Feed aggregator

While Apple TV first showed that the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max could handle the demands of a live professional sports broadcast during Friday Night Baseball, the company has since expanded their role into Major League Soccer, using the smartphones to capture angles traditional broadcast cameras simply can't.

Nearly a year after Apple first put iPhone 17 Pro Max units into a live sports broadcast workflow, the cameras are back for 2026 MLS All-Star Week in Charlotte, North Carolina. During the July 28 Skills Challenge and the July 29 MLS All-Star Game, iPhone 17 Pro Max can be mounted behind goals, attached to Magic Arms — articulated mounts commonly used in film and broadcast production — and carried on Ronin gimbals by roaming camera operators. If a penalty kick happens, one could even end up just feet behind the player taking the shot, delivering an even more immersive perspective.

I've been on the ground in Charlotte this week and caught up once again with Royce Dickerson, Executive Producer, Live Sports on Apple TV, to see how the company's approach has evolved over the past year. For Dickerson, the mission is no longer proving the iPhone belongs in a live broadcast — it's figuring out what broadcasters can do with it that they couldn't before.

"We’re always looking for ways to innovate and bring fans closer to the action," Dickerson told me. "How do we continue to be creative with the spaces that we have? Where can we stick iPhones that we haven't thought about before?... We're always striving for... what is that perfect shot? I don't think we've found it yet."

That shift in mindset is perhaps the biggest takeaway one year later. Apple is no longer asking whether the iPhone can work as a broadcast camera — it's asking how many more it can deploy and where they can go next.

'Just like another camera'

(Image credit: Apple)

A year in, nobody on Dickerson's crew treats the iPhone as a novelty act anymore. He pointed back to that first Friday Night Baseball broadcast, when veteran director John Moore ended up cutting to the iPhone shot more often than he expected once he saw the picture quality for himself. Camera operators reached the same place, Dickerson told me that once they're familiar with the iPhone, "it's just like another camera to them."

That comfort is why Apple is running the setup weekly across both MLS and Friday Night Baseball now, rather than treating it as a special event. "I don't think we'd be doing it week-over-week in MLS right now and in Friday Night Baseball if everybody wasn't 100% comfortable with the camera," he said.

The hardware has diversified slightly, too — alongside the now-recognizable Cosmic Orange units, Apple has mixed in some silver iPhone 17 Pro Max cameras as well.

From four iPhones to 15 — and eventually 30?

Ask Dickerson what he took away from that first Fenway broadcast and applied directly to MLS, and his answer is immediate: they needed more iPhones.

That first game ran four units total — one on the Pesky Foul Pole, one tucked into the Green Monster, one on a Ronin gimbal, and one in the dugout. Seeing how unobtrusively that small footprint could be worked into a stadium convinced him the ceiling was much higher than four.

"We need more of them," he told me. "The small-scale size of that just showed me we can put iPhones anywhere. We need to be able to say, like, let's put 20 — what can we do that's crazy in a stadium that just provides full 360 coverage inside of a venue?"

That thinking has already become reality. For a dedicated MLS match shot almost entirely on iPhone, Apple deployed 15 iPhone 17 Pro Max cameras throughout the stadium — and Dickerson doesn't see that as a ceiling.

"I see a world where we have 20 iPhones. I see a world where we have like 30," he said. "With the confidence that everybody has in them now, the envelope's going to start getting pushed a little bit further out."

The workflow has caught up with that ambition. What used to take a full day of rigging and connectivity checks is now, in Dickerson's words, roughly a tenth of the time it took a year ago — purely a result of doing it week after week and building familiarity with the process.

Crews are still using Beastgrip rigs for mounting, but the iPad-based control setup I saw a year ago is gone: camera input and shading are now integrated directly into the truck's standard broadcast system, no separate tablet required.

Geometry is a key difference between capturing MLB and MLS

(Image credit: Jacob Krol/Future)

The biggest difference between MLB and MLS comes down to something surprisingly simple: geometry.

A pitch is the same size in Charlotte as it is in LA, Miami, or New York, and in many soccer stadiums, the stands run right up to the touchline — meaning a Ronin-mounted iPhone can get shockingly close to the run of play.

Baseball doesn't offer that flexibility. The foul lines are a hard boundary, and once you cross onto the field of play, that's it — no matter which park you're in, and no matter how the dimensions shift from stadium to stadium. Soccer's more consistent footprint, paired with sideline access, is letting Apple push cameras nearer to the action than it could at a ballpark.

That proximity has led to placements you wouldn't get near a diamond: a Ronin at the touchline for tight shots, an iPhone on the team benches (Dickerson mentioned catching LA Galaxy head coach Greg Vanney's face as he made notes on an iPad during a match), cameras tucked into the goal net, in the tunnel, and mounted on field-level advertising boards. None of it blocks a fan's sightline, and all of it is small enough that it goes unnoticed until a broadcast cuts to it.

Dickerson also pointed to a subtler benefit: players, coaches, and managers react differently to an iPhone than they do to a traditional broadcast camera.

"Usually there's a big broadcast camera being shoved in their face, and they immediately kind of retreat within themselves," he said. "But all of a sudden there's just an iPhone 17 Pro Max on a gimbal... and it kind of eases them."

That reaction is helping Apple capture more intimate, unguarded moments without disrupting play or fans' sightlines.

What to watch for in Charlotte

Tuesday's Skills Challenge leaned heavily on mobility with Ronins at the stadium, two of them on RF for full remote control, plus two more mounted on Magic Arms positioned for organic, up-close angles of balls in flight and players running by.

Wednesday's All-Star Game mixes in two Ronins pushed toward the sidelines, alongside iPhones positioned around the halftime stage for Ciara's performance (produced by a separate crew that Apple's broadcast will ingest as a feed).

Dickerson's dream shot for the All-Star Game: a Ronin-mounted iPhone getting a tight angle from behind a player on a penalty kick — a shot that's essentially impossible with a traditional camera rig.

I'll be keeping an eye out for that moment during the match, because if Apple can pull it off, it may be one of the clearest examples yet of why these tiny cameras are changing what's possible in a live broadcast.

Still searching for the perfect shot

(Image credit: Apple)

Twenty years into a broadcast career, Dickerson isn't interested in declaring victory. He pointed to a home run from Phillies outfielder Bryson Stott, shot from a low third-base angle, as one of the closest things to a perfect shot his team has captured with the iPhone so far — but he's clear it's not the finish line.

The goal, as he put it, is finding angles nobody's thought to try yet, in stadiums that all start to look the same until you walk them looking for a spot nobody's used before.

With Apple already talking about a "year-and-a-half" of testing and implementation behind it heading into the next MLS season and Friday Night Baseball campaign, Dickerson is promising more of what got Apple here in the first place: more iPhones, more unconventional angles, and continued insistence that the phone in your pocket can shoot alongside — and sometimes replace — a six-figure broadcast camera.

Apple TV in the United States is the broadcast home to MLS, and you get to watch for free as it’s included with one of the best streaming services. The MLS All-Star Game will kick off at 8 PM ET tonight, July 29, 2026, with a pre-show starting before it, and it’ll be easy to know when they call for a shot from the iPhone thanks to a ‘Shot on iPhone’ bug visible on the screen.

Tom Hanks is one of the most celebrated actors in the world, having starred in several iconic films throughout his career and winning two Academy Awards in the process. Like all actors, however, he's been no stranger to the rise of AI and its potential to upend the film industry.

Life after death

Hanks raised the prospect of his image being used to bring films to life far beyond his death in an episode of The Adam Buxton Podcast.

Quote of the day

This article is part of TechRadar Pro's QOTD project to provide an insight into the minds of the brightest and most recognized figures in the technology industry today and in years gone by. Read the full series here.

The notion of using AI in film to either recreate actors that have died, or to generate performances by using the images of living actors, is highly controversial and led to industrial action at the time. Hanks said that he had first anticipated such a future during his work on 2004's 'The Polar Express', which pioneered live-action motion capture CGI.

Using technology to bring actors back from the dead, however, wasn't a new phenomenon. 'Rogue One' used technology to digitally resurrect Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin, while the 'Irishman' used AI to de-age Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci so they could portray their characters over a period of decades.

The future of cinema

What's clear now is that AI in film is here to stay, with the technology being utilized in several film and television productions today.

The 2025 Oscars saw films that used AI, including 'Emilia Perez' and 'The Brutalist', win big. Netflix, meanwhile, revealed that 300 titles used generative AI in one form or another this year. Usage spanned every stage, from concepting and visualization to post-production and eventual release.

As far as audiences go, most people may not notice these subtle uses of AI in the production process, and may not object to this kind of AI usage either. But, generally, research consistently shows they reject the idea of AI-generated content.

I bought the EcoFlow Rapid strictly for travel over the summer, but it ended up living on my nightstand. The outlet in my bedroom is blocked by the headboard, so keeping this battery on the table makes it way easier to charge my iPad while reading in bed. Nothing fancy, but it solved a daily annoyance right out of the box.

It's a fantastic way to beat charging woes even at full price - as I detail below. But US and UK readers can grab it for up to half-price, with the EcoFlow Rapid Power Bank down to $60 (was $130) at Amazon, while in the UK, the Rapid is now £65 (was £100).

At 25,000mAh (roughly 90 watt-hours), it sits right under the 100Wh limit TSA and most airlines set for carry-ons. Output maxes out at 170W total across two 140W USB-C ports and a 33W USB-A port—plenty of overhead to fast-charge a laptop and phone simultaneously without throttling either.

Recharging is equally quick: feeding it 140W gets the battery to 50% in about 20 minutes, which takes the stress out of low-battery warnings before a flight. There's a small color TFT display on the front that shows battery percentage and what's flowing through each port, so you're not guessing whether it's actually charging or just warm.

EcoFlow also includes in the usual protections you'd want in something you're tossing in a bag next to your laptop: overcharge, overheat, and short-circuit protection, along with a fire-resistant housing.

I found this power bank the best way to solve my charging problems thanks to the three ports that let me fast-charge my laptop and iPad.

In the UK: now £65 (was £100)View Deal

Where it actually earns its keep

(Image credit: Future)

Bedside, mostly. I like having my iPad plugged in while I half-watch something before I drift off, and I was sick of the nightly math: is there an outlet on this side of the bed, and is the cable even going to reach? Now the bank just lives on the nightstand and takes care of both problems at once.

Vacations are the other place it's become non-negotiable. On a trip, this thing is doing the work of what used to be three separate chargers: phone, tablet, and whatever camera or laptop

I've brought along, and because it clears TSA's carry-on limit, I've never had it questioned at security. Hotel rooms are notorious for having exactly one usable outlet near the bed, usually behind a nightstand you can't move, and having a full day of charging sitting in reach solves that without rearranging furniture.

Conferences are a battery killer. At a trade show a few months ago, my phone hit 20% before noon just from taking photos and answering Slack messages. The only nearby outlet had four different cables running out of it across the floor. I stopped hunting for plugs after that. Now I just charge my phone between talks and run a cable out of my bag to my laptop when it gets low.

It's also a solid answer for anywhere a plug isn’t guaranteed: a long flight, a road trip, a power outage at home, or a coffee shop where every outlet is already taken. That's really the point of a bank this size; it's not built for one scenario, it's built for the gap between wherever you are and the nearest working outlet.

A few things worth knowing before you buy

(Image credit: Future)

At just over a pound and roughly the size of a large candy bar, it's not the smallest power bank on the market, and that's a deliberate tradeoff for the output it delivers. If you only ever need to top off a phone, something smaller and lighter will do the job with less bulk in your bag. It also doesn't do wireless charging; everything works through the USB-C or USB-A ports, so you'll need a cable regardless of what you're charging.

One more thing worth noting: that 170W is a shared pool, not per-port. Plug in a laptop, a phone, and a set of earbuds at the same time, and the bank splits that 170W across all three rather than giving each one its own full rating. I've never actually perceived a slowdown using it that way, but don't expect three devices each pulling 140W simultaneously; that math just doesn't work.

For what it's actually meant to do- keep me charged through a flight, a conference floor, or just a lazy night in bed with the iPad- it's been reliable enough that I stopped thinking about battery anxiety altogether. That's a low bar to clear on paper, but it's exactly what made me trust it enough to bring it everywhere.

For more top picks, see our guide to the best power banks we've tested.

• Ukraine says Russian defenses mistakenly destroyed one of Moscow's premier fighter jets
• InformNapalm claims cyber intelligence turned Russian air defenses against their own aircraft
• Russia insists a technical failure caused the reported Su-57 crash near Moscow

A Russian Su-57 fighter jet recently crashed in the Moscow region, and Ukrainian intelligence sources say it was no accident.

The international intelligence community InformNapalm claims a combined human and cyber intelligence operation manipulated a Russian air defense unit into striking its own aircraft.

The jet, valued at roughly $50 million, represents one of Russia's most advanced fighter platforms currently in active service.

How the operation reportedly unfolded

InformNapalm says the effort began earlier, when analysts processed a large volume of intercepted Russian communications and footage from a training ground.

That footage showed the BARS Moscow air defense system being trained specifically to counter Ukrainian long-range drones over the capital region.

Analysts used the material to build a detailed report covering personnel training, hardware, software, and combat algorithms tied to the system.

The report also identified specific vulnerabilities within the BARS Moscow network that outside actors could exploit.

This information was reportedly submitted to the Ukrainian Defense Forces, which allegedly used the findings during the operation.

“We thank our friends — cyber specialists of the future Cyber ​​Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” InformNapalm emphasized, saying the intelligence gathered went beyond passive observation, and was instead used to influence how the specific air defense unit actually operated.

The group says this approach allowed the very system built by Russian engineers to be turned against a Russian aircraft.

The result, according to InformNapalm, was the destruction of the Su-57 by its own side's defenses, a claim that Russia vehemently denies.

Russia insists a technical failure caused the crash

The Russian Ministry of Defense attributed the crash to a technical malfunction, which is common rather than any external interference or sabotage.

InformNapalm disputes that account, noting reports of sabotage within the BARS Moscow system had already circulated in pro-Russian online spaces beforehand.

The group also points to a prior operation from 2025, called OKBMLeaks, in which it published documents from a Russian manufacturer supplying components for the aircraft.

That earlier material was translated into 13 languages and picked up by numerous international outlets covering the war.

However, there is no independent verification of InformNapalm's claim, leaving Ukraine's account directly contested by Russia.

Coincidentally, Russia's civil aviation authority Rosaviatsiya lowered the maximum flight altitudes near Moscow airports and banned transit flights over the region.

Officials cited security concerns tied to a rise in Ukrainian drone activity as the reason behind these restrictions.

Whether the security concern includes the recent case cited by InformNapalm remains to be seen.

Airlines remain worried that the changes could add 20 to 30 minutes to routes that once passed directly through Moscow's airspace corridor.

Kommersant, a major Russian business newspaper, also reported that the lower altitude ceiling raises the risk of bird strikes.

Whether the crash resulted from sabotage or a genuine technical fault, the competing accounts remain unresolved for now.

Via Army Inform (originally in Ukrainian)

• Ukraine's deputy commander-in-chief says combat lasers could reach the front within two to three months
• Tryzub's own May 2026 figures, 800 to 900 meters against FPV drones and 1,500 meters against reconnaissance UAVs, are far below the three- to five-kilometer claims made by military officials in 2025
• Ukrainian forces have set themselves a 95% drone interception rate goal, with lasers being incorporated as part of their multi-layered defense plans

Ukraine could field combat lasers against aerial targets within two to three months, according to Brigadier General Andrii Lebedenko, the deputy commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Teams within the Armed Forces and private Ukrainian defense companies are developing the systems, and a prototype called Tryzub, or Trident, is undergoing trials at proving grounds.

General Lebedenko said the technology can already shoot down FPV drones and is already working against Shaheds, and that within two to three months Ukraine would have systems capable of hitting aerial attack weapons better than machine guns can.

The need of the hour or a prototype that is becoming increasingly less ambitious?

Tryzub has been publicly discussed for about 19 months, and the disclosed performance has moved in an unusual direction.

In December 2024, Vadym Sukharevskyi, then commander of the Unmanned Systems Forces, told Interfax that Ukraine had become roughly the fifth country in the world to possess a laser weapon and could shoot down aircraft at altitudes above two kilometers, though Ukrainian reporting of the quote notes that "aircraft" was understood to mean drones.

In April 2025, he presented the system publicly with a larger set of numbers: drones and cruise missiles engaged out to three kilometers, helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft to five kilometers, and sensor dazzling to ten kilometers.

Then, in May 2026, the manufacturer disclosed what the hardware actually does. Celebra Tech, the Ukrainian company behind Tryzub, said the trailer-mounted configuration destroys FPV drones at 800 to 900 meters and reconnaissance UAVs at around 1,500 meters, with work continuing toward Shahed-class interception at ranges approaching five kilometers. The company also said the system had entered final testing and that roughly 15 people were working on it.

Ten weeks later, Lebedenko said the laser was already downing FPVs and already working against Shaheds, without giving specific ranges. If Celebra Tech's stated range claims hold, they still paint a much more sobering picture of Tryzub's capabilities.

The appeal of directed energy in a war that has tilted toward cheap, expendable systems rather than expensive, high-end ones is obvious. The binding constraint, however, is atmospheric.

A laser needs a clear optical path, and fog, rain, snow, smoke, and battlefield dust all attenuate the beam. Autumn and winter in eastern Ukraine supply all of those, so a system arriving on Lebedenko's timeline would meet its least favorable operating conditions almost immediately, which could be why the specs are downplayed by the manufacturer versus those being presented in public.

Even as it continues its focus on its drone defenses, Ukraine is expanding its drone supply from domestic and foreign sources in parallel as it looks to score wins on a front line that has arguably slowed as the conflict enters its fifth year.

Federal subsidies that have helped defray insurers' Medicare drug costs will disappear at the end of the year. Millions of beneficiaries could face higher premiums in 2027.

(Image credit: Eric Thayer)

Just a few weeks ago, I read an interesting article on the Festival of Ludd, the world's first-ever festival dedicated to 'Neo Luddism' — a place where technology is openly eschewed, in layman's terms.

I found it interesting that a loose, somewhat broad collection of thoughts and notions around techno-pessimism seems to be coalescing into something more mainstream. We've heard TED talks and read articles on Neo Luddism well before the Summer of Ludd was a thing, but this feels new to me — something being swept into a wider generational zeitgeist.

Of course, wariness around technology isn't exactly exclusive to Gen Z, but there is evidence to suggest that younger people are increasingly turning away. Quoted in the above article is a 2025 Pew Research study that reported that 48 per cent of teenage respondents asked said social media had a negative effect on people of their age group. That's up from 32 per cent in 2022.

This somewhat correlates to a decline in social media usage. As reported by the Financial Times, overall usage is down in all adults from a historical peak back in 2022.

What's interesting to me, however, is how younger audiences are becoming more vocal in their skepticism. Before, you could argue that skepticism was mostly associated with an older generation that was resistant to change. Now, one of the first truly digital generations is leading the call online.

I do have a few niggling doubts, though, which I'll cover shortly.

What exactly is a Neo Luddite?

Workers from Kent, England burn a rural farm due to its operation of thresher machines - new tools that they thought were threatening their jobs. Engraving c1890. (Image credit: Getty Images / Universal Images Group Editorial /  Photo 12)

The original Luddites were a group that fought against industrialisation, and as the name suggests, Neo-Luddism is a movement that looks to reject the encroaching influence of technology on our lives in the twenty-first century.

If that sounds like a vague cause, that's because the movement encompasses everything from a simple affinity for older, single-use, and analog technology to more hardline stances on de-industrialization. It's not a new term or a new movement, but it's gaining traction recently within the wider sense of technology fatigue and growing fears around AI.

The Festival of Ludd, in my eyes, is the clearest example of the latest version of the wider movement. I've written about Gen Z eschewing technology before, but this really feels like a natural progression — an actual event that is dedicated to things like 'dumbphones', combating the attention economy, and in-person networking.

At a surface level, it could be seen as a simple protest or gathering of disaffected tech workers, but the festival does appear to attempt to answer the big questions and problems. At the very least, the diagnosis of the issues raised is completely valid.

So what's the issue?

A significant number of the population, including Gen Z, will be employed in services, media, or tech-adjacent roles.

While I'm broadly sympathetic to the overall movement, one thing that struck me about the Festival of Ludd in particular is that the movement seems to be coalescing around people who are effectively able to shut themselves out. I want to get fully on board, but there's a kind of idealism that always clashes with reality when I wrestle with this issue in my head.

This isn't as simple as being an indicator of class or someone's background, but to be able to 'turn off' in the first place suggests a certain level of privilege. I think if you can choose to turn off your phone, laptop, or smartwatch, then you're luckier than a lot of people right now.

There's nothing to suggest here that the movement is intentionally exclusive (in fact, it seems incredibly inclusive), but to walk away from all technology — even for a few days — is something that many cannot simply partake in.

That may sound like an excuse, but a simple analogy to make here is gas-powered cars. We know the effect of these vehicles on the environment. We know they cause harm. However, to simply opt out of these cars is not an option for some people — especially lower-income folk, in some cases.

Am I an advocate of gas-powered cars? Of course not, but the realist in me knows that people need infrastructure and affordable alternatives before they can switch to electric vehicles. In an ideal world, public transport and city infrastructure would be so good we wouldn't even need cars.

I see a similar situation unfolding for many in terms of technology. A significant number of the population, including Gen Z, will be employed in services, media, or tech-adjacent roles that require interfacing with at least some facet of potentially harmful technology.

To simply opt out, however, can severely limit your options in today's world. At best, it can be a healthy sacrifice of convenience. At worst, it can mean not having a decent job that can put food on your table.

Escaping technology

(Image credit: Alex Whitelock)

The Festival of Ludd reminds me a lot of my own experience of going to week-long festivals in my twenties. These festivals didn't outwardly eschew technology, but I see them as very much analogous to the viewpoints conveyed by those at the Festival of Ludd. Phone use was discouraged, social media was commonly derided, and you'd be bombarded with messages encouraging human connection. All good things, of course.

Now, in my thirties, however, I know I simply cannot afford to switch my phone off for a week. I have elderly parents for one, and my job requires a certain level of connection.

I wouldn't call myself perpetually online, but I obviously need to be informed about the comings and goings in my field. It would be nice to spend less time online, but I'm realistic about my uses — I am a technology journalist, after all.

You could argue that I would be able to do all of the above with a 'dumb phone' or a similar Luddite-friendly device. To an extent, that is true, and I'm certainly no advocate for AI features or similar bloat on modern smartphones.

Realistically, however, I admit that a smartphone does have several uses — a calendar, maps, emails, and so on. It effectively reduces the number of things I need to do my job dramatically. Again, it's a clash of idealism versus realism for me. I enjoy the romantic notion of throwing my smartphone away, but I know that it would just mean more devices and paperwork.

Turning off is a privilege?

I see a clash of idealism versus the reality of the situation here.

Interestingly, as a millennial, I do know people who have essentially escaped the grip of technology. People who have essentially retrained, emigrated, or even gone fully 'off-grid '. Some who have talked about a more disconnected life have effectively made it a reality.

The issue with their path, however, is that they've needed significant capital to break away. Some have even spent over a decade working in tech-adjacent roles to get to that point.

Again, I see a clash of idealism versus the reality of the situation here. These are examples where people have had to work within the wider system before they're privileged enough to make a choice whether to partake or not.

Bleakly, I can almost foresee a future where the choice of whether to 'turn off' or not is solely the reserve of the privileged. I'm somehow reminded of this report of Silicon Valley bosses sending their children to schools without computers. Most people don't have the option to send their kids to schools like this. Likewise, most people won't get to be that picky about work.

I strongly suspect that most Gen Z Neo-Luddites will face a similar path to mine in the next few decades. Some will dream of an unconnected world, but the reality may be different. The genie is unfortunately out of the bottle now, and it could take several years to actually attain a state of unconnectedness, if it is indeed possible.

Where to go from here?

So, am I against the Gen Z Neo Luddites? Not at all; I think their scepticism is absolutely valid and healthy. They've correctly diagnosed a growing issue and made their frustrations known. The question is, how do they really effect change and make the cause mainstream?

When you look for an answer to this question, you seem to generate even more questions. For one, are you able to effect change when you simply opt out of a system? Doing so seems to immediately cede the floor to the technology companies that the movement rails against. Perhaps it's more effective to try and build a more collaborative relationship, as idealistic as that sounds.

For what it's worth, the Festival of Ludd does attempt to tackle many of these questions. Such subjects as offline networking and independent websites are covered, and several attendees did point out the inherent contradiction of using social media to promote the event. They are acutely aware of the contradictions and issues raised in this article, so none of this will be news to them.

Hopefully, as the festival and wider movement grow, the option to 'turn off' becomes more of a choice, rather than a sacrifice.

Claude’s status page is reporting elevated errors across all models.

Wildfires in central and eastern Oregon are prompting evacuations and forcing ranchers to scramble to move cattle and find feed as public range land burns. More than a million acres have burned so far. Most fires have little or no containment.

(Image credit: Noah Berger)

If you prefer running outdoors, this new feature could help you stay on track through the summer heat.

Here are hints and the answer for today’s Wordle No. 1,867 for Thursday, July 30.

Here are hints and the answers for the NYT Connections puzzle No. 1145 for July 30.

Apple's long-rumored product leasing program, which it calls unironically "Apple Upgrade," is finally here, and it looks like a low-cost way to slide into the Apple ecosystem whether on the shiny surface of a gleaming iPhone 17 Pro, a Snoopy-faced Apple Watch, a clamshell Apple Silicon Mac, or an ultra-slim iPad Pro.

With no upfront fee and monthly charges as low as $11.99 a month (it's only available in the US for now), your new Apple Watch might cost you far less than your daily Starbucks mocha latte.

Honestly, this sounds like a great program, especially when you can snap up a powerful MacBook Pro for as little as $38.99 a month. Naturally, most people might be looking at the Upgrade program, a leasing program actually run by Klarna, for their next iPhone and probably the popular iPhone 17 Pro Max, which starts at $34.99 a month. Still, when I asked on a pair of social media platforms (X and Threads) if people would be leasing their next iPhone, the sentiment was decidedly negative.

Will you lease your next iPhone?July 28, 2026

On Threads and with 199 votes in, 80% said no. On X, with 105 votes, 78% said nah. I was surprised, but some of the responses to my anecdotal polls offered a little insight.

One thing a few talked about was ownership. Apple Upgrade works like most other lease programs, which means ownership is not really a thing. Here are the highlights:

• You have to qualify for the program (might be a credit check)
• You pay a fixed fee for 12, 24, or 36 months
• You're not paying off the cost of the phone
• At the end of the lease term, you own nothing
• You can return the phone
• You can turn it in for an upgrade and continue paying
• A better device (upgrading from an iPhone 17 to an iPhone 17 Pro Max) will increase your monthly fee
• You can buy the leased device at the end of the lease term (it's the full price minus whatever you've paid thus far via the lease program)

Virtually every part of this resembles a typical lease program you might have with an automobile.

"I have an Apple Card for a reason… I like being able to pay it off whenever and ACTUALLY own the thing," wrote brianniesniak on Threads.

The ownership argument is the sole reason I've never leased a car. I always buy them with a substantial down payment and then pay the rest off. Of course, I tend to hold onto my cars for a decade or more. In the world of technology, like smartphones, laptops, watches, and tablets, technical advances are so rapid that it rarely makes sense to hold onto them for that long.

On the other hand, there are people who own their tech for extraordinarily long times and only upgrade when companies like Apple, Microsoft, or a necessary third-party application force them to through lack of support. These days, many companies, including Samsung and Google, tout years of OS and security updates, but in a world of leases, none of that really matters. Every two years, you could have a new device; it will always have the latest software and security protections.

Access for all

"If you can’t buy it, you can’t afford it," argues Mrmarchall on Threads. I mean, isn't that the whole point of credit and lease programs? They throw open the doors of access to these products to those who don't have the funds to cover full purchase. Yes, there is the risk of someone who unexpectedly is unable to afford the lease, and then, if they try to leave the program, they're still on the hook for the remainder of the program (they leave at 3 months and still have to pay 21 months).

Even though most in my poll respondents were anti-lease, some saw the obvious benefits. "People who picked no, you seriously have $1000 laying around?" wrote Ajvizz on Threads.

"Yeah, probably. I can't personally think of any negatives in my situation," surmised Dilpickle1 on Threads.

Others on X pointed to the excellent option of refurbished iPhones, which offer access to pre-owned iPhones (sometimes higher-end models) at far more reasonable prices. And you get the added benefit of true ownership, if that's your thing.

The endless age of subscriptions

Apple Upgrade's inherent lack of ownership and never-ending payments because you're in an endless upgrade cycle does raise some concerns and correlates to an unfortunate and rapidly growing trend.

"It is absolutely crazy that we have entered the era of leased consumer electronics. "Everything is a subscription!" should not be the new normal," wrote Tech Journalist Matthew Keys on X.

I had to agree. Last year I wrote about tech services subscription culture and how companies are now often placing key features behind subscription paywalls. At least in this instance, you're getting the whole device and all its capabilities. The lease only equates to a subscription in that there's an assumption you will jump from one leased device to another, hence the name "Apple Upgrade".

If I were asked, I think I'd look more positively on Apple Upgrade.

Smartphones, laptops, smart watches, desktop computers, and tablets are, in some ways, a fact of life. No one leaves home without a phone in their pocket. Frustration over aging iPhones that can't support the latest OS or whose battery life ends faster than a summer vacation is all too real. The knowledge that with a relatively affordable monthly payment, you're guaranteed a better phone in 24 months might be a relief.

It's an irrefutable fact that as soon as you unbox your shiny new iPhone, it's worth less than it was seconds before. Those who buy cars know that depreciation, which begins the moment you drive it off the lot, is real. It's no different with consumer electronics. Maybe ownership isn't all it's cracked up to be. So what if joining Apple Upgrade means, for the next 24 months, Apple kind of owns you?

Good news everyone - it seems that the reason AI hasn't yet resulted in less work and more leisure time, as promised by multiple "evangelists" and AI "experts" is that we just love working too darn much.

That's according to OpenAI CEO and America's next top (AI) model whisperer Sam Altman, who has declared that people are just really big fans of grinding away and competing with others.

Speaking on the Relentless podcast, Altman told host Ti Morse that in fact, he doesn't expect a change in society or working practices for quite some time, despite widespread promises that AI would boost our productivity and efficiency across the board.

AI "won't change" work - yet

"Technology, for a long time, has been promising people that they're going to work less and they're going to have all this leisure," Altman said.

"But somehow we never get the promise of the four-hour workweek at mass scale in society," he added. "And I don't expect AI to change that."

It's a remarkably candid admission from the leader of a company which is explicitly setting out to solve some of the world's biggest problems - whether personal or work-related - with AI.

In fact, Altman pointed out that we do have more free time and luxuries today than at any point in history - but this has led to increased expectations from many people.

"We always want more," Altman added, "we think of new things to do, to create for each other, to want for ourselves. It's like a relative game. People are very focused on how they're doing relative to other people."

"I think we're all going to be much busier than we thought we were supposed to be in a post-superintelligence world. We're still going to complain about it, but secretly we're going to be happy," Altman concluded.

I'm not so sure about that - but I'm happy to be proved wrong.

Play it again, Sam

I'm not so sure about that - but I'm happy to be proved wrong.

That's because Altman has been pretty vocal on the future of AI in the workplace for some time, with his viewpoints often changing depending on the situation.

For starters, he recently revealed OpenAI's future strategy would be not to automate everything but to allow people to make better decisions as AI improves their lives, particularly as it expects an AGI world to be here by 2028.

"Entirely automating everything is not the future we want", Altman declared, as he described how OpenAI is now looking to opens a "third phase" and aims to build technology "to benefit everyone".

In May 2026, Altman also criticized companies blaming job cuts on AI - but did admit the technology has some accountability in displacing human workers.

"I would expect that the real impact of AI on jobs, in the next few years, to begin to be palpable," Altman explained, adding that "Of course we'll find new kinds of jobs."

Days later, Altman said he would be "delighted to be wrong" about the effect of AI on human roles, hitting out at claims the increasing global usage of AI technology worldwide will lead to a "jobs apocalypse".

"I thought there would have been more impact on entry-level white-collar jobs being eliminated by now than ​has actually happened," Altman said, who also admitted that while he believed OpenAI has been "roughly right" on the technological predictions it made when it launched ​ChatGPT in 2022, they were "pretty wrong" on the social and economic implications.

At the time of writing, 252 companies have announced job cuts in 2026 so far, leading to 124,255 employees losing their roles (via Layoffs.fyi) - people who, I suppose, do now have a lot more free time than they expected.

The popular AI platform is used by developers to share access to their AI models and demo apps.

The PlayStation 5 Pro has been my primary, booted-up-nearly-every-day console since the premium PS5 variant launched in late 2024. I’ve used it a lot on both a 60Hz display and a 120Hz display, and the experience it gives me on both for my PS5 games has been basically flawless.

The extra power, chops, and graphical prowess that it offers have been superb for a console enthusiast like me. It makes both fidelity-focused and performance-focused game settings better, but has also paved the way for a new middle ground between the two.

This in-between mode, often labeled as ‘Balanced’, allows players with a 120Hz display to enjoy a host of enhanced ray tracing features and boosted image quality, with a bunch of extra frames per second, giving it a clear boost over standard fidelity modes, which are normally locked at 30fps. What’s even better is that you can often engage this mode on base PS5 or PS5 Slim consoles when those are teamed with a 120Hz-capable display too, and it’s proving once again to be a saving grace for fidelity-chasers this generation.

This Balanced mode is absolutely excellent in Assassin’s Creed Black Flag Resynced and is the only way I’d recommend a PS5 or PS5 Pro user to play what is one of the best Assassin's Creed games. It combines the sheer beauty of the Anvil-engine-powered Caribbean setting with loads of water, shadow, and particle detail to boot, with a 40fps frame rate that, while not as super slick as 60fps, is absolutely noticeably better than 30fps. The difference is huge.

Two and a half years ago, I wrote how I was happy with 4K 30fps on console. But, after spending time with a PS5 Pro, I will happily admit that my preferences and opinions have changed — and that gives me much confidence when it comes to Grand Theft Auto 6.

Perfectly balanced

(Image credit: Ubisoft)

Not that long ago, stories were circulating saying that GTA 6 having a 60fps mode on console would be unlikely. And it was something to take note of too, given it was coming from the brilliant tech analysts over at Digital Foundry.

I don’t think many folks were truly surprised at this. The amount of technical brilliance and sheer detail that will likely go into GTA 6 will surely translate into the amount of demand on a console’s GPU and CPU. Think of the poor old Series S trying to run such a behemoth. Godspeed, little Xbox.

However, playing Assassin’s Creed Black Flag Resynced on its Balanced mode right now has me feeling a bit more confident in the prospects of what we may have to settle for on GTA 6.

While the smoothness of 60fps is a joy on a console like the PS5 or PS5 Pro, I am one to chase graphical fidelity wherever I can.

I’m a sucker but also quasi-expert on video game landscapes and environments in a way, so I will always desire to see more detail like the edges of leaves, the fluttering of foliage in the wind, and expansive vistas across lands as far as the eye can see, views scattered with landscape features, ruins, and blissful seas — all at the expense of a few more frames. And that’s what Resynced’s 40fps mode does.

(Image credit: Ubisoft)

The glorious beauty and image quality that’s on offer in the balanced mode isn’t far off the fidelity-focused 30fps mode at all. The overall fidelity in balanced mode is fantastic. I can enjoy all the detail of plants and foliage, and every landscape element and urban rooftop or dwelling is a sight to behold, genuinely.

Sony’s enhanced PlayStation Spectral Super Resolution (PSSR) tech, and the benefits of variable refresh rate (VRR) play a big part in how good it looks on PS5 Pro too, of course. The former offers excellent boosts to anti-aliasing, overall image detail and quality (at least in my eye), and things like the flickering of fire and light — something again noticed by Digital Foundry. The latter, VRR, does — as usual, in my experience — a great job of smoothing out any potential frame rate drops to reduce tearing, too, but it’s not something I’ve been hugely concerned about generally with Resynced.

The extended ray tracing is also excellent in this mode on PS5 Pro, with shadows being fantastic, reflections being lifelike and adding an extra mirror-like quality to views, and particles of dust or vegetation fluttering beautifully in the wind. The water is absolutely lovely too, with each splash from Edward Kenway’s swimming perfectly natural and evocative of how the seas would behave, and the glistening rocks and sand of every beach. Blissful at every glance.

A reason to be confident

(Image credit: Ubisoft)

As I said above, the difference between 30 and 40fps is absolutely noticeable and tangible, and while the jump to 60 is even smoother, I concede that the fact that one can cling on to extended ray tracing and high levels of detail at 40fps is a triumph and offers a super balance. For someone who, for one reason or another, but happily, has settled on one platform in PlayStation consoles, as one’s main way to play games, and has a penchant for quality and performance, then Resynced has nailed that sweet spot.

Combine Resynced’s excellence in this mode with the likes of the Horizon games, The Last of Us games, Marvel’s Spider-Man games and more on PS5 and PS5 Pro, and the 40fps modes are the reason I’m more confident in GTA 6 if 60fps really is off the table and it does indeed end up having a balanced mode ‘instead’ of a performance mode. Plus, given Rockstar’s track record of squeezing all the graphical excellence it can out of even standard consoles — how Rockstar made Red Dead Redemption 2 look that good on base PS4 is actual witchcraft — the detail, lighting, reflections, and image quality we can expect in Vice City’s urban and natural landscapes, as well as characters adn cars, is going to be immense.

Of course, I would prefer there were a 60fps mode for GTA 6. Heck, I’d hope for the three settings we’ve grown a bit used to on the PS5 Pro covering 30, 40, and 60 frames per second modes.

But if compromises have to be made due to the likely enormous demand made by GTA 6 on consoles, then this sweet, sweet 40fps mode in the middle could be the door to excellence on PS5 and PS5 Pro, given the evidence we have so far of it being the perfect middle ground for superb graphical fidelity and deliciously smooth frame rates.

Some mild spoilers for The Odyssey ahead.

Normally, when my TikTok FYP causes me to experience an extreme case of FOMO, I do something I regret. That's ranged from buying something cheap and tacky on TikTok Shop to queueing for hours to get sub-par food at a restaurant that influencers say is my area's "best-kept secret".

But that losing streak has ended with The Odyssey in 4DX.

If you've been active on social media in the last two weeks, you might have come across the many viral videos of cinema-goers having popcorn knocked out of their hands while their chair moves at a million miles a minute in Troy, and being sprayed in the face during one of the many seen featuring Odysseus (Matt Damon) at sea.

At first, I thought these clips were performative. I hate the idea that filming in theaters has become as commonplace as it has (which is why I won't be sharing any of those clips here), but surely watching The Odyssey in 4DX isn't like a very dark log flume at Six Flags... is it?

After giving into curiosity and getting myself a ticket, I can happily confirm that the TikToks don't lie. Not only do I think that my 4DX-perience was my favorite cinema visit of 2026 so far, but having seen The Odyssey in three different formats — standard DCP, IMAX 70mm, and now 4DX — I can confirm that 4DX wins out by a long shot.

Before you think I've taken too many Greek beatings to the head — surely Christopher Nolan's original IMAX format is superior? — let me explain my thinking. Here's what you need to know about 4DX, my review of the movie in this format, and the five most brutal scenes, which on their own are, I think, worth the price of your ticket.

The Odyssey in 4DX: the basics

4DX screenings feel almost as few and far between as IMAX 70mm. There are a relatively few 790 screens worldwide, meaning that if you don't live in a big city that has one, you'll have to add the cost of a trip to the admission price.

That price is also the most premium of the three formats. I'm based in the UK, and the cost of my three options for watching the The Odyssey is as follows:

• Standard screening: £16.99
• IMAX 70mm screening: £26
• 4DX screening: £28

In the US, the prices will look something like this:

• Standard screening: $12–$20
• IMAX 70mm screening: $25-$35
• 4DX screening: approx $35

I've left out a few other formats that I haven't seen The Odyssey in, including 70mm, IMAX and Superscreen. It's also worth pointing out that thanks to my beloved Cineworld membership, I only had to pay out an additional £6 for my 4DX screening on top of the monthly direct debit.

Do I think the full price is worth the experience? Yes and no. The cost of 4DX is extortionate, and I don't think the experience would work for a first-time viewing — you'd be too busy worrying where your nachos have gone to keep up with whether Robert Pattinson is Antinous or Agamemnon.

Having said that, I think it has to be done once. As I'll explain below, I think 4DX makes for an ideal second or third viewing of The Odyssey, and I feel quite smug that I've had the chance to experience being enlightened by the Gods (of cinema tech).

What social media has got wrong, though, is the idea that The Odyssey in 4DX is a "three-hour rollercoaster." While you're getting a lot of bang for your buck in terms of movement and effects, a lot of the movie's scenes allow for the stillness you'll feel in desperate need of.

As someone who got battered relentlessly from beginning to end while watching Top Gun: Maverick in 4DX, and was worried because she'd forgotten her travel sickness tablets before heading to Ithaca, this was a welcome surprise.

However, ladies — please don't make my mistake and wear a dress or skirt. I'd recommend long pants, a supportive sports bra. I'd also recommend a minimal amount of snacks, and a maximum amount of drinks; there's ample time and space to go to the bathroom, I promise.

Don't forget: you'll be in control of some of the effects yourself. You can choose to turn water on or off at any time, and you can lean forward to avoid any unwanted back damage during fight scenes.

Review: 4DX allows The Odyssey to compensate for its lack of heart and emotion

(Image credit: Universal Pictures)

My biggest problem with The Odyssey isn't just that it's clearly not Nolan's best movie, but that there's next to no heart or emotion in it.

From a technical perspective, the new film is a genuine masterpiece. Cinematography, score, performances, production design… everything, and everyone, is firing on all cylinders.

But even with all of those things in place, nothing comes through the screen enough to touch your heart. You'll absolutely be impressed… but moved? It's not like you're really rooting for anybody to reunite (and if you are, chances are they'll end up dead).

By seeing The Odyssey in 4DX, you become the character that brings the missing emotion. I defy you not to giggle your way through being slammed about on a Bronze Age boat, weep because you can literally feel the pain of Odysseus being shot by arrows, and gleefully lean into every witch-like stroke as Circe (a magnificent performance from Samantha Morton) turns soldiers into pigs.

Frankly, it's all a riot that neither Homer nor Nolan likely expected when they decided to tell this story. As I said earlier, you'll need to see the film while stationary first to fully grasp the nuances and gravitas of the story, but in 4DX you'll feel as bruised and confused as Odysseus did throughout his 10-year journey home. Bottom line: it's so much fun.

The Odyssey's most brutal scenes in 4DXAny time Odysseus is on a boat

(Image credit: Universal Pictures)

Let's start with the elephant in the room. With Odysseus and his crew taking 10 years to get home to Ithaca from Troy, we spent a lot of time at sea.

For the most part, this involves of some gentle chair-rocking, not the chaotic assault on the senses you've seen on TikTok. With the effects slowed down and used minimally in these instances, you really understand how impactful the slightest spritz of water or well thought-out vibration can be.

Depending on where you're sitting in the theater, the in-seat water effects will perform differently. As I was sitting in the center of the second row of my section, I mostly got soaked on the lower half of my body. If you sit down and there's a black barrier directly in front of you; I'm sorry to say that you'll be taking some direct hits to the face.

Regardless of where you're sitting, a separate effects system in the ceiling rig of the theater, which takes care of rain, snow, smoke and light effects, will make sure that the rest of you is drenched. And even when the waters aren't choppy, for much of Odysseus' journey home he's pelted by rain storms, so maybe save hair-wash day until the day after your screening.

The cyclops

(Image credit: Universal Pictures)

Our first big action sequence in The Odyssey, the cyclops scenes, are the perfect 4DX starter, getting us ready for bigger and better things to come.

Lots of sudden, juddering movements within the seat are used each time the cyclops decides to have some dinner, with additional smoke effects being used depending on how high the fire in his cave is burning. In an ideal world, I'd have liked a bit of cheese smell-o-vision at this point... but we can't have it all.

Things ramps up a level when Odysseus decides that blinding our cyclops with a hot stick is a good means of escaping. Somehow, the cyclops' painful cries — which made me think that my ear drums were going to burst during my first screening — were more palatable to listen to, perhaps because I was being distracted by the sudden whiplash I'd suffered thanks to the stick's movement.

As Odysseus disguises his men as sheep and successfully gets them out of the cave, you can almost imagine the cyclops' gigantic fingers running down your spine. Things take a more violent 4DX turn when Odysseus decides to provoke the creature with a final arrow to the face (I mean... what was the point of that?), leaving the crew to charge towards the boats on the island's coast.

We feel every tumble, misplaced step and unexpected branch-to-head contact that the boys get — but the real fun begins when the cyclops himself enters the water. Performing a belly flop that could have won him a gold medal at the Jackass Olympics, the cyclops' demise is our first real test of the in-seat water system, combined with some severe shaking as his colossal frame hits the sea.

The 7ft soldiers in silver

(Image credit: Universal Pictures)

The action sequence I was the most impressed by (in terms of both production design and 4DX) is Odysseus' next stop on his ill-fated journey. The gang arrives on another island, only to be met by giant soldiers in silver armor, who remarkably were real 7ft-tall actors.

Given that they fight with machetes instead of Greek bows and arrows and swords, expect some serious upper back damage here. Out of every scene in the movie, this one inflicted the longest sustained impact between my shoulder blades, which I could still feel the next day.

What's also really fun here is the use of air bursts. Two 'air jets' are mounted on either side of your seat's headrest, and are used almost every time a Greek soldier shoots an arrow at his target. It feels exactly like the arrow is zooming past you, just without the pain.

4DX also manages to briefly incorporate the use of the snow machine during this scene, as Odysseus and co come across a woodland shrouded in dense mist.

There's a surprising lack of water effects, despite the soldiers clambering back into their boats mere minutes after they first disembarked. Only one of those boats makes it to freedom, but at least you won't be drowned, like the poor souls who didn't make it.

The final storm

(Image credit: Universal Pictures)

The big kahuna, and the moment you've seen plastered all over TikTok, is the final storm. By this, I mean the scene directly after Odysseus has chastised his men for eating Apollo's cattle when Tiresias (James Remar) specifically warned them not to, and their repaired ship heads out to sea once more when the volatile winds clear.

As we know, this was a trap by Poseidon and Zeus, who mean to kill all the men responsible through a fatal storm. Incredibly, the 4DX experience is exactly as brutal as it looks in all of the social media clips.

The special effects go into overdrive, with the audience bombarded by everything bar the snow machine, and the kitchen sink, at the same time. I was holding onto my seat trying to steady myself through severe turbulence, wondering whether I was the first person in history to consume the story of The Odyssey and almost die laughing in the process.

There are shots to your back and sides, water and winds to the face, rain falling onto your head, constant strobe lighting to replicate the weather (definitely not suitable for those with epilepsy) and enough jostling to give you a mild concussion.

A special shoutout must go to the in-seat air jets by your legs, which begin to be utilized shortly before, when Odysseus must steer his vessel between the whirlpool that is Charybdis, and the six-headed monster, Scylla. If you don't have anything covering your legs, they're about to be whipped so hard that they sting.

Then just when we think it's all over, a brief pause in movement lulls the audience into a false sense of security. The boat splits in half as Odysseus' crew sinks into darkness, and we're back to being pummeled to within an inch of our lives. Make sure your snacks are firmly on the floor in the moments beforehand, or risk covering the person next to you in nacho cheese and guacamole as an unexpected additional effect.

This moment alone is worth the £28, in my opinion... what an experience.

Odysseus' homecoming fight

(Image credit: Universal Pictures)

But we're not out of the woods just yet! Before attending my 4DX screening, I wondered if the effects would be limited to scenes with lots of travel in. I'd only seen Top Gun: Maverick and Jurassic World: Dominion in the format before The Odyssey, so I didn't have a handle on what happens when you're not flying, driving, or a cretaceous monster.

Turns out, fight scenes are just as thoughtfully rendered to make your back ache for days, even if they're just in a palace hall. Once Odysseus re-fights for Penelope's (Anne Hathaway) hand in marriage at the palace trial, he turns his successfully strung bow on the group of suitors, including Antinous (Pattinson). It's a different kind of chaos, and we're once again immersed in it.

Our seats sway in whichever direction our victim is being attacked from, with our shoulders blades once again jabbed to oblivion as other weapons manage to find their way back into the great hall. The air jets are working 10 to the dozen here, but thankfully just the ones by your head.

There's a particular moment where Antinous breaks an entire chair over Odysessus' back, and it got me thinking that I should really try seeing a chiropractor for the first time. Nothing says 'final farewell' quite like a parting blow that could potentially cause permanent damage — and I wouldn't have it any other way.

The hit anime streaming service’s first bundle deal is available now.

If you think downloading a VPN directly from an official app store guarantees your digital privacy, it’s time to think again.

We recently undertook a huge audit of storefront verification standards, which has exposed a severe lack of quality control across both the iOS App Store and Google Play.

We evaluated developer transparency and store verification standards, analyzing 3,392 Android VPN apps (with more than 1,000 downloads) and 1,387 iOS VPN apps (with at least one review).

It appears that Google Play looks significantly worse than Apple's App Store across almost every transparency and validity metric. In fact, a mere 61.4% (851) of iOS apps passed all main validity checks, while Android trailed far behind with just 40.8% (1,210) passing the same tests.

Just because a VPN is available on an official App Store doesn’t mean it’s legitimate. Here is what the data tells us about the safety of mobile VPNs.

Storefront Enforcement & Quality Control Data

(Image credit: Google)

When you hand over your web traffic to a VPN, you expect the developer to be a real, registered business. However, storefront enforcement data proves that thousands of these apps lack even the most basic corporate infrastructure.

When it comes to maintaining a valid developer website, Apple leads the pack. Our data shows that 82.7% (1,147) of iOS apps maintain a valid developer website. In contrast, only 52.2% (1,774) of total Android apps manage to do the same (which equals 59.8% of the Android apps that actually bothered to list a URL).

But the problem goes deeper than broken links. 46.9% of valid Android websites (832) and 47.5% of total Android privacy policies (1,612) rely entirely on free third-party domains like Google Sites, GitHub, and Blogger.

In total, more than 1,200 Android developer website or privacy policy links pointed directly to free Google pages. Apple performs better here, but isn't immune; 15.6% of iOS websites (179) and 18.3% of iOS privacy policies (217) still rely on these free hosts.

So What?

Relying on free platforms like Blogger or Google Sites signals a complete lack of dedicated corporate infrastructure and financial investment. If a developer isn't willing to spend a few dollars on a custom domain, how can you trust them to invest in secure AES-256 encryption or server maintenance?

Worse, if that free third-party account is suspended or abandoned by the host, developer support and privacy documentation vanish instantly.

The platform differences are equally stark when it comes to developer contact requirements. Google Play mandates that developers display an email address, but 65.1% of Android apps (2,208) use free, public domain services like @gmail.com or @yahoo.com.

Meanwhile, iOS does not require developers to display an email address at all, and it is present on only 16.2% of iOS VPNs (225 apps).

Allowing developers to omit contact emails lets operators remain entirely anonymous. This prevents users from exercising fundamental privacy rights, such as GDPR data access or deletion requests.

It strongly indicates that the "company" is an individual or transient entity rather than a registered business, making legal accountability and data privacy enforcement virtually impossible.

Privacy Policy Misrepresentation & Boilerplate Networks

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

A VPN is only as trustworthy as its privacy policy. Premium providers like ExpressVPN and NordVPN undergo regular independent audits to verify their no-logs claims. By contrast, our audit revealed that hundreds of mobile VPNs use completely meaningless, generic, or copied text to masquerade as legitimate services.

In one example, we found 13 iOS apps sharing identical boilerplate text containing unedited template placeholders. Because the developers didn't even bother to read their own legal documents, the text still reads: "If you have questions about this Privacy Policy, contact us at support@example.com." You can view one of these identical unedited policies here.

These unedited templates contain zero binding commitments regarding VPN-specific practices, such as traffic logging, IP tracking, or bandwidth monitoring. Users are misled into assuming they are protected when, in reality, no legal policy actually exists.

Furthermore, a massive portion of these apps rely on automated "policy generator farms", sites that bulk-host generic privacy documents. The audit discovered:

• 48 Android apps hosting policies on projeto10.top
• 40 apps using freeprivacypolicy.com
• 19 apps using termsfeed.com

Automated policy generators often attach legal disclaimers stating they do not guarantee accuracy. Furthermore, the host platform can alter or remove the page without the developer's knowledge, leaving users without valid privacy terms.

Perhaps the most absurd discovery belongs to Sigma VPN, an Android app with over 100,000 downloads. Its listed privacy policy isn't a policy at all. Instead, it links directly to a copied Wix support article on how to create a privacy policy.

Even when policies are unique, they are often too short to mean anything. The audit found that 2.3% of valid Android policies (72) and 6.6% of valid iOS policies (78) contain 250 words or fewer. Highly truncated policies like these lack necessary legal disclosures regarding logging, third-party data sharing, jurisdiction, and data retention windows.

Consumer Advice & Actionable Insights

So, how do you navigate app stores safely without downloading a dud, or worse, a data-harvesting nightmare? Here is our actionable checklist to protect yourself before hitting 'Download'.

• Domain Verification: Always check that the provider operates an independent, custom web domain matching the product name, rather than a free sub-domain on Blogger or Google Sites. If they don't own their own website, they shouldn't own your web traffic.
• Policy Audit Checklist: Don't just trust the word "Privacy Policy." Open the link and search the text for generic email placeholders (like support@example.com), generator footers, or broad non-VPN terms. Confirm that the policy explicitly commits to no connection or activity logging.
• Contact Testing: Test the developer's contact channels before subscribing. Send a quick email to verify that support responsiveness and account deletion mechanisms actually exist.

The Bottom Line

Google Play's link verification method lets hundreds of apps operate using temporary blogs, blank pages, and automated generator sites. While Apple does a better job of enforcing valid web links, its main flaw is that it permits total anonymity for developers, leaving users with no way to hold iOS developers accountable legally.

In response to our investigation, Apple declined to comment on the record, pointing instead to its safety guidelines and app review processes. Meanwhile, a Google spokesperson said: “We are looking into this. When made aware of an app that violates our policies, we will review the apps in question and take appropriate action."

The final takeaway is a crucial lesson in modern cybersecurity: store listing approval reflects compliance with basic submission forms, not operational legitimacy or privacy protection. Always do your own research before trusting a mobile VPN with your personal data.

Robot vacuums have been around for many years, and modern bots are cleverer and more helpful than ever. But while they are getting more popular, they seem to be struggling to properly break through to the mainstream. See a robot vacuum in someone's house, and you'd probably still remark on it. The aim for robovac brands must be to at some point overtake manual vacs as the general public's dust-sucker of choice — so why isn't that happening?

I rounded up representatives from some of the best robot vacuum brands to get their take. I wanted to learn more about the misconceptions that brands are still fighting against, how perceptions of these handy puck-shaped home helpers has changed, and what challenges still remain if robovacs are going to truly hit the mainstream.

Get with the times

"Robot vacuums are gradually being accepted and adopted by the public, rather than being treated as a novel and unrealistic concept," insists Michael Meng, president of the robotic vacuum division at Dreame.

"Admittedly, the market share of robot vacuums is still smaller than that of stick vacuums and upright vacuums, but the trend towards automated, hands-free household cleaning is inevitable," he adds. The problem — as all of my interviewees agree — is that people's perceptions are stuck in the past.

The trend towards automated, hands-free household cleaning is inevitable

Michael Meng, Dreame

"The issue isn't technical — it's psychological," says Faraz Mehdi, a managing director at Eufy. "Many people who've used robot vacuums still associate the category with 'mopping with dirty water' and 'poor carpet cleaning' — real pain points from a few years ago. Today's products are fundamentally different."

(Image credit: Future)

"One lingering misconception is that robot vacuums are still novelty gadgets that wander randomly, get stuck constantly, and cannot clean as well as a conventional vacuum. That perception often comes from earlier generations of the category," says Ricky Ma, the general manager for Europe and America at Roborock.

The biggest opportunity is helping consumers understand that a robot vacuum is not simply a smaller vacuum; it is an automated, intelligent cleaning system

Ricky Ma, Roborock

He continues: "The biggest opportunity is helping consumers understand that a robot vacuum is not simply a smaller vacuum; it is an automated, intelligent cleaning system designed to maintain the home every day and free up their time in a way that no other appliance can compete with."

"Ultimately, the industry's continued growth will depend not only on technological innovation but also on helping consumers better understand how far the category has evolved," adds Dreame's Meng. "Bridging the gap between perception and reality remains one of the most important opportunities for the industry as a whole."

Welcome to the real world

So there are unfair assumptions about modern robot vacuum performance, but there are also genuine issues that still need to be solved. As a robovac reviewer, I'm regularly struck by how simultaneously smart and stupid these bots can be — for every bot raising itself majestically over a tall room threshold, there's another determinedly head-butting a French door.

(Image credit: Future)

I'm in wholehearted agreement with Reena Patel — a floorcare category manager at iRobot, the brand behind Roomba — when she suggests that autonomy and reliability should be the key focus areas.

"While robot vacuums have become significantly smarter, consumers still expect them to navigate increasingly complex environments, avoid everyday obstacles, handle pet hair effectively, and transition seamlessly between different floor types without intervention," she says.

"The goal is to deliver consistently excellent cleaning results while reducing the need for maintenance, ensuring the robot can truly operate as a set-and-forget solution that fits effortlessly into consumers' daily lives."

(Image credit: Future)

Minimal human intervention is one of the hot robot vacuum trends du jour, but it's easier said than done. Mehdi points out that, in the UK at least, plenty of people live in old apartments or multi-story homes, both of which are "historically a nightmare for robots". Throw in challenges like clutter, low-slung furniture, uneven flooring, and mixtures of different floor types, and it's easy to see why people might assume a robot vacuum wouldn't be able to cope.

There are solutions to some of these problems — albeit mostly confined to the premium end of the market. Today's most advanced flagship robots have features like little stilts for vaulting tall thresholds, sensors that identify and respond to different surfaces, and slimline designs that can sneak under furniture.

(Image credit: Future)

However, the challenge is to hone those features to a point where they work consistently and reliably. After all, if, your bot misjudges the height of a space and gets itself wedged, or fails to cross a step on the way back to its dock, and you're not around to bail it out, that can put a pretty abrupt end to the cleaning for the day.

"It’s one thing for a robot to perform well in a demo, but another to perform reliably, day after day, in homes that are busy, messy, and unpredictable," admits Mehdi. "The real issue isn't what the product can do, it's that consumers haven't seen it perform in their own space."

The bigger picture

The robot vacuum market has evolved considerably in the past few years, but so too has what customers are looking for. All my interviewees agreed lofty specs are no longer the route to a customer's heart (or wallet).

"Customers are looking beyond headline suction figures and realize that the performance of robot vacuums is the combination of a lot of features," says Dreame's Meng.

Eufy's Mehdi echoes his sentiments: "A few years ago, the category was often marketed around isolated features like suction power. But consumers are now evaluating robot vacuums much more holistically. People are looking for real cleaning outcomes, not just bigger numbers on a spec sheet."

Users are starting to realize that they can trust robot vacuums to take on more of their household cleaning

Michael Meng, Dreame

Expectations are also rising — a number of the brands I spoke to told me that customers increasingly want bots that can mop as well as vacuuming, and are looking for models with self-maintenance features like dust-emptying, water tank refilling, and mop washing.

iRobot's Patel comments that customers are "more willing to purchase premium robot vacuums to deliver a genuinely hands-off experience".

Dreame's Meng argues that the move from cheap-and-basic to pricey-and-advanced bots reflects a change in perceptions. "Users are starting to realize that they can trust robot vacuums to take on more of their household cleaning."

(Image credit: Future)

Pricier bots might be becoming more popular, but customers aren't willing to splash their cash on just anything. Mehdi at Eufy describes a demand for "flagship-level experiences… at broader price points", noting that even at the upper end of the market, people are "rational about value".

"The market is shifting towards products that deliver meaningful innovation people can actually use and justify paying for," he explains.

As part of this trend, the early adopters who took a leap of faith with a simpler model a few years ago are now ready for something more advanced. "We have observed a significant shift from 'first-time experimenters' to 'sophisticated upgraders'," Roborock's Ma tells me.

These shoppers are seeking out replacements that solve the issues that frustrated them with their first bot. Thanks to design innovations, many problems that plagued early robot vacuums — hair tangling, poor edge coverage and stinky mop pads — are far less common in modern models.

Not your average robovac

Features and price decisions aside, my interviewees have noticed a broader change in purchasing habits — and it's tied to how people see robot vacuums. "More consumers are treating robot vacuums as long-term home automation investments rather than one-off gadgets," says Richard Mou, co-founder of SwitchBot. "They're spending more time comparing ecosystem compatibility, software updates, and after-sales support before making a purchase."

Consumers are treating robot vacuums as long-term home automation investments rather than one-off gadgets

Richard Mou, SwitchBot

Mehdi describes a dovetailing of approaches. At the upper end of the market, he's noticed customers going really in-depth with the research and product comparison, while at the more affordable end of the market, the decision-making process is different.

"There, trust can matter more than technical comparisons," he says. "Ratings, reviews, brand reputation, and recommendations from friends or family are often more influential than specs alone."

"That tells us something important about where the category is today," he concludes. "As robot vacuums become more mainstream, people are evaluating them less like gadgets and more like long-term home appliances."

(Image credit: Future)

So robot vacuums are getting smarter, customers are starting to embrace the modern advancements now on offer, and brands are working to address the pain-points that still linger when it comes to using a robovac in a real, messy, haphazard home.

The fact that people are viewing their robot vacuums as investment purchases rather than short-lived impulse purchases suggests things are moving in the right direction. Perhaps we will yet see a future where, when we see a robot vacuum in the corner of a room, it'll no longer be worthy of comment.