Malcolm Crawford (Mastodon):
The open-plan floors make it hard to concentrate. The building is so large that getting from one meeting to the next eats real time out of the day. It’s common for people to run meetings with colleagues over Webex — colleagues on the same campus, sometimes no more than two hundred yards away.
Ironically, Apple Park replaced a campus that did far better on the same measure without ever trying to. Infinite Loop produced far more of the accidental, cross-team contact Apple Park was explicitly built to create. Working out why starts with what Infinite Loop got right by accident. It continues with what the research on office proximity says about why that kind of thing happens at all. And it ends with what Apple Park could become instead — including a version of the fix Apple already trusts enough to run for a hundred people a year.
[…]
There’s no obvious focal point for the whole site — most sections have their own sitting area and their own coffee bar, but nothing plays the role Caffè Macs and the IL1 coffee bar played together at Infinite Loop. Caffè Macs at Apple Park seats a thousand people and feels built for throughput, not conversation. Everything is organised per-segment rather than around a shared centre, which is convenient for the people in that segment and useless for the discovery-by-accident that made the old campus work.
[…]
By multiple accounts from people who were there during design and construction, the site was flagged as under-provisioned for meetings and conferences before it even opened.
Via Jason Anthony Guy:
Apple Park is a beautiful structure, but is not terribly conducive to focused or collaborative work. Even as an occasional visitor I found it overwhelming. Employees sit shoulder to shoulder, voices bounce off and bleed through glass walls, and privacy is a virtual impossibility. My friends and colleagues who worked there regularly found it difficult to be productive.
I worked in Infinite Loop (Building 3, 2nd floor) for thirteen years (right below Developer Publications, where Malcolm spent a good portion of his Apple career). I loved IL because its design made serendipitous encounters easy. Whether it was sitting outside Caffè Macs or in the IL 1 Atrium, I would inevitably bump into someone and have a conversation that furthered an in-flight project, sparked something new, or simply reinforced the social ties that bind colleagues.
It helped that at that time, Apple had perhaps 10,000 employees, most of whom were in or near IL. After iPhone came about and IL started getting locked down, much of the natural collaboration dissipated, disappearing behind badged doors and disclosures.
Ken McLeod:
IL provided a place to focus on your work[1], as well as seating spaces that are out of the flow of traffic where you can have an informal meeting[2]. At AP, every collaborative space is effectively in the middle of a hallway. That turns out to be enormously distracting, both to you and to those people trying to work in the glass bullpen right next to it.
[1] before all cubicles and offices became multi-person shared spaces
[2] before all those spaces were filled in with more offices
Helge Heß:
“The IL1 atrium really was the crossroads of the company in those days” I really don’t think that this is true literally by any means. Assuming “those days” overlap with the time I’ve been there (pre Park). The XFs in IL have been extremely scarce.
IL was way too small and overloaded, I’d actually say it was very similar to Apple Park. No one really wanted to work there in those tiny offices with multiple people 🤷♀️
Steve Hayman:
I loved the IL1 atrium. I’d sit there and hope that someone like MMalc would wander by, and they often did. It was a real destination for field people who didn’t get to visit the mothership very often. I miss that. AP had nothing like it.
Eric Schwarz:
I think of my days in college—most dorms residence halls were not air conditioned, so at the end of August, you had to open your window (often to place a box fan) and door to create some airflow. People walking through the building would meet by chance. Newer buildings tended to be less lively and more like a hotel—all the doors closed and rarely much activity. Through renovations, most of the buildings have had air conditioning added, dropping those interactions over the years.
Previously:
Apple Apple Park Design Webex Working
Aleem Shaun:
I’ve used Day One for more than a decade. It was an excellent journalling app. Private, minimal, easy to use, with excellent features such as geolocation, weather, ‘On this Day’, and book printing. Features that got out of the way and either worked quietly in the background or appeared only when you summoned them. That’s changed.
Now there are new subscription tiers. Previously, the tiers were Free and Premium. Simple. Premium included sync and a few other things that I can’t remember, but it was compelling enough that I’ve been a Premium subscriber from the beginning. Now, without consultation, I’m Silver (not Premium), and there’s a new, more expensive AI-driven tier, Gold. I don’t object solely on that basis. You would think I could just choose to remain on ‘Silver’ and all would be well. But no. Even with these features turned off in settings, I’m visually prompted in the app to upgrade to Gold and use the Daily Chat (with AI), which I’ve turned off and can only use if I upgrade. And yet, there it is, taunting me.
Via Eric Schwarz:
Even Apple is guilty of doing this in the Settings app and the former iWork apps.
Previously:
Artificial Intelligence Day One Journal iOS iOS 26 iOS App Mac Mac App macOS Tahoe 26
Chance Miller:
Here are the new monthly prices for Apple Music and Apple One as of today:
Apple Music
Apple One
The price increases for Apple Music come after Spotify announced its own round of price hikes earlier this year, which Apple poked fun at on social media. Even with today’s price hikes, though, Apple Music remains cheaper than Spotify.
Lee Peterson:
Apple Music no longer makes sense when I’m already paying for YouTube Premium. Apple Music goes up to £11.99, YouTube Premium is £12.99 and on top of a good music service you get no ads on YouTube.
Mike Rockwell:
Distilling my longtime argument down to its simplest bit, I’d ask “do you want to pay $10 a month for music for the rest of your life?”
But truly, it was never going to just be $10 per month. The price was going to go up over time. It was going to get more expensive to have access to the same music.
If you purchase your music, though, I think most people would reach a point in their life where they stop buying new music entirely or they’re only buying a few albums per year. The cost of music would go down for you over time.
That was my thinking, too, but then I found that music I’ve purchased from Apple won’t work on my HomePod. I refuse to condone that behavior, so now I have two solid reasons not to subscribe to Apple Music.
Joe Rossignol:
While the monthly and annual prices of AppleCare+ plans for Macs and iPads received a slight increase this week, AppleCare One continues to start at $19.99 per month in the U.S., making the multi-device plan even more valuable.
Previously:
Apple Music Apple One Apple Services AppleCare Business Music
John Gruber (Mastodon, 2):
Some of [Cook’s letter] remains true, but has lost some truthiness — and truthiness matters. But some of it is no longer true, period. It’s no longer just “one small part” of Apple’s business that serves advertisers. Here in 2026, search results in the App Store not only show paid ads — frequently for casinos — but the search results are visually dominated by paid ads now that Apple has added a second ad to results. Apple News+ is a paid subscription that offers a genuinely great value for the number of paywalled publishers whose content it includes, but articles on the News app tend to include the weirdest AI-generated ads on the Internet. (How many young blond women am I supposed to believe need hearing aids?) And — at this writing, still “coming soon” — Apple is launching ads on Apple Maps. Apple Maps remains free of charge to use, so according to Tim Cook, we’re not the customer. We’re the product. Or, if you prefer, our frustration is the product.
[…]
The ratio of ads to organic results in App Store search — especially when measured in screen area — is clearly not aligned with Cook’s 2014 statement that “Our software and services are designed to make our devices better. Plain and simple.” Obviously not. App Store search today is designed primarily to generate more revenue for Apple. That’s not criminal, but it’s a change.
[…]
What gave Tim Cook’s privacy letter heft in 2014 wasn’t just the clarity of its plain language, but the fact that you didn’t have to take his word for it that the ads Apple showed you respected your privacy, because Apple didn’t show you ads in 2014. Apple today can’t say that.
[…]
John Ternus should return Apple’s privacy policy to its 2014 clarity. The trust Apple would earn from such a move would far out-value whatever revenue these ads pad to their already hefty and ever-increasing quarterly Services numbers.
I wish that were the case, but I fear this is kind of a Hotelling’s Law situation, where Apple can get most of the benefit by being just slightly better on this axis. Where else do its customers have to go?
Jeff Johnson (Mastodon):
In the second fiscal quarter of 2018, services generated $9 billion in revenue (net sales), whereas in Q2 2026, that amount had grown to $31 billion! In this blog post, I want to focus on understanding the relative financial importance of products and services for Apple.
[…]
In 2025, services were 42% of Apple gross margin. How does 26% of net sales become 42% of gross margin? The explanation is that services have a much lower cost of sales. The products gross margin was 37% of products net sales, while the services gross margin was an astonishing 75% of services net sales. In other words, Apple services are almost pure profit!
Does this 75% account for TV and movie production costs?
With persistent general inflation, consumers do not have unlimited money to spend on Apple products. At least in the near future, it’s reasonable to question how much further room is available for growth in profits from Apple products. To satisfy the demands of investors, Apple executives including CEO-elect John Ternus may be forced to rely even more than before on growth in services, which do not face as much pressure on cost of sales as hardware products.
Previously:
Advertising Apple Apple Services Apple TV+ Business iOS John Ternus Mac Tim Cook
