News

Apple and OpenAI are currently engaged in a legal battle. Apple alleges that OpenAI stole trade secrets and poached employees.

But the two companies have always had a complicated relationship. They partnered in 2024 to bring ChatGPT to Apple devices, but Apple chose Google's Gemini rather than OpenAI for Siri. Then OpenAI acquired io, the hardware startup founded by former Apple design chief Jony Ive, and promised a future hardware device, powered by AI.

All of this has prompted speculation about what Apple is worried about if OpenAI makes hardware, too. We can't know the company's motivations and the specifics of the case are still unfolding. But it got me thinking, what if your phone stopped being a collection of apps and instead revolved around AI?

If AI became the main interface, which apps would disappear and which would survive? And would a phone controlled through ChatGPT actually be practical?

So I decided to find out based on the current tech we have. For a day, whenever I reached for an app, I'd try ChatGPT first instead. If it could do the job, great it passed the test. If it couldn't, it would fail.

There were some obvious things I missed out from the start. ChatGPT isn't connected to my email, it can't open WhatsApp for me and it doesn't have access to my wallet, so those wouldn’t be part of the test. But there were plenty of everyday tasks that felt like fair game.

I use the stopwatch in my iPhone's Clock app constantly throughout the day. When I'm working, cooking or exercising, it's one of the simplest ways I've found to keep me on track as a freelancer. When you can set your own schedule, it's way too easy to disappear down a research rabbit hole and lose an hour.

I asked ChatGPT to start a stopwatch. It said it couldn't measure elapsed time, although it could estimate the time based on message timestamps if I later asked it to stop. Instead, it suggested I use my phone's built-in Clock app.

Result: fail

Strangely, I don't use alarms as much as stopwatches. But if I only have 25 minutes to spare, whether that’s for cleaning or working on a personal writing project, I'll sometimes set one to keep myself focused.

Would ChatGPT do any better here? Well, at first it looked promising. It created a scheduled task to notify me after 10 minutes. I checked that notifications were enabled, put my phone down and carried on working.

When I realized at least 15 minutes had passed, I checked the chat. Sure enough, ChatGPT had posted a message saying the time was up, but it hadn't actually alerted me. Later, I discovered it had also sent an email but it had landed in my spam folder. This one was a fail too in my book.

Result: fail

I love the word games in the New York Times app, home to addictive puzzles like Wordle and Connections. One of my current favorites is Spelling Bee. You're given a handful of letters and then have to make as many words as possible. It's one of my favorite ways to warm up my brain before I start writing.

Could ChatGPT recreate it? Surprisingly, yes. It generated a set of letters, understood the rules and kept track of the words I found. In terms of pure functionality, it worked.

But what it couldn't recreate was the experience. The New York Times app is beautifully simple, with an interface designed around the game. Playing through a chat window felt really clunky and annoying by comparison. The whole point of this game is I'm focusing on the letters and words, I don't want a constant back and forth with ChatGPT about the words.

So I'm calling this a partial success. Yes, ChatGPT replaced the mechanics of the game, but not the experience. And after a few rounds, I knew which version I'd rather use every day.

Result: partial pass

The Sky Guide app is one of my all-time favorites, especially its augmented reality mode. Turn on your phone's location and compass, point it at the night sky and it instantly tells you what you're looking at, whether that's constellations, planets, bits of debris, or the ISS. It's incredible.

Could ChatGPT replace it? Well, sort of. If you upload a photo of the night sky, ChatGPT can usually identify the constellations. But there are caveats. The image needs to be clear, the stars need to be visible and you're relying on a single snapshot. Whereas Sky Guide works continuously as you move your phone around the sky.

This was another reminder that knowledge doesn't necessarily bring you a good experience. Because yes, ChatGPT knows about constellations. But Sky Guide lets you explore them. You can point your phone in any direction, tap on a star or planet and instantly get more information about it without having to keep asking questions. It's a much more intuitive way to learn.

Result: partial pass

Telling me what to expect from the weather forecast for the day turned out to be one of ChatGPT's strongest categories.

The forecast was accurate and pulled from a reliable source, so I trusted the information it gave me. I did find myself asking follow-up questions for things like the hourly forecast and the chance of rain, which would have taken a single tap in a dedicated weather app.

It knew the answers and I trusted them, but getting to them was much slower. That's why I'm generously calling this one a pass.

Result: pass

I have a few favorite apps I use for guided meditations and have some saved in Spotify too. So I wondered whether ChatGPT could take over that role.

For this test, I switched on voice mode and asked it to guide me through a short meditation. Now, technically it did that. But in practice it wasn't even remotely relaxing.

Thanks to a recent update, the voice had odd intonation, frequent vocal fry and distracting little "ums", "ahs" and "let me sees" throughout that constantly pulled me out of the experience. At one point it even told me to breathe in, then never got around to telling me to breathe out.

By the logic of how I graded the other tests, this one should have been a partial pass. It did what I asked, right? But because I had to stop using it out of irritation and came away from the mediation feeling actively more stressed, it's going down as a fail for me.

Result: fail

ChatGPT doesn't have a great track record of counting things, so I was wary about using it as a calculator. I asked it to do some massive sums for me and it got all of them right.

It did pause a few times with a "let me think" message, so I wasn't getting the instant response I'd expect from a calculator. But the delay was only a few seconds, and the answers were correct.

Once again, I found myself missing the simplicity of an app. Typing numbers into a calculator is faster than turning them into a conversation. But ChatGPT did work as a capable stand-in.

Result: pass

I love Letterboxd. I log every film I watch, browse other people's lists and regularly discover new films through recommendations.

Now, there was never a chance ChatGPT could replace the logging side of the app. It can't update my Letterboxd diary or plug me into that community. But recommendations are one of the main reasons I use it, so I wondered how well ChatGPT would do.

I asked it to recommend films similar to some of my favorites, then spent the next few evenings watching its suggestions to really test them. And, to my surprise, it did an excellent job.

Then again, that perhaps isn't all that surprising. We know LLMs are trained on huge amounts of publicly available text, especially discussions reviews and recommendations from where film fans gather online, like Reddit. But whatever the reason, the recommendations felt well matched to my taste.

What I missed wasn't the recommendations themselves, but the social side of Letterboxd. I do enjoy seeing what friends had watched, reading reviews and stumbling across unexpected lists. So, for me, ChatGPT can't replace Letterboxd, but for simply finding something to watch, it did well.

Result: pass

I rely on my Maps app both for planning journeys in advance and for live navigation. So I asked ChatGPT the best way to get from my home to the airport the following day.

At first, it handled the request well. It laid out the different travel options clearly under headings and the advice looked really sensible. It even cited sources from places like Rome2Rio and The Trainline.

Then things got unnecessarily complicated. At the end of those suggestions it asked what time my flight was so it could tailor the recommendations. But when I told it, it started creating a scheduled task instead. I didn't want a reminder, so I had to cancel that, explain what I actually meant and steer the conversation back to route planning.

Eventually, it gave me the information I wanted. But the Maps app would have got me there in a fraction of the time, without all the back and forth.

It also can't replace what I actually use Maps for the most, which is live, turn-by-turn navigation.

Result: partial pass

ChatGPT obviously can't deliver food, but I wondered whether it could replace the part of the app I probably spend the longest on, which is deciding what to eat.

It got off to a surprisingly good start. It asked about my preferences, budget and location, then narrowed down the options and even presented them neatly on a map.

The recommendations themselves looked really good. They're all local places I already really liked to eat at. But there was just one problem. Every restaurant it suggested was closed. Even the map it generated had "closed" written beneath each one.

After a bit of back and forth, it said they weren't shut, eventually acknowledged that they were and suggested a different set of places instead.

Unfortunately, those weren't much use either. They were small independent cafés and restaurants that don't appear on food delivery apps. I wouldn't expect ChatGPT to know exactly which businesses partner with which delivery services, but it did highlight the gap between recommending somewhere to eat and actually helping me make a decision about where I could order from.

Result: fail

I still very reluctantly use Duolingo and have recently started trialling a few other language learning apps to polish my Spanish.

I asked ChatGPT to help me improve my Spanish for an upcoming trip and it suggested role-play ordering food in a café so I could practise.

We switched to voice mode and at first it felt genuinely fun. It held a natural back-and-forth conversation and felt much closer to speaking to a real person than working through a series of multiple-choice questions like in Duolingo.

But it was also noticeably glitchier than a dedicated language app thanks to that recent voice update. There were odd pauses in the conversation, and at one point it repeatedly kept marking one of my answers as incorrect when it wasn't. Shortly afterwards, the exercise just stopped working altogether after a bizarre "ummmmm" from ChatGPT.

When it was working, I actually enjoyed the experience more than using an app like Duolingo. But if I'm trying to learn a language properly, I also want something that's reliable.

Result: partial pass

I love identifying things I see in nature, like bird song with the Merlin app. But I most often rely on plant identifying apps when I'm walking to take a quick snap of a leaf or flower then find out more about it.

ChatGPT was really effective at doing this. I took pictures of leaves, trees, flowers and bushes. I was a little wary about the results at first because I know that ChatGPT tends to make guesses about things rather than admitting it doesn't know. But I did fact check all of the results and everything seemed accurate.

Again, I missed some of the simple, additional features in dedicated apps. But it was surprisingly effective.

Result: pass

Before drawing too many conclusions, it's worth pointing out that a true AI-native phone wouldn't just be ChatGPT running as another app like it was in this experiment. It would probably be integrated into the operating system. Which would mean it could access things like your calendars, timers, navigation and settings. So many of the tasks ChatGPT failed at here might become a whole lot easier with an AI-first phone.

This experiment was based on whether AI could replace the apps on my phone. What I found was that it replaces a specific kind of app. Well, sort of.

If an app's main job is providing information, explaining something or answering questions, AI is already a fairly capable alternative. Plant identification, travel advice, calculations and general knowledge all felt natural.

But if an app exists to perform an action quickly, like starting a timer, setting an alarm, finding restaurants for getting food delivered, opening a map, AI still has a long way to go. Those tasks depend on deeper integration with the device and a different way of working, not just how smart it is.

There are some big trade-offs, too. Dedicated apps often rely on specialist databases and expertise, while AI can still present incorrect answers confidently or fail to make its uncertainty clear. For example, when I was trying to identify a plant I felt wary because I'd generally trust an app built with the input of botanists over a chatbot.

And, as you could probably tell from my mounting frustration, a huge sticking point for me was also realizing how much I missed the interface of many apps.

For me, a well-designed app is always a better way to explore information than a conversation. I don't think everything should, or even can, be done through chat, despite that being the direction many AI companies seem to be heading. In fact, it showed me that a conversational interface can be more work rather than less.

It's impossible to know exactly what Apple and OpenAI's long-term plans are. But I can imagine a future where knowledge apps increasingly merge into AI, while utility apps remain part of the operating system itself.

If that happens, we may stop thinking about which app to open and simply ask AI instead. But for that future to actually catch one, I'd want stronger guarantees around accuracy, better integration with trusted sources and the option to step outside the chat interface more often.

• Ukrainian drone destroys Russian flag moments after dramatic aerial deployment attempt
• Competing battlefield videos continue fueling disputed territorial claims across eastern Ukraine
• Analysts continue examining disputed battlefield footage for signs of digital manipulation

Ukrainian forces released footage showing a Russian flag destroyed roughly 30 seconds after a drone placed it on a damaged building in the Sumy region.

According to Ukraine's 105th Territorial Defense Brigade, Russian operators dropped the flag from a drone before Ukrainian personnel responded with an FPV drone strike.

The video shows a Russian drone placing a flag associated with Russia's Airborne Forces onto the roof of a damaged residential building in Velyka Pysarivka.

Footage later captures a Ukrainian FPV drone approaching the location before striking the flag shortly after it landed, ending the display within approximately 30 seconds.

The 105th Territorial Defense Brigade said drone operators located the position before Russian forces could use the footage to reinforce claims of battlefield progress.

"Enemy rags do not remain on Ukrainian soil for long," the 105th Territorial Defense Brigade said about the operation.

Velyka Pysarivka lies close to the Ukrainian border with Russia and has experienced repeated attacks while remaining an active area of military operations.

Fighting around the settlement continues as Russian forces conduct cross-border activities while attempting to expand operations across parts of the Sumy region.

The released footage focuses on the sequence involving the flag placement and the subsequent strike instead of showing any broader military engagement nearby.

Throughout the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, both sides have repeatedly made competing claims about capturing territory, often supported by battlefield footage.

The latest video follows another disputed incident involving territorial gains that was circulated through Russian military communication channels.

Russian sources previously circulated a video claiming forces had captured Bilyi Kolodyaz in Ukraine's Kharkiv region after raising a Russian flag inside the settlement.

Analysts later questioned that recording after identifying what they described as signs suggesting digital manipulation within several parts of the footage.

Among those observations were an unusually oversized soldier together with a flag that reportedly disappeared from the frame during the recording sequence.

Neither side's battlefield footage can always be independently verified immediately because active combat conditions often limit direct access to the reported locations.

Military analysts therefore continue examining released videos alongside satellite imagery, geolocation evidence, and additional sources before confirming claims involving territorial advances or battlefield events.

The flag incident in Velyka Pysarivka adds another example showing how symbolic actions increasingly accompany frontline operations.

As of now, independent verification of the footage remains unavailable, making its authenticity difficult to establish.

Via United24media

• Amazon beats its last all-time low price of AU$1,098 during EOFY, dipping below AU$1,000 for the first time
• Also discounted at Samsung Australia's store for AU$999, with exclusive colours and monthly installment payment options
• Trade-in options available from both stores for further savings

It’s an exciting time to be a Samsung phone fan right now with the recent launch of its new foldable range, including a brand new form factor for the Galaxy Z Fold 8.

Pre-orders are still ongoing, but with prices starting from AU$1,949, not everyone will be springing for these premium phones.

If you’re in the market for something much more affordable, then you’re in luck — the Samsung Galaxy S26 is currently at its all-time low price of AU$992 on Amazon, or a whopping 36% off.

Costing less than Apple’s budget phone — the AU$999 iPhone 17e — the base model Samsung Galaxy S26 is a true flagship device with three camera lenses, 12GB of RAM and the full Galaxy AI suite. This deal handily beats the previous all-time low of AU$1,098 we saw during EOFY and Prime Day. Amazon has the Black, Cobalt Violet, Sky Blue and White colours available for this price, and you can also trade in your old phone for more savings.View Deal

Our Samsung Galaxy S26 review praised the bright AMOLED display, reliable 3-lens camera setup and surprisingly long battery life given its relatively small 4,300mAh capacity. It also has a 6.3-inch screen, perfect for those who like smaller-sized handsets.

Storage options now also start at 256GB, up from the predecessor’s 128GB. That change, plus the other improvements over the S25, meant the S26 came with a price increase from AU$1,399 to AU$1,549.

Aussies also miss out on the Snapdragon 8 Elite chipset found in the US model, having to settle for an Exynos 2600 processor. Our reviewer also noted the relatively slow 25W charging speed and the lack of full Qi2 wireless charging support, commenting that this phone is only worth buying when it’s on sale.

And that’s why this phone is an easy recommendation for less than AU$1,000, despite its shortcomings. It’s a solid entry-level flagship with the specs to back it up, which also comes in an increasingly rare 6.3-inch size.

Not a fan of the default colours on sale at Amazon? The Samsung Australia store also has the handset discounted for AU$999, and that includes the store-exclusive Pink Gold and Silver Shadow colours. You can also purchase the handset through a monthly repayment plan and trade in an old device to save even more.View Deal

• Xiaomi officially launches SkyNomad N70 and N90 SUVs
• Both pair a 1.5-liter gasoline engine with huge 76 kWh NMC battery packs
• Hybrid technology allows for more than 1,000 miles of driving

Fresh off the success of the SU7 and YU7 all-electric models, which offer the sort of performance and range to compete with Porsche’s Taycan, Chinese tech company Xiaomi is now moving into the world of hybrid SUVs.

Teased a few weeks ago, the company has now taken the wraps off the roughly $35,000 (in China, that is) SkyNomad N70 and N90, two hulking SUVs that are capable of seating either five or seven people in a variety of luxurious configurations.

Shirking the pure EV powertrain of Xiaomi's previous efforts, the SkyNomad sub-brand uses a Changan-derived 1.5-liter gasoline engine and a huge 76 kWh NMC battery pack to offer substantial range.

According to China’s generous CLTC testing cycle, the Xiaomi SkyNomad N90 Max offers a combined range of up to 1,705 km — or 1,060 miles.

Customers in China also have the option of a more affordable 52 kWh battery pack, but when the larger of the two is specified in the five-seat N70, pure electric range is almost 314 miles, according to the CLTC testing cycle.

If you crunch the numbers and remove some of the CLTC's generosity, it equates to around 250-miles on the UK and Europe's WLTP cycle. That's still enough to shame many pure EVs.

Alas, Xiaomi hasn’t announced plans to sell its SkyNomad models outside its domestic market yet, but it has previously stated that it hopes to introduce the SU7 and YU7 models to the UK and Europe by 2028.

As we have seen with BYD’s luxury brand, Denza, the price of high-performance or luxury Chinese EVs isn’t so appealing once you factor in local taxes and import duties.

It was revealed recently that the supercar-baiting Denza Z, for example, will start at a staggering £142,900 in the UK (around $200,600) and rises to £172,900 (around $233,000) for the top-spec Racing variant. It costs around $100,000 in China.

We can expect to see a similar pattern with models like the SkyNomad N70 and N90 should they arrive in Europe, especially since they come fitted with the sort of battery pack that many rival pure-electric vehicles use today.

Those hoping for something that drastically undercuts the likes of Audi’s Q7, the Volvo XC90 or even Kia’s slightly more affordable EV9 and Hyundai’s Ioniq 9 could be a tad disappointed when official European pricing is eventually announced.