Disney will reportedly end its use of Slack for internal employee communications and migrate to Microsoft Teams after a hacking group stole and leaked more than a terabyte of corporate data.
Disney CFO Hugh Johnson announced plans to move away from Slack in a memo to staff earlier this week, according to a report Wednesday by Oliver Darcy in the “Status” newsletter. The company now plans to complete the migration during the second quarter of 2025.
Disney will move employees onto Microsoft’s rival collaboration application, Teams, according to aBusiness Insider report — a switch that is apparently unpopular with some Disney employees.
A group called “Nullbulge” published a 1.1 TB file containing data taken from Disney’s internal Slack archive in July. This included 44 million messages between Disney employees, 18,800 spreadsheets and at least 13,000 PDFs, according to a Wall Street Journal report earlier this month. Information posted publicly included details on Disney’s financial status and strategy, as well as personally identifiable information on some staffers and customers.
The breach apparently occurred after a computer belonging to software development manager at Disney was compromised. Data was then stolen from public and private Slack channels, though private messages were unaffected, according to the Journal.
Slack is owned by business software vendor Salesforce following a $28 billion acquisition in 2020. At the company’s Dreamforce event this week, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff highlighted Disney’s continued use of Salesforce products across its operations, including by Disney retail workers and customer service staff.
Benioff also commented on Disney’s decision to drop Slack during a Bloomberg interview on Thursday.
“Our security is rock-solid,” said Benioff. “This is really important. Also, there’s no finish line when it comes to security. But companies have to also take the right measures to prevent phishing attacks and to lockdown their employees from social engineering. So, we can do our part, but our customers also have to do their part — that’s extremely important.”
The iPhone has come a long way since its arrival in 2007. Here’s our look at every iPhone that Apple has released since the original iconic iPhone arrived in 2007.
Every iPhone model from 2007 to 2023
The original iPhone (2007)
The iPhone 3G (2008)
The iPhone 3GS (2009)
The iPhone 4 (2010)
The iPhone 4S (2011)
The iPhone 5 (2012)
The iPhone 5s and 5c (2013)
The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus (2014)
The iPhone 6s and 6s Plus (2015)
The iPhone 7 and 7 Plus (2016)
The iPhone 8 and 8 Plus (2017)
The iPhone X (2017)
The iPhone Xr (2018)
The iPhone Xs and Xs Max (2018)
The iPhone 11 (2019)
The iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max (2019)
The iPhone 12 and 12 mini (2020)
The iPhone 12 Pro and Pro Max (2020)
The iPhone 13 and 13 mini (2021)
The iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max (2021)
The iPhone 14 and 14 Plus (2022)
The iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max (2022)
The iPhone 15 and 15 Plus (2023)
The iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max (2023)
First iPhone
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s first iPhone arrived in June 2007.
After months of rumors and speculation, Apple CEO Steve Jobs unveiled the first iPhone on Jan. 9, 2007. The device, which didn’t actually go on sale until June, started at $499 for a 4GB model, $599 for the 8GB version (with a two-year contract). It offered a 3.5-in. screen, a 2-megapixel camera and won plaudits for the then-new multitouch features. Critics, however, said the phone was too expensive to do well in the market. (See iPhone launch story.)
iPhone 3G
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 3G arrived in July 2008
On June 9, 2008, a year after the original iPhone went on sale, Apple rolled out its successor, the iPhone 3G. The new model could connect to faster 3G-based networks, included built-in GPS, offered more storage and was cheaper. Selling for $199 for the 8GB model, $299 for the 16GB version, the iPhone 3G was available on July 11, and offered something called location services. “Location services is going to be a really big deal on the iPhone,” said CEO Steve Jobs. “It’s going to explode.” (See launch story.)
iPhone 3GS
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 3Gs arrived in June 2009.
Again at WWDC, Apple’s Steve Jobs announced the next iPhone, a faster version called the iPhone 3GS. Although the form factor was unchanged from the previous version, the new iPhone was twice as fast as its predecessor and ran iPhone 3.0 (an early version of iOS 8, due out later this month). The 32GB iPhone 3G S sold for $299; a 16GB model went for $199. An 8GB iPhone 3G was also offered for $99. The iPhone 3GS was available June 19, 2009. (See launch story.)
iPhone 4
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 4 arrived in June 2010.
The redesigned iPhone 4 arrived on June 7, 2010 in tandem with the newly-renamed iOS 4, and marked the arrival of FaceTime video chat. Prices remained unchanged: $199 for a 16GB model and $299 for the 32GB version. It went on sale on June 24, and heralded the arrival of the first high-resolution “Retina” screen. “Once you use a Retina Display, you can’t go back,” said Steve Jobs. (See launch story.)
iPhone 4S
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 4S arrived in October 2011.
In a change of pace, Apple unveiled the iPhone 4S on Oct. 4, 2011, a few weeks after Steve Jobs stepped down because of health issues. New CEO Tim Cook talked up the new phone’s dual-core processor (the same used in the iPad 2), and said the 4S would go on sale Oct. 14. In addition to the usual 16GB and 32GB models, Apple also unveiled a 64GB version that sold for $399. (See launch story.)
iPhone 5
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 5 arrived in September 2012.
The iPhone 5, the first version to have a 4-in. screen, arrived on Sept. 12, 2012, as CEO Tim Cook touted the faster, slimmer upgrade to the iPhone 4S during a 90-minute presentation in San Francisco. “This is the biggest thing to happen to iPhone since the [original] iPhone,” he said, referring to the first-gen smartphone Steve Jobs had launched in 2007. The iPhone 5 hit the streets on Sept. 21; prices for the 16GB, 32GB and 64GB models were unchanged. (See launch story.)
iPhone 5S and 5C
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 5s and 5c arrived in September 2013.
On Sept. 10, 2013, Apple CEO Tim Cook rolled out not one, but two iPhones: the upscale iPhone 5S (now in gold, in addition to the usual white and black), and the colorful, less-expensive iPhone 5C. (The iPhone 5C was basically a reskinned iPhone 5.) The iPhone 5S got a faster, 64-bit A7 SoC (system on a chip), Touch ID, and a new motion data processor touted as the foundation for a new wave of health and fitness apps. The iPhone 5C started at $99 for a $16GB model; the iPhone 5S started at $199 for the same amount of storage. Both went on sale Sept. 20. (See launch story.)
iPhone 6 and 6 Plus
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 6 and 6 Plus arrived in September 2014.
For the second year in a row, Apple unveiled two iPhones in 2014: the iPhone 6, which has a 4.7-in. screen, and the iPhone 6 Plus, with a 5.5-in. screen. Both iPhones sported new A8 processors that were faster and more efficient than the previous year’s models. Both also had upgraded cameras and were NFC-ready for access to the new Apple Pay network that rolled out in October. Although the iPhone 6 was priced the same as 2013’s iPhone 5S, the Plus model was $100 more. (See launch story.)
iPhone 6S and 6S Plus
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 6s and 6s Plus arrived in September 2015.
Apple’s iPhone 6S and 6S Plus represented meaty upgrades to the 2014 models on which they were based. The 6S and 6S plus got new force touch technology called 3D Touch, as well as a beefed up 12-megapixel iSight camera that shot 4K video. (The 5-megapixel FaceTime camera was also new, and was designed to take better selfies.) Both phones ran on a faster A9 chip, and came in a new color for 2015: rose gold. (See launch story.)
iPhone 7 and 7 Plus
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 7 and 7 Plus were released in September 2016.
The iPhone 7 and 7 Plus looked much like the 2015 models, with three major exceptions: Apple eliminated the audio jack, changed the home button into a haptic-based virtual button, and added a dual-camera setup in the 7S. The loss of the audio jack, a somewhat controversial move, meant users had to rely on the Apple-supplied earbuds or use their old headphones with the included adapter. Both phones ran on a quad-core A10 Fusion chip, and came in two new colors: Black (a matte-finish charcoal color) and the super shiny Jet Black. (See launch story launch story.)
iPhone 8/8 Plus
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone 8 and 8 Plus were released in September 2017.
Apple introduced the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus with a new glass and aluminium enclosure, Retina HD display, A11 Bionic Chip, and wireless charging on Sept. 12, 2017. The front and back glass enclosure, which Apple said was the most durable glass ever in a smartphone, was reminiscent of the design of the iPhone 4 and 4s. True Tone technology adjusted the white balance of the display to match the surrounding light. Redesigned stereo speakers were 25% louder and delivered deeper bass.
Apple called the A11 Bionic chip “the most powerful and smartest chip ever in a smartphone.” It featured a six-core CPU with two performance cores and four efficiency cores, which were 25% and 70% faster than the A10 Fusion chip, respectively. The new iPhones included an Apple-designed GPU that delivered up to 30% faster graphics than in 2016’s iPhone 7.
Each model featured an improved 12-megapixel camera with a larger (and faster) sensor, a new color filter, deeper pixels, and capabilities for 4K video up to 60fps and 1080p slo-mo up to 240fps. ARKit in iOS 11 allowed developers to create AR games and apps offering immersive and fluid experiences. Color variations included space gray, silver, and a new version of gold.
iPhone X
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone X arrived in November 2017.
To commemorate a decade of iPhones, Apple ended its September event with “one more thing,” the iPhone X (“ten”). Starting at $999 for 64GB and $1,149 for 256GB, it was Apple’s most expensive iPhone to date. It included a redesigned glass and stainless steel enclosure, wireless charging, and dual cameras. Its flagship feature was an edge-to-edge “Super Retina display” — a 5.8-in. OLED display that supports Dolby Vision and HDR 10. It had a pixel resolution of 458ppi, a 1 million-to-1 contrast ratio, and True Tone.
Touch ID and the Home button were removed in favor of a new biometric security feature: Face ID. Face ID uses a TrueDepth camera system made up of a dot projector, infrared camera and flood illuminator. The A11 Bionic chip works in tandem with advanced depth-sensing technologies to map and recognize a user’s face to securely unlock the iPhone or make a transaction with Apple Pay. Face ID only works when a user looks at the iPhone X directly and is designed to prevent spoofing by photos and masks.
The 7-megapixel TrueDepth front-facing camera that enables Face ID also included auto image stabilization and delivered Portrait mode for better selfies with a depth-of-field effect. The TrueDepth camera also could animate emoji, which Apple playfully calls Animoji. The dual 12-megapixel rear camera included dual optical image stabilization, and an improved f/2.4 aperature on the telephoto lens.
According to Apple, the A11 Bionic neural engine performed up to 600 billion operations per second and was designed for specific machine learning algorithms, enabling Face ID, Animoji, and other features. Colors included silver and space gray.
iPhone Xr
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone Xr arrived in October 2018.
The Xr had an aluminum-and-glass design in six finishes, with improved water resistance and a 6.1-in. “Liquid Retina” display. Available in 64GB, 128GB and 256GB models and starting at $749, it featured Apple’s A12 Bionic Chip with second-generation Neural Engine — the first 7-nanometer chip in a smartphone.
Portrait mode with depth control was available on the TrueDepth camera for selfies, which included support for Memoji and face tracking for Face ID authentication, while the 12-megapixel camera with an f/1.8-aperture wide-angle lens featured a new sensor and improved software algorithms for faster focusing and enhanced portraiture with depth control. Established iPhone gestures were supported, and haptic touch controls could be used to instantly launch the camera or flashlight from the home screen.
iPhone Xs and Xs Max
loading="lazy" width="400px">
Apple’s iPhone Xs and Xs Max arrived in September 2018.
Featuring 5.8- and 6.5-in. all-screen designs and improved scratch- and water-resistance, Apple’s iPhone Xs and Xs Max both offered Super Retina OLED displays that supported Dolby Vision and HDR10 and had iOS system-wide color management; the Xs Max had the largest iPhone display to date, with more than 3 million pixels, and the biggest battery — promising up to an hour and a half more battery life than the iPhone X.
The 12-megapixel dual-camera system offered advanced depth segmentation in Portrait mode with the ability to adjust depth of field both in preview and post-capture for precise control in portrait creation; the system allowed for faster face tracking for Face ID, Memoji, and third-party ARKit apps. Low-light performance and image stabilization were enhanced for both still photography and video capture, in addition to an extended dynamic range for better highlight and shadow detail. Four built-in mics could record stereo sound.
These models were the first to include Apple’s A12 Bionic Chip with second-generation Neural Engine. The chip design was capable of completing up to 5 trillion operations per second (compared with 600 billion in its predecessor). Models in 64GB, 256GB and 512GB configurations started at $999 and $1,099 for the Xs and Xs Max, respectively.
iPhone 11
loading="lazy" width="400px">
The iPhone 11 arrived in September 2019.
The iPhone 11, which succeeded 2018’s iPhone XR, got a $50 price cut (to $699), a new color (purple), a redesigned two-camera system, and a number of under-the-hood technology upgrades. The screen is a 6.1-in. Liquid Retina HD display, storage comes in 64GB, 128GB or 256GB options, and the phone uses Apple’s new A13 “Bionic” processor.
The camera system features an ultra-wide camera that captures more than four times the scenery and 4K video at up to 60 frames per second. It also features audio zoom, so if you zoom in on video, the audio does, too. The front-facing camera is a 12-megapixel model that allows for slow-motion selfies, which Apple dubbed “slofies.” The camera system also offers a new “night mode” for better images in low-light conditions. According to Apple, the A13 bionic chip allows for an extra hour of use compared to the 2018 models.
iPhone 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max
loading="lazy" width="400px">
The iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max arrived in September 2019.
The iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max succeeded 2018’s iPhone XS and XS Max, and started at $999. The phones come in four colors, including a new one (Midnight Green), and feature a wholly new three-camera system and a variety of under-the-hood technology upgrades. The screen is either a 5.8-in. or 6.5-in. Super Retina XDR display, storage cames in 64GB, 128GB or 256GB options, and the phone uses Apple’s new A13 “Bionic” processor.
The camera system features an ultra-wide camera that captures more than four times the scenery and 4K video at up to 60 frames per second. It also features audio zoom, so if you zoom in on video, the audio does too. The front-facing camera is a 12-megapixel model that allows for slow-motion selfies, which Apple dubbed “slofies.” The camera system offers a “night mode” for better images in low-light conditions.
According to Apple, the A13 bionic chip and the third-generation Neural Engine run more efficiently, allowing for up to four or five hours of additional use compared to the previous year’s models.
The iPhone 12 and 12 mini arrived in October and November, 2020.
The iPhone 12 took over for the iPhone 11, as Apple expanded its OLED displays across its smartphone lineup and rolled out a new 5.4-in. iPhone mini. Prices started at $699 for the mini ($100 more for the larger iPhone 12), with storage options of 64GB, 128GB, and 256GB. The new Super Retina XDR displays are built with what Apple calls “Ceramic Shield” for four times better resistance to breaking if dropped.
All iPhone 12 models use the A14 Bionic chip and offered 5G networking — both the sub-6GHz and mmWave varieties. Both models offer a dual 12MP camera system with Ultra Wide and Wide cameras that include Night Mode for better photos in low-light conditions. 4K video recording can be done at 24 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 30 fps.
Apple’s iPhone 12 Pro and Pro Max arrived in October and November, 2020.
The iPhone 12 Pro got an even larger big brother with the 6.7-in. iPhone 12 Pro Max. Prices started at $999 for the iPhone 12 Pro ($100 more for the Pro Max), with storage options of 128GB, 256GB and 512GB. The Super Retina XDR OLED displays are built with what Apple calls “Ceramic Shield” for four times better resistance to breaking if dropped.
Both Pro models use the A14 Bionic chip and offered 5G networking — both the sub-6GHz and mmWave varieties. The three-lens Pro 12MP camera system includes either a 4X or 5X optical zoom range, Night Mode for better photos in low-light conditions, and LiDAR sensors for faster focus and improved AR/VR. 4K video recording can be done at 24 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps.
The iPhone 13 and 13 mini arrived in September 2021.
The iPhone 13 and 13 mini picked up where the previous year’s models left off: they have the same form factor and price range as in 2020, plus a new processor and better battery life. Prices started at $699 for the mini ($100 more for the larger iPhone 13), with storage options of 128GB (twice the base amount offered last year), 256GB, and 512GB. Both models sport Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays and run on the new A15 Bionic chip.
Both also feature a 12MP dual-camera system with Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, sensor‑shift optical image stabilization for sharper photos, and “cinematic mode” for video. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps. Both have larger batteries for up to 2.5 hours more battery life in the iPhone 13 (1.5 hours more in the mini).
The Apple iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max arrived in September 2021.
The iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max are virtually identical to their predecessors (though slightly thicker and heavier). They got Apple’s newest A15 bionic processor and delivered better battery life. Prices again started at $999 (for the iPhone 13 Pro) and $1099 (for the iPhone 13 Pro Max), with storage options ranging from 128GB to a whopping 1TB. Both models again use Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays, with the Pro models getting ProMotion screens for smoother on-screen graphics.
Both feature a 12MP triple-camera system with revamped Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, “cinematic mode” for video, and macro photography. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps. A larger battery means up to 2.5 hours more battery life in the iPhone 13 Pro Max (1.5 hours more in the 13 Pro).
The Apple iPhone 14 and 14 Plus arrived in September and October 2022, respectively.
The iPhone 14 and new 14 Plus have the same form factor and price range as the previous year, with the larger Plus model replacing the discontinued iPhone 13 mini. Both use an updated version of the Bionic A15 processor — the same chip used in the 2021 models — and offer better battery life. Prices start at $799 for the iPhone 14 and $899 for the larger 14 Plus, with storage options of 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB.
Both models use Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays with the iPhone 14 having a 6.1-in. screen and the 14 Plus model sporting a 6.7-in. display. (Unlike the Pro models, these versions of the iPhone do not have an always-on display or any changes to the screen “notch.”) Both feature a 12MP dual-camera system with Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, sensor‑shift optical image stabilization, and cinematic and action modes for video. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps and HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps. Pre-orders began Sept. 7, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 16 (iPhone 14) and Oct. 7 (iPhone 14 Plus).
The Apple iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max arrived in September 2022.
The iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max look similar to last year’s models, but get noteworthy new features, including the new A16 processor and a more powerful 48MP rear camera system. Prices are unchanged from 2021, storage options range between 128GB and 1TB, and this year brings a new “Deep Purple” color as an option. Both models again use Apple’s Super Retina XDR displays, but this year get an always-on display. (The screen dims when not in use to save on battery life, but can display as much as 2000 nits of brightness outdoors.)
Both feature a 48MP triple-camera system with tweaked Ultra Wide and Wide cameras, and the same 3X optical zoom in/2X optical zoom out as last year. 4K video can be shot at 24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps, or 60 fps, HDR video recording with Dolby Vision is available at up to 60 fps, and cinematic video stabilization is available in 4K, 1080p and 720p.) Gone this year are SIM cards, which Apple has replaced with eSIMs. Pre-orders began Sept. 7, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 16.
iPhone 15 and 15 Plus
loading="lazy" width="400px">
The Apple iPhone 15 and 15 Plus were released in September 2023.
TheiPhone 15 and new 15 Pluslook much like their 2022 predecessors (with prices in the same range), but offer design tweaks that include an aluminum and color-infused glass combo and new colors. Both use the Bionic A16 processor — the same chip used in the 2022 Pro models — and get USB-C charging for the first time. Prices again start at $799 for the iPhone 15 and $899 for the larger 15 Plus, with storage options remaining unchanged at 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB.
Both models continue to feature Apple’s Super Retina XDR display; the iPhone 15 has a 6.1-in. screen, the 15 Plus model has a 6.7-in. display — and both get the Dynamic Island feature at the top of the screen for more interactivity with various apps. The iPhone 15 now features a revamped camera system that includes a 48-megapixel main camera, a 26 mm ƒ/1.6 aperture, sensor‑shift optical image stabilization with support for super-high-resolution photos, and a 4x optical optical zoom range. Both models now get Roadside assistance via satellite through AAA.
Pre-orders begin Sept. 15, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 22.
iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max
loading="lazy" width="400px">
The Apple iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max were released in September 2023.
The big change for the iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Maxthis year involves a new Titanium-based design that cuts 19 grams of weight and allows for thinner bezels around both models’ screens. Inside, both run Apple’s new A17 Pro processor (with 6 cores) and get a tweaked 48MP rear camera system. The main difference between the two camera systems: the Pro Max version gets a 12-megapixel 5x Telephoto feature at 120 mm with an ƒ/2.8 aperture; 3D sensor‑shift optical image stabilization and autofocus, and a new tetraprism design; the smaller Pro version features a 12-megapixel 3x Telephoto at 77 mm with an ƒ/2.8 aperture. Coming later this year on Pro models: the ability to capture spatial video for playback on Apple’s upcoming Vision Pro device.
For connectivity, the Pro models move to USB-C, with USB 3 support and Wi-Fi 6E for faster wireless speeds. Screen sizes remain the same as last year — 6.1-in. and 6.7-in. — but thinner bezels allow for a slightly smaller overall size. The mute button has been replaced with a programmable “Action” button similar to the one that debuted in 2022 on the Apple Watch Ultra. And Find My Friends gets more powerful “Precision Finding.” Storage options start at 128GB for the Pro model, 256GB for Pro Max version, and range up to 1TB.
As with the regular iPhone 15, pre-orders for the Pro models begin Sept. 15, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 22.
The iPhone 16 and 16 Plus look much like their 2023 predecessors (and they both start at the same prices). The big news is inside: both get Apple’s new A18 processor, a 3-nanometer chip the company says is designed for Apple Intelligence — the generative AI features that will roll out later this year with iOS 18.1. Apple also made changes on the outside, bringing the “Action button” from the Pro line-up and adding a new “Camera Control” button for easier photo and video shoots. Prices again start at $799 for the iPhone 16 ($100 more for the larger 16 Plus), with storage options the same as last year: 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB.
Both models feature Apple’s Super Retina XDR display; the iPhone 16 has a 6.1-in. screen, the 16 Plus has a 6.7-in. display — and both get an internal redesign that allows for a larger battery and longer battery life. Both models get a revamped camera system that includes a 48-megapixel main camera with a 2x optical telephoto capabilities and a new 12-megapixel Ultra Wide camera with autofocus for macro photography. Both models can now shoot spatial photos and video for playback on the Apple Vision Pro.
Pre-orders began Sept. 13, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 20.
The iPhone 16 Pro and Pro Max grew a little this year and now offer larger Super Retina XDR displays; the Pro model has a 6.3-in. screen, the Pro Max gets a 6.9-in display. Both also get Apple’s new “Camera Control” button for easier photo and video shoots. Inside, both rely on Apple’s new 3-nanometer A18 Pro processor (with a 16-core neural engine) designed for Apple Intelligence — the generative AI features slated to arrive later this year with iOS 18.1. There’s also an upgraded camera system with a new 48-megapixel Fusion camera that allows for 4K120 fps video recording in Dolby Vision and spatial photos for display on the Apple Vision Pro.
Both devices now have four new studio-quality mics that allow users to modify sound afterit’s captured and to record Spatial audio for more immersive playback. Apple is also touting an internal redesign that allows for a bigger battery — and longer battery life. Storage options start at 128GB for the Pro model, 256GB for Pro Max version, and range up to 1TB. New for 2024 is a “Desert Titanium” color to go with Natural Titanium, White Titanium and Black Titanium.
As with the regular iPhone 16 line-up, pre-orders for the Pro models began Sept. 13, with the phones available in stores on Sept. 20.
During an earnings call in the summer of 2021, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg first publicly used the M-word. “In the coming years,” Zuck told investors, “I expect people will transition from seeing us primarily as a social media company to seeing us as a metaverse company.”
“Um, what?” said every cyberpunk sci-fi fan on Earth in unison.
Until that moment, Neal Stephenson (who coined the word) described the “metaverse” in his 1992 science fiction novel “Snow Crash” this way: as a virtual reality (VR) platform controlled by wealthy leaders of powerful corporations that exacerbated social inequality and was so addictive that people spent all their time there, neglecting their real lives in the real world.
The “metaverse” was a warning, not a business plan.
His essential vision back then was a new internet anchored in VR. Just as today we shop, learn, and find entertainment on the internet, the “metaverse” version would do all those things in 3D environments, in which we would move around as avatars. Sure, elements of this VR world would be accessible via augmented reality (AR) and even phones, tablets, and PCs. But Meta’s essential belief was that the future is VR.
Not so fast, said Apple
“AR is going to become really big,” Apple CEO Tim Cook said in 2016. “VR, I think, is not going to be that big compared to AR… and we will wonder… how we lived without it.”
Back then, Apple was hard at work in its labs creating what it hoped would be the future of consumer technology — AR. And Meta was working on what it hoped would be the future of consumer technology — VR.
Apple envisioned business meetings, random social interactions, professional conferences, and family get-togethers as happening in person in the real world. Everyone would wear Apple glasses that displayed digital information based on the context of the interaction.
Meta envisioned business meetings, random social interactions, professional conferences, and family get-togethers happening in virtual spaces in the “metaverse,” with everyone wearing Meta goggles that immersed them in a believable 3D world.
Apple envisioned ordinary-looking eyeglasses. Meta envisioned big, bulky headsets.
Based on these respective inclinations, something unpredictable happened. Meta released ordinary-looking eyeglasses, and Apple released big, bulky headsets.
Specifically, a year ago, Meta replaced its lackluster and uninteresting Ray-Ban Stories glasses with Ray-Ban Meta glasses, which took off in popularity. They looked like regular Ray-Ban glasses, but contained high-quality microphones, speakers, and a camera. Best of all, they accessed AI via the camera, including (later) multimodal AI.
It’s likely that Meta was surprised by the success of Ray-Ban Meta glasses as a product and thrilled that Meta alone provided a compelling daily mobile use case for its AI.
Then, in January, Apple shipped Apple Vision Pro. Let’s be very clear about what Apple Vision Pro hardware is — it’s VR hardware. It’s a big, heavy, bulky headset that delivers incredible visuals and features unique to Apple Vision Pro. But it’s VR delivering an AR experience.
Apple has made a big point of emphasizing the categorization of Apple Vision Pro as spatial computing, not AR or VR. The spatial features are among the best things about Apple Vision Pro. The augmented reality feel of Apple Vision Pro is achieved through pass-through video. You don’t actually see the room you’re in; you see a video of the room. Others don’t actually see your eyes. They see an avatar of your eyes.
Apple required a lot of VR hardware to create AR and eventually wants to sell spatial computing AR glasses that look like ordinary eyeglasses. But that technology is a few years in the future, which is why Apple’s AR vision requires VR hardware.
Meta, meanwhile, also seems super excited about augmented reality glasses — something like Ray-Ban Meta glasses, but with spatial-computing visuals. It seems less excited about VR, as evidenced by losses and cutbacks. Meta’s Reality Labs division has lost tens of billions of dollars and laid off thousands of employees in the past few years.
Enter Project Nazare
Instead of going big on the “metaverse,” Meta focuses more on AR and AI.
Project Nazare is its first big hope in that space. Zuckerberg described this project as the company’s first attempt at creating true AR glasses. The device they’re working on sounds like Ray-Ban Meta glasses, plus holographic displays and sensors for mapping the physical environment for spatial computing (the placement of virtual objects in relation to the physical environment).
As with Apple Vision Pro, Nazare glasses would facilitate interaction with holographic avatars mapped to real people in real time, showing facial expressions, mouth movements, and hand gestures.
Meta is focusing on a problem critics have drawn attention to with Apple Vision Pro, Microsoft Hololens, and Magic Leap: the narrow visual field. Nazare is reportedly working on a 200- to 220-degree field of holographic visuals.
The company is also working on using multimodal AI through the camera to enable AI image recognition.
And that maps with Apple’s glasses
Meanwhile, Apple is reportedly focused on something similar. Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman reported that Apple is working on lightweight AR glasses that could be worn all day and could be launched as early as 2027 (but are more likely to arrive in 2028 or 2029).
Both Apple and Meta face immense hurdles in reducing the size and cost of these glasses. Battery size and weight are an enormous issue, and the miniaturization of all components remains a major focus.
But both companies are moving in the same direction. The disparate visions of the future each once had appear to no longer exist.
Even though Apple’s current face computer is essentially VR hardware and Meta’s is essentially AR hardware (minus the light engine for holographic imagery), both companies appear to be well on their way to realizing what used to be Apple’s vision — everyday, all-day AR glasses that will one day replace the smartphone as our main device.
IBM has apparently begun layoffs of as many as 8,000 people — layoffs that were announced back in January. But those layoffs are avoiding the age-related criticisms of IBM’s past and are also too early to reflect the IBM-promised generative artificial intelligence (genAI) layoffs, according to Jason Andersen, a former IBM manager who today serves as VP/principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy.
Andersen said his overall take on the layoffs is that “it was a bit of a yawn,” given IBM’s January announcement and Big Blue’s recent workforce reduction efforts. “IBM has used this tactic of kind of quietly laying people off for many, many years,” said Andersen, who spent more than eight years as a senior product manager at IBM, leaving in 2008. He works with IBM today as an analyst.
IBM spokesperson Sarah Minkel emailed a rather vague statement to Computerworld that seemed to confirm the layoffs: “Early this year, IBM disclosed a workforce rebalancing charge that would represent a very low single digit percentage of IBM’s global workforce, and we still expect to exit 2024 at roughly the same level of employment as we entered with.”
The Register did some quick math, based on IBM’s global employment numbers. “With about 288,000 employees worldwide at the end of 2023, the ‘very low single digit percentage’ possibilities for 2024 might be 1 percent (2,880 layoffs), 2 percent (5,760 layoffs), 3 percent (8,640 layoffs), or more,” the Register story noted.
It also noted, “last year, CEO Arvind Krishna said IBM expected to replace around 7,800 jobs with AI, though no specific time frame was provided.”
Andersen said that the AI reference was to generative AI, and that it was far too early to have IBM layoffs due to that. “Is it genAI? I don’t buy it. it’s a little too far ahead now. Maybe two years from now,” he said. He estimated that such IBM genAI layoffs wouldn’t happen until late 2026.
Andersen couldn’t directly confirm that these are the layoffs that IBM talked about in January, but he has seen anecdotal evidence that the layoffs have happened.
Over the last few months, he said, “I have seen twice as many people leaving IBM for whatever reason than the previous six months. And IBM is not the only one doing this.”
Andersen stressed that he seriously doubts that IBM is doing anything that will get them into trouble with age- or gender-related issues.
“IBM doesn’t necessarily look at it demographically. They look at it functionally in terms of individual contributors in a group versus managers — explicitly, because IBM has been called out on this this so many times, there are a number of reviews to prevent any type of -ism,” Andersen said. Sometimes he has seen the company go in the opposite direction. “Maybe this person is a poor performer, but they may get a second chance because it might possibly be seen as ageism or sexism.”
He sees many of the layoffs as related to cloud cutbacks, as enterprises rebalance their on-prem versus cloud environments. Many enterprises, he said, went too far into the cloud at the beginning of the pandemic in 2020.
That’s where the definition of ‘AI’ comes into play. Today, most AI workforce reduction references involve genAI. But he does see some of the cloud reductions being driven by greater efficiencies due to IT automation and automated IT operations. Given that much of the sophisticated automation at IBM is leveraging other forms of AI, most likely machine learning, one could say that AI is a little bit involved in these layoffs — just not genAI.
Symbol Zero CEO Rafael Brown said that IBM was one of many companies that over hired during the start of the pandemic, and this is a correction. Back in 2020, IBM “anticipated, they made some guesses, and they were wrong. If they hired slower, as Apple did, they wouldn’t be cutting back as much as they are,” Brown said.
Brown said that another factor that is playing into this situation is the return to offices movement, and the move away from remote sites including home offices.
“Large tech companies are boiling the frog on return to work,” Brown said, “and creating a culture of fear that if you don’t come back in, you’re going to get laid off.”
Some of this may also be manipulative, he said, suggesting that CEOs are hoping that a demand for five days in the office will encourage people to quit, which is a lot cheaper than having to lay them off.
“My kudos for Nvidia that they haven’t pushed people back into offices,” Brown said, adding that Nvidia is hiring away a lot of the people who were pushed into return to the office at other high tech companies. But, ironically, he said, Nvidia is finding that a lot of the managers they are hiring are themselves insisting on workers returning to the office.
IBM has apparently begun layoffs of as many as 8,000 people — layoffs that were announced back in January. But those layoffs are avoiding the age-related criticisms of IBM’s past and are also too early to reflect the IBM-promised generative artificial intelligence (genAI) layoffs, according to Jason Andersen, a former IBM manager who today serves as VP/principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy.
Andersen said his overall take on the layoffs is that “it was a bit of a yawn,” given IBM’s January announcement and Big Blue’s recent workforce reduction efforts. “IBM has used this tactic of kind of quietly laying people off for many, many years,” said Andersen, who spent more than eight years as a senior product manager at IBM, leaving in 2008. He works with IBM today as an analyst.
IBM spokesperson Sarah Minkel emailed a rather vague statement to Computerworld that seemed to confirm the layoffs: “Early this year, IBM disclosed a workforce rebalancing charge that would represent a very low single digit percentage of IBM’s global workforce, and we still expect to exit 2024 at roughly the same level of employment as we entered with.”
The Register did some quick math, based on IBM’s global employment numbers. “With about 288,000 employees worldwide at the end of 2023, the ‘very low single digit percentage’ possibilities for 2024 might be 1 percent (2,880 layoffs), 2 percent (5,760 layoffs), 3 percent (8,640 layoffs), or more,” the Register story noted.
It also noted, “last year, CEO Arvind Krishna said IBM expected to replace around 7,800 jobs with AI, though no specific time frame was provided.”
Andersen said that the AI reference was to generative AI, and that it was far too early to have IBM layoffs due to that. “Is it genAI? I don’t buy it. it’s a little too far ahead now. Maybe two years from now,” he said. He estimated that such IBM genAI layoffs wouldn’t happen until late 2026.
Andersen couldn’t directly confirm that these are the layoffs that IBM talked about in January, but he has seen anecdotal evidence that the layoffs have happened.
Over the last few months, he said, “I have seen twice as many people leaving IBM for whatever reason than the previous six months. And IBM is not the only one doing this.”
Andersen stressed that he seriously doubts that IBM is doing anything that will get them into trouble with age- or gender-related issues.
“IBM doesn’t necessarily look at it demographically. They look at it functionally in terms of individual contributors in a group versus managers — explicitly, because IBM has been called out on this this so many times, there are a number of reviews to prevent any type of -ism,” Andersen said. Sometimes he has seen the company go in the opposite direction. “Maybe this person is a poor performer, but they may get a second chance because it might possibly be seen as ageism or sexism.”
He sees many of the layoffs as related to cloud cutbacks, as enterprises rebalance their on-prem versus cloud environments. Many enterprises, he said, went too far into the cloud at the beginning of the pandemic in 2020.
That’s where the definition of ‘AI’ comes into play. Today, most AI workforce reduction references involve genAI. But he does see some of the cloud reductions being driven by greater efficiencies due to IT automation and automated IT operations. Given that much of the sophisticated automation at IBM is leveraging other forms of AI, most likely machine learning, one could say that AI is a little bit involved in these layoffs — just not genAI.
Symbol Zero CEO Rafael Brown said that IBM was one of many companies that over hired during the start of the pandemic, and this is a correction. Back in 2020, IBM “anticipated, they made some guesses, and they were wrong. If they hired slower, as Apple did, they wouldn’t be cutting back as much as they are,” Brown said.
Brown said that another factor that is playing into this situation is the return to offices movement, and the move away from remote sites including home offices.
“Large tech companies are boiling the frog on return to work,” Brown said, “and creating a culture of fear that if you don’t come back in, you’re going to get laid off.”
Some of this may also be manipulative, he said, suggesting that CEOs are hoping that a demand for five days in the office will encourage people to quit, which is a lot cheaper than having to lay them off.
“My kudos for Nvidia that they haven’t pushed people back into offices,” Brown said, adding that Nvidia is hiring away a lot of the people who were pushed into return to the office at other high tech companies. But, ironically, he said, Nvidia is finding that a lot of the managers they are hiring are themselves insisting on workers returning to the office.
The UN Secretary-General’s Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence has released its final report — “Governing AI for Humanity” — detailing how AI can best serve humanity, especially people who are often underrepresented and left out of such discussions.
The report builds on months of extensive global consultation with more than 2,000 participants and the publication of a provisional report last December. The group behind the report is described as the world’s first and most representative collection of experts capable of reflecting humanity’s aspirations for AI.
The final report sets out a plan to manage AI-related risks and share the technology’s potential globally. Among other things, it calls for the foundation to be laid for the first globally inclusive and distributed architecture for AI governance based on international cooperation. It also proposes seven recommendations to address shortcomings in current AI governance and calls on all governments and stakeholders to cooperate in overseeing AI to promote the development and protection of all human rights.
Beginning with the new year, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy wants his employees back in the office five days a week, returning to an office routine that was common before the COVID-19 pandemic upended the workplace.
The backlash from employees was nearly instantaneous, as they berated Jassy — and the return-to-work policy — and vowed to quit. Others demanded raises in exchange for in-office work requirements.
Industry analysts were not surprised by the reaction, and said back-to-office mandates more often than not have the exact opposite effect as intended.
According to the employee memo released this week, Jassy believes being back in the office will help boost employee training, bolster collaboration, and strengthen culture.
“If anything, the last 15 months we’ve been back in the office at least three days a week has strengthened our conviction about the benefits,” Jassy wrote. “We understand that some of our teammates may have set up their personal lives in such a way that returning to the office consistently five days per week will require some adjustments. To help ensure a smooth transition, we’re going to make this new expectation active on January 2, 2025.”
In fact, a study performed in May indicated mandatory return-to-office (RTO) policies could lead to higher quit rates compared with companies that allow remote or hybrid work. The study by the University of Michigan and University of Chicago found that three large US tech companies — Microsoft, Apple and SpaceX — saw substantially increased attrition, particularly among more senior personnel, when they implemented strict return-to-work policies in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Forcing employees to quit, however, might be exactly what Amazon wants, according to J. P. Gownder, a vice president analyst with Forrester Research. “There is a chance that Amazon is hoping to induce a level of voluntary attrition with this move in lieu of layoffs. Unfortunately, the best talent often has choices, and most don’t want to work in an office five days a week,” Gownder said.
In his memo, Jassy also outlined a plan to reduce managers, saying that “will remove layers and flatten organizations more than they are today. If we do this work well, it will increase our teammates’ ability to move fast, clarify and invigorate their sense of ownership,” he wrote.
Amazon’s mandate puts the company in the minority, according to recent research. Among employees with jobs that can be done remotely, 43% work hybrid, 22% work fully remote, and 35% work in the office full time.
“Amazon’s decision may just compromise its promise to be ‘Earth’s best employer,’” said Gownder. “The macro data shows that pre-pandemic nostalgia is not a post-pandemic reality. Other companies should not follow suit.”
Abandoning hybrid work policies will negatively affect employee experience — particularly recruiting, retention, and diversity — impacting productivity and, potentially, the bottom line, according to Gownder.
Flexible hybrid work policies are the gold standard, research has shown. According to a Stanford University study, only 17.6% of employees who can work from home say they want to work in an office five days a week.
A June study by McKinsey & Co. showed organizations where employees work in multiple locations (at home, in the office, or at client sites) are more likely to see 10% or greater revenue growth than companies where employees work from a single location.
Another McKinsey study revealed that employees consistently point to greater productivity and reduced burnout as primary benefits of flexible work policies. Flexibility is especially important to women, who report having more focused time to work when working remotely, the study showed.
Across industries, employees are also doing the bare minimum to meet in-office mandates. For example, some are simply showing up long enough to get credit for being there before returning home to work — a practice known as “coffee badging.”
To determine what stops people from coming into the office, workplace management software maker Robin Powered surveyed nearly 600 full-time employees at companies that had flexible work policies. The survey revealed that while RTO mandates are everywhere, they aren’t sticking. Forty-five percent of those surveyed said their company’s mandates required them to be in the office at least four days a week, yet only 24% adhered to the policy.
In fact, 46% of respondents said that the reason they don’t come into the office is because they believe they are more productive with their at-home work setup. They frequently cited feeling more productive at home (71%) and not having the right resources at their desk (76%).
Amazon’s planned move to five days a week flies in the face of a positive employee experience, according to Gownder. “Consistently, studies show that hybrid [work] drives higher levels of employee productivity,” Gownder said. “Offices have their own distractions, plus onerous commutes. Employees do best at individual level work when they can customize their environments and schedules.
Employee experience, Gownder pointed out, is a central driver of productivity, employee retention, and business results. “And when employees feel valued, have purpose, possess a degree of autonomy, and feel trusted, they perform better,” he said.
“Offices, by comparison, are great for collaborative exercises that involve brainstorming, team bonding, and certain types of decision-making,” he said. “However, these collaborations can usually be accomplished in a couple of days per week.”
Europe’s bureaucrats continue to do their best to ensure Apple is forced to sell the world’s worst operating system, announcing plans to force Apple to open up its systems even more than it already has.
In a triumph of bureaucratic doublespeak, the European Union doesn’t argue that it’s attempting to force the issue. Instead, it says it wants to “assist” Apple. “Today, the European Commission has started two specification proceedings to assist Apple in complying with its interoperability obligations under the Digital Markets Act (‘DMA’),” the group says. Then it goes on to insist: “Under the DMA, Apple must provide free and effective interoperability to third party developers and businesses with hardware and software features controlled by Apple’s operating systems iOS and iPadOS, designated under the DMA.”
Bureaucrats versus innovators
To some extent, this might not represent too big a change. The EU has been actively pursuing its edicts against the company; now, the DMA gives regulators new power in the form of specification proceedings. Under the DMA, these proceedings are prescriptive.
What that means is Europe might, “adopt a decision specifying the measures a gatekeeper has to implement to ensure effective compliance with substantive DMA obligations, such as the interoperability obligation.”
In other words, the rules effectively give regulators the power to tell Apple what it must do to comply with the DMA or face huge fines.
What the Commission is looking at
The latest news is that the European Commission has launched two proceedings against Apple:
The first proceeding focuses on “iOS connectivity features and functionalities, predominantly used for and by connected devices.” (That is everything from watches to headsets.) These devices depend on being interoperable with smartphones and their operating systems. “The Commission intends to specify how Apple will provide effective interoperability with functionalities such as notifications, device pairing and connectivity.”
The second proceeding focuses on the process Apple has set up to address interoperability requests submitted by developers and third parties. Europe wants that process to be “transparent, timely, and fair.” It wants this so all developers have an “effective and predictable path to interoperability and are enabled to innovate.”
(Critics like me may think this means non tech-savvy bureaucrats have suddenly been elevated to the status product designers, with all the lack of nuance that almost certainly entails. Will future operating systems sold in Europe all suffer from the fate of being designed by committee?)
There may be more clarity
If there is anything good in Europe’s latest wheeze, it is clarity. In a sense, it formalizes ongoing dialog between Europe and Apple regarding DMA compliance.
Margrethe Vestager, executive vice president in charge of competition policy, said: “This process will provide clarity for developers, third parties and Apple. We will continue our dialogue with Apple and consult third parties to ensure that the proposed measures work in practice and meet the needs of businesses.”
While that may sound a little like escaping gas, it hopefully means Apple and Europe will be able to clarify the rules around the DMA enough to ensure new products and services launch in Europe in ways that comply with the law.
This clarity might also enable Apple Intelligence to launch in Europe, hopefully without that launch becoming a green light to attack on personal privacy. (In this regard, the DMA may conflict fatally with GDPR.)
What does Europe want?
What Europe wants we will learn in a few months’ time, when the Commission tells Apple what it must do to comply. Meanwhile, of course, Europe reserves the right to levy fines against the company.
These fresh demands come in the context of Apple’s continued attempts to tweak its operating systems and business models to meet Europe’s existing demands. While that effort remains a work in progress, as illustrated by the company’s recent changes in how it handles browser choice in Europe, it is ongoing. As I understand it, Apple is working as closely as it can with European regulators to find some way toward compliance that still leaves customer privacy and security intact — while still giving it a viable business in the EU.
Is Europe a worthwhile iPhones market?
The need to ensure Apple’s business is viable might turn out to be a very big deal. Europe has already fined Apple billions to protect the interests of European firm Spotify. It has clawed back (as Apple sees it) $14 billion in tax money. And yet, at least according to John Gruber, the EU contributes perhaps 7% of Apple’s global revenue.
This opens up new questions.
At what point will it make sense for Apple to cease sales of iPhones and iPads in the region, rather than risk more of these eye-watering fines?
If Apple does that, how is the Commission representing European consumer rights by making the cost of Apple doing business there higher than the consequences of withdrawing from the region?
What impact would such an exit have on the multi-billion dollar app economy across the region, particularly as Apple continues to invest in fast-emerging markets elsewhere on Terra Ferma.
In 2020, Apple supported more than 1.8 million jobs in Europe and in the five years prior to that it spent over 65 billion Euros with suppliers and partners across the region. What would be the economic consequences of Apple focusing outside the bloc?
With all this in mind, I can’t help but think that perhaps the real gatekeeper harming consumer interests in this case is actually Vestager.
The United Nations’ High-Level Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence, created last year to address AI governance issues, has made seven recommendations to address the risks with this technology in its first report, just published.
The document, entitled Governing AI for humanity, highlights the importance of creating a global dialogue — the European Union is one of the few to have acted with its EU AI Act — by building a global fund that addresses differences in capacity and collaboration and exchange standards.
And it warns of the dangers that AI can pose if it can be controlled in the market by only a few multinationals. “There is a risk that technology could be imposed on people without them having a say in how it is used,” it says.
Google landed a major antitrust victory on Wednesday as the EU’s Court of Justice annulled a $1.7 billion (€1.49 billion) antitrust fine against the search giant.
The EU court stated that the European Commission failed to fully consider all relevant factors regarding the duration of the abusive contract clauses. The court, however, upheld most of the Commission’s findings.
“By today’s judgment, the General Court, after having upheld the majority of the Commission’s findings, concludes that that institution committed errors in its assessment of the duration of the clauses at issue, as well as of the market covered by them in 2016,” the court said in a statement.
The European Commission, in its 2019 ruling, had accused Google of exploiting its market dominance by restricting websites from using ad brokers other than its AdSense service for search ads.
This would come as a relief for Google, which is facing other legal challenges. Just last week, the European Data Protection Commission (DPC) opened an inquiry into its use of personal data.
In August, a US District Court ruled that the tech giant is a monopoly, accusing it of leveraging its dominance in the online search market to hinder competition. A separate trial centered on its advertising business also commenced this month.
Meanwhile, in a separate ruling, Qualcomm failed to get the EU penalty imposed on it overturned, highlighting contrasting outcomes for the two major players in their ongoing regulatory battles with European authorities.
Implications for Big Tech
The Google ruling could influence future antitrust investigations and enforcement in the region, potentially leading to a more balanced and competitive environment, though the long-term impact remains uncertain.
“In this instance, the ruling is favorable for Big Tech as it signals a shift toward a more balanced approach to antitrust enforcement, taking into account both market impact and consumer welfare,” said Thomas George, president of Cybermedia Research. “This victory could foster a competitive environment where the constant threat of sanctions does not stifle growth and innovation.”
However, the court’s citation of errors in the Commission’s investigation, including issues with its definitions, suggests that a likely outcome is the Commission adopting a more cautious approach moving forward.
“While this is a significant win for Google, it is worth noting that the court largely agreed with the arguments against the company, and the annulment was largely driven by the commission’s failure to build a strong case,” said Mayank Maria, vice president of Everest Group.
Maria added that this suggests there may not be a significant shift in the bloc’s approach toward Big Tech in the near future, even as new leaders take charge of two key roles — the antitrust chief and the digital chief — responsible for regulating Big Tech practices in the EU. Earlier this week, the European Commission appointed a new team to lead the institution for the next five years.
Qualcomm ruling in contrast
In Qualcomm’s case, the company secured a slight reduction of its EU antitrust fine, lowering the penalty to $266 million (€238.7 million) from the original $270 million (€242 million), but the court dismissed its other claims.
The fine, handed down by the European Commission in 2019, was based on claims that Qualcomm engaged in predatory pricing from 2009 to 2011, selling chipsets below cost to undercut British software firm Icera, now owned by Nvidia.
Compared to the Google ruling, Qualcomm’s failure to successfully appeal its fine highlights a different set of challenges, underscoring the varied regulatory issues impacting different areas of the technology sector, according to George. “As for its relevance to the semiconductor and chip markets, this ruling reinforces the substantial restrictions these markets will continue to face, particularly concerning competitive practices,” George said. “Competition within the semiconductor space could drive businesses to address issues like predatory pricing and stricter antitrust enforcement.”
