Nikita Prokopov:
But recently (a decade, more or less), this relationship has subtly changed. Newer programs (which are called apps now, yes, I know) started to want things from you.
[…]
This got so bad that when a program doesn’t ask you to create an account, it feels refreshing.
[…]
Everybody is checking for updates all the time. Some notoriously bad ones lock you out until you update.
[…]
Notifications are like email: to-do items that are forced on you by another party. Hey, it’s not my job to dismiss your notifications!
[…]
The company needs to announce a new feature and makes [an onboarding] popup window about it.
Nick Heer:
Adobe is so awful about this, it added an option called “Quiet Mode” in Photoshop “to reduce in-app pop-ups and non-essential notifications”. Not eliminate — that would be too kind — but reduce. And this preference is not in every Adobe app, so every time I update Illustrator or InDesign, I am treated like I have never used either one before. (Notably, I was not informed about this “Quiet Mode” preference with an in-app notification. I stumbled across it after desperately searching the web.)
When I read this yesterday, the Adobe icon in my menu bar had a red dot in it. I don’t really care to be notified in that way when a Lightroom update is available. But this red indicator was not even for an app update. It was to let me know that the “Day Two keynote” at the Adobe MAX conference was available to watch. Wouldn’t want to miss that!
So I agree with this sentiment, but I would like to present a steelmanned argument: a change introduced in an update may either benefit or confuse a user.
[…]
Updates are now largely automatic or even, in the case of many software-as-a-service apps, mandatory. This means changes will be introduced without any warning.
I agree with Heer on this, but the app should put me in control. I should be able to skip the onboarding and get right back into the app with a single tap. There should also be a link or menu command so that I can go back and view the information when I feel like it.
Why are so many big developers shipping new versions every two weeks? What could possibly warrant that?
Jeff Johnson says it’s Agile. Yet I don’t think continuous integration means that you need to be constantly shipping. They are optimizing for how the developer wants to work, not what the customer wants delivered. This is the same issue that I have with Apple’s OS release schedule. The theory is that everything is always at a high level of quality so it’s fine to ship on a fixed schedule, creating a “continuous flow of value to users.” The reality is that there are no more polished releases. Any given release may fix a bug in one area but turn another area beta without warning.
Dave Rahardja:
I don’t think users are complaining about server code being updated too often. In fact, most users have no idea how often server-side code is updated. With automatic app updates, users may also have no idea how often their app is updated. Does it matter if the updates happen every other week or every other month?
An unfortunate pattern I’ve been seeing lately is that they make a breaking server code change and so you’re forced to update the client.
As a user, I prefer the old model where the updates are presented on a reasonable schedule in a way that makes sense to me. This is a feature update that’s well tested, this is a bug fix update, and I can see what’s happening (I love reading release notes) and when I want to update each app. But the App Store model has ruined this because developers are constantly pushing updates, and they happen in the background (sometimes breaking things at the worst time) without showing any release notes. There are so many updates that it’s impractical to turn off auto-updates, as I found when I did that for a year. You just end up with a huge backlog in the App Store app with little way to sort through them.
Adobe Adobe Photoshop Apple Software Announcement Design Mac Mac App macOS Tahoe 26 Working
Anthony Ha (MacRumors, Hacker News):
Apple is getting serious about succession planning, according to a new report in The Financial Times.
The company’s board and senior executives are reportedly preparing for the possibility that Tim Cook could step down as CEO as soon as early next year.
[…]
Apple’s senior vice president of hardware engineering John Ternus is reportedly seen as the most likely candidate for the company’s next CEO.
Joe Rossignol:
[But] he might not fully retire. Instead, it is possible that he will become the next chairman of Apple’s board of directors.
[…]
In this scenario, it is unclear if Cook would become chairman or executive chairman. In the former role, he would focus more on managing the board and corporate governance. In the latter role, Cook would remain more involved in Apple’s day-to-day operations and decision-making, which could help to ease the transition to a new CEO.
John Gruber:
I absolutely love the idea of Cook’s successor being a product person like Ternus, and Ternus is young enough — 50, the same age Cook was in 2011 when he took the reins from Steve Jobs — to hold the job for a long stretch.
From what little I know, I have a generally favorable view of Ternus, but I think Apple really needs a leader who understands and cares about software. (Maybe Ternus does, but on paper he looks like a hardware guy.)
I would also bet that Cook moves into the role of executive chairman, and will still play a significant, if not leading, role for the company when it comes to domestic and international politics. Especially with regard to Trump.
Previously:
Update (2025-12-10): Hartley Charlton:
There is uncertainty about Apple’s head of hardware engineering John Ternus succeeding Tim Cook as CEO, The Information reports. Some former Apple executives apparently hope that a new “dark-horse” candidate will emerge.
[…]
Some skeptics inside the company say that Ternus is too risk averse, leading to frustrations within his group. For example, some in Apple’s hardware engineering department were disappointed that Ternus declined to fund more ambitious projects.
I see it as good judgement that he wanted to focus on iOS and Mac instead of funding Vision Pro and the Apple Car.
John Gruber:
The parenthetical undersells the unlikelihood of Fadell returning to Apple, ever, in any role, let alone the borderline insanity of suggesting he’d come back as Cook’s successor.
Previously:
Update (2026-01-08): Eric Slivka:
Several recent reports have identified Apple’s senior vice president of hardware engineering, John Ternus, as likely to be named the next Apple CEO, and The New York Times has now shared a profile of Ternus with some context on his expertise and how he is viewed within the company.
According to sources who spoke to The New York Times, Apple began accelerating its planning for Tim Cook’s succession last year, with Cook having expressed a desire to reduce his workload.
Update (2026-01-09): John Gruber:
Cook may well be preparing to retire as CEO. He is 65! But it doesn’t ring true to me that he’s telling “senior leaders” that he’s tired. First, I’ve heard otherwise from actual senior leaders at the company. Second, any senior leader he’d tell that to, if true, wouldn’t share it.
It seems to me that aside from the utterly normal and plainly obvious speculation that, at age 65, he might be on the cusp of retiring as CEO, there’s something going on where a narrative is being spread that Cook is in poor health.
Update (2026-01-23): Juli Clover:
Apple’s hardware chief John Ternus has been overseeing Apple design teams since late last year as Apple continues preparing him to take over as CEO, reports Bloomberg.
John Gruber:
Here’s to hoping Ternus is as pissed as the rest of us are about MacOS 26 Tahoe.
Update (2026-02-19): Jason Snell:
If Eddy Cue can come in and decide that something Apple’s been working on for years doesn’t meet the company’s standards, that even a potentially revenue-generating new service is a bad idea, imagine what might happen with new executives all over the company.
Apple has benefited greatly from an era of executive stability over the last decade or two. Now it potentially stands to benefit from ending that era and embracing change.
Apple Business Design Eddy Cue iOS John Ternus Mac Tim Cook
Juli Clover:
Following signs of new Side Button functionality in the iOS 26.2 beta 3 update, Apple developer documentation has confirmed that assigning a third-party voice assistant to the Side Button will be a feature available to iPhone users in Japan.
[…]
Apple makes it clear that the option to activate a third-party personal assistant using App Intents will only be available on the iPhone in Japan, not in other countries.
Apparently not even in the EU.
I wonder how well this will work. It sounds like audio doesn’t begin recording until after the app launches, so you may not be able to just press the button and immediately begin speaking like with Siri. And then, I guess, afterwards you’re left in the voice assistant app, whereas Siri gets to work on top of other apps in its own mode. There also doesn’t seem to be a way for third-parties to set a wake word.
Previously:
Antitrust App Intents Artificial Intelligence iOS iOS 26 Japan Siri
