a 256GB M3 Air apart, showing a pair of 128GB NAND flash chips rather than the single 256GB chip that the M2 Air used. BlackMagic Disk Speed Test performance increases accordingly; read and write speeds for the 256GB M2 Air come in at around 1,600 MB/s, while the M3 Air has read speeds of roughly 2,900 MB/s and write speeds of about 2,100 MB/s. That’s roughly in line with the M1 Air’s performance.
For the other M3 MacBook Airs, storage speed should be mostly comparable to the M2 versions. Apple sent us the 512GB configuration of the 13- and 15-inch M3 Airs, and storage speeds in the BlackMagic Disk Speed Test were roughly the same as for the 512GB M2 Airs—roughly 3,000 MB/s for both reading and writing.
Though this appears to be good news for M3 Air buyers, it doesn’t guarantee that any given 256GB MacBook Air will come configured this way. Apple uses multiple suppliers for many of the components in its devices, and the company could ship a mix of 128GB and 256GB chips in different 256GB MacBook Airs based on which components are cheaper or more readily available at any given time. (The Max Tech channel speculates that a single 128GB NAND chip costs Apple more than a single 256GB NAND chip, though Max Tech doesn’t cite a source for this, and we just don’t know what prices Apple negotiates with its suppliers for these components.)
Though it’s nice that the M3 Air’s baseline storage speeds are increasing, it’s too bad that a new Air is still offering the same storage speed as the M1 Airs released over three years ago. It’s frustrating that Apple can’t improve storage speeds along with CPU and GPU performance, especially when the standard M.2 SSDs in PCs are getting faster and cost less money than what Apple sells in its Mac lineup.
Enlarge/ Domestically made smartphones were much in evidence at the National People’s Congress in Beijing
Wang Zhao/AFP/Getty Images
Apple and Tesla cracked China, but now the two largest US consumer companies in the country are experiencing cracks in their own strategies as domestic rivals gain ground and patriotic buying often trumps their allure.
Falling market share and sales figures reported this month indicate the two groups face rising competition and the whiplash of US-China geopolitical tensions. Both have turned to discounting to try to maintain their appeal.
A shift away from Apple, in particular, has been sharp, spurred on by a top-down campaign to reduce iPhone usage among state employees and the triumphant return of Chinese national champion Huawei, which last year overcame US sanctions to roll out a homegrown smartphone capable of near 5G speeds.
Apple’s troubles were on full display at China’s annual Communist Party bash in Beijing this month, where a dozen participants told the Financial Times they were using phones from Chinese brands.
“For people coming here, they encourage us to use domestic phones, because phones like Apple are not safe,” said Zhan Wenlong, a nuclear physicist and party delegate. “[Apple phones] are made in China, but we don’t know if the chips have back doors.”
Wang Chunru, a member of China’s top political advisory body, the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, said he was using a Huawei device. “We all know Apple has eavesdropping capabilities,” he said.
Delegate Li Yanfeng from Guangxi said her phone was manufactured by Huawei. “I trust domestic brands, using them was a uniform request.”
Financial Times using Bloomberg data
Outside of the US, China is both Apple and Tesla’s single-largest market, respectively contributing 19 percent and 22 percent of total revenues during their most recent fiscal years. Their mounting challenges in the country have caught Wall Street’s attention, contributing to Apple’s 9 percent share price slide this year and Tesla’s 28 percent fall, making them the poorest performers among the so-called Magnificent Seven tech stocks.
Apple and Tesla are the latest foreign companies to feel the pain of China’s shift toward local brands. Sales of Nike and Adidas clothing have yet to return to their 2021 peak. A recent McKinsey report showed a growing preference among Chinese consumers for local brands.
Enlarge/ AMD’s depiction of a game playing without FreeSync (left) and with FreeSync (right).
AMD announced this week that it has ceased FreeSync certification for monitors or TVs whose maximum refresh rates are under 144 Hz. Previously, FreeSync monitors and TVs could have refresh rates as low as 60 Hz, allowing for screens with lower price tags and ones not targeted at serious gaming to carry the variable refresh-rate technology.
AMD also boosted the refresh-rate requirements for its higher AdaptiveSync tiers, FreeSync Premium and FreeSync Premium Pro, from 120 Hz to 200 Hz.
Here are the new minimum refresh-rate requirements for FreeSync, which haven’t changed for laptops.
Laptops
Monitors and TVs
FreeSync
Max refresh rate: 40-60 Hz
< 3440 Horizontal resolution: Max refresh rate: ≥ 144 Hz
FreeSync Premium
Max refresh rate: ≥ 120 Hz
< 3440 Horizontal resolution: Max refresh rate: ≥ 200 Hz≥ 3440 Horizontal resolution: Max refresh rate: ≥ 120 Hz
FreeSync Premium Pro
FreeSync Premium requirements, plus FreeSync support with HDR
FreeSync Premium requirements, plus FreeSync support with HDR
AMD will continue supporting already-certified FreeSync displays even if they don’t meet the above requirements.
Interestingly, AMD’s minimum refresh-rate requirements for TVs go beyond 120 Hz, which many premium TVs currently max out at, due to the current-generation Xbox and PlayStation supporting max refresh rates of 120 frames per second (FPS).
Announcing the changes this week in a blog post, Oguzhan Andic, AMD FreeSync and Radeon product marketing manager, claimed that the changes were necessary, noting that 60 Hz is no longer “considered great for gaming.” Andic wrote that the majority of gaming monitors are 144 Hz or higher, compared to in 2015, when FreeSync debuted, and even 120 Hz was “a rarity.”
Since 2015, refresh rates have climbed ever higher, with the latest sports targeting competitive players hitting 500 Hz, with display stakeholders showing no signs of ending the push for more speed. Meanwhile, FreeSync cemented itself as the more accessible flavor of Adaptive Sync than Nvidia’s G-Sync, which for a long time required specific hardware to run, elevating the costs of supporting products.
AMD’s announcement didn’t address requirements for refresh-rate ranges. Hopefully, OEMs will continue making FreeSync displays, especially monitors, that can still fight screen tears when framerates drop to the double digits.
The changes should also elevate the future price of entry for a monitor or TV with FreeSync TV. Sometimes the inclusion of FreeSync served as a differentiator for people seeking an affordable display and who occasionally do some light gaming or enjoy other media with fast-paced video playback. FreeSync committing itself to 144 Hz and faster screens could help the certification be aligned more with serious gaming.
Meanwhile, there is still hope for future, slower screens to get certification for variable refresh rates. In 2022, the Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) released its MediaSync Display for video playback and AdaptiveSync for gaming, certifications that have minimum refresh-rate requirements of 60 Hz. VESA developed the lengthy detailed certifications with its dozens of members, including AMD (a display could be MediaSync/AdaptiveSync and/or FreeSync and/or G-Sync certified). In addition to trying to appeal to core gamers, it’s possible that AMD also sees the VESA certifications as more appropriate for slower displays.
Enlarge/ The bigger Pixel 8 Pro gets the latest AI features. The smaller model does not.
Google
If you believe Google’s marketing hype, AI in a phone is really, really important, the best AI is Google’s, and the best place to get that AI is Google’s flagship smartphone, the Pixel 8. We’re five months removed from the launch of the Pixel 8, and that doesn’t seem like a justifiable position anymore: Google says its latest AI models can’t run on the Pixel 8.
Google dropped that news in a Mobile World Congress wrap-up video that was spotted by Mishaal Rahman. At the end of the show in a Q&A session, Googler Terence Zhang, a member of the Gemini-on-Android team, said “[Gemini] Nano will not be coming to the Pixel 8 because of some hardware limitations. It’s currently on the Pixel 8 Pro and very recently available on the Samsung S24 family. It’ll be coming to more high-end devices in the near future.”
That is a wild statement. Gemini is Google’s latest AI model, and it made a big deal of the launch last month. Gemini comes in a few different sizes, and the smallest “Nano” size is specifically designed to run on smartphones as a much-hyped “on-device AI.” The Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro are Google’s flagship smartphones. Google designed the phone and the chip and the AI model and somehow can’t make these things play nice together?
Adding to the weirdness is that Gemini Nano can run on the Pixel 8 Pro but not the smaller Pixel 8 due to “hardware limitations.” What limitations would those be, exactly? The two phones have the exact same Google Tensor SoC. They run the same software. The main differences between the two phones are screen size (6.7 inches versus 6.2), battery size, a different camera loadout, and 8GB of RAM versus 12GB. RAM is the only known difference you can point to that could create a processing limitation, but Gemini Nano also runs on the Galaxy S24 series, where the base model has 8GB of RAM. RAM being the issue would mean Samsung phones are somehow more RAM efficient than Pixel phones, which is hard to believe. If the Pixel 8 Pro Tensor 3 and Pixel 8 Tensor 3 are different somehow, that’s not on the spec sheet.
Five months ago at the Pixel 8 launch event, Google painted a very different picture of the Pixel 8 series: “I’m excited to introduce you to the next evolution of AI in your hand, Google Pixel 8 Pro and Google Pixel 8. Our latest phones bring together so many technologies from across Google. They’re the first phones to use our latest Google Tensor chip. They include the very best Android experience, first-of-its-kind camera experiences, and the latest AI advancements from Google.” Both devices feature the custom Google Tensor 3 SoC that Google claimed was “designed specifically to bring Google’s AI breakthroughs directly to Pixel users and show the world what’s possible.” This custom Google AI-focused design was supposed to deliver “unbelievably helpful experiences that no other phone can.”
Enlarge/ Google’s “Compare” page does not clearly communicate to customers what they’re buying.
Google
When you launch two phones at once, it’s always hard to distinguish what the actual differences between the two models are. Sometimes, the devices get talked about in the plural, while other times “Pixel 8” is used to represent both devices. Sometimes, the more expensive device is singularly mentioned for no reason other than it’s the more expensive flagship. Between the hour-long presentation and private press pre-briefing that Ars was a part of, “What’s the difference” became a pretty well-worn question that was expected to be answered clearly. Usually, the go-to delineator here is the spec sheet, which is expected to spell out in clear language what you’re actually buying. The Google Store has a compare page where you can directly pit the Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro against each other, and nothing spells out a difference in AI processing capabilities or a difference in the Tensor chips.
In the case of the Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro, Google wasn’t clear enough in its communication at launch. Today, though, re-watching the launch presentation with the new knowledge that there is some dramatic difference in AI processing capabilities, you can pick up some language like talk of the “Pixel 8 Pro’s on-device LLM” that you could now interpret as a declaration of exclusive AI capabilities for the Pro model, but that wasn’t clear at the time.
As a consumer, it’s hard not to feel misled, and it’s embarrassing for Google, but to practically care about this, you’d need to know what the heck “Gemini Nano” actually does and why you should care about it. That’s a hard question to answer. Google has a page up here detailing some of the features Gemini Nano powers on the Pixel 8 Pro, but a feature could also be powered by different models on different devices. For what it’s worth, the rundown lists a “summarize” feature for the Google Recorder app and “smart reply” in Gboard. Plenty of Google apps already have a “smart reply” feature without Gemini Nano. Third-party developers can also plug into the onboard Gemini Nano model for their apps, but it’s hard to imagine anyone doing that with such limited device support.
The other option is to just forget about doing all of this AI stuff on-device and just do it in the cloud. As a great example of this, none of this Gemini Nano stuff has anything to do with the Google Gemini Chatbot, which all runs in the cloud. A big question is what this will mean for the smaller Google Pixel 8 going forward. Google promised seven years of OS updates for the new Pixels, and to already be stripping down features due to “hardware limitations” after five months is a disappointment.
Enlarge/ A blurry, ghostly Persona in visionOS 1.0. They should at least look less bad in visionOS 1.1.
Samuel Axon
Apple has released a long list of medium-sized software updates for most of its devices today. The macOS Sonoma 14.4, watchOS 10.4, tvOS 17.4, and visionOS 1.1 updates are all available now, and most of them add at least one or two major features as they fix multiple bugs and patch security vulnerabilities.
The visionOS 1.1 release is the first major update for Apple’s newest operating system, and as our coverage of the headset has demonstrated, there’s still plenty of low-hanging fruit to fix. Most notably for people who are trying to use the headset for work meetings, Apple says that there have been multiple changes to the look of Personas, the 3D avatars that show up in your place when you’re video chatting with the Vision Pro on your face. The update improves “hair and makeup appearance,” “neck and mouth representation,” and “rendering of the eyes,” and while it’s clear that it’s an improvement over the 1.0 release of Personas, the core uncanniness still seems to be intact. The Persona feature is still labeled as a beta.
Apple has also made tweaks to the appearance and functionality of the headset’s virtual keyboard, improved the Virtual Display feature’s Mac connectivity, and added a handful of mobile device management features for IT administrators.
Apple’s headlining feature for macOS 14.4 is the addition of new Unicode 15.1 emoji, plus podcast transcriptions in the Apple Music app. It’s unclear whether this release enables multiple external displays for users of the $1,599 M3 MacBook Pro, a feature that Apple announced alongside the new M3 MacBook Airs.
Apple Watch owners can look forward to the resolution of one annoying bug I’ve run into a few times on my own watch: a bug that would make the screen act as though it was receiving touch input even when you weren’t touching it. Sometimes referred to as a “ghost touch” or “phantom touch” bug, the only way to get it to go away was to reboot the watch. I haven’t noticed the bug since I installed one of the later watchOS 10.4 betas a couple of weeks ago.
Version 17.4 of the HomePod operating system now allows users to set their preferred music service, so telling Siri to play music will automatically use whatever service you want instead of defaulting to Apple Music unless you specify. The tvOS 17.4 update doesn’t appear to include any particular features or fixes of note.
All of the new releases follow iOS 17.4 and iPadOS 17.4, which came out a few days ago with mostly minor changes unless you happened to live in the European Union. For European users, that update ushers in Apple’s first attempt at compliance with new regulations that require the company to allow the use of third-party app stores, alternate browsing engines, and sideloaded apps. These changes come with plenty of conditions and caveats, as Apple seeks to remain the ultimate arbiter of what software can and can’t run on iPhones and iPads.
Roku customers are threatening to stop using, or to even dispose of, their low-priced TVs and streaming gadgets after the company appears to be locking devices for people who don’t conform to the recently updated terms of service (ToS).
This month, users on Roku’s support forums reported suddenly seeing a message when turning on their Roku TV or streaming device reading: “We’ve made an important update: We’ve updated our Dispute Resolution Terms. Select ‘Agree’ to agree to these updated Terms and to continue enjoying our products and services. Press to view these updated Terms.” A large button reading “Agree” follows. The pop-up doesn’t offer a way to disagree, and users are unable to use their device unless they hit agree.
Customers have left pages of complaints on Roku’s forum. One user going by “rickstanford” said they were “FURIOUS!!!!” and expressed interest in sending their reported six Roku devices back to the company since “apparently I don’t own them despite spending hundreds of dollars on them.”
Another user going by Formercustomer, who, I suspect, is aptly named, wrote:
So, you buy a product, and you use it. And they want to change the terms limiting your rights, and they basically brick the device … if you don’t accept their new terms. … I hope they get their comeuppance here, as this is disgraceful.
Roku has further aggravated customers who have found that disagreeing to its updated terms is harder than necessary. Roku is willing to accept agreement to its terms with a single button press, but to opt out, users must jump through hoops that include finding that old book of stamps.
To opt out of Roku’s ToS update, which primarily changes the “Dispute Resolution Terms,” users must send a letter to Roku’s general counsel in California mentioning: “the name of each person opting out and contact information for each such person, the specific product models, software, or services used that are at issue, the email address that you used to set up your Roku account (if you have one), and, if applicable, a copy of your purchase receipt.” Roku required all this to opt out of its terms previously, as well.
But the new update means that while users read this information and have their letter delivered, they’re unable to use products they already paid for and used, in some cases for years, under different “dispute resolution terms.”
“I can’t watch my TV because I don’t agree to the Dispute Resolution Terms. Please help,” a user going by Campbell220 wrote on Roku’s support forum.
Based on the ToS’s wording, users could technically choose to agree to the ToS on their device and then write a letter saying they’d like to opt out. But opting into an agreement only to use a device under terms you don’t agree with is counterintuitive.
Even more pressing, Roku’s ToS states that users only have “within 30 days of you first becoming subject to” Roku’s updated terms, which was February 20, to opt out. Otherwise, you’re opted in automatically.
Archived records of Roku’s ToS website seem to show the new ToS being online since at least August. But it was only this month that users reported that their TVs were useless unless they accepted the terms via an on-screen message. Roku declined to answer Ars Technica’s questions about the changes, including why it didn’t alert users about them earlier. But a spokesperson shared a statement saying:
Like many companies, Roku updates its terms of service from time to time. When we do, we take steps to make sure customers are informed of the change.
What Roku changed
Customers are criticizing Roku for aggressively pushing them to accept ToS changes. The updates focus on Roku’s terms for dispute resolution, which prevent users from suing Roku. The terms have long forced a described arbitration process for dispute resolution. The new ToS is more detailed, including specifics for “mass arbitrations.” The biggest change is the introduction of a section called “Required Informal Dispute Resolution.” It states that except for a small number of described exceptions (which include claims around intellectual property), users must make “a good-faith effort” to negotiate with Roku, or vice versa, for at least 45 days before entering arbitration.
Roku is also taking heat for using forced arbitration at all, which some argue can have one-sided benefits. In a similar move in December, for example, 23andMe said users had 30 days to opt out of its new dispute resolution terms, which included mass arbitration rules (the genetics firm let customers opt out via email, though). The changes came after 23andMe user data was stolen in a cyberattack. Forced arbitration clauses are frequently used by large companies to avoid being sued by fed-up customers.
Roku’s forced arbitration rules aren’t new but are still making customers question their streaming hardware, especially considering that there are rivals, like Amazon, Apple, and Google, that don’t force arbitration on users.
Based on comments in Roku’s forums, some users were unaware they were already subject to arbitration rules and only learned this as a result of Roku’s abrupt pop-up.
But with the functionality of already-owned devices blocked until users give in, Roku’s methods are questionable, and Roku may lose customers over it. Per an anonymous user on Roku’s forum:
Enlarge/ Apple’s M3 MacBook Airs put a new chip in 2022’s design.
Andrew Cunningham
Right off the bat, the M3 MacBook Airs aren’t as interesting as the M2 models.
July 2022’s M2 MacBook Air updated the design of the 13-inch laptop for the Apple Silicon era after the M1 Air’s external design played it safe. And the first-ever 15-inch MacBook Air, released over a year later, was an appealing option for people who wanted a larger screen but didn’t need the extra power or cost of a MacBook Pro. Together, they were a comprehensive rethink of Apple’s approach to its mainstream laptops, modeled after the similarly dramatic Apple Silicon MacBook Pro redesigns.
The M3 Airs don’t do any of that. They are laptop designs we’ve already seen, wrapped around a processor we’ve already seen. But they may end up being more important than the M2 Airs because of when they’re being released—as the last of the Intel Macs slowly age and break and Apple winds down software support for them (if not in this year’s macOS release, then almost certainly next year’s). Between the faster chip and a couple of other feature updates, the new machines may also be the first ones that are truly worth a look for M1 Air early adopters who want an upgrade.
Apple left us a scant 48 hours to test and use this laptop, but here’s what we’ve observed so far.
Does the design hold up?
The 13- and 15-inch MacBook Airs. Same design, but the 15-inch Air has a bigger screen and trackpad and better speakers, while the 13-inch Air is smaller and lighter. Note both the fingerprints on the Midnight finish and how the notch can be either more or less visible based on your settings.
Andrew Cunningham
Air footprints compared: the 13-inch on top of the 15-inch.
Andrew Cunningham
The M1 MacBook Air is still the one I use most days, and anyone coming from a 2018–2020 Intel MacBook Air will be familiar with the design. So the M2/M3-era MacBook Air design is still striking to me, despite being the better part of two years old.
By and large, I think the newer design holds up pretty well; I don’t mind the loss of the taper, even if it makes the laptop look a bit more boxy and less sleek. The full-height function row and tweaked keyboard are both good, and I don’t generally have issues with trackpad palm rejection on either the 13- or 15-inch models. It’s nice to have MagSafe back, though in the end, I almost always charge the Air with one of the many USB-C chargers I have strategically tucked into most rooms in the house.
Specs at a glance: Apple M3 MacBook Air (as reviewed)
Screen
13.6-inch 2560×1664 IPS LCD
15.3-inch 2880×1864
OS
macOS 14.4 Sonoma
CPU
Apple M3 (4 E-cores, 4 P-cores)
RAM
16GB unified memory
GPU
Apple M3 (10 GPU cores)
Storage
512GB soldered SSD
Battery
52.6 WHr
66.5 WHr
Networking
Wi-Fi 6E (802.11ax), Bluetooth 5.3
Ports
2x Thunderbolt/USB4, MagSafe 3, headphones
Size
11.97×8.46×0.44 inches (304.1×215×113 mm)
13.40×9.35×0.45 inches (340.4×237.6×115 mm)
Weight
2.7 lbs (1.24 kg)
3.3 lbs (1.51 kg)
Warranty
1-year
Price as reviewed
$1,499
$1,699
Other perks
1080p webcam, TouchID
I’m also reminded anew of just how much I like the 15-inch MacBook Air as someone who likes a big screen but doesn’t use a laptop for much gaming or anything heavier than Photoshop or Lightroom (and I generally don’t care that much about high-refresh-rate displays). The combination of size and weight really is close to ideal, and though the 15-inch Air is unmistakably larger and heavier than the 13-inch model, the difference isn’t so large in daily use that I spend a lot of time thinking about it. The improved speaker setup is also nice to have when you’re playing music or using that bigger screen to watch something.
The biggest downside of the design remains the display notch. As we and others have noted multiple times, it’s not that you don’t get used to it, and in typical desktop use (especially in dark mode and with a dark wallpaper), you can often forget it’s there. But in the absence of FaceID or some major other functional addition, it feels like a lot of space to take up for not a lot of user-visible benefit.
Sure, a 1080p webcam instead of a 720p webcam is nice, but I would choose a notch-less screen with more usable space every time if given the choice. (The strips of screen to either side of the notch can only really display the macOS menu bar; go into the Control Center area of the Settings and change “automatically hide and show the Menu Bar’ to “Never” if you don’t want those strips of screen to go totally wasted in full-screen mode).
The Midnight finish as seen on a 15-inch MacBook Air, freshly cleaned and pristine.
Andrew Cunningham
This is what the laptop looked like before I cleaned it. I’ve had it for two days. You’ll definitely still see fingerprints.
Andrew Cunningham
One design change that Apple has highlighted for the M3 Airs is a new coating for the Midnight (read: blue-tinted black) version of the Air that is said to reduce its fingerprint-y-ness. Apple did the same thing for the M3 version of the MacBook Pro last year.
The new finish looks a shade or two lighter than the old Midnight coating and does show fingerprints a bit less. But “less” isn’t “none,” and my Air was immediately, visibly fingerprint-y and skin-oily, both on the lid and in the palm rest area. It remains more noticeable than on either the Starlight finish of the 13-inch M3 Air or the space gray finish on my M1 Air. Choose your color finish accordingly.
Enlarge/ Max viewers will soon need their own account to watch Ellie in The Last of Us.
Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) has confirmed that it will be cracking down on password sharing for its Max streaming service starting this year. The news follows streaming rivals, including Netflix and, soon, Disney-owned Disney+ and Hulu, in banning the sharing of account login information with people outside of the account holder’s household.
As spotted by TheWrap, while speaking at Morgan Stanley’s Technology, Media, and Telecom 2024 conference in San Francisco on Monday, JB Perrette, CEO and president of global streaming and games at WBD, said that WBD sees a password-sharing crackdown as a “growth opportunity.”
“Obviously Netflix has implemented [its password crackdown] extremely successfully. We’re gonna be doing that starting later this year and into ’25,” Perrette said.
Netflix famously launched the password crackdown trend in March 2022 and brought the rule changes to US subscribers in May 2023. Netflix had excused password sharing for years, but in 2022, it lost subscribers—about 200,000—for the first time since 2011. At the time, Netflix had 221.64 million subscribers; its most recent subscriber count was 260 million.
However, Max is unlikely to see the same subscriber surge as Netflix did. After all, Netflix’s ban on password sharing started after 17 years of gaining millions of subscribers. The Max streaming service has only been around for four years, a number that includes HBO Max, as Perrette pointed out, noting that banning account sharing is still a ”meaningful” financial prospect.
Perrette didn’t get into details about how Max’s password crackdown would work and how it might apply to the Discovery+ streaming service that WBD also owns.
New types of ads on Max
WBD is aiming to grow its streaming business with more subscribers and less churn as it expands to other markets and tries to boost content selection following a light year impacted by strikes.
On Monday, Perrette also discussed interest in changing the types of ads its streaming service shows. On the network side, HBO is known as a channel with very few commercials and a primary focus on its own content. Now that WBD is focusing on driving the streaming side of HBO through the Max app, it would prefer that the content be more synonymous with ads. Streaming services report making more money per user on average when they use a streaming subscription with ads rather than paying more for no commercials.
Per Perrette:
On the ad format size, we’ve made lots of improvements from where we were, but we still have a lot of ad format enhancements that will give us more things that we can go to marketers with, [like] shoppable ads [and] other elements of the ad format side of the house that we can improve …
Again, Max isn’t starting a trend here. Amazon Prime Video, for example, is already looking at transactional ads. Disney+ announced beta testing for shoppable ads to advertisers in January. Hulu has worked with transactional ads for years. Peacock sells them, too. Apple TV+ still doesn’t have an ad tier for its streaming service, but recent hires have people suspecting that that may change.
Perrette also touched on scaling WBD’s streaming business by bundling with third-party services, as Max does with Verizon. Perrette said WBD is in discussions with other partners for potential bundles.
WBD’s strategies come as it tries to grow the profitability of its streaming businesses. In its earnings report shared on February 23, WBD said that its direct-to-consumer (DTC) business, which includes the Max and Discovery+ streaming services and HBO network, made a profit of $103 million in 2023. In 2022, WBD’s DTC business lost $2.1 billion. The company most recently reported having 97.7 million DTC subscribers, compared to the 95.8 million that it finished Q2 2023 with.
Outside of Max, WBD is planning to launch a joint sports-streaming app with Fox and Disney; some, including rival streamers, however, have challenged the proposed joint venture as monopolistic. This week, also at Morgan Stanley’s event, Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch said he expects the future sports-streaming service to have 5 million subscribers five years after launch, Bloomberg reported.
But as streaming services like Max contemplate ways to make more money in the near term, subscribers are facing a pivotal point. Streaming is increasingly mirroring traditional cable companies in terms of being ad-driven, promoting long-term subscriptions, enacting price hikes, bundling, and threatening possible consolidation. While such moves might make sense from a business perspective, in many cases the result is unhappy subscribers.
