×
‘Together’ Director Explains How that Wild Final Shot Was Made (Without AI)

‘Together’ Director Explains How that Wild Final Shot Was Made (Without AI)

Tech-news , , ,

Ever since its debut at Sundance earlier this year, fans of horror have had Michael Shanks’ new film, Together, on their radars. Neon picked it up out of the festival and, after some really creepy trailers and marketing, opened it in theaters last weekend with solid results. It’s a provocative, surprising, and incredibly disgusting movie with an ending viewers will not soon forget. An ending that was achieved through traditional methods of visual effects and without a hint of AI.

As per that spoiler warning above, we’re about to explain what happens at the end of Together, so if you haven’t seen it and want to, we urge you to look away right now.

In the film Tim and Millie (Dave Franco and Alison Brie) get infected by this unexplained force that wants their bodies to become one. The how and why behind it is pretty weird, mysterious, and fun, but eventually, the couple realize the only way to defeat this force is to give in to it. And so we watch as their bodies combine from two into one, and, in the film’s final shot, a completely new person, the amalgamation of both of them, opens the door to Millie’s visiting parents.

Speaking on Indiewire’s Filmmaker Toolkit Podcast, Shanks explained that both the blending of the bodies and the new character were achieved without the use of AI. “The amount of screenings I’ve gone to now, and people come up to me and say, ‘Was that AI at the end?’ It’s just so crazy that people assume AI is now the cause. We’ve used absolutely none of it on this film,” Shanks said. “As a VFX guy, as somebody that’s worked with all these teams that put in so much work, it’s so frustrating now that people look at something that looks interesting or good, and they [assume] just a computer made it. It’s like, ‘No, no, no, no, no.’”

Instead, the “Tillie” character was created using makeup and visual effects compositing by Genevieve Camilleri. “In pre-production, Gen just went up and took photos of Dave and Alison and then in Nuke, she made a bunch of variations on which elements to take from which of their faces to figure out what is essential to seeing both of them in that final image,” Shanks said.

Then, on the day, the director shot the scene with both actors. “After we shot the scene with Alison, we moved in Dave, with a bunch of dots on his face,” he continued. “Gen has taken his jaw and his lips and stuck that onto the bottom [of the face]. It’s really a combination of makeup and, you wouldn’t call it CGI, because nothing’s computer-generated, but it’s compositing.”

Stepping back a bit from the specifics of Together, it’s wild that Shanks has to defend that his film didn’t use generative AI. If it had come out even just 3-4 years ago, it would not have even been a thought. We all would’ve just assumed it was one of them dressing up as the other or visual effects. Ultimately, it’s kind of both. But the whole conversation changed when we began living in a world where you can put “Dave Franco and Alison Brie as one person” into a program and get something back in seconds. Basically, props to Shanks for doing something right, working hard at it, and making something memorable. And boo to the world for making us forget that the real magic of filmmaking comes from the human touch.

Together is now in theaters.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

Source link
#Director #Explains #Wild #Final #Shot

Tag

Related Posts

Microsoft is weighing whether to delay or scale back one of its most ambitious clean energy goals as its rapid buildout of AI data centers puts pressure on its ability to meet those targets. Microsoft has yet to make any public announcements, but according to Bloomberg the company is having internal discussions over its hourly clean energy matching goal.

The tech company has said that by 2030 it intends to match 100% of its hourly energy use with clean power on the same grid. But Microsoft’s rush to build AI data centers has apparently sparked debate within the company about whether the pledge has become an impediment to its ambitions.

Microsoft declined to comment on the internal debate over the hourly matching goal. Instead, a spokesperson told TechCrunch the company continues “to look for opportunities to maintain our annual matching goal.”

Hourly targets like the kind Microsoft has set for itself are more rigorous than annual targets. Because the grid is a balanced system — the supply and demand of electrons needs to be matched on a near-instantaneous basis — hourly matching helps develop clean energy sources that more closely align with a company’s usage patterns.

Annual targets are more lenient. They are effectively accounting tricks that could, for example, let a company buy more solar power than it might use at midday. Other customers on the grid use that energy, but the company that paid for the solar panels gets to claim the renewable power they make. It’s a tidy arrangement that has sped the deployment of wind, solar, and batteries. But on its own, annual targets won’t eliminate fossil fuels entirely. Hourly targets help foster renewable development that more closely mimics how a true net-zero world would be powered.

Big tech companies like Microsoft, Meta, Google, and Apple have generally led on emissions reductions, setting aggressive net-zero targets. Many have eliminated their carbon emissions on an annual basis. Microsoft, for instance, said it met that goal last year.

But as data centers grow in size and number, those same companies are turning to natural gas. Microsoft is included in that list; last month, the company said it was working with Chevron and Engine No. 1 to build a massive natural gas power plant in West Texas that could eventually generate up to 5 gigawatts. 

Techcrunch event

San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026

Despite the West Texas project, Microsoft is widely viewed as a leader among tech companies pursuing net zero emissions. By 2030, Microsoft intends to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than its operations produce.

Part of the company’s renewable push has been driven by an internal carbon tax. The Microsoft spokesperson did not reply to questions about the company’s carbon tax. If it remains in place, some of the internal debate surrounding hourly matching might revolve around a cost-benefit analysis of the shift.

If Microsoft were to abandon its hourly-matching target, the company would also lose some leverage in efforts to sell the public on its on its data centers. 

As data centers have proliferated, the general public has begun to push back against them, citing concerns over pollution, power prices, and water use. When Microsoft brings its own clean power to a project, it can plausibly say it has addressed two of those concerns. Without it, new data centers might be harder to sell to the public.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Microsofts #data #center #push #colliding #clean #power #goals #TechCrunchdata centers,Microsoft,net zero,renewable energy">Microsoft’s AI data center push is colliding with its clean power goals | TechCrunch Microsoft is weighing whether to delay or scale back one of its most ambitious clean energy goals as its rapid buildout of AI data centers puts pressure on its ability to meet those targets. Microsoft has yet to make any public announcements, but according to Bloomberg the company is having internal discussions over its hourly clean energy matching goal. The tech company has said that by 2030 it intends to match 100% of its hourly energy use with clean power on the same grid. But Microsoft’s rush to build AI data centers has apparently sparked debate within the company about whether the pledge has become an impediment to its ambitions. Microsoft declined to comment on the internal debate over the hourly matching goal. Instead, a spokesperson told TechCrunch the company continues “to look for opportunities to maintain our annual matching goal.” Hourly targets like the kind Microsoft has set for itself are more rigorous than annual targets. Because the grid is a balanced system — the supply and demand of electrons needs to be matched on a near-instantaneous basis — hourly matching helps develop clean energy sources that more closely align with a company’s usage patterns. Annual targets are more lenient. They are effectively accounting tricks that could, for example, let a company buy more solar power than it might use at midday. Other customers on the grid use that energy, but the company that paid for the solar panels gets to claim the renewable power they make. It’s a tidy arrangement that has sped the deployment of wind, solar, and batteries. But on its own, annual targets won’t eliminate fossil fuels entirely. Hourly targets help foster renewable development that more closely mimics how a true net-zero world would be powered. Big tech companies like Microsoft, Meta, Google, and Apple have generally led on emissions reductions, setting aggressive net-zero targets. Many have eliminated their carbon emissions on an annual basis. Microsoft, for instance, said it met that goal last year. But as data centers grow in size and number, those same companies are turning to natural gas. Microsoft is included in that list; last month, the company said it was working with Chevron and Engine No. 1 to build a massive natural gas power plant in West Texas that could eventually generate up to 5 gigawatts.  Techcrunch event San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026 Despite the West Texas project, Microsoft is widely viewed as a leader among tech companies pursuing net zero emissions. By 2030, Microsoft intends to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than its operations produce. Part of the company’s renewable push has been driven by an internal carbon tax. The Microsoft spokesperson did not reply to questions about the company’s carbon tax. If it remains in place, some of the internal debate surrounding hourly matching might revolve around a cost-benefit analysis of the shift. If Microsoft were to abandon its hourly-matching target, the company would also lose some leverage in efforts to sell the public on its on its data centers.  As data centers have proliferated, the general public has begun to push back against them, citing concerns over pollution, power prices, and water use. When Microsoft brings its own clean power to a project, it can plausibly say it has addressed two of those concerns. Without it, new data centers might be harder to sell to the public. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#Microsofts #data #center #push #colliding #clean #power #goals #TechCrunchdata centers,Microsoft,net zero,renewable energy

according to Bloomberg the company is having internal discussions over its hourly clean energy matching goal.

The tech company has said that by 2030 it intends to match 100% of its hourly energy use with clean power on the same grid. But Microsoft’s rush to build AI data centers has apparently sparked debate within the company about whether the pledge has become an impediment to its ambitions.

Microsoft declined to comment on the internal debate over the hourly matching goal. Instead, a spokesperson told TechCrunch the company continues “to look for opportunities to maintain our annual matching goal.”

Hourly targets like the kind Microsoft has set for itself are more rigorous than annual targets. Because the grid is a balanced system — the supply and demand of electrons needs to be matched on a near-instantaneous basis — hourly matching helps develop clean energy sources that more closely align with a company’s usage patterns.

Annual targets are more lenient. They are effectively accounting tricks that could, for example, let a company buy more solar power than it might use at midday. Other customers on the grid use that energy, but the company that paid for the solar panels gets to claim the renewable power they make. It’s a tidy arrangement that has sped the deployment of wind, solar, and batteries. But on its own, annual targets won’t eliminate fossil fuels entirely. Hourly targets help foster renewable development that more closely mimics how a true net-zero world would be powered.

Big tech companies like Microsoft, Meta, Google, and Apple have generally led on emissions reductions, setting aggressive net-zero targets. Many have eliminated their carbon emissions on an annual basis. Microsoft, for instance, said it met that goal last year.

But as data centers grow in size and number, those same companies are turning to natural gas. Microsoft is included in that list; last month, the company said it was working with Chevron and Engine No. 1 to build a massive natural gas power plant in West Texas that could eventually generate up to 5 gigawatts. 

Techcrunch event

San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026

Despite the West Texas project, Microsoft is widely viewed as a leader among tech companies pursuing net zero emissions. By 2030, Microsoft intends to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than its operations produce.

Part of the company’s renewable push has been driven by an internal carbon tax. The Microsoft spokesperson did not reply to questions about the company’s carbon tax. If it remains in place, some of the internal debate surrounding hourly matching might revolve around a cost-benefit analysis of the shift.

If Microsoft were to abandon its hourly-matching target, the company would also lose some leverage in efforts to sell the public on its on its data centers. 

As data centers have proliferated, the general public has begun to push back against them, citing concerns over pollution, power prices, and water use. When Microsoft brings its own clean power to a project, it can plausibly say it has addressed two of those concerns. Without it, new data centers might be harder to sell to the public.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Microsofts #data #center #push #colliding #clean #power #goals #TechCrunchdata centers,Microsoft,net zero,renewable energy">Microsoft’s AI data center push is colliding with its clean power goals | TechCrunch

Microsoft is weighing whether to delay or scale back one of its most ambitious clean energy goals as its rapid buildout of AI data centers puts pressure on its ability to meet those targets. Microsoft has yet to make any public announcements, but according to Bloomberg the company is having internal discussions over its hourly clean energy matching goal.

The tech company has said that by 2030 it intends to match 100% of its hourly energy use with clean power on the same grid. But Microsoft’s rush to build AI data centers has apparently sparked debate within the company about whether the pledge has become an impediment to its ambitions.

Microsoft declined to comment on the internal debate over the hourly matching goal. Instead, a spokesperson told TechCrunch the company continues “to look for opportunities to maintain our annual matching goal.”

Hourly targets like the kind Microsoft has set for itself are more rigorous than annual targets. Because the grid is a balanced system — the supply and demand of electrons needs to be matched on a near-instantaneous basis — hourly matching helps develop clean energy sources that more closely align with a company’s usage patterns.

Annual targets are more lenient. They are effectively accounting tricks that could, for example, let a company buy more solar power than it might use at midday. Other customers on the grid use that energy, but the company that paid for the solar panels gets to claim the renewable power they make. It’s a tidy arrangement that has sped the deployment of wind, solar, and batteries. But on its own, annual targets won’t eliminate fossil fuels entirely. Hourly targets help foster renewable development that more closely mimics how a true net-zero world would be powered.

Big tech companies like Microsoft, Meta, Google, and Apple have generally led on emissions reductions, setting aggressive net-zero targets. Many have eliminated their carbon emissions on an annual basis. Microsoft, for instance, said it met that goal last year.

But as data centers grow in size and number, those same companies are turning to natural gas. Microsoft is included in that list; last month, the company said it was working with Chevron and Engine No. 1 to build a massive natural gas power plant in West Texas that could eventually generate up to 5 gigawatts. 

Techcrunch event

San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026

Despite the West Texas project, Microsoft is widely viewed as a leader among tech companies pursuing net zero emissions. By 2030, Microsoft intends to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than its operations produce.

Part of the company’s renewable push has been driven by an internal carbon tax. The Microsoft spokesperson did not reply to questions about the company’s carbon tax. If it remains in place, some of the internal debate surrounding hourly matching might revolve around a cost-benefit analysis of the shift.

If Microsoft were to abandon its hourly-matching target, the company would also lose some leverage in efforts to sell the public on its on its data centers. 

As data centers have proliferated, the general public has begun to push back against them, citing concerns over pollution, power prices, and water use. When Microsoft brings its own clean power to a project, it can plausibly say it has addressed two of those concerns. Without it, new data centers might be harder to sell to the public.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Microsofts #data #center #push #colliding #clean #power #goals #TechCrunchdata centers,Microsoft,net zero,renewable energy
1. Samsung S90F OLED TV
5 Budget OLED TVs Worth Buying in 2026 If you’re planning to upgrade your TV, OLED is one of the best technologies you can choose today. They offer deeper blacks, better contrast, and more accurate colors because each pixel works independently. This creates a more immersive experience, whether you’re watching movies, sports, or playing games. It’s one of the main reasons why OLED TVs are often recommended by experts. The only issue has always been the price. However, the situation is different today, as technology allows users to choose models that deliver equal performance but are cheaper. For your convenience, we looked at expert reviews and real-world performance experts and have selected the best budget OLED TV models. 1. Samsung S90F OLED TV In terms of price-to-performance, the Samsung S90F OLED TV is one of the top recommendations right now. It doesn’t just rely on standard OLED strengths; it pushes things further with its QD-OLED panel. That means brighter highlights and more saturated colors, especially noticeable in HDR content. Instead of the usual “good OLED picture,” this one actually stands out when you’re watching high-quality movies or shows. Bright scenes look punchier, and darker scenes still keep their depth without losing detail. Where this TV really stands out is in gaming. First, it supports up to a 144Hz refresh rate, and the low input lag helps keep gameplay smooth and responsive. Secondly, the presence of features like VRR can eliminate issues such as screen tearing. If gaming is even a low priority, this is one of the best options. Another advantage is viewing angles. Even if you’re not sitting directly in front, colors and contrast stay consistent. Compared to something like the S85F, if you watch in a bright room, this makes a noticeable difference over cheaper OLEDs, which makes a real difference in well-lit rooms. 2. LG B5 Series OLED TV The LG B5 is one of those TVs that doesn’t try to impress with flashy upgrades but gets the basics right. It delivers what most people expect from OLED: deep blacks, strong contrast, and natural-looking colors, but the key difference is how balanced everything feels. Nothing looks overprocessed or exaggerated, making it a safe choice if you watch a mix of content, including movies, sports, and regular TV. LG’s processing also plays a big role here. Lower-resolution content doesn’t look stretched or blurry, which is useful if you’re not always watching 4K content. It quietly improves the overall viewing experience without making it obvious. That’s something LG has been consistently good at, and this model continues that trend. For gaming, it covers all the important features without going overboard. You get a 120Hz refresh rate, HDMI 2.1 support, VRR, and low input lag. It’s not as aggressive as Samsung’s 144Hz setup, but for console gaming, it’s more than enough and feels smooth in real use. 3. Sony Bravia XR8B OLED TV Sony takes a different approach compared to Samsung and LG. If you watch a lot of movies or shows, this TV is best for you. Instead of focusing on brightness or gaming specs, it puts more effort into how the picture actually looks. The XR8B reflects that. Colors feel more accurate, especially skin tones, and motion looks smoother in fast scenes. One of its biggest strengths is upscaling. Not everything you watch will be in 4K, and this is where Sony usually performs better than others. Lower-resolution content looks cleaner and more detailed, rather than just being stretched to fit the screen. That alone makes it a good option for people who still watch HD channels or older content. Furthermore, the Google TV interface enhances the experience. It’s easy to navigate, and most apps are readily available, so there’s no learning curve. Everything feels straightforward, which matters for daily use. That said, it’s not the strongest performer in every area. Brightness is lower than that of Samsung’s QD-OLED models, so HDR doesn’t feel as impactful. It’s also priced a bit higher than it should be for what it offers, especially if gaming is important to you. But if your focus is on accurate visuals and overall picture quality, this TV still holds its place. 4. Samsung S85F OLED TV The Samsung S85F OLED TV is meant for people who want better color accuracy from an OLED display but are not looking to purchase a premium OLED TV. The advanced QD-OLED screen technology boosts color vibrancy and brightness compared to an ordinary OLED display. Colors look richer, and contrast remains strong, so the overall image quality is still impressive for the price. In terms of features, the S85F supports the full suite of HDMI 2.1 functionality, including 120Hz refresh rate and VRR. As a result, it is well-suited for gaming, as it ensures smoother gameplay without screen tearing during fast-action sequences. For console users especially, this setup works well and doesn’t feel limited in everyday use. The main reason to consider this model is price. If you want QD-OLED without stretching your budget too much, this is worth considering. 5. Panasonic Z85 OLED TV The Panasonic Z85 focuses on a slightly different audience. Instead of pushing picture performance to the limit, it tries to offer a more complete experience out of the box. The display still delivers solid OLED-level contrast and black levels, so you won’t feel like you’re missing out on the core benefits. One of the main highlights of this TV is the high-quality sound. Unlike most TVs in this range, the built-in speakers are actually good enough for regular use. You don’t immediately feel the need to add a soundbar, which can save extra cost and setup effort. For many users, that makes a practical difference. It also supports both Dolby Vision and HDR10+, which gives you more flexibility depending on what you watch. That’s something not all TVs offer, and it helps ensure compatibility across different platforms. Compared to Samsung and LG models, it feels a bit less dynamic, especially in bright scenes. It’s also not as widely recommended in top-tier rankings, which affects its positioning here. Still, if you want a simple setup with good sound and reliable picture quality, this TV does its job well without overcomplicating things. #Budget #OLED #TVs #Worth #BuyingOLED TV

In terms of price-to-performance, the Samsung S90F OLED TV is one of the top recommendations right now. It doesn’t just rely on standard OLED strengths; it pushes things further with its QD-OLED panel. That means brighter highlights and more saturated colors, especially noticeable in HDR content. Instead of the usual “good OLED picture,” this one actually stands out when you’re watching high-quality movies or shows. Bright scenes look punchier, and darker scenes still keep their depth without losing detail.

Where this TV really stands out is in gaming. First, it supports up to a 144Hz refresh rate, and the low input lag helps keep gameplay smooth and responsive. Secondly, the presence of features like VRR can eliminate issues such as screen tearing. If gaming is even a low priority, this is one of the best options.

Another advantage is viewing angles. Even if you’re not sitting directly in front, colors and contrast stay consistent. Compared to something like the S85F, if you watch in a bright room, this makes a noticeable difference over cheaper OLEDs, which makes a real difference in well-lit rooms.

2. LG B5 Series OLED TV

LG B5 OLED TV

The LG B5 is one of those TVs that doesn’t try to impress with flashy upgrades but gets the basics right. It delivers what most people expect from OLED: deep blacks, strong contrast, and natural-looking colors, but the key difference is how balanced everything feels. Nothing looks overprocessed or exaggerated, making it a safe choice if you watch a mix of content, including movies, sports, and regular TV.

LG’s processing also plays a big role here. Lower-resolution content doesn’t look stretched or blurry, which is useful if you’re not always watching 4K content. It quietly improves the overall viewing experience without making it obvious. That’s something LG has been consistently good at, and this model continues that trend.

For gaming, it covers all the important features without going overboard. You get a 120Hz refresh rate, HDMI 2.1 support, VRR, and low input lag. It’s not as aggressive as Samsung’s 144Hz setup, but for console gaming, it’s more than enough and feels smooth in real use.

3. Sony Bravia XR8B OLED TV

OLED TVs

Sony takes a different approach compared to Samsung and LG. If you watch a lot of movies or shows, this TV is best for you. Instead of focusing on brightness or gaming specs, it puts more effort into how the picture actually looks. The XR8B reflects that. Colors feel more accurate, especially skin tones, and motion looks smoother in fast scenes.

One of its biggest strengths is upscaling. Not everything you watch will be in 4K, and this is where Sony usually performs better than others. Lower-resolution content looks cleaner and more detailed, rather than just being stretched to fit the screen. That alone makes it a good option for people who still watch HD channels or older content.

Furthermore, the Google TV interface enhances the experience. It’s easy to navigate, and most apps are readily available, so there’s no learning curve. Everything feels straightforward, which matters for daily use.

That said, it’s not the strongest performer in every area. Brightness is lower than that of Samsung’s QD-OLED models, so HDR doesn’t feel as impactful. It’s also priced a bit higher than it should be for what it offers, especially if gaming is important to you. But if your focus is on accurate visuals and overall picture quality, this TV still holds its place.

4. Samsung S85F OLED TV

Samsung OLED TVs

The Samsung S85F OLED TV is meant for people who want better color accuracy from an OLED display but are not looking to purchase a premium OLED TV. The advanced QD-OLED screen technology boosts color vibrancy and brightness compared to an ordinary OLED display. Colors look richer, and contrast remains strong, so the overall image quality is still impressive for the price.

In terms of features, the S85F supports the full suite of HDMI 2.1 functionality, including 120Hz refresh rate and VRR. As a result, it is well-suited for gaming, as it ensures smoother gameplay without screen tearing during fast-action sequences. For console users especially, this setup works well and doesn’t feel limited in everyday use.

The main reason to consider this model is price. If you want QD-OLED without stretching your budget too much, this is worth considering.

5. Panasonic Z85 OLED TV

Panasonic

The Panasonic Z85 focuses on a slightly different audience. Instead of pushing picture performance to the limit, it tries to offer a more complete experience out of the box. The display still delivers solid OLED-level contrast and black levels, so you won’t feel like you’re missing out on the core benefits.

One of the main highlights of this TV is the high-quality sound. Unlike most TVs in this range, the built-in speakers are actually good enough for regular use. You don’t immediately feel the need to add a soundbar, which can save extra cost and setup effort. For many users, that makes a practical difference.

It also supports both Dolby Vision and HDR10+, which gives you more flexibility depending on what you watch. That’s something not all TVs offer, and it helps ensure compatibility across different platforms.

Compared to Samsung and LG models, it feels a bit less dynamic, especially in bright scenes. It’s also not as widely recommended in top-tier rankings, which affects its positioning here. Still, if you want a simple setup with good sound and reliable picture quality, this TV does its job well without overcomplicating things.

#Budget #OLED #TVs #Worth #BuyingOLED TV">5 Budget OLED TVs Worth Buying in 2026 If you’re planning to upgrade your TV, OLED is one of the best technologies you can choose today. They offer deeper blacks, better contrast, and more accurate colors because each pixel works independently. This creates a more immersive experience, whether you’re watching movies, sports, or playing games. It’s one of the main reasons why OLED TVs are often recommended by experts. The only issue has always been the price. However, the situation is different today, as technology allows users to choose models that deliver equal performance but are cheaper. For your convenience, we looked at expert reviews and real-world performance experts and have selected the best budget OLED TV models. 1. Samsung S90F OLED TV In terms of price-to-performance, the Samsung S90F OLED TV is one of the top recommendations right now. It doesn’t just rely on standard OLED strengths; it pushes things further with its QD-OLED panel. That means brighter highlights and more saturated colors, especially noticeable in HDR content. Instead of the usual “good OLED picture,” this one actually stands out when you’re watching high-quality movies or shows. Bright scenes look punchier, and darker scenes still keep their depth without losing detail. Where this TV really stands out is in gaming. First, it supports up to a 144Hz refresh rate, and the low input lag helps keep gameplay smooth and responsive. Secondly, the presence of features like VRR can eliminate issues such as screen tearing. If gaming is even a low priority, this is one of the best options. Another advantage is viewing angles. Even if you’re not sitting directly in front, colors and contrast stay consistent. Compared to something like the S85F, if you watch in a bright room, this makes a noticeable difference over cheaper OLEDs, which makes a real difference in well-lit rooms. 2. LG B5 Series OLED TV The LG B5 is one of those TVs that doesn’t try to impress with flashy upgrades but gets the basics right. It delivers what most people expect from OLED: deep blacks, strong contrast, and natural-looking colors, but the key difference is how balanced everything feels. Nothing looks overprocessed or exaggerated, making it a safe choice if you watch a mix of content, including movies, sports, and regular TV. LG’s processing also plays a big role here. Lower-resolution content doesn’t look stretched or blurry, which is useful if you’re not always watching 4K content. It quietly improves the overall viewing experience without making it obvious. That’s something LG has been consistently good at, and this model continues that trend. For gaming, it covers all the important features without going overboard. You get a 120Hz refresh rate, HDMI 2.1 support, VRR, and low input lag. It’s not as aggressive as Samsung’s 144Hz setup, but for console gaming, it’s more than enough and feels smooth in real use. 3. Sony Bravia XR8B OLED TV Sony takes a different approach compared to Samsung and LG. If you watch a lot of movies or shows, this TV is best for you. Instead of focusing on brightness or gaming specs, it puts more effort into how the picture actually looks. The XR8B reflects that. Colors feel more accurate, especially skin tones, and motion looks smoother in fast scenes. One of its biggest strengths is upscaling. Not everything you watch will be in 4K, and this is where Sony usually performs better than others. Lower-resolution content looks cleaner and more detailed, rather than just being stretched to fit the screen. That alone makes it a good option for people who still watch HD channels or older content. Furthermore, the Google TV interface enhances the experience. It’s easy to navigate, and most apps are readily available, so there’s no learning curve. Everything feels straightforward, which matters for daily use. That said, it’s not the strongest performer in every area. Brightness is lower than that of Samsung’s QD-OLED models, so HDR doesn’t feel as impactful. It’s also priced a bit higher than it should be for what it offers, especially if gaming is important to you. But if your focus is on accurate visuals and overall picture quality, this TV still holds its place. 4. Samsung S85F OLED TV The Samsung S85F OLED TV is meant for people who want better color accuracy from an OLED display but are not looking to purchase a premium OLED TV. The advanced QD-OLED screen technology boosts color vibrancy and brightness compared to an ordinary OLED display. Colors look richer, and contrast remains strong, so the overall image quality is still impressive for the price. In terms of features, the S85F supports the full suite of HDMI 2.1 functionality, including 120Hz refresh rate and VRR. As a result, it is well-suited for gaming, as it ensures smoother gameplay without screen tearing during fast-action sequences. For console users especially, this setup works well and doesn’t feel limited in everyday use. The main reason to consider this model is price. If you want QD-OLED without stretching your budget too much, this is worth considering. 5. Panasonic Z85 OLED TV The Panasonic Z85 focuses on a slightly different audience. Instead of pushing picture performance to the limit, it tries to offer a more complete experience out of the box. The display still delivers solid OLED-level contrast and black levels, so you won’t feel like you’re missing out on the core benefits. One of the main highlights of this TV is the high-quality sound. Unlike most TVs in this range, the built-in speakers are actually good enough for regular use. You don’t immediately feel the need to add a soundbar, which can save extra cost and setup effort. For many users, that makes a practical difference. It also supports both Dolby Vision and HDR10+, which gives you more flexibility depending on what you watch. That’s something not all TVs offer, and it helps ensure compatibility across different platforms. Compared to Samsung and LG models, it feels a bit less dynamic, especially in bright scenes. It’s also not as widely recommended in top-tier rankings, which affects its positioning here. Still, if you want a simple setup with good sound and reliable picture quality, this TV does its job well without overcomplicating things. #Budget #OLED #TVs #Worth #BuyingOLED TV

Samsung S90F OLED TV is one of the top recommendations right now. It doesn’t just rely on standard OLED strengths; it pushes things further with its QD-OLED panel. That means brighter highlights and more saturated colors, especially noticeable in HDR content. Instead of the usual “good OLED picture,” this one actually stands out when you’re watching high-quality movies or shows. Bright scenes look punchier, and darker scenes still keep their depth without losing detail.

Where this TV really stands out is in gaming. First, it supports up to a 144Hz refresh rate, and the low input lag helps keep gameplay smooth and responsive. Secondly, the presence of features like VRR can eliminate issues such as screen tearing. If gaming is even a low priority, this is one of the best options.

Another advantage is viewing angles. Even if you’re not sitting directly in front, colors and contrast stay consistent. Compared to something like the S85F, if you watch in a bright room, this makes a noticeable difference over cheaper OLEDs, which makes a real difference in well-lit rooms.

2. LG B5 Series OLED TV

LG B5 OLED TV

The LG B5 is one of those TVs that doesn’t try to impress with flashy upgrades but gets the basics right. It delivers what most people expect from OLED: deep blacks, strong contrast, and natural-looking colors, but the key difference is how balanced everything feels. Nothing looks overprocessed or exaggerated, making it a safe choice if you watch a mix of content, including movies, sports, and regular TV.

LG’s processing also plays a big role here. Lower-resolution content doesn’t look stretched or blurry, which is useful if you’re not always watching 4K content. It quietly improves the overall viewing experience without making it obvious. That’s something LG has been consistently good at, and this model continues that trend.

For gaming, it covers all the important features without going overboard. You get a 120Hz refresh rate, HDMI 2.1 support, VRR, and low input lag. It’s not as aggressive as Samsung’s 144Hz setup, but for console gaming, it’s more than enough and feels smooth in real use.

3. Sony Bravia XR8B OLED TV

OLED TVs

Sony takes a different approach compared to Samsung and LG. If you watch a lot of movies or shows, this TV is best for you. Instead of focusing on brightness or gaming specs, it puts more effort into how the picture actually looks. The XR8B reflects that. Colors feel more accurate, especially skin tones, and motion looks smoother in fast scenes.

One of its biggest strengths is upscaling. Not everything you watch will be in 4K, and this is where Sony usually performs better than others. Lower-resolution content looks cleaner and more detailed, rather than just being stretched to fit the screen. That alone makes it a good option for people who still watch HD channels or older content.

Furthermore, the Google TV interface enhances the experience. It’s easy to navigate, and most apps are readily available, so there’s no learning curve. Everything feels straightforward, which matters for daily use.

That said, it’s not the strongest performer in every area. Brightness is lower than that of Samsung’s QD-OLED models, so HDR doesn’t feel as impactful. It’s also priced a bit higher than it should be for what it offers, especially if gaming is important to you. But if your focus is on accurate visuals and overall picture quality, this TV still holds its place.

4. Samsung S85F OLED TV

Samsung OLED TVs

The Samsung S85F OLED TV is meant for people who want better color accuracy from an OLED display but are not looking to purchase a premium OLED TV. The advanced QD-OLED screen technology boosts color vibrancy and brightness compared to an ordinary OLED display. Colors look richer, and contrast remains strong, so the overall image quality is still impressive for the price.

In terms of features, the S85F supports the full suite of HDMI 2.1 functionality, including 120Hz refresh rate and VRR. As a result, it is well-suited for gaming, as it ensures smoother gameplay without screen tearing during fast-action sequences. For console users especially, this setup works well and doesn’t feel limited in everyday use.

The main reason to consider this model is price. If you want QD-OLED without stretching your budget too much, this is worth considering.

5. Panasonic Z85 OLED TV

Panasonic

The Panasonic Z85 focuses on a slightly different audience. Instead of pushing picture performance to the limit, it tries to offer a more complete experience out of the box. The display still delivers solid OLED-level contrast and black levels, so you won’t feel like you’re missing out on the core benefits.

One of the main highlights of this TV is the high-quality sound. Unlike most TVs in this range, the built-in speakers are actually good enough for regular use. You don’t immediately feel the need to add a soundbar, which can save extra cost and setup effort. For many users, that makes a practical difference.

It also supports both Dolby Vision and HDR10+, which gives you more flexibility depending on what you watch. That’s something not all TVs offer, and it helps ensure compatibility across different platforms.

Compared to Samsung and LG models, it feels a bit less dynamic, especially in bright scenes. It’s also not as widely recommended in top-tier rankings, which affects its positioning here. Still, if you want a simple setup with good sound and reliable picture quality, this TV does its job well without overcomplicating things.

#Budget #OLED #TVs #Worth #BuyingOLED TV">5 Budget OLED TVs Worth Buying in 2026

If you’re planning to upgrade your TV, OLED is one of the best technologies you can choose today. They offer deeper blacks, better contrast, and more accurate colors because each pixel works independently. This creates a more immersive experience, whether you’re watching movies, sports, or playing games. It’s one of the main reasons why OLED TVs are often recommended by experts.

The only issue has always been the price. However, the situation is different today, as technology allows users to choose models that deliver equal performance but are cheaper. For your convenience, we looked at expert reviews and real-world performance experts and have selected the best budget OLED TV models.

1. Samsung S90F OLED TV

5 Budget OLED TVs Worth Buying in 2026 If you’re planning to upgrade your TV, OLED is one of the best technologies you can choose today. They offer deeper blacks, better contrast, and more accurate colors because each pixel works independently. This creates a more immersive experience, whether you’re watching movies, sports, or playing games. It’s one of the main reasons why OLED TVs are often recommended by experts. The only issue has always been the price. However, the situation is different today, as technology allows users to choose models that deliver equal performance but are cheaper. For your convenience, we looked at expert reviews and real-world performance experts and have selected the best budget OLED TV models. 1. Samsung S90F OLED TV In terms of price-to-performance, the Samsung S90F OLED TV is one of the top recommendations right now. It doesn’t just rely on standard OLED strengths; it pushes things further with its QD-OLED panel. That means brighter highlights and more saturated colors, especially noticeable in HDR content. Instead of the usual “good OLED picture,” this one actually stands out when you’re watching high-quality movies or shows. Bright scenes look punchier, and darker scenes still keep their depth without losing detail. Where this TV really stands out is in gaming. First, it supports up to a 144Hz refresh rate, and the low input lag helps keep gameplay smooth and responsive. Secondly, the presence of features like VRR can eliminate issues such as screen tearing. If gaming is even a low priority, this is one of the best options. Another advantage is viewing angles. Even if you’re not sitting directly in front, colors and contrast stay consistent. Compared to something like the S85F, if you watch in a bright room, this makes a noticeable difference over cheaper OLEDs, which makes a real difference in well-lit rooms. 2. LG B5 Series OLED TV The LG B5 is one of those TVs that doesn’t try to impress with flashy upgrades but gets the basics right. It delivers what most people expect from OLED: deep blacks, strong contrast, and natural-looking colors, but the key difference is how balanced everything feels. Nothing looks overprocessed or exaggerated, making it a safe choice if you watch a mix of content, including movies, sports, and regular TV. LG’s processing also plays a big role here. Lower-resolution content doesn’t look stretched or blurry, which is useful if you’re not always watching 4K content. It quietly improves the overall viewing experience without making it obvious. That’s something LG has been consistently good at, and this model continues that trend. For gaming, it covers all the important features without going overboard. You get a 120Hz refresh rate, HDMI 2.1 support, VRR, and low input lag. It’s not as aggressive as Samsung’s 144Hz setup, but for console gaming, it’s more than enough and feels smooth in real use. 3. Sony Bravia XR8B OLED TV Sony takes a different approach compared to Samsung and LG. If you watch a lot of movies or shows, this TV is best for you. Instead of focusing on brightness or gaming specs, it puts more effort into how the picture actually looks. The XR8B reflects that. Colors feel more accurate, especially skin tones, and motion looks smoother in fast scenes. One of its biggest strengths is upscaling. Not everything you watch will be in 4K, and this is where Sony usually performs better than others. Lower-resolution content looks cleaner and more detailed, rather than just being stretched to fit the screen. That alone makes it a good option for people who still watch HD channels or older content. Furthermore, the Google TV interface enhances the experience. It’s easy to navigate, and most apps are readily available, so there’s no learning curve. Everything feels straightforward, which matters for daily use. That said, it’s not the strongest performer in every area. Brightness is lower than that of Samsung’s QD-OLED models, so HDR doesn’t feel as impactful. It’s also priced a bit higher than it should be for what it offers, especially if gaming is important to you. But if your focus is on accurate visuals and overall picture quality, this TV still holds its place. 4. Samsung S85F OLED TV The Samsung S85F OLED TV is meant for people who want better color accuracy from an OLED display but are not looking to purchase a premium OLED TV. The advanced QD-OLED screen technology boosts color vibrancy and brightness compared to an ordinary OLED display. Colors look richer, and contrast remains strong, so the overall image quality is still impressive for the price. In terms of features, the S85F supports the full suite of HDMI 2.1 functionality, including 120Hz refresh rate and VRR. As a result, it is well-suited for gaming, as it ensures smoother gameplay without screen tearing during fast-action sequences. For console users especially, this setup works well and doesn’t feel limited in everyday use. The main reason to consider this model is price. If you want QD-OLED without stretching your budget too much, this is worth considering. 5. Panasonic Z85 OLED TV The Panasonic Z85 focuses on a slightly different audience. Instead of pushing picture performance to the limit, it tries to offer a more complete experience out of the box. The display still delivers solid OLED-level contrast and black levels, so you won’t feel like you’re missing out on the core benefits. One of the main highlights of this TV is the high-quality sound. Unlike most TVs in this range, the built-in speakers are actually good enough for regular use. You don’t immediately feel the need to add a soundbar, which can save extra cost and setup effort. For many users, that makes a practical difference. It also supports both Dolby Vision and HDR10+, which gives you more flexibility depending on what you watch. That’s something not all TVs offer, and it helps ensure compatibility across different platforms. Compared to Samsung and LG models, it feels a bit less dynamic, especially in bright scenes. It’s also not as widely recommended in top-tier rankings, which affects its positioning here. Still, if you want a simple setup with good sound and reliable picture quality, this TV does its job well without overcomplicating things. #Budget #OLED #TVs #Worth #BuyingOLED TV

In terms of price-to-performance, the Samsung S90F OLED TV is one of the top recommendations right now. It doesn’t just rely on standard OLED strengths; it pushes things further with its QD-OLED panel. That means brighter highlights and more saturated colors, especially noticeable in HDR content. Instead of the usual “good OLED picture,” this one actually stands out when you’re watching high-quality movies or shows. Bright scenes look punchier, and darker scenes still keep their depth without losing detail.

Where this TV really stands out is in gaming. First, it supports up to a 144Hz refresh rate, and the low input lag helps keep gameplay smooth and responsive. Secondly, the presence of features like VRR can eliminate issues such as screen tearing. If gaming is even a low priority, this is one of the best options.

Another advantage is viewing angles. Even if you’re not sitting directly in front, colors and contrast stay consistent. Compared to something like the S85F, if you watch in a bright room, this makes a noticeable difference over cheaper OLEDs, which makes a real difference in well-lit rooms.

2. LG B5 Series OLED TV

LG B5 OLED TV

The LG B5 is one of those TVs that doesn’t try to impress with flashy upgrades but gets the basics right. It delivers what most people expect from OLED: deep blacks, strong contrast, and natural-looking colors, but the key difference is how balanced everything feels. Nothing looks overprocessed or exaggerated, making it a safe choice if you watch a mix of content, including movies, sports, and regular TV.

LG’s processing also plays a big role here. Lower-resolution content doesn’t look stretched or blurry, which is useful if you’re not always watching 4K content. It quietly improves the overall viewing experience without making it obvious. That’s something LG has been consistently good at, and this model continues that trend.

For gaming, it covers all the important features without going overboard. You get a 120Hz refresh rate, HDMI 2.1 support, VRR, and low input lag. It’s not as aggressive as Samsung’s 144Hz setup, but for console gaming, it’s more than enough and feels smooth in real use.

3. Sony Bravia XR8B OLED TV

OLED TVs

Sony takes a different approach compared to Samsung and LG. If you watch a lot of movies or shows, this TV is best for you. Instead of focusing on brightness or gaming specs, it puts more effort into how the picture actually looks. The XR8B reflects that. Colors feel more accurate, especially skin tones, and motion looks smoother in fast scenes.

One of its biggest strengths is upscaling. Not everything you watch will be in 4K, and this is where Sony usually performs better than others. Lower-resolution content looks cleaner and more detailed, rather than just being stretched to fit the screen. That alone makes it a good option for people who still watch HD channels or older content.

Furthermore, the Google TV interface enhances the experience. It’s easy to navigate, and most apps are readily available, so there’s no learning curve. Everything feels straightforward, which matters for daily use.

That said, it’s not the strongest performer in every area. Brightness is lower than that of Samsung’s QD-OLED models, so HDR doesn’t feel as impactful. It’s also priced a bit higher than it should be for what it offers, especially if gaming is important to you. But if your focus is on accurate visuals and overall picture quality, this TV still holds its place.

4. Samsung S85F OLED TV

Samsung OLED TVs

The Samsung S85F OLED TV is meant for people who want better color accuracy from an OLED display but are not looking to purchase a premium OLED TV. The advanced QD-OLED screen technology boosts color vibrancy and brightness compared to an ordinary OLED display. Colors look richer, and contrast remains strong, so the overall image quality is still impressive for the price.

In terms of features, the S85F supports the full suite of HDMI 2.1 functionality, including 120Hz refresh rate and VRR. As a result, it is well-suited for gaming, as it ensures smoother gameplay without screen tearing during fast-action sequences. For console users especially, this setup works well and doesn’t feel limited in everyday use.

The main reason to consider this model is price. If you want QD-OLED without stretching your budget too much, this is worth considering.

5. Panasonic Z85 OLED TV

Panasonic

The Panasonic Z85 focuses on a slightly different audience. Instead of pushing picture performance to the limit, it tries to offer a more complete experience out of the box. The display still delivers solid OLED-level contrast and black levels, so you won’t feel like you’re missing out on the core benefits.

One of the main highlights of this TV is the high-quality sound. Unlike most TVs in this range, the built-in speakers are actually good enough for regular use. You don’t immediately feel the need to add a soundbar, which can save extra cost and setup effort. For many users, that makes a practical difference.

It also supports both Dolby Vision and HDR10+, which gives you more flexibility depending on what you watch. That’s something not all TVs offer, and it helps ensure compatibility across different platforms.

Compared to Samsung and LG models, it feels a bit less dynamic, especially in bright scenes. It’s also not as widely recommended in top-tier rankings, which affects its positioning here. Still, if you want a simple setup with good sound and reliable picture quality, this TV does its job well without overcomplicating things.

#Budget #OLED #TVs #Worth #BuyingOLED TV

According to the New York Times, if you bought an iPhone 16 or certain iPhone 15 between June of 2024 and March of 2025, you may soon be eligible to receive a check for as much as $95 per device as part of a class action lawsuit related to Apple Intelligence and Siri. The allegedly flawed Apple Intelligence features that were part of the suit originally shipped on iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max in June of 2024. The Apple Intelligence-native iPhone 16 line shipped later that year.

On Tuesday, Apple settled claims in U.S. District Court in San Jose, California over alleged false advertising. The suit argued that Apple led consumers to believe the Apple Intelligence suite of features was more capable than it actually was. The total settlement amount, still awaiting a judge’s approval, is $250 million.

Apple maintains that it did nothing wrong. Marni Goldberg, an Apple spokesperson gave a statement to the Times, claiming that beginning with “the launch of Apple Intelligence,” Apple has “introduced dozens of features across many languages that are integrated across Apple’s platforms,” and that the company had “resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users.”

This lawsuit was “fallout,” according to Axios, from Apple’s acknowledgement last year that AI upgrades to Siri were not going to be released on schedule. A statement to Daring Fireball at the time said Apple had “been working on a more personalized Siri, giving it more awareness of your personal context, as well as the ability to take action for you within and across your apps,” but added, “It’s going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year.”

The next day, it was reported that Apple had pulled a now-notorious ad starring Bella Ramsey:

The ad is a nice summary of the “more personal” Siri concept that still has not been realized. We see Ramsey notice a person whose name they know they should know, so they quickly ask Siri “the name of the guy I had a meeting with a couple of months ago at Cafe Grenel?” It’s up to the viewer to presume this beefed-up version of Siri is able to use this prompt to draw on, say, an email, and produce the right answer. It immediately replies, “You met Zac Wingate at Cafe Grenel a couple of months ago.” 

To put this class action settlement in context, Apple had been struggling mightily with Siri ever since—deservedly or not—ChatGPT created new consumer expectations for an AI-powered assistant. “AI is what most investors are really excited about. Almost all momentum in the market in general is being fueled by AI,” a portfolio manager named Brian Mulberry told the Wall Street Journal in February of 2024. Mulberry lamented that “Apple really hasn’t made a big splash in the AI space yet.”   

So the Apple Intelligence rollout was perceived as coming late, but it was also, it seems, too early—given that it was sued and ended up settling for $250 million. In an interview with TechRadar last year after the smoke cleared around Siri’s underperformance, Apple software chief Craig Federighi explained that the company was working on a “version 2” of the new Siri that would work in all the personalized ways consumers had come to expect, but that Apple was no longer publicly offering a speculative release schedule for that version.

#Apple #Settles #Alleged #False #Advertising #Suit #AIPowered #SiriApple,lawsuits,Siri">Apple Settles Alleged False Advertising Suit Over AI-Powered Siri According to the New York Times, if you bought an iPhone 16 or certain iPhone 15 between June of 2024 and March of 2025, you may soon be eligible to receive a check for as much as per device as part of a class action lawsuit related to Apple Intelligence and Siri. The allegedly flawed Apple Intelligence features that were part of the suit originally shipped on iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max in June of 2024. The Apple Intelligence-native iPhone 16 line shipped later that year. On Tuesday, Apple settled claims in U.S. District Court in San Jose, California over alleged false advertising. The suit argued that Apple led consumers to believe the Apple Intelligence suite of features was more capable than it actually was. The total settlement amount, still awaiting a judge’s approval, is 0 million. Apple maintains that it did nothing wrong. Marni Goldberg, an Apple spokesperson gave a statement to the Times, claiming that beginning with “the launch of Apple Intelligence,” Apple has “introduced dozens of features across many languages that are integrated across Apple’s platforms,” and that the company had “resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users.” This lawsuit was “fallout,” according to Axios, from Apple’s acknowledgement last year that AI upgrades to Siri were not going to be released on schedule. A statement to Daring Fireball at the time said Apple had “been working on a more personalized Siri, giving it more awareness of your personal context, as well as the ability to take action for you within and across your apps,” but added, “It’s going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year.” The next day, it was reported that Apple had pulled a now-notorious ad starring Bella Ramsey: The ad is a nice summary of the “more personal” Siri concept that still has not been realized. We see Ramsey notice a person whose name they know they should know, so they quickly ask Siri “the name of the guy I had a meeting with a couple of months ago at Cafe Grenel?” It’s up to the viewer to presume this beefed-up version of Siri is able to use this prompt to draw on, say, an email, and produce the right answer. It immediately replies, “You met Zac Wingate at Cafe Grenel a couple of months ago.”  To put this class action settlement in context, Apple had been struggling mightily with Siri ever since—deservedly or not—ChatGPT created new consumer expectations for an AI-powered assistant. “AI is what most investors are really excited about. Almost all momentum in the market in general is being fueled by AI,” a portfolio manager named Brian Mulberry told the Wall Street Journal in February of 2024. Mulberry lamented that “Apple really hasn’t made a big splash in the AI space yet.”    So the Apple Intelligence rollout was perceived as coming late, but it was also, it seems, too early—given that it was sued and ended up settling for 0 million. In an interview with TechRadar last year after the smoke cleared around Siri’s underperformance, Apple software chief Craig Federighi explained that the company was working on a “version 2” of the new Siri that would work in all the personalized ways consumers had come to expect, but that Apple was no longer publicly offering a speculative release schedule for that version. #Apple #Settles #Alleged #False #Advertising #Suit #AIPowered #SiriApple,lawsuits,Siri

According to the New York Times, if you bought an iPhone 16 or certain iPhone 15 between June of 2024 and March of 2025, you may soon be eligible to receive a check for as much as $95 per device as part of a class action lawsuit related to Apple Intelligence and Siri. The allegedly flawed Apple Intelligence features that were part of the suit originally shipped on iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max in June of 2024. The Apple Intelligence-native iPhone 16 line shipped later that year.

On Tuesday, Apple settled claims in U.S. District Court in San Jose, California over alleged false advertising. The suit argued that Apple led consumers to believe the Apple Intelligence suite of features was more capable than it actually was. The total settlement amount, still awaiting a judge’s approval, is $250 million.

Apple maintains that it did nothing wrong. Marni Goldberg, an Apple spokesperson gave a statement to the Times, claiming that beginning with “the launch of Apple Intelligence,” Apple has “introduced dozens of features across many languages that are integrated across Apple’s platforms,” and that the company had “resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users.”

This lawsuit was “fallout,” according to Axios, from Apple’s acknowledgement last year that AI upgrades to Siri were not going to be released on schedule. A statement to Daring Fireball at the time said Apple had “been working on a more personalized Siri, giving it more awareness of your personal context, as well as the ability to take action for you within and across your apps,” but added, “It’s going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year.”

The next day, it was reported that Apple had pulled a now-notorious ad starring Bella Ramsey:

The ad is a nice summary of the “more personal” Siri concept that still has not been realized. We see Ramsey notice a person whose name they know they should know, so they quickly ask Siri “the name of the guy I had a meeting with a couple of months ago at Cafe Grenel?” It’s up to the viewer to presume this beefed-up version of Siri is able to use this prompt to draw on, say, an email, and produce the right answer. It immediately replies, “You met Zac Wingate at Cafe Grenel a couple of months ago.” 

To put this class action settlement in context, Apple had been struggling mightily with Siri ever since—deservedly or not—ChatGPT created new consumer expectations for an AI-powered assistant. “AI is what most investors are really excited about. Almost all momentum in the market in general is being fueled by AI,” a portfolio manager named Brian Mulberry told the Wall Street Journal in February of 2024. Mulberry lamented that “Apple really hasn’t made a big splash in the AI space yet.”   

So the Apple Intelligence rollout was perceived as coming late, but it was also, it seems, too early—given that it was sued and ended up settling for $250 million. In an interview with TechRadar last year after the smoke cleared around Siri’s underperformance, Apple software chief Craig Federighi explained that the company was working on a “version 2” of the new Siri that would work in all the personalized ways consumers had come to expect, but that Apple was no longer publicly offering a speculative release schedule for that version.

#Apple #Settles #Alleged #False #Advertising #Suit #AIPowered #SiriApple,lawsuits,Siri">Apple Settles Alleged False Advertising Suit Over AI-Powered SiriApple Settles Alleged False Advertising Suit Over AI-Powered Siri According to the New York Times, if you bought an iPhone 16 or certain iPhone 15 between June of 2024 and March of 2025, you may soon be eligible to receive a check for as much as $95 per device as part of a class action lawsuit related to Apple Intelligence and Siri. The allegedly flawed Apple Intelligence features that were part of the suit originally shipped on iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max in June of 2024. The Apple Intelligence-native iPhone 16 line shipped later that year. On Tuesday, Apple settled claims in U.S. District Court in San Jose, California over alleged false advertising. The suit argued that Apple led consumers to believe the Apple Intelligence suite of features was more capable than it actually was. The total settlement amount, still awaiting a judge’s approval, is $250 million. Apple maintains that it did nothing wrong. Marni Goldberg, an Apple spokesperson gave a statement to the Times, claiming that beginning with “the launch of Apple Intelligence,” Apple has “introduced dozens of features across many languages that are integrated across Apple’s platforms,” and that the company had “resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users.” This lawsuit was “fallout,” according to Axios, from Apple’s acknowledgement last year that AI upgrades to Siri were not going to be released on schedule. A statement to Daring Fireball at the time said Apple had “been working on a more personalized Siri, giving it more awareness of your personal context, as well as the ability to take action for you within and across your apps,” but added, “It’s going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year.” The next day, it was reported that Apple had pulled a now-notorious ad starring Bella Ramsey: The ad is a nice summary of the “more personal” Siri concept that still has not been realized. We see Ramsey notice a person whose name they know they should know, so they quickly ask Siri “the name of the guy I had a meeting with a couple of months ago at Cafe Grenel?” It’s up to the viewer to presume this beefed-up version of Siri is able to use this prompt to draw on, say, an email, and produce the right answer. It immediately replies, “You met Zac Wingate at Cafe Grenel a couple of months ago.”  To put this class action settlement in context, Apple had been struggling mightily with Siri ever since—deservedly or not—ChatGPT created new consumer expectations for an AI-powered assistant. “AI is what most investors are really excited about. Almost all momentum in the market in general is being fueled by AI,” a portfolio manager named Brian Mulberry told the Wall Street Journal in February of 2024. Mulberry lamented that “Apple really hasn’t made a big splash in the AI space yet.”    So the Apple Intelligence rollout was perceived as coming late, but it was also, it seems, too early—given that it was sued and ended up settling for $250 million. In an interview with TechRadar last year after the smoke cleared around Siri’s underperformance, Apple software chief Craig Federighi explained that the company was working on a “version 2” of the new Siri that would work in all the personalized ways consumers had come to expect, but that Apple was no longer publicly offering a speculative release schedule for that version. #Apple #Settles #Alleged #False #Advertising #Suit #AIPowered #SiriApple,lawsuits,Siri

According to the New York Times, if you bought an iPhone 16 or certain iPhone 15 between June of 2024 and March of 2025, you may soon be eligible to receive a check for as much as $95 per device as part of a class action lawsuit related to Apple Intelligence and Siri. The allegedly flawed Apple Intelligence features that were part of the suit originally shipped on iPhone 15 Pro and Pro Max in June of 2024. The Apple Intelligence-native iPhone 16 line shipped later that year.

On Tuesday, Apple settled claims in U.S. District Court in San Jose, California over alleged false advertising. The suit argued that Apple led consumers to believe the Apple Intelligence suite of features was more capable than it actually was. The total settlement amount, still awaiting a judge’s approval, is $250 million.

Apple maintains that it did nothing wrong. Marni Goldberg, an Apple spokesperson gave a statement to the Times, claiming that beginning with “the launch of Apple Intelligence,” Apple has “introduced dozens of features across many languages that are integrated across Apple’s platforms,” and that the company had “resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users.”

This lawsuit was “fallout,” according to Axios, from Apple’s acknowledgement last year that AI upgrades to Siri were not going to be released on schedule. A statement to Daring Fireball at the time said Apple had “been working on a more personalized Siri, giving it more awareness of your personal context, as well as the ability to take action for you within and across your apps,” but added, “It’s going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year.”

The next day, it was reported that Apple had pulled a now-notorious ad starring Bella Ramsey:

The ad is a nice summary of the “more personal” Siri concept that still has not been realized. We see Ramsey notice a person whose name they know they should know, so they quickly ask Siri “the name of the guy I had a meeting with a couple of months ago at Cafe Grenel?” It’s up to the viewer to presume this beefed-up version of Siri is able to use this prompt to draw on, say, an email, and produce the right answer. It immediately replies, “You met Zac Wingate at Cafe Grenel a couple of months ago.” 

To put this class action settlement in context, Apple had been struggling mightily with Siri ever since—deservedly or not—ChatGPT created new consumer expectations for an AI-powered assistant. “AI is what most investors are really excited about. Almost all momentum in the market in general is being fueled by AI,” a portfolio manager named Brian Mulberry told the Wall Street Journal in February of 2024. Mulberry lamented that “Apple really hasn’t made a big splash in the AI space yet.”   

So the Apple Intelligence rollout was perceived as coming late, but it was also, it seems, too early—given that it was sued and ended up settling for $250 million. In an interview with TechRadar last year after the smoke cleared around Siri’s underperformance, Apple software chief Craig Federighi explained that the company was working on a “version 2” of the new Siri that would work in all the personalized ways consumers had come to expect, but that Apple was no longer publicly offering a speculative release schedule for that version.

#Apple #Settles #Alleged #False #Advertising #Suit #AIPowered #SiriApple,lawsuits,Siri

Post Comment