mpantone

AppleZulu said:

Is there any indication that this might eventually be enabled on existing vehicles?

This is addressed in the last paragraph of the article:

"...and will be available for existing Aston Martin vehicles in the U.S. and Canada featuring the brand's next-generation infotainment system in the coming weeks through a software update available at local dealers."

It is safe to assume that it will be up to each manufacturer to decide whether or not to do the extra programming work to bring the CarPlay Ultra to vehicles already on the road. Most likely it will be a model-by-model decision with a higher chance of it being deployed on more expensive, premium trims.

In the old days, the car you bought is the car you live with. I don't think anyone should be entitled to think that they deserve all of the latest features when nothing like that was promised when they signed the sales contract. I certainly don't expect CarPlay Ultra to magically appear in my 20-year-old Toyota. 

However most people aren't in the habit of changing their automobiles often so bringing the CarPlay Ultra feature to existing recent vehicles demonstrates some goodwill. 

It is clear there was a fundamental shift about ten years ago about what constitutes an automobile. They're basically computers with wheels these days. At some point, manufacturers may start charging extra for infotainment software upgrades in existing vehicles. It's not like software engineers work for free.

It's really up to the individual manufacturer who will have to assess the value of the additional engineering effort. There is plenty of precedence for this. Tesla Full Self-Driving Mode (FSD) is an extra charge and GM's OnStar satellite connectivity was a recurring subscription fee after a complimentary first year. Today's consumers are now accustomed to recurring charges (like streaming music/video or satellite connectivity on phones) so at some point car infotainment upgrade fees might be tolerated (albeit not embraced with open arms). It'll take just one manufacturer to start imposing fees and then soon the most of their competitors will follow suit.

Tim & Co. don't want to serve niche markets. As we all know, they pulled the plug on the popular iPhone mini series after just two releases, abandoning a market that is unserved by the competition. Maybe the margins were too low. And I can't imagine the margins on an iPhone Thin will be much better (apart from a simpler camera module). They also ditched the "low cost" plasticky iPhone 5c after one release.

For there to be any growth in their iPhone business, they need to focus on emerging markets not to chase the 1% of their mature markets that might want to upgrade to something flashier. In the end it's still just another phone. The iPhone Thin won't do anything better than the standard iPhone; the leakers and rumor mongers have only said it'll be thin, there are no other unique features that will set the handset apart.

I'm still baffled why they would want to market an iPhone Thin. Sure, the initial model will sell well but I don't see any other reason for its existence other than pure aesthetics. For sure it's not going to be the performance champion nor will it be priced as an entry level model. Yes, we'll see it all over Instagram and Tik Tok but that's not going to build the user base in Ivory Coast or Bangladesh.

I truly doubt anyone from Apple management reads the forum comments at Apple news sites however hopefully they will understand that they squandered a LOT of customer trust from Batterygate.

While they continued to state that they did not intentionally slow down older iPhones to get people to buy new devices public perception is everything.

I still have a bad taste from Batterygate and I also resent Apple's battery replacement costs. I paid them to replace the battery in an iPhone XS recently and I will probably be paying them even more to replace one in an iPhone 12 mini in the next year.

They will need to explicitly state what their AI is doing. Personally I think they should leave it turned off by default. Apple Intelligence is already pretty weak in the features they have deployed to date and many (including myself) will be very skeptical about Apple Intelligence's ability to do this correctly when/if the feature launches.

For sure if this ever appears in my iPhone's Settings, I will disable it, wait six months, read analyses and reports about its effectiveness and then decide whether or not to enable it. I don't even trust the Optimized Battery Charging feature that is currently available.

davebarnes said:

Are consumers clamoring for thinner phones?
For me, thicker with a better camera would be more desirable.

For me, thicker with a longer- lasting battery would be preferred.

MOST consumers would agree with you. We know that today's consumer prioritizes display brightness, camera quality, and battery performance in their smartphones.

However not everyone shares your exact usage case.

Is there a large enough segment of the market that will sustain thin smartphones? Only time will tell however we do know that the small and vocal group of small phone enthusiasts weren't enough to keep the iPhone mini alive. And no other major smartphone manufacturer has made iPhone mini-sized handsets for years either.

I think smartphones are already thick enough I really don't want to carry anything larger or heavier. Better battery technology and power management would be a boon for everyone on all iPhone models. Improvements in camera technology are always welcome too, we have enjoyed so many performance improvements over the years especially in low light photography/videography which was abysmal on early iPhone/iPod touch/iPad generations.

My gut feeling is that the purported thin "iPhone Air" will have an initial pop of interest and then wane over time. It may end up meeting the same demise as the iPhone mini and be discontinued after two generations.

I own an iPod touch 6th generation so I know what a very thin handheld device is like. But the iPod touch 6th generation also has abysmal battery performance, despite the CPU being underclocked to save power. Naturally today's silicon is more energy efficient and today's battery technology has improved but it's still a compromise. More performance = faster battery drain.

For the iPhone Air to work Apple will need to make significant compromises to maintain decent battery performance. These compromises might be acceptable for typical everyday usage but might be a severe detriment in more demanding situations, like going on vacation and using your phone heavily (photos, videos, mapping, web surfing, research) while you're out of the hotel room for 16-18 hours straight.

Apple doesn't like to be in the market of niche iPhones and the iPhone Air smacks of being niche.

If Apple does release an iPhone Air I'm sure I'll drop by the local Apple Store and check it out though. But I'm not shelling out $1000 for a phone that gets poorer battery life than my trusty old iPhone 12 mini. Hell, I'd rather upgrade to the iPhone 16 or 16e instead of this purported Air. And I don't know if I can go back to a one-lens camera from a two-lens camera. The wide-angle lens is particularly useful to me, much more than telephoto. Even on my old film cameras I'd usually mount a wide-angle lens.

AppleInsider said:

Businesses will start paying the price for those moves, if they haven't already. That toll has already begun on the already beleaguered Main Street retail, and will expand to the bigger guys soon enough.

There are already red warning lights all over the U.S. economy.

Incoming container ship traffic to the Port of Los Angeles has massively slowed down. Expedia revised their 2025 forecast because travel bookings are down. Airlines taking aircraft out of service, cutting back on flights. My guess is next summer (2026) will show an even larger slowdown in foreign travel to the USA.

This is going to hit Main Street USA much harder than the Fortune 100 corporations who can pass along increased costs more easily.

And as others have mentioned, foreign trust in the USA -- built up over decades -- both as a world leader and a safe haven for investment has been carelessly wiped out in 100 days. The rest of the world no longer sees the USA as a friendly ally and trading partner. The tumbling dollar is a serious issue.

Unfortunately, this is going to hit the wallets of the middle class extremely hard, the ones who voted for the current administration. The more affluent and urban centers on the coasts and in major metropolitan areas are more financially equipped to ride out the storm. But everyone will have to tighten their belts.

And no, USA isn't going to wake up tomorrow and see a new iPhone factory from their bedroom window.

Today's pop in the stock market is just a false sense of relief. The damage is already done and we'll start seeing more of it this fall. But ask anyone in the leisure & hospitality businesses how their summer is looking and you'll get a lot of frowns.

And there are tons of weird scenarios that the average American voter doesn't get. Things like American chicken farmers losing the Chinese market for chicken feet; there's no domestic market for those pieces. Same with American fishermen and leftover fishheads. Chinese will buy them, Americans won't touch them. Hell, many Americans don't even eat fish. There's simply no domestic market for these.

If fishermen can't get any overseas revenue from fishheads due to exorbitant tariffs, that salmon steak you buy at the grocery store is going to get more expensive, even if the US-flagged boat left and returned to an American port. And that same salmon served to you at a restaurant is also going to be a few dollars higher next year.