verge-rss

Image: Lionsgate

Francis Ford Coppola’s long-gestating epic Megalopolis is a series of loosely connected ideas, tied together with an undercooked world and embarrassing dialogue. There’s a refreshing idealism to Megalopolis. In a time overflowing with grim, nihilistic postapocalyptic stories, Francis Ford Coppola’s latest film is a retrofuturistic parable about creating a better world through architecture, science, and dreams. Unfortunately, that sheen fades almost immediately. The film wants viewers to imagine an idealistic future. But its vision for that future is so vague as to be meaningless. For all of its good intentions, Megalopolis is a confusing, bloated disaster.
This shouldn’t be too surprising, as the lead-up to the film’s release has mostly been focused on one controversy after another. There’s the long development time, with director Coppola working on the movie in some form since 1982, forced to self-finance the entire $120 million production because studios passed on it. There are the reports of inappropriate on-set behavior (and a subsequent lawsuit), specifically hiring actors “who were canceled at one point or another,” and all of those fake AI-generated review quotes. The four-decade-long process of bringing Megalopolis to theaters was an absolute mess, much like the film itself.
Now, this is the part of the review where I normally would give a clear summary of what the film is about. That’s not so easy with Megalopolis, because it borders on the nonsensical. It takes place in an alternate universe setting called New Rome City and is centered on a war of ideas between Mayor Cicero (Giancarlo Esposito) and Cesar (Adam Driver), the chair of the Design Authority (sort of like a really powerful group of architects who are treated like rock stars for some reason). Cicero wants to keep New Rome as it is, a functional but not particularly inspiring place that could maybe use a lucrative new casino. Cesar wants to rebuild it as a fantastical utopia that, yes, is called Megalopolis.
The idea is pretty clear: America is much like Ancient Rome at its peak, a place full of excess and indulgence (which is exemplified by everyone doing lots of coke) that is also heading for a historic fall from grace. Megalopolis is trying to ask if there’s another way. It doesn’t necessarily have any answers, but it really wants to ask the question.
Almost every aspect of Megalopolis — both the film and the fictional city at its heart — feels completely underdeveloped, despite being in the works for so long. New Rome City, for instance, is literally just New York City with a perpetual golden hue. People drive modern cars, use QR codes, and read the New Rome Post. There’s no creative design that might make for an intriguing parallel to our own world, aside from the occasional chariot race.

Even worse is Cesar, who is the core of the film. He’s an architectural genius, which you know because everyone calls him a genius and because he won a Nobel Prize for creating a mysterious building material that is basically magic. (It can be used to create fantastical cities and dresses that render the wearer invisible and doubles as a handy cure for bullet wounds.) Cesar has the ability to stop time when he’s inspired by his muse, who happens to be Cicero’s daughter, played by Nathalie Emmanuel. This superpower isn’t explained either literally or thematically and never really has an impact on the story in any way. It’s just there.
Nothing Cesar does seems all that smart. He mostly quotes Shakespeare at length and says things like “what connects power also stores it” during design meetings. It’s unclear how his dream city is being funded or constructed or how it will actually address real-world issues like income inequality or joblessness, aside from giving every adult their own personal garden. I’m not asking for a blueprint of Megalopolis, but nothing in the city’s concept ever rises above the depth of a “The World If” meme. When Cicero questions whether Cesar’s city is realistic and is met with some philosophical musings, I found myself siding with the crooked mayor. Like Coppola, Cesar is only interested in questions, not answers. But this isn’t a story about a man’s tragic, idealistic hubris, either — his dream simply somehow works.
It might be generous to describe Megalopolis as having a story at all. Coppola has said that he collected thousands of clippings from newspapers and magazines while working on the script. And that’s exactly how the movie feels: like a series of ideas thrown together, without a real narrative binding them. Things just… happen. A satellite crashes into New Rome despite having long been predicted to hit Labrador. When Cicero gets the news that it’s on course to hit the city, he asks, “What do we do?” Then the scene abruptly ends with no answer.
Story isn’t everything, of course, but it’s not like Megalopolis has many other redeeming qualities. The acting is stilted and erratic, as if the performers are as confused about what’s going on as the audience is. The dialogue veers between painfully obvious allegories and painfully juvenile jokes. You can imagine how bad the sex scenes are. Much of it is also just plain dumb. Aubrey Plaza plays a platinum blonde reporter named Wow Platinum, while Cesar’s uncle Crassus (Jon Voight) hides weapons behind his erection. These moments are funny, but it’s not clear if they’re supposed to be given how serious the rest of the movie is.
There are some intriguing moments. At one point during the theatrical experience, the lights turn back on so that a real-world actor in the theater can lip-sync questions that a reporter is asking Cesar during a press conference. (How this will play out during wide release or when the movie hits Blu-ray and streaming services is unclear.) But mostly, it’s the kind of movie that makes an audience laugh unintentionally.
I can appreciate the sentiment behind Megalopolis — hell, that’s something the world could really use right now. It may have been conceived in the ’80s, but the core of the film feels timely. It’s a shame that the rest of the movie — its story, characters, acting, and dialogue — does nothing but get in the way. If Coppola couldn’t clearly articulate that viewpoint with 40 years of work, there’s no way I’m going to understand it in two and a half hours.
Megalopolis hits theaters on September 27th.

Image: Lionsgate

Francis Ford Coppola’s long-gestating epic Megalopolis is a series of loosely connected ideas, tied together with an undercooked world and embarrassing dialogue.

There’s a refreshing idealism to Megalopolis. In a time overflowing with grim, nihilistic postapocalyptic stories, Francis Ford Coppola’s latest film is a retrofuturistic parable about creating a better world through architecture, science, and dreams. Unfortunately, that sheen fades almost immediately. The film wants viewers to imagine an idealistic future. But its vision for that future is so vague as to be meaningless. For all of its good intentions, Megalopolis is a confusing, bloated disaster.

This shouldn’t be too surprising, as the lead-up to the film’s release has mostly been focused on one controversy after another. There’s the long development time, with director Coppola working on the movie in some form since 1982, forced to self-finance the entire $120 million production because studios passed on it. There are the reports of inappropriate on-set behavior (and a subsequent lawsuit), specifically hiring actors “who were canceled at one point or another,” and all of those fake AI-generated review quotes. The four-decade-long process of bringing Megalopolis to theaters was an absolute mess, much like the film itself.

Now, this is the part of the review where I normally would give a clear summary of what the film is about. That’s not so easy with Megalopolis, because it borders on the nonsensical. It takes place in an alternate universe setting called New Rome City and is centered on a war of ideas between Mayor Cicero (Giancarlo Esposito) and Cesar (Adam Driver), the chair of the Design Authority (sort of like a really powerful group of architects who are treated like rock stars for some reason). Cicero wants to keep New Rome as it is, a functional but not particularly inspiring place that could maybe use a lucrative new casino. Cesar wants to rebuild it as a fantastical utopia that, yes, is called Megalopolis.

The idea is pretty clear: America is much like Ancient Rome at its peak, a place full of excess and indulgence (which is exemplified by everyone doing lots of coke) that is also heading for a historic fall from grace. Megalopolis is trying to ask if there’s another way. It doesn’t necessarily have any answers, but it really wants to ask the question.

Almost every aspect of Megalopolis — both the film and the fictional city at its heart — feels completely underdeveloped, despite being in the works for so long. New Rome City, for instance, is literally just New York City with a perpetual golden hue. People drive modern cars, use QR codes, and read the New Rome Post. There’s no creative design that might make for an intriguing parallel to our own world, aside from the occasional chariot race.

Even worse is Cesar, who is the core of the film. He’s an architectural genius, which you know because everyone calls him a genius and because he won a Nobel Prize for creating a mysterious building material that is basically magic. (It can be used to create fantastical cities and dresses that render the wearer invisible and doubles as a handy cure for bullet wounds.) Cesar has the ability to stop time when he’s inspired by his muse, who happens to be Cicero’s daughter, played by Nathalie Emmanuel. This superpower isn’t explained either literally or thematically and never really has an impact on the story in any way. It’s just there.

Nothing Cesar does seems all that smart. He mostly quotes Shakespeare at length and says things like “what connects power also stores it” during design meetings. It’s unclear how his dream city is being funded or constructed or how it will actually address real-world issues like income inequality or joblessness, aside from giving every adult their own personal garden. I’m not asking for a blueprint of Megalopolis, but nothing in the city’s concept ever rises above the depth of a “The World If” meme. When Cicero questions whether Cesar’s city is realistic and is met with some philosophical musings, I found myself siding with the crooked mayor. Like Coppola, Cesar is only interested in questions, not answers. But this isn’t a story about a man’s tragic, idealistic hubris, either — his dream simply somehow works.

It might be generous to describe Megalopolis as having a story at all. Coppola has said that he collected thousands of clippings from newspapers and magazines while working on the script. And that’s exactly how the movie feels: like a series of ideas thrown together, without a real narrative binding them. Things just… happen. A satellite crashes into New Rome despite having long been predicted to hit Labrador. When Cicero gets the news that it’s on course to hit the city, he asks, “What do we do?” Then the scene abruptly ends with no answer.

Story isn’t everything, of course, but it’s not like Megalopolis has many other redeeming qualities. The acting is stilted and erratic, as if the performers are as confused about what’s going on as the audience is. The dialogue veers between painfully obvious allegories and painfully juvenile jokes. You can imagine how bad the sex scenes are. Much of it is also just plain dumb. Aubrey Plaza plays a platinum blonde reporter named Wow Platinum, while Cesar’s uncle Crassus (Jon Voight) hides weapons behind his erection. These moments are funny, but it’s not clear if they’re supposed to be given how serious the rest of the movie is.

There are some intriguing moments. At one point during the theatrical experience, the lights turn back on so that a real-world actor in the theater can lip-sync questions that a reporter is asking Cesar during a press conference. (How this will play out during wide release or when the movie hits Blu-ray and streaming services is unclear.) But mostly, it’s the kind of movie that makes an audience laugh unintentionally.

I can appreciate the sentiment behind Megalopolis — hell, that’s something the world could really use right now. It may have been conceived in the ’80s, but the core of the film feels timely. It’s a shame that the rest of the movie — its story, characters, acting, and dialogue — does nothing but get in the way. If Coppola couldn’t clearly articulate that viewpoint with 40 years of work, there’s no way I’m going to understand it in two and a half hours.

Megalopolis hits theaters on September 27th.

Read More 

Image: Cath Virginia / The Verge

If kids are asking to hear one song from Encanto on repeat, it can filter back into the algorithm and recommendations for a parent’s Spotify profile. The company tried addressing the issue with a dedicated kids app, and last year, Spotify added a feature to exclude specific playlists from your taste profile.
Now, Spotify is launching a pilot in three countries to test managed accounts for users under the age of 13.
For parents and guardians, managed accounts enable them to better tailor the content that is available to young listeners via in-app controls—like managing the playback of Canvas, videos, and content labeled as explicit. They will now also be able to decide whether a young listener can play certain artists or tracks with Spotify’s new control feature.

Image: Spotify

It’s available for users with the Premium Family plan in Denmark, New Zealand, and Sweden to start — there’s no word on when it will be enabled for the now $19.99 / month Family plan in the US.
Keeping Bluey, Raffi, and the rest out of the top spots on your annual Wrapped roundup may not be the biggest problem parents face. But having this available could be enough to sell a few more subscribers on upgrading, and it sets up the youth with their own accounts.

Image: Cath Virginia / The Verge

If kids are asking to hear one song from Encanto on repeat, it can filter back into the algorithm and recommendations for a parent’s Spotify profile. The company tried addressing the issue with a dedicated kids app, and last year, Spotify added a feature to exclude specific playlists from your taste profile.

Now, Spotify is launching a pilot in three countries to test managed accounts for users under the age of 13.

For parents and guardians, managed accounts enable them to better tailor the content that is available to young listeners via in-app controls—like managing the playback of Canvas, videos, and content labeled as explicit. They will now also be able to decide whether a young listener can play certain artists or tracks with Spotify’s new control feature.

Image: Spotify

It’s available for users with the Premium Family plan in Denmark, New Zealand, and Sweden to start — there’s no word on when it will be enabled for the now $19.99 / month Family plan in the US.

Keeping Bluey, Raffi, and the rest out of the top spots on your annual Wrapped roundup may not be the biggest problem parents face. But having this available could be enough to sell a few more subscribers on upgrading, and it sets up the youth with their own accounts.

Read More 

In addition to offering a $70 discount, OnePlus is also throwing in your choice of a free strap or charging base. | Photo by Amelia Holowaty Krales / The Verge

The Google Pixel Watch 3 is here while the new Apple Watch Series 10 is on its way, but they’re not for everybody. Luckily, there is a wide range of excellent Android smartwatches on the market, and today one of our favorites — the OnePlus Watch 2 — is on sale for an all-time low of $229.99 ($70 off) through September 22nd directly from OnePlus. To get the deal, you’ll have to clip the coupon, which you can find when you click on “Check out all offers” and then “Claim.” OnePlus is also throwing in your choice of either a free OnePlus Watch 2 Strap (valued at up to $39.99) or OnePlus Watch 2 Charging Base (regularly $29.99).

If you’re looking for a WearOS alternative to the Pixel Watch 3 or Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 Classic, the OnePlus Watch 2 is our top pick. It runs on Wear OS 4, rendering it the only third-party wearable to run on this latest version. It also comes with Google Assistant built-in, which is hard to find in a third-party wearable, and grants access to the Google Play Store. Aside from software, the OnePlus Watch 2 also has other things going for it. It offers all the standard health features you need, plus dual-frequency GPS for navigating challenging environments like crowded cities. For a flagship wearable, it also offers an incredibly long battery life, lasting us nearly four days with regular use.
There are some trade offs you’ll make if you choose this smartwatch over Google and Samsung’s watches, though. It only comes in one size — 46mm — and lacks features like LTE connectivity, fall detection, and EKGs. But if you don’t mind sacrificing these, the OnePlus Watch 2 offers a lot of value for its price.
Read our OnePlus Watch 2 review.

A few more deals and discounts

Now through September 21st, Woot’s discounting Ember’s self-heating mugs when you purchase them in refurbished condition. You can, for example, buy the Ember Mug 2 starting at $48.99 for the 10-ounce version, which costs $81 less than buying it new. The larger 14-ounce model is also on sale, down to $56.99, which saves you $93 over buying it new. If you’re a big coffee or tea drinker, the smart mug is a nice luxury that lets you dial in a specific temperature from 120 to 145 degrees Fahrenheit via the companion app. The mug is then capable of maintaining that temperature for up to 90 minutes or indefinitely if you dock it on the included charging coaster.
The Anker 736 100W is on sale for $39.99 ($35 off) from Amazon, which marks an all-time low price. Anker’s 100-watt charger features a pair of USB-C ports and a single USB-A, so you can charge up to three devices ranging from smartphones to laptops and wireless earbuds simultaneously. It doesn’t come with a cable included, but you can buy a five-foot USB-C cable bundled with the charger for $6 extra.
Sports-focused live TV streaming service Fubo TV streaming plans is offering $30 off the first month right now. All plans are discounted, including Fubo’s Pro-tier subscription ($50), the Elite with Sports Plus plan ($70), and the Deluxe package ($80). All of the plans grant access to a wide range of sports-focused channels, including ESPN and ESPN2, FS1 and FS2, multiple NBC Sports channels, CBS Sports, and more. The higher-end plans add in about a hundred more channels as well as 4K support, while the Deluxe plan even includes international sports. It’s not all sports, though — all of the tiers also grant access to major networks like Fox, AMC, Food Network, MTV, and Syfy.

In addition to offering a $70 discount, OnePlus is also throwing in your choice of a free strap or charging base. | Photo by Amelia Holowaty Krales / The Verge

The Google Pixel Watch 3 is here while the new Apple Watch Series 10 is on its way, but they’re not for everybody. Luckily, there is a wide range of excellent Android smartwatches on the market, and today one of our favorites — the OnePlus Watch 2 — is on sale for an all-time low of $229.99 ($70 off) through September 22nd directly from OnePlus. To get the deal, you’ll have to clip the coupon, which you can find when you click on “Check out all offers” and then “Claim.” OnePlus is also throwing in your choice of either a free OnePlus Watch 2 Strap (valued at up to $39.99) or OnePlus Watch 2 Charging Base (regularly $29.99).

If you’re looking for a WearOS alternative to the Pixel Watch 3 or Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 Classic, the OnePlus Watch 2 is our top pick. It runs on Wear OS 4, rendering it the only third-party wearable to run on this latest version. It also comes with Google Assistant built-in, which is hard to find in a third-party wearable, and grants access to the Google Play Store. Aside from software, the OnePlus Watch 2 also has other things going for it. It offers all the standard health features you need, plus dual-frequency GPS for navigating challenging environments like crowded cities. For a flagship wearable, it also offers an incredibly long battery life, lasting us nearly four days with regular use.

There are some trade offs you’ll make if you choose this smartwatch over Google and Samsung’s watches, though. It only comes in one size — 46mm — and lacks features like LTE connectivity, fall detection, and EKGs. But if you don’t mind sacrificing these, the OnePlus Watch 2 offers a lot of value for its price.

Read our OnePlus Watch 2 review.

A few more deals and discounts

Now through September 21st, Woot’s discounting Ember’s self-heating mugs when you purchase them in refurbished condition. You can, for example, buy the Ember Mug 2 starting at $48.99 for the 10-ounce version, which costs $81 less than buying it new. The larger 14-ounce model is also on sale, down to $56.99, which saves you $93 over buying it new. If you’re a big coffee or tea drinker, the smart mug is a nice luxury that lets you dial in a specific temperature from 120 to 145 degrees Fahrenheit via the companion app. The mug is then capable of maintaining that temperature for up to 90 minutes or indefinitely if you dock it on the included charging coaster.
The Anker 736 100W is on sale for $39.99 ($35 off) from Amazon, which marks an all-time low price. Anker’s 100-watt charger features a pair of USB-C ports and a single USB-A, so you can charge up to three devices ranging from smartphones to laptops and wireless earbuds simultaneously. It doesn’t come with a cable included, but you can buy a five-foot USB-C cable bundled with the charger for $6 extra.
Sports-focused live TV streaming service Fubo TV streaming plans is offering $30 off the first month right now. All plans are discounted, including Fubo’s Pro-tier subscription ($50), the Elite with Sports Plus plan ($70), and the Deluxe package ($80). All of the plans grant access to a wide range of sports-focused channels, including ESPN and ESPN2, FS1 and FS2, multiple NBC Sports channels, CBS Sports, and more. The higher-end plans add in about a hundred more channels as well as 4K support, while the Deluxe plan even includes international sports. It’s not all sports, though — all of the tiers also grant access to major networks like Fox, AMC, Food Network, MTV, and Syfy.

Read More 

Image: Team Asobi / Sony

Astro Bot is a game I cannot help but to evangelize, raving about its cute characters, its bright and varied level design, and its short but dense 8–10 hour runtime. But perhaps the biggest element contributing to the game’s joyousness is its sound design, which makes Astro Bot something that engages and delights more than just your mind but your body as well.
Astro Bot had me hooked before the game even started. I left my PS5 running on the game’s preload screen and was simultaneously soothed by calming bell tones and thrilled because the song conveyed a sense of imminent wonder. It sounded like something that would play in the opening sequence of a children’s movie, letting you know that an adventure was on the way. Music has a tendency to distract me as I’m working, but I let it play for hours because listening to it felt that good.

Image: Team Asobi / Sony

The music in the game itself is also banger after banger. I cannot get enough of hearing Astro sing in his little robot voice, “I am Astro Bot!” His theme song is bouncy and happy and seems immune to the pitfalls typical of music geared toward a younger audience. “Baby Shark” is only cute the first couple of times you hear it, but I could listen to “I Am Astro Bot” on a loop and it would never get old. “Astro,” with its funky beat, is another song on my endless repeat playlist. Each level has its own song appropriate to its theme, but every so often, “Astro” will play, and I giggle longer and louder in those levels than anywhere else. I need this soundtrack on Spotify yesterday.
I could listen to “I Am Astro Bot” on a loop and it would never get old
Astro Bot’s incredible soundtrack is only half of the equation. The game also makes phenomenal use of the DualSense controller. As Astro moved about, I could hear the soft swish of grass or the hard clang of metal underfoot. The ability to hear environmental sounds emanating from the controller is not particularly new for the PS5, but what astonished me about Astro Bot was the sheer depth, detail, and quality of those sounds that made me feel like I could perceive texture. In one level, the sound and feedback from bouncing on a regular trampoline was so subtly different from what I felt bouncing on a hot air balloon that I could almost feel the texture of the nylon. In another, I could feel the rain pelting Astro’s metal body with a hard clink. But suddenly that sound softened and muffled with a light whumpf when Astro automatically deployed his umbrella. It felt like I was the one who hit the button on a real umbrella to do it.
[The] quality of those sounds that made me feel like I could perceive texture
Perhaps the most magical thing about Astro Bot is the depth with which sound and the controller enhanced my perception of the game. Astro’s Playroom incorporated a lot of these same elements and developer Team Asobi enhanced them greatly for the sequel. The controller acts as a bridge between the game world and the real one. I was delighted when I’d fiddle with the sticks or the buttons and those actions were mirrored on the controller in the game. When Astro rescues another bot, they get stored for safekeeping within the onscreen controller. But when I put my ear to my DualSense, I can hear their muffled little squeals, and when I shake it, the controller subtlely rumbles as though those little suckers are actually in your hand.
The worlds in Astro Bot are colorful and fantastical places but, through the player’s suspension of disbelief, are nevertheless entirely real. As I played, absorbing the sounds coming out of my controller, I had a revelation. Of course, there are logs of wood in the gardening world, but when I hit them, they made the distinct hollow noise that comes from striking two Lincoln Logs together. It made me realize that there are two games going on in Astro Bot. In one, I’m a little robot rescuing my friends. But in the other, I’m actually just playing with toys.

Image: Team Asobi / Sony

Astro Bot is a game I cannot help but to evangelize, raving about its cute characters, its bright and varied level design, and its short but dense 8–10 hour runtime. But perhaps the biggest element contributing to the game’s joyousness is its sound design, which makes Astro Bot something that engages and delights more than just your mind but your body as well.

Astro Bot had me hooked before the game even started. I left my PS5 running on the game’s preload screen and was simultaneously soothed by calming bell tones and thrilled because the song conveyed a sense of imminent wonder. It sounded like something that would play in the opening sequence of a children’s movie, letting you know that an adventure was on the way. Music has a tendency to distract me as I’m working, but I let it play for hours because listening to it felt that good.

Image: Team Asobi / Sony

The music in the game itself is also banger after banger. I cannot get enough of hearing Astro sing in his little robot voice, “I am Astro Bot!” His theme song is bouncy and happy and seems immune to the pitfalls typical of music geared toward a younger audience. “Baby Shark” is only cute the first couple of times you hear it, but I could listen to “I Am Astro Bot” on a loop and it would never get old. “Astro,” with its funky beat, is another song on my endless repeat playlist. Each level has its own song appropriate to its theme, but every so often, “Astro” will play, and I giggle longer and louder in those levels than anywhere else. I need this soundtrack on Spotify yesterday.

Astro Bot’s incredible soundtrack is only half of the equation. The game also makes phenomenal use of the DualSense controller. As Astro moved about, I could hear the soft swish of grass or the hard clang of metal underfoot. The ability to hear environmental sounds emanating from the controller is not particularly new for the PS5, but what astonished me about Astro Bot was the sheer depth, detail, and quality of those sounds that made me feel like I could perceive texture. In one level, the sound and feedback from bouncing on a regular trampoline was so subtly different from what I felt bouncing on a hot air balloon that I could almost feel the texture of the nylon. In another, I could feel the rain pelting Astro’s metal body with a hard clink. But suddenly that sound softened and muffled with a light whumpf when Astro automatically deployed his umbrella. It felt like I was the one who hit the button on a real umbrella to do it.

Perhaps the most magical thing about Astro Bot is the depth with which sound and the controller enhanced my perception of the game. Astro’s Playroom incorporated a lot of these same elements and developer Team Asobi enhanced them greatly for the sequel. The controller acts as a bridge between the game world and the real one. I was delighted when I’d fiddle with the sticks or the buttons and those actions were mirrored on the controller in the game. When Astro rescues another bot, they get stored for safekeeping within the onscreen controller. But when I put my ear to my DualSense, I can hear their muffled little squeals, and when I shake it, the controller subtlely rumbles as though those little suckers are actually in your hand.

The worlds in Astro Bot are colorful and fantastical places but, through the player’s suspension of disbelief, are nevertheless entirely real. As I played, absorbing the sounds coming out of my controller, I had a revelation. Of course, there are logs of wood in the gardening world, but when I hit them, they made the distinct hollow noise that comes from striking two Lincoln Logs together. It made me realize that there are two games going on in Astro Bot. In one, I’m a little robot rescuing my friends. But in the other, I’m actually just playing with toys.

Read More 

Apple’s higher-end iPhones feature a titanium finish and a new “desert” option. (That just means dark gold.) | Screenshot: Apple

Apple’s new iPhone 16, 16 Plus, 16 Pro, and 16 Pro Max are already up for preorder ahead of their debut on September 20th. It’ll be a few more weeks before the Apple Intelligence AI features arrive, though, as Apple is serving them up in beta as part of iOS 18.1 in October. But without those hyped-up software features in tow just yet, what’s there to be excited about on day one? Well, to make sense of all four models, we’ve put together a little side-by-side comparison outlining some of the key differences between them (if you’re so inclined to make an iPhone 16 your own).

Apple Intelligence will (eventually) be available for all four of the new phones, and each comes equipped with Apple’s latest processors and the new Camera Control button. But while the step-up Pro models look modest compared to the iPhone 15 Pro generation, save for bigger size configurations, the mainline iPhone 16 and 16 Plus seem to have adopted numerous features that were formerly exclusive to Apple’s pricier models (including the ability to take macro photos and a programmable Action button).
Take a look at the spec table below, and see which (if any) is the right one for you. Let us know in the comments what you’re going with, or if this generation is a bit of a snoozer (ya know, just for funsies).

Photo by Nilay Patel / The Verge
The bezels are slightly thinner on the iPhone 16 Pro models.

Photo by Nilay Patel / The Verge
It’s all about buttons with this year’s iPhones.

Apple’s higher-end iPhones feature a titanium finish and a new “desert” option. (That just means dark gold.) | Screenshot: Apple

Apple’s new iPhone 16, 16 Plus, 16 Pro, and 16 Pro Max are already up for preorder ahead of their debut on September 20th. It’ll be a few more weeks before the Apple Intelligence AI features arrive, though, as Apple is serving them up in beta as part of iOS 18.1 in October. But without those hyped-up software features in tow just yet, what’s there to be excited about on day one? Well, to make sense of all four models, we’ve put together a little side-by-side comparison outlining some of the key differences between them (if you’re so inclined to make an iPhone 16 your own).

Apple Intelligence will (eventually) be available for all four of the new phones, and each comes equipped with Apple’s latest processors and the new Camera Control button. But while the step-up Pro models look modest compared to the iPhone 15 Pro generation, save for bigger size configurations, the mainline iPhone 16 and 16 Plus seem to have adopted numerous features that were formerly exclusive to Apple’s pricier models (including the ability to take macro photos and a programmable Action button).

Take a look at the spec table below, and see which (if any) is the right one for you. Let us know in the comments what you’re going with, or if this generation is a bit of a snoozer (ya know, just for funsies).

Read More 

Image: Cath Virginia / The Verge; Getty Images

The Biden administration is addressing the “de minimis” exemption that it says some Chinese e-commerce companies “abuse” to ship products under $800 to US customers without tariffs.
New rules proposed on Friday subject certain shipments from China to closer inspection and tariffs — a move that will affect products sold by ultralow-cost retailers like Shein and Temu.

With the rise of Chinese e-commerce sites like Shein and Temu, the US has seen a surge in shipments claiming the duty-free exemption. These shipments have increased from 140 million per year to more than 1 billion over 10 years, with the “majority” of products using the exemption coming from China. Shein and Temu claim the exemption because they send individual products directly to customers rather than shipping them in bulk to warehouses.
Under the proposed rules, the US will prevent companies from claiming the de minimis exemption if their goods are covered by Section 301, Section 232, and Section 201 tariffs, which apply to products from China, steel, and aluminum, as well as washing machines and solar panels. In addition to slapping these shipments with tariffs, the rule change would subject them to closer inspection by US Customs and Border Protection.

Earlier this week, House Democrats wrote a letter to President Joe Biden, urging the administration to close the de minimis “loophole.” Safety regulators have also called on the US Consumer Product Safety Commission to investigate Shein and Temu over concerns they sell dangerous products banned in the US.
The Biden administration said the proposal would help “protect consumers from goods that do not meet regulatory health and safety standards.” Even though Shein is headquartered in Singapore, it’s known for cheap fast fashion that’s mainly manufactured in China. The China-based Temu sells clothes, household items, electronics, and a variety of other goods made in the country as well.
“American workers and businesses can outcompete anyone on a level playing field, but for too long, Chinese e-commerce platforms have skirted tariffs by abusing the de minimis exemption,” US Secretary of Commerce Gina M. Raimondo said in a statement. “With these new actions, the Biden-Harris Administration is standing up for American consumers and cracking down on Chinese companies’ efforts to undercut American workers and businesses.”

Image: Cath Virginia / The Verge; Getty Images

The Biden administration is addressing the “de minimis” exemption that it says some Chinese e-commerce companies “abuse” to ship products under $800 to US customers without tariffs.

New rules proposed on Friday subject certain shipments from China to closer inspection and tariffs — a move that will affect products sold by ultralow-cost retailers like Shein and Temu.

With the rise of Chinese e-commerce sites like Shein and Temu, the US has seen a surge in shipments claiming the duty-free exemption. These shipments have increased from 140 million per year to more than 1 billion over 10 years, with the “majority” of products using the exemption coming from China. Shein and Temu claim the exemption because they send individual products directly to customers rather than shipping them in bulk to warehouses.

Under the proposed rules, the US will prevent companies from claiming the de minimis exemption if their goods are covered by Section 301, Section 232, and Section 201 tariffs, which apply to products from China, steel, and aluminum, as well as washing machines and solar panels. In addition to slapping these shipments with tariffs, the rule change would subject them to closer inspection by US Customs and Border Protection.

Earlier this week, House Democrats wrote a letter to President Joe Biden, urging the administration to close the de minimis “loophole.” Safety regulators have also called on the US Consumer Product Safety Commission to investigate Shein and Temu over concerns they sell dangerous products banned in the US.

The Biden administration said the proposal would help “protect consumers from goods that do not meet regulatory health and safety standards.” Even though Shein is headquartered in Singapore, it’s known for cheap fast fashion that’s mainly manufactured in China. The China-based Temu sells clothes, household items, electronics, and a variety of other goods made in the country as well.

“American workers and businesses can outcompete anyone on a level playing field, but for too long, Chinese e-commerce platforms have skirted tariffs by abusing the de minimis exemption,” US Secretary of Commerce Gina M. Raimondo said in a statement. “With these new actions, the Biden-Harris Administration is standing up for American consumers and cracking down on Chinese companies’ efforts to undercut American workers and businesses.”

Read More 

Image: Annapurna

Marielle Heller’s defanged adaptation pulls back from the book’s ferocious strangeness to lean into a more quirky, feel-good vibe. In Rachel Yoder’s novel Nightbitch, an unnamed woman’s unfulfilling life playing homemaker becomes so all-consuming that she snaps. She’s angry, horny, and hungry, which are all feelings she can understand. But she also suspects that she might be transforming into a dog, an idea that both terrifies and excites her.
All of these beats and plenty of Yoder’s prose are present in writer / director Marielle Heller’s new adaptation of the 2021 novel. But whereas the book was a deeply weird character study of a woman interrogating what it means to be a mother in a patriarchal society that demands unfaltering perfection, the movie is more of a cheesy comedy that feels skittish about really baring its teeth. And while Heller’s take on Nightbitch has a handful of moments that almost seem ready to dig into the meat of the book’s ideas about motherhood, it never quite musters up the courage to go wild.
Once upon a time, before leaving the city to start her family, the Mother (Amy Adams) was a well-respected artist with an eye for the eccentric. Her ability to see profound beauty in gruesome things like decaying animal carcasses is part of what attracted Husband (Scoot McNairy) to her, and his reverence for her creativity made their pairing feel like a perfect match. Love still exists between Mother and Husband a few years into their marriage after they’ve welcomed a baby, Son (twins Arleigh and Emmett Snowden), into the world. But with Mother having quit her art gallerist job and Husband constantly traveling for work, her days and nights are often spent alone with the baby — so much so that she almost feels like a single parent.

Mother adores Son more than she can put into words, but she struggles to find meaning in the playdate-obsessed mommy culture. She hates spending afternoons at the library with Son surrounded by other people’s screaming, slobbering children. And Husband’s insistence that he’d much rather “hang out” with Son all day than clock in at work makes it clear to Mother that he has no idea how much physical and mental labor goes into raising a child. Mother’s sense of having withered into a shadow of her former self is so all-consuming that she often feels like a failure. But her quiet rage about the trappings of her life gives rise to something unexpected — a persona called Nightbitch who revels in barking and snarling out all the ugly, honest thoughts Mother would usually keep to herself.
As Mother matter-of-factly narrates her adventures in zoanthropy, you can hear Heller (who also penned the screenplay) working through the challenge of making the novel’s story of radical introspection more legible for the screen. Adams’ Mother is still a complicated woman who doesn’t know what to make of her newfound urge to howl or the hair sprouting from unexpected places all over her body. But Heller’s Nightbitch presents the emotional arc of Mother’s transformation in a far more straightforward way that drains the story of some of its cerebral tension.
The movie comes alive in a handful of more horrific moments, when it shows rather than tells you how Nightbitch’s presence within Mother makes her feel like she’s becoming an animal. The much-talked-about dog transformation sequence adds to the movie’s pseudo-supernatural element that’s meant to leave you wondering just how much of this is merely happening in Mother’s mind. But that deliciously disconcerting energy evaporates whenever Mother breaks the fourth wall to sigh at Husband’s ineptitude or fantasize about the mildly stern things she might say if she weren’t so concerned with other people’s feelings.

Image: Anne Marie Fox

Though Adams delivers a perfectly fine performance, there’s a flatness to Mother and her Nightbitch persona that keeps her from feeling like the complicated, challenging character she could be. Very little of what Nightbitch says is all that mean or off-putting, and the film never really lets her pop off in a way that makes her feel like a transgressive presence bucking social norms. Were Mother more of an unsympathetic character, the movie might be more effective at illustrating its well-trod ideas about how society encourages women to suppress parts of themselves and put the needs of others before their own. Instead, the film frames Mother as a quirky woman at the center of a comedy-drama in which the stakes never feel particularly high.
Though Nightbitch aspires to the subversive provocation its title evokes, its insistence on being a feel-good movie keeps it from hitting the mark. It might make you laugh, but it’s nothing to howl at the moon about.
Nightbitch also stars Zoe Chao, Mary Holland, Ella Thomas, Archana Rajan, Jessica Harper, and Roslyn Gentle. The film hits theaters on December 6th.

Image: Annapurna

Marielle Heller’s defanged adaptation pulls back from the book’s ferocious strangeness to lean into a more quirky, feel-good vibe.

In Rachel Yoder’s novel Nightbitch, an unnamed woman’s unfulfilling life playing homemaker becomes so all-consuming that she snaps. She’s angry, horny, and hungry, which are all feelings she can understand. But she also suspects that she might be transforming into a dog, an idea that both terrifies and excites her.

All of these beats and plenty of Yoder’s prose are present in writer / director Marielle Heller’s new adaptation of the 2021 novel. But whereas the book was a deeply weird character study of a woman interrogating what it means to be a mother in a patriarchal society that demands unfaltering perfection, the movie is more of a cheesy comedy that feels skittish about really baring its teeth. And while Heller’s take on Nightbitch has a handful of moments that almost seem ready to dig into the meat of the book’s ideas about motherhood, it never quite musters up the courage to go wild.

Once upon a time, before leaving the city to start her family, the Mother (Amy Adams) was a well-respected artist with an eye for the eccentric. Her ability to see profound beauty in gruesome things like decaying animal carcasses is part of what attracted Husband (Scoot McNairy) to her, and his reverence for her creativity made their pairing feel like a perfect match. Love still exists between Mother and Husband a few years into their marriage after they’ve welcomed a baby, Son (twins Arleigh and Emmett Snowden), into the world. But with Mother having quit her art gallerist job and Husband constantly traveling for work, her days and nights are often spent alone with the baby — so much so that she almost feels like a single parent.

Mother adores Son more than she can put into words, but she struggles to find meaning in the playdate-obsessed mommy culture. She hates spending afternoons at the library with Son surrounded by other people’s screaming, slobbering children. And Husband’s insistence that he’d much rather “hang out” with Son all day than clock in at work makes it clear to Mother that he has no idea how much physical and mental labor goes into raising a child. Mother’s sense of having withered into a shadow of her former self is so all-consuming that she often feels like a failure. But her quiet rage about the trappings of her life gives rise to something unexpected — a persona called Nightbitch who revels in barking and snarling out all the ugly, honest thoughts Mother would usually keep to herself.

As Mother matter-of-factly narrates her adventures in zoanthropy, you can hear Heller (who also penned the screenplay) working through the challenge of making the novel’s story of radical introspection more legible for the screen. Adams’ Mother is still a complicated woman who doesn’t know what to make of her newfound urge to howl or the hair sprouting from unexpected places all over her body. But Heller’s Nightbitch presents the emotional arc of Mother’s transformation in a far more straightforward way that drains the story of some of its cerebral tension.

The movie comes alive in a handful of more horrific moments, when it shows rather than tells you how Nightbitch’s presence within Mother makes her feel like she’s becoming an animal. The much-talked-about dog transformation sequence adds to the movie’s pseudo-supernatural element that’s meant to leave you wondering just how much of this is merely happening in Mother’s mind. But that deliciously disconcerting energy evaporates whenever Mother breaks the fourth wall to sigh at Husband’s ineptitude or fantasize about the mildly stern things she might say if she weren’t so concerned with other people’s feelings.

Though Adams delivers a perfectly fine performance, there’s a flatness to Mother and her Nightbitch persona that keeps her from feeling like the complicated, challenging character she could be. Very little of what Nightbitch says is all that mean or off-putting, and the film never really lets her pop off in a way that makes her feel like a transgressive presence bucking social norms. Were Mother more of an unsympathetic character, the movie might be more effective at illustrating its well-trod ideas about how society encourages women to suppress parts of themselves and put the needs of others before their own. Instead, the film frames Mother as a quirky woman at the center of a comedy-drama in which the stakes never feel particularly high.

Though Nightbitch aspires to the subversive provocation its title evokes, its insistence on being a feel-good movie keeps it from hitting the mark. It might make you laugh, but it’s nothing to howl at the moon about.

Nightbitch also stars Zoe Chao, Mary Holland, Ella Thomas, Archana Rajan, Jessica Harper, and Roslyn Gentle. The film hits theaters on December 6th.

Read More 

Image: Cath Virginia / The Verge, Getty Images

Google changed the rules of its publisher ad product in a way it knew online websites selling ad space would protest in order to gain back more control in the ad tech market, the Department of Justice alleged on the trial’s fourth day in its antitrust case against the company.
Through the testimony of a former Google executive, internal company emails, and a recording of a contentious 2019 meeting with Google’s publisher customers, the DOJ painted a picture of a company that ignored its customers’ preferences to strengthen its own business position, knowing they had few real alternatives. Google’s attorneys countered that executives listened to customer feedback and made some adjustments, even though it kept the core of the change in place.
The story of one Google feature rollout, to the Justice Department, indicates the tech giant faced so little competition in certain parts of the advertising tech market that it could unilaterally set terms. Making changes that negatively impacted customers without losing business could indicate monopoly power — and the government claims that rather than choosing Google’s products because of how good they were, publishers simply couldn’t leave.
Unified pricing rules
The change at issue was called unified pricing rules (UPR). Prior to UPR, when publishers put ad inventory on their sites for sale through a publisher ad server, they could set different floor prices for the ad exchanges that would bid on those ad spaces. That means a publisher like The Wall Street Journal could set a different minimum bid it would accept from Google’s AdX ad exchange than it would from a different exchange, like PubMatic. Google knew that publishers would often set higher price floors for AdX than other exchanges, according to documents presented in court.
One reason Google understood this to be the case, according to internal emails at the time, was that publishers valued diversifying ad revenue sources to decrease their reliance on Google. In emails shown in court, Google executives recognized publishers set a higher price floor for AdX as part of a strategy to essentially “push google harder.” The emails agreed it was a rational decision. “Publishers have been willing to tolerate some revenue loss in exchange for reduced dependence on Google as a whole,” said one slide deck.
“Publishers have been willing to tolerate some revenue loss in exchange for reduced dependence on Google as a whole.”
But with UPR, Google eliminated that choice. The new rules meant publishers had to set the same floor price for every exchange. Stephanie Layser, who worked in programmatic advertising at Wall Street Journal parent company News Corp at the time Google rolled out UPR in 2019, testified earlier this week that she told Google she thought UPR was “in the best interest of Google and not in the best interest of their customers.”
Butting heads with publishers
That was the setup for a testy meeting in April 2019 in New York City, where Google broke the news of UPR to publishers it invited to an announcement event. The DOJ played clips from a recording of that meeting, where several publishers, including Layser, complained about the feature.
Felix Zheng, who led programmatic advertising at IBM Watson Advertising at the time, told Google executives that taking away the kind of “control” they had with price floors was “something that’s very hard to give up.” Jana Meron, who led programmatic and data strategy at Business Insider at the time, said, “It hand-ties us.”
“It hand-ties us.”
If publishers decided they wanted to switch because they didn’t like UPR, Layser said in the meeting, it didn’t seem like they’d be able to fully access Google’s advertiser network outside of Google’s ad exchange, AdX. In response, Rahul Srinivasan, a former Google employee who worked on sell-side products at the time, said that was a fair point.
Google executives recognized the rollout would be challenging to communicate. Sam Temes, a product and sales executive, highlighted a concern that communicating “even more spend shift into AdX will be tricky.” Martin Pál, an engineer, worried UPR would “generate pushback from publishers who may view the move as us taking away functionality they are rather attached to and consider critical to their business.”
In a statement to The Verge, Google disputed that framing. “We introduced Unified Pricing Rules and other updates as a way to improve the transparency and fairness of the auction and help publishers achieve their goals,” Google spokesperson Peter Schottenfels said on Thursday. “During the rollout, we made changes and introduced new features in response to publisher feedback. As we heard in court today and from the DOJ’s own expert yesterday, the result was that publishers saw increased revenue.”
During cross-examination, Google’s attorney pulled up an August 2019 email describing “Improved” market perception of UPR “due to continued dialogue with publisher partners and the press, and incorporation of some publisher feedback into product changes.” That fall, another internal document showed, Google said publishers saw a “neutral to positive impact on revenue.”
Softening the blow
Google rolled out the news of UPR in 2019 with some other changes it anticipated publishers would like, including switching from a second-price to first-price auction (where the winner pays their bid, rather than the price the runner-up bid, which generally results in higher ad sale revenue).
The DOJ tried to characterize Google’s bundled announcement as pairing good news with bad to soften the blow for publishers. Srinivasan testified on Thursday that executives’ understanding that “some publishers might be upset by UPR” was just “one of many factors” that led them to launch it alongside the first-price auction. He added that Google believed the different pricing rules “were less relevant in a first-price world.”
In a May 2019 email exchange, a colleague noted some “difficult PR” after the announcement and asked if Google could change to the first-price auction without removing price floor controls. Srinivasan responded that “the primary internal objective” was to compete on equal footing among exchanges. Moving to the first-price auction, he wrote, “provides us additional justification to remove some [of] these controls.” In the end, however, at least some publishers were left feeling shortchanged — and now they’re getting their day in court.

Image: Cath Virginia / The Verge, Getty Images

Google changed the rules of its publisher ad product in a way it knew online websites selling ad space would protest in order to gain back more control in the ad tech market, the Department of Justice alleged on the trial’s fourth day in its antitrust case against the company.

Through the testimony of a former Google executive, internal company emails, and a recording of a contentious 2019 meeting with Google’s publisher customers, the DOJ painted a picture of a company that ignored its customers’ preferences to strengthen its own business position, knowing they had few real alternatives. Google’s attorneys countered that executives listened to customer feedback and made some adjustments, even though it kept the core of the change in place.

The story of one Google feature rollout, to the Justice Department, indicates the tech giant faced so little competition in certain parts of the advertising tech market that it could unilaterally set terms. Making changes that negatively impacted customers without losing business could indicate monopoly power — and the government claims that rather than choosing Google’s products because of how good they were, publishers simply couldn’t leave.

Unified pricing rules

The change at issue was called unified pricing rules (UPR). Prior to UPR, when publishers put ad inventory on their sites for sale through a publisher ad server, they could set different floor prices for the ad exchanges that would bid on those ad spaces. That means a publisher like The Wall Street Journal could set a different minimum bid it would accept from Google’s AdX ad exchange than it would from a different exchange, like PubMatic. Google knew that publishers would often set higher price floors for AdX than other exchanges, according to documents presented in court.

One reason Google understood this to be the case, according to internal emails at the time, was that publishers valued diversifying ad revenue sources to decrease their reliance on Google. In emails shown in court, Google executives recognized publishers set a higher price floor for AdX as part of a strategy to essentially “push google harder.” The emails agreed it was a rational decision. “Publishers have been willing to tolerate some revenue loss in exchange for reduced dependence on Google as a whole,” said one slide deck.

But with UPR, Google eliminated that choice. The new rules meant publishers had to set the same floor price for every exchange. Stephanie Layser, who worked in programmatic advertising at Wall Street Journal parent company News Corp at the time Google rolled out UPR in 2019, testified earlier this week that she told Google she thought UPR was “in the best interest of Google and not in the best interest of their customers.”

Butting heads with publishers

That was the setup for a testy meeting in April 2019 in New York City, where Google broke the news of UPR to publishers it invited to an announcement event. The DOJ played clips from a recording of that meeting, where several publishers, including Layser, complained about the feature.

Felix Zheng, who led programmatic advertising at IBM Watson Advertising at the time, told Google executives that taking away the kind of “control” they had with price floors was “something that’s very hard to give up.” Jana Meron, who led programmatic and data strategy at Business Insider at the time, said, “It hand-ties us.”

If publishers decided they wanted to switch because they didn’t like UPR, Layser said in the meeting, it didn’t seem like they’d be able to fully access Google’s advertiser network outside of Google’s ad exchange, AdX. In response, Rahul Srinivasan, a former Google employee who worked on sell-side products at the time, said that was a fair point.

Google executives recognized the rollout would be challenging to communicate. Sam Temes, a product and sales executive, highlighted a concern that communicating “even more spend shift into AdX will be tricky.” Martin Pál, an engineer, worried UPR would “generate pushback from publishers who may view the move as us taking away functionality they are rather attached to and consider critical to their business.”

In a statement to The Verge, Google disputed that framing. “We introduced Unified Pricing Rules and other updates as a way to improve the transparency and fairness of the auction and help publishers achieve their goals,” Google spokesperson Peter Schottenfels said on Thursday. “During the rollout, we made changes and introduced new features in response to publisher feedback. As we heard in court today and from the DOJ’s own expert yesterday, the result was that publishers saw increased revenue.”

During cross-examination, Google’s attorney pulled up an August 2019 email describing “Improved” market perception of UPR “due to continued dialogue with publisher partners and the press, and incorporation of some publisher feedback into product changes.” That fall, another internal document showed, Google said publishers saw a “neutral to positive impact on revenue.”

Softening the blow

Google rolled out the news of UPR in 2019 with some other changes it anticipated publishers would like, including switching from a second-price to first-price auction (where the winner pays their bid, rather than the price the runner-up bid, which generally results in higher ad sale revenue).

The DOJ tried to characterize Google’s bundled announcement as pairing good news with bad to soften the blow for publishers. Srinivasan testified on Thursday that executives’ understanding that “some publishers might be upset by UPR” was just “one of many factors” that led them to launch it alongside the first-price auction. He added that Google believed the different pricing rules “were less relevant in a first-price world.”

In a May 2019 email exchange, a colleague noted some “difficult PR” after the announcement and asked if Google could change to the first-price auction without removing price floor controls. Srinivasan responded that “the primary internal objective” was to compete on equal footing among exchanges. Moving to the first-price auction, he wrote, “provides us additional justification to remove some [of] these controls.” In the end, however, at least some publishers were left feeling shortchanged — and now they’re getting their day in court.

Read More 

Image: Alex Parkin / The Verge

Sony’s new PlayStation 5 Pro appears to be very powerful. But at $700 — plus another $80 if you want to buy the disc drive accessory since the console itself doesn’t have one — a lot of gamers have been left wondering exactly how powerful it needs to be in order to justify the cost.
On this episode of The Vergecast, we try to figure out why the PS5 Pro has the specs and price tag it does and what this new console might tell us about the overall state of the gaming business. Around the same time as Sony’s announcement, Microsoft said it was laying off another 650 Xbox employees — these are two companies with very different ideas about the same business, and it’s not always obvious who’s right.

After we finish with our PS5 Pro chat, we talk about the other gadget news of the week. We also talk a bit about the reaction to Monday’s Apple event, after briefly forgetting that it happened this week at all. We discuss Huawei’s Mate XT, the triple-folding smartphone that excited people in all the ways the iPhone 16 didn’t. We get very excited about the multi-window future of Android. And we consider two simultaneous Google stories: the excellent Pixel Watch 3 and the potentially company-shaking ad tech trial. Google is winning. Google is in peril. Google, as ever, continues to Google.
Finally, in the lightning round, we talk about big trucks, AI podcasts, the future of WhatsApp, and more.

If you want to know more about everything we discuss in this episode, here are some links to get you started, beginning with the PS5 Pro:

PS5 Pro: all the news about Sony’s next console
Sony’s PS5 Pro has a larger GPU, advanced ray tracing, and AI upscaling
Sony’s new PS5 heralds the end of disc drives
Here are all the games enhanced by the PS5 Pro
Come pixel-peep what the PS5 Pro can maybe actually do
PlayStation 5 Pro comparison: what’s different from the regular PS5?
The people want disc drives

And in other gadget news:

From Spyglass: Apple Needs an Editor

Google tests desktop windowing for Android tablets
No, Kamala Harris wasn’t wearing these audio earrings
Huawei’s new trifold phone costs more than a 16-inch MacBook Pro
Here’s a closer look at the Huawei Mate XT triple-screen foldable
Google and the DOJ’s ad tech fight is all about control

And in the lightning round:

Alex Cranz’s pick: The US finally takes aim at truck bloat

David Pierce’s pick: WhatsApp will send messages to other apps soon — here’s how it will look

Nilay Patel’s pick: Google is using AI to make fake podcasts from your notes

Nilay’s other pick: Facebook and Instagram are making AI labels less prominent on edited content

Image: Alex Parkin / The Verge

Sony’s new PlayStation 5 Pro appears to be very powerful. But at $700 — plus another $80 if you want to buy the disc drive accessory since the console itself doesn’t have one — a lot of gamers have been left wondering exactly how powerful it needs to be in order to justify the cost.

On this episode of The Vergecast, we try to figure out why the PS5 Pro has the specs and price tag it does and what this new console might tell us about the overall state of the gaming business. Around the same time as Sony’s announcement, Microsoft said it was laying off another 650 Xbox employees — these are two companies with very different ideas about the same business, and it’s not always obvious who’s right.

After we finish with our PS5 Pro chat, we talk about the other gadget news of the week. We also talk a bit about the reaction to Monday’s Apple event, after briefly forgetting that it happened this week at all. We discuss Huawei’s Mate XT, the triple-folding smartphone that excited people in all the ways the iPhone 16 didn’t. We get very excited about the multi-window future of Android. And we consider two simultaneous Google stories: the excellent Pixel Watch 3 and the potentially company-shaking ad tech trial. Google is winning. Google is in peril. Google, as ever, continues to Google.

Finally, in the lightning round, we talk about big trucks, AI podcasts, the future of WhatsApp, and more.

If you want to know more about everything we discuss in this episode, here are some links to get you started, beginning with the PS5 Pro:

PS5 Pro: all the news about Sony’s next console
Sony’s PS5 Pro has a larger GPU, advanced ray tracing, and AI upscaling
Sony’s new PS5 heralds the end of disc drives
Here are all the games enhanced by the PS5 Pro
Come pixel-peep what the PS5 Pro can maybe actually do
PlayStation 5 Pro comparison: what’s different from the regular PS5?
The people want disc drives

And in other gadget news:

From Spyglass: Apple Needs an Editor

Google tests desktop windowing for Android tablets
No, Kamala Harris wasn’t wearing these audio earrings
Huawei’s new trifold phone costs more than a 16-inch MacBook Pro
Here’s a closer look at the Huawei Mate XT triple-screen foldable
Google and the DOJ’s ad tech fight is all about control

And in the lightning round:

Alex Cranz’s pick: The US finally takes aim at truck bloat

David Pierce’s pick: WhatsApp will send messages to other apps soon — here’s how it will look

Nilay Patel’s pick: Google is using AI to make fake podcasts from your notes

Nilay’s other pick: Facebook and Instagram are making AI labels less prominent on edited content

Read More 

Pedestrians exit a Waymo self-driving car in front of Google’s San Francisco headquarters. | Photo by Smith Collection / Gado / Getty Images

Waymo and Uber — bitter enemies turned awkwardly polite work friends — announced they were expanding their two-year robotaxi partnership to two new cities: Austin, Texas, and Atlanta, Georgia, starting in early 2025.
The companies have been working together in Phoenix, Arizona, since last year — but not in California in San Francisco or Los Angeles. It’s a mutually beneficial partnership in which Waymo gets access to Uber’s vast customer base, while Uber gets to serve as a platform for a futuristic mode of transportation.
When it launches, Waymo’s robotaxis will “only” be available to hail for rides on Uber’s app in Austin and Atlanta. That means Waymo’s own ridehail app, Waymo One, will not be operational in either city. The Alphabet-owned company is currently testing its self-driving cars in both cities.
It’s a mutually beneficial partnership
Waymo employees in Austin have been using the company’s Waymo One app to hail rides as part of early testing. Waymo spokesperson Ethan Teicher said that in the following weeks, the company will invite “a limited number of early riders into the Waymo One app before fully transitioning to the Uber app next year.”
The scope of the partnership will be significantly different in these two cities than it is in Phoenix. Waymo and Uber will share the responsibilities of operating a fleet of driverless ridehail vehicles: Uber will take care of fleet management services, including vehicle cleaning, repair, and other general depot operations, and Waymo will provide the driverless vehicles while handling roadside assistance (when the robot Jaguar I-Paces inevitably get stuck) and customer service.
They will obviously share in the costs and the revenue produced by the robotaxi service, though Teicher declined to share the revenue split between the two companies.
Waymo currently operates its own Waymo One ridehail service in San Francisco, Phoenix, and Los Angeles; it recently hit the milestone of operating 100,000 rides each week in all three cities. Studies have shown that Waymo has better customer retention than human-powered ridehail services like Uber and Lyft.
The scope of the partnership will be significantly different in these two cities
The robotaxi business is difficult thanks to restrictions on where the vehicles can travel and the costs incurred by expensive hardware. Human-driven services like Uber and Lyft have no such limitations. And customers can be fickle, quick to switch to another service that promises shorter wait times and fewer limits on where they can travel.
Waymo co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana said she was “excited to launch this expanded network and operations partnership with Uber in Austin and Atlanta to bring the benefits of fully autonomous driving to more riders.” And Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said he was “thrilled to build on our successful partnership with Waymo, which has already powered fully autonomous trips for tens of thousands of riders in Phoenix.”
The companies haven’t always been so full of praise for each other. In February 2017, Waymo sued Uber and its subsidiary, self-driving truck startup Otto, over allegations of trade secret theft and patent infringement. The case went to trial almost a year later but ended quickly when the two sides reached a surprise settlement agreement after just a week of deliberations.
Uber later admitted that it misappropriated some of Waymo’s tech and vowed to license it for future use. Anthony Levandowski, a former Google engineer and the founder of Otto, was sentenced to 18 months in prison for stealing Waymo’s trade secrets but was later pardoned by former President Donald Trump.
The companies haven’t always been so full of praise for each other
Uber and Waymo have a preexisting partnership involving autonomous long-haul trucking. That venture, which is still ongoing, allows fleet owners to deploy trucks equipped with Waymo’s autonomous “driver” for on-demand delivery routes offered by Uber Freight, the company’s trucking division.
Waymo also had a partnership with Lyft to deploy its robotaxis on the smaller ridehail company’s app, but that ended in 2020 during the covid-19 pandemic. And Waymo isn’t the only robotaxi company to appear in Uber’s app. Motional, which is owned by Hyundai, has its vehicles available to hail on Uber’s app in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Infamously, Uber was developing its own fleet of autonomous vehicles with the intention to eventually replace all of its human drivers, but the program was shut down after a woman was killed by one of the company’s vehicles in 2018. A federal investigation later found Uber to be partly responsible for the incident.
Correction, September 13th: A previous version of this story included the incorrect year for the Uber self-driving crash in Arizona. It was 2018, not 2017.

Pedestrians exit a Waymo self-driving car in front of Google’s San Francisco headquarters. | Photo by Smith Collection / Gado / Getty Images

Waymo and Uber — bitter enemies turned awkwardly polite work friends — announced they were expanding their two-year robotaxi partnership to two new cities: Austin, Texas, and Atlanta, Georgia, starting in early 2025.

The companies have been working together in Phoenix, Arizona, since last year — but not in California in San Francisco or Los Angeles. It’s a mutually beneficial partnership in which Waymo gets access to Uber’s vast customer base, while Uber gets to serve as a platform for a futuristic mode of transportation.

When it launches, Waymo’s robotaxis will “only” be available to hail for rides on Uber’s app in Austin and Atlanta. That means Waymo’s own ridehail app, Waymo One, will not be operational in either city. The Alphabet-owned company is currently testing its self-driving cars in both cities.

Waymo employees in Austin have been using the company’s Waymo One app to hail rides as part of early testing. Waymo spokesperson Ethan Teicher said that in the following weeks, the company will invite “a limited number of early riders into the Waymo One app before fully transitioning to the Uber app next year.”

The scope of the partnership will be significantly different in these two cities than it is in Phoenix. Waymo and Uber will share the responsibilities of operating a fleet of driverless ridehail vehicles: Uber will take care of fleet management services, including vehicle cleaning, repair, and other general depot operations, and Waymo will provide the driverless vehicles while handling roadside assistance (when the robot Jaguar I-Paces inevitably get stuck) and customer service.

They will obviously share in the costs and the revenue produced by the robotaxi service, though Teicher declined to share the revenue split between the two companies.

Waymo currently operates its own Waymo One ridehail service in San Francisco, Phoenix, and Los Angeles; it recently hit the milestone of operating 100,000 rides each week in all three cities. Studies have shown that Waymo has better customer retention than human-powered ridehail services like Uber and Lyft.

The robotaxi business is difficult thanks to restrictions on where the vehicles can travel and the costs incurred by expensive hardware. Human-driven services like Uber and Lyft have no such limitations. And customers can be fickle, quick to switch to another service that promises shorter wait times and fewer limits on where they can travel.

Waymo co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana said she was “excited to launch this expanded network and operations partnership with Uber in Austin and Atlanta to bring the benefits of fully autonomous driving to more riders.” And Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said he was “thrilled to build on our successful partnership with Waymo, which has already powered fully autonomous trips for tens of thousands of riders in Phoenix.”

The companies haven’t always been so full of praise for each other. In February 2017, Waymo sued Uber and its subsidiary, self-driving truck startup Otto, over allegations of trade secret theft and patent infringement. The case went to trial almost a year later but ended quickly when the two sides reached a surprise settlement agreement after just a week of deliberations.

Uber later admitted that it misappropriated some of Waymo’s tech and vowed to license it for future use. Anthony Levandowski, a former Google engineer and the founder of Otto, was sentenced to 18 months in prison for stealing Waymo’s trade secrets but was later pardoned by former President Donald Trump.

Uber and Waymo have a preexisting partnership involving autonomous long-haul trucking. That venture, which is still ongoing, allows fleet owners to deploy trucks equipped with Waymo’s autonomous “driver” for on-demand delivery routes offered by Uber Freight, the company’s trucking division.

Waymo also had a partnership with Lyft to deploy its robotaxis on the smaller ridehail company’s app, but that ended in 2020 during the covid-19 pandemic. And Waymo isn’t the only robotaxi company to appear in Uber’s app. Motional, which is owned by Hyundai, has its vehicles available to hail on Uber’s app in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Infamously, Uber was developing its own fleet of autonomous vehicles with the intention to eventually replace all of its human drivers, but the program was shut down after a woman was killed by one of the company’s vehicles in 2018. A federal investigation later found Uber to be partly responsible for the incident.

Correction, September 13th: A previous version of this story included the incorrect year for the Uber self-driving crash in Arizona. It was 2018, not 2017.

Read More