John Voorhees

2794 posts on MacStories since November 2015

John is MacStories’ Managing Editor, has been writing about Apple and apps since joining the team in 2015, and today, runs the site alongside Federico.

John also co-hosts four MacStories podcasts: AppStories, which covers the world of apps, MacStories Unwind, which explores the fun differences between American and Italian culture and recommends media to listeners, Ruminate, a show about the weird web and unusual snacks, and NPC: Next Portable Console, a show about the games we take with us.


The Latest from Magic Rays of Light, Comfort Zone, and MacStories Unwind

Enjoy the latest episodes from MacStories’ family of podcasts:

This week on Magic Rays of Light, Sigmund and Devon highlight Apple Original film Fancy Dance starring Lily Gladstone, discuss Sigmund’s experience with the new Beats Pill, share their thoughts on the third season of Acapulco, and recap thrilling sci-fi series Dark Matter.


This week, Matt goes Infinite, Chris embraces Nothing, and Niléane tries to make a Frame…work. Oh, and we discover 2 of the hosts have sane travel bags and the other is a maniac.

Our thanks once again to ListenLater.net for sponsoring Comfort Zone and MacStories! Let them know you heard about them from us to get 20% more credits with your first purchase.


This week, the Umarell return and a bay leaf mystery must be solved with technology. Plus, we have summertime movie and TV picks.

Read more


The Latest from AppStories and NPC: Next Portable Console

Enjoy the latest episodes from MacStories’ family of podcasts:

This week, Federico and I share tips on iPadOS, macOS, RSS, cross-platform file transfers, and more.

This episode is sponsored by:

  • Sofa – Be More Intentional with Your Downtime.

For episode 3 of NPC, we cover the latest news about the Ayn Odin2 Mini, ONEXPLAYER X1 Mini, Asus ROG Ally X, the Anbernic RG Cube, and more, John finally received his transparent blue Anbernic RG35XXSP, Brendon got a surprise in the mail, and Federico shares his first impressions of the Powkiddy RGB30.

Read more


Highlighting Journalism on Mastodon

Eugen Rochko, writing on Mastodon’s blog today:

To reinforce and encourage Mastodon as the go-to place for journalism, we’re launching a new feature today. You will notice that underneath some links shared on Mastodon, the author byline can be clicked to open the author’s associated fediverse account, right in the app. This highlights writers and journalists that are active on the fediverse, and makes it easier than ever to follow them and keep up with their future work—potentially across different publications. Writers often work with different publishers over the span of their careers, but Mastodon is the perfect platform to amass a loyal audience that you, as the author, truly own, and can take with you across the fediverse.

When Eugen approached us about being one of the first publications to implement this new feature, we jumped at the chance. You may have noticed that we believe pretty strongly in writing and writers, so we’re pleased to be joining The Verge and MacRumors in implementing author bylines. Now, when you see a MacStories post on Mastodon, you can click on the author byline at the bottom of the post to jump to the author’s profile.

What’s more, the feature is incredibly easy to set up. It took Robb Knight about 15 minutes to add the creator OpenGraph tag to MacStories, and ever since, our posts have linked to our authors’ fediverse profiles:

Clicking the author link in a post takes you to that person's Mastodon profile.

Clicking the author link in a post takes you to that person’s Mastodon profile.

Currently, the authorship feature requires you to use the web version of Mastodon or its official app and have a mastodon.social account or be on a server running recent nightly releases. However, the new feature is part of the Mastodon API, so it shouldn’t be long before third-party apps begin supporting it, too.

Like a lot of people, we follow our favorite publications, but also our favorite writers. Mastodon’s author byline is an excellent way to shine a spotlight on both.

Permalink

AI Companies Need to Be Regulated: An Open Letter to the U.S. Congress and European Parliament

Federico: Historically, technology has usually advanced in lockstep with opening up new creative opportunities for people. From word processors allowing writers to craft their next novel to digital cameras letting photographers express themselves in new ways or capture more moments, technological progress over the past few decades has sustained creators and, perhaps more importantly, spawned industries that couldn’t exist before.

Technology has enabled millions of people like myself to realize their life’s dreams and make a living out of “creating content” in a digital age.

This is all changing with the advent of Artificial Intelligence products based on large language models. If left unchecked without regulation, we believe the change may be for the worse.

Over the past two years, we’ve witnessed the arrival of AI tools and services that often use human input without consent with the goal of faster and cheaper results. The fascination with maximization of profits above anything else isn’t a surprise in a capitalist industry, but it’s highly concerning nonetheless – especially since, this time around, the majority of these AI tools have been built on a foundation of non-consensual appropriation, also known as – quite simply – digital theft.

As we’ve documented on MacStories and as other (and larger) publications also investigated, it’s become clear that foundation models of different LLMs have been trained on content sourced from the open web without requesting publishers’ permission upfront. These models can then power AI interfaces that can regurgitate similar content or provide answers with hidden citations that seldom prioritize driving traffic to publishers. As far as MacStories is concerned, this is limited to text scraped from our website, but we’re seeing this play out in other industries too, from design assets to photos, music, and more. And top it all off, publishers and creators whose content was appropriated for training or crawled for generative responses (or both) can’t even ask AI companies to be transparent about which parts of their content was used. It’s a black box where original content goes in and derivative slop comes out.

We think this is all wrong.

The practices followed by the majority of AI companies are ethically unfair to publishers and brazenly walk a perilous line of copyright infringement that must be regulated. Most worryingly, if ignored, we fear that these tools may lead to a gradual erosion of the open web as we know it, diminishing individuals’ creativity and consolidating “knowledge” in the hands of a few tech companies that built their AI services on the back of web publishers and creators without their explicit consent.

In other words, we’re concerned that, this time, technology won’t open up new opportunities for creative people on the web. We fear that it’ll destroy them.

We want to do something about this. And we’re starting with an open letter, embedded below, that we’re sending on behalf of MacStories, Inc. to U.S. Senators who have sponsored AI legislation as well as Italian members of the E.U. Special Committee on Artificial Intelligence in a Digital Age.

In the letter, which we encourage other publishers to copy if they so choose, we outline our stance on AI companies taking advantage of the open web for training purposes, not compensating publishers for the content they appropriated and used, and not being transparent regarding the composition of their models’ data sets. We’re sending this letter in English today, with an Italian translation to follow in the near future.

I know that MacStories is merely a drop in the bucket of the open web. We can’t afford to sue anybody. But I’d rather hold my opinion strongly and defend my intellectual property than sit silently and accept something that I believe is fundamentally unfair for creators and dangerous for the open web. And I’m grateful to have a business partner who shares these ideals and principles with me.

With that being said, here’s a copy of the letter we’re sending to U.S. and E.U. representatives.

Read more


The Latest from Magic Rays of Light, Comfort Zone, and MacStories Unwind

Enjoy the latest episodes from MacStories’ family of podcasts:

This week on Magic Rays of Light, Sigmund and Devon highlight new Apple Original bilingual comedy series Land of Women, discuss latest with regards to Apple and the Digital Markets Acts, and recap The Big Cigar.


Niléane tests the gang on their French knowledge (it goes great…), Chris adds some goblins to this productivity system, and Matt tries to connect to the other side.

This episode is sponsored by:

Our thanks once again to ListenLater.net for sponsoring Comfort Zone and MacStories! Let them know you heard about them from us to get 20% more credits with your first purchase.


This week, Federico and I look back at the first half of 2024 and pick our favorite TV shows, movies, videogames, music, and gadgets.

This episode is sponsored by:

  • Sofa – Be More Intentional with Your Downtime

Read more


The Story Behind Half-Life’s Canceled Mac Port

Half-Life was a defining game of the late 90s, which is why Mac users were excited when a Mac OS port was announced in 1999. However, within months, the game was canceled. As Greg Gant writes on Inaudible Discussion:

The official reason why the port was axed was given by Gabe Newell, president of Valve, citing the lack of Team Fortress Classic and multiplayer with PC users and fear of releasing an inferior product.

However, according to a companion video version of the post on the Definitive Mac Upgrade Guide channel, the real reason was bad blood between Apple and Valve, Half-Life’s developer:

Drawing from an interview with developer Rebecca Heineman, who worked on the port, the video explains that Valve canceled the port after being misled by an Apple games evangelist about expected sales figures.

In addition to Heineman’s story about the cancellation of the Mac port of Half-Life, the video covers how Valve intended to bring the technology that powers the Steam Deck to the Mac and why it never did. Plus, for those who have always wanted to play Half-Life on the Mac, Gant explains the best ways to do so on a variety of Mac architectures.

Gant’s story of the failed Half-Life port is an interesting bit of Apple history from a time when most major videogames were ported to the Mac. That’s no longer the case, although Apple seems to be making efforts to turn that tide. Gant’s story shows that there’s a lot of history to overcome.

Permalink

The Latest from AppStories and Ruminate

Enjoy the latest episodes from MacStories’ family of podcasts:

This week, Federico and John attempt to clear up confusion about MacStories’ position on AI web crawlers before rethinking email apps in light of the update to Apple’s Mail app coming this fall.

On AppStories+, Federico and John preview their fall review research setups and consider the impact of Apple Intelligence on the Shortcuts app.

This episode is sponsored by:


On Ruminate, I tried a pork rind and then we get into the drama of the week: AI.

Read more


European Commission Preliminarily Finds That Apple Has Violated the Digital Markets Act

Today, the European Commission informed Apple that based on its preliminary investigation it has determined that the company is in violation of the Digital Markets Act. The EC has also opened a separate non-compliance procedure against Apple over the Core Technology Fee and other changes instituted earlier this year as part of its response to the DMA.

In particular, the EC’s preliminary findings take issue with Apple’s response to the DMA’s anti-steering provisions:

Apple currently has three sets of business terms governing its relationship with app developers, including the App Store’s steering rules. The Commission preliminarily finds that:

  • None of these business terms allow developers to freely steer their customers. For example, developers cannot provide pricing information within the app or communicate in any other way with their customers to promote offers available on alternative distribution channels.
  • Under most of the business terms available to app developers, Apple allows steering only through “link-outs”, i.e., app developers can include a link in their app that redirects the customer to a web page where the customer can conclude a contract. The link-out process is subject to several restrictions imposed by Apple that prevent app developers from communicating, promoting offers and concluding contracts through the distribution channel of their choice.
  • Whilst Apple can receive a fee for facilitating via the AppStore the initial acquisition of a new customer by developers, the fees charged by Apple go beyond what is strictly necessary for such remuneration. For example, Apple charges developers a fee for every purchase of digital goods or services a user makes within seven days after a link-out from the app.

Apple may respond to the EC’s preliminary findings in writing. A final decision regarding compliance with the law is due by March 25, 2025, the one year anniversary of the beginning of DMA proceedings against Apple.

The EC has also opened a separate investigation regarding Apple’s compliance with Section 6(4) of the DMA, which provides that:

The gatekeeper shall allow and technically enable the installation and effective use of third-party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, its operating system and allow those software applications or software application stores to be accessed by means other than the relevant core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall, where applicable, not prevent the downloaded third-party software applications or software application stores from prompting end users to decide whether they want to set that downloaded software application or software application store as their default. The gatekeeper shall technically enable end users who decide to set that downloaded software application or software application store as their default to carry out that change easily.

The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking, to the extent that they are strictly necessary and proportionate, measures to ensure that third-party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper.

Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall not be prevented from applying, to the extent that they are strictly necessary and proportionate, measures and settings other than default settings, enabling end users to effectively protect security in relation to third-party software applications or software application stores, provided that such measures and settings other than default settings are duly justified by the gatekeeper.

Specifically, the EC says it will investigate whether the Core Technology Fee, the multi-step process for downloading apps from alternative app marketplaces, and the eligibility requirements for running an alternative app marketplace are ‘necessary and proportionate’ under the DMA. The EC also notes that it is continuing to investigate Apple’s process for validating apps and alternative app marketplaces.

None of this is particularly surprising, given the complexities of the provisions Apple put into place in the wake of the DMA. The ‘necessity and proportionality’ of Apple’s changes are, by their nature, subjective determinations. That makes the DMA hard to comply with, but it also leaves ample room for the EC and Apple to negotiate a resolution of their dispute over the DMA. It’s time for the parties to put this dispute to rest.


Apple Says It Won’t Ship Major New OS Features in the EU This Fall Due to DMA Uncertainty

A new round in the fight between the EU and Apple has been brewing for a while now. About a week ago, the Financial Times reported that unnamed sources said that the EU was poised to levy significant fines against the company over a probe of Apple’s compliance with the Digital Markets Act. Then, earlier this week, in an interview with CNBC, the EU’s competition chief, Margrethe Vestager telegraphed that Apple is facing enforcement measures:

[Apple] are very important because a lot of good business happens through the App Store, happens through payment mechanisms, so of course, even though you know I can say this is not what was expected of such a company, of course we will enforce exactly with the same top priority as with any other business.

Asked when enforcement might happen, Vestager told CNBC ‘hopefully soon.’

Apple made no comment to CNBC at the time, but today, that shoe has apparently dropped, with Apple telling the Financial Times that:

Due to the regulatory uncertainties brought about by the Digital Markets Act, we do not believe that we will be able to roll out three of these [new] features – iPhone Mirroring, SharePlay Screen Sharing enhancements, and Apple Intelligence – to our EU users this year.

Is it a coincidence that Apple made its statement to the same media outlet that reported that fines were about to be assessed? I doubt it. The more likely scenario is that Apple is using OS updates as a negotiating chip with EU regulators. Your guess is as good as mine whether the move will work. Personally, I think the tactic is just as likely to backfire. However, I’m quite confident that you’ll be hearing from me again about fines by the EU against Apple sooner rather than later.

Permalink