Milwaukee Tool has launched a new modular vacuum system called NEXUS.

Milwaukee Nexus was designed to deliver a customizable cleanup experience to suit many different pro vacuuming needs.

And yes, as shown above it is Packout-compatible, with a top plate that can fit your tool boxes, organizers, and most other Packout products.

Milwaukee Nexus Vacuum System Modularity

The Milwaukee Nexus vacuum system will allow users to choose from several cordless and AC-powered vacuum heads, optional add-ons such as a dust separator and filter cleaner, different sizes of debris collection containers, and mobile bases.

There is the potential for further expansion in the future. They break down the vertical stack as follows:

• Power – vacuum motor head units
• Add-ons for optional features
• Capacity – debris collection containers
• Mobility – wheeled bases

At launch, there will be 3 Nexus modular vacuum heads:

• M18 Fuel 6-gallon vacuum with mobile base
• M18 Fuel 6-gallon vacuum with mobile base and VacLink
• M18 Fuel Dual Battery with VacLink

An existing AC vacuum head unit is already available. The new Nexus M18 Fuel vacuum heads are Packout-compatible, the AC head is not.

Most of Milwaukee’s example images show the vacuum being used with a 4-wheel base.

The vacuum can be also used without any mobile base, if that’s what you want.

The M18 Fuel and M18 Fuel dual battery vacuum motor heads both have Packout-compatible top plates.

The vacuums are capable of wet/dry pickup.

While none of the product images show a drain port, Milwaukee is using the same collection drums as their earlier M18 Fuel cordless vacuums, which do have drain ports on the left side.

Milwaukee Nexus Compatibility

Looking deeper, Milwaukee has rebranded their earlier M18 Fuel 6-gallon cordless vacuum, bringing it into the Nexus line. This suggests backwards compatibility between the different head units, collection drums, and mobile bases.

Milwaukee’s earlier vacuum system featured multiple M18 and AC power units, collection drums, and mobile bases. The new Nexus system seems to be a reimagining while maintaining compatibility.

Milwaukee’s add-ons are said to be fully compatible with existing [Milwaukee] medium capacity wet/dry vacuums, models 0910, 0914, 0915, 0920, 0930.

We’re checking with Milwaukee about whether there are any exceptions or incompatibilities to be aware of.

Update: It looks like the entire system is backwards compatible with the interchangeable vacuum products Milwaukee launched in 2022.

Milwaukee Nexus Vacuum Add-on: Dust Separator

The dust separator add-on, described as the first of its kind, directs debris away from the vacuum filter, separating up to 99% of jobsite debris before it reaches the filter. This should result in less clogging and longer sustained airflow.

Both add-ons fit in between the vacuum motor unit and the collection container.

From cut-away diagrams, it looks like the dust separator is completely inline and makes use of the main collection container.

Milwaukee Nexus Vacuum Add-on: Filter Cleaner

The manual filter cleaner add-on also fits in between the vacuum head and collection container.

You have to choose one add-on or the other – or none – as multiple add-ons will not work together.

The filter cleaner is said to bridge the gap between wet/dry vacuums and dust extractors.

It comes with 2x HEPA filters and is said to allow for Table 1 OSHA compliance in light concrete applications.

The design allows for quick filter cleaning that helps to remove fine dust from the filter, improving airflow in certain applications.

Milwaukee VacLink

VacLink compatibility allows for remote activation via a hose-end remote or select tools. From Milwaukee’s product images, it seems more VacLink-compatible tools are on the way.

Milwaukee Nexus Vacuum Performance and Runtime

M18 Fuel Single Battery Vacuum

• 3.5 HP peak
• Wet/dry pickup
• 63″ suction power
• 95 CFM
• 2 modes – max power, max runtime
• Blower port

M18 Fuel Single Battery Runtime: up to 44 minutes of continuous cleaning time per M18 FORGE 12Ah battery, up to 31 minutes at max power.

M18 Fuel Dual Battery Vacuum

• 4.25 HP peak
• Wet/dry pickup
• 80″ suction power
• 115 CFM
• 2 modes – max power, max runtime
• Blower port

M18 Fuel Dual Battery Runtime: up to 49 minutes of continuous cleaning time per 2x M18 FORGE 12Ah batteries, up to 35 minutes at max power.

Milwaukee Nexus Vacuum Package Options

At this time there will be 2 starter packages – 6-gallon with and without a VacLink remote.

M18 FUEL NEXUS 6 Gallon Wet/Dry Vacuum w/ PACKOUT Compatibility & VACLINK

M18 FUEL NEXUS 6 Gallon Wet/Dry Vacuum w/ PACKOUT Compatibility

M18 FUEL NEXUS Dual Battery Wet/Dry Vacuum Motor Head w/ PACKOUT Compatibility & VACLINK (0926-20)

The M18 Fuel dual battery vacuum head does NOT come with a collection container or mobile base. It can be used with Milwaukee Nexus 6, 9, and 12 gallon wet/dry vacuum tanks, models 0912, 0922, 0932.

Milwaukee Nexus Vacuum Component Pricing

Milwaukee Nexus M18 Fuel 6-Gallon Vacuum w/ VacLink (0914-20, $299) – Buy it at Acme Tools
Milwaukee Nexus M18 Fuel 6-Gallon Vacuum (0915-20, $249) – Buy it at Acme Tools
Milwaukee Nexus M18 Dual Battery Vacuum Head (0926-20, $299) – Buy it at Acme Tools

Milwaukee Nexus Dust Separator Add-on (0990-20, $99) – Buy it at Acme Tools
Milwaukee Nexus Filter Cleaner Add-on w/ 2 HEPA Filters (0991-20, $149) – Buy it at Acme Tools
Milwaukee VacLink Remote (0952-20, $49) – Buy it at Acme Tools
Wet/Dry Vacuum Cart Mobile Base (0943-20, $79) – Buy it at Acme Tools

Related Posts:

New Milwaukee Cordless Wet/Dry Vacuums and AIR-TIP Accessories Milwaukee is Launching a New Cordless Dust Extractor Finally, a Milwaukee Cordless Mower is Coming Soon

Juli Clover:

The 2025 Worldwide Developers Conference is just a few days away, with the keynote event set to take place on Monday, June 9. Ahead of Apple’s big software debut, we’ve rounded up all of the rumors that we’ve heard so far about iOS 26, macOS 26, and Apple’s other updates.

Apple:

Today, Apple announced the winners and finalists of this year’s Apple Design Awards, celebrating 12 standout apps and games that set a high bar in design.

Sebastiaan de With:

Congrats to all of this year’s Apple Design Award winners! Sad that there’s no ceremony this year, though :(

Curt Clifton:

New for WWDC25 — online group labs! Register now to join Apple engineers online to ask questions, get advice, and follow the discussion about the week’s biggest announcements in real time, Tuesday, June 10 through Friday, June 13!

Paul Hudson:

So, a number of us decided to start this repository to host links to various WWDC events, news, and tutorials from around the community. That means this repo will contain links to events being organized around our community, plus content from SwiftUI Lab, Hacking with Swift, Donny Wals, Swift with Majid, and many more – and we would love to share your articles too.

Basic Apple Guy:

WWDC25 is nearly upon us, and it felt only fitting to release a new wallpaper to decorate your desktop for the occasion.

Jordan Morgan:

Today, I’m proud to give you the eleventh annual Swiftjective-C W.W.D.C. Pregame Quiz featuring Apple Intelligence, Jony Ive and more!

Upgrade:

It’s time for our 10th annual competition regarding what will happen at Apple’s WWDC keynote! What will be announced? Will there be a major redesign? What will the AI story be? We predict it all!

Jason Snell:

My big question for this year’s WWDC is: Will Apple apologize, or even acknowledge, the fact that it announced numerous AI features at this same event last year that are still not shipping? Even after having attended a couple of dozen WWDCs, I really don’t know which way Apple will go.

Steve Troughton-Smith:

A WWDC that is rumored to promise major iPad UX updates, sweeping OS redesigns, and built-in LLMs I can build new features atop? Honestly, that could be a dream WWDC. It could spur me on to ship major new versions of all my apps with tons of new things.

It could go very wrong, too — we had to live with the consequences of the iOS 7 redesign for a long time before apps started to approach looking nice again.

Warner Crocker:

The reason I titled this post “Thoughts and Prayers Heading into WWDC 2025” isn’t that I’m offering up good vibes for Apple as they try to work out of the messes they’ve mostly created for themselves. I’m actually hoping — most likely against hope — that Apple will finally clean up some of the annoyances they’ve neglected over several generations of iOS and macOS.

Brian Stucki:

In so many years past, developers have entered WWDC disgruntled and generally left pretty enthusiastic and hopeful. I’m having a hard time picturing this happening in a couple weeks without some massive changes. (And even then, we’ll only be cautiously trusting.) I guess we’ll see.

Mario Guzmán:

Apple can give a fresh coat of paint to all their operating systems but unless you fix the buggy state of everything Apple… well, if you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.

Jeff Johnson:

I don’t know if the news media or even Apple engineers understand the existential dread that developers can feel about WWDC. The latter are excited to show what they’ve done, the former to report it, and we’re excited too, but also terrified.

For developers, WWDC is like an annual employee performance review, from which we could get a big raise (new features and platforms), or we could get fired (Sherlocked, deprecated), although none of that actually depends on on our past performance.

Max Oakland:

I’m not excited at all. It’s become more a “what are they going to screw up this time” vibe

The first 12 or so years that I was writing Mac OS X apps, it was always exciting to anticipate what new features or frameworks would be announced and how I could leverage them to improve my apps. The last 12 or so years, Apple has given speeches about how much they love developers and then gone on to make changes that felt like they were meant to kill my apps, make them harder to use and harder for customers to discover, and drown us all in rising sea of bugs.

Previously:

• WWDC 2025 Wish Lists
• The Talk Show Live, Without Apple
• Apple Operating System Version Years
• Rumored Redesign in iOS 19 and macOS 16
• WWDC 2024 Preview

Apple (MacRumors):

In the last five years, the App Store has protected users by preventing over $9 billion in fraudulent transactions, including over $2 billion in 2024 alone, according to Apple’s annual App Store fraud analysis. This reflects the App Store’s continued investment in fostering the most secure experience for users while providing developers with tools and resources, including a powerful commerce system that helps customers transact safely and securely in 175 regions around the globe.

[…]

In 2024, Apple terminated more than 146,000 developer accounts over fraud concerns and rejected an additional 139,000 developer enrollments, preventing bad actors from submitting their apps to the App Store in the first place.

Apple also rejected over 711 million customer account creations and deactivated nearly 129 million customer accounts last year, blocking these risky and malicious accounts from carrying out nefarious activity. That includes spamming or manipulating ratings and reviews, charts, and search results that risk compromising the integrity of the App Store.

[…]

Before any app makes its way onto the App Store, it is vetted by a member of Apple’s App Review team, all of whom are deeply familiar with the App Review Guidelines, and focused on ensuring apps meet Apple’s standards for quality and safety. On average, this team reviews nearly 150,000 app submissions each week, helping bring new apps and updates to the App Store.

I think some developers would beg to differ on the emphasized point.

Other common tactics used by fraudulent developers can include concealing hidden features and functionality in their code, which are only enabled after the app passes App Review. Apple monitors for such behavior, and in 2024, rejected over 43,000 app submissions for containing hidden or undocumented features.

Are they saying that there were 43K apps that, like Fortnite, tricked App Review and had to be blocked after the fact? I don’t see that as an endorsement of the current system vs. what sideloading and code signing would offer.

These bad actors can also attempt to deceive users by disguising potentially risky software as seemingly innocuous apps. Last year, App Review removed over 17,000 apps for bait-and-switch maneuvers such as these, as part of its ongoing efforts to routinely monitor and take action against problematic apps.

Again, it sounds like these all got through App Review.

Nick Heer:

This has become an annual tradition in trying to convince people — specifically, developers and regulators — of the wisdom of allowing native software to be distributed for iOS only through the App Store. Apple published similar stats in 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024, reflecting the company’s efforts in each preceding year.

[…]

There are plenty of numbers just like these in Apple’s press release. They all look impressive in large part because just about any statistic would be at Apple’s scale. Apple is also undeniably using the App Store to act as a fraud reduction filter, with mixed results. I do not expect a 100% success rate, but I still do not know how much can be gleaned from context-free numbers.

M.G. Siegler:

I’m totally fine if Apple wants to point such numbers out as a way to upsell their own services, such as the App Store itself, and their payments infrastructure. But I’m worried this is more about the continued justification for why they need to keep the App Store locked down.

Craig Hockenberry:

Now do Stripe.

The App Store processes about $100B/year, while Stripe does about $1T/year. So, roughly, Stripe’s business is 10x of Apple’s *

It also tells us that Apple’s fraud rate is 2% ($2B / $100B). Let’s assume that Stripe’s has a similar fraud rate: that means they prevented $20B last year, or $100B vs. Apple’s $9B.

Apple’s still thinking like they area the only ones on the Internet that can process money securely…

Jake Mor:

Finally figured out why your app keeps getting rejected... because Apple takes pride in it.

Jeff Johnson:

It’s possible, perhaps likely, that Apple executives BELIEVE that the crApp Store is not full of scams, in the same way they may believe that their operating systems are not full of bugs: they have “internal metrics” telling them what they want to hear. In both cases, Apple’s own QA is practically nonexistent due to overwork and understaffing, while their external issue reporting system is overly difficult and unresponsive, a black hole.

The execs only see problems when they come via the media.

John Gruber (Mastodon):

What some App Store critics argue is that if any substantial amount of fraud, scams, or rip-offs occur through apps distributed through the App Store, that proves that there are no protective benefits of the App Store model. That’s nonsense. There are high-crime cities and low-crime cities, but there exist zero no-crime cities. The question is whether Apple is catching most — or even just “enough” — scammers. Scammy apps, pirated apps, fraudulent app reviewers. You name it.

Aside from the very small alternative marketplaces in the EU, Apple has made sure that there’s no competition for the App Store. So we can’t actually compare whether they’re doing a good job. All we know is that they block a lot but also that a lot gets through. The main point I would make here is that I don’t think Apple has presented much evidence that the current system is safer than something more like the Mac model with notarization. If the App Store is a magnet for scammers because the search and reviews are so easy to game, and if almost all the damage could be blocked post–App Review, then it’s hard to see how the protections around discovery and the review process are really load-bearing.

Jeff Johnson:

Defenders vastly underestimate the extent to which App Store is a scammer’s paradise that makes it much easier to find victims and take their money. Apple handles hosting, search, downloads, and payments for scammers. “Free with IAP” auto-renewing subscriptions are inherently scammy. And Apple tells users to trust the App Store, lowering their guard.

As the sole source of iOS apps, App Store is a single point of failure. Once you sneak in, you’re golden.

James Remeika:

One very weird stat this year: apps using StoreKit & Apple Pay fell more than 50% since the ’23 report. This stat has been included in this report every year[…]

See also: Mac Power Users.

Previously:

• The App Store Era Must End
• Deluge of Fake Mac App Store Reviews
• Apple Transparency Report to Include App Takedowns
• 2022 App Store Transparency Report
• IAP Bait-And-Switch Apps
• What It Was Like to Sell Apps Online in 2003
• Epic Direct Payment

Ric Ford:

Website traffic is overwhelmingly dominated now by “bots” executing sophisticated cyberattacks and sucking up every scrap of content; only a tiny fraction of our traffic comes from legitimate human visitors. Unfortunately, these rampant and rising abuses and attacks drive rising server costs, and there’s no practical way to stop them — they originate from networks at Microsoft, Amazon, Oracle, Tencent, Russia, hosting companies, proxies, and limitless other networks everywhere in the world.

I personally need to stop and take a break for a while to re-assess priorities and approaches going forward. I’m putting macintouch.com on pause in an attempt to stem the rising costs, but I’ll note that tidbits.com offers an alternative with similar history and values.

I remain enormously grateful for the wonderful support and collaboration of the MacInTouch community over these past decades, regardless of the murky future we’re all facing. Thank you.

Miguel Arroz:

I’ve been following MacInTouch for… decades… I don’t even know any more. Sad to see the site being paused. I’m hoping Ric brings it back sometime in the feature, but whatever his decision is, I’m thankful for many, many years of great content about the Macintosh and Apple.

Same.

Adam Engst:

I understand all too well what he’s going through, and I wish him the best of luck in figuring out his next steps.

[…]

Our hosting plans don’t have any visit-based limits so I only worry about bandwidth, and since we use Cloudflare for caching and bot protection, that’s generally not a huge issue. The big win recently was switching to Cloudlflare’s bot prevention to block what could literally be hundreds of spambot-created accounts per day.

I’ve had intermittent problems with bots but so far have been able to avoid adding Cloudflare.

Adam Tow:

When I left The Wall Street Journal in 2014, one of my last tasks was to ensure all the article links remained active, even as the front pages redirected to WSJ’s tech section. Eleven years later, many of those links still work. Some embedded videos are gone, but the core content has largely survived.

The same cannot be said (right now) of Macintouch. With its pause, past articles, such as this one, now return 404 Page Not Found errors. It’s yet another reminder of the impermanence of the internet. Beloved, long-running sites can vanish overnight, taking decades of knowledge with them.

And don’t forget the forums.

Previously:

• Please Stop Externalizing Your Costs Directly Into My Face
• New Blog Server
• No More iMore
• AI Companies Ignoring Robots.txt
• MacInTouch Switches to WordPress
• MacInTouch Note to Readers

Mac users of a certain age may remember Ambrosia Software, maker of iconic shareware hits like Maelstrom and Escape Velocity. For over a decade, the Ambrosia website included this quotation on its homepage:

“Virtue does not come from money, but rather from virtue comes money, and all other things good to man.” ―Socrates

In other words, don’t try to make money. Try to make great things, and the money will surely follow. It’s a strategy that’s simple to explain, but almost impossible for any company to follow.

Folks in the C-suite will try to tell you that these two goals are perfectly aligned—that making great products is part of being a profitable company. But they mean it in the same way that Frosted Flakes is part of a complete breakfast. It’s on the table, sure…along with a glass of milk, a poached egg, toast with jam, and a piece of fruit. It turns out that, as far as big corporations are concerned, one part of this spread is actually kind of optional.

From virtue comes money, and all other good things. This idea rings in my head whenever I think about Apple. It’s the most succinct explanation of what pulled Apple from the brink of bankruptcy in the 1990s to its astronomical success today. Don’t try to make money. Try to make a dent in the universe. Do that, and the money will take care of itself.

Turn, Turn, Turn

Dissatisfaction with Apple among its most ardent fans has, at various times, reached a crescendo that has included public demands for a change in leadership. The precipitating events could be as serious as Apple bowing to pressure from an authoritarian regime, or as trivial as releasing an unsatisfying new version of an application or operating system.

Despite making my living by criticizing Apple, I tend not to get caught up in the controversy of the moment. When Apple ruined its laptop keyboards, I wasn’t calling for Tim Cook’s head. I just wanted them to fix the keyboards. And they did (eventually).

But success hides problems, and even the best company can lose its way. To everything, there is a season.

As far as I’m concerned, the only truly mortal sin for Apple’s leadership is losing sight of the proper relationship between product virtue and financial success—and not just momentarily, but constitutionally, intransigently, for years. Sadly, I believe this has happened.

The preponderance of the evidence is undeniable. Too many times, in too many ways, over too many years, Apple has made decisions that do not make its products better, all in service of control, leverage, protection, profits—all in service of money.

To be clear, I don’t mean things like charging exorbitant prices for RAM and SSD upgrades on Macs or taking too high a percentage of in-app purchases in the App Store. Those are venial sins. It’s the apparently unshakable core beliefs that motivate these and other poor decisions that run counter to the virtuous cycle that led Apple out of the darkness all those years ago.

Apple, as embodied by its leadership’s decisions over the past decade or more, no longer seems primarily motivated by the creation of great products. Time and time again, its policies have made its products worse for customers in exchange for more power, control, and, yes, money for Apple.

The iPhone is a better product when people can buy ebooks within the Kindle app. And yet Apple has fought this feature for the past fourteen years, to the tune of millions of dollars in legal fees, and has only relented due to a recent court order (which they continue to appeal).

In the (Apple-mandated) absence of competition in the realms of app sales, payment processing, customer service, and software business models, Apple’s exclusive offerings in these areas have stagnated for years. What should be motivating Apple to make improvements—the desire to make great products—seems absent. What should not be motivating Apple—the desire for power, control, and profits—seems omnipresent.

And I don’t mean that in a small way; I mean that in a big way. Every new thing we learn about Apple’s internal deliberations surrounding these decisions only lends more weight to the conclusion that Apple has lost its north star. Or, rather, it has replaced it with a new, dark star. And time and again, we’ve learned that these decisions go all the way to the top.

The best leaders can change their minds in response to new information. The best leaders can be persuaded. But we’ve had decades of strife, lawsuits, and regulations, and Apple has stubbornly dug in its heels even further at every turn. It seems clear that there’s only one way to get a different result.

In every healthy entity, whether it’s an organization, an institution, or an organism, the old is replaced by the new: CEOs, sovereigns, or cells. It’s time for new leadership at Apple. The road we’re on now does not lead anywhere good for Apple or its customers. It’s springtime, and I’m choosing to believe in new life. I swear it’s not too late.

For more on this topic, see the follow-up article: Apple Turnaround

Tom Warren:

A year ago Xbox president Sarah Bond revealed that Microsoft was planning to launch a new Xbox mobile web store in July 2024. That never happened. I’ve been wondering what the hold up has been over the past year, and it seems we might have an answer: Apple.

Microsoft filed an amicus brief late on Tuesday, in support of Epic Games’ ongoing fight with Apple’s control over the App Store. The brief takes issue with Apple’s attempt to overturn the injunction that allows Epic and other developers to freely advertise alternative payment methods in their apps, and not have to pay Apple additional fees for purchases made outside of apps.

Microsoft:

Prior to the district court’s most recent order, Microsoft had been unable to implement linked-out payments (or even inform customers that alternative purchase methods exist) because of Apple’s new anti-steering policies that restrict Microsoft’s communication to users and impose an even higher economic cost to Microsoft than before the injunction.

[…]

Similarly, Microsoft has long sought to enable Xbox app users on iOS to both buy and stream games in the app from the cloud or their other devices. Apple’s policies have restricted Microsoft’s ability to offer these functionalities together; the injunction allows Microsoft to explore this possibility.

Previously:

• Epic Files Motion to Enforce Injunction
• Apple Appeals Epic Anti-Steering Injunction
• Microsoft Still Unhappy With iOS Cloud Gaming Rules
• Streaming Games in a Single App
• Microsoft’s Open App Store Principles
• Microsoft xCloud App Store Negotiations