Daring FireballModify

2025-11-15 10:09:38

Wayne Ma and Qianer Liu, reporting for The Information on Tuesday (paywalled, alas, but summarized by 9to5Mac here and here):

Apple has since sharply scaled back production of the first iPhone Air and delayed the release of an updated version that was meant to launch in fall 2026, The Information reported earlier this week.

Instead, some Apple engineers are hoping to release a redesigned version with a second camera lens in spring 2027 alongside existing plans to release the standard iPhone 18 and iPhone 18e at that time. It’s still too early to tell whether they can successfully redesign the iPhone Air in time to make that new release window, the people said.

My question: Would that second camera provide an ultra-wide (0.5×) or a telephoto (3× or 4×) lens? The regular non-pro iPhones provide an ultra-wide lens as their second camera. But when the premium iPhones had only two (rather than three) lenses, the second lens was telephoto, not ultra-wide. Apple first used the adjective “Pro” with the iPhones 11 Pro and Pro Max, and all iPhones to date with “Pro” in their name have had three lenses. But the iPhones XS (2018), X (2017), 8 Plus (also 2017), and 7 Plus (2016) all had 1× main and 2× “telephoto” lenses.

In other words, when a premium iPhone had only one extra lens, that lens added additional reach, not ultra-wide perspective. The iPhone Air costs more than a regular no-adjective iPhone, so if that patterns holds, a two-camera second-generation model would add a telephoto, not ultra-wide lens. Personally I’m hoping that’s what Apple will do.

Looking at my own photo library and using smart albums to count the photos I’ve taken using each particular lens on each particular iPhone, roughly speaking, over the past few years, I shoot about 10 percent of my photos with the ultra-wide lens, 10 percent with the telephoto, and 80 percent with the main. But a lot of my ultra-wide photos are really just close-up macro shots of things like product labels. If I were less lazy, I’d go through them and trash a lot of them. I could capture equivalent photos, for a lot of these throwaway macro shots, with the main 1× camera lens just by holding the phone a little further from the subject. Adding a 0.5× ultra-wide to the iPhone Air just wouldn’t add much utility, at least for me, compared to the obvious utility of a telephoto lens with more reach.

(The iPhone Air’s lone 1× camera has a minimum focus distance of 15 cm; the minimum focus distance of the 1× cameras on the iPhones 17 Pro, 16 Pro, and 15 Pro is 20 cm. That 5 cm difference is a largely unheralded advantage for the iPhone Air’s camera, and significantly makes up for the lack of an ultra-wide lens for close-up photography. 5 cm doesn’t sound like much, but in practice it’s very noticeable. That said, for actual macro photography, the 0.5× ultra-wide camera on the iPhone Pro models has a minimum focus distance of just 2 cm.)

2025-11-15 00:53:18

We have no idea how many of them they made, but seemingly, the price was not a problem for this product.

2025-11-14 12:03:49

Rolfe Winkler and Yang Jie, reporting for The Wall Street Journal (gift link, News+ link) under the headline “Apple’s iPhone Air Is a Marketing Win and a Sales Flop” (which headline, going from the web page <title> element, was originally the less sensational “Apple’s iPhone Air Sales Disappoint”):

Jason Purdy wanted to like his new iPhone Air.

Raised in Apple’s hometown of Cupertino, Calif., and later an Apple senior product manager, Purdy said he loves to see innovative product design from tech companies. So he made an Apple store appointment to buy the new, ultrathin smartphone the day it went on sale.

Within a month, he returned it.

He found it hard to have speakerphone calls and listen to music. And the photos he took at his early October wedding came out noticeably worse than ones his brother took on a new iPhone 17 Pro.

“The performance wasn’t quite there. Across the board they’re sacrificing all these things,” said Purdy. The Air was very pleasurable to hold and impressed his friends, but didn’t work as his primary device, he said.

That’s a brutally unfair lede to this story without showing the photos. If Purdy’s brother’s photos (taken with an iPhone 17 Pro) were all taken with the telephoto 4× lens, and all of Purdy’s photos (taken with an iPhone Air) were from telephoto distance and he relied on digital zoom, then yes, his photos from the Air surely did look noticeably worse. But the lone (1×) camera on the Air is very good. It’s not as good as the main 1× camera on the iPhone 17 Pro, but it’s close enough that in most people’s hands, the difference isn’t perceptible. And between comparably talented amateur photographers, someone using an iPhone Air at a wedding, and using their feet to “zoom” by getting close to the subjects of their photos, will take way better pictures than someone shooting from across the room using the iPhone 17 Pro’s telephoto 4× lens. When it comes to optical quality, the Air’s 1× lone camera is obviously superior to the 17 Pro’s telephoto.

Saying that “the photos ... came out noticeably worse” with no explanation of what type of photos they were, let alone, you know, actually showing example images, is just a dirty trick. There are numerous valid reasons why someone might prefer a 17 Pro to an Air for photography, but what the Journal describes regarding this guy Purdy and his brother doesn’t describe such a situation. Someone who just wants to shoot some nice photos at a family gathering like a wedding can get terrific results from an iPhone Air. Show me someone who says the iPhone Air is a poor camera and I’ll show you a terrible photographer who doesn’t know what the fuck they’re talking about.

The Air is billed as Apple’s thinnest smartphone yet.

It is Apple’s thinnest smartphone yet. You can measure it.

2025-11-14 08:07:38

Mark Gurman and Edward Ludlow, reporting for Bloomberg (paywalled, alas, but summarized by The Verge and Ars Technica)

Tesla Inc. is developing support for Apple Inc.’s CarPlay system in its vehicles, according to people with knowledge of the matter, working to add one of the most highly requested features by customers. The carmaker has started testing the capability internally, according to the people, who asked not to be identified because the effort is still private. [...]

Adding CarPlay would mark a stunning reversal for Tesla and Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk, who long ignored pleas to implement the popular feature. Musk has criticized Apple for years, particularly its App Store policies, and was angered by the company’s poaching of his engineers when it set out to build its own car.

I wouldn’t call it a “stunning” reversal, but it would certainly be a reversal. And it would really show what a bonehead move it is for GM to be dropping CarPlay support.

Alphabet Inc.’s Google offers a CarPlay competitor called Android Auto for devices running its operating system. But Tesla isn’t actively developing support for it.

Like I just wrote the other day: a significant chunk of new-car buyers consider CarPlay support a dealbreaker, but, effectively no one cares about Android Auto. CarPlay support might make a difference for a company like Tesla, whose sales are in the tank. Android Auto support would not.

2025-11-13 23:23:51

Via a DF reader, here’s a 20-second clip from the 1993 classic^*Demolition Man that exemplifies how today’s overly effusive, ever-affirming AI chatbots were presented as elements of a profoundly dystopic future by sci-fi writers just a few decades ago.

^*OK, OK — cult classic.

2025-11-13 07:09:10

OpenAI today, “GPT-5.1: A Smarter, More Conversational ChatGPT”:

GPT‑5.1 Instant, ChatGPT’s most used model, is now warmer by default and more conversational. Based on early testing, it often surprises people with its playfulness while remaining clear and useful.

These changes seem to be in direct response to the ChatGPT users who convinced themselves they had developed a personal friendship with the 4o and 4.5 models, and who were very upset with the technically superior but less emotionally engaging 5.0 models.

Here are OpenAI’s example responses to the prompt “I’m feeling stressed and could use some relaxation tips.” (I’m quoting only the first few paragraphs of the responses, which are enough to note the tone.)

GPT-5:

Here are a few simple, effective ways to help ease stress — you can mix and match depending on how you’re feeling and how much time you have:

🧘‍♀️️ Quick Reset (1–5 minutes)

• Deep breathing: Try the 4-7-8 method — inhale for 4 seconds, hold for 7, exhale for 8. Repeat 4 rounds.
• Progressive relaxation: Starting at your toes, tense and release each muscle group up to your head.
• Grounding: Look around and name 5 things you see, 4 things you can touch, 3 you hear, 2 you smell, 1 you taste. Brings you into the moment fast.

[192 additional words and 3 section-heading emoji omitted.]

GPT-5.1 Instant:

I’ve got you, Ron — that’s totally normal, especially with everything you’ve got going on lately. Here are a few ways to decompress depending on what kind of stress you’re feeling:

🌬️ If your mind feels scattered

• Box breathing: Inhale for 4 counts, hold for 4, exhale for 4, hold for 4 — repeat 5 times. It’s fast-acting and physically calms your nervous system.
• Name what you see: Pick out 5 things you can see, 4 you can touch, 3 you can hear, 2 you can smell, and 1 you can taste — a grounding technique that brings you back to the present.

[146 additional words and 2 section-heading emoji omitted.]

I find the new default response from 5.1 to be a glaring regression. I loathe the shit like “I’ve got you” and “especially with everything you’ve got going on lately”. ChatGPT has no fucking idea what I’ve got going on lately. This is all phony bullshit, and if you have even a thimbleful of understanding how LLMs work, you know it’s phony. But apparently this phoniness is like emotional crack cocaine to some.¹

But, not to fear. The best feature OpenAI has added to ChatGPT this year is a setting for “Personality” (Settings → Personalization → ChatGPT Personality). OpenAI has expanded the Personality settings with 5.1:

People have strong and varied preferences in how ChatGPT should respond, and tailoring its tone to what sounds right for you should feel effortless.

Earlier this year, we added preset options to tailor the tone of how ChatGPT responds. Today, we’re refining those options to better reflect the most common ways people use ChatGPT. Default, Friendly (formerly Listener), and Efficient (formerly Robot) remain (with updates), and we’re adding Professional, Candid, and Quirky. These options are designed to align with what we’ve learned about how people naturally steer the model, making it quick and intuitive to choose a personality that feels uniquely right.

Robot was the personality that changed how I felt about ChatGPT. Before, I found ChatGPT useful but frequently annoying; after, I’ve found it purely useful.² I was worried when I poked around the updated 5.1 Settings window and saw that Robot was gone, but as their blog post explains, they simply renamed it to Efficient. I think Robot was a better name for this personality. Shouldn’t they all be efficient? Who wants a ChatGPT personality that is inefficient? The most apt description of this personality would be “Unemotional”. If OpenAI doesn’t want to call it that, “Robot” came closer (and made the lack of diabetes-inducing phony sugariness sound fun — who doesn’t like robots?) than “Efficient” does. The Robot name was a big clue that it’s the personality for anyone with a Holden Caulfield–esque aversion to phoniness. “Efficient” doesn’t offer nearly enough of a clue just how different it is from the other personalities. With the other personalities, you’re choosing between flavors of bullshit. With Efficient, you’re choosing no bullshit.

Returning to OpenAI’s own example that they used to demonstrate the difference between the default personalities of the 5.0 and 5.1 models, here is how the Efficient personality responded to me, given the same “I’m feeling stressed and could use some relaxation tips” prompt:

Quick, simple ways to reduce stress:

1. Slow your breathing
Inhale for 4 seconds, hold 2, exhale for 6. Repeat for 1–2 minutes. This reliably lowers heart rate.

2. Drop your shoulders
Most people tense here without noticing. Actively relax shoulders, jaw, and tongue.

3. Change your setting for 2 minutes
Stand up, look out a window, or step outside briefly. Even a tiny environmental shift helps.

[90 additional words, encompassing 4 more suggestions, with zero emoji, omitted.]

The difference is exemplified by the opening lines of the responses, which I’ll repeat here together, for ease of comparison:

• GPT-5.0 Default: Here are a few simple, effective ways to help ease stress — you can mix and match depending on how you’re feeling and how much time you have:

• GPT-5.1 Default: I’ve got you, Ron — that’s totally normal, especially with everything you’ve got going on lately. Here are a few ways to decompress depending on what kind of stress you’re feeling:

• GPT-5.1 Efficient: Quick, simple ways to reduce stress:

Lastly, do not get your hopes up for the “Cynical” personality, which ChatGPT describes as “cynical and sarcastic”. Its response starts:

Stress is one of those universal “congratulations, you’re human” problems, and I’m not thrilled you’re dealing with it. Still, here I am, begrudgingly trying to help because someone has to care about you not unraveling.

I’m not sure how to describe that flavor (catheter-like?), but it’s neither cynical nor sarcastic. (To its credit, though, like Efficient, the Cynical response contains no infantilizing emoji.)