2026-03-18 07:58:55
The MacBook Neo is really something, isn't it? Novelty is a hell of a drug, but I also think there's something to specific products that, despite them clearly not being the best technical option available, still have a draw for some reason. Apple's actually had two examples of this in the past six months alone.
On paper, the iPhone Air is absolutely not the best iPhone that came out last year. The iPhone 17 Pro is better in every spec, and the iPhone 17 is better and cheaper. While reports seem to be that the Air is not selling as much as those other two phones, it's certainly creating die hard fans as well. They understand the trade-offs and they still want this phone.
And now I think we're seeing something similar with the MacBook Neo. While I do think that the honeymoon period with this device will start to wear thin over time as the realities of using a budget computer start to sink in amongst an audience that's used to using premium machines, I still think there's something special here. I have it; I already own an M4 Pro MacBook Pro. I have a computer that I've described as having effectively unlimited power and is just a perfect device for me in almost every way. But I gotta be honest, I am using the MacBook Neo when I'm not at my desk because I just like using it.
It has a smaller screen, it's noticeably slower, and I'm having to remember to add all of these little things that I customized about my system on the MacBook Pro and get them on here so things work as I expect. So it's definitely more work I'm going through to make this happen, and all to use a machine that's not as good, technically. And yet I keep turning to it.
So I think there's something that some products have that is special and just taps into something that people really love. And I think the MacBook Neo has that, as does the iPhone Air that came out a few months ago.
Both of these devices point to something I keep coming back to lately: the computers in our lives right now (including smartphones) are kind of better than they need to be. We'd all be totally fine with less. Lots of us love to pixel-peep a photo comparison between the latest iPhone and the latest Samsung or whatever, searching for whichever one is 2% better in any given situation, then using the winner to validate their purchasing decision. But then an iPhone Air comes out with a single, worse camera, suddenly plenty of people are saying, "you know, I really only need the one camera, right?"
Similarly, with Macs in the Apple Silicon era, we've loved as Apple fans to share bar charts showing how fast Apple Silicon is and how terrible SSD speeds are on other devices and all this stuff. And the MacBook Neo does all the bad things that we said about those other computers, but we love it.
So there's something there where we set the bar super high for what we demand from these computers that we buy. And then sometimes we'll get a device that's not as technically powerful, and we still love it, and we still are able to do what we want on it. And I just think that's something that we should ruminate on, the question of how much power we actually need when we get a computer, whether it's a computer that sits on our desk, goes in our backpack, or lives in our pocket.
None of this is meant to suggest that wanting more is somehow wrong. If you enjoy having a fast, high-quality computer, that's completely valid. What you need and what you want don't have to be the same thing, and there's nothing wrong with wanting nice things.
2026-03-17 08:57:02
Cameron Faulkner, Richard Lawler: DLSS 5 looks like a real-time generative AI filter for video games
Nvidia announced DLSS 5 on Monday during its GTC conference, and based on early reactions, it’s going to be a divisive update, with some reactions calling it “slop” that unacceptably alters artistic intent. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang is calling this the “GPT moment for graphics — blending hand-crafted rendering with generative AI to deliver a dramatic leap in visual realism while preserving the control artists need for creative expression.”
As someone who really loves DLSS, I gotta say, my first impression of DLSS 5 in these comparisons is that it looks like ass. To be honest, it feels like it goes against the whole point of DLSS from the start, which was to allow people to run games at higher resolutions without sacrificing performance. I think DLSS 3 was where it crossed into the "excellent, but sometimes imperfect" territory, and DLSS 4 was basically flawless. But all along the way this was displaying the game in the best way possible.
What they showed in this teaser video was more of a visual mod to the game. Set everything else aside and the design of the enhanced versions looks like they were made by a teenager who just discovered the clarity slider in Lightroom and cranked that shit all the way up. Tools such as ReShade allow you to change the look of games already and that's fine but what they showed here is…odd.
Maybe I'll eat my words on this when it comes out, and they can certainly improve it before then, but this initial rollout mostly had me going "ew".
2026-03-17 00:41:14
From the MotionVFX home page today:
We are extremely excited to share that MotionVFX is joining the Apple team to continue to empower creators and editors to do their best work.
I love MotionVFX and have used their plugins for a few years to add a bit of flavor to my videos. Their plugins are a little pricy for a solo, small creator like myself, so I have to be very picky which plugins I pick up, but if Apple did something with including some (all?) of these in their Creator Studio, that would be a big incentive for me to subscribe.
2026-03-16 21:00:00
My apps very rarely prompt you to leave a review on the App Store. Truthfully, it's something that I completely forget to consider when I'm developing an app. I only remember to add it down the road, and as such, my apps don't have a lot of reviews compared to the number of people who use them.
So I come to you, dear readers, to make a plea: please use the links below (ideally for the ones you've enjoyed) and leave a five-star review. You don't even have to write anything, just leaving a star rating would be really helpful to document the impressions people have of the apps.
Oh, and if you have any serious issues with any of my apps that you'd like to get fixed, feel free to hit me up on social media.
2026-03-16 01:00:31
Mark Gurman had a new report this past week where he suggested that the folding iPhone would allow apps to be displayed side by side on the internal screen, and that iPad apps would not run on the device, although Apple is working to update their apps to have a more iPad-like layout when displayed wide on the Fold. Here's how I think these square with my prediction that the folding iPhone will run what is effectively iPadOS.
Above is a screenshot from App Store Connect. This is for my app, Quick Subtitles, which runs on the iPhone, iPad, and Mac. As you can see I've already created binaries for iOS and MacOS but there's no option for iPad OS so how does the iPad version work?
As you can see, iPadOS runs iOS apps. The difference is that the UI lays out differently due to the different screen size. So when Mark Gurman says iPad apps won't run on the folding iPhone, I interpret that as saying that apps which have blocked their app from running on the iPhone will not run on this folding phone either. For example, here's the "supported destinations" for Quick Subtitles in Xcode.
If I wanted to block my app from running on the iPhone, I would simply remove iPhone from this list but the code wouldn't change at all.
I guess what I'm saying is that the iPhone is already running the iPad version of Quick Subtitles and the iPad is running the iPhone version. To-may-to, to-mah-to…there's literally no difference, it's just screen size.
My expectation is that for apps like mine, which run on the iPhone and iPad, they will run like normal when on the outer screen, as well as when they're in split view on the internal screen. They will run with their "iPad layout" when running on the internal screen at full screen.
As we have previously established the windowing options available on an iPhone are already there. There are just flags set in the software that prevent them from displaying to the user. My expectation is that in the iPad OS 27 announcement at WWDC this summer there will be the return of a split-screen layout, which is not just the split-screen hack that we have right now in the windowing system. This will give iPad users the ability to have split-screen without adopting the full windowing system introduced last year. I think this will make a lot of iPad users happy.
The added benefit here is that this will allow Apple to use this new split-screen option on the iPhone Fold without needing to have the full windowing solution as iPads.
What will Apple do? We'll have to wait for this fall to find out. I do think we are going to see the line in the sand between iOS and iPadOS blur to the point of not mattering, though.
2026-03-15 22:18:57
I sometimes feel like I'm a minor villain in the iPad enthusiast world. It probably doesn't help that I'm pretty outspoken for wanting a touch screen tablet-style Mac or that I recently titled a post "Apple will kill iPadOS." But I honestly think that the world we would be in if Apple did these two things would be better specifically for iPad users.
Inevitably during an iPad review, especially in an iPad Pro review, you are going to get to the part where the reviewer says that while the hardware is amazing, they can't do everything they want to do with it because iPadOS is too limiting for their needs. As a former iPad-only person I understand the fire this lights in iPad fans. "What do you mean you can't do real work on an iPad? I'm doing it!"
I think it's pretty clear what reviews like this are indicating, which is that they adore the hardware; the hardware in an iPad Pro is outstanding. It feels really great. The OLED screen is outstanding and it has plenty of performance, being powered by Apple's latest generation of chips. All they want in the world is to be able to use this device for their needs but they can't.
This is where iPad fans will say, "just get a Mac then. You clearly don't want an iPad." And yes that is literally what I am arguing for when I'm asking Apple to build a tablet-style Mac. There are plenty of people out there who lust after the iPad hardware and the adaptability that the tablet form factor brings. They just have needs for different software and workflows than the iPad supports. They quite literally want an iPad that's running macOS. iPad fans may say this is something to be criticized but I would say it's a clear message of intent from customers as to what product they wished they could buy.
Now imagine a world where in addition to the iPad Pro Apple also sells a comparably priced and spec'd Mac tablet that people can buy instead. Those people who don't find the iPad to be sufficient for their needs but really love having a tablet device that they can bring around, well now they can have exactly what they want. When the new iPads come out they don't need to ask those to be more than they are, they can simply recognize them as a different operating system for different people with different needs.
I will say that I posted this poll to Mastodon recently to get a vibe in the room for what people thought the impact would be of Apple releasing an iPad that ran macOS. It's a small sample size, but I know a few iPad lovers follow me, and the results still showed that 45% of people thought that it would have the large impact on iPad Pro sales. Maybe this isn't the case but I do get the vibe that iPad fans like that Mac users don't get a touch device. At some level they believe that a touch-based Mac with comparable hardware would cannibalize iPad users.
I haven't written anything in quite a while that got as much of a reaction as my post about Apple unifying the naming back to iOS across the iPhone and iPad. I think the idea in that post, that the iPhone Fold would share the same split-screen and multitasking interface as iPads, is a really powerful idea that would just be good news for iPad users. iPad users are very familiar with the idea that some years they get a lot of updates and other years they get what feels like nothing. I think a lot of us remember Stage Manager coming out in 2022, people having lots of issues with it, and it not getting any love for several years after that.
iOS is clearly Apple's most important operating system. If something is wrong in iOS, Apple has a very real incentive to fix it as soon as possible. Making the folding iPhone, Apple's flagship product, and the iPad more directly share UI will make the iPad's experience the most important thing to Apple, and help ensure it has a bright future.
I fully recognize that there are people who love the iPad for how it's different than the Mac. My intention is not to take away what these people love, it's to give more people the computer that they want and to make the operating system that iPads run more important to Apple so that the experience can be as incredible as possible. The iPad is a really cool piece of hardware, and Mac users want a version that runs their OS of choice, and I want iPad users to get the software updates they want as quickly as possible.