Nature, Published online: 14 October 2026; doi:10.1038/s41586-026-11143-w
De novo-designed enzymes use an activated cysteine nucleophile to hydrolyse polypeptide backbones in a sequence-dependent manner.Nature, Published online: 14 October 2026; doi:10.1038/s41586-026-11167-2
RFdiffusion methods are used to de novo design proteins with water-activating zinc-based active sites adjacent to a peptide substrate binding pocket, yielding highly active, programmable proteases with potential applications in therapeutics, biotechnology and bioremediation.Nature, Published online: 14 October 2026; doi:10.1038/s41586-026-11126-x
The AI framework probabilistic bias correction is shown to correct weather forecast errors 2 to 6 weeks ahead and boost forecast skill, making it promising for improved extreme-weather prediction.
For decades, photojournalist Steve Winter has traveled across the world capturing incredible images of big cats as part of his work for National Geographic. Yet he didn't photograph an animal professionally until he was 34.
"If anybody had said, 'You're going to work with big cats for 25 years of your career,' I would have said 'No, I don't know anything about big cats,'" he told Live Science. "But I learned from scientists and local people," he added. "That was very, very important — that's what, to me, was the biggest change in my life."
Together with his wife, author and environmental journalist Sharon Guynup, Winter has helped change laws around big cats in the U.S.; revealed the horrors of the Tiger Temple in Bangkok, resulting in its closure; and took an iconic photograph of the cougar P-22 beneath the Hollywood sign, which eventually led to the creation of the world's largest highway wildlife corridor over Highway 101 in California.
In their new book, "Big Cats" (National Geographic Books, 2026), Winter and Guynup provide a retrospective of their careers, looking at the fragility of these predators, the conservation work helping to save them, and the challenges they still face. Live Science spoke with Winter about his career, the changes he's seen, and why he's hopeful for the future.
Hannah Osborne: You've traveled all over the world and seen so many things. Is there one photograph that really sticks out for you, one that you come back to and think about?
Steve Winter: I always look at the images that have had an impact at the time. That makes a huge difference to me, because in the end, I know that in taking this [photograph], not only did I succeed beyond my wildest expectations, but it's making a difference in the world. Right now, I have just been putting remote cameras up on what will be the world's largest wildlife overpass, and that was started by my Hollywood cougar picture of P-22, Puma 22, under the Hollywood sign. [Editor's note: The common names cougar, puma and mountain lion all refer to the same species, Puma concolor.]
That changed so much in Los Angeles. I've never seen a city be transformed in their love for the fact that they have a mountain lion in a park in the city. What came of that was [people] thinking, "Hey, maybe we should connect these areas where these animals are living." [Editor's note: The Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing over the 10-lane Highway 101 that was inspired by the cougar P-22 is due to open Dec. 2.]
To think about that is pretty amazing, so right now, P-22 and the Hollywood cougar is my go-to image.
He became a celebrity in the land of celebrities; people loved him. There's a P-22 day; schools are using urban wildlife in their curriculum. The LA Natural History Museum has a permanent exhibit, and what is right in the center of it? The Hollywood cougar picture.
HO: How did the P-22 photograph come about?
SW: As wildlife photographers, we will often go to these meetings where people are gathering to save elephants, to save this, to save that. So I went to meet the scientists that worked with these cats in the largest urban park in the United States. I asked Jeff Sikich, a biologist for the National Park Service, "[Do] you have a lot of trails in that park? Do you have any that the cats walk on where you could see the lights of LA in the background?" He kept saying no.
When you're working with camera traps, it's very important to visualize the picture in your mind that you're after [when] you visit a spot. I just said, "Well, Jeff, you know what would really tell the story of urban wildlife is if we had a mountain lion under the Hollywood sign." He looked at me like I'm crazy, and said, "There's no mountain lions in Griffith Park." I said, "If anything changes, let me know."
Eight months later, I got a text. They had a trail camp set up to census bobcats [Lynx rufus] in the park, and there was P-22.
With camera traps, you don't need to sit, and I learned that from the beginning. For the second story I did, it was photographing a quetzal, which is a sacred bird of the Maya and the Aztecs. I knew nothing about birds, either. It's got a meter-long [3 feet] tail. I was enamored by the fact that it had a historical background — they used quetzal feathers as a form of currency; they were sacred birds.
I loved all that, but working on that story in a cloud forest in Guatemala on top of a mountain all by myself, every morning I'd come down and set my camera up on the tripod [near the bird's nest], and then take it away at the end of the day. I'd walk back, and all of a sudden, the hair on the back of my head would stand up and on my arm, and I'd get this tingling feeling and it's like, what's going on? I'd turn around. You can't see anything in a rainforest or a cloud forest because the proliferation of life is everywhere. One night when I'm reading my book in the one room shack that I was staying in my bunk bed, all I hear is the stairs creaking. Then I hear the floorboards creaking. Then I hear scratching, and then sniffing, outside the door.
I grabbed the walkie-talkie to call Juan Carlos, the naturalist that I was working with. He would find the quetzal nests for me. I asked him, in Spanish, "Juan Carlos, what is this?"
And he said, "Oh, Steve, don't worry; it's just a black panther [Panthera onca]." I've been there five weeks, and I said, "Well, how come it took you so long to tell me there was a black jaguar here?" And he said, "We didn't want to worry you."
HO: Throughout the book, you look at topics like poaching, captive tigers in the Tiger Temple in Thailand, and the way they're kept in the U.S. for entertainment. And a lot of these things are still going on. How do you cope with seeing that side of their lives?
SW: When I was first working on tigers, I was in Thailand. I was wanting to work in Thailand and Sumatra because they were the two subspecies that experts said may go extinct. I was working with the most incredible group of scientists I've probably ever worked with. They were trying to save the Indo-Chinese tiger [Panthera tigris corbetti] in Thailand.
But close by was this place called the Thai Tiger Temple. And I said, "Hey, guys; I'd like to go there." And they said, "No, Steve; don't go. These are bad people, and we think they're involved in the black-market trade of tiger parts and tigers to Laos and then into China."
That's a good reason for me to go if you don't want me to go. The first thing I saw was this huge sign that said "conservation." This was a Buddhist monastery. For some reason, the abbot had been given a tiger cub about 10 years before, and he fell in love with tigers. So they started a tiger tourism operation that brought in at least $3 million a year.
I could see something was fishy right away, because by then, I'd learned a lot about these cats. They kept saying that they always had 150 tigers. But you could pet tiger cubs for Instagram selfies or bottle-feed them 365 days a year. If you're breeding tigers, what are you going to have? More tigers. Something was happening to them, because the death rate wouldn't take over the birth rate when you're speed-breeding cubs, which is what they were doing. A female has cubs; they take them away immediately so she'll be ready to have another litter. You can only use the cubs for three months because after that, they're too big to pet.
They had all these tourist things where you could get a selfie with a head of a tiger in your lap. I was saying, "Why are these tigers acting so sleepy?" They're taking this giant head of a tiger and putting it in somebody's lap that's sitting on the concrete. You would think that if you put the head of a tiger in your lap, you're going to end up with your head in their mouth.
[Editor's note: Winter and Guynup worked together on an investigation into the Tiger Temple in 2016, which eventually led to it being exposed for its abuse and connections with the illegal wildlife trade. Shortly after, the Tiger Temple was shut to the public.]
Sharon did the investigation, and I already had pictures. But we went to do a video and go visit the temple again … By the time we got done, the TV stations in Bangkok had taken the video and showed it all over on the nightly news. We kept working on this, and Sharon wrote four more stories. And after the last one, the Thai government was inundated with people calling for the prime minister to shut it down. They went in with the army and the police, and what they found was horrific. They went to the freezer. There were tigers hanging on meat hooks, cubs in jars, with a little Thai flag on them. They shut it down.
Stopping this is really important. After that, we did a story on tigers in the U.S., which was very difficult psychologically. It was one thing to see them in Thailand, but we had always heard that there were more tigers in the United States than there are in the wild, and people would go, "What are you talking about? We don't have tigers here."
Sharon and I … we found a lot of the same speed-breeding cubs at these roadside zoos, whether it was Doc Antle's Myrtle Beach that was $500 a day, or some dumpy little place on the road down south where you can give them $10 to look at a tiger. They were everywhere.
After that story came out, the National Geographic Society gave a copy of this 30-page story that we had done for the magazine to every member of Congress. We got this text on 20th December, 2022, that President Biden had signed the Big Cat Public Safety Act, which outlawed all that. We were part of getting this law passed, which was incredible.
HO: What are some of the biggest changes in conservation you've seen over your career?
SW: Conservation was changing a lot in the '90s and 2000s. Alan Rabinowitz [a zoologist who served as the president, CEO and chief scientist at Panthera Corp., a nonprofit conservation organization devoted to protecting wild cats] had this idea after he had a lot of scientists in Central and South America give him data on where they were working and where jaguars were. When he took it away and just showed the locations, he goes, this is a corridor, a natural corridor, because now we're talking a lot about connectivity and how roads get in the way. It's like animals are in prison because they can't cross these big freeways or even small ones. Find out where animals are, their migrating paths, and put in an overpass or an underpass or something.
All this was happening, all this new science, new conservation. That was all spearheaded by the work of [biologist and conservationist] George Schaller, who became a friend of ours. What a life that we've had — and are having. We're still working on the connectivity part right now.
HO: Are you hopeful for the big cats in LA?
SW: Oh, definitely. The ones that live in the Santa Monica National Recreation Area will be able to cross the 101 and then go all the way to San Jose. They could actually then hug the top of a certain mountain and get close to San Francisco, which is incredible to think about now. It's a huge metropolitan area, so you're leaving one, going to another. But there's so much land in between, and they can cross safely.
HO: What made you specialize in big cats in the first place, and what's the draw that keeps you coming back?
SW: Big cats are so charismatic and, to me, mystical. And they're an umbrella species, so if you save the largest predator, which is usually a big cat in any landscape, you save everything underneath it.
I was just taken over by these animals. National Geographic had never done a jaguar story before. I found out really quick why: You can't see them. I tried to use remote cameras, camera traps, but they're really smart. They'll go around them, so they don't have the flash going off or they don't like the sound or the smell of meat on these waterproof boxes and the cords and all that.
I just fell in love with big cats, and what a life to be able to work with every one of them. The only one that was on my list that I haven't done is the Amur tiger, Siberian tiger [Panthera tigris altaica]. When I was ready to photograph them with the scientists that had been monitoring them for over a decade, [the tigers] got canine distemper and about 60% died.
Big cats really bounce back when you give them protection, and there was protection given after you lose this many. All the study tigers that had the GPS collars on, the ones they could monitor, died. But the population bounced back, and there's more now than there were before.
I won't get to photograph Amur tigers. And the reason is, there's people — locals — who are working on it, and they're doing an incredible job. I've got a book here that has all the cats that I've worked on. The impact these stories have had, and the change that's come about, is what really makes me proud.
This interview has been condensed and edited lightly for clarity.
Help us improve Live Science Pro: We're always trying to make our content better. Leave us feedback about Pro here.
National Geographic photographer Steve Winter has spent his career photographing big cats around the world, from the graceful jaguars of Brazil’s Pantanal to the elusive Himalayan snow leopard. His photographs astound; his stories, even more so. In Big Cats, Winter and environmental journalist Sharon Guynup share experiences behind the lens.
In chapters on every key species—cougar, jaguar, leopard, snow leopard, tiger, and lion—readers will witness the power of Winter’s work, including uplifting stories of how his photographs have made a difference and powered important conservation efforts on behalf of these mighty creatures.
When asked about the greatest innovation of humans, people will often say language or fire. A new paper suggests that these innovations may be more interlinked than we previously assumed.
Understanding how human language evolved is one of the hardest problems in science to unpick, since writing is a relatively recent innovation. Also, the vocal tracts and brains of our ancestors did not fossilise as they were made of soft tissue. We are left, then, with indirect evidence about how humans and other apes communicate today.
One of the most prominent theories about the origins of human language is that our ancestors started to communicate using gestural language. This theory is based on our understanding of the abilities of apes, as evidence suggest both chimpanzees and gorillas have gestural communication systems.
We also know that one of the best strategies for communicating when you don’t have a shared language is gesture. We often do this when communicating on holiday with someone who doesn’t speak our language; we point, mime and emote to get our message across.
Some of my previous research has shown that we do this because gestures or sign languages are often more iconic than words in spoken languages. This means their meaning is easier to guess for someone without any previous knowledge of the gesture or language being spoken; perfect for creating a new language from scratch.
If human language started with gestures, then why are the vast majority of languages today spoken? One reason for this shift might lie in the limits of gestural language. You need a light source to see a gesture, and communication would have been necessary for our ancestors after dark.
An article by researchers at the University of St Andrews argues that by the dim light of a campfire, we might find an explanation for why we moved from gesture to spoken language. While a light source, firelight is potentially too dim for us to rely on it for the meaningful bits of early gestural language. For fully expressive stories in the dark, we would need spoken language but still keep gestural elements to emphasise and emote our speech.
The study highlights how storytelling links to some of the features of human language that make it unique. Stories have complex structures and are often displaced in time and space, meaning they talk about things not immediately present, in the past, or sometimes not even real.
The article suggests that social storytelling is what enabled us to surpass the communicative abilities of other living apes, into the rich, expressive tapestry of human language. Storytelling aids our social bonds and helps us understand the world and how to behave. It can help us develop our imagination, identities and cultural belief systems.
The idea that language emerged for social bonding is not new; however, the authors of the new article highlight that fireside context might have been crucial. They argue that the colour spectrum of fire is well suited for human vision without suppressing the melatonin that helps us sleep, like modern screen light can.
The study also highlights that human neurons synchronise to the frequency of flickering firelight, which the authors argue can improve shared social experience and bonding through connected rhythmic activities that can promote empathy.
Other research, reviewed in my own work, has shown that stories from our early oral traditions share similar traits to one another. This is thought to happen because the social transmission of stories acts like evolution. Instead of survival of the fittest, we get survival of the most memorable aspects of stories as they are shared. Stories survive when they have more social, human-oriented content, counterintuitive elements, create negative emotions and have elements of survival.
Researchers think this happens because swapping stories about social bonds, unexpected dangers and survival are advantageous for our evolution.
Storytelling is still one of the primary ways we understand the world even now, through the news and social media. This content is full of human interest, negative emotions and surprise.
Storytelling in the modern world is now often about getting the most clicks and attention. It is often about keeping people up past their bedtime looking at the melatonin suppressing blue light of our screens.
I’m left wondering, after reading about the potential fireside origins of our language, that we might feel more connection and trust by going back to sharing stories around a fire.
Hannah Little receives funding from the British Academy and the Royal Society.
Nature, Published online: 16 September 2026; doi:10.1038/d41586-026-02859-w
Lost connections.Nature, Published online: 09 September 2026; doi:10.1038/s41586-026-10998-3
TRI-611 induces the degradation of ALK fusion proteins via a previously undescribed CRBN recruitment motif, and its preclinical anti-tumour activity highlights TRI-611 as a potential new way of treating ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.Patrick Brammall is heading into a much darker week on television. Following the Last Seen screening in Sydney, the Colin from Accounts star arrives on Apple TV as a father whose missing daughter has left his life suspended for more than a decade. The Australian thriller premieres September 9, bringing a very different kind of emotional discomfort from the romantic comedy that introduced him to many American viewers.
In Colin from Accounts, embarrassment can become an opening for affection. Last Seen gives Brammall a character with far less room to recover from a bad decision. Ian Ridley is a former detective, now working as a police dispatcher, who receives a call he believes could finally lead him back to his daughter.
The casting offers an immediate reason to be curious. Audiences familiar with Brammall’s comic timing will be watching him carry a story built around loss, uncertainty, and a hope that could become dangerous.
Brammall has described drawing on fatherhood to understand the role. In an interview with Radio Times, he explained that being the father of two young daughters gave him access to an emotional vulnerability he could bring into the performance.
He did not need to imagine the story happening to his own children. Becoming a parent had already changed how available those feelings were to him.
“Ian is like a raw nerve,” he said.
That description gives a more precise sense of the character than the familiar image of a troubled detective. Ian’s professional experience may help him interpret a crisis, but his connection to this particular call makes distance almost impossible.
The challenge for a performance like this lies in keeping both sides believable. An audience needs to understand why Ian recognizes a possibility others might dismiss, while remaining alert to how much he wants that possibility to be true.
Brammall also credited his classical theater training and casting director Kirsty McGregor with helping him move between genres. The dramatic assignment draws on an established acting background, even if it surprises viewers who associate him most closely with comedy.
Maggie disappeared 11 years before the events of Last Seen. Ian has never accepted that she might be gone forever. When a teenage girl calls for help, he becomes convinced that he recognizes his daughter and begins pursuing the possibility of bringing her home.
The premise places an ordinary professional responsibility under extraordinary personal pressure. A dispatcher must listen carefully, gather information, and help someone through an emergency. Ian suddenly has to do that while confronting the possibility that the voice belongs to the person he has spent years hoping to find.
There is tension in the simple absence of a face. A voice offers clues without providing the certainty of seeing someone. Memory, fear, and recognition can arrive together, leaving very little time to sort one from another.
The emotional question extends beyond whether the caller is Maggie. Eleven years have passed for everyone involved. Even a reunion could not return the family to the day before she disappeared.
That gives the story room to explore the difference between finding someone and recovering the life that existed before their loss. It also gives Brammall something more complicated to play than determination alone: a man whose idea of rescue may be tied to a past that cannot be restored.
These are the tensions established by the premise. How the series resolves them remains part of the mystery awaiting viewers.
Last Seen adapts Ryan David Jahn’s novel The Dispatcher, with Kris Mrksa serving as writer and executive producer. The series is produced by 60Forty Films and was entirely set and filmed in Victoria, Australia.
The official cast and crew credits name Christian Schwochow as director and executive producer. Brammall is joined by Maxine Peake, Brendan Cowell, Daniel Henshall, Jessica Wren, Zahra Newman, Chloe Jean Lourdes, and Tobias Muhafidin. Executive producers also include Hakan Kousetta, Jamie Laurenson, and Joanna Werner.
For American audiences, the Australian setting gives the show an identity outside the familiar geography of U.S. police dramas. Victoria is the location of the story itself, allowing the adaptation to establish its own surroundings rather than asking local scenery to stand in for another country.
The ensemble also creates room for perspectives beyond Ian’s. A missing-person story can become claustrophobic when every event is filtered through a single person’s conviction. The dramatic interest comes partly from encountering people who have their own knowledge, loyalties, and reasons for responding differently.
Brammall carries the central search, but the relationships around him will determine whether that search feels convincing as a family story.
Last Seen also demanded action sequences, and Brammall has been candid about finding them harder at 50 than he once imagined.
Discussing the production with Radio Times, he credited a younger scene partner with taking on much of the physical work during an early confrontation. Asked about the possibility of doing more action, he offered a practical condition: “Give me the right stunt double and I’ll do it.”
His account brings a welcome human detail to the promotional image of a desperate father fighting his way toward an answer. Performing that desperation requires choreography, cooperation, and people prepared to absorb the physical demands of a scene.
For the character, physical vulnerability can be useful territory. Ian’s willingness to intervene does not necessarily mean he is equipped to control what follows. The possibility of getting hurt gives an impulsive decision consequences beyond moving the investigation forward.
Apple’s official premiere announcement confirms that the first two episodes arrive together on Wednesday, September 9. The remaining four episodes follow weekly, with the sixth scheduled for October 7.
That gives the thriller a five-week release window. Viewers can begin with a substantial introduction to Ian’s situation, then follow the investigation one chapter at a time. Those who prefer watching a complete season can plan around the final episode’s arrival.
The U.S. Last Seen page provides access to the series through Apple TV. No familiarity with the source novel or Brammall’s previous work is needed to begin.
American viewers will have an unusually sharp contrast available the following day. Paramount+ has confirmed that the third and final season of Colin from Accounts arrives September 10, with all episodes released at once.
Brammall returns there alongside Harriet Dyer, his wife and fellow creator, writer, and star. Their comedy began with a car accident, an injured dog, and two strangers drawn into each other’s lives. Its farewell season places another set of complicated relationships on his schedule, with considerably more space for laughter between the difficult moments.
The post Patrick Brammall Takes a Dark Turn in Apple TV’s Last Seen appeared first on AppleMagazine.
iPhone 18 launch, Apple Park, iPhone 18, iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, iPhone Ultra, foldable iPhone, Apple event, September event, John Ternus, Steve Jobs Theater, iOS 27, iPhone camera, variable aperture, liquid metal hinge, foldable display, hands-on event, product launch, Cupertino, smartphone news
The iPhone 18 launch is turning Apple Park into more than a stage for Wednesday’s presentation. The September 9 Apple event already carries unusual expectations around a possible foldable iPhone, a new generation of Pro cameras, and John Ternus’ first major product introduction as CEO. Reports of additional event staff now suggest that the experience awaiting invited media could be larger and more demanding than a conventional iPhone demonstration.
The official event announcement confirms that “Surprise and shine” begins September 9 at 10 a.m. Pacific Time, with worldwide streaming through apple.com, Apple TV, and YouTube. The invited audience will attend from Apple Park, but the increased activity surrounding the event does not necessarily mean that the company will abandon its carefully produced video format for a completely live keynote.
A polished presentation can explain specifications, introduce software, and display new hardware from perfect angles. It cannot reproduce the first sensation of opening a foldable screen, examining a crease under direct light, testing a mechanical hinge, or watching a camera respond as the lighting changes. Those moments happen after the main presentation, inside the hands-on areas where early opinions begin to form.
The first indication of a larger operation arrived through an internal program for US retail employees. According to reporting distributed by Bloomberg, store employees were invited to enter a lottery for positions supporting the in-person unveiling.
Selected employees were expected to organize lines, check in guests, provide directions, welcome attendees, and assist security teams. Employees who participated in WWDC 2026 or the iPhone 17 event were reportedly excluded, allowing another group of retail workers to experience the launch.
The existence of the lottery does not prove that the keynote itself will return to a traditional live-stage presentation. Apple has previously recruited retail employees to support events, and the company has not disclosed how many people were selected this year.
It does confirm that the Apple Park gathering requires a substantial customer-facing operation beyond the team producing the presentation. Retail employees already know how to direct visitors, explain products without overwhelming them, manage queues, and identify when someone needs technical help.
Those skills become particularly useful during an event attended by journalists, photographers, analysts, creators, and international guests, all trying to reach the same devices within a short period. Additional staff can prevent the hands-on area from becoming a crowded ring around a few demonstration tables.
The iPhone 18 launch may also require more movement between specialized spaces. A conventional phone can be displayed in rows according to color or size. A foldable model needs room for repeated opening and closing, interface demonstrations, durability questions, and comparisons between its exterior and interior screens. Camera testing requires a different environment again.
Apple Park does not need to undergo a permanent architectural transformation for that expansion. Modular tables, managed lighting, guided demonstrations, additional charging equipment, and more employees can significantly enlarge the experience around Steve Jobs Theater for a single afternoon.
The rumored iPhone Ultra is likely to attract the longest lines if it appears on Wednesday. It would represent the first substantially new iPhone form factor since the current full-screen design became established, and its appeal cannot be communicated through processor charts alone.
Visitors will want to know how the hinge feels at different angles, whether the device stays open when partially folded, how much pressure is required to close it, and whether both sides align evenly. They will inspect the central folding area under bright light and move a finger across the display to determine whether the crease is visible, noticeable by touch, or effectively hidden during normal use.
Display stress remains one of the most difficult engineering problems in the foldable category. TrendForce’s analysis of foldable display technology explains that crease reduction depends on controlling stress across the panel’s multilayer structure. Ultra-thin glass, optically clear adhesive, support plates, and the position of the display’s neutral layer can all influence how the screen behaves after repeated folding.
Reports have associated the iPhone Ultra with a liquid-metal hinge and a virtually creaseless internal display, but neither detail has been announced. Even if the production device resembles those descriptions, “virtually creaseless” will remain a subjective claim until people can examine the screen from different angles and under different lighting conditions.
Apple will consequently need demonstration units that are fully accessible rather than fixed behind stands. A journalist should be able to fold the device repeatedly, rotate the internal display, type with the phone partially open, and watch iOS 27 transfer an activity between the exterior and interior screens.
Those interface transitions could be as revealing as the physical hardware. A larger display gains value when an app can reveal another column, create a more capable workspace, or reposition controls without simply enlarging the standard iPhone interface.
Demonstrators may need to direct visitors toward examples that reveal those differences within the limited time available. Mail, Maps, Photos, Safari, video calling, document editing, and drag-and-drop workflows could communicate the benefit of the larger display faster than a static home screen.
The hands-on area must also answer durability questions without pretending that a few minutes can replace months of ownership. Hinge resistance, protection around the folding axis, weight distribution, screen reflections, and off-center visibility can be judged immediately. Long-term wear, dust resistance, and thousands of folding cycles cannot.
The Pro camera system is expected to receive one of the lineup’s most technical hardware changes. Previous iPhone 18 Pro camera reporting has centered on a mechanical or variable aperture, which could physically alter the amount of light passing through the main lens.
A conventional fixed-aperture smartphone camera manages exposure through shutter speed, sensor sensitivity, computational processing, and other electronic controls. A mechanical aperture can change the physical opening through which light reaches the sensor. Depending on its design, that could provide additional control over exposure, depth of field, highlights, and the appearance of subjects at different distances.
Current pre-event iPhone 18 expectations indicate that the feature may be exclusive to the iPhone 18 Pro Max, although its final availability will remain uncertain until the presentation.
A normal demonstration table would reveal little about such a camera system. Effective testing requires contrast, motion, faces, reflections, foreground objects, and meaningful changes in brightness.
Apple has previously used prepared scenes to demonstrate cameras, making controlled lighting stations a reasonable possibility for the iPhone 18 launch. No dependable report has confirmed that a dedicated photography pavilion or a particular new installation has been constructed for Wednesday, however.
A useful setup would allow creators to move between bright and dim areas while watching the aperture respond. A foreground object positioned near a person could demonstrate changes in depth of field. Directional lights could reveal highlight handling, while a darker scene could test whether the physical aperture works smoothly with computational photography.
Video creates another challenge. Any aperture adjustment during recording must appear gradual rather than causing sudden jumps in exposure or background separation. If manual control is available, photographers will immediately look for the number of supported aperture positions and whether a chosen setting can be locked before recording.
These demonstrations would offer the in-person audience something that cannot be reproduced during the stream. The presentation can display carefully selected photographs and video clips, but activity around the camera stations will reveal how quickly professionals understand the controls and whether the results remain convincing outside a prepared promotional sequence.
Wednesday’s event will be John Ternus’ first major product launch as CEO. That creates an unusual balance between continuity and change. The campus, production team, executives, and controlled demonstrations remain familiar, while the person responsible for the final message has changed.
Ternus does not need to replace every established event practice during his first days in the role. A larger in-person component would let him place more attention on direct product experience without sacrificing the timing and visual precision of a prerecorded presentation.
A live welcome, appearances around the campus, and extended media access after the video could establish his presence without forcing the event into an entirely different format. His background in hardware engineering also makes this a suitable launch for more detailed demonstrations, particularly if the lineup includes a new hinge, display construction, or mechanical camera component.
The hardware surrounding the iPhone 18 launch will test how well the company explains unfamiliar decisions. A foldable iPhone must justify its size, construction, software behavior, and likely premium price within minutes. The Pro camera must demonstrate an advantage that remains visible after computational processing. Accessories must protect new shapes without making them unpleasant to hold.
Retail employees working at Apple Park can observe those reactions closely. They will hear which controls require an explanation, which accessories create hesitation, and which claims prompt the same questions repeatedly. That experience can return to stores before customers begin arriving for demonstrations of their own.
Apple controls every frame of its presentation video, but it cannot control every observation made after the screens turn off. A foldable display will be photographed from difficult angles. Its hinge will be opened hundreds of times. Camera samples will be compared before visitors have left Apple Park. Any awkward transition, reflection, or confusing control will circulate within minutes.
This makes the in-person operation more demanding than a larger guest list might suggest. Every demonstration unit must remain charged, connected, clean, updated, and ready for the next visitor. Foldable devices may require closer inspection between sessions, while camera areas need staff who understand both the feature and the conditions created to demonstrate it.
The employees around those spaces should provide enough guidance to help visitors locate unfamiliar features without turning every interaction into another scripted presentation. Excessive control makes a demonstration feel artificial; too little creates confusion and crowded tables.
Apple Park therefore becomes a second launch platform after the worldwide stream. The video introduces the products, while the hands-on area exposes them to fingers, lenses, questions, and immediate judgment. By Wednesday afternoon, the questions repeated most frequently around those demonstration tables may offer the first indication of how easily the iPhone 18 lineup can explain itself.
The post iPhone 18 Launch: Apple Park Prepares for a Bigger In-Person Event appeared first on AppleMagazine.
Over a century ago, German pathologist Georg Schmorl documented a strange phenomenon: cells from fetuses that had moved into the mother during pregnancy. He had discovered microchimerism — where the cells from one individual move into another and set up shop.
In the past few decades, scientists' understanding of microchimerism has grown, thanks to technological advances. And the implications are wild.
Cells transferred during pregnancy could mean you have cells from your grandmother living inside you. A twin can be "absorbed" within the womb, leaving a genetic trace of the lost sibling. And after a bone marrow transplant, a man ended up with the donor's DNA in his blood and semen. These are just a few examples of how microchimerism opens a new way to understand immunology, genetics and evolution.
In her book "Hidden Guests: Migrating Cells and How the New Science of Microchimerism Is Redefining Human Identity" (Greystone Books, 2025), author and journalist Lise Barnéoud explores how the field emerged and developed as scientists grappled with understanding what was going on, and why — as well as the far-reaching implications of these minuscule interlopers.
"Hidden Guests" has been short-listed for the 2026 Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize.
Excerpt from "Hidden Guests": 'It doesn't lie. So who are you?': What happens when DNA tests show a woman is not the mother of the child she gave birth to?
Live Science spoke with Barnéoud about the book, why the idea of microchimerism resonates so deeply, and where the field could be headed next. "Hidden Guests" has been short-listed for the 2026 Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize.
Hannah Osborne: What first got you interested in microchimerism? How did your personal understanding change over the course of writing "Hidden Guests"?
Lise Barnéoud: The first time I heard about it, I was writing my previous book on vaccinations, and I had a chapter on our immunity, how our immune system works. I wanted to explain what we got wrong about how our immunity works. We are still learning — [we used to have this idea] that our immune system is kind of an army patrolling in our body and expelling any foreign elements. That's the image we have of our immune system. I wanted to tell another story, which is more accurate because we know now that it's not working like that.
I was looking for counterexamples, and, of course, one very famous counterexample is pregnancy. We tolerate the fetus that is half different than us. Another well-known counterexample is microbiota. Inside our body, we carry microbial cells as well as human cells — so cells coming from bacteria, viruses, fungi. We don't expel them; we need them. The third example I found was microchimerism.
The more I read about it, the more I was interested in it. It was challenging so many things. I've learned that the placenta is not that watertight barrier that we often think of, that the immune system is not as intolerant as we often think, and we can inherit cells from our kids like an inverted inheritance. All those elements popped up within my first reading, and I thought, "OK, I really need to dig more."
For your second question, I think the biggest change is that I realized those cells are not only kind of inactive tourists, just homeless drifters passively traveling in our body. They are really active. They can multiply, they can produce protein, they communicate with other cells, and they really influence our physiology, for better or for worse.
HO: We see how microchimerism is a relatively new field of research that has had lots of stops and starts. What was the biggest hindrance to the development of the field, and what changed?
LB: Maybe before speaking about the hindrances, just saying that the first time we discovered cells from other individuals within individuals was a century ago. The first one was in 1893, and it was a German pathologist who discovered cells from fetal origin in lungs from women who had died during pregnancy. Then it took a century to understand that this phenomenon happened to everyone and that it is of importance.
I think there are several hindrances. There's never one big one. The first one we can think of is the technology, because you need to study these microchimeric cells; you need tools that are able to study a tissue at the cellular level. This is quite new, so now we have these tools and we can make some progress. The second big hindrance is that this research field calls into question the traditional view of the immune system. If you see the immune system as a purely defensive and intolerant army, then you can't think of these foreign cells staying forever in your body, and that was a big hindrance, I think.
Maybe a third hindrance is that at the beginning of this field — I mean the new beginning in the '90s — they were mostly women working in this field. They told me that male colleagues often said, "Well, that's woman's stuff, you know; you're looking for some connection with your babies, but it's not really relevant," which is wrong, of course, because even men are affected by this phenomenon. They stayed nine months in the womb like us.
That might have, at least, challenged some of the first pioneers of the field. Now there are more and more men working in the field. In April, there was an international conference on microchimerism, and I think it was half women.
It's because it's such a new field and you have such open questions, there's room for many interpretations, many hypotheses.
HO: The book includes many anecdotes about people directly affected by microchimerism. Which story were you most affected by, and why?
LB: I guess it'd be the story of Lydia Fairchild because she nearly lost custody of her children because of microchimerism. She was 26 and living in the U.S., and she applied for a welfare benefit to help her raise her kids. In the U.S., you need to undergo a maternity test for that, and her DNA test ends up showing that she could not be the mother of her kids. Of course she tried to argue; she had photos; she had testimonies. But she was always told, "DNA is 100% foolproof; DNA doesn't lie," which implied that she was lying. But she was not, so she called several lawyers. But at the beginning, they were all saying, "No, DNA doesn't lie."
At that time, she was pregnant with her third child, and they decided to do a test immediately after birth. Again, the impossible happened. This third child that just emerged from her womb was not her son — genetically speaking, at least.
In fact, she was harboring cells from her vanished sister inside her. Most of her eggs carried her sister's genetic signature, which means that the mother of her kids never lived. Isn't it amazing? That's maybe one of the stories that blew my mind.
HO: The section on DNA and how microchimerism complicates things is fascinating. How much of an impact do you think hidden cells have on the reliability of DNA evidence?
LB: The truth is that I think we don't really know. If you have only some microchimeric cells, among thousands of your own cells, then it won't change the reliability of the DNA test. But in some cases, these microchimeric cells can make up a significant part of an organ and sometimes even an entire organ. This proportion might depend on when you received those microchimeric cells. For instance, if you received those cells like Lydia Fairchild at the very, very beginning of your development, they might end up making up the entire organ where they landed first. But probably, we don't know which percentage of us start our in utero life with an evanescent embryo.
I looked for this number because I didn't really know about evanescent twins, so I wanted to know how many pregnancies started with several embryos and suddenly one disappeared. And I couldn't find any good number because, of course, it's quite difficult to put any imaging there at the beginning of the condition. Some articles say that up to 30% of pregnancies will start with several embryos, which means a lot of us are affected by evanescent twins. But let's say it might be rare that we have so many microchimeric cells in one organ that it completely changed a DNA test.
But there's another example in my book that took place in Alaska in 2004. After a rape, the forensic investigators collected the semen from the scene, and they discovered that the DNA in this semen matched with a man who was already in the database. But this guy was behind bars. He was in jail, the day of the rape, so he couldn't be the rapist.
Finally, investigators discovered that this guy, the prisoner, received a bone marrow transplant a few years ago from his brother, and the cells from the bone marrow of his brother didn't stay quietly in the bone marrow and blood. They go outside the marrow, and some end up in the semen. And the true rapist was the brother, the one who donated the bone marrow, and not the receiver. Without the alibi of the prison, the brother who received the transplant would have been charged, and the true rapist would have been left free.
I guess there are some cases where microchimeric cells can really change the result of a DNA test. But for now, it's not really studied. I've been contacted by some forensic investigators to learn more about microchimerism, so maybe things will change.
HO: You point out that microchimerism is used for both pro- and anti-abortion arguments, and it's used by "manosphere" influencers to promote ideologies. Why do you think microchimerism research is so open to interpretation and used in this way?
LB: Next time you're at a dinner, just try to explain microchimerism. You're a science journalist, right? Well, usually when you tell the story you're working on, people are saying, "Oh, yeah, OK." And they just turn to another conversation. If you try mentioning microchimerism in your next dinner, then you'll see. Everyone will try to make some hypothesis, some connection; some will be moved that it's possible to keep some cells from an unborn child or a lost child. Some will be disgusted by the idea that they keep cells from their mother, like having their mother on their shoulder all the time. It's really the first time as a science journalist I experienced such resonance with a story I was working on among people around me, people who are really not into science.
As soon as the door opened, it revealed the fears and the desires of people. So yes, some conservatives use microchimerism to fight against abortion because they say the cells from those aborted will haunt the women for the rest of their life. [But] I've met scientists explaining that if you receive a shot of cells of fetal origin, it can also help you to regenerate your organs. It can be used also by some other people to rejuvenate, to try to stay young.
It's because it's such a new field and you have such open questions, there's room for many interpretations, many hypotheses. I mean, that's fine; that's how science works. You should always have hypotheses and try to answer your hypothesis with new experiments. But it's true that sometimes I didn't know how to handle all those ideas at the beginning. Then I realized it was like a window open on the intimate — their fears and their desires — and it reveals what they really think about their connection to the world they are in. From a sociological point of view, it would be really interesting to study that.
HO: In the book, biologist and evolutionary theorist Amy Boddy warns that microchimerism researchers love to hypothesize. When the implications of the field are so far-reaching, how do we get past this? Which hypothesis do you find most intriguing?
LB: Many scientists told me that until 2021 or something like that, there was this hypothesis that those cells could come from another generation than the mother. We knew that the mother would give cells to the fetus and the fetus could give cells to the mother, but then people ask, because the mother can still carry cells from her mother, maybe she could pass those cells to the fetus. Until the 2020s, scientists were thinking, "Well that's a crazy hypothesis; that can't happen." There could be only a few cells that won't go through the placenta and integrate with the new fetus — until one scientist proved that a newborn can carry cells from the grandma.
In this field, you always have crazy hypotheses, and I guess until we haven't proved that this hypothesis is wrong, you can still leave the hypothesis on the table. One of the craziest hypotheses, the first time I encountered it, I thought, "OK, they've gone really too far."
This hypothesis is that we could inherit cells from our sexual partner. I thought it was not possible because I thought the semen was full of spermatozoa, that they are only like half cells having only half chromosomes, so they cannot survive. But actually in semen, you have a lot more cells than spermatozoids — you have immune cells, for example.
There are many cells in the semen, and we can think that if you have some, there could be some path for those cells to escape and go into your blood. It's not completely crazy. For now, there's no formal proof of this new source of microchimerism, but I recently heard that some scientists are working on the topic on mice.
We should be careful about those interpretations. But I think scientists are not the ones who should care about this interpretation; otherwise, they would prevent themselves from doing their research. They should open all the doors with all kinds of hypotheses. If we do it in a scientific way, meaning if we try to answer a hypothesis with good experiments, then I think everything is fine. You will never prevent people around you from using this information to distort the facts and tell another story. That's how life goes.
HO: What do you think the most promising use for microchimerism research will be over the next 10 to 20 years? How do you see it unfolding?
LB: I guess it will be in the regeneration field. We have discovered that those cells can participate to regenerate tissue. Some scientists around the world are doing clinical studies to see whether we could use these cells as a therapy either after an infarctus [heart attack], but also a vascular accident [stroke] or when you have a wound on your skin. The hope is that by either attracting microchimeric cells that are within our bodies, or injected, these microchimeric cells maybe can help this kind of tissue to repair. I think that might be one of the promising uses of these cells in the future.
Maybe also in the transplantation field; maybe we can think about using the knowledge of how microchimeric cells can induce tolerance to avoid [immunosuppressive] drugs. When you receive the transplant, you need to take drugs [that suppress the immune system] for the rest of your life, and those drugs are like really strong drugs. If we can use microchimeric cells before the transplant to allow better tolerance, then we could either not use any drugs or maybe use less drugs. That would be really interesting, too.
This interview has been condensed and edited lightly for clarity.
Help us improve Live Science Pro: We're always trying to make our content better. Leave us feedback about Pro here.
What if some of your cells were not your own? What if they once belonged to someone else?
Part mind-bending medical mystery — part cutting-edge science — Hidden Guests uncovers the astonishing phenomenon of microchimerism: the presence of foreign cells inside our own bodies. The incredible story of how those cells got there — and what they do once they arrive — might change everything we know about the immune system, lineage, and identity.
Nature, Published online: 10 August 2026; doi:10.1038/s41586-026-10989-4
Learning millisecond protein dynamics from what is missing in NMR spectraLong before chemistry was a formal science, humans were experimenting with substances to solve problems, cure illnesses and make money. In his book "The Age of Alchemy: How Early Innovators Shaped Modern Chemistry" (Profile Books, 2026), author Kit Chapman, a science journalist and honorary researcher at Falmouth University in the U.K., traces how this ancient, protoscientific tradition shaped the world.
From our ancestors' early use of fire to some accidental — and disastrous — pyrotechnics in the 14th-century French court of Charles VI, Chapman reveals how early innovations across the world paved the way for modern science.
Live Science spoke with Chapman about his book, which has been short-listed for the 2026 Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize.
Read an excerpt: 'These were harder than any other blades, cut sharper and cost more': How ancient Sri Lankans created steel of legends by harnessing monsoons
Hannah Osborne: The book is full of brilliant historical anecdotes that bring all of these alchemy breakthroughs into context. What was your favorite one and why?
Kit Chapman: I mean, you can't go wrong with a man trying to turn his own urine into gold, I think. Hennig Brand [who accidentally discovered phosphorus in the 17th century] was one of my early touchstones. I've known about this story for a while. I've always thought, "How can I get this into a book? What's the link?" Obviously alchemy provides this fantastic base. He bankrupted two wives to try and fund his 1,500-gallon [5,700 liters] urine habit — and then he gets something [phosphorous], against the odds.
This is the first element we can actually put a name to. This is the first person we can say actually discovered a chemical element, and it's an alchemist in the purest sense of the word. Then, of course, he tries to keep it secret. He sells it, eventually, to a friend, and his urine goes on tour around Europe, showing the kings and queens this glowing pee, before suddenly, [chemist and philosopher] Robert Boyle actually works out exactly what's going on.
That, to me, sort of encompassed everything I was hoping for in the book. There's a fantastic story there that's about human connection. There's the unraveling of mythology, and theology and belief, and starting to look at science. But there's also real practical stuff going on there. He didn't know what he was doing. He just didn't know why he was doing it, and that I found fascinating.
HO: You make the point that these people weren't thinking, "Oh, I'm going to do chemistry." How important is that for understanding how these early innovations shaped modern knowledge of how things work?
KC: I think that's essential. We often look at science as something separate from the real world, and one of the things that I really wanted to do with this book was to illustrate that science is going on in every profession. It's going on in every home, continuously; it's going on in our bodies continuously. It's everywhere.
Science is a way to understand what's going on in the world. It is not a separate thing from culture, from belief, from trade, from globalization, from discovery, from just getting on with life. I wanted to bring in the potters, the weavers, the bakers, the urine salesmen — which was an entire thing that I didn't really know I had to go down. I found it fascinating.
And, of course, [there are] artisans. When we start looking at the first actual chemistry that's being done, it is people trying to create beautiful works of art, perfumes, things like that. It moves away from survival and into this ecstatic beauty, and that, to me, encompasses what I love about the history of science. It's bringing all of these threads together and making discoveries not necessarily where we think we're going to find them.
HO: You mentioned the beauty of it all, and the perfume. One of the chapters I really enjoyed was the first chemist who was a female perfume maker in ancient Assyria.
KC: Tappūtī Bēlet-ekallim. The fascinating thing is that the only reason we know her name is that she put it down in cuneiform. She wrote it down. She may well have been a slave; perfume makers were often slaves. She was certainly a woman who was working in the palace. She was working with another woman whose name, unfortunately, we've lost to time.
What I find fascinating is that we now have this person who was one of the working class, one of the underdogs, slaving for a week to make this potion that she wrote down because the recipe is incredibly detailed. And we remember her name, but we have no recollection of the lord or lady that she was actually making it for. It's kind of class warfare throughout the centuries.
HO: I found the extreme sort of secrecy really striking — that so many of these ancient texts were lost because they were being hidden. But then you also have the fall of civilizations, so we've lost all this knowledge.
KC: It's this combination of, as you mentioned, hiding the recipes because they are trade secrets. If you look at the first alchemy book that we actually know of — "Physika Kai Mystika" — it literally translates as "natural and secret questions" or trade secrets. These were craftsmen, and, of course, they didn't want to share it with rival craftsmen. If you've got a really good recipe for making something look like gold, you want to keep that to yourself.
They use these code words — and that went all the way through into what we think of as alchemy, that sort of Renaissance period where they're talking about taking the fiery sword from the belly of the dragon, which is just wonderful and descriptive.
But you also have things like Emperor Diocletian destroying the texts in Alexandria in 300 A.D. Why did he do it? Because it was a matter of survival for him. Twenty-five of his predecessors were murdered by their own guards or died of plague and things like that — horrible fates. He wanted to avoid that, and the idea that [someone] could turn something into gold terrified him. It would debase his currency, so it always brings in that politics. It brings in human nature and human curiosity.
HO: Do you think there are still things we're yet to discover from alchemy from the past?
KC: Yeah, without question. Whether or not we're going to discover some kind of new, groundbreaking technology that's going to change the world, I can't see that happening. But the one thing we could see is the use of natural products in a way that we hadn't necessarily thought [of].
A great example of that is [Nobel Prize-winning chemist] Tu Youyou and the discovery of artemisinin compounds [from the] qinghao [plant], which comes from a Chinese alchemist's herbal remedies book, essentially 1,700 years ago. The fact that the best defense we have against malaria, the best antimalarials possible, comes from this ancient alchemical source indicates that there's probably more to find.
There is almost certainly more to find in terms of how they [ancient alchemists] used recipes, how they would try and make gold. Their understanding of the world is something that we don't necessarily have a full grasp of, and we're still piecing it together. There's some wonderful work being done by Matteo Martinelli and others looking at the history of, particularly of Western alchemy emerging in Egypt.
We also have things like Greek fire. We have a pretty good idea how they did it, but if you're looking for what the exact recipe [is], we're still not 100% sure.
HO: It's interesting now, watching modern equivalents taking place. We still, to an extent, try to guard our own knowledge.
KC: Yeah, we do, and I think it's actually a pernicious thing in science. We have this publish-or -perish mentality, which is that if we don't get the paper out first, obviously we lose the patent, but wider than that, we lose the kudos. There's this kind of necessity to kind of hide things. You hear about all kinds of shenanigans — a reviewer delaying a paper until their paper comes out, things like that, all this kind of naughtiness going on.
We've got to recognize that science has moved on certainly from the "Great Man" idea. We're now working collaboratively in teams. That is the only way that modern science gets done. The second, if there is one lesson from the book, it's that if you try and hide science, you delay progress.
If you look at the traditional story of science, we talk about Europe. Occasionally, we might bring in China. But India, Africa, Mesoamerica, South America, North America — every single continent was having scientific discoveries and developments.
The moment you actually start spreading ideas, the real ignition for me for the Renaissance and for what becomes chemistry, is the printing press. It's the fact that ideas can then be shared and accessed by everybody. The moment we start realizing that science is a global endeavor, that everyone can do it — man, woman, child, it doesn't matter your nationality, [it] doesn't matter your ethnic ethnicity, it's for everybody — the sooner we're going to start seeing some major progress that we otherwise wouldn't make.
HO: We see loads of the advances in chemistry and alchemy within civilizational melting pots. What were some of the biggest surprises to you when you were researching the book?
KC: One thing that really annoyed me was, looking through textbooks, you can look at who made zinc, and you come up with a name that came from the 1700s, or how platinum was discovered — that's a fantastic example. Platinum was discovered by a conquistador who noticed that some natives were wearing platinum. But, of course, he didn't discover it; it was discovered by the Indigenous populations.
The amount of science that came out of Mesoamerica, Central America, and the way that science was also being developed in India, it's just kind of completely overlooked. If you look at the traditional story of science, we talk about Europe. Occasionally, we might bring in China. But India, Africa, Mesoamerica, South America, North America — every single continent was having scientific discoveries and developments.
They weren't necessarily developments that we think of in terms of leading to chemistry, but they were dealing with social problems that they had at the time. They were tackling what was in front of them, and we always need to remember when we're looking at history to look at the context of the discoveries.
HO: Which breakthrough did you think was most impressive in terms of the materials or facilities that were available?
KC: One thing that I found sort of striking was, there's a chap called Paracelsus who is absolutely fascinating, absolutely bonkers. Paracelsus is, for me, the archetypical alchemist because he was certainly trying to revitalize medicine and get rid of humor theory and come up with all these ideas. [Editor's note: Humor theory is the idea that human health and temperament were related to four fluids in the body — black and yellow bile, blood and phlegm.] But he also believed that mermaids were real and that they were just out to steal men's souls.
He was a drunk, he had a broadsword, and yet he's the guy that was able to combine what we think of as the traditional herbalist role and the doctors. At that point, doctors weren't even touching patients. They believed that the true skill of a medical man was that you didn't even need to examine a patient; you could just sort of look at them and you'd know what was wrong. He [Paracelsus] was able to say, "No, that's not right; you need to actually test things, and you need to try things." The moment we actually combine those two different threads together is when we actually started to get what becomes of modern medicine. The number of lives that saves is incalculable, so I think that that's one of the great moments.
The other one that always comes to me is Antoine Lavoisier in the French Revolution. He made several great discoveries — the fact that matter can only be changed; it can't be destroyed [at least at low energies]. The idea that if you take something, then obviously there's got to be components to that; you're not making it out of thin air. And coming up with a list of elements in the French Revolution or just before the French Revolution, unfortunately dies, from the guillotine [when Lavoisier was executed].
That, for me, was when we started to get true chemistry. That's when all of the magic is dispelled. I think he [Lavoisier] is, for me, the French equivalent of Isaac Newton. He's incredible.
HO: For you personally, throughout researching and writing the book, what was your biggest takeaway and what was the biggest surprise?
KC: My biggest takeaway is that science happens everywhere continuously through everyone. I traveled around the world for this book; I went to pretty much all of the continents. I didn't go down to Australia; that's about it. Wherever you go, there are discoveries being made. There are people who are trying to make their worlds better.
Science is not for this elite group; it's for everyone. One of the things I try to do with this book is to show people that even if you think that science isn't for you, it absolutely is; you're doing science continuously.
There've been so many [surprises]. One of the things — this is purely because of the way that I was taught and these inherent biases that we have — but it's so easy to overlook the role of women. When you start delving into the role of women in science … You've mentioned Tappūtī; we also have Mary the Jewess. Throughout the Renaissance, we have people like Caterina Sforza and [the] very famous Queen Christina of Sweden, which I didn't mention in the book because I just didn't have space.
The one shocker for me is this book "The Secrets of Isabella Cortese," which was a man pretending to be a woman to sell his science book. For me, [it] just kind of unravels this whole idea that science isn't for everyone.
This interview has been condensed and edited lightly for clarity.
"Age of Alchemy" is a fascinating and funny dive into chemistry long before chemistry existed. It captures the ingenuity of humans across cultures and time, revealing how ultimately the work of these early innovators would eventually meld into modern science.
Apple Health data can now move between the Health app and Google Health on an iPhone. The connection lets Google Health import supported information recorded by an iPhone, Apple Watch, and compatible apps. The latest Google Health update can also send supported Fitbit information to Apple Health.
This two-way connection is useful for people who wear a Fitbit but prefer Apple’s Health app as the central place for viewing activity, sleep, steps, and other wellness information. It also reduces the need for third-party synchronization apps.
The feature requires a recent version of Google Health. Google began introducing support for sending data back to Apple Health with Google Health version 5.05. Because app updates can roll out gradually, the new sharing options may not appear until the latest version reaches your account.
The Fitbit app became Google Health in 2026. Existing Fitbit users should find that the installed app has changed its name and design after updating. Fitbit accounts must also be moved to an adult Google Account to use the redesigned service.
Google says the Apple Health connection requires iOS 16.4 or later. The iPhone must have internet access while the connection is being created.
Settings > General > About > iOS Version
Install the latest compatible iOS update if the phone is running an older release.
Settings > General > Software Update
Next, confirm that Google Health is current. Version 5.05 or later is required for the newer option that sends supported Google Health and Fitbit information to Apple Health.
App Store > Profile Picture > Available Updates > Google Health > Update
If Google Health does not appear under Available Updates, search for the app manually. The App Store page may show an Update button if a newer release is available.
App Store > Search > Enter Google Health > Google Health (Fitbit)
People who previously used Fitbit should sign in with the Google Account connected to their Fitbit information. Creating a different account may produce an empty Google Health profile.
Connecting the apps allows Google Health to read supported information from Apple Health. This can include data collected by the iPhone, Apple Watch, and other apps that already share information with Apple Health.
Google Health > Connections > Apps and Services > Apple Health > Get Started
Depending on the Google Health version and interface shown on the iPhone, Connections may appear behind the profile icon.
Google Health > Profile Icon > Partner Apps > Apple Health
Google Health will display a consent screen explaining the connection. Read the information before continuing.
Sync Google Health With Apple Health > Agree
The iPhone will then display Apple’s health permission screen. This screen lets you decide which information Google Health can read.
Apple Health Permission Screen > Turn All Categories On > Allow
You do not have to share every available category. Selecting individual permissions provides more control over sensitive health information.
Apple Health Permission Screen > Select Each Health Category > Allow
Google Health can import supported information such as steps, distance, active energy, exercise records, routes, sleep sessions, sleep stages, heart rate, resting heart rate, heart rate variability, blood oxygen, respiratory rate, body temperature, weight, body fat percentage, water, nutrition information, and some cycle-tracking data.
Available categories depend on the devices and apps connected to Apple Health. An iPhone may provide steps and walking information, while an Apple Watch can contribute heart rate, workouts, sleep, and other measurements supported by the model.
After the permissions are approved, Google Health should confirm that the connection is complete.
Google Health Confirmation Screen > Done
New Apple Health information should begin appearing automatically in Google Health. Google has said that imported data can be used across relevant Google Health metrics, although not every external data type is used for every calculation.
Google Health > Health > Select a Metric
Google Health may display information from several connected sources together. Its value for a metric can differ slightly from the number shown by Apple Health because the apps may process available data differently.
Google Health version 5.05 adds the reverse direction that many iPhone and Fitbit users previously lacked. Supported information recorded through Fitbit can now be written into Apple Health.
Before enabling this option, make sure the Fitbit is properly connected to Google Health. Fitbit devices normally synchronize automatically throughout the day when Bluetooth is available and the wearable is near the iPhone.
Google Health > Profile Icon > Devices > Select Your Fitbit
The device page should show the wearable, its battery level, and its most recent synchronization time. Opening Google Health can also prompt a nearby Fitbit to transfer recently collected information.
Once the wearable is updating Google Health correctly, open the Apple Health connection settings.
Google Health > Profile Icon > Partner Apps > Apple Health
The interface may use Apps and Services instead of Partner Apps on some versions.
Google Health > Connections > Apps and Services > Apple Health
Follow the prompts for sharing Google Health information with Apple Health. The iPhone may display separate permissions for data that Google Health can read and data that it can write.
Apple Health Permission Screen > Allow Google Health to Write > Select Health Categories > Allow
Google says supported information can include exercise records, steps, sleep, vitals, and other health data. The exact selection can vary according to the Fitbit model, region, Google Health version, and information stored in the account.
Selecting every category is convenient, but it can create overlapping sources when an iPhone, Apple Watch, and Fitbit record the same type of activity. Choose only the categories you want Google Health to add.
A person who uses a Fitbit mainly for sleep, for example, can allow sleep information while leaving steps disabled. Someone who wears a Fitbit instead of an Apple Watch may prefer to enable steps, workouts, heart rate, sleep, and other supported categories.
Apple Health keeps permission controls on the iPhone. You can change them after the first connection without deleting either app.
Health > Profile Picture > Privacy > Apps > Google Health
The page shows the categories Google Health is permitted to read or update. Turn off any category you no longer want to share.
Some iOS versions provide the same controls through the Sharing tab.
Health > Sharing > Apps and Services > Google Health
Turning off a permission stops future sharing for that category. It does not necessarily remove information that has already been written to Google Health or Apple Health.
The Google Health app also provides controls for the connection.
Google Health > Connections > Apps and Services > Connected > Apple Health
If Google Health displays a message that new data types are available, open the connection and approve the additional categories you want to use. Newly supported information is not automatically shared without permission.
An iPhone, Apple Watch, and Fitbit can record similar information at the same time. Apple Health keeps each source attached to its data and uses a priority order when presenting combined measurements.
You can inspect the sources contributing to a category and choose which one Apple Health should prefer.
Health > Search > Activity > Steps > Data Sources and Access
The screen shows the apps and devices that provide step records. If Google Health, an Apple Watch, and the iPhone all appear, you can adjust their priority.
Health > Search > Activity > Steps > Data Sources and Access > Edit > Drag Sources Into the Preferred Order > Done
Move the source you trust most toward the top. Apple Health generally gives higher priority to sources placed above others when similar records overlap.
Repeat the same process for other categories if their totals do not look right. Exercise, sleep, active energy, and distance can each have their own sources and permissions.
Synchronization is not always immediate. A Fitbit first sends its information to Google Health, and Google Health then writes supported records to Apple Health. Bluetooth availability, Background App Refresh, internet access, and battery-saving behavior can affect this process.
Begin by opening Google Health with the Fitbit close to the iPhone. Wait for the device to complete its normal synchronization before checking Apple Health.
If Apple Health information is missing from Google Health, confirm that the connection remains active.
Google Health > Connections > Apps and Services > Apple Health
If Google Health displays an error or a request for new permissions, follow the message shown on the screen.
Background App Refresh can help Google Health update when the app is not open.
Settings > General > Background App Refresh > Google Health > On
Bluetooth must remain available for a Fitbit to communicate with the iPhone.
Settings > Bluetooth > Bluetooth On
If the connection continues to fail, disconnecting and reconnecting Apple Health may restore the permission request.
Google Health > Connections > Apps and Services > Apple Health > Disconnect > Confirm Disconnect
Disconnecting the service does not automatically remove every permission already stored by Apple Health. Review the Google Health entry in the Health app if you want to remove those permissions as well.
Health > Profile Picture > Privacy > Apps > Google Health > Turn Off All
After reconnecting the apps, allow time for new records to appear. Previously stored information may not transfer in exactly the same way as activity recorded after the connection was enabled.
You can inspect an individual entry to confirm whether it came from Google Health, a Fitbit, an Apple Watch, or the iPhone.
Health > Search > Select a Health Category > Show All Data > Select the Latest Entry
The post How to Sync Apple Health Data With Google Health on Your iPhone appeared first on AppleMagazine.
FaceTime Dual Capture is bringing simultaneous front-and-rear camera streaming to video calls in iOS 27, allowing compatible iPhones to show the caller and their surroundings without repeatedly switching between cameras.
The feature expands technology Apple introduced with the iPhone 17 family. Dual Capture already allows the Camera app to record through the Center Stage front camera and a rear camera at the same time. iOS 27 brings a similar capability directly into live FaceTime calls.
During a call, the front camera can continue showing the speaker while the rear camera displays whatever the iPhone is pointing toward. Someone attending a concert can share the performance and remain visible. A parent can show a child playing without disappearing from the conversation. A person asking for technical assistance can remain on screen while directing the rear camera toward the equipment causing the problem.
Dual Capture removes the awkward sequence of switching to the rear camera, showing something, and switching back to continue speaking face to face. Both perspectives remain available inside the same call.
The normal FaceTime camera control changes from a simple front-or-rear choice on supported iPhones. When the caller activates the rear camera, iOS 27 keeps the front camera visible by default.
The main view displays the rear camera feed while a smaller window contains the front camera image. This picture-in-picture arrangement gives the other participant a continuous view of the caller’s reaction, commentary, or explanation.
FaceTime > Start a video call > Tap the Flip button
Tapping the Flip button turns on the rear camera without immediately removing the front view. The other participant begins receiving both perspectives as part of the FaceTime stream.
The caller can disable the front view when it is no longer needed. This provides a conventional rear-camera presentation for situations where the surroundings should occupy the complete image.
FaceTime > Tap the camera view > Disable the front camera
The exact labels and placement may change before the public release of iOS 27 because the feature is still being tested in beta software. Its basic behavior is already established: the Flip control activates the rear camera while retaining the front camera feed.
Dual Capture does not create two independent FaceTime calls. Both images belong to one video stream, so the caller does not need a second account, device, or invitation.
The feature also differs from screen sharing. FaceTime screen sharing transmits applications and interface activity from the iPhone display. Dual Capture transmits live video from two physical cameras.
Apple has limited FaceTime Dual Capture transmission to the iPhone 17, iPhone 17 Pro, iPhone 17 Pro Max, and iPhone Air. Each model includes Apple’s 18MP Center Stage front camera and the Dual Capture capability introduced in the Camera app.
An older iPhone that supports iOS 27 cannot originate a Dual Capture stream. It continues to use the normal option of selecting either the front camera or a rear camera during a call.
Older models can still receive and display a Dual Capture feed when they are running iOS 27. This allows an iPhone 16 or another supported device to see both views transmitted from an iPhone 17, even though it cannot send the same presentation back.
Both participants need iOS 27 for the new FaceTime layout to work as intended. The transmitting device must also be one of the supported iPhone 17-generation models.
This limitation is based on Apple’s official feature support rather than the simple presence of front and rear cameras. Earlier iPhones have camera hardware capable of operating in several multi-camera applications, but Apple has not extended its native Dual Capture implementation to them.
Third-party applications have offered forms of simultaneous multi-camera recording for years through Apple’s developer frameworks. The difference is that iOS 27 integrates the experience into FaceTime, where users can activate it through the familiar camera-switching control.
Describing FaceTime Dual Capture as retro-compatible with the iPhone 17 does not fully explain its relationship with the hardware. The iPhone 17 family introduced Apple’s native Dual Capture recording in 2025, and iOS 27 now gives that existing camera system another purpose.
Inside the Camera app, Dual Capture produces a saved video containing front and rear views. Apple lists support for recording at up to 4K Dolby Vision at 30 frames per second on the iPhone 17.
FaceTime uses the camera pairing for live communication instead. Network quality, bandwidth, device temperature, and FaceTime processing can affect the transmitted resolution, so users should not assume that a call will preserve the Camera app’s maximum 4K recording specification.
The Center Stage front camera also contributes more than resolution. Its square sensor gives the iPhone greater freedom to adjust framing without requiring the device to be physically rotated. Center Stage can help keep the caller positioned inside the smaller front-camera view while the rear camera follows the subject being shared.
That combination makes Dual Capture more useful than placing two untreated camera feeds beside each other. FaceTime can preserve the speaker’s presence while directing most of the screen toward the event, object, or location being discussed.
The feature may require more processing power and energy than an ordinary single-camera call. Running two camera sensors while encoding and transmitting live video can increase battery consumption and device temperature, especially during long calls over cellular data.
Apple has not published separate battery estimates for Dual Capture FaceTime calls. Users planning extended sessions may want access to power and a stable Wi-Fi connection.
FaceTime Dual Capture arrives shortly before Apple’s expected iPhone 18 generation, making it likely to become part of how the company demonstrates the new phones’ camera and communication abilities.
Apple has not announced the iPhone 18 lineup or confirmed its final camera specifications. Compatibility with FaceTime Dual Capture is therefore expected from the software’s “iPhone 17 and newer” positioning, but individual iPhone 18 models should not be treated as confirmed until Apple presents them.
The software release gives existing iPhone 17 owners access without requiring another hardware purchase. That approach also provides Apple with a working FaceTime feature before the next iPhone launch rather than introducing the camera mode and communication interface at the same moment.
Future hardware could improve the experience through faster processors, stronger image stabilization, upgraded sensors, or more efficient video encoding. None of those additions is required for the supported iPhone 17 family, which already contains the camera system needed to transmit both views.
Dual Capture is only one part of the FaceTime update. Apple is also improving video-call quality when the network connection is weak, addressing a problem that becomes especially relevant when two live camera views require transmission. Traditional Chinese support is joining FaceTime Live Captions as well.
The weak-connection improvement may determine how dependable Dual Capture becomes away from Wi-Fi. A feature designed for travel, events, repairs, and outdoor calls needs to tolerate changes in cellular bandwidth without freezing both views or forcing the session to end.
FaceTime Dual Capture remains part of the iOS 27 beta as Apple prepares the public update for September. Apple can still adjust the interface, performance, device requirements, and picture-in-picture behavior before the completed software reaches iPhone 17 owners.
The post FaceTime Dual Capture: iOS 27’s Biggest Video Call Upgrade appeared first on AppleMagazine.
Bonfire series planned for Apple is no longer proceeding at the streaming service, ending the latest attempt to transform Tom Wolfe’s The Bonfire of the Vanities into an episodic television drama.
The project had assembled a notable creative team. David E. Kelley was attached to write and executive produce, while The Batman director Matt Reeves was expected to direct the eight-episode adaptation and serve as an executive producer through his 6th & Idaho Productions company.
Warner Bros. Television was producing the series, with Sarah Geismer representing 6th & Idaho and Matthew Tinker participating through David E. Kelley Productions.
According to industry reports, Apple and the creative team were not aligned on the direction of the adaptation. Kelley was also reportedly dissatisfied with how the development process had been handled. The exact source of the disagreement has not been disclosed.
Apple has not announced the project as a formal cancellation, and it never received a public premiere date or cast. Its departure from Apple instead ends one stage of development while leaving Warner Bros. Television with the possibility of taking the adaptation elsewhere.
News of the Bonfire series first emerged in April 2026. Kelley was expected to write the adaptation after working with Apple on Presumed Innocent and Margo’s Got Money Troubles, while Reeves would direct after completing his existing film commitments.
The partnership appeared well suited to a complicated literary adaptation. Kelley has extensive experience turning novels into television dramas, including Big Little Lies, The Lincoln Lawyer, Nine Perfect Strangers, Presumed Innocent, and Wolfe’s A Man in Full.
Reeves brought a different set of strengths. His work on The Batman, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, War for the Planet of the Apes, and Cloverfield demonstrated his ability to handle large casts, morally compromised characters, and cities presented as active elements of the story.
The arrangement also connected Warner Bros. Television with Apple’s preference for recognizable creators and established literary properties. Wolfe’s novel offered a prestigious title, a large ensemble, and a view of New York society that could support a limited-series structure.
The development reportedly lasted only a few months before the creative relationship broke down. No actors had been announced, and there was no indication that cameras were close to rolling.
The absence of production activity makes the development easier to stop than a commissioned series with actors, sets, and crews already under contract. It also means Apple can leave the project without abandoning completed episodes or disrupting a release calendar.
A television project entering development is not the same as a series receiving a complete production order. Writers can prepare scripts, directors can become attached, and studios can negotiate with a streaming service before a final budget or filming commitment is approved.
The Bonfire of the Vanities was widely discussed as an eight-episode Apple adaptation, but Apple never unveiled it through its official press service. The project did not appear with a cast, production date, first-look image, or planned release window.
That distinction makes “stalled” more accurate than suggesting that Apple canceled a finished series. The adaptation remains intellectual property controlled through its rights and production arrangements, but the version developed for Apple has stopped advancing.
Creative alignment can cover several areas, including tone, period setting, episode structure, budget, casting, and how closely a project follows its source. None of those issues has been identified publicly as the specific cause of the disagreement.
The source material presents difficult choices. Wolfe wrote the novel as a detailed portrait of 1980s New York, with Wall Street, tabloid journalism, city politics, race, class, and personal ambition colliding around a single incident.
An adaptation could preserve that period or move the story into a contemporary financial and media environment. Keeping the 1980s setting would retain the social ecosystem Wolfe observed, while modernization would require substantial changes to technology, journalism, policing, politics, and the financial industry.
Reports of creative differences do not establish which approach Apple, Kelley, Reeves, or Warner Bros. preferred. Until one of the parties discusses the project, the disagreement remains undefined.
Published in 1987 after being serialized in Rolling Stone, The Bonfire of the Vanities follows Sherman McCoy, a wealthy bond trader who considers himself a “Master of the Universe.”
McCoy’s protected life begins collapsing after he and his mistress take a wrong turn into the Bronx. Their encounter with two young Black men ends in a hit-and-run, creating an opportunity for journalists, attorneys, politicians, activists, and social climbers to exploit the case.
The novel spreads its attention across several communities and institutions. Its satire depends on the reader observing how each group manipulates the incident while claiming moral authority. That scope gives television more room than a feature film, but it also requires precise control of perspective and tone.
Brian De Palma directed the previous film adaptation, released by Warner Bros. in 1990. Tom Hanks played Sherman McCoy alongside Melanie Griffith, Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, Kim Cattrall, and F. Murray Abraham.
Despite the cast and an estimated production budget of approximately $47 million, the film earned about $15.6 million domestically. Critics objected to its casting, tonal decisions, and changes to Wolfe’s characters.
The difficult production later became the subject of Julie Salamon’s The Devil’s Candy, a detailed account of how an expensive adaptation made by accomplished filmmakers deteriorated through compromises and conflicting decisions.
The film’s reputation has followed every subsequent effort to revisit Wolfe’s novel. A television version has frequently been proposed as a better format because it can preserve more characters, institutional detail, and social context.
Amazon began developing an eight-episode adaptation in 2016 with Chuck Lorre and Warner Bros. Television. That version was intended to update the story while approaching it through themes of race, class, politics, and media. It never entered production.
Apple’s attempt therefore becomes another chapter in a long development history rather than the first revival since De Palma’s film.
The collapse of this project does not necessarily end David E. Kelley’s relationship with Apple. His adaptation of Presumed Innocent became a major drama for the service, while Margo’s Got Money Troubles expanded his work with the company into comedy-drama.
Large producers and streaming services regularly continue working together after deciding against an individual project. Each adaptation has its own creative, financial, and scheduling demands.
The reported dissatisfaction does introduce uncertainty around whether Kelley would remain involved if Warner Bros. Television places the series with another distributor. Reeves’ position is similarly unknown, particularly because directing all eight episodes would require a substantial scheduling commitment.
Apple can continue expanding its collection of literary adaptations without Bonfire. Its existing slate includes projects derived from novels, nonfiction books, short stories, podcasts, and magazine reporting, often with established filmmakers receiving considerable creative control.
The decision also illustrates how selective Apple can be before production. Projects in development may attract prominent writers and directors without ever becoming Apple Originals available to subscribers.
Warner Bros. Television remains attached as the studio behind the adaptation, giving it a potential route to another streaming service or network. No new buyer, revised creative team, or timetable has been reported for The Bonfire of the Vanities.
The post Bonfire Series Stalls at Apple After Creative Split appeared first on AppleMagazine.
Apple lawsuit against OpenAI has reached its first major procedural challenge, with the ChatGPT developer asking a US federal judge to dismiss allegations that it acquired or used trade secrets taken by former Apple employees.
OpenAI submitted its 31-page dismissal motion on Wednesday in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. The filing argues that Apple has not adequately identified protectable trade secrets or alleged facts showing that OpenAI misappropriated confidential information.
Apple filed the case on July 10 against OpenAI, its io Products hardware operation, former Apple Vice President Tang Yew Tan, and former electrical engineer Chang Liu. The complaint accuses the defendants of obtaining information connected to Apple’s product development, manufacturing, components, testing, and supply chain operations.
The allegations have not been proven, and OpenAI denies possessing or seeking Apple’s trade secrets. US District Judge Edward Davila must now decide whether Apple’s complaint contains enough factual detail for the litigation to continue.
OpenAI’s motion focuses initially on how Apple described the information it claims was stolen. According to OpenAI, the complaint relies on generalized product-development categories without identifying the protected information with enough precision.
Trade secret plaintiffs face a difficult balance at the beginning of litigation. Apple must describe the protected material sufficiently to establish a plausible legal claim, but revealing the material publicly could expose the same information it is trying to protect.
Sensitive details can later be handled under seal or through a protective order. At the dismissal stage, however, Apple must still provide enough information for the court to distinguish genuine trade secrets from general engineering knowledge, employee experience, or skills acquired through years of work.
OpenAI argues that Apple has not crossed that threshold. Its motion says the complaint fails to establish ownership of a protectable trade secret and does not plausibly allege that OpenAI acquired, disclosed, or used such information.
The filing also disputes the commercial premise behind Apple’s accusations. OpenAI says it is developing products that are different from Apple’s hardware and has no need or desire to use the iPhone maker’s confidential material.
That position does not settle whether information was taken. A company can potentially misappropriate trade secrets even when its eventual product has a different design. The court’s immediate task is narrower: determining whether Apple has alleged facts that could support its claims if those facts are later proven.
Apple’s complaint centers partly on Chang Liu, who spent eight years working as a senior system electrical engineer at the company before joining OpenAI in January 2026.
Apple alleges that Liu retained an Apple-issued computer and accessed confidential technical information after leaving. It claims he exploited residual authentication access on multiple occasions to obtain internal documents while already working for OpenAI.
OpenAI presents a different explanation. It says Apple employees contacted Liu after his departure and asked him to help locate files needed for ongoing Apple work. The company published redacted messages that it says support this account.
OpenAI argues that Apple’s systems and policies allowed personal and corporate information to become intermingled through iCloud accounts. Former employees, it says, could retain access to Apple files without requesting it or realizing that access remained active.
The motion maintains that Apple cannot treat the foreseeable effects of its own access-management practices as proof that former employees intentionally stole data. Apple, in contrast, alleges that its records document repeated access to restricted information rather than an accidental discovery of lingering permissions.
These competing accounts are likely to become central if the case enters discovery. Authentication logs, downloaded files, device records, internal communications, and employment timelines could establish whether access was deliberate, what information was obtained, and whether it reached anyone working on OpenAI products.
A dismissal motion normally tests whether the complaint states a legally sufficient claim. It is not a trial, and the judge is not expected to resolve every factual disagreement using competing evidence at this point.
Apple separately accuses Tang Tan, OpenAI’s chief hardware officer, of seeking confidential information from Apple employees during recruiting conversations.
Tan spent more than 24 years at Apple and worked on products including the iPhone, Apple Watch, AirPods, and iPod. He later helped establish io Products with former Apple design chief Jony Ive and other collaborators. OpenAI acquired the hardware company as part of its effort to create a family of devices built around artificial intelligence.
Apple alleges that Tan used confidential project names, retained internal materials, and encouraged job candidates to discuss unreleased components or bring physical parts to interviews. OpenAI rejects the claim that these interactions formed a coordinated effort to collect Apple secrets.
OpenAI says Tan repeatedly instructed employees that confidential information from previous employers could not be brought into its organization. It also offers an alternative explanation for an Apple offboarding document found in his possession, arguing that Tan retained it to help incoming employees comply with Apple’s departure procedures.
Apple’s position is that the document and recruiting communications must be examined alongside the other alleged conduct. It describes the events as part of a connected campaign rather than isolated employment or administrative issues.
The dispute comes during intense competition for engineers capable of developing consumer AI hardware. Apple alleges that more than 400 former employees have moved to OpenAI, although hiring people from a competitor does not by itself establish trade secret misappropriation.
A company must generally connect recruitment to the acquisition, disclosure, or use of protected information. OpenAI is relying heavily on that distinction, presenting Apple’s lawsuit as an attempt to respond to employee departures and its difficulties competing for AI talent.
OpenAI’s dismissal request arrives shortly after Apple asked the court for a preliminary injunction. Apple wants restrictions imposed while the lawsuit proceeds, arguing that it could suffer harm if its confidential information is used during OpenAI’s hardware development.
The requested relief would prevent OpenAI and the individual defendants from acquiring, accessing, using, or disclosing the alleged trade secrets. Apple has also requested expedited discovery and forensic examination of relevant devices and accounts.
OpenAI says those restrictions are unnecessary because it does not possess or want Apple’s protected information. It has described Apple’s request as based on false information and has offered to cooperate in addressing specific concerns.
The two companies also disagree over their communications before the lawsuit. Apple initially said its concerns had been raised with OpenAI months earlier. OpenAI responded that Apple’s outside lawyers contacted the wrong person after confusing names and incorrectly described a conversation with OpenAI’s general counsel.
OpenAI says Apple did not present the specific accusations before filing the case and that the companies had previously discussed resolving any access issues. Apple has since provided additional information in support of its injunction request, including allegations involving other former employees.
These disputes have moved beyond ordinary court filings. OpenAI published messages and emails on its website to support its version of events, calling Apple’s lawsuit aggressive and poorly investigated. Apple has primarily presented its account through formal legal submissions.
Judge Davila could dismiss some or all of Apple’s claims, deny the motion, or allow Apple to amend its complaint with more specific allegations. Even a dismissal would not necessarily end the case if permission to revise the complaint is granted.
The next scheduled public test is an October 1 hearing covering Apple’s preliminary injunction and request for early discovery. That proceeding may determine whether OpenAI faces immediate limits on its hardware work before the underlying trade secret claims receive a full evidentiary review.
The post Apple Lawsuit: OpenAI Seeks Dismissal of Trade Secrets Case appeared first on AppleMagazine.
The iPhone Ultra price could establish an entirely new tier within Apple’s smartphone range. Current estimates place the company’s first foldable iPhone above $2,000, with some industry forecasts suggesting an average selling price near $2,500 and higher-storage configurations approaching $3,000.
Apple has not confirmed the device, its name, or its retail price. The iPhone Ultra branding also remains unofficial, although it has appeared repeatedly in reports concerning Apple’s planned expansion beyond the Pro and Pro Max levels.
The foldable is expected to join the iPhone 18 Pro family during Apple’s fall hardware cycle. Rather than replacing the iPhone Pro Max, it would sit above it as a separate model built around a book-style design and a display that expands to approximately the size of a small tablet.
A price beyond $2,000 would make it the most expensive iPhone Apple has released. The current iPhone 17 Pro Max starts at $1,199 in the United States, leaving a difference of at least $800 between Apple’s established flagship and the lowest estimates for the foldable.
Recent projections have pushed that gap even wider. Reports citing analyst Ming-Chi Kuo have discussed a possible range between $2,300 and $2,500, while an IDC estimate cited in supply-chain coverage placed the average selling price at approximately $2,500. Storage upgrades could take selected configurations closer to $3,000.
Apple has spent years arranging the iPhone range around a price ladder. Standard models serve the center of the market, while Air and Pro devices address different preferences involving weight, cameras, materials, performance, and display size.
A foldable iPhone would require another level. Its internal display, hinge, structural materials, battery arrangement, and manufacturing tolerances introduce costs that do not exist in a conventional iPhone.
The rumored hardware points to a device intended to combine phone and tablet functions. Reports describe an outer screen measuring about 5.5 inches and an internal display of approximately 7.8 inches. When closed, the product would operate as a compact iPhone. Opening it would provide enough space for larger applications, side-by-side content, expanded video, and an iPad-style software interface.
Apple is reportedly developing interface changes that would let applications take greater advantage of the internal display instead of simply enlarging an iPhone layout. That software work may become one of the main distinctions between the device and existing foldables, particularly if Apple can connect it closely with iPad multitasking conventions.
The hinge is expected to use liquid metal, an amorphous alloy chosen for strength and resistance to deformation. Apple has also reportedly focused on reducing the visible display crease, one of the most recognizable compromises found on current folding phones.
Those elements help explain a premium price without guaranteeing that customers will accept it. A $2,000-plus phone would compete for spending that could otherwise purchase an iPhone and an iPad, a high-end Mac, or several years of conventional smartphone upgrades.
The device would therefore need to offer more than the novelty of a folding screen. Durability, battery life, camera performance, application behavior, repair costs, and long-term display reliability will influence whether buyers view the iPhone Ultra as a versatile computer or an unusually expensive phone.
Rumors suggest Apple may use Touch ID in the side button instead of Face ID. The change would not necessarily represent a retreat from facial authentication across the rest of the iPhone range. A foldable chassis has limited internal space, and eliminating the TrueDepth camera hardware could help Apple manage thickness around the outer and inner displays.
The reported design includes two rear cameras and front-facing cameras accessible in both folded and unfolded positions. That arrangement may leave the iPhone 18 Pro Max with the more extensive photography system, despite the foldable carrying a much higher price.
Such a decision would position the iPhone Ultra around form factor and productivity rather than making it the automatic leader in every specification. Apple has used similar distinctions elsewhere, allowing one product to command a premium for its design while another retains advantages in cameras, battery endurance, or sustained performance.
Display production is another source of expense. Folding OLED panels require flexible materials, protective layers, specialized hinges, and tighter assembly controls. Apple’s reported pursuit of a nearly crease-free screen may increase component costs and reduce early manufacturing yields.
The company is also entering the category after competitors have spent several generations addressing hinge failures, screen damage, dust protection, and application scaling. Arriving later gives Apple access to a more mature supply chain, but its design standards may create additional production challenges.
Industry estimates suggest Apple’s arrival could help raise the average selling price of book-style foldables throughout 2026. Competitors already sell premium folding phones, yet a model priced near $2,500 would push the category further away from mainstream flagship pricing.
Apple Upgrade could make the iPhone Ultra price appear less intimidating at checkout. The Klarna-backed program lets eligible US customers lease selected Apple devices through fixed monthly payments rather than covering the entire retail price upfront.
Current iPhones can be leased for 12 or 24 months. At the end of the term, customers may return the device, move into another eligible Apple product, or pay the remaining amount required to keep it.
That structure can produce lower monthly payments than traditional financing because the customer is not necessarily paying the entire purchase price during the lease. Part of the product’s value remains in the device at the end of the agreement.
A future iPhone Ultra could fit naturally into this model. Its high retail price and expected resale value would give Apple and Klarna room to separate the cost of using the phone for two years from the cost of owning it permanently.
No monthly figure has been announced for the foldable. Apple cannot price an Apple Upgrade lease until it establishes the phone’s retail cost, residual value, eligible term, and trade-in conditions. A simple calculation that divides $2,000 or $2,500 by 24 months would therefore be misleading.
The monthly charge may be considerably lower than a standard purchase installment, but the customer does not automatically own the iPhone after making the scheduled lease payments. Keeping it requires an additional payment based on the remaining value specified by the agreement.
AppleCare+ is also separate from the current Apple Upgrade lease price. That differs from the former iPhone Upgrade Program, which bundled AppleCare+ coverage into its monthly payments. Protection could be particularly relevant for an expensive first-generation foldable containing a flexible display and complex hinge.
Trade-in credit may reduce the monthly charge, while storage selection would push it higher. Sales tax, cellular service, accessories, and optional protection would remain additional costs. Apple Upgrade changes when and how customers pay, but it does not turn a $2,000-plus product into a lower-priced iPhone.
Apple is reportedly preparing millions of foldable units, but production may be heavily weighted toward the final months of 2026 and 2027. Supply-chain estimates have ranged from 7 million to 10 million devices, with different reports using different production periods and assumptions.
The foldable may be announced alongside the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max but reach customers later. That would resemble the 2017 launch of the iPhone X, which was introduced with the iPhone 8 family in September and released in November.
A delayed retail date would give Apple more time to accumulate inventory while preserving the device’s place in its fall presentation. It could also place the iPhone Ultra into the holiday quarter with considerable demand concentrated around a relatively small supply.
High pricing does not necessarily prevent shortages during the first weeks of an Apple product launch. Early adopters, developers, collectors, and customers waiting specifically for an Apple foldable represent a smaller audience than the conventional iPhone market, but they may still outnumber the units available at release.
Apple Upgrade could add another source of demand by replacing the full retail figure with a monthly lease price inside the Apple Store. That presentation may make the phone accessible to customers who would reject a $2,500 purchase while accepting a recurring payment and returning the device later.
Kuo expects only 500,000 to 1 million foldable iPhones to ship during the third quarter, a supply level that could push some deliveries four to six weeks beyond the opening preorder window.
The post iPhone Ultra Price Could Take Apple’s Foldable Beyond $2,000 appeared first on AppleMagazine.
Nature, Published online: 05 August 2026; doi:10.1038/s41586-026-10843-7
Integration of genome-scale CRISPR screening data from traditional cell lines and next-generation cancer models expands the representation of tumour subtypes and genomic alterations in The Cancer Dependency Map.
Login
