2025-09-12 23:07:30
While Microsoft and OpenAI will only give you 49 words to update their (beyond complicated) situation, I give you nearly 3,000 in an attempt to translate why they're even bothering to publish those 49 words in a joint statement on both corporate blogs, no less. Again, it's complicated. But the high-level may be decidedly straightforward: the race is officially on to convert OpenAI into a PBC.
M.G. Siegler
Spyglass Signal is a newsletter sent on weekdays featuring links and commentary from M.G. Siegler on timely topics found around the web.
I was right in what I wrote about Paramount's strategy – I just didn't think it would take over a year to close the deal and start executing upon it...
M.G. Siegler
Fred Vogelstein looks back at the news aggregator of choice for so many of us, for so long. He also talks to Gabe Rivera about the state of the business and why the site looks almost exactly as it did in 2005. Gabe is a good friend of mine but wasn't in the site's early days when I would pester him over email about why my obviously excellent blog posts weren't on Techmeme. He nicely responded to those emails, though not in the nicest way, essentially noting that my posts added nothing to the topic. Which I didn't appreciate at the time, but now I do. Mediagazer, a sister site, launched later, remains great on days like this too. Happy 20th Techmeme, next year, drinks on me. 🍻🎂 [Crazy Stupid Tech]
"An iPhone for the Ozempic era."
– Sam Schube, describing the iPhone Air, in his piece for The Wall Street Journal.
His sit down with several Apple executives including Tim Cook, is unsurprisingly fluffy. But it's also another data point that I brought up in my own piece on the unveiling: that Apple is explicitly trying to lean back into the design narrative that has long differentiated them. This is mainly about the fashion aspect of the device (and the new crossbody straps) but also the internal debate people might be having for the first time in a while when it comes to picking an iPhone model: Air or Pro?
Cook, of course, says he won't choose and will use both. 🙄
Below, members of The Inner Ring will find thoughts on:
• Larry Ellison Riding the AI Wave
• A Protocol for AI Data Licensing
• No AirPods Translation in the EU
• MountDance WarBroDisco
• and more...
2025-09-12 17:47:05
It seems like OpenAI has solved their Microsoft problem. Well, maybe. Tentatively, at least. Pending some pesky details. Details they'd rather not talk about right now, while still letting us all know they're on the same page via a 49-word statement published to both of their corporate blogs at the same time. The statement is so short that the images in each overshadows the text.1 The joint statement, in full:
OpenAI and Microsoft have signed a non-binding memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the next phase of our partnership. We are actively working to finalize contractual terms in a definitive agreement. Together, we remain focused on delivering the best AI tools for everyone, grounded in our shared commitment to safety.
It's settled then. Of course, it's not actually or it would be finalized. But there's clearly some reason they'd like us to know they're working on it!
Experience and common sense suggests that they're trying to get ahead of something. And, in fact, there are a lot of tangential stories floating around out there that could explain the announcement. The biggest one is probably the two key states involved in the matter of OpenAI shifting to a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC), Delaware (where OpenAI is incorporated) and California (where OpenAI resides), are clearly not happy about the recent news around the company being tied to recent tragedies, as ChatGPT, at best, didn't help vulnerable users who seemed to be in bad mental states of mind before taking their own lives and in one case, the lives of others. This narrative has been simmering for some time and now it's boiling over, with the state AGs specifically suggesting the move away from non-profit status may not be the right decision.
This is a big enough problem that there are now whispers of the company debating shifting their domicile elsewhere (which OpenAI has denied). And mixed with their main benefactor Microsoft also apparently blocking the transition – not to mention their original backer and co-founder, Elon Musk, trying to constantly throw wrenches into the process and you have... well, a shitshow.
Alleviating the Microsoft portion of this situation is an important step, but not the only one here. But it should help the company continue to make the case for the PBC transition, which they had hoped would happen this year, but reportedly was pushed into next year because of the impasse with Microsoft. Again, that impasse is now being cleared – well, they're working on it. To me, that suggests OpenAI is very much trying to make this happen this year still.
And yes, contractually they're incentivized to do this because as has been widely reported, OpenAI's new big benefactor, SoftBank, had the right not to fund the remainder of their portion of the $40B fundraise if the company didn't transition by the end of the year. Now there's almost no way SoftBank was going to back out of that agreement regardless – I mean, they're buying up secondary shares right now at $500B, which is significantly higher than the shares they're buying in the primary transaction. They'd be crazy not to take the automatic markup of their money which they can still invest at $300B!
But we're too in the weeds now. The key is that solving this Microsoft situation was perhaps the main element in trying to get a transition done any time soon. And even without the SoftBank deal pressure, the pressure from those states is now far more acute. One imagines that OpenAI wants to get this done quickly before they're sucked into endless political hearing about AI's role in the mental health crisis – which is clearly about to happen.
If that's true, one has to wonder what OpenAI conceded to Microsoft here to get them on board, fast. Again, they're not saying because they're still negotiating, but clearly a big part of it is "The Clause". That is, the stipulation in the original contract that Microsoft would lose access to OpenAI's technology if the company achieved AGI. It's decidedly more complicated than that, including in the who gets to decide what constitutes "AGI" (namely OpenAI's board, which is now a totally different board, composed of people will completely different backgrounds, than the one that was supposed to be determining it), and if Microsoft retained access to "older" AI technology, but the high-level was clearly a problem for Microsoft.
And it keeps coming up because Sam Altman on down has kept hinting that the company may be close to achieving "AGI". It was clearly pissing off Satya Nadella, who made that more or less known, and so talk suddenly shifted to "superintelligence", which is totally different, you see.
At the same time, a lesser known part of "The Clause" apparently also blocked Microsoft itself from going after AGI. This undoubtedly didn't matter to the company at the time of the agreement, but since then – well, things have changed. Including "the blip" – the brief moment in time when Altman was ousted from OpenAI, only to be quickly reinstated with the help of Nadella – which torpedoed the trust between the two sides and led to Microsoft inventing the "hackquisition" process (born out of the way they almost hired all of OpenAI during said blip) to take on Inflection AI talent and bring DeepMind co-founder Mustafa Suleyman on board to lead new AI efforts internal to Microsoft.
Over the past many months, all we've heard is how there was nothing to see to all of this. But of course there was. Including the notion that Microsoft was building their own smaller models because they were deferring to OpenAI for the "frontier" models. Yes, they were doing that because they couldn't build models going after AGI, per "The Clause". But some news this week may be hinting of a big change there – here's Tom Warren reporting for The Verge:
Microsoft AI launched its first in-house models last month, adding to the already complicated relationship with its OpenAI partner. Now, Microsoft AI chief Mustafa Suleyman says the company is making “significant investments” in the compute capacity required to Microsoft’s own future frontier models.
“We should have the capacity to build world class frontier models in house of all sizes, but we should be very pragmatic and use other models where we need to,” said Suleyman during Microsoft’s employee-only town hall on Thursday. “We’re also going to be making significant investments in our own cluster, so today MAI-1-preview was only trained on 15,000 H100s, a tiny cluster in the grand scheme of things.”
Interesting, he continues:
Suleyman hinted that Microsoft has ambitions to train models that are comparable to Meta, Google, and xAI’s efforts on clusters that are “six to ten times larger in size” than what Microsoft used for its MAI-1-preview. “Much more to do, but it’s good to take the first steps,” said Suleyman.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said at the same town hall that he’s “looking forward to us building model capability, so that we can build model-forward products.” Nadella also made it clear that Microsoft will “definitely support multiple models” in its products, and highlighted GitHub Copilot as “the best example” of that strategy.
Yeah, so this news is trickling out of Microsoft's internal meetings. Meanwhile, so is the news that Microsoft may start using Anthropic's models to power Copilot, as Aaron Holmes also scooped this week for The Information. I mean, what?! Microsoft has done a few moves to hedge their bets – including, of course the aforementioned Inflection deal – but this is OpenAI's main competitor replacing them in Microsoft's core AI product. Uhh...
So yeah, what's going on here? Well, in the reporting around the 49-word joint statement, we have this tidbit from Karen Weise and Cade Metz for The New York Times:
As part of their new deal, Microsoft and OpenAI have renegotiated the financial terms of a commercial agreement they signed in 2019. The deal includes how the two companies share technology and how they share revenue from those technologies.
The original agreement also included a clause that rescinded Microsoft’s access to OpenAI’s most powerful technology when the OpenAI board formally decided that the technology had achieved “artificial general intelligence,” or A.G.I., shorthand for a machine that matches the power of the human brain.
This clause remains part of the new agreement but has been modified, according to a person familiar with the agreement who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it.
"The Clause" "remains" but, it's modified. And my guess would be that it's modified such that Microsoft is also now free to pursue AGI and/or superintelligence, and anything else they wish. I'm also guessing they'll also retain some form of access to OpenAI's technologies beyond 2030 – the other aspect of the contract Microsoft had reportedly wanted to change. Again, Microsoft seemingly holds the cards here with the sign-off sword in hand and with all the other issues swirling around OpenAI...
At the same time, another big hold up in any agreement between OpenAI and Microsoft was said to be the future equity stake in the event of a conversion. Because of the non-profit status, Microsoft, alongside all other investors just technically hold rights to future profits at the moment. Those will convert to actual equity with the PBC switch, but it wasn't tenable for Microsoft to hold the same 49% they hold in those profit rights (and it's actually more than that as it starts higher, closer to 75% to start up until a certain amount).
And Microsoft probably doesn't even want such a stake, optically. Regulators might note that say, 49% is a mere percent or two below majority control. The second biggest company in the world suddenly controlling the largest AI company? Yeah, not the best optics there.
My guess has long been that they would net out around a 33% stake in OpenAI. And subsequent reporting seemingly backed this up. There's no word on that stake here yet, but tangential to that, there is word on the stake the non-profit would hold going forward. In fact, it comes in the form of another post on the corporate blog. This one, by Chairman of the Board Bret Taylor, is a whole 324 words. The key words:
As previously announced and as outlined in our non-binding MOU with Microsoft, the OpenAI nonprofit’s ongoing control would now be paired with an equity stake in the PBC. Today, we are sharing that this new equity stake would exceed $100 billion—making it one of the most well-resourced philanthropic organizations in the world. This recapitalization would also enable us to raise the capital required to accomplish our mission—and ensure that as OpenAI’s PBC grows, so will the nonprofit’s resources, allowing us to bring it to historic levels of community impact.
Yes, he puts an actual value – well, a rough value – on the stake. Why? Because it sounds good, of course. Holy shit, $100B? For a non-profit? This has been OpenAI's comms approach to the conversion since they had to move away from a full-on for-profit shift to the PBC move a few months back (amidst a lot of pressure making it clear that wouldn't happen without meaningful protection of the remaining non-profit). Not only will the non-profit remain, and remain in control, it will be the best capitalized non-profit ever, the story goes. And it's probably not wrong! But it's also clearly PR meant to sway those states holding the keys to the conversion kingdom:
This structure reaffirms that our core mission remains ensuring AGI benefits all of humanity. Our PBC charter and governance will establish that safety decisions must always be guided by this mission. We continue to work with the California and Delaware Attorneys General as an important part of strengthening our approach, and we remain committed to learning and acting with urgency to ensure our tools are helpful and safe for everyone, while advancing safety as an industry-wide priority.
And look, a $50M cherry on top too!
As part of this next phase, the OpenAI nonprofit has launched a call for applications for the first wave of a $50 million grant initiative to support nonprofit and community organizations in three areas: AI literacy and public understanding, community innovation, and economic opportunity. This is just the beginning. Our recapitalization would unlock the ability to do much more.
This blog post is also interesting because it reinforces my thought that OpenAI is going to try to execute this transition fast. Like imminently, perhaps. Which again, is why you give the non-statement statement on the Microsoft situation.
Back to the equity piece. Weise and Metz were also able to glean a bit more here:
The nonprofit that now manages OpenAI would become “one of the most well-resourced philanthropic organizations in the world,” Bret Taylor, OpenAI’s board chair, said in a blog post. The nonprofit’s stake will exceed 20 percent of the reorganized company, according to the person familiar with the deal.
A stake that would "exceed 20 percent" is also in line with my guesstimate a year ago that the non-profit would get 25% of the equity. So far, so good. One element that wasn't yet a part of OpenAI's cap table equation back then was SoftBank. And given that they've now shot past the $13B or so that Microsoft has put into OpenAI over the years, clearly their stake is going to be sizable as well upon conversion. One recent report pegs the target at 12%.
So Microsoft at 33%, the non-profit at 25%, and SoftBank at 12% nicely adds up to 70%. But there are many other stakeholders around the table to convert here, most notably Khosla Ventures and the other original investors alongside Microsoft. And then Thrive Capital, who has led a few of the later rounds. And many, many others. And none of that includes equity for Altman, who famously holds none at the moment. That has always been presumed to change with a conversion, but it can't be a massive percentage as we're running out of room, fast.
Oh yes, and what about that co-founder who put up the money to start the whole thing? He remains another big wrinkle here because he's undoubtedly going to argue that his grants to a non-profit should be considered investments for equity if OpenAI is allowed to convert (which he'd still prefer not happen as it makes life easier for his new AI startup competing with OpenAI, xAI). That is a total wildcard here. Imagine if a judge says OpenAI has to give Musk an equity slug...
Regardless, he's seemingly about to get very vocal as OpenAI is clearly accelerating towards the PBC conversion...
Point is, there's a lot going on at the moment and a lot more likely to go on from here. Things which a 49-word statement can't convey. But I can – in 2,500 words.
One more thing: Perhaps a bit less pressing given their current $40B fundraise, but at some point soon-ish, OpenAI does likely need to go public. Because the amount of money they're now projecting to burn is so astronomical, the only way to access it may be through the public markets and tangential instruments (especially given the equity dilution situation mentioned above). And the only path to go public is to move on from their non-profit status...
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
2025-09-12 04:38:49
In July of 2024, just after Skydance's bid to acquire Paramount was finally made official, I laid out some plans for what the newly merged company should do once the deal closes to best compete. And then the deal took over a year to actually close. Still, the ideas were pretty good, apparently. Because one of them is now on the verge of happening.
And it's a big one.
As I wrote incidentally exactly 14 months ago:
There's been a lot of talk amidst the Paramount dealings that WBD might be a good home/partner. What if, once the Skydance/Paramount deal is closed, *they actually buy WBD*? Yes, there are debt issues, but a year from now, hopefully WBD head David Zaslav will have a better answer and path there. Ellison has spoken a few times about Paramount+ in particular. Most assume they'll either spin it off or merge it with another player, like WBD's Max or Comcast's Peacock. And perhaps they will. But again, I'm not sure they shouldn't just buy all of WBD to bulk up into one of the major players themselves.
Well, here's Jessica Toonkel reporting for The Wall Street Journal today:
Paramount Skydance is preparing a majority cash bid for Warner Bros. Discovery that is backed by the Ellison family, according to people familiar with the situation.
The bid will be for the entire company, including its cable networks and movie studio, the people said. Warner said late last year it planned to restructure into two operating divisions, one focused on the legacy cable-television business and the other on streaming and studios.
Ooooh, that's a bingo. In fact, it's such a bingo that it may sound obvious now. But back then, it was anything but obvious – not only because Skydance was having a hell of a time getting to a deal with Paramount, but as alluded to up above, there was a lot of talk that WBD might be the more obvious buyer of Paramount because they were the much larger entity. And, in fact, they remain the much larger entity, which remains a main complication of such a deal, as Toonkel notes:
Such a deal would be a big swing. Warner Bros.’s nearly $33 billion market capitalization is more than double that of Paramount Skydance. A bid hasn’t yet been submitted and the plans could still fall apart.
And it's not just the fact that WBD is double the size of Paramount Skydance, it's also the mountain of debt WBD is carrying, as I noted back then. And yes, WBD chief David Zaslav has been able to clean it up a bit, but the main purge was set to occur when the company split in two next year – which wouldn't happen under this new offer.
In backing up the reporting, Brooks Barnes, Lauren Hirsch, and Benjamin Mullin note for The New York Times:
Mr. Ellison is interested in acquiring the entire company, in line with his strategy of doubling down on both streaming and traditional TV, according to the people with knowledge of the plans. The bid would be made mostly in cash.
A deal to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery would be costly. The company is worth $41 billion and has $35 billion in debt, remnants of the merger that brought it to life. But the Ellison family has the means: Larry Ellison, David Ellison’s father, is the co-founder of Oracle and one of the richest men in the world, with an estimated net worth of $383 billion, according to Bloomberg.
Just yesterday, the elder Ellison actually became the richest man in the world thanks to a surge in Oracle shares after their earnings report. So yeah, they have the cash to do this. But it's still going to be insanely expensive. And undoubtedly time-consuming, given the slog the first deal went through. But it also makes some sense from a pure bulking-up into a major player, perspective. Which is exactly why I suggested they might do it.
As for why now, back to Toonkel:
By preparing a play for the company before Warner’s planned split, Paramount Skydance is attempting to pre-empt a potential bidding war for the studio and streaming unit that could include deep-pocketed technology companies such as Amazon and Apple.
A week after I wrote about Paramount Skydance buying WBD, I was off to spend someone else's money – an old favorite, Tim Cook's. While my title made the case that Apple should by HBO, the post made the case for Apple beating Skydance Paramount to the punch and buying all of WBD. While it would obviously be a headache for Apple – and Apple obviously doesn't like headaches, in particular around M&A – there's also a number of reasons why such a deal could make sense, starting at the highest level that Apple wants content and WBD has content. Some of the best content. Yes, Apple could use it to boost Apple TV+, but such IP could work in all sorts of ways for Apple. All in the name of boosting the all-important Services business.
Anyway, for now, it looks like the Skydance Paramount + WBD dance begins. But no one should hold their breath too tightly because we've seen this movie before. It ultimately ended well, but it was a horror story for a while there.
One more thing: I still like the more recent idea I had to spend Skydance Paramount's money, even with this deal: buying IMAX.
Fine, two more things: the branding possibilities are endless here. Paramount Skydance Warner Bros Discovery? PSWBD? ParSkyWarBroDis? MountDance WarBroDisco? Winner.
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
2025-09-11 21:54:11
Since tomorrow's newsletter will go out after pre-order time and quite a few folks have pinged me apparently not having read all the way to the bottom of my 2,000-word post on the matter (😜), I'll just reiterate my intent is to buy the iPhone 17 Pro Max. Yes, in 'Cosmic Orange' which could get old fast but because fun.
And yes, I'm tempted by the iPhone Air, but ultimately, the camera and battery life matter far too much to me to "trade down". Apple did a nice job making it more compelling than I originally thought though!
Spyglass Signal is a newsletter sent on weekdays featuring links and commentary from M.G. Siegler on timely topics found around the web.
It seems to me that the KPop Demon Hunters phenomenon may have given Sony – and perhaps Netflix – an interesting opportunity to experiment more with some models for the movie business...
M.G. Siegler
🗣️ Apple's iPhone Strap – As all of my "European Carry-All" jokes may have indicated, I haven't been sure what to make of Apple's crossbody iPhone strap. But actually, Jess Weatherbed makes a lot of good points here about the potential usefulness – in particular with Apple's easy-to-adjust magnetic innovations. And not just for women either. Might Apple mainstream such an accessory (in Western markets) just as they've done with so many other things that seem sort of ridiculous to many at first (see: AirPods)? As a recent victim of a phone-snatched-out-of-hand theft, I think I'm sold to at least try it. Now to pick a color... [Verge]
"Applicants send out thousands of AI-crafted résumés, and businesses use AI to sift through them."
– Annie Lowrey, describing the current state of the job market for The Atlantic. She continues, "What Bumble and Hinge did to the dating market, contemporary human-resources practices have done to the job market. People are swiping like crazy and getting nothing back."
Below, members of The Inner Ring will find thoughts on:
• Amazon's AR Glasses
• Meta's New AI Unit Sparks Tensions
• The Rise of Small Language Models
• Crypto Holding Firms Struggle
• 'Good Will Hunting' with Guns
• and more...
2025-09-10 21:57:49
A special edition of Spyglass Signal today, as I furiously try to catch up on every little nook and cranny of Apple news hidden in yesterday's iPhone event. And, of course, I wrote 2,000-ish words covering my own high-level thoughts about the event, the announcements, the products, and the state of the company below...
M.G. Siegler
Back to your regularly scheduled programming tomorrow...
Spyglass Signal is a newsletter sent on weekdays featuring links and commentary from M.G. Siegler on timely topics found around the web.
There's also the iPhone 16 at $699 and iPhone 16 Plus at $799 (if you really want a bigger screen than the iPhone 17 at the same price, I guess). I pretty much nailed the pricing line-up six months ago – not too hard to do except for the fact that the Air was still obviously just rumored at that point and I suspected they might try to bump it up $100 versus the price that the 'Plus' was sold at – which is exactly what they did. And that also let them bump the entry 'Pro' from $999 to $1,099 – but they did so alongside a bump to 256GB minimum storage.
And that leaves a hole at the $899 price point. Perhaps this year's iPhone Air will fill that next year? Speaking of next year, I'm more curious if my guess on 'iPhone Fold' pricing ends up being right as well: $1,999. Which, incidentally is now the price of a fully maxed-out iPhone 17 Pro Max (with the new 2TB storage option).
2025-09-10 17:53:04
Look, you can't go wrong with a Steve Jobs quote.
I'm not really sure why Apple chose to open their 2025 iPhone event with the famous "Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works." quote. It preceded a video focused on design elements of Apple products that I guess was meant to show case how well all their products work together? It was a nice little video. But overall, I don't think this year was more about design than any other Apple keynote. If I had to stretch towards a guess, maybe the notion of emphasizing that this year wouldn't be massive external design tweaks – such as with the AirPods and Apple Watches – but in refining how it all works?
Then again, the iPhones sort of do look different this year? So maybe this was just Tim Cook's attempt to do a sort of reset with regard to the narrative about Apple. Internally and externally. To take back control of the message. Forget AI and everything else, Apple is first and foremost about design, as was seemingly the point of his post-video opening.
I don't know. It doesn't matter. The quote always works.
My actual biggest takeaway from this keynote was how animated Tim Cook was. For once I don't mean animated literally with a goofy emoji face or whatever, he just seemed to have a pep in his step that I hadn't recalled seeing in quite some time. Perhaps ever when it comes to these pre-recorded keynotes. It's almost as if someone told him that if they wanted to keep doing these as recordings versus going back to live events – as they obviously should – he had to seem about 200% more excited. And he did!
It was sort of nice to see, even if staged. Especially after that one sleepy earnings call where he seemed completely disengaged and well, whatever the fuck this was.
From there, we were off to the races. The AirPods Pro 3 segment was maybe 10 minutes long, but chock-full of great stuff. The AirPods-to-AirPods translation feature looks killer.1 As does adding some health/fitness capabilities to the headphones. Better ANC, better fit, better battery life, sweat-proof, same price. An absolute no-brainer of an upgrade.
Apple Watch was more like 15 minutes as we had three different models to get through (as well as the now-standard testimonials of how the device has literally saved lives, which despite being showcased every year is no less affecting).2 The hypertension alert functionality – which Apple is openly predicting will help over a million people in the first year alone – seems incredible. New sleep tracking moves to match Oura Ring and others. While everything generally looks the same,3 they've managed to jack up battery life across the board. The company still feels far ahead here.
And there we were, just 30 minutes in, when Cook kicked off the iPhone portion of the iPhone event. Not a Jimmy Fallon in sight to distract everyone, Apple was cooking.
iPhone 17 got a solid 10 minutes by itself. Nice updates, new colors, pretty standard stuff – presented from... Miami? The biggest thing of note may have been the lack of a literal big thing: no more "Plus" model, only one 6.3" version.
Of course, this was well known because...
The worst kept secret in Cupertino (this year) is here: iPhone Air. Notably, it's not 'iPhone 17 Air', just 'iPhone Air' which stands out in the line up with iPhone 17 and iPhone 17 Pro. And it leads to the obvious question if Apple views this as a one-off design, perhaps if it doesn't sell well? That seems unlikely, so perhaps they'd just do an 'iPhone Air 2' next year? But that would be a bit awkward and confusing if they stick with the standard naming schemes for the other iPhones – i.e. do I buy an iPhone 18, an iPhone 18 Pro, or an iPhone Air 2 next year? Then again, next year should also see the 'iPhone Fold' introduced, so perhaps we're slowly moving away from the bigger numbers, which were always untenable at some point. Were we really going to get an 'iPhone 37' in 2045?
The intro video highlights the narrator, Abidur Chowdhury, who is an industrial designer at Apple. Nice soothing, dulcet tones. English accent, but decidedly not Jony Ive... This was also the first mention of the "iconic plateau". Now, you and I may call this the "camera bump" but you and I are mistaken. It's a "plateau". Which is French for "big ass camera bump". But it's iconic, so there's that.
"It's our thinnest iPhone ever with the power of 'Pro' inside. A paradox you have to hold, to believe." That's some very nice copy. And it highlights the true key of both the device and perhaps of the entire event. The iPhone Air isn't so much an iPhone 'Plus' replacement, as much as it's a skinny iPhone Pro model.
That was a legitimate surprise and makes a decision on which iPhone to get for many users decidedly more difficult. If the iPhone Air was going to be relatively under-powered, you were probably still going to get a Pro. So the question would have been if iPhone 17 buyers wanted to shell out more money for the thinner model. But it's a different equation when you're offering something that's sexier and cheaper than the Pro lineup, but powered by the same A19 Pro chip...
Of course, the decision will ultimately likely come down to two things: camera system and battery life. On the former, the Pros are still clearly ahead. So if that's you're most important factor, you're still getting a Pro. With the Pros now getting even bigger batteries than before, that should also be relatively straight-forward if that's your main concern. But the introduction of a new iPhone Air-only (ugh) MagSafe battery that apparently brings battery life up to par with the Pro (though not the Pro Max) is interesting... But with that add-on, the price is up to Pro levels too.
Regardless, it's an impressive feat of engineering (software and hardware?) to even get the battery life up to these levels in such a thin device. And by all accounts, the device looks and feels great in hand. Personally, I care too much about camera and battery life – and I've long been a 'Max' guy anyway – but I get why this is a debate now.
Speaking of the A19 Pro chip, the most notable thing Tim Millet mentioned was "MacBook Pro-levels of compute in an iPhone", specifically when discussing its "Neural Accelerators" (read: AI) capabilities. A new 'N1' chip brings WiFi, Bluetooth, and Thread capabilities fully built by Apple to the iPhone for the first time. And yes, the 'C1X' brings Apple's modem chip to a flagship device – "it is even faster than the modem in iPhone 16 Pro" which is a veiled shot at Qualcomm, of course. The follow-up power efficiency point certainly has shades of Intel shade back in the day. Boy is Apple happy to be well on its way to severing this tie too...
A single-lens camera system that John Ternus swears is great – we'll see. eSim-only, which may be an issue you-know-where.4 And a bumper! Yes, the bumper is back! Hopefully without the cellular performance issues this time... And I appreciate that Apple showed a man putting on the cross-body iPhone strap while getting ready to go biking, showcasing a use-case and alleviating some "European Carry-All" fears...
For the iPhone Pro models, we got a video narrated by Molly Anderson, Apple's VP of Industrial Design – who wasn't shy about busting out "a-lew-min-e-um". Orange! Which almost distracted from "the first iPhone unibody" – which is probably only cool to those of us who recall the OG MacBook unibody reveal 15 years ago. Oh my god what are they doing to that poor iPhone Pro in that video? Bombarding it with keys, concrete, coins... um, beakers?
Broken beaker proof iPhone!
I was almost too distracted by Greg Joswiak clearly enjoying saying "vapor chamber" when he busted out "Cosmic Orange". I'm sorry, what? I knew Apple wouldn't just go with "orange" or "papaya" but what exactly is "cosmic" about "orange"? Perhaps the ease at which Apple can trademark such branding is out of this world... Actually, in a way, my guess of "Sunbeam Orange" may not have been far off or out.5
The new thermal system does seem impressive if it can boost performance as much as Apple is touting (thanks to being able to run the chips longer and thus, hotter, at max capabilities). We even got a "running local large language models" out of Joz.
Aluminum and ceramic are the new titanium and glass. 48MP on all three cameras – which are all now "Fusion" which means little to anyone outside of Apple's marketing department. 8x zoom. 8x-ish, at least. The entire event was filmed with an iPhone 17 Pro – nice touch. The device can now do "bullet time" shots. Whoa.
"TechWoven" is indeed the new "FineWoven" but hopefully actually, you know, good this time. (It certainly looks better.)
Looks like I was right in my early guesstimations about how much Apple might charge for the iPhone Air – which is to say, more than the iPhone Plus models (even though I assumed it wouldn't have the better specs of the Pro, so that's a nice bonus here). With a fully-spec'd-out iPhone 17 Pro Max with the new 2TB storage option, we finally have a $2,000 iPhone – fine, a $1,999 one. That means next year's Fold is undoubtedly going to shoot right past that...
Tim Cook turn back to design to close. And he does so quickly, wrapping at the one hour, eleven minute mark. Overall, a nice and tight Apple event featuring three no-brainer updates and nothing more. No AirTags, no Apple TV, no HomePods, no iPad Pro (on its exact 10th anniversary, harsh), certainly no Vision Pro. (Certainly no new AI!) That seems to indicate that we'll get another fall event, perhaps around Halloween again. Or perhaps just some press releases?
As for me, while the iPhone Air being decidedly more 'Pro' was an interesting wild card thrown out there, my upgrade path is clear: AirPods Pro 3, Apple Watch Ultra 3, iPhone 17 Pro Max – in "Cosmic Orange".
One more thing: maybe the biggest surprise of the entire event? There is no black option for the iPhone Pro model. Just silver, orange, or blue ("Deep Blue" – though oddly, Apple doesn't try to brand "Silver"). Sort of wild. Bruce Wayne is going to be so pissed.
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
1 Yes, yes, Android has had live translation for a while, which apparently has sort of worked, sort of not over that time. But Airpods-to-Airpods in particular seems killer since, well, a lot of people have Airpods – Pixel Buds? Not so much. ↩
2 Notably absent? Newly-announced-to-be-retiring Jeff Williams who previously always helped to introduce new Apple Watches. But perhaps CEO-in-waiting Jeff Ternus got his stage time during the all-important iPhone portion – well, screen time. ↩
3 The Apple Watch Ultra 3's screen is slightly larger, but that was shrinking the bezels, not changing the case. ↩
4 Apparently only one carrier, China Unicom, is ready to roll with eSIM. ↩
5 But I was really hoping for something more "Copper" but figured "Orange" was more likely... ↩