Apple's triple threat: tariffs, AI troubles and a Fortnite fail
Hello, and welcome to TechScape. This week in tech: Apple struggles on multiple fronts, OpenAI grows increasingly ambitious, and Trump helps some of his fans lose money on cryptocurrency.
Long dominant and unassailable, Apple is showing signs of weakness. The CEO, Tim Cook, can't tame Donald Trump's threats of tariffs that would spike the price of an iPhone; Apple's AI offerings pale against its competitors; and the company can't win a Fortnite match – or a single battle in its legal war with Epic Games – to save its life.
On Friday, the president threatened to levy a 25% tariff on any iPhone not made in the US. Trump said in the post: 'I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else. If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the US.'
The majority of iPhones have been assembled in China, where Trump has imposed whopping 145% tariffs on exports. Cook had obtained an exemption from those tariffs, and he said in an earnings call this month that the majority of iPhones sold in the US in the next quarter will 'have India as their country of origin'. The move seemed meant to skirt political tensions between China and the US. No such luck, it seems.
Cook had declined to accompany Trump on his trip to the Middle East last week, which irked the president, according to the New York Times. Trump said as much out loud: Flanked by tech executives during a speech in Riyadh, he noted that Cook was not among them. The failure of fealty may cost Apple dearly.
On the home front, Apple is facing criticism that has been mounting for months of its flailing efforts to integrate generative artificial intelligence into the iPhone and other products. The iPhone dominates in the US today, boasting a market share of more than half. With far fewer artificial intelligence products than Google, for example, the shine of Apple's future dims. Watching Siri fail to play the right song yet again is far less appealing than being able to tell Google Assistant to make a podcast about a Wikipedia page I find intriguing.
Read more about .
Apple promised a suite of features branded Apple Intelligence at its annual developer conference in 2024 that has yet to make a splash beyond botched notification summaries. Insiders are leaking details of internal chaos in Apple's AI department to the press, a rarity for a company that prides itself on aggressive secrecy. Apple's competitors are suffusing every aspect of their new flagship phones with AI that the iPhone maker can't match. Siri remains nearly as incapable as when she made her debut fifteen years ago. The Vision Pro, though not in the realm of AI, has been a flop, blemishing Apple's sheen.
On the legal front, Apple keeps losing its battle with Fortnite maker Epic Games, and it keeps playing the part of sore loser. In late April, a US federal judge found that the company had violated her order to allow app developers to link to their own payment options, even ones that skirt Apple's App Store. The judge said a top Apple executive 'outright lied under oath'.
Now Fortnite is back in the App Store after five years of exile, and Epic is empowered to circumvent Apple's 15% to 30% commissions. Fortnite may be a popular game, but it's not a significant portion of Apple's overall revenue from the App Store. The upshot of the legal fight is that Apple's grip on its tightly controlled software ecosystem is loosening, which may lead to an avalanche of developers eschewing in-app purchases and payments. That is the greater threat to Apple's revenue from digital services.
Read more about .
Bloomberg published a story Monday questioning whether Meta's CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, has gotten what he wanted by sucking up to Trump in these early days of the administration. It's a fair question, but, on the whole, Zuckerberg has largely governed his digital empire unmolested by the second-term president. He nixed his company's vaunted diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, and perhaps that toll was enough to buy Trump's inattention. It's Cook who should be asking what he got in return for his $1m donation to Trump's inauguration. He's been dancing like an outlaw with a sheriff shooting at his feet these past few weeks.
OpenAI struck two multibillion-dollar deals this week, one on its home turf and one on a new frontier. The company is doing its utmost to expand beyond ChatGPT. Compare that with a major rival, Anthropic, which spent the week preoccupied with releasing a new version of its flagship model Claude. That's either a total snooze or a strong focus on a core business, but I'm inclined to think it's a bore. In an era when Google is worth $2tn and Microsoft $3.3tn, these are the kind of moves necessary to compete with the biggest players in the game. If you're not going to buy a startup that has released no products but was founded by the designer of the iPhone for billions, you're not playing to win.
On Wednesday, the ChatGPT maker announced it would acquire Sir Jony Ive's untested hardware startup, io, for $6.4bn. Dara Kerr reports: in CEO Sam Altman and Ive's blogpost on Wednesday, they wrote that the io team will merge with OpenAI to work 'more intimately with the research, engineering and product teams in San Francisco'. Ive himself will not join OpenAI as an employee, but his company will 'take over design for all of OpenAI, including its software', according to Bloomberg.
The goal of the merger seems clear: hire Ive to create an AI-infused hardware device as popular and iconic as the iMac or the iPhone. Whether there is a market for devices whose sole purpose is to deliver AI to the masses is less clear. The nearest analogue to what Ive might produce, the Humane Pin, likewise backed by Altman and designed by Apple alumni, did not take off.
Read more about .
On Thursday, OpenAI announced plans for an enormous data center in Abu Dhabi likely to cost tens of billions. The project is a part of Stargate, a $500bn investment in AI by the likes of Nvidia, Oracle, OpenAI and Softbank. Stargate at first seemed like a domestic project, but Donald Trump's deal with the UAE on AI and OpenAI's announcement have made it a global initiative.
The spotlight of the public's attention is shining brightly on OpenAI's CEO this week as the startup makes these major moves. Two new books, one laudatory and one critical, chronicle how OpenAI came to be the company it is today. The Optimist by the Wall Street Journal's Keach Hagey offers a biography of Altman. Empire of AI by The Atlantic's Karen Hao details the time between the founding and the spectacular 2023 ouster and reinstatement of Altman. With their shared debut, the two accounts offer dueling descriptions of Sam Altman's character. They ask: which is he to you, gifted scion of progress or ruthless tycoon?
Either way, by spending billions and hiring Apple's second-most famous employee, it seems Altman is gunning for the title of the next Steve Jobs.
Google unveils 'AI Mode' in the next phase of its journey to change search
Estonia eschews phone bans in schools and takes leap into AI
Alabama paid a law firm millions to defend its prisons. It used AI and turned in fake citations
Chicago Sun-Times confirms AI was used to create reading list of books that don't exist
Live facial recognition cameras may become 'commonplace' as police use soars
Trump hosted a dinner at his private golf club in Virginia Thursday night for the top holders of his cryptocurrency, $TRUMP. Nearly half of the top holders of $TRUMP lost money on their investments, according to an analysis by the Guardian. Niamh Rowe reports:
Of the 220 winners, 95 – some 43% – have suffered a net loss from purchasing $Trump since the coin's January launch, a combined $8.95m, according to trading history and portfolios as of 21 May.
A contestant under the username 'GAnt' appears to have endured the biggest losses. Despite placing fourth on the leaderboard, buying the tokens has led to a $1.06m shortfall. Similarly, user 'Meow' is down $621,000, despite achieving VIP status.
$TRUMP is often included under the umbrella of 'memecoins', a term that describes cryptocurrencies which reference or were inspired by internet trends. Trump himself is a primary driver of online culture the world over, especially in the cryptocurrency world, but he isn't a meme in the same way that the Shiba Inu mascot of Dogecoin is.
The definition of a memecoin put forward by Coinbase, the US's largest exchange, fits $TRUMP in other ways, though. Coinbase describes memecoins as 'typically supported by enthusiastic online communities' and 'associated with entertainment rather than usability'. The president's coin is not aligned with any tangible financial or physical asset. It is a flimsy speculative asset, and a poor one at that.
Read more about .
Elon Musk says Doge didn't cut HIV programs. But it threw a 'miracle drug' into chaos
Russian-led cybercrime network dismantled in global operation
OnlyFans owner in talks to sell UK-based adult content platform for £5.9bn
Your favourite podcast is now a video – but are vodcasts the future, or just 'crap telly'?
Fear, hope and loathing in Elon Musk's new city: 'It's the wild, wild west and the future'
FTC drops case over Microsoft's $69bn Activision Blizzard acquisition
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iran has little choice but to retaliate against US - as Russia faces urgent decision on how to back Tehran
Donald Trump's decision to attack Iran could trigger a wider regional or even global war, but much will hinge on how Russia and China - Tehran's most powerful allies - respond. Abbas Araghchi, the Iranian foreign minister, said he will hold "serious consultations" with Vladimir Putin on Monday morning in Moscow. His country is also in contact with Beijing. Israel-Iran live: 'Incredible success' of US strikes on Iran hailed by Hegseth Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are regarded by Western allies as a new axis of authoritarian powers, increasingly aligned and supportive of each other. Donald Trump, though, has broken ranks from his country's traditional democratic partners to forge a closer relationship with Mr Putin than any other US leader in recent years. How much that might affect the Kremlin's calculations, as Moscow weighs up how to respond to his actions in Iran, adds a new layer of unpredictability to the crisis. Another limiting factor is the Russian military's physical capacity - should it wish - to bolster Iran with military support given its war in Ukraine. Unlike the NATO alliance, there is no formal agreement between Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang to come to each other's assistance in a crisis. However, the weakening of one member of the quartet would impact on the vital national interests of the other three, making it mutually beneficial to help each other out - including with military force or at the very least by supplying weapons. Iran has little choice but to retaliate directly against the United States after three of its main nuclear facilities were struck overnight. But its ability to launch ballistic missiles and drones has been severely degraded by waves of Israeli strikes since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu went to war with Iran a week and a half ago. Read more: What are Iran's options? US bases, warships, and aircraft across the region are well within range of Iranian missiles and drones, but the Pentagon has significantly strengthened its air defences in anticipation of an Iranian counterattack. There are plenty of softer targets, though, such as American embassies or other diplomatic missions. Iran could also choose to mine the Strait of Hormuz - a move that would have global ramifications by disrupting the flow of large amounts of oil and gas, as well as other trade. In addition, the military assets of American allies could be viewed as legitimate targets. The UK has said it played no part in the US attack. But Britain's Ministry of Defence has further increased "force protection" measures for its military bases and personnel in the Middle East to their highest level in the wake of the US strikes, it is understood. What was hit in US attack? In an operation that has been in the planning for years, American B-2 stealth bombers dropped enormous bunker-busting bombs - the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator - on the Fordow nuclear fuel enrichment plant, around 70 miles (110km) southwest of Tehran. It was built under a mountain - about 80 to 90 metres beneath the ground - to be beyond the reach of Israel's armed forces. Only the US Air Force carries munitions large enough to penetrate the rock, earth and concrete to inflict meaningful damage. Also targeted with the enormous munitions was Iran's main uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, 155 miles (250km) southeast of the Iranian capital. In addition, US submarines launched TLAM cruise missiles against Natanz and at a site outside the city of Isfahan, which is 260 miles (420km) south of Tehran. Near-bomb-grade nuclear fuel is thought to be stored here. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog, however, said the six buildings at Isfahan that were hit contained little or no nuclear material. Mr Trump has said he ordered the attack to destroy Iran's ability to enrich uranium to a level that could be used to make a nuclear bomb. Tehran has always insisted its nuclear programme is purely for civilian purposes. Analysts warn, though, that it would be very difficult to stop the Iranian nuclear programme through military action alone and that such a move may spur Iran to accelerate efforts to make a bomb if it has managed to protect key components. The Russian foreign ministry on Sunday strongly condemned the American strikes against Iranian nuclear sites as a "dangerous escalation" that could further undermine "regional and global security". "The risk of an escalation of conflict in the Middle East already beset by multiple crises, has increased significantly," it said in a statement. Last week, the Russian government warned the US against joining Israel's war in Iran, saying this "would be an extremely dangerous step with truly unpredictable negative consequences". The remarks came after Mr Putin held a call with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping. It means the Russian government in particular - given Tehran's military support to Moscow in the Russian invasion of Ukraine - faces an urgent decision about how to support Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, whose very existence is under threat from Israel.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Are Robust Financials Driving The Recent Rally In Definity Financial Corporation's (TSE:DFY) Stock?
Definity Financial (TSE:DFY) has had a great run on the share market with its stock up by a significant 28% over the last three months. Since the market usually pay for a company's long-term fundamentals, we decided to study the company's key performance indicators to see if they could be influencing the market. Particularly, we will be paying attention to Definity Financial's ROE today. Return on equity or ROE is an important factor to be considered by a shareholder because it tells them how effectively their capital is being reinvested. In other words, it is a profitability ratio which measures the rate of return on the capital provided by the company's shareholders. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. The formula for ROE is: Return on Equity = Net Profit (from continuing operations) ÷ Shareholders' Equity So, based on the above formula, the ROE for Definity Financial is: 12% = CA$422m ÷ CA$3.6b (Based on the trailing twelve months to March 2025). The 'return' is the income the business earned over the last year. So, this means that for every CA$1 of its shareholder's investments, the company generates a profit of CA$0.12. See our latest analysis for Definity Financial So far, we've learned that ROE is a measure of a company's profitability. We now need to evaluate how much profit the company reinvests or "retains" for future growth which then gives us an idea about the growth potential of the company. Assuming all else is equal, companies that have both a higher return on equity and higher profit retention are usually the ones that have a higher growth rate when compared to companies that don't have the same features. To begin with, Definity Financial seems to have a respectable ROE. And on comparing with the industry, we found that the the average industry ROE is similar at 12%. This certainly adds some context to Definity Financial's exceptional 30% net income growth seen over the past five years. We believe that there might also be other aspects that are positively influencing the company's earnings growth. For instance, the company has a low payout ratio or is being managed efficiently. As a next step, we compared Definity Financial's net income growth with the industry, and pleasingly, we found that the growth seen by the company is higher than the average industry growth of 9.4%. Earnings growth is an important metric to consider when valuing a stock. The investor should try to establish if the expected growth or decline in earnings, whichever the case may be, is priced in. By doing so, they will have an idea if the stock is headed into clear blue waters or if swampy waters await. Has the market priced in the future outlook for DFY? You can find out in our latest intrinsic value infographic research report. Definity Financial has a really low three-year median payout ratio of 18%, meaning that it has the remaining 82% left over to reinvest into its business. So it looks like Definity Financial is reinvesting profits heavily to grow its business, which shows in its earnings growth. Additionally, Definity Financial has paid dividends over a period of three years which means that the company is pretty serious about sharing its profits with shareholders. Upon studying the latest analysts' consensus data, we found that the company is expected to keep paying out approximately 20% of its profits over the next three years. Therefore, the company's future ROE is also not expected to change by much with analysts predicting an ROE of 11%. Overall, we are quite pleased with Definity Financial's performance. Specifically, we like that the company is reinvesting a huge chunk of its profits at a high rate of return. This of course has caused the company to see substantial growth in its earnings. That being so, a study of the latest analyst forecasts show that the company is expected to see a slowdown in its future earnings growth. To know more about the latest analysts predictions for the company, check out this visualization of analyst forecasts for the company. — Investing narratives with Fair Values Vita Life Sciences Set for a 12.72% Revenue Growth While Tackling Operational Challenges By Robbo – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: A$2.42 · 0.1% Overvalued Vossloh rides a €500 billion wave to boost growth and earnings in the next decade By Chris1 – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: €78.41 · 0.1% Overvalued Intuitive Surgical Will Transform Healthcare with 12% Revenue Growth By Unike – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: $325.55 · 0.6% Undervalued View more featured narratives — Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Fox News
12 minutes ago
- Fox News
AOC, other angry Democrats, call for Trump impeachment over attack on Iran
Progressive champion Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and a handful of other Democrats quickly floated the prospect of impeaching President Donald Trump for launching a military strike on Iran without Congressional authorization. "The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers," the four-term congresswoman from New York wrote on social media Saturday night, soon after the president announced the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Ocasio-Cortez charged that Trump "has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." Democrat Rep. Sean Casten of Illinois also argued that the president's order to bomb Iran's nuclear sites without seeking Congressional approval could be considered an "unambiguous impeachable offense." Casten, a four-term representative whose district covers southwestern Chicago and surrounding suburbs, wrote Saturday night on social media that "this is not about the merits of Iran's nuclear program….to be clear, I do not dispute that Iran is a nuclear threat." But he highlighted that "no president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress. This is an unambiguous impeachable offense." "I'm not saying we have the votes to impeach," Casten added. "I'm saying that you DO NOT do this without Congressional approval." The calls for impeachment are the most visible, and furthest reaching, representation of the party's anger with Trump for taking unilateral action against Iran. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the top Democrat in the chamber, wrote that the president had "failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East." "Donald Trump shoulders complete and total responsibility for any adverse consequences that flow from his unilateral military action," Jeffries added in a statement. While the executive branch technically doesn't have the legal authority to order a foreign military attack without the approval of Congress, previous presidents, including Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Trump during his first term, launched comparable military actions in Libya, Sudan, Afghanistan and Iran. Congress has not actually declared war since 1941, following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor during World War II, and legal scholars have long been divided on whether the president has the authority to unilaterally launch a military strike.
