MacRumors

An extensive new report by Slate has revealed the challenges publishers are facing when it comes to profiting from Apple News despite the platform's growing readership.

According to the report, page views on Apple News have roughly tripled since September 2017, and the app has now surpassed Facebook as a driver of readership.

Unlike Google and Facebook however, Apple News hosts content within the app instead of sending readers to the original website, depriving publishers of ad revenue.

In a stark example, Slate revealed that it earns more money from an article that gets 50,000 page views on its own site than it does from 54 million views on Apple News.

Apple News has so far offered publishers few opportunities for generating ad revenue, although Apple recently added support for Google's industry standard ad-serving tool DoubleClick.

Still, Apple's privacy policy ensures limitations: Google's ad manager can serve traditional banner ads including animated GIF ads, but it can't yet be used to serve HTML5-based ads or pre-roll video ads.

Despite the struggle, publishers are reportedly continuing to embrace Apple News in the hope that things will eventually change and given the huge potential opportunities for exposure that the platform offers. The app now comes pre-installed on all new Macs and iOS devices in countries where Apple News is available.

Apple has also reportedly urged major U.S. newspapers about adding their content to the Texture magazine app that Apple purchased in March, with a view to eventually integrating the subscription-based service into Apple News.

Compared to the iPhone X, the iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max offer up an upgraded wide-angle camera with a larger sensor and new features like Smart HDR and Depth Control, all of which bring quite a few changes to photo quality on Apple's newest iPhones.

We did an in-depth comparison between the iPhone X camera and the camera in the iPhone XS Max to highlight the feature updates and what you can expect to see in your images when upgrading from iPhone X to iPhone XS or XS Max.

The wide-angle camera on the iPhone XS Max is just a bit wider with a 26mm focal length equivalent vs. the 28mm focal length equivalent on the iPhone X, and Apple has introduced a new image sensor that's twice as fast and 32 percent larger with bigger, deeper pixels that bring out more detail in your photos.

Both iPhones use a TrueDepth camera system with a 7-megapixel front-facing camera for selfies, but the iPhone XS features a faster A12 chip with an upgraded Neural Engine and a new image signal processor, enabling several new features for both the front and rear-facing cameras.

A Smart HDR option offers better dynamic range, bringing out more detail in the highlights and shadows of your images, while a new Depth Control option for Portrait Mode lets you adjust the amount of background blur in your images after a photo is taken. Apple has also introduced improved bokeh, for more aesthetically pleasing blurring of the background details in a photo when using Portrait Mode.

In our experience, Portrait Mode with both the rear and front-facing cameras is improved in the iPhone XS Max compared to the iPhone X with the new features Apple has introduced. The camera is better able to distinguish between the foreground and the background of a photo so it doesn't blur out as much detail as the iPhone X. It's by no means perfect and there are still issues with some images, but it's a definite improvement.

Apple's Smart HDR feature brings out more detail in iPhone XS Max photos when compared to photos taken with the iPhone X. For example, in images of the sky, the iPhone X will blow out the details due to the variance in lighting, while the iPhone XS Max is able to provide a better photo with the Smart HDR. Smart HDR kicks in often, and paired with the larger sensor, it offers up images with more detail in most photos with low lighting.

Almost all iPhone X photos in low light or with areas where there's a lot of difference between brightness and darkness overexpose photos or feature too much overcompensation for shadows, a problem that the iPhone XS Max does not have.

Unfortunately, in some situations, Apple's Smart HDR and/or some heavy-handed noise reduction blurs or smooths out images, something that's especially noticeable with the front-facing camera in lower light. There is, for example, an entire thread on Reddit filled with users complaining about the ultra smoothing Apple has introduced for the selfie camera.

The strange smoothing effect is primarily noticeable with the front-facing camera when lighting is not great, but it does also affect the rear-facing camera and can sometimes result in soft images that lose their crispness. The iPhone X, which does not use Smart HDR or the same noise reduction algorithms, does not seem to have this issue.

When it comes to capturing video, the experience is nearly the same, though we did feel stabilization was a bit better. The iPhone XS Max continues to be able to record 4K video at up to 60 frames per second, but audio is improved due to new stereo recording functionality.

All in all, iPhone XS Max photos are better than iPhone X photos with a noticeable difference between the two cameras, but there are quirks to be aware of, such as the Smart HDR and heavy noise reduction.

The images featured in the video and in the article can be found in a higher resolution in an Imgur album for clearer comparisons. What do you think of the camera in the iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max? Let us know in the comments.

The iPhone XS Max with 256GB of storage costs an estimated $443 to make, according to estimates shared by TechInsights in a teardown of the new device. At $443, the iPhone XS Max components are nearly $50 more expensive than the estimated $395.44 component cost of the 64GB iPhone X.

TechInsight's component cost breakdown suggests the iPhone XS Max display is the most expensive component in the device at $80.50, while the A12 chip and modems are the second most expensive, at $72.

The iPhone XS Max housing, display, battery, and memory are all more expensive than similar components in the iPhone X, largely due to the size increase in the new 6.5-inch device. The housing, for example, is larger and heavier, while the display is also larger.

According to TechInsights, Apple cut down on display cost in the iPhone XS Max by removing some 3D Touch components that were previously included in the iPhone X, but that does not appear to have affected 3D Touch functionality in the new iPhone XS Max.

In a statement provided to Reuters, Al Cowsky, who oversees the cost analysis at TechInsights, said Apple took out components worth up to $10, cutting the cost of the iPhone XS Max display to $80.

Component cost estimates from companies like TechInsights only took at the pricing of raw components and do not take into account other iPhone manufacturing expenses like research and development, software creation, advertising, and distribution.

TechInsights itself warns that its cost estimates are compiled using the information available at the time of the initial teardown, with "some assumptions" made where concrete data is not yet available. The company plans to continue to refine its estimate over time.

Last year, when the iPhone X was first released, TechInsights estimated the component cost at $357.50, a number that has now gone up to an estimated $395.44, so there can be quite a bit of variance in these early guesses.

While interesting, device cost estimates are not an accurate measurement of Apple's overall profit margin for the iPhone XS Max, nor do they offer a clear picture of the overall cost of creating a new smartphone.

Back in 2015, Apple CEO Tim Cook said that cost breakdowns for devices are not reflective of actual costs. "I've never seen one that is anywhere close to being accurate," he said.

Update: According to TechInsights, its analysis of the iPhone XS Max parts was inaccurate because Apple has not removed any 3D Touch components from the iPhone's display. The estimated cost of the iPhone XS Max is now $453 rather than $443.

We have revised our initial estimates of the component cost of the iPhone Xs Max from $443.00 to $453.00, based on new information about the 3D touch system. Our initial review of the phone indicated that some of the 3D components that were included in last year’s iPhone X had been removed, but further investigation revealed this not to be the case. We can confirm that the iPhone Xs Max includes the same Broadcom BCM15951 3D touch controller used in the iPhone X.

This increases the Display cost from $80.50 to $90.50, for a total cost of $453.00.

The title of the post has been updated to reflect TechInsights' new pricing estimate.

Apple today seeded the first beta of an upcoming macOS Mojave 10.14.1 update to developers, just one day after releasing the macOS Mojave update.

macOS Mojave introduces a new method of installing software updates, so after the initial beta has been installed using the appropriate profile from the Developer Center, additional betas can be downloaded through opening up System Preferences and choosing the "Software Update" option.

It's not yet clear what improvements the first update to macOS Mojave will bring, but it likely includes performance improvements and bug fixes for issues that weren't addressed in the first release of macOS Mojave. It also likely re-introduces support for Group FaceTime, a feature that was removed during the beta testing period. Group FaceTime, which lets you chat with up to 32 people at once, is also present in the iOS 12.1 beta.

macOS Mojave is a major update that brings features like a systemwide Dark Mode, stacks for organizing messy desktops, new Finder capabilities, new tools for taking screenshots, a Continuity Camera option for easily transferring photo scans and documents from iPhone to Mac, and more.

Should we find new notable features in the first beta of macOS 10.14.1, we'll update this post.

Earlier this week, iFixit completed a teardown of an Apple Watch Series 4 that said the 44mm model has roughly four percent more battery capacity, but that was compared to a 38mm-sized Apple Watch Series 3 model.

An eagle-eyed MacRumors reader has since pointed us towards Apple's Product Information Sheet, which contains battery capacities measured in watt-hours for several products, including Apple Watch Series 4 models. Apple appears to disclose this information for legal and safety reasons.

Based on Apple's document, Apple Watch Series 4 models actually have less battery capacity than the equivalent Series 3 models:

• Apple Watch Series 3 (42mm): 1.34 watt-hours
  

• Apple Watch Series 4 (44mm): 1.12 watt-hours
  

• Apple Watch Series 3 (38mm): 1.07 watt-hours
  

• Apple Watch Series 4 (40mm): 0.86 watt-hours

More specifically, the new 44mm Series 4 models have approximately 16.5 percent less battery capacity than the previous large-size 42mm Series 3 models. Likewise, 40mm Series 4 models have approximately 19.7 percent less battery capacity than the previous small-size 38mm Series 3 models.

Despite having smaller batteries, Apple says Series 4 models get the same all-day battery life of up to 18 hours that Series 3 models are rated for. We reached out to Apple in hopes of an explanation, but we have yet to receive a response.

What we do know is that Apple Watch Series 4 models use a new display technology named LTPO that improves power efficiency. The new Apple S4 system-in-a-package also has more efficient cores, so they presumably consume less power as well. Other components could be more efficient too.

In general, however, battery life is simply hard to predict. Different customers have different use cases. One user could be an athlete who is constantly working out with the Apple Watch, while another could be a more casual wearer who taps on a few notifications once in a while and not much else.

All in all, we wanted to clear up some confusion surrounding the Apple Watch Series 4 batteries. They pack less juice, not more, but seemingly without compromising battery life. Over time, we'll see if that's truly the case.

Apple is sending longtime employee and Vice President of Software Technology Bud Tribble to a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on Wednesday to offer support for federal privacy regulations, reports Axios.

According to Tribble's prepared statement obtained by Axios, he plans to "convey Apple's support for comprehensive federal privacy legislation that reflects Apple's long-held view that privacy is a fundamental human right."

"We want your device to know everything about you; we don't feel that we should," he'll say. "These concepts have guided our design process for years because privacy is a core value at Apple, not an obligation or an aftermarket add-on."

Tribble will echo sentiments that Apple executives have shared time and time again, explaining Apple's belief that customers have a right to keep their personal information private, a stance that differs from companies like Facebook and Google.

Back in June, Apple CEO Tim Cook said in an interview that privacy "from an American point of view" is one of the "key civil liberties" defining what it means to be American. Cook has also said multiple times that Apple's customers are not its product.

"We could make a ton of money if we monetized our customers," Cook said in March. "If our customers were our product. We've elected not to do that. We're not going to traffic in your personal life."

Tribble will be testifying before the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation alongside representatives from other tech and media companies that include Amazon, Twitter, Google, AT&T, and Charter Communications.

Ahead of the meeting, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, part of the U.S. Department of Commerce, released a proposal for consumer data privacy protection and is seeking public comment. The NTIA is asking for feedback on certain desired outcomes for organizational practices:

• Organizations should be transparent about how they collect, use, share, and store users' personal information.
• Users should be able to exercise control over the personal information they provide to organizations.
• The collection, use, storage and sharing of personal data should be reasonably minimized in a manner proportional to the scope of privacy risks.
• Organizations should employ security safeguards to protect the data that they collect, store, use, or share.
• Users should be able to reasonably access and correct personal data they have provided.
• Organizations should take steps to manage the risk of disclosure or harmful uses of personal data.
• Organizations should be accountable for the use of personal data that has been collected, maintained or used by its systems.

These are the same kind of topics that will be explored during the privacy-focused Senate hearing, which is designed to "examine the privacy policies of top technology and communication firms" as well as review the "current state of consumer data privacy."

Update: Tribble's prepared remarks are embedded below.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

VMware has released Fusion 11, the latest version of its virtualization software, with full support for macOS Mojave and the latest Mac hardware, including the 18-core iMac Pro and the 2018 MacBook Pro with a six-core Intel Core i9.

VMware Fusion, like rival software Parallels Desktop, can run hundreds of operating systems, ranging from the latest Windows 10 versions to Linux distributions like Ubuntu, directly on the desktop of a Mac.

VMware says Fusion 11 delivers many new features and platform enhancements, including an updated user interface. A new Application Menu allows users to quickly switch between virtual machines, or create a new one; change view modes, settings, and snapshots; or launch Windows apps with a single click.

Fusion 11 and Fusion 11 Pro both default to Apple's Metal graphics rendering engine on supported hosts, with added DirectX 10.1 compatibility. The new version also allows for customizable Touch Bar controls on the latest MacBook Pro models.

There are also many under-the-hood performance improvements, particularly with Virtual NVMe devices. Users can change their virtual disk type to NVMe to increase performance on Macs equipped with SSD storage. Meanwhile, security fixes and architectural changes have been made to mitigate threats like Spectre and Meltdown.

VMware details other new features, including a new Finder integration at the top of the VM Window, on its website.

Fusion 11 and Fusion 11 Pro are available today for $79.99 and $159.99 respectively via VMware's website. Upgrade licenses for Fusion 11 and Fusion 11 Pro are available for $49.99 and $119.99 respectively for existing users of Fusion 10, Fusion 8, or Fusion 8.5. Prices and availability vary by region.

Qualcomm has accused Apple of stealing confidential information and trade secrets, and passing them on to rival chipmaker Intel, according to a court document filed Monday and reported by several media outlets.

For background, Qualcomm agreed that Apple could have access to its source code and tools for LTE modems, but with limitations. Qualcomm believes that Apple proceeded to share the information with Intel to help improve its LTE modems, allowing Apple to stop using Qualcomm's modems in the latest iPhones.

Axios's Ina Fried shared an excerpt from Qualcomm's complaint:

Although discovery is ongoing, it is clear that Apple's conduct went far beyond simply breaching the contract originally sued on. Indeed, it is now apparent Apple engaged in a years-long campaign of false promises, stealth and subterfuge designed to steal Qualcomm's confidential information and trade secrets for the purpose of improving the performance of lower-quality modem chipsets, with the ultimate goal of eliminating Qualcomm's Apple-based business.

Qualcomm already sued Apple in November 2017 based on suspicions the iPhone maker was using the chipmaker's trade secrets in wrongful ways. Now, Qualcomm is more confident and direct about its accusation.

Don Rosenberg, General Counsel of Qualcomm, in a statement provided to MacRumors:

Once again Apple has flouted its contractual commitments and misappropriated Qualcomm's property rights in an effort to improve its performance and increase its profits.

The code, tools and design details of Qualcomm's modem technology which are the subjects of this litigation represent the genius and labors of our dedicated engineers. We have only the rule of law to protect them.

The lawsuit is scheduled to be heard in April 2019, but Qualcomm's proposed amendment could delay the trial, which is one of over a dozen lawsuits waged between the two companies. Apple initially sued Qualcomm in June 2017 for $1 billion in unpaid royalties, and later for patent infringement.

iFixit's teardown of the iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max uncovered an Intel modem in both devices, a few months after Qualcomm said Apple was unlikely to use its own modems in the latest iPhones. Qualcomm was Apple's exclusive provider of modems until Intel was added as a second supplier for the iPhone 7 lineup.

Update: MacRumors has obtained a copy of Qualcomm's motion, embedded below.

Apple's Macs and iPads continue to have the highest customer satisfaction score among PC and tablet makers, according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index's new 2018 Household Appliance and Electronics Report.

Apple earned an ACSI score of 83 in 2018, the same score that it had last year, remaining in the lead over Amazon, Samsung, ASUS, HP, Lenovo, and more.

According to the ACSI, Apple's machines earned best-in-class ratings across "nearly every aspect of the customer experience" from device design to features and available apps.

Apple earned the highest score despite the fact that much of its Mac and iPad lineup has yet to be refreshed in 2018. We are awaiting refreshed iPad Pro models with major upgrades like an edge-to-edge design with slimmer bezels and Face ID, along with updates to the MacBook, Mac mini, and other machines.

Based on ASCI's numbers, Amazon is closing in on Apple with an ASCI score of 82, with customers satisfied with design, ease of operation, and sound/graphics quality on the company's line of tablets.

Samsung tied with Amazon, also earning a score of 82. Samsung also scores well across the customer experience, but can't match Apple on features that include operating system, preloaded apps, and data storage.

According to the American Customer Satisfaction Index, overall customer satisfaction with personal computers (a category that includes laptops, desktop machines, and tablets) continues to earn a score of 77 on the ACSI scale.

Smartphones outpaced personal computers in customer satisfaction back in 2014, and customers continue to be more satisfied with their handheld devices, using them for more tasks that had previously been limited to computers.

Among PC owners, desktop machines earned the highest overall satisfaction score, followed by tablets and then laptops. Just 17 percent of respondents to the ACSI survey purchased a desktop computer in the last year, but customer satisfaction grew 4 percent. Satisfaction with tablets also grew 4 percent, while laptop satisfaction declined.

To create its scoring system and compile device scores, the ACSI uses data from interviews with approximately 250,000 customers each year, analyzing customer satisfaction with more than 380 companies across 46 industries.

Tom's Guide has published the results of a battery comparison test pitting Apple's new iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max against a variety of smartphones, with some surprising results.

Both of Apple's latest flagship models failed to reach the heights of last year's first-generation iPhone X using the same battery endurance test, which involved surfing the web continuously over a 4G data connection. Displays were set to 150 nits of brightness, with both auto-brightness and TrueTone disabled.

The iPhone XS Max lasted 10 hours and 38 minutes, while the iPhone XS managed 9 hours and 41 minutes. Those figures compare unfavorably to the results of the original iPhone X, which lasted 10 hours and 49 minutes in the same test last year.

As far as rival phones go, the iPhone XS and XS Max outperformed the HTC U12+ (9 hours, 13 minutes) and the LG G7 ThinQ (8 hours, 35 minutes), however both Apple models were beaten by flagship devices in the Android category. Google's Pixel 2, for example, lasted 12 hours and 9 minutes, while Samsung's Galaxy Note 9 lasted 11 hours and 26 minutes. However, the overall winner was Huawei's P20 Pro, clocking in 14 hours and 13 minutes.

Apple advertises that the iPhone XS can last up to 12 hours during internet use (the same figure given for last year's iPhone X) while the iPhone XS Max can last up to 13 hours on a single charge. However, battery performance can be affected by various factors, including OS version, hardware optimization, and even cellular reception, which is why Apple only offers approximate numbers.

Earlier this week, iFixit teardowns confirmed the existence of a new single-cell L-shaped battery in the iPhone XS, while the iPhone XS Max remains two cells. Chinese regulatory filings also earlier revealed the iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max have battery capacities of 2,658 mAh at 3.81V and 3,174 mAh at 3.80V respectively.

Last year's iPhone X has a battery capacity of 2,716mAh at 3.81 V, yet Apple claims iPhone XS customers can expect a 30-minute increase in operating time over that device, while XS Max users can expect an hour and a half. If you're an iPhone XS or XS Max owner, let us know what kind of battery life you're seeing by using the comments below.