Amazon is reportedly working on custom silicon chips for its hardware network switches, according to The Information. The chips, which could help Amazon improve its internal infrastructure as well as AWS, are said to be the result of Amazon’s $350 million acquisition of Israeli chipmaking firm Annapurna Labs back in 2015.
Amazon building the silicon for its switches could help it solve bottlenecks and issues in its own infrastructure, especially if it’s also custom-building the software that runs on them. Amazon already builds its own switches, but it’s reliant on Broadcom for the silicon that powers them. It makes sense for the company to want to completely control those machines, especially given how important its web services business is. It’s possible Amazon could even offer some services it wasn’t able to offer before, powered by the new switches, The Information suggests, citing the machine learning software that Amazon offers that currently runs on Annapurna chips.
The reported chips aren’t Amazon’s first custom silicon product. The company has previously worked with MediaTek to create a chip for its Echo smart speaker products, designed to make Alexa respond faster. It also has its custom machine learning chips it calls Trainium, which will become available to AWS customers soon. It makes sense that the company would also want its own chips to power the backbone of its network.
Custom chip design is also quickly becoming table stakes for big tech companies. We’ve recently seen reports that Google and Microsoft are building custom processors for their devices, and Apple has been doing it for years now, with the M1 Macs being an example of how much more potent a company’s products can be when it controls both the hardware and software. While Amazon may not be a titan in the smartphone or PC space, it’s a giant in the cloud, and that’s where it seems to be focusing on putting new chips to work.
Google is forging ahead with its third-party cookie replacement technology
Repent, o ye ad trackers, for the cookiepocalypse is nigh!
If Google sticks to its roadmap, by this time next year Chrome will no longer allow websites to use third-party cookies, which are cookies that come from outside their own domains. The change theoretically makes it vastly more difficult for advertisers to track your activities on the web and then serve you targeted ads. Safari and Firefox have already blocked those cookies, but when it comes to market share, Chrome is currently the leader and so its switchover is the big one.
Blocking third-party cookies means that only websites you explicitly visit will be able to save those little cookie files on your computer, and they should theoretically only do what cookies were originally intended to do: keep track of smaller things like whether you’re logged in or which shopping cart is yours. Blocking third-party cookies also means ad networks can’t figure out who you are and serve you targeted ads, which is a big problem for the ad industry.
Google, which is the biggest player in online ads, has claimed that it does not intend to replace third-party cookies with “alternative identifiers to track individuals as they browse across the web.” This seems like a win for privacy all around, but if something about the story of Google as the privacy and anti-ad crusader strikes you as a little… off, you are far from alone.
Because of course Google doesn’t want to kneecap the online ad industry — the one it dominates and from which it makes all its money. Instead, Google wants to replace the third-party tracking cookie with a complicated set of (bird-themed) technologies that are meant to let ad companies target specific demographics like age and location, while at the same time allowing the people who are targeted to remain anonymous.
Google is trying to avert the cookiepocalypse for the ad tech industry, no repentance necessary.
And so today, the company is forging ahead with an “origin trial” for one of these new technologies, the Federated Learning of Cohorts (FLoC). In an origin trial, websites are able to begin testing without asking browser users to turn on specific flags. The feature itself will be slowly turned on inside Chrome via the usual process of introducing it into developer builds, then beta, then finally in the shipping version most people use.
But what the hell is FLoC, and does it really protect your privacy?
FLoC: a Federated Learning of Cohorts
FloC is a proposed browser standard that, in Google’s words, will enable “interest-based advertising on the web” without letting advertisers know your identity. Instead, you’ll be associated with a “cohort,” a group of users sufficiently large enough to make you at least semi-anonymous to the companies targeting you.
That’s the simple explanation. The technical one gets very complicated very quickly. Here’s a quick version. Chrome browsers will use algorithms (the “Federated Learning” part) to create a very large number of “cohorts,” groups of people that share certain qualities and interests. Each person’s individual browsing history is kept private and never shared with anybody, but the browser itself will look at the history and then assign a user to one of those cohorts.
When you visit a website, Chrome will tell that site that the visitor is part of cohort 198273 (or whatever) and then it’s up to the website to know that cohort 198273 (or whatever) is interested in pickup trucks and shoes with vegan leather. Since Chrome will never assign a user to a small cohort (Google has proposed that it will wait until there are “thousands” in a group), your identity as an animal-loving coal roller is theoretically protected.
Chrome itself isn’t assigning any content labels to these FloCs; Google is leaving that to the ad tech industry to figure out. So you won’t be able to open up a privacy page inside Chrome and see what it thinks you’re interested in (though there’s theoretically nothing stopping a third-party website from telling you).
Since FLoC is structured in this way, it could mean that the powerful players in ad tech could become even more entrenched, because they have the technology to parse what FLoCs mean and what ads to target against them. Or it could mean smaller players could find a way in. We don’t know all the possible repercussions of FLoC, which is why it has both ad industry executives and privacy advocates so unsettled.
You can read the whole proposal and even check out the code for how it works at the GitHub repository for FLoC inside the Web Incubator Community Group. As with most things on the web, it’s being developed out in the open and is part of a process of proposals, critiques, counter-proposals, attempts to get other browser vendors to join, arguments, harangues, screeds, and good-faith efforts to make the web a better place. It’s a party, y’all.
The new front in the browser wars: privacy
No other browser vendor has signaled its intention to support FLoC. The rest are simply blocking third-party cookies and letting the chips fall where they may. And those chips are messy.
Whatever motivations you want to imbue on the Chrome team, it is already apparent that simply blocking third-party cookies will lead to very problematic new solutions from the ad tech industry. So Google is creating both FLoC and a suite of other technologies to replace the third-party cookie, in order to hopefully forestall even worse replacements.
One of the very bad things Google is trying to forestall is fingerprinting. That’s the generalized term for ways that websites can identify you through little data signals that leak out of your browser when you visit a site. Sites can look at your IP address, the OS you’re browsing from, the size of your window, whether your browser supports Bluetooth controllers, and much more.
Battling fingerprinting is a huge arms race for browser engineers and new, nefarious methods pop up seemingly weekly. Here’s a new method of fingerprinting I just came across: playing a very tiny bit of audio and then analyzing how your particular browser and device handle it, and then using that data to individually identify you in milliseconds. (The website that proposed it sells fingerprint services to legitimate companies so they can ostensibly use it to better identify potential fraudsters on their sites.)
Apple has very publicly and vociferously advocated for cutting off all methods of individualized tracking, including fingerprinting, and has committed itself to that arms race indefinitely. The Chrome team’s concern is that essentially such a hard line creates an incentive for legitimate ad tech companies to start engaging in fingerprinting, which will then be all but impossible to stop or regulate.
Here’s how Google puts it in its blog post:
When other browsers started blocking third-party cookies by default, we were excited about the direction, but worried about the immediate impact. Excited because we absolutely need a more private web, and we know third-party cookies aren’t the long-term answer. Worried because today many publishers rely on cookie-based advertising to support their content efforts, and we had seen that cookie blocking was already spawning privacy-invasive workarounds (such as fingerprinting) that were even worse for user privacy. Overall, we felt that blocking third-party cookies outright without viable alternatives for the ecosystem was irresponsible, and even harmful, to the free and open web we all enjoy.
It’s hard to separate each company’s financial incentives from their very real philosophical differences. Google prints money with its de facto monopoly on monetizing the open web through ads and is therefore incentivized to keep it going. At the same time, Chrome’s developers are true believers in the power and importance of the open web. Meanwhile, Apple wouldn’t be sad if Google made less money amid a massive online ad tracking reckoning. At the same time, Apple’s developers are true believers in the importance of personal privacy and the urgent need to go all-out in protecting that privacy against constant online assaults.
In any case, the problem with fingerprinting is that once you’re identified, it’s much harder to anonymize yourself. A cookie can be deleted, but the way your particular computer processes a milliseconds-long snippet of audio is much harder to change (though Brave has an innovative solution called Farbling).
The basic argument from the Chrome team is that erecting a so-called “privacy wall” will entice legitimate ad tech companies into succumbing to the temptation of fingerprinting. Google is hoping that ad tech companies will adopt FLoC as an alternative.
If nothing else, there’s one big thing to take away from all this: FLoC is a hell of a lot better than the current status of third-party cookies that directly identify you anywhere you go on the web. But “better than the worst” is a low bar, and it’s hard to know yet whether FLoC just clears it or vaults way over it.
Is FLoC really private?
Instead of a trying to build a metaphorical privacy wall that blocks all forms of ad targeting, Google plans on building a Privacy Sandbox inside Chrome. Within that sandbox, websites can still legitimately request to know certain details about your browser as they need. A game streaming site could ask to know if your browser supports a game controller, for example. But ask too much and you’ll exceed the browser’s “privacy budget” and get cut off. Websites can have just a little identifying information, as a treat.
FLoC will be part of that privacy sandbox and further should protect your identity by only associating you with a cohort if that cohort is sufficiently large. Chrome will also change what FLoC cohort your browser is associated with on a regular basis, say once a week or so.
But whether FLoC is actually anonymous is very much up for debate. Bennett Cyphers at Electronic Frontier Foundation recently put up a handy post detailing some of the biggest concerns with FLoC.
One of the key aspects of FLoC is that Google isn’t making some giant list of interests and demographics and then assigning you to them. Instead, it’s proposing to use Federated Learning to create a ton of these cohorts algorithmically. Chrome won’t really know what any of them are actually about; it’ll be up to ad tech vendors to understand that over time.
But as Cyphers points out, that algorithm will inevitably create cohorts that could be incredibly dangerous — say, a group of people who have visited sites about getting out of domestic abuse situations. The Chrome team says it recognizes this concern and so will be analyzing the algorithmically created cohorts to see if any are related to what it deems to be sensitive topics — and then Chrome won’t serve those cohort IDs. But FLoC isn’t centralized, so it’s important to know that if another browser vendor adopts FLoC, it will be incumbent on that browser to create similar block lists.
Websites will be able to opt out of participating in FLoC, meaning that visits to their sites won’t contribute to an individual FLoC user’s profile. Similarly, the Chrome team intends to put opt-out toggles somewhere in Chrome’s settings for users who don’t want to provide FLoC IDs to the websites they visit.
Could FLoC become just another data point for fingerprinters? It seems likely, and defending against that seems to be another job for Chrome’s privacy budget and privacy sandbox algorithms.
One more thing: FLoC is a very convenient way for the websites you visit to know enough about you to target relevant ads, which means that FLoC is a very convenient way for websites to know things about you. It’s certainly no worse than the current cookie situation, but it’s far from the “You Shall Not Pass!” philosophy other browser vendors (like Apple and Brave) apply to allowing access to potentially identifiable information.
What’s next?
This first FLoC “origin trial” is designed to help websites learn how FLoC works; some of the testing for Chrome users will come later. Here is how Google describes the way it’s going to work:
The initial testing of FLoC is taking place with a small percentage of users in Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Philippines and the U.S. We’ll expand to other regions as the Privacy Sandbox expands globally. In April, we’ll introduce a control in Chrome Settings that you can use to opt out of inclusion in FLoC and other Privacy Sandbox proposals. In the meantime, if you’ve chosen to block third-party cookies, you won’t be included in these origin trials.
If you look at that list of countries, you might notice that something stands out: none of them are in the EU, where GDPR regulations are in effect. Recently, Robin Berjon of TheNew York Times wondered whether that meant that FLoC would run afoul of those privacy regulations. According to the product manager for the Chrome privacy sandbox, Marshall Vale, it’s more a matter of limiting the size of the early tests and that his team is “100% committed to the Privacy Sandbox in Europe.”
Under normal circumstances, a newly proposed web technology wends its way through mailing lists and W3C conference room debates. It gets supported by the browser vendor that championed it and then, if its lucky, other browsers. Thus, the web manages to not become browser-specific in the ways it was back in the bad old days of Internet Explorer 6.
But when Google originally announced its intention to block third-party cookies last year, I pointed out that the rhetoric between browser vendors was getting sharp. It’s only gotten sharper as Apple, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, Brave, and others have gone further down their respective paths.
It seems unlikely that FLoC will lead to a standard because everybody agrees on a good way to allow targeted advertising. If FLoC does become a standard, it’ll probably be because Chrome will eventually turn it on and it will become the norm just through sheer market share — both Chrome’s within the browser market and Google’s within the ad tech market.
That possible future might avert the cookiepocalypse, but it could also become a different kind of nightmare for the web: one where websites once again try to push you to use the browser they can best monetize via whatever ad tech platform they’re using.
Chip designer Arm has announced Armv9, its first new chip architecture in a decade following Armv8 way back in 2011. According to Arm, Armv9 offers three major improvements over the previous architecture: security, better AI performance, and faster performance in general. These benefits should eventually trickle down to devices with processors based on Arm’s designs.
It’s an important milestone for the company, whose designs power almost every smartphone sold today, as well as increasing numbers of laptops and even servers. Apple announced its Mac computers’ transition to its own Arm-based processors last year, and its first Apple Silicon Macs released later in the year. Other manufacturers like Microsoft have also released Arm-based laptops in recent years.
First of the big three improvements coming with Armv9 is security. The new Arm Confidential Compute Architecture (CCA), attempts to protect sensitive data with a secure, hardware-based environment. These so-called “Realms” can be dynamically created to protect important data and code from the rest of the system.
Next up is AI processing. Armv9 will include Scalable Vector Extension 2 (SVE2), a technology that is designed to help with machine learning and digital signal processing tasks. This should benefit everything from 5G systems to virtual and augmented reality and machine learning workloads like image processing and voice recognition. AI applications like these are said to be a key reason why Nvidia is currently in the process of buying Arm for $40 billion.
But away from these more specific improvements, Arm also promises more general performance increases from Armv9. It expects CPU performance to increase by over 30 percent across the next two generations, with further boosts performance coming from software and hardware optimizations. Arm says all existing software will run on Armv9-based processors without any problems.
With the architecture announced, the big question is when the processors using the architecture might release and find their way into consumer products. Arm says it expects the first Armv9-based silicon to ship before the end of the year.
DigiTimes today reported that TSMC is set to begin volume production for its 4nm process in the fourth quarter of 2021, rather than early 2022 as originally planned. The report also indicated that Apple has contracted initial production using this node for use in future versions of the custom silicon found in some of its Mac products.
TSMC announced in January that it planned to spend up to $28 billion in 2021 to increase production for its N5 and N7 processes while it started risk testing its N3 process. China Renaissance Securities then said in February that N5 capacity was at roughly 55,000~60,000 wafer starts per month (WSPM); that’s expected to double this year.
N5 doesn’t necessarily refer to a single process—it actually covers the N5, N5P, and N4 processes. The first two are 5nm processes and the last is the upcoming 4nm process. It gets bundled with its predecessors because it’s expected to have a smaller impact than the 3nm process (N3) expected to debut in late 2022.
It seems the increased capital expenditure for 2021 is pushing N4 along faster than TSMC expected. The company said in August 2020 that its 4nm process was supposed to enter risk production in 4Q21 and volume production in 2022. According to DigiTimes sources, however, volume production should begin this year.
The first Apple chips based on that 4nm process shouldn’t be too far behind. Apple is TSMC’s largest customer by far, and its shift to custom silicon in the Mac lineup is expected to make it an even bigger part of TSMC’s business. So it’s no surprise that Apple has, per DigiTimes, already contracted initial production for the 4nm process.
DigiTimes reported that TSMC will begin production of the N5P-based A15 chip, which is expected to debut in the iPhone 13 later this year, sometime in May. An upgraded version of that SoC will likely be added to future iPad models later, but Apple is said to be jumping straight to N4 for the next SoC designed for Mac.
This accelerated timeline could allow Apple to switch every Mac over to its custom silicon earlier than anticipated. The company said in November 2020 that it wanted to have its own SoCs across the Mac lineup by 2022. TSMC’s ability to begin volume production of the N4 process should make it that much easier to beat that goal.
In somewhat related news, Intel today released the latest CPUs based on its 14nm process, with plans to introduce the first desktop 10nm processors later this year and 7nm CPUs following in 2023. That should give it plenty of time to put out a commercial claiming that, when it comes to process nodes, bigger is better. Right?
Adobe has launched a new bundle for iPad creators. The Design Mobile Bundle is available for $14.99 a month or $149.99 a year, and it includes access to iOS Creative Cloud apps like Photoshop, Illustrator, Fresco, and Spark, as well as services like Adobe Fonts and 100GB of cloud storage. Unlike Adobe’s other bundles, this won’t get you access to its desktop apps. Adobe says the bundle saves you 50 percent compared to paying for each app separately and that “they all work with touch and Apple Pencil.”
Adobe’s mobile apps have come on a lot in the last couple of years. Photoshop only arrived on the iPad back in 2019, lacking many of the features of its desktop counterpart. But over time, Adobe has continued to add features, including a new rotate canvas tool that’s soon making its way to desktop Photoshop.
Adobe also says that support for Photoshop’s desktop brushes is coming soon to iPad. “Soon, you’ll be able to load your brushes onto Photoshop on the iPad, meaning that all the great brushes you’ve discovered or created on Photoshop on the desktop will be close at hand on the iPad as well,” the company writes.
A monthly cost of $14.99 makes this one of the less expensive bundles Adobe offers, though you are limited to only accessing it via an iPad (and iPhone in the case of Fresco). Currently, you can subscribe to all of its apps for $52.99 a month. Meanwhile, if you only need Photoshop and Lightroom, there’s a bundle with 20GB of storage for $9.99 a month that works on both desktop and tablet. (A bundle with 1TB of storage costs $19.99 a month.)
(Pocket-lint) – The Google Nest Hub (second gen) updates Google’s first smart display, which originally launched as the Google Home Hub.
Sporting a 7-inch display, it rivals Amazon’s Echo Show models, looking to bring a visual experience to Google Assistant, and slot the Mountain View company into the centre of your home.
This time around, however, Google has eyes on your bedroom.
Design and build
120.4 x 177.4 x 69.5mm, 558g
Four colours
Floating display design
Glance and you’ll miss it. The design of the second-gen Nest Hub is essentially the same as the old, but there are some minor differences on the spec sheet – not that you’ll really spot that from across the room.
The new Nest Hub remains a cute smart display and we’ve always liked this design. It fits in with the mesh covered designs we’ve seen from other Google devices over the past few years, using safe fabric colours to help it blend into your home décor.
Pocket-lint
It’s a 7-inch display, so not huge – but glance at the offering from Amazon and you’ll find it sandwiched by the likes of the Echo Show 5 and the Echo Show 8, although we do think it looks a little more sophisticated.
There’s some bezel to the display – now incorporating a range of expanded sensors and mics – while there’s a volume rocker on the rear right and a physical mute switch on the centre rear, within easy reach.
It’s still a great looking device and while some might think that a 7-inch display is too big to have on your bedside table, that’s exactly where Google wants you to put it.
Setup and introducing sleep sensing
Google Home app
Sleep tracking calibration
Setting up the Nest Hub is easy. You’ll need to have the Google Home app on your smartphone, as this serves to control the device and gets setup underway. Once plugged in, it’s a few simple steps to get the Nest Hub up and running – the important part being connecting to your Wi-Fi and logging in with your Google account.
If you’ve used any Google devices before, this will now be familiar – and like Amazon’s Echo devices, signing in gets Google Assistant ready and so you’re quickly connected with everything that you have setup without Assistant already.
The Roborock S7 robot vacuum – we have just entered a new era of automated cleaning, and it’s amazing
By Pocket-lint Promotion
·
Pocket-lint
That’s great, because it means that all your connected smart home devices will now work from your Nest Hub, if you have Voice Match in Google Assistant active then it will know who you are and tailor results to you, so you’re good to go.
That would be just about it for a regular Google device, but sleep sensing brings with it some additional requirement: calibration.
Sleep sensing on the Nest Hub uses a range of sensors, including temperature, light, sound and the Soli radar chip we previously saw in the Pixel 4 phones. Together, these sensors will be able to give you a complete picture of how you slept and the conditions you were sleeping it.
But first and foremost you need to make sure that the Soli radar will be able to see you. It sends out low power short-range electromagnetic waves allowing it to detect motion. It’s important to understand that it’s not using cameras for this, so it’s not visually spying on your while you’re asleep.
Pocket-lint
This means that positioning is important and there’s a calibration process you’ll have to run through to get the Nest Hub in the right position so it will work. It doesn’t take long and all you have to do is basically lie in bed with the device on your bedside table and it will do its stuff. If it’s in the wrong position, it will ask you to adjust it.
There’s a few things you need to know here: firstly, it needs to be focused towards your upper body and secondly, it actually needs to be about level with you. If it’s too low, it won’t be able to detect anything because it’s looking at the side of the bed, so it’s no good putting it on the floor or on a bookcase a metre higher than you.
For most, it should be simple and within a few minutes it was all setup – but you have to remember you can’t then move it too much and you can’t put things in front of it, like a glass of water, because you’ll block the view.
Sleep tracking and bedside performance
Sensors to detect sleep
Personalised sleep summary
Syncing to Google Fit
Using all the sensors, the Nest Hub gathers data and, using an algorithm, can understand what’s going on.
From this data it can tell when you get into bed, when you go to sleep, when you’re disturbed during the night and when you get up. It also knows when you’re awake but lounging in bed refusing to get up.
This is the first converged device to offer sleep tracking that doesn’t require any physical touch. We’ve seen and used sleep tracking from the likes of Apple, Fitbit and Garmin where you need to wear a watch. We’ve used systems like ResMed SleepScore and Withings Sleep Analyzer – but the Nest Hub is likely to be more popular.
The problem with wearing something is that it can disturb you as you move around – and you’re sweating into it all day and all night. The problem with some of the other detection devices is that they only do one thing – whereas Nest Hub is your familiar Google-based smart display and your sleep tracking buddy.
Pocket-lint
We’ve been sleeping with the Nest Hub over the last week and found the sleep tracking to be pretty accurate. But first of all, there’s no need to be concerned about having a 7-inch LCD display next to the bed – it dims really well so it’s not glowing at the side of the bed and keeping you awake.
Detection on getting into bed appears to happen at any point that you get into bed. Come back from a run and flop onto the bed while you check your Strava stats and you’ll see the on-screen notification telling you that it has detected you.
But the Nest Hub is smart enough to figure out what’s happening when. Because there’s processing to be done there are moments when you’ll be told that it’s processing – for example when you wake up. That’s mostly because it’s waiting to see when you leave bed so that it can report on how long it took you to get up and so on.
Pocket-lint
Data is available to tap though on the display in the morning or you can ask Google Assistant. The results also sync to Google Fit so you can examine them on your phone, but again, these will vary and might change slightly depending on when you look at Google Fit and how that corresponds with any processing that the Nest Hub is doing.
The results are interesting and certainly accurate, but there’s no breakdown of heavy or light sleep like you’ll get from Fitbit. It also won’t think you’re asleep on the sofa when you’re watching a movie like Garmin sometimes does, but there are limits.
For example, on a disturbed night, you might try to sleep, then do some reading, toss and turn a bit and as a last resort, attempt to get to sleep by putting yourself into a meditative state. Anyone reading who suffers from insomnia will know what it’s like to clear your mind, calm your breathing and just lie still, hoping that you’ll get to sleep – and it’s here that Google thinks you are asleep, when you’re not.
Pocket-lint
Otherwise, on normal sleeping days, we’ve found the reports to be accurate, detecting those middle of the night toilet breaks, and knowing when you’ve woken up earlier than you wanted to. It also detects snoring and coughing, which can be a bit thing that disturbs sleep.
Google’s analysis then attempts to give you feedback to improve your habits. For us, our average sleep time has been a little short and the Nest Hub tells us that we’re sometimes going to bed too early and staying in bed awake when we should be getting up in the morning. It’s trying to establish a better routine.
It all makes sense too: those days where we’re told sleep is “fairly restful” we’re awaking feeling refreshed; on the days when it’s been “restless”, we can feel that too. The thing is, we don’t need telling that. Whether this information is useful will be a personal decision.
Pocket-lint
What Google doesn’t seem to be doing is putting this into context with anything else. There’s no relationship between sleeping and activity like you get from Garmin’s Body Battery. It’s also unclear what you might have to pay for this data in the future.
That’s right – it’s a free preview through to the end of 2021, but then Google says: “After the preview ends, paid subscription may be required.” Currently we don’t know what that cost might be. We also don’t know how this data might integrate with Fitbit, but Google has said it’s looking at how that might work.
Of course, if everything above fills you with horror, it’s an opt-in service. You don’t have to have sleep tracking at all.
Display, interface and sound quality
7-inch 1024 x 600 pixels
3 mics, 1.7-inch speaker driver
Google Assistant
There’s a 7-inch display on the front of the Nest Hub, with a 1024 x 600 pixel resolution. That’s not hugely high in terms of resolution, but we’ve nothing to complain about when it comes to quality.
There’s a visually engaging interface presented by Google and we think it’s better than Amazon’s equivalent on the Echo Show models: it just looks and feels a little more useful. Much of that comes down to the fact that Google has more information to pull in to serve you content you like, like relevant news.
Pocket-lint
You can swipe through the screens to access various sections – wellness, home control, media, communication, including the discover section. The media option will already be connected to your Spotify account (if you’ve linked the two) while YouTube is front and centre.
Google can also take advantage of Chromecast support, allowing you to cast content to the Nest Hub too – so it can be a little more dynamic than Amazon’s device.
Google Assistant remains as smart as ever and has progressive developed over the past few years. We’ve one criticism and that’s the hiss that accompanies spoken replies. That was detectable on the Nest Audio too – something that Google really should fix to increase the overall offering – it’s not something that Alexa does.
Pocket-lint
Of the two, we’d say that Google is a little smarter, often being able to give smarter replies, but there are some services better optimised for Echo devices – like requesting the BBC news: it’s just better when Alexa serves that up.
When it comes to speaker quality, the Nest Hub has a single 1.7-inch driver. It has boosted bass over the previous version for a richer overall sound and we think it’s great as a bedside unit, perhaps a little weak if you’re planning to use it as a main speaker in a room – you’d want the Nest Hub Max for that instead.
Comparing that to Alexa briefly and the Echo Show 8 – slightly larger than this model – does have a bigger sound too. The smallest Echo Show 5 also has a 1.7-inch driver, giving you an idea of how these devices compare.
Smart home and expanded functions
Thread, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi
Chromecast built in
There’s no camera by design on the Nest Hub and Google had to opportunity to put one on this refreshed version and decided not to. For some people that will be a major downside, for others, a significant advantage.
There are a range of other connectivity technologies however and we’ve covered most already – Wi-Fi for the connection to the internet, Chromecast via the same route, Bluetooth to use your Nest Hub as a speaker or to connect it to a Bluetooth speaker.
Pocket-lint
Then there’s Thread. Thread is a relatively new wireless smart home protocol which works on a mesh network. The Nest Hub can be part of a Thread system, just as the Apple HomePod Mini can be – very much working in the same was a Zigbee on the Echo models.
As this is a technology that’s just starting to establish itself, we haven’t tested it. We did test the Nest Hub with the wider set of smart home devices we’ve already linked to Google Assistant via the Home app and found no problems – and in the future, if you are buying Thread-equipped devices, the idea will be that you can control those directly from the Nest Hub without the need to a dedicated hub for whatever those devices are.
All in, the Nest Hub is still a super-connected device, able to play its part as the centre of your smart home, just as the name suggests.
Verdict
This new version of the Nest Hub only makes a couple of changes from the previous version: indeed, if you’re not interested in the sleep tracking, then you might be better off trying to find the older model at a discounted price, because you’re not missing out.
The sleep tracking adds a new dimension. As people are increasingly turning to technologies to track wellbeing, and sleep being a growing area. While the technology works, uncertainty about future subscription costs might give pause for though – or you might want to try it and cross that bridge in 2022.
Fundamentally, the Nest Hub 2021 is a good device. It’s connected, good quality, a refreshingly simple interface and offers the best voice assistant in the business. If you want your home to be smarter, this is a great place to start.
Alternatives to consider
Pocket-lint
Lenovo Smart Clock
squirrel_widget_148841
The Lenovo is a compact bedside device that gives you all the advantages of Google Assistant in a small package.
Read the full Lenovo Smart Clock review
Pocket-lint
Amazon Echo Show 8
squirrel_widget_167746
The Echo Show 8 is larger, but features a camera as well as the full skills of Alexa.
Apple just announced that its Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) will take place on June 7th through June 11th this year, and that like last year it will be an online-only event.
The announcement, as is typical for Apple, is opaque when it comes to details, but there might be a tantalizing hint: is the memoji character’s glasses simply showing a reflection from their laptop? Or could Apple finally be gearing up to announce its long-rumored VR headset or AR glasses?
“We are working to make WWDC21 our biggest and best yet, and are excited to offer Apple developers new tools to support them as they create apps that change the way we live, work, and play,” said Susan Prescott, Apple’s vice president of worldwide developer relations, in a press release.
WWDC is when Apple typically details changes coming to iOS, iPadOS, macOS, tvOS, and watchOS with the occasional hardware surprise. Last year it also dedicated a significant portion of its keynote to announcing its Mac lineup’s transition to its own Apple Silicon processors. With this transition still underway, it seems likely that Apple will have an update to share about its progress.
New hardware tends to be less of a focus at the developer conference, but it’s not unheard of. Apple used WWDC 2019 as its venue to announce the new Mac Pro, and at WWDC 2017 it announced its HomePod smart speaker, updated iMac desktops, and a new 10.5-inch iPad Pro.
It’s not surprising that Apple has opted to make its global conference for developers online-only given the impact of COVID-19 is still being felt around the world. Facebook’s F8 developer conference will be virtual this year, and San Diego Comic-Con and the 2021 Anime Expo have also confirmed that their physical events will not take place. But some organizations are attempting to make limited physical events happen like Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.
Entercom, a company mostly associated with its hundreds of US radio stations, is losing its old name in an effort to signify its broader interest and investments in audio — specifically, podcasts. Today, Entercom becomes Audacy. The company, which owns podcast networks Cadence13 and Pineapple Street Studios, as well as ad network Podcorn, is looking to keep expanding its work in the digital audio space. Along with the rebrand, the company is announcing a new podcast partnership with Demi Lovato; a partnership with BetMGM to create content around sports betting; and a plan to exclusively debut new, original shows on its Audacy listening app (previously the Radio.com app).
“We’ve come to this point where we are really fundamentally different than who we were before,” CEO David Fields tells The Verge. “And it was time for a new identity, a new brand that really reflected the depth and breadth of all the things that we do and the ambitions and vision that we have going forward.”
The branding shift comes as more companies double down on podcasting. iHeartMedia and Cumulus both own radio stations around the US but also maintain podcast businesses. Cumulus owns Westwood One, which hosts shows from political commentators like Ben Shapiro, while iHeartMedia altered its operating structure to report its podcasting division revenue separately from its radio stations earlier this year. Audacy already makes podcasts, and Fields claims it’s the “number one creator of audio content in the United States” considering its news and local sports radio stations’ programming.
“We think that deserves its own platform as opposed to being part of somebody else’s platform,” he says when asked why Audacy wants to launch shows exclusively on its app rather than looking to the biggest listening apps, like Spotify or Apple Podcasts. (Spotify has already locked in exclusives with Audacy’s Pineapple Street Studios on shows like Welcome to Your Fantasy.)
Meanwhile, he also says with live audio apps, like Clubhouse, taking off, “there is more energy and enthusiasm around audio today than ever before.” Audacy clearly wants to make sure it stays in the conversation and its investors know it’s serious about podcasting, not just radio.
No one in the world does corporate pomposity quite like tech firms, and Chinese mobile giant Xiaomi is no exception. The company announced its new foldable Mi Mix Fold today, but it also revealed a new logo, spending more than 20 minutes describing the process in which it turned its old square design into… a squircle. (Halfway between a square and a circle.)
In fairness to Xiaomi, the company is not blind to the fact its new logo is pretty similar in appearance to the old one. “Are you disappointed at this logo, that we just made our original logo rounder?” asked Xiaomi’s CEO Lei Jun, somewhat rhetorically. No worry, Lei explained, as the company “didn’t just change the shape from square to round” but also changed “the internal spirit as well as the mentality of the brand.” So, that’s reassuring!
The company went on to note that the shape of the new logo can be described using mathematical equations (a property that is common to most shapes, I believe) and that it took the firm a long time to pick the right one (it started the rebranding process in 2017).
You can see some of the shapes it considered and discarded below, along with the blindingly, obviously, self-evidently superior final design. N:3, could it be any other way?
We’re having some fun at Xiaomi’s expense here, but really this is just par for the course when it comes to corporate redesigns. Indeed, this sort of long-winded, self-indulgent presentation is common to pretty much all big tech brands at this point, from Samsung to Microsoft to Apple (who started the game and remains the master of the form).
As Lei explained, the new logo is part of a bigger overhaul of Xiaomi’s “brand identity” overseen by famed Japanese designer Kenya Hara. “The new logo is not a simple redesign of the shape but an encapsulation of Xiaomi’s inner spirit,” said Hara during a video segment. “The design is essentially a reflection of the concept ‘Alive.’”
So, if you feel dead inside considering the millions of dollars of work that went into circling the square of Xiaomi’s logo: don’t. That’s disrespectful to its brand identity.
(Pocket-lint) – We’re probably showing our age here, but when someone says “Highlander” it’s hard to not visualise Christopher Lambert’s 1986 movie of the same name. That said, the Toyota Highlander – the marque’s biggest SUV – is hardly new, as it’s been around for over 20 years, since the turn of the millennium.
From a UK perspective, however, the Highlander is all new, with this Hybrid model representing this SUV’s first time on our roads. It’s only available with a hybrid powertrain on these shores, making for a fairly individual pitch. To paraphrase the movie (we just can’t help ourselves): “there can be only one!” – as you’re not going to find many other 7-seat hybrids, save for examples like the pricier and plug-in Volvo XC90 T8 and Audi Q7 TFSI e.
Design
So is the Highlander Hybrid as immortal as Lambert’s character? Given the sheer scale of this 7-seat station wagon it’ll be hard to not feel invincible when sat behind the wheel.
Pocket-lint
From an outside perspective the look is very Toyota, with all the modern design cues, such as the trapezoidal grille and blue-tinted badge on the front (showing a touch of hybrid there).
There’s no escaping that the Highlander is a large vehicle; even its lowering roofline and those subtle curves to its sides can’t shroud the scale of this vehicle. That said, it’s not too outlandish either: there aren’t the off-the-charts quirky headlights like Toyota’s Prius.
Whether you think it’s as contemporary or European as a Volvo or Audi is a whole other question. And while you may have a preference one way or other, really the Highlander is mostly about practicality and space.
Interior Space
This is where the Highlander really sells itself. With three rows of seats – a pair up front, three to the centre, three to the rear – it’s a 7-seater as standard, driving appeal for families.
Or, who knows, maybe you want to drop the third row to reveal the gigantic boot space – it’s 1.13 metres long in that arrangement, which is huge – so you could easily fit a couple of dog crates in there for when you’re carting Mog and Molly, the Irish wolfhounds, out and about (there’s probably a joke here about West Highlander Terriers, but we wouldn’t dare, but of course).
The third row, when it’s up, is accessible through power-sliding the second row forwards to permit access. It’s not the biggest of spaces to sit, but if you’ve got a big family that’ll be on the road often then it’s perfectly fitting for young’uns.
The seats are comfy, too, with heated/cooled options available for the front pair. There’s a diamond-shape style throughout, providing cushioning where needed.
And to make everything feel airier a panoramic roof comes as standard. That’s usually thousands extra for some of the high-end brands, so is a nice touch to add to the sense of space.
Tech
Sat in the drivers seat, however, and the Highlander doesn’t feel at the top of its game when it comes to tech configuration and layout. This is where Audi rules the roost and the Highlander – while cheaper, for sure – doesn’t come anywhere close.
The main driver’s dials are all physical, mechanical objects – not built-in displays with adjustable options, as is so common these days. The mass of buttons surrounding the high-positioned integrated screen on the dashboard looks a bit dated already, too. Not to mention that for such a massive car and interior, that screen, at just 8-inches, looks small – and there’s no option for the 12-inch model in the UK, as you can find elsewhere.
Pocket-lint
Again, though, it’s all very practical. You won’t be digging through menus to find what you need. There are some great standards, such as a JBL soundsystem that’s rather decent, plus you can amp up the whole so-so navigation and infotainment experience with Apple CarPlay or Android Auto if you would prefer – so it’s got its good foot in the modern door. Even the air conditioning can be tri-zoned, so you can look after the temperature of all your passengers/family members.
Really and truly you don’t need several screens looking all fancy but not doing all that much. So the Highlander averts that, but in so doing it just appears a little last-gen. Which might also sound like something of a contradiction when there are oddities such as a digital rear-view mirror here (and unexpected and unnecessary surprise).
Drive
Don’t think of the Highlander Hybrid as you would a plug-in hybrid (PHEV), as the kind of range on offer here is very slight – you’re talking a mile or so of pure electric power, acquired from regenerative braking.
Pocket-lint
Now that might sound approaching pointless, but it’s not: because it’s always regenerating while driving, it will bring an improvement to overall consumption figures (39mpg is quoted). Meanwhile combined CO2 emissions, at 163g/km, also place the Highlander into a reasonable bracket for such a large vehicle – it’s one lower down than a Volvo XC90 T5’s 184g/km, for example.
Having an electric motor driving this all-wheel drive system delivers reasonable power – it’s actually Toyota’s most powerful full-hybrid system yet – that will see the Highlander from 0-62mph in 8.3 seconds. Not that you’ll be racing this wagon around much. Really it’s the quietness of a near-silent electric pull-away that we found most refined.
The petrol engine, here a 2.5-litre four-cylinder arrangement, does kick in with a bit of noise thereafter – although Toyota is keen to point out how much dampening has gone into the engine compartment and even all the windows to deliver a, let’s say, not rorty driving experience.
The best electric cars 2021: Top battery-powered vehicles available on UK roads
By Chris Hall
·
Pocket-lint
In terms of handling the Highlander is, well, effortless really. It’s comfortable, easy to manage, and we didn’t feel as though we were commanding a tank when on the roads – yes it’s large, but it’s not unwieldy. That’s the key boxes ticked for the whole family then.
Verdict
So can there be only one? Well, like we say, the Toyota Highlander Hybrid is a fairly individual pitch – as you won’t find many 7-seat hybrid SUVs on the market.
Yes, it’s still over £50K, so it’s no small chunk of change, and the hybrid system delivers very low genuine mileage from electric only. But the Highlander’s obvious competitors, such as the Volvo XC90 and Audi Q7, sit yet higher up the asking price ranks.
The Highlander’s overall tech experience already feels somewhat outdated, however, so it’s not the most future-facing car you’ll ever see. But it firmly ticks all the ‘practical’ boxes, ensuring heaps of space and comfort for carting around larger numbers of passengers/family members than you could in something smaller.
Which makes the Highlander Hybrid somewhat niche. But if 7-seats are a must and you want the mild benefit of a hybrid system then there’s few other places to go looking. Which ought to deliver a captive audience.
The wait for the new Apple TV goes on, but a new leak suggests the next-gen video streamer will come with an all-new remote control with improved Siri voice functionality.
Details are thin as the ground, but 9to5Mac claims to have “learned that Apple is developing a new Remote for Apple TV”. The source says the new zapper is being developed under the codename ‘B519’, whereas the current Siri Remote goes by the much catchier name ‘B439’. So in other words, something is afoot.
Today’s leak ties in with last week’s report by MacRumours, which noted that Apple had erased all mentions of “Siri Remote” from its tvOS14.5 beta, replacing it with the name “Apple TV Remote”. Again, it appears to point to a new wand.
While some love the simplicity of the current Siri Remote, which features a
minimalistic touchpad (we called it “skittish” in our Apple TV 4K review), others have bemoaned the lack of physical buttons and called for a replacement – which it seems like they’re going to get.
As for the box itself, talk of a new Apple TV has been swirling around for some time now. It’s rumoured to boast a faster processor, with a new focus on the Apple Arcade cloud-based video gaming service.
Well-known Twitter tipster Ice Universe (@UniverseIce) even suggested that if Apple drops its super-speedy A14 Bionic chip into the next Apple TV, it could give dedicated games consoles a run for their money.
With any luck, we’ll find out soon. Apple is rumoured to be holding a launch event in April that could see it unveil the new video streamer alongside the iPad Pro 2021 and AirPods 3. The iPhone 13, however, isn’t slated to arrive until September.
MORE:
Everything we know so far about the new Apple TV
Here’s our round-up of the very best video streamers
Getting an Apple product repaired often involves going directly to the (expensive) source — an Apple Store — or a big third-party firm. If you live somewhere with limited choices, Apple’s recently announced expansion of its Independent Repair Provider program might change that. The company plans to expand its repair program to “nearly every country where Apple products are sold,” meaning someone near you could soon be using official Apple parts to fix your cracked phone.
Right now, the program is only available in the US, Canada and Europe, but according to Apple’s announcement, repair providers from countries including Australia, Japan, and Korea will be able to join this week, with providers from even more countries including China joining the program later this year.
Providers have to apply to participate, but once approved, they can only buy a limited variety of first-party materials like batteries, screens, and diagnostic tools. So while your local repair person will be able to fix the most common issues with official parts, anything more more exotic will have to go through Apple, one of its authorized service providers, or risk voiding a warranty or becoming unsupported down the line.
If you actually do the hard work of repairing devices, there’s other things to be aware of, too. Joining the program comes with a contract that reportedly gives Apple the right to both inspect repair shops and fine them if it finds something amiss. Apple can charge $1,000 per transaction for any shop it catches using knockoff parts in more than two percent of repairs, according to a Motherboard report.
Apple generally only seems to be supportive of third-party repairs if it can find a way to make money off of them, and this repair program doesn’t seem to be any different. This is the company that routinely attempts to kill right-to-repair bills and has devised methods to make iPhones non-functional if they use third-party batteries, after all.
You can read the full list of participating countries and regions on Apple’s website.
(Pocket-lint) – The 13-inch Intel MacBook Pro was upgraded with the latest specs in early 2020 to bring it in line with 2019’s MacBook Pro 16-inch.
However, there’s also a version – released in November 2020 – with Apple’s own M1 processor. However, we’re only looking at Intel machines in this guide. If you want to think about an Apple Silicon Mac instead, check out our bigger MacBook guide.
All these Macs run Apple’s latest version of its Mac operating system – macOS 11 Big Sur.
So which is the model for you – the larger 16-incher or the more manageable 13-inch? Let’s find out!
Intel MacBook Pro 16-inch vs MacBook Pro 13-inch: Design and build
All models have Touch Bar and Touch ID
New style keyboard – dubbed the Magic Keyboard
Both sizes of MacBook Pro are available in silver and space grey and have the Touch Bar and Touch ID for fingerprint. Every MacBook Pro now has a Touch Bar.
The 13-inch models measure 304.1 x 212.4 x 15.6mm and weighs 1.4kg. That means it’s slightly thicker and heavier than the older model which was 14.9mm thick/1.37kg.
The larger 16-inch models all measure 358 x 246 x 16.2mm and weigh 2kg. Despite the larger screen size, the new 16-incher is only marginally bigger than the 15-inch it replaced.
The keyboard has been completely redesigned on both models after mass criticism of Apple’s previous Butterfly design (that was present on now end-of-life 15-inch models and pre-2020 13-inch MacBook Pros). That older keyboard design remains the subject of an ongoing recall program.
The Magic Keyboard is designed to be much more durable and with better travel for more comfortable typing. The physical Escape key has also returned.
You’ll get two USB-C/Thunderbolt 3 ports on the two lower end 13-inch models, and four on the top-end pair of models. Yep, there are four standard models of the 13-inch MacBook Pro.
The 16-inch models all have four. Every MacBook Pro retains its 3.5mm headphone jack and there’s the Force Touch trackpad, too.
Intel MacBook Pro 16-inch vs MacBook Pro 13-inch: Display
New MacBooks offer True Tone display
13-inch size and resolutions remain the same
The 16-inch model has a resolution of 3,072 x 1,920 pixels (226ppi), with almost six million pixels on board. The 13-inch model has a resolution of 2,560 x 1,600 pixels (227ppi), the same as older 13-inch MacBook Pros.
All MacBook Pro displays boast True Tone, 500 nits of brightness and a wide P3 colour gamut. True Tone is a tech that was first introduced on the iPad Pro, adjusting the screen to match the colour temperature of the lighting in the room.
What is Apple’s True Tone display?
Intel MacBook Pro 16-inch vs MacBook Pro 13-inch: Processor, graphics and storage
8th and 9th generation Intel Core processors for 16-inch
10th generation Intel Core processors for 13-inch
Radeon Pro graphics for 15-inch
15-inch gets 6-core i9 option
The 16-inch MacBook Pro has 8th generation Intel Core processors and adds some 9th generation options. Everything on the bigger model has either 6 or 8 cores. It has the ‘basic’ option of a 2.6Ghz Intel Core i7 with six cores, but there are two Core i9 processors you can get in the range, too, clocked at 2.3Ghz or 2.4Ghz with Turbo Boost speeds of 4.5 or 5Ghz respectively.
The 13-inch MacBook Pro boasts a quad-core Core i5 processor as standard – a 10th generation chip clocked at 2.0 or 2.3Ghz. You can also configure up to 10th generation Core i7 at 2.3GHz with maximum Turbo Boost speed of 4.1Ghz.
The MacBook Pro 16-inch uses AMD Radeon graphics with the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M or 5500M with 4GB of GDDR6 memory and automatic graphics switching between that and the integrated Intel graphics.
Unfortunately, there’s no discrete graphics option on the 13-inch, but Intel’s Iris Plus graphics chips are no slouch and are way better than the integrated graphics of yesteryear. They aren’t a patch on the 16-inch, however.
The 16-inch model can be topped up to 64GB of memory, while the 13-inch can have up to 32GB. 8GB of 2133MHz LPDDR3 memory is standard on the 13-inch and 16GB of 2666MHz DDR4 memory is standard on the 16-inch.
squirrel_widget_237735
The storage tops out at a whopping 8TB on the 16-inch and 4TB on the 13-inch but starting at 512GB. Adding more internal storage at the time of purchase ups the cost significantly.
The MacBook Pro lineup all has Apple’s own T2 chip. This is a chip dedicated to security that handles Touch ID and some other capabilities such as powering Siri.
squirrel_widget_171234
Conclusions
The 16-inch MacBook Pro is a real step up in terms of the power and options it offers, but you have to really need the larger screen, dedicated graphics and sheer power to justify the expense. It’s a machine for people who edit video, photos, chop between projects and need a do-anything machine with the power to match.
The 13-inch model is still our pick for most users but with the MacBook Air now much more powerful, it’s always worth seeing if that’s actually the 13-inch laptop that you need.
Remember that Apple is transitioning all its laptops over to Apple Silicon, so Intel versions won’t be available too much longer.
Xiaomi unveiled a new wireless charging pad during its Mi Mix event this morning. The pad is capable of simultaneously charging three devices without precise placement, similar to the canceled Apple AirPower charger.
According to Xiaomi, this wireless charging pad features up to 20W of wireless power per device and includes 19 coils, allowing users to place any three devices that support Qi wireless charging, according to Xiaomi.
Unlike most other clones out there, Xiamoi’s wireless charging pad is more affordable, selling for about $90. However, it is unknown if the charging pad will see a release outside of China.
Xiaomi is not the first company to make its own clone of the Apple AirPower. In 2019, Nomad released the Base Station Pro, an 18-coil wireless charger that can charge any three devices with no specific placement, but as noted by my colleague Chaim Gartenberg, one of the downsides was that aside from the iPhone, the pad only provided 5W of charging.
Alongside a new wireless charging pad, Xiamoi also unveiled the Mi 11 Pro, which includes 67W wireless charging as opposed to the Mi 10 Ultra and Huawei’s Mate 40 Pro, which have previously had the fastest wireless charging with 50W. Additionally, Xiaomi also announced a new 80W wireless charger.
A rare prototype of a Leica camera crafted by former Apple luminary Jony Ive and famed designer Marc Newson is being sold at auction in June. The device, which is described as being in “B+” condition, has a starting price of €100.000 (around $118,000), and the Leitz Photographica Auction house estimates that it’ll sell for between €200.000 and €250.000 (around $235,000 to $295,000).
The prototype was produced during the development of the one-off Leica M for (RED) camera, which was sold at a charity auction in 2013 for $1.8 million. While the final product’s design shared a lot of similarities with Apple’s “cheesegrater” Mac Pro, this prototype appears to have a smooth reflective finish that looks like an absolute fingerprint magnet.
The prototype, which is described as showing the “final development step” of the design process, is equipped with a Apo-Summicron 2/50 mm ASPH lens. There’s no mention of whether it actually functions as a camera, however. Here’s the full description from Leitz Photographica Auction:
“A beautifully sculptured aluminium body with a matching Apo-Summicron 2/50 mm ASPH. lens — both showing distinctive features both designers are famous for. Only one finished camera has been made and was sold in an auction in 2013 for an amazing $ 1.8 M! The prototype we have the pleasure to offer shows the final development step when the camera took its final shape after hundreds of prototype parts have been made and tried. It is a beautiful piece of design and a very special opportunity for Leica collectors!”
At the time, Leica said “a total of 561 models and nearly 1000 prototype parts” were made during the camera’s design process. The final Leica M for (RED) camera was sold alongside over 40 other items at the auction, which raised around $26 million in total for charity. Newson later joined Apple to work under Ive the following year.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
