 |
|
|
|||||
Greetings, everyone, and welcome back to Fast Companys Plugged In. It was one of the best-received pieces of Apple news I can recall. At the companys WWDC conference last month, it announced that its iPadOS 26 software upgrade would give the iPad a powerful new interface closely modeled on the one offered by the Mac. The response can be fairly summarized as finally. Its over: Apple has fixed multitasking on the iPad, mimicking the experience on the Mac, tweeted Bloombergs Mark Gurman, who had earlier reported such a move was imminent. We won! The move is Apples most comprehensive answer to a long-simmering conundrum: How can it make the iPadwhich packs some of its most powerful hardwareinto a professional-strength computing tool? Starting now, its inviting iPad users to judge the results for themselves. After four rounds of iPadOS 26 developer betas since WWDC, the company is releasing its first public beta version of the software, along with corresponding ones for the iPhone, Mac, and Apple Watch. Final versions are scheduled to ship this fall. Theres quite a lot in iPadOS 26 I like a lot, starting with the translucent-y new Liquid Glass aestheticrough around the edges in spots, but satisfying eye candy overall. Apple has brought the Macs Preview app to iPad, beefed up the iPad Files app to more closely resemble the Macs Finder, added better support for background tasks such as video processing, and made it possible to put folders in the Dockall of which makes the iPad feel more like a full-powered productivity machine. Without making a big deal out of it, the company also improved iPadOSs support for web apps, a boon for any piece of software whose browser-based version is better than its native iPad experience. iPad apps are now fully resizable and draggable, replicating the interface Macs and Windows PCs have had for decades. However, as someone whos used an iPad as my main computer for almost 14 years, I cant join the chorus of unbridled enthusiasm for iPadOS 26s embrace of Mac conventions such as floating, overlapping windows and a menu bar at the top of the screen. Apple may well be making the right decision to please the largest pool of people who want to get work done on its tablet. But its also moving decisively away from some of the philosophies that attracted me to the platform in the first place, and Im trepidatious about where that might lead. (My Fast Company colleague Jesus Diaz expressed similar qualms right after the WWDC keynote.) Fifteen years ago, when the iPad was new, it wasnt Mac-like at all. Instead, it was often described as a giant iPhonedepending on your perspective, either high praise or a damning indictment. Soon enough, that changed. Apps arrived that let you accomplish tasks that were previously the domain of Macs and Windows PCs; accessory makers started shipping keyboard cases that turned the iPad into a mini-laptop. Apple doubled down on these trends with 2015s original iPad Pro, a bigger-screen version with optional Smart Keyboard. Ever since, the company has made new iPadsnot just the Pro, but other models such as the iPad Airmore and more capable of serious work. That included adding trackpad support in the Magic Keyboard, a classic Mac feature that made the transition to the iPad with aplomb. At the 2015 iPad Pro launch event, Apple CEO Tim Cook declared, The iPad is the clearest expression of our vision of the future of personal computing. Over the past decade, however, its become obvious that the hardware aspect of this proposition has been easier to figure out than the software. The company has made several stabs at features for letting users juggle multiple apps, all designed with touch-friendliness in mind, and seemed determined not to simply clone the Macs way of doing things. However, it never felt like the platform had solved productivity or even made steady progress in one direction. Sometimes, it felt stuck in limbo. In January 2020, Daring Fireballs John Gruber smartly analyzed why the iPads user interface could baffle the uninitiated. His critique remained relevant for every iPadOS version until iPadOS 26: To launch the first app, you tap its icon on the homescreen, just like on the iPhone, and just like on the iPad before split-screen multitasking. Tapping an icon to open an app is natural and intuitive. But to get a second app on the same screen, you cannot tap its icon. You must first slide up from the bottom of the screen to reveal the Dock. Then you must tap and hold on an app icon in the Dock. Then you drag the app icon out of the Dock to launch it in a way that it will become the second app splitting the display. But isnt dragging an icon out of the Dock the way that you remove apps from the Dock? Yes, it iswhen you do it from the homescreen. So the way you launch an app in the Dock for split-screen mode is identical to the way you remove that appfrom the Dock. Yet once I mastered these maneuvers, and learned you could also add a second app from iPadOSs Spotlight search, they became embedded in my muscle memory. More importantly, I loved that the iPad maxed out at two on-screen apps, or three if you counted the SlideOver feature. Floatable, draggable, overlappable windows of the sort that help define the Mac and Windows had always struck me as simulating a desktopbut a messy one. Any time I invested in rearranging them felt like wasted cognitive overload. iPad apps now have Mac-style menus. And submenus, some of which have so many items that you need to scroll through them. Similarly, I cherished the iPads abandonment of Mac/Windows-style menus, which felt like a card catalog overwhelmed by features I didnt need at that particular moment, if ever. By forcing iPad developers to think harder about how to engineer their interfaces for maximum efficiency, Apple gave them the opportunity to transcend the cruft of older interfaces. Many rose to the challenge. While Apple has given iPadOS 26 a full-screen-only mode for people who are just as happy using it as, well, a giant iPhone, it hasnt tossed many bones in the direction of those who liked the Split View and SlideOver features, which it has now retired. Even the fastest methods of filling the screen with two apps now take more steps and feel like work. Meanwhile, using the menu bar remains optional, though I worry that developers will begin to see it as the primary interface, not an alternative one. To me, the least successful Mac import is iPadOS 26s traffic light system for closing, minimizing, maximizing, and tiling apps. The buttons are located in the menu bar for full-screen apps and in the upper left-hand corner of partial-screen ones, imposing a mental tax as you remember where they are. And since theyre too dinky to touch with adequate precision, they expand when you engage with them, requiring you to reposition your finger or cursor. Its tough to imagine Apple coming up with them for the iPad if they werent already a Mac staple. If making the iPad more like a Mac was a potentially crowd-pleasing approach all along, why didnt Apple do it long ago? In an interview with MacStories Federico Viticci, software chief Craig Federighi said its only recently that the company has been able to engineer a full-blown windowing system that runs well on a range of iPad models. The interview is the best explanation of Apples iPadOS 26 thinking Ive seen, and I encourage you to read it if youre as interested in this stuff as I am. Still, understanding why Apple gave the iPad a Mac-esque makeover doesnt clarify its long-term strategy. Will the next few years of iPadOS releases be about bringing the platform in even closer alignment with its elder sibling? Or is there still room for them to divergeeven sharply, if appropriate? What happens if AI transforms how all computing devices work in ways nobody yet understands? Also: Are we any closer to being able to run Mac apps on an iPadnot a prospect that makes me giddy, but one certain users have long craved? (As quoted by Viticci, Federighi said the iPad shouldnt run MacOS, but he said nothing about Mac apps.) As I write, the first hands-on evaluations of iPadOS 26 in its public beta form are popping up online. So far, so good: Not to put too fine a point on it, this is the best iPad has ever been, says Gizmodos Kyle Barr. Its like a weight has been lifted from the soul of the iPad, writes Six Colors Jason Snell, a pretty dedicated user of the tablet himself. Right now, Im feeling a tad weighed down by some of the updates changes. Heres hoping they grow on me, and that iPadOS 27 and beyond reflect Apples future vision of computing rather than merely continuing to catch up with its past. Youve been reading Plugged In, Fast Companys weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to youor if you’re reading it on FastCompany.comyou can check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself every Friday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at hmccracken@fastcompany.com with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters. I’m also on Bluesky, Mastodon, and Threads, and you can follow Plugged In on Flipboard. More top stories from Fast Company The Microsoft SharePoint breach was massive. The response has been minimalA critical vulnerability in on-premise SharePoint servers allowed state-backed hackers to breach governments and institutions worldwide. Experts are questioning why more hasn’t been done or said. Read More AI’s unfulfilled promise to small businessesExpert advice for SMBs: Start small. And rather than investing in new tools, explore the AI features already built into your existing tech stack. Read More This concept ad for Ikea shows that AI ads don’t have to be cringe‘Exploding box’ AI ads are going viral on X, and hey’re actually pretty good. Read More How to use the clean energy tax credits before they’re goneThe One Big Beautiful Bill is quickly sunsetting tax credits for all sorts of clean energy purchasesfrom EVs and heat pumps to batteries and solar panels. If you want to claim them, here are the dates each are ending. Read More This tool lets users send fake legal letters that look realwithout a lawyerHeavyweight is a free open-source project that mimics the intimidating design of legal threats to help ordinary people push backlegally or not. Read More 9 essential Perplexity AI search tips and tricksSearch engine, meet answer engine. Here’s how to get started with Perplexity. Read More
Category:
E-Commerce
For several years Ive been evangelizing about the growing ways automation and robotics are beneficial to all. From medical facilities to factories, warehouses, industrial rigs and transit, Automated Mobile Robots (AMRs) are driving massive efficiency gains while also elevating the people and organizations who use them. AMRs reduce costs, improve safety, and address labor shortages, while delivering a rapid return on investment. A robot can be hacked As automation progresses, its vital to recognize and respect the fact that robots are both physical and digital beings. We speak with and instruct robots through digital apps and programmed instructions on computers, smart devices, and the cloud. This means that as industries rush to adopt AMRs, theyre also inadvertently exposing themselves to cybersecurity risks. Just as a database or bank account can be hacked, the digital aspects of AMRs are vulnerable to the same degradation, bugginess, or malicious misuse and damage as any software-dependent program. Yes, there are plenty of funny videos of a misdirected robot suddenly throwing punches at anyone in sight. But imagine the real consequences of even a relatively small misdirection such as a robotic traffic jam in a warehouse, or the physical danger and loss that could result from a single robotic miscue such as smashing the produce, missing a critical step in a manufacturing process, or driving a piece of expensive equipment into a wall. The results can be catastrophic. Chang Robotics CIO Joe Tenga has performed a comprehensive examination of these risks and he has written a whitepaper on industry-specific vulnerabilities of AMRs and strategies to mitigate them. For example, in the health industry, if a robots operation includes access to personal information, it could result in a HIPAA violation. In a purchasing center, AMRs could become a target for financial or personal information theft. In a manufacturing or product distribution role, AMRs could become a window for potential theft of Intellectual Property. Here are two specific concerns about AMRs and cyberthreats. AMRs run on cyber-physical systems. Unlike traditional IT assets, AMRs integrate computation, networking, and physical processes, leaving companies that use them open to these possible threats: Mobility introduces risk. AMRs can physically transport rogue hardware or bypass secure zones. Badge-based access abuse. AMRs with elevator/door credentials could be exploited to breach restricted areas. Tampering risk. Robots could be hijacked or outfitted with spy devices. Robots are not just endpoints, they are mobile insiders. Their dual nature requires an approach to safety and security that combines both physical and cyber defense. AMRs can be exploited through common network-based threats. Without proper protection, AMRs could be weaponized as mobile reconnaissance and access platformsboth passively (sniffing) and actively (spoofing or unlocking doors). Possible threats that can potentially exploit weaknesses in security include: Rogue access points and snifferscan hijack data over Wi-Fi as robots move. Man-in-the-middle attacks and hardware implantscan inject malicious commands or covertly monitor data. IoT exploit modules and proxy access abusecan use robots as conduits to broader network intrusions or unauthorized facility access. Heres how companies can protect themselves AMRs are transformative to modern business, but only if they are properly secured. Every organization using robotics must do the following: Implement security at every phase of use from procurement through deployment. View AMRs as both digital endpoints and physical agents. Develop scalable, industry-specific cybersecurity programs. The ability to scale AMR deployments with confidence hinges on embedding cybersecurity from the ground up not as an afterthought but as a competitive differentiator for your successful operation from its very inception and through all seasons to come. Matthew Chang is the Founder and Principal Engineer of Chang Robotics.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sometimes one bad apple can spoil the whole bushel. Generative AI (GenAI) seems to have gotten a bit of that reputationa few high-profile, epic fails in a range of industries have made many organizations limit internal use of this technology, and sometimes even ban it to reduce business risk. The reality is, despite the inherent risk of hallucinations and inaccuracies, GenAI is rapidly being adopted in industries that hinge on precision and certainty, such as pharmaceutical research, medical diagnostics and legalindustries in which time to insight also drives competitive advantage. Lets take sales as a generic example. Proper use of GenAI tools can speed time to insight significantly, allowing a sales team to improve the quality of their prospects, create meeting summaries and action items, and quickly glean insight from the mountains of client and prospect data that already exist in enterprise systems. This team has a distinct advantage over a competitor that uses manual processes or non-GenAI tools for opportunity analysis. Thus, in sales, the business risk GenAI poses is opportunity risk: the revenue opportunities one loses out on by not using this technology. Lets dive into that. GenAI opportunity risk Broadly speaking, opportunity risk can be thought of as the potential loss or missed opportunity that an organization faces by not taking advantage of favorable circumstances or potential benefits. For companies that ignore GenAI, the resulting opportunity risk can manifest in a wide range of significant ways. Here are three examples of GenAI opportunity risk, from a macro level down to a very individual, in-the-moment view. Drug development research labs risk losing revenue. Drug development research labs are using GenAI to digitally design drug molecules, which are translated in a high-speed automated lab into physical molecules and tested for interaction with target proteins. The test results are used to improve the next design iteration, speeding the overall process. These development labs, which typically partner with pharmaceutical giants, aim to reduce from seven years to four years the time it typically takes to get a new drug to the pre-clinical trial stagea critical chunk of the $1 billion and 10 to 15 years required, on average, to develop a new drug. The stakes in the global pharmaceutical market are incredibly high, and speed to market can have an enormous impact on revenues. Pharmaceutical companies that dont take advantage of advanced GenAI technologies, either internally or through a development partner, are at a distinct competitive disadvantage and may risk losing billions in future revenues. Software companies risk loss of innovation. Software companies are increasingly using GenAI to write code. About 30% of new code at Google and Microsoft is AI-generated, while Meta recently said that AI will take over half of the companys software development within the next year. These BigTech companies, as well as many startups, are finding ways for GenAI to accelerate their pace of software development. Competitors that dont use GenAI to dramatically improve their software development practice face the very sobering opportunity risk of simply being out innovated in the market. Legal teams risk losing a competitive advantage. Legal teams that use GenAI tools in the discovery phase of a legal matter can accelerate their time to insight in ways that are nothing short of game-changing. For example, one Am Law 100 firm used a GenAI tool to review 126,000 documents in a government investigation. In doing so, the firm slashed document review time by 50% to 67%, with one quarter of the personnel that a project of this size would typically require. The review achieved accuracy rates of 90% or higher, with performance at or above the firms benchmark metrics for first-level attorney reviewers. In the moment, this breakthrough gave the team more time to debate the merits of a potential piece of evidence instead of blindly clicking through endless documents. Strategically, the two-thirds reduction in document review time and the 75% reduction in associated headcount gave the law firm an invaluable amount of additional time to develop its case prior to appearing in court. For legal teams that dont use GenAI tools to supercharge their eDiscovery efforts, its easy to envision any lawyers nightmare scenario: arriving at court to face off against an adversary whos had far more time to develop their case, based on a solid foundation of facts culled from discovery documents. Who wants to risk that happening? Final thoughts While its true that many industries operate on a razors edge of innovation and risk aversion, these examples show how companies that ignore GenAI technology due to business risks, or simply organizational inertia, may suddenly find themselves on the outside looking in. AJ Shankar is Founder and CEO of Everlaw.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||