Epic Games (Hacker News):

We recently announced that Apple approved our Epic Games Sweden AB developer account. We intended to use that account to bring the Epic Games Store and Fortnite to iOS devices in Europe thanks to the Digital Markets Act (DMA). To our surprise, Apple has terminated that account and now we cannot develop the Epic Games Store for iOS. This is a serious violation of the DMA and shows Apple has no intention of allowing true competition on iOS devices.

[…]

Apple said one of the reasons they terminated our developer account only a few weeks after approving it was because we publicly criticized their proposed DMA compliance plan. Apple cited this X post from this thread written by Tim Sweeney. Apple is retaliating against Epic for speaking out against Apple’s unfair and illegal practices, just as they’ve done to other developers time and time again.

Phil Schiller:

We welcome all developers to the Developer Program so long as they follow the rules. Those rules, including the DPLA and the App Store Review Guidelines, are intended to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, developers large and small, and - most importantly-users. Accordingly, developers who are unable or unwilling to keep their promises can’t continue to participate in the Developer Program.

In the past, Epic has entered into agreements with Apple and then broken them. For example, you testified that Epic Games, Inc. entered into the Developer Program with full understanding of its terms, and then chose to intentionally breach the agreement with Apple. You also testified that Epic deliberately violated Apple’s rules, to make a point and for financial gain. More recently, you have described our DMA compliance plan as “hot garbage,” a “horror show,” and a “devious new instance of Malicious Compliance.” And you have complained about what you called “Junk Fees” and “Apple taxes.”

Your colorful criticism of our DMA compliance plan, coupled with Epic’s past practice of intentionally violating contractual provisions with which it disagrees, strongly suggest that Epic Sweden does not intend to follow the rules. Another intentional breach could threaten the integrity of the iOS platform, as well as the security and privacy of users.

You have stated that allowing enrollment of Epic Games Sweden in the Developer Program is “a good faith move by Apple.” We invite you to provide us with written assurance that you are also acting in good faith, and that Epic Games Sweden will, despite your public actions and rhetoric, honor all of its commitments. In plain, unqualified terms, please tell us why we should trust Epic this time.

Tim Sweeney:

Epic and its subsidiaries are acting in good faith and will comply with all terms of current and future agreements with Apple, and we’ll be glad to provide Apple with any specific further assurances on the topic that you’d like.

Mark A. Perry:

Apple recently reached out directly to Mr. Sweeney to give him an opportunity to explain why Apple should trust Epic this time and allow Epic Games Sweden AB to become an active developer.

Mr. Sweeney’s response to that request was wholly insufficient and not credible. It boiled down to an unsupported “trust us.” History shows, however, that Epic is verifiably untrustworthy, hence the request for meaningful commitments.

[…]

Given the past and current conduct of Epic, Apple cannot allow Epic Games Sweden AB to be part of its ecosystem.

Please be advised that Apple has, effective immediately, terminated the Developer Program membership of Epic Games Sweden AB.

This is now the second time Apple has said they would let Epic have their account back if they agreed to follow the rules, Epic agreed, and Apple reneged, saying it didn’t believe Epic. In this case, it seems like Apple ignored Sweeney’s offer to provide “specific further assurances,” so unless there are key parts of the communication omitted it seems like Apple’s offer was not made in good faith. There is nothing in the rules saying that you can’t criticize Apple.

Joe Rossignol:

Apple shared the following statement with MacRumors:

Epic’s egregious breach of its contractual obligations to Apple led courts to determine that Apple has the right to terminate “any or all of Epic Games’ wholly owned subsidiaries, affiliates, and/or other entities under Epic Games’ control at any time and at Apple’s sole discretion.” In light of Epic’s past and ongoing behavior, Apple chose to exercise that right.

Zac Hall:

In short, Apple is leaning on a court ruling from 2021 that upholds its ability to terminate developer accounts that violate its guidelines. That’s the legal basis for which Apple is relying upon globally — not just in the EU. As recently as last month, Epic Games accepted existing rules of the Apple Developer Program like all other developers.

Note that this ruling was in the US, and the Swedish account had not violated the guidelines.

Michael Love:

If Apple doesn’t want to have to have a business relationship with Epic, a great way to achieve that would be to do what every other platform maker has done for decades, and allow companies to distribute apps without going through Apple.

But if you insist that everything go through you then you’re obligated to treat everyone equally, even those that criticize you.

Steve Troughton-Smith:

Putting Phil Schiller in charge of the App Store is going to be a hundred billion dollar mistake that all-told leaves Apple with a pile of legal, perhaps criminal, liability and a raft of draconian regulations around the world that massively compromise the iOS experience. This was clear years ago; it is unimaginable that he’s still calling the shots.

Previously:

• Thoughts on Apple’s DMA Compliance
• App Marketplaces: AltStore and Epic Games Store
• Epic Gets New Developer Account
• DMA Compliance: Alternative App Stores But No Sideloading
• Epic Wants Its Developer Account Back
• Apple Terminates Epic Games’ Developer Account
• Court Rules on Epic’s Temporary Restraining Order
• Apple to Cut Epic Off From iOS and Mac Developer Tools

Apple has canceled all plans to release an autonomous, electric vehicle, reports Bloomberg. Apple has been working on an Apple Car for more than a decade and invested millions of dollars into development before deciding it was not a viable project.


Apple's Chief Operating Officer Jeff Williams today told approximately 2,000 employees working on the ‌Apple Car‌ that the project was canceled, and the information reportedly came as a surprise.

Work on the ‌Apple Car‌ is winding down and many of the people that were working on the car will move to Apple's artificial intelligence division to work on generative AI under AI chief John Giannandrea.

There are a number of hardware engineers and car designers that were on the ‌Apple Car‌ team, and there will be layoffs. Some of the employees may be able to shift to other divisions within the company.

Earlier this year, there were rumors that the ‌Apple Car‌ project had been scaled back, with Apple abandoning plans for a full driverless car with autonomous capabilities. Apple shifted focus to an electric vehicle with fewer self-driving features, and the vehicle would have been on par with Tesla's technology. Apple was aiming to release the car sometime around 2026, but now those plans have been shelved completely.

News of the ‌Apple Car‌ first surfaced in 2014, and since then, the project has been rife with problems. The focus of the work has changed and evolved multiple times, and Apple has had several leadership changes due to internal strife. Apple Watch chief Kevin Lynch took over the project in 2021, and he worked to scale down the project while still putting out a viable car.

According to Bloomberg, senior Apple executives made the decision to wind down the ‌Apple Car‌ project in recent weeks.
This article, "Apple Cancels Electric Car Project" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

Juli Clover (Mark Gurman, Hacker News, Slashdot):

Apple has canceled all plans to release an autonomous, electric vehicle, reports Bloomberg. Apple has been working on an Apple Car for more than a decade and invested millions of dollars into development before deciding it was not a viable project.

Apple’s Chief Operating Officer Jeff Williams today told approximately 2,000 employees working on the Apple Car that the project was canceled, and the information reportedly came as a surprise.

Apple surely spent billions on it, not millions.

John Gruber (Mastodon):

Kevin Lynch took over leadership of Project Titan back in September 2021, but remained in charge of Apple Watch, too. In hindsight that makes me wonder if Lynch’s mission wasn’t to ship a car, but more to assess what technologies the group had created could be used to create other products. Whatever progress Apple has made with “autonomy” ought to be applicable to robots, for example. Making intelligent robots feels more like something Apple should be doing than making cars.

Hartley Charlton:

Founder and chairman Lei Jun today posted on Weibo that he was “very shocked” by the news of Apple’s decision to cancel its EV. He added that he “knows deeply how difficult it is to make cars,” but Xiaomi has made an “unshakeable strategic choice” to move into EVs. He Xiaopeng, chairman of Chinese EV maker Xpeng, expressed similar disbelief that Apple is abandoning its car plans.

Adam Engst:

Perhaps the most interesting part of Gurman’s piece is the claim that many of the Project Titan employees will be shifted to Apple’s artificial intelligence division to focus on generative AI projects. Siri could use the help.

Mr. Macintosh:

The rumored Apple Car was one of most embarrassing projects in Apple’s history.

NO ONE WANTED AN APPLE CAR!!!!!

Imagine if all the wasted billions of dollars was instead put into the Siri team!🤦‍♂️

Benjamin Mayo:

Self-driving or nothing has been the Apple Car mission since the beginning. It seems they finally resigned themselves to the former not being possible.

Kontra (Mastodon):

Apple’s problem with Titan was not complicated, almost singular: like everyone else, they found out L5 was/is not achievable and there really was no point introducing a car without it in mid-2020s.

Eric Schwarz:

Over the last couple of years, it has started to feel like Apple is spread too thin at times and while the employees working on the car won’t jump over to go fix That Bug You Hate™ in iOS now, I think it removes a notable distraction for the company.

Demetrio:

They couldn’t afford to develop a bog standard calculator app, they were busy not making a car.

Jeff Johnson:

But I so wanted a car that demanded 30% of every shopping trip and refused to travel to destinations unapproved by the manufacturer.

Joanna Stern:

I was actually really looking forward to what they were going to do in this space—and flipping my car over to charge it.

Whole Mars Catalog:

It pains me to announce that I was fired from Apple today.

I was the engineer responsible for designing the charge port at the bottom of the Apple car.

Brandon Butch:

Was looking forward to the Apple iLift for making charging easier

Tony Fadell:

Apple doesn’t have any real technology or UI advantage in autos (& TVs).

That’s why Apple doesn’t make TVs (only AppleTV) & it’s same reason it shouldn’t make typical cars/EVs (iPhones + CarPlay is fine enough)

Florian Mueller:

Instead of making a car, Apple will just leverage its platform power to tax car makers and their customers.

Previously:

• Apple Car: Software and Money

Apple (via Ivan Krstić, because there is no RSS feed, Hacker News, MacRumors):

Today we are announcing the most significant cryptographic security upgrade in iMessage history with the introduction of PQ3, a groundbreaking post-quantum cryptographic protocol that advances the state of the art of end-to-end secure messaging. With compromise-resilient encryption and extensive defenses against even highly sophisticated quantum attacks, PQ3 is the first messaging protocol to reach what we call Level 3 security — providing protocol protections that surpass those in all other widely deployed messaging apps. To our knowledge, PQ3 has the strongest security properties of any at-scale messaging protocol in the world.

[…]

To mitigate risks from future quantum computers, the cryptographic community has been working on post-quantum cryptography (PQC): new public key algorithms that provide the building blocks for quantum-secure protocols but don’t require a quantum computer to run — that is, protocols that can run on the classical, non-quantum computers we’re all using today, but that will remain secure from known threats posed by future quantum computers.

[…]

To best protect end-to-end encrypted messaging, the post-quantum keys need to change on an ongoing basis to place an upper bound on how much of a conversation can be exposed by any single, point-in-time key compromise — both now and with future quantum computers. Therefore, we believe messaging protocols should go even further and attain Level 3 security, where post-quantum cryptography is used to secure both the initial key establishment and the ongoing message exchange, with the ability to rapidly and automatically restore the cryptographic security of a conversation even if a given key becomes compromised.

[…]

Support for PQ3 will start to roll out with the public releases of iOS 17.4, iPadOS 17.4, macOS 14.4, and watchOS 10.4, and is already in the corresponding developer preview and beta releases. iMessage conversations between devices that support PQ3 are automatically ramping up to the post-quantum encryption protocol.

The obvious question is, but what about iCloud backups? Advanced Data Protection is off by default, and most users leave it off, so most messages are not truly end-to-end encrypted, and this won’t change that. Jason Snell implies that iCloud backup with Advanced Data Protection does support PQ3, but Apple’s blog post doesn’t mention backups or ADP at all.

Steve Troughton-Smith:

Apple’s encryption may be quantum-computer-proof, but it’s not lawmaker-proof. And that’s a weak link that absolutely will be exploited, someday. E2EE is a luxury that can be snatched away in an instant, a false sense of security in an increasingly dangerous world.

Previously:

• Signal Usernames
• iCloud Advanced Data Protection Uptake
• Reminder: iMessage Not Meaningfully E2E
• Apple Dropped Plans for End-to-End Encrypted iCloud Backups After FBI Objected

Update (2024-02-23): Nick Heer:

Apple says this protocol will begin rolling out with the public releases of iOS 17.4, iPadOS 17.4, MacOS 14.4, and WatchOS 10.4 — missing from that list is VisionOS, though I am not sure I should read anything into that — but it is not clear to me if these operating systems are required for PQ3 encryption. In other words, if a device has not been updated or cannot be updated to these software versions, does that preclude messages from being encrypted using this protocol? If so, that might be true of all iMessage contacts, and it does not appear there is any way of knowing which encryption protocol is being used.

[…]

These are among the many questions I have for Apple, and I expect to hear more as this update approaches its release. However, I do not think I will get an answer to the thing I am most curious about: is a protocol similar to PQ3 going to be used by Apple to secure other end-to-end encrypted data against future threats? It would make sense.

I have been buying and using modular tool boxes, organizers, and other such storage products for years.

I have also tested every major professional system available.

In my opinion, these are the top 5 to pay attention to. There are others that have some merit, but they don’t stand on even ground with these leading and potentially leading systems.

#1 Milwaukee Packout

Milwaukee Packout is leading the industry, and they’re not showing any signs of slowing down.

Packout is constantly a step ahead of the competition, on average, and I doubt this will change anytime soon; no other brand comes close.

In my opinion, the cost is the biggest – and often only – downside.

I have niggles about some little things, such as the space efficiency of certain Packout tool boxes, but that’s about it.

I’m not much of a fan of the wall system – yet – but I think this will change once Milwaukee launches an externally-mounted accessory system. Hopefully those eventual accessories can also be used with the wall plates.

The biggest mistake that Milwaukee’s competitors make is in seeing Packout as a system. Yes, it’s a system, but a system of discrete solutions.

Of all of the tool storage brands, Milwaukee offers me the most solutions suited to my specific needs, wants, and user demands.

The drawers are great, the 4-wheel dolly with foot brake is the best I’ve used, the work tops are practical, the tool boxes are decent, the organizers are okay but I bought a whole lot at great pricing, the crates are good but I wish they were less expensive, and the tool totes are useful even outside of Packout connectivity (although I’ve started using some as top-of-stack catch-alls).

You can take a Packout tool bag, add an organizer to the bottom, and bring just what you need to an installation or maintenance task.

Or put drawers on a 4-wheel dolly to create a workshop-friendly roll-around tool box tower.

There are Packout accessory cases as well. Mechanics tool sets. Socket sets. It’s getting harder and harder to avoid Packout-integrated tools or accessories.

Tool users keep asking for more, and Milwaukee seems intent to deliver.

#2 Dewalt ToughSystem

I bought original Dewalt ToughSystem tool boxes, and gradually replaced them with other solutions.

But, I’ve now gravitated back to the updated ToughSystem 2.0 system to complement my storage and organizational setup.

I prefer certain Dewalt components better than the Milwakee equivalents, such as the compact tool box, and found myself using small groupings of ToughSystem tool boxes and accessories.

In my opinion, Dewalt has the most flexible and functional options after Milwaukee – for now.

The Dewalt workshop storage system has the potential to be huge, especially when users realize they can mount the storage rails to any vertical surface – including the sides of tool boxes.

Dewalt doesn’t have many external accessory solutions designed for mobile tool box setups, yet.

#3 ToughBuilt StackTech

ToughBuilt’s first wave of StackTech tool boxes and organizers are very good, and I’m told that the second wave has started shipping out to select stores.

When talking to some industry insiders recently, the same question kept coming up. ToughBuilt announced the new system with a bunch of computer renders depicting an ambitious first year product roadmap. So the question that comes up now is “can they do it?”

Well, they are doing it. ToughBuilt’s first wave launched just a few months ago, and the second wave is upon us.

In my opinion, ToughBuilt is already leaving most competing brands in the dust.

StackTech’s system offers unique solutions.

Unlike a couple of other brands that entered the market in the past 2 years, ToughBuilt’s system looks inspired but not derivative. Some brands say “let’s copy that.” Judging from what’s both out already and coming soon, I would bet that ToughBuilt’s decision makers instead said “how can we do this better?”

#4 Ridgid Pro Gear 2.0

Ridgid’s updated Pro Gear 2.0 tool box system – like its predecessor – is a good system at fair pricing.

The Ridgid system introduced some unique features and options, with the removable hand cart component meaning any XL-sized tool box can be placed on the bottom of a rolling stack – even the new 3-drawer tool box.

Ridgid’s system rarely grows, which isn’t good. But, what they offer is decent, and the pricing is fair.

It’s far from being the best system for my needs, but I consider Ridgid’s to be a “one size fits many mobile users” type of system.

#5 Klein ModBox

Klein’s new ModBox system is far from being at the top of the list, and to be frank I’m not convinced they’re the 5th best option.

But, ModBox is different, and that helps it stand out in an increasingly saturated market.

The system as it exists now is on-par with many other brands’ already. Its external accessory attachment system is novel and effective.

In my early tests, I found the designs and executions to be well-done. There was a minor fitment issue that self-resolved.

ModBox is very electrician-focused right now, and there’s the potential for Klein to broaden its appeal.

It’s not a system I would buy for my own use yet, but I’m watching it closely.

ifixcoinops (via Hacker News):

Watching a mutual ask for printer recs and receive a chorus of tired tech folk going “Just get a Brother, they’re fine” and man

MAN

Like this is actually kinda fascinating honestly, Brother is now the best printer brand, the one that every Computer Person recommends, and is it because their printers are good? Their printers are fine, they print, whatever, no, it’s because everybody else’s printers have gotten Innovated out the wazoo, every innovation making them way worse, until it’s gotten to the point where I wouldn’t have one in the house even if it were free, and meanwhile Brother’s have remained consistently Fine I Guess, which now makes them the best printer manufacturer simply by virtue of them opting out of the Who Can Get Crappiest Fastest race

It’s true, from what I can tell. There was a time when pretty much all the printers were fine. I tended to like the HP ones. Then at some point they pretty much all started to suck. I ran into a series of horrible models from HP and Epson, with both hardware and software issues. I’ve been using a Brother laser printer for at least 15 years now, and it’s boring in the best possible way. It does what it’s supposed to do and never gives me any trouble. Over the summer we bought another one—my first color laser—and it also works as expected. Decent printers are ridiculously cheap these days. I think I got it on sale for roughly the price of an AirPods Pro. It seems like we’ve printed and color-copied a lot, yet the initial toner cartridges are still going strong. There’s no software to install, and the scanner works with macOS’s Image Capture, although that app seems to be falling into disrepair.

Previously:

• The Enshittification of All Things
• DYMO Label Printer RFID DRM
• Canon Forced to Ship “Knockoff” Ink Cartridges
• HP Reneges on Free Instant Ink
• HP Printer Driver Certificate Revoked
• 64-bit ScanSnap Manager for Older Scanners
• Apple Stops Maintaining Its Printer Compatibility List
• HP Leaves Mac Users Vulnerable to Fax Hacks