Personally I wouldn't count Chromebooks as something newer than Apple's last category-creating product since the iPad is in roughly the same time frame and netbooks a few years before that.
The Apple Watch is newer and is where I'd say the cutoff is for Apple.
--
At a higher level, I'd say there were two personal-computer-hardware revolution periods that Apple featured heavily in:
1) home personal computers and then the GUI-fication of them and the portable-ification - the wave the Apple II was part of, and then the one the Mac mainstreamed, then laptops where Apple was pretty instrumental in setting design and execution standards
2) mainstream general-purpose/software-defined mobile devices (vs single- or few-function gadgets). Initial failures or niche products (Newton from Apple, Palm/PocketPC more successfully as a niche later) and then Apple REALLY mainstreaming with the iPhone and the extensions that were the iPad and Watch. I'm leaving out the iPod here since "single-purpose MP3 players" were a transitional stop on the gadget->general purpose device trend. (But that general purpose nature also makes it hard to invent a new mobile device category.)
Of things that have been percolating for a while, maybe VR/AR takes off one day, I'm not sure there's mass appeal there. Are people going to get enough utility over a phone to justify pop-up ads in their field-of-view all day long?
It's possible the LLM/transformer boom could lead to some new categories, but we don't know what that would look like yet, so it's hard to penalize Apple for not being a super-early first-mover in the last 3 years since nobody else has figured out a great hardware story there either, and even in their prime they were less of a "first mover" than a "show everyone else how it could be done better" player.
I guess we’re being a bit vague on timeframe but chrome books launched in 2011 so they’re one of those products that took ~10 years to be an overnight success, with 2020 being an accelerant. So my vote is no.
I got quite close with Gemini 3 pro in AI studio. I uploaded a screenshot (no assets) and the results were similar to OP. It failed to follow my fix initially but I told it to follow my directions (lol) and it came quite close (though portrait mode distorted it, landscape was close to perfect.
“Reference the original uploaded image. Between each image in the clock face, create lines to each other image. Measure each line. Now follow that same process on the app we’ve created, and adjust the locations of each image until all measurements align exactly.”
Stripe already built this out and it’s in ChatGPT. Some merchants let you buy directly in the chat interface, and payment credentials are shared through the chat interface to the store (securely, etc)
Gemini kind of already does this. I use builder in AI studio and it tends to use Gemini in places where other solutions make more sense. Last week I needed users to input their address, validate it, and geo code it. Rather than using google maps APIs (way cheaper, free tier) it used Gemini to do it.
Transparency is important to us, so we want to inform you about a recent security incident at Mixpanel, a data analytics provider that OpenAI used for web analytics on the frontend interface for our API product (platform.openai.com). The incident occurred within Mixpanel’s systems and involved limited analytics data related to your API account.
This was not a breach of OpenAI’s systems. No chat, API requests, API usage data, passwords, credentials, API keys, payment details, or government IDs were compromised or exposed.
What happened
On November 9, 2025, Mixpanel became aware of an attacker that gained unauthorized access to part of their systems and exported a dataset containing limited customer identifiable information and analytics information. Mixpanel notified OpenAI that they were investigating, and on November 25, 2025, they shared the affected dataset with us.
What this means for you
User profile information associated with use of platform.openai.com may have been included in data exported from Mixpanel. The information that may have been affected was limited to:
Name that was provided to us on the API account
Email address associated with the API account
Approximate coarse location based on API user browser (city, state, country)
Operating system and browser used to access the API account
Referring websites
Organization or User IDs associated with the API account
Our response
As part of our security investigation, we removed Mixpanel from our production services, reviewed the affected datasets, and are working closely with Mixpanel and other partners to fully understand the incident and its scope. We are in the process of notifying impacted organizations, admins, and users directly. While we have found no evidence of any effect on systems or data outside Mixpanel’s environment, we continue to monitor closely for any signs of misuse.
Trust, security, and privacy are foundational to our products, our organization, and our mission. We are committed to transparency, and are notifying all impacted customers and users. We also hold our partners and vendors accountable for the highest bar for security and privacy of their services. After reviewing this incident, OpenAI has terminated its use of Mixpanel.
Beyond Mixpanel, we are conducting additional and expanded security reviews across our vendor ecosystem and are elevating security requirements for all partners and vendors.
What you should keep in mind
The information that may have been affected here could be used as part of phishing or social engineering attacks against you or your organization.
Since names, email addresses, and OpenAI API metadata (e.g., user IDs) were included, we encourage you to remain vigilant for credible-looking phishing attempts or spam. As a reminder:
Treat unexpected emails or messages with caution, especially if they include links or attachments.
Double-check that any message claiming to be from OpenAI is sent from an official OpenAI domain.
OpenAI does not request passwords, API keys, or verification codes through email, text, or chat.
Further protect your account by enabling multi-factor authentication.
The security and privacy of our products are paramount, and we remain resolute in protecting your information and communicating transparently when issues arise. Thank you for your continued trust in us.
For more information about this incident and what it means for impacted users, please see our blog post here.
Please contact your account team or mixpanelincident@openai.com if you have any questions or need our support.
It’s aggressively partisan, conflates storylines, uses flawed logic, and a variety of other journalistic malfeasance. There does appear to be welfare fraud, but this site does not appear to be a good place to learn about it.
The original article is clearly very loaded, but it's also the type of story that the mainstream media hates picking up: massive welfare fraud being used to fund terrorist groups in Somalia gores at least half a dozen sacred cows. This should receive a lot more attention, and, if true, heads should roll (and not low level managers and workers).
In this case, city-journal has previously run articles that make clearly false claims on topics I am familiar with, such as the cost of homelessness on the city of Seattle. I don’t trust them at all.
Are those OSes actually that strict about contributors? That’s got to be impossible to verify and I’ve only seen clean room stuff when a competitor is straight up copying another competitor and doesn’t want to get sued
ReactOS froze development to audit their code.[1] Circumstantial evidence was enough to call code not clean. WINE are strict as well. It is impossible to verify beyond all doubt of course.
reply