Hands-on with the MacBook Air, and Rivian has a surprise
Apple released new MacBook Airs by press release, and then took shots at Spotify and Epic. Also, Rivian rolled out three new vehicles, and at least one of them could be what saves the company.
One way to think about basically every product is that it is the result of a series of compromises made by the people who designed and built that product. You can, for example, make a smartphone or laptop thinner, but you compromise on battery life. Or, you can make it incredibly durable, but it probably won't be fun to hold in your hand.
For most of its life, the MacBook Air has been the best set of compromises for most people. There's a reason it is, as Apple is fond of reminding us, the "world's most popular laptop. It's an incredibly lightweight and thin laptop, while still getting great battery life and enough performance for the things that most users care about.
With the introduction of Apple Silicon, it seemed as though those compromises started to fade away. The M1 MacBook Air was so much more powerful than the Intel models it replaced--while also being vastly more efficient--it was as though Apple had figured out how to make a compromise-free laptop.
Of course, there were still compromises. The M1 MacBook Air only had two ports, one of which you had to use to power the device. Even the M2 version, which Apple says is the first product it built specifically for Apple Silicon, wasn't perfect. To keep the design as thin as possible, you still are stuck with those two USB-C ports, though the M2 added MagSafe for power. Oh, and it only supported a single external display.
For most people, that doesn't seem like much of a compromise, but it meant that there are people for whom a MacBook Air could never be an option--even if it was otherwise the perfect laptop for their needs. If you needed a laptop that could support two different external monitors, you would have had to spend $2000 on a MacBook Pro with M3 Pro.
The M1 and M2 supported two displays; it's just that they always considered the built-in display one of those--even if it wasn't being used. Now, however, the MacBook Air with M3 can support two external displays with the lid closed. Specifically, it can drive one display up to 6K and one up to 5 K. (Apple says that the base MacBook Pro with M3 will gain the same display support with a future software update.)
Look, you might ask why I spent so much time discussing a feature that most people could not care less about. Most people do not have two external displays sitting on their desks. I get it, but I think there are two reasons this is a big deal.
The first is that Apple is clearly listening to what customers say they care about. Sure, the number of people who are thinking of buying a MacBook Air to use with two displays seems likely to be very small. But, before now, they couldn't even consider the MacBook Air because its biggest compromise was that it wouldn't support them.
It was really the only real complaint anyone had about the M2, and Apple could have just said "Hey, buy a MacBook Pro," but it didn't. It turns out that there are a lot of people who don't need a MacBook Pro but might still want to be able to use two displays.
I don't know whether it was challenging to figure out technically, but I think it's notable that Apple is solving that problem. I think Apple is at its best when it listens to the things customers really want and figures out how to build that into its products--even if those things are different from what Apple believes they should want.
The other reason is that everything else about the M3 MacBook Air is exactly what you expect. It's the exact same design, with the same display and keyboard. That's not a bad thing, by the way. The M2 MacBook Air was an incredibly good laptop, which means there's not a lot to change. Obviously, the M3 is faster than the M2, but that's what you expect.
That isn't to say the M2 MacBook Air wasn't great. It was. It might be the best laptop I've ever reviewed. That's not to say it's the most powerful--that would be the MacBook Pro with M3 Max that I've spent a few months using. It is, however, the best overall for most people.
In my experience over the past few days, the M3 definitely does not lack for speed. There wasn't anything I asked it to do that made it feel as though the M3 couldn't keep up. Even applying and rendering effects in Adobe Audition, or Izotope RX10 was fast enough that you could definitely use the MacBook Air for those tasks. Yes, a MacBook Pro or Mac Studio is going to be faster, but for occasional use, the Air is definitely capable.
Oh, it does have WiFi 6E, which isn't WiFi 7, but is an improvement over WiFi 6. Also, the Midnight color gets the same anti-fingerprint treatment as the Space Black MacBook Pro. It still seems more prone to fingerprints compared with the Space Grey or Silver versions, but it is definitely better than the M2 version of this color.
Ultimately, the M3 MacBook Air would have been my recommendation as the best laptop for most people even if nothing else had changed but replacing the M2 with the M3. Now, however, Apple has made a lightweight, powerful laptop with even fewer compromises--making it a very good choice for almost anyone.
A version of this review first appeared in my column at Inc.com
Latest Episode of Primary Technology Is Here
Stephen and I talked about the M3 MacBook Air on the latest episode of Primary Technology, our show about the tech news that matters. We also covered Apple’s fights with Spotify, Epic, and basically all of Europe. Watch us on YouTube, or get the show wherever you listen to podcasts:
Apple Podcasts / Spotify / PocketCasts / Overcast / primarytech.fm
Rivian’s Surprise Vehicle Announcement
On Thursday, Rivian held an event to announce its newest model, the R2. The company's CEO, RJ Scaringe, talked about the features of what looks a lot like a smaller version of its R1S SUV and what will most certainly be the electric vehicle (EV) maker's most important product.
While the R1T and R1S have been successful--at least, in terms of customer impression and reviews--the company has struggled to make money. Rivian needs a more affordable hit to make a meaningful dent as overall demand for $75,000 EVs has cooled. The R2, which starts at $45,000, could certainly be that product, though it isn't expected to start delivering orders until 2026.
Overall, the R2 looks like a fantastic option that will likely appeal to a wider audience than the R1 lineup. There are only so many people willing to spend what can end up close to $100,000 for an electric pickup or SUV. What Rivian really needs is a mass-market product that can compete with Tesla's Model 3 and Model Y, which are the two most popular EVs in the world. Actually, the Model Y is the most popular vehicle that isn't a Big Three pickup truck.
The R2 could definitely be that vehicle. It's a smaller and less expensive vehicle that maintains Rivian's attention to detail and style. However, it was what Scaringe did after the R2 announcement that got most of the attention.
I'm so excited about this vehicle. I'm so excited about what it represents for us as a company in terms of achieving scale, what it represents for us in terms of our collective learning, being embodied into one vehicle as the, you know, the follow product to what we did with our flagship product with R1. But it's important to note, R2 represents not just a vehicle, but it also represents a platform. And that platform, as I said—the performance, the capabilities, but also the flexibility for a manufacturing point of view—is really important for us. And I'm really, really excited to talk about R2's sibling, which we call R3. So you didn't expect that one more thing here.
That's right, at an event to unveil the R2, Rivian surprised everyone by dropping another vehicle, the R3. Not only that, but Scaringe took a page directly out of Steve Jobs' playbook with the "one more thing" reference.
Then, after walking the audience through a demo of the R3, he did it again. "But there's one more thing," Scaringe said. "And looking at our R3, we wanted to take everything that's embodied and put it into an even higher performance package. And this is something we call R3X."
I want to come back to the "one more thing" piece in just a minute, but first, I think it's important to consider that Rivian is probably going to sell as many R3s as it can make. It's a crossover with a smaller wheelbase than the R2--which means it will likely be less expensive--but with the same Rivian styling.
Scaringe didn't say anything about availability or pricing information, only that the R3 would come "after" the R2. Presumably, that means we won't start seeing them on the road until 2027 or later. I don't think it is a mistake that the company wanted to announce them now. Rivian is at a make-or-break point. It is selling vehicles that are widely beloved, it just isn't selling enough of them.
The company continues to lose money on its vehicles, but that just means it hasn't sold enough of them to cover the cost of design and production. The most obvious way to address this is to have smaller, more affordable options. The R2, and to an even greater extent, the R3, could very well be the solution to that problem.
Apple vs Spotify
On Monday, the European Commission (EC) fined Apple roughly $2 billion over a complaint filed by Spotify that Apple was unfairly using the App Store to make it hard for streaming music services to compete. Apple has its own service, Apple Music, which doesn’t have to pay a commission on subscriptions in the way that Spotify or other services do.
Apple responded with a post on its Newsroom that disagreed with the fine—as you might expect—but then directed most of its ire not toward the EC, but toward Spotify. Seriously, Apple’s post is a little over 1,500 words. Less than 100 of them are about the decision. The rest of those words are about Apple’s anger with Spotify. Four words, in particular, get to the heart of Apple’s position: “Spotify pays Apple nothing.”
There’s an entire section in Apple’s response with those four words as the heading:
“Spotify has grown their company into the largest digital music business in the world… Despite that success, and the App Store’s role in making it possible, Spotify pays Apple nothing. That’s because Spotify — like many developers on the App Store — made a choice. Instead of selling subscriptions in their app, they sell them on their website. And Apple doesn’t collect a commission on those purchases.”
When you think about it, it’s pretty clear that Apple sees itself as entitled to a commission for every dollar that is generated in proximity to the iPhone. Not only that, it seems clear that the fact that companies like Spotify don’t pay anything is a particular source of consternation at Apple.
Apple vs Epic (Again)
In other Apple vs. everyone news, the company terminated Epic’s developer account in the EU. Shortly after Apple announced its plan to comply with the DMA, Epic said it had obtained a developer account and planned to open a third-party app store. At the same time, Epic’s CEO, Tim Sweeney, made it clear he wasn’t a fan of what he called “malicious compliance” by Apple. Apparently, Apple took exception to this and revoked Epic’s developer account.
I honestly cannot think of a reason Apple wants to keep having this fight. I mean, we’ve been through this all. There was a lawsuit, a trial where we got to see Tim Cook on the stand, we got to read the emails, and then a judge said Apple could basically do what it wanted. Well, except the part where it prevents developers from telling customers that they can subscribe or buy stuff on the web. That it had to allow.
But, now, Apple and Epic are at it again, and I just don’t see how this is worth it for Apple. Is Epic a trustworthy partner? Probably not, but this just seems like far more headache for Apple than it’s worth—especially after the $2 billion fine.
Elon Musk vs OpenAI
Speaking of fights that don’t make a lot of sense, Elon Musk is suing OpenAI because—I think—he’s mad that the company wouldn’t let him be the boss. He used other words in the lawsuit—like the fact that OpenAI was started as a non-profit, but changed its mind, and the fact that it’s not actually, well, open at all.
Emails published by OpenAI, however, make it pretty clear that Musk was cool with all of it until he proposed that OpenAI build its tech within Tesla, or let him have 51 percent of the company and run the show. OpenAI said no, and Musk said “I’m out.” Now that he’s building his own AI tech, he’s back to throw a wrench in things.
The lawsuit mostly seems like trolling. I haven’t read a single legal expert that thinks there’s any chance Musk could win (he doesn’t even appear to have standing to sue in the first place, and a breach of contract lawsuit requires—you know—a contract, which doesn’t exist in this case).
Still, the case highlights a very real question about OpenAI, which is “What does the ‘open’ really mean anyway?” Musk might not have legal standing to demand an answer, but it does seem like the company owes the world an answer.