Linked List: March 2026

Wednesday, 4 March 2026

Studio Display vs. Studio Display XDR 

Not sure if this page was there yesterday, but the main “Displays” page at Apple’s website is a spec-by-spec comparison between the regular and XDR models. Nice.

Compatibility Notes on the New Studio Displays 

Juli Clover, at MacRumors, notes that neither the new Studio Display nor the Studio Display XDR are compatible with Intel-based Macs. (I’m curious why.) Also, in a separate report, she notes that Macs with any M1 chip, or the base M2 or M3, are only able to drive the Studio Display XDR at 60 Hz. You need a Pro or better M2/M3, or any M4 or M5 chip, to drive it at 120 Hz.

‘In Other Words, Batman Has Become Superman and Robin Has Become Batman’ 

Jason Snell, Six Colors:

Here’s the backstory: With every new generation of Apple’s Mac-series processors, I’ve gotten the impression from Apple execs that they’ve been a little frustrated with the perception that their “lesser” efficiency cores were weak sauce. I’ve lost count of the number of briefings and conversations I’ve had where they’ve had to go out of their way to point out that, actually, the lesser cores on an M-series chip are quite fast on their own, in addition to being very good at saving power!

Clearly they’ve had enough of that, so they’re changing how those cores are marketed to emphasize their performance, rather than their efficiency.

Tuesday, 3 March 2026

Apple Announces Updated Studio Display and All-New Studio Display XDR 

Apple Newsroom:

Apple today announced a new family of displays engineered to pair beautifully with Mac and meet the needs of everyone, from everyday users to the world’s top pros. The new Studio Display features a 12MP Center Stage camera, now with improved image quality and support for Desk View; a studio-quality three-microphone array; and an immersive six-speaker sound system with Spatial Audio. It also now includes powerful Thunderbolt 5 connectivity, providing more downstream connectivity for high-speed accessories or daisy-chaining displays. The all-new Studio Display XDR takes the pro display experience to the next level. Its 27-inch 5K Retina XDR display features an advanced mini-LED backlight with over 2,000 local dimming zones, up to 1000 nits of SDR brightness, and 2000 nits of peak HDR brightness, in addition to a wider color gamut, so content jumps off the screen with breathtaking contrast, vibrancy, and accuracy. With its 120Hz refresh rate, Studio Display XDR is even more responsive to content in motion, and Adaptive Sync dynamically adjusts frame rates for content like video playback or graphically intense games. Studio Display XDR offers the same advanced camera and audio system as Studio Display, as well as Thunderbolt 5 connectivity to simplify pro workflow setups. The new Studio Display with a tilt-adjustable stand starts at $1,599, and Studio Display XDR with a tilt- and height-adjustable stand starts at $3,299. Both are available in standard or nano-texture glass options, and can be pre-ordered starting tomorrow, March 4, with availability beginning Wednesday, March 11.

Compared to the first-generation Studio Display (March 2022), the updated model really just has a better camera. (Wouldn’t take much to improve upon the old camera.) The Studio Display XDR is the interesting new one. Apple doesn’t seem to have a “Compare” page for its displays, so the Studio Display Tech Specs and Studio Display XDR Tech Specs pages will have to suffice. Update: The main “Displays” page at Apple’s website serves as a comparison page between the new Studio Display and Studio Display XDR.

The regular Studio Display maxes out at 600 nits, and only supports a refresh rate of 60 Hz. The Studio Display XDR maxes out at 1,000 nits for SDR content and 2,000 nits for HDR, with up to 120 Hz refresh rate. Nice, but not enough to tempt me to upgrade from my current Studio Display with nano-texture, which I never seem to run at maximum brightness. I guess it would be nice to see HDR content, but not nice enough to spend $3,600 to get one with nano-texture. And I don’t think I care about 120 Hz on my Mac?

Unresolved is what this means for the Pro Display XDR, which remains unchanged since its debut in 2019. Update: Whoops, apparently this has been resolved. A small-print note on the Newsroom announcement states:

Studio Display XDR replaces Pro Display XDR and starts at $3,299 (U.S.) and $3,199 (U.S.) for education.

New MacBook Air With M5 

Apple Newsroom:

MacBook Air now comes standard with double the starting storage at 512GB with faster SSD technology, and is configurable up to 4TB, so customers can keep their most important work on hand. Apple’s N1 wireless chip delivers Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 6 for seamless connectivity on the go. MacBook Air features a beautifully thin, light, and durable aluminum design, stunning Liquid Retina display, 12MP Center Stage camera, up to 18 hours of battery life, an immersive sound system with Spatial Audio, and two Thunderbolt 4 ports with support for up to two external displays.

Base storage went from 256 to 512 GB, but the base price went from the magic $999 to $1,100 ($1,099, technically, which doesn’t make the 99 seem magic). Presumably, those in the market for a $999 MacBook will buy the new about-to-be-announced-tomorrow lower-priced MacBook “Neo”, which I’m guessing will start at $800 ($799), maybe as low as $700 ($699), but will surely have higher-priced configurations for additional storage. Today’s new M5 MacBook Airs have storage upgrades of:

  • 1 TB (+ $200)
  • 2 TB (+ $600)
  • 4 TB (+ $1,200)

Colors remain unchanged (and in my opinion, boring): midnight, starlight, silver, sky blue (almost black, gold-ish gray, gray, blue-ish gray). RAM options remain unchanged too: 16, 24, or 32 GB.

A comparison page showing the new M5 Air, old M4 Air, and base M5 MacBook Pro suggests not much else is new year-over-year, other than the Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 6 support from the N1 chip.

Apple Might Have Prematurely Leaked the Name ‘MacBook Neo’ 

Joe Rossignol, MacRumors:

A regulatory document for a “MacBook Neo” (Model A3404) has appeared on Apple’s website. Unfortunately, there are no further details or images available yet. While the PDF file does not contain the “MacBook Neo” name, it briefly appeared in a link on Apple’s regulatory website for EU compliance purposes.

My money was on just plain “MacBook”, but I like “MacBook Neo”.

Apple Introduces MacBook Pro Models With M5 Pro and M5 Max Chips 

Apple Newsroom:

Apple today announced the latest 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro with the all-new M5 Pro and M5 Max, bringing game-changing performance and AI capabilities to the world’s best pro laptop. With M5 Pro and M5 Max, MacBook Pro features a new CPU with the world’s fastest CPU core, a next-generation GPU with a Neural Accelerator in each core, and higher unified memory bandwidth, altogether delivering up to 4× AI performance compared to the previous generation, and up to 8× AI performance compared to M1 models. This allows developers, researchers, business professionals, and creatives to unlock new AI-enabled workflows right on MacBook Pro. It now comes with up to 2× faster SSD performance and starts at 1TB of storage for M5 Pro and 2TB for M5 Max. The new MacBook Pro includes N1, an Apple-designed wireless networking chip that enables Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 6, bringing improved performance and reliability to wireless connections. It also offers up to 24 hours of battery life; a gorgeous Liquid Retina XDR display with a nano-texture option; a wide array of connectivity, including Thunderbolt 5; a 12MP Center Stage camera; studio-quality mics; an immersive six-speaker sound system; Apple Intelligence features; and the power of macOS Tahoe. The new MacBook Pro comes in space black and silver, and is available to pre-order starting tomorrow, March 4, with availability beginning Wednesday, March 11.

The MacBook Pro Tech Specs page is a good place to start to compare the entire M5 MacBook Pro lineup. One noteworthy change is that last year’s M4 Pro models only supported 24 or 48 GB of RAM; the new M5 Pro models support 24, 48, and 64 GB. Memory configurations for the M5 Max are unchanged from the M4 Max: 36, 48, 64, and 128 GB. (You could get an M4 Pro chip with 64 GB, but only on the Mac Mini.)

Also worth noting — Apple’s RAM pricing remains unchanged, despite the spike in memory prices industry-wide. With the “full” M5 Max chip (18-core CPU, 40-core GPU — there’s a lesser configuration with “only” 32 GPU cores for -⁠$300), base memory is 48 GB. Upgrading to 64 GB costs $200, and upgrading to 128 GB costs $1,000. Same prices as last year. This means the price for a MacBook Pro with 64 GB of RAM — if that’s your main concern — dropped by $800 year over year. Last year you needed to buy one with the high-end M4 Max chip to get 64 GB; now you can configure a MacBook Pro with the M5 Pro with 64 GB. Nice!

Ben Thompson and I wagered a steak dinner on this on Dithering. Ben bet on Apple’s memory prices going up; I bet on them staying the same. My thinking was that this industry-wide spike in RAM prices is exactly why Apple has always charged more for memory — “just in case”. I’m going to enjoy that steak.

Apple Debuts M5 Pro and M5 Max, and Renames Its M-Series CPU Cores 

Apple Newsroom:

Apple today announced M5 Pro and M5 Max, the world’s most advanced chips for pro laptops, powering the new MacBook Pro. The chips are built using a new Apple-designed Fusion Architecture. This innovative design combines two dies into a single system on a chip (SoC), which includes a powerful CPU, scalable GPU, Media Engine, unified memory controller, Neural Engine, and Thunderbolt 5 capabilities. M5 Pro and M5 Max feature a new 18-core CPU architecture. It includes six of the highest-performing core design, now called super cores, that are the world’s fastest CPU core. Alongside these cores are 12 all-new performance cores, optimized for power-efficient, multithreaded workloads. [...]

The industry-leading super core was first introduced as performance cores in M5, which also adopts the super core name for all M5-based products — MacBook Air, the 14-inch MacBook Pro, iPad Pro, and Apple Vision Pro. This core is the highest-performance core design with the world’s fastest single-threaded performance, driven in part by increased front-end bandwidth, a new cache hierarchy, and enhanced branch prediction.

M5 Pro and M5 Max also introduce an all-new performance core that is optimized to deliver greater power-efficient, multithreaded performance for pro workloads. Together with the super cores, the chips deliver up to 2.5× higher multithreaded performance than M1 Pro and M1 Max. The super cores and performance cores give MacBook Pro a huge performance boost to handle the most CPU-intensive pro workloads, like analyzing complex data or running demanding simulations with unparalleled ease.

This is a bit confusing, but I think — after a media briefing with Apple reps this morning — I’ve got it straight. From the M1 through M4, there were two CPU core types: efficiency and performance. When the regular M5 chip debuted in October, Apple continued using those same names, efficiency and performance, for its two core types. But as of today, they’re renaming them, and introducing a third core type that they’re calling “performance”. They’re reusing the old performance name for an altogether new CPU core type. So you can see what I mean about it being confusing.

There are now three core types in M5-series CPUs. Efficiency cores are still “efficiency”, but they’re only in the base M5. What used to be called “performance” cores are now called “super” cores, and they’re present in all M5 chips. The new core type — more power-efficient than super cores, more performant than efficiency cores — are taking the old name “performance”. Here are the core counts in table form, with separate rows for the 15- and 18-core M5 Pro variants:

Efficiency Performance Super
M5 6 — 4
M5 Pro — 10 5
M5 Pro — 12 6
M5 Max — 12 6

Another way to think about it is that there are regular efficiency cores in the plain M5, and new higher-performing efficiency cores called “performance” in the M5 Pro and M5 Max. The problem is that the old M1–M4 names were clear — one CPU core type was fast but optimized for efficiency so they called it “efficiency”, and the other core type was efficient but optimized for performance so they called it “performance”. Now, the new “performance” core types are the optimized-for-efficiency CPU cores in the Pro and Max chips, and despite their name, they’re not the most performant cores.

Monday, 2 March 2026

Unsung Heroes: Flickr’s URLs Scheme 

Marcin Wichary, writing at Unsung (which is just an incredibly good and fun weblog):

Half of my education in URLs as user interface came from Flickr in the late 2000s. Its URLs looked like this:

flickr.com/photos/mwichary/favorites
flickr.com/photos/mwichary/sets
flickr.com/photos/mwichary/sets/72177720330077904
flickr.com/photos/mwichary/54896695834
flickr.com/photos/mwichary/54896695834/in/set-72177720330077904

This was incredible and a breath of fresh air. No redundant www. in front or awkward .php at the end. No parameters with their unpleasant ?&= syntax. No % signs partying with hex codes. When you shared these URLs with others, you didn’t have to retouch or delete anything. When Chrome’s address bar started autocompleting them, you knew exactly where you were going.

This might seem silly. The user interface of URLs? Who types in or edits URLs by hand? But keyboards are still the most efficient entry device. If a place you’re going is where you’ve already been, typing a few letters might get you there much faster than waiting for pages to load, clicking, and so on.

In general, URLs at Daring Fireball try to work like this.

I say “in general” because the DF URLs could be better. There should be one unified URLs space for all posts on DF, not separate ones for feature articles and Linked List posts. Someday.

Wichary subsequently posted this fine follow-up, chock full of links regarding URL design.

ChangeTheHeaders 

During the most recent episode of The Talk Show, Jason Snell brought up a weird issue that I started running into last year. On my Mac, sometimes I’d drag an image out of a web page in Safari, and I’d get an image in WebP format. Sometimes I wouldn’t care. But usually when I download an image like that, it’s because I want to publish (or merely host my own copy of) that image on Daring Fireball. And I don’t publish WebP images — I prefer PNG and JPEG for compatibility.

What made it weird is when I’d view source on the original webpage, the original image was usually in PNG or JPEG format. If I opened the image in a new tab — just the image — I’d get it in PNG or JPEG format. But when I’d download it by dragging out of the original webpage, I’d get a WebP. This was a total WTF for me.

I turned to my friend Jeff Johnson, author of, among other things, the excellent Safari extension StopTheMadness. Not only was Johnson able to explain what was going on, he actually made a new Safari extension called ChangeTheHeaders that fixed the problem for me. Johnson, announcing ChangeTheHeaders last year:

After some investigation, I discovered that the difference was the Accept HTTP request header, which specifies what types of response the web browser will accept. Safari’s default Accept header for images is this:

Accept: image/webp,image/avif,image/jxl,image/heic,image/heic-sequence,video/*;q=0.8,image/png,image/svg+xml,image/*;q=0.8,*/*;q=0.5

Although image/webp appears first in the list, the order actually doesn’t matter. The quality value, specified by the ;q= suffix, determines the ranking of types. The range of values is 0 to 1, with 1 as the default value if none is specified. Thus, image/webp and image/png have equal precedence, equal quality value 1, leaving it up to the web site to decide which image type to serve. In this case, the web site decided to serve a WebP image, despite the fact that the image URL has a .png suffix. In a URL, unlike in a file path, the “file extension”, if one exists, is largely meaningless. A very simple web server will directly match a URL with a local file path, but a more complex web server can do almost anything it wants with a URL.

This was driving me nuts. Thanks to Johnson, I now understand why it was happening, and I had a simple set-it-and-forget-it tool to fix it. Johnson writes:

What can you do with ChangeTheHeaders? I suspect the biggest selling point will be to spoof the User-Agent. The extension allows you to customize your User-Agent by URL domain. For example, you can make Safari pretend that it’s Chrome on Google web apps that give special treatment to Chrome. You can also customize the Accept-Language header if you don’t like the default language handling of some website, such as YouTube.

Here’s the custom rule I applied a year ago, when I first installed ChangeTheHeaders (screenshot):

Header: Accept
Value: image/avif,image/jxl,image/heic,image/heic-sequence,video/*;q=0.8,image/png,image/svg+xml,image/*;q=0.8,*/*;q=0.5
URL Domains: «leave blank for all domains»
URL Filter: «leave blank for all URLs»
Resource Types: image

I haven’t seen a single WebP since.

ChangeTheHeaders works everywhere Safari does — Mac, iPhone, iPad, Vision Pro — and you can get it for just $7 on the App Store.

Welcome (Back) to Macintosh 

Jesper, writing at Take:

My hope is that Macintosh is not just one of these empires that was at the height of its power and then disintegrated because of warring factions, satiated and uncurious rulers, and droughts for which no one was prepared, ruining crops no one realized were essential for survival.

My hope is that there remains a primordial spark, a glimpse of genius, to rediscover, to reconnect to — to serve not annual trends or constant phonification, but the needs of the user to use the computer as a tool to get something done.

SerpApi Filed Motion to Dismiss Google’s Lawsuit 

Julien Khaleghy, CEO of SerpApi:

Google thinks it owns the internet. That’s the subtext of its lawsuit against SerpApi, the quiet part that it’s suddenly decided to shout out loud. The problem is, no one owns the internet. And the law makes that clear.

In January, we promised that we would fight this lawsuit to protect our business model and the researchers and innovators who depend on our technology. Today, Friday, February 20, 2026, we’re following through with a motion to dismiss Google’s complaint. While this is just one step in what could be a long and costly legal process, I want to explain why we’re confident in our position.

Is Google hurting itself in its confusion? Google is the largest scraper in the world. Google’s entire business began with a web crawler that visited every publicly accessible page on the internet, copied the content, indexed it, and served it back to users. It did this without distinguishing between copyrighted and non-copyrighted material, and it did this without asking permission. Now Google is in federal court claiming that our scraping is illegal.

I’ve come around on SerpApi in the last few months. My initial take was that it surely must be illegal for a company to scrape Google’s search results and offer access to that data as an API. But I’ve come around to the argument that what SerpApi is doing to obtain Google search results is, well, exactly how Google scrapes the rest of the entire web to build its search index. It’s all just scraping publicly accessible web pages.

This December piece by Mike Masnick at Techdirt is what began to change my mind:

Look, SerpApi’s behavior is sketchy. Spoofing user agents, rotating IPs to look like legitimate users, solving CAPTCHAs programmatically — Google’s complaint paints a picture of a company actively working to evade detection. But the legal theory Google is deploying to stop them threatens something far bigger than one shady scraper.

Google’s entire business is built on scraping as much of the web as possible without first asking permission. The fact that they now want to invoke DMCA 1201 — one of the most consistently abused provisions in copyright law — to stop others from scraping them exposes the underlying problem with these licensing-era arguments: they’re attempts to pull up the ladder after you’ve climbed it.

Just from a straight up perception standpoint, it looks bad.

‘Anthropic and Alignment’ 

Ben Thompson, writing at Stratechery:

In fact, Amodei already answered the question: if nuclear weapons were developed by a private company, and that private company sought to dictate terms to the U.S. military, the U.S. would absolutely be incentivized to destroy that company. The reason goes back to the question of international law, North Korea, and the rest:

  • International law is ultimately a function of power; might makes right.
  • There are some categories of capabilities — like nuclear weapons — that are sufficiently powerful to fundamentally affect the U.S.’s freedom of action; we can bomb Iran, but we can’t North Korea.
  • To the extent that AI is on the level of nuclear weapons — or beyond — is the extent that Amodei and Anthropic are building a power base that potentially rivals the U.S. military.

Anthropic talks a lot about alignment; this insistence on controlling the U.S. military, however, is fundamentally misaligned with reality. Current AI models are obviously not yet so powerful that they rival the U.S. military; if that is the trajectory, however — and no one has been more vocal in arguing for that trajectory than Amodei — then it seems to me the choice facing the U.S. is actually quite binary:

  • Option 1 is that Anthropic accepts a subservient position relative to the U.S. government, and does not seek to retain ultimate decision-making power about how its models are used, instead leaving that to Congress and the President.
  • Option 2 is that the U.S. government either destroys Anthropic or removes Amodei.

It’s Congress that is absent in — looks around — all of this. Right down to the name of the Department of Defense. The whole Trump administration has taken to calling it the Department of War, but only Congress can change the legal name. (Anthropic, despite its very public spat with the administration, refers to it as the “Department of War” as well. But serious publications like the Journal and New York Times continue to call it the Department of Defense.)

Nilay Patel, quoting the same section of Thompson’s column I quoted above, sees it as “Ben Thompson making a full-throated case for fascism”. I see it as the case against corporatocracy. Who sets our defense policies? Our democratically elected leaders, or the CEOs of corporate defense contractors?

WSJ: ‘Trump Administration Shuns Anthropic, Embraces OpenAI in Clash Over Guardrails’ 

Amrith Ramkumar, reporting for The Wall Street Journal (gift link):

Trump’s announcement came shortly before the Pentagon’s Friday afternoon deadline for Anthropic to agree to let the military use its models in all lawful-use cases, a concession the company had refused to make. “We cannot in good conscience accede to their request,” Anthropic Chief Executive Dario Amodei said on Thursday.

The company’s red lines had been domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, areas the Pentagon said Anthropic didn’t need to worry about because the military would never break the law with AI. Defense Department officials said Anthropic needed to fully trust the Pentagon to use the technology responsibly and relinquish control.

OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman said the company’s deal with the Defense Department includes those same prohibitions on mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, as well as technical safeguards to make sure the models behave as they should. “We have expressed our strong desire to see things de-escalate away from legal and governmental actions and towards reasonable agreements,” he said, adding that OpenAI asked that all companies be given the chance to accept the same deal. [...]

Shortly after the deadline, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on X that he is designating the company a supply-chain risk, impairing its ability to work with other government contractors.

My short take is that both of these are true:

  • It’s not the place of a corporation to dictate terms to the Department of Defense regarding how its product or services are used within the law.
  • It’s a preposterous, childish (and almost certainly illegal) overreaction to designate Anthropic a “supply-chain risk to national security” in this way. Grow up.

See also: Anthropic’s official response.

Seasonal Color Updates to Apple’s iPhone Cases and Apple Watch Bands 

Joe Rossignol, MacRumors:

A seasonal color refresh arrived today for a variety of Apple accessories, including iPhone cases, Apple Watch bands, and the Crossbody Strap. All of the accessories in the latest colors are available to order on Apple.com starting today.

Apple Introduces New iPad Air With M4 

Apple Newsroom:

Apple today announced the new iPad Air featuring M4 and more memory, giving users a big jump in performance at the same starting price. With a faster CPU and GPU, iPad Air boosts tasks like editing and gaming, and is a powerful device for AI with a faster Neural Engine, higher memory bandwidth, and 50 percent more unified system memory than the previous generation. With M4, iPad Air is up to 30 percent faster than iPad Air with M3, and up to 2.3× faster than iPad Air with M1. The new iPad Air also features the latest in Apple silicon connectivity chips, N1 and C1X, delivering fast wireless and cellular connections — and support for Wi-Fi 7 — that empower users to work and be creative anywhere. [...]

With the same starting price of just $599 for the 11-inch model and $799 for the 13-inch model, the new iPad Air is an incredible value. And for education, the 11-inch iPad Air starts at $549, and the 13-inch model starts at $749. Customers can pre-order iPad Air starting Wednesday, March 4, with availability beginning Wednesday, March 11.

So much for my theory that Apple would separate its announcements this week with separate days for each product family (e.g. iPhone 17e on Monday, iPads on Tuesday, MacBooks on Wednesday.) Maybe an update to the no-adjective iPad isn’t coming this week?

Aside from the M3 to M4 speed bump, there are very few differences between this generation iPad Air and the last. Same colors even (space gray, blue, purple, and starlight). Here’s a link to Apple’s iPad Compare page, preset to show the current M5 iPad Pro, new M4 iPad Air, and old M3 iPad Air side-by-side.

One interesting tech spec: the new M4 iPad Air models come with 12 GB of RAM, up from 8 GB in last year’s M3 models. With the M5 iPad Pro models, RAM is tied to storage: the 256/512 GB iPad Pros come with 12 GB RAM; the 1/2 TB models come with 16 GB RAM.

Apple Introduces the iPhone 17e 

Apple Newsroom:

Apple today announced iPhone 17e, a powerful and more affordable addition to the iPhone 17 lineup. At the heart of iPhone 17e is the latest-generation A19, which delivers exceptional performance for everything users do. iPhone 17e also features C1X, the latest-generation cellular modem designed by Apple, which is up to 2× faster than C1 in iPhone 16e. The 48MP Fusion camera captures stunning photos, including next-generation portraits, and 4K Dolby Vision video. It also enables an optical-quality 2× Telephoto — like having two cameras in one. The 6.1-inch Super Retina XDR display features Ceramic Shield 2, offering 3× better scratch resistance than the previous generation and reduced glare. With MagSafe, users can enjoy fast wireless charging and access to a vast ecosystem of accessories like chargers and cases. And when iPhone 17e users are outside of cellular and Wi-Fi coverage, Apple’s groundbreaking satellite features — including Emergency SOS, Roadside Assistance, Messages, and Find My via satellite — help them stay connected when it matters most.

Available in three elegant colors with a premium matte finish — black, white, and a beautiful new soft pink — iPhone 17e will be available for pre-order beginning Wednesday, March 4, with availability starting Wednesday, March 11. iPhone 17e will start at 256GB of storage for $599 — 2× the entry storage from the previous generation at the same starting price, and 4× more than iPhone 12 — giving users more space for high-resolution photos, 4K videos, apps, games, and more.

The main year-over-year changes from the 16e:

  • MagSafe, the absence of which felt like the one bit of marketing spite in the 16e.
  • An additional color other than black or white.
  • SoC goes from A18 to A19, the same chip in the iPhone 17, except the iPhone 17 has 5 GPU cores and the 17e only 4 (same as the 16e). No big whoop.
  • Improved camera with next-gen portraits. I found the 16e camera to be surprisingly good.
  • Ceramic Shield 2 on the front glass.
  • Base storage goes from 128 to 256 GB, while the price remains $600.
  • The 512 GB version drops from $900 to $800.

That’s about it. Here’s a preset version of Apple’s iPhone Compare page with the iPhone 17, 17e, and 16e.

Sunday, 1 March 2026

Sentry 

My thanks to Sentry for sponsoring last week at DF. Sentry is running a hands-on workshop: “Crash Reporting, Tracing, and Logs for iOS in Sentry”. You can watch it on demand. You’ll learn how to connect the dots between slowdowns, crashes, and the user experience in your iOS app. It’ll show you how to:

  • Set up Sentry to surface high-priority mobile issues without alert fatigue.
  • Use Logs and Breadcrumbs to reconstruct what happened with a crash.
  • Find what’s behind a performance bottleneck using Tracing.
  • Monitor and reduce the size of your iOS app using Size Analysis.

I know so many developers using Sentry. It’s a terrific product. If you’re a developer and haven’t checked them out, you should.

The Talk Show: ‘Bad Dates’ 

Jason Snell returns to the show to discuss the 2025 Six Colors Apple Report Card, MacOS 26 Tahoe, Apple Creator Studio, along with what we expect/hope for in next week’s Apple product announcements.

Sponsored by:

  • Notion: The AI workspace where teams and AI agents get more done together.
  • Squarespace: Save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code talkshow.
  • Sentry: A real-time error monitoring and tracing platform. Use code TALKSHOW for $80 in free credits.