AllYouCanTech

Apple Research Shows Promise for AirPods to Operate as AI Cardiac Monitors

The Apple Research team has released a study examining the ability of AI models to estimate heart rates from stethoscope audio recordings, even though they were not specifically designed for this purpose. The results are encouraging, showing that AI can accurately estimate heart rates from recordings of heart sounds, referred to as phonocardiograms.

This research tested six widely-used foundation models that were trained on audio or speech to assess their heart rate estimation capabilities. Interestingly, these models showed performance levels similar to those of traditional methods that depend on handcrafted audio features. Notably, Apple’s proprietary model, a version of CLAP (Contrastive Language-Audio Pretraining), surpassed the baseline, demonstrating the most effective performance in various assessments.

The evaluation process used a publicly accessible dataset comprising over 20 hours of labeled hospital heart sounds. Apple segmented these recordings into brief 5-second clips, resulting in around 23,000 heart sound snippets which were utilized to train a neural network for heart rate classification.

An important finding from the study indicated that larger models did not necessarily provide superior outcomes. In fact, the deeper layers of these models frequently contained less useful information for cardiorespiratory data, suggesting that representations from shallower or mid-layers were more effective.

The study highlights the importance of merging traditional signal processing methods with cutting-edge AI to improve the reliability of heart rate estimations. The researchers intend to enhance these models for healthcare applications, create lighter versions suitable for low-power devices, and investigate other physiological sounds.

While the study does not assert clinical claims, it underscores the potential for incorporating these models into Apple devices, including iPhones, Apple Watches, and AirPods, which could leverage in-ear microphones for monitoring heart rates.

For additional information, the complete paper is accessible on arXiv.

Leaked iPhone Roadmap Indicates Solid Reason for Annual Rebranding

This week, an unexpected report emerged indicating that Apple intends to overhaul the naming of all its software platforms to a year-based system. Consequently, instead of iOS 19, we can anticipate the release of iOS 26 this fall (similar to automotive models). Could the iPhone hardware also face a transformation? A leaked roadmap from Apple might provide some insights.

### Alteration in iPhone Release Timetable Ahead

Earlier this month, insights from Wayne Ma and Ming-Chi Kuo provided a comprehensive look at Apple’s roadmap for the next generation of iPhone models. This roadmap unveiled several unexpected developments, one being a significant alteration in the release timetable.

Commencing next year, Apple is projected to discontinue the fall launch of its new base model iPhone. Thus, what may be known as the iPhone 18 will actually be available the subsequent spring, roughly six months later. The models set for the fall will include:

– iPhone Air
– iPhone Pro
– iPhone Pro Max
– iPhone Fold

This modification is not merely a solitary occurrence. Rather, Apple is anticipated to begin releasing six new iPhones annually: two budget-friendly models in the spring and four premium choices in the fall. However, in this framework, the entry-level models will consistently be released after the Pro, Air, and the like.

### Transitioning the iPhone to Yearly Branding

As I reflect on this modification concerning the iOS 26 announcement, it dawns on me that year-based branding might be an ideal complement to this new annual cycle. Let’s put aside the inquiry of whether Apple will alter iPhone naming this year. I can envision it happening, but perhaps Apple prefers to observe the reception of the OS change first.

At the very least, implementing the change next year would be quite logical. In September 2026, Apple could unveil:

– iPhone Air 27
– iPhone Pro 27
– iPhone Fold 27
– and similar models

These cutting-edge iPhones would exude a ‘ahead of their time’ aura, akin to new automotive models. Then, six months later, in March 2027, we would see:

– iPhone 27
– iPhone 27e

This way, the high-end premium iPhones would gain the edge of feeling ultra-modern, as they release several months prior to the new year. Then, in the early part of that new year, the entry-level iPhones would carry names that align with their launch timing.

### iPhone Rebranding: Conclusion

There’s definitely no assurance that Apple is inclined to rebrand the iPhone in the same manner as its software. It might be satisfied maintaining the existing 17, 18, etc. branding. However, if a year-based transformation is on the horizon, the new annual release pattern could fit perfectly.

What are your thoughts? Will Apple transition the iPhone to year-based branding? Share your opinions in the comments.

Apple Might Satisfy My Only Feature Request for iOS 19

**The Prospective Evolution of Apple’s Operating Systems: Transitioning to iOS 26 and Beyond**

The discussion surrounding Apple’s operating systems has consistently captivated tech aficionados, especially regarding their versioning methodologies. Recently, Mark Gurman disclosed that Apple intends to unveil iOS 26 instead of iOS 19, along with the 26th iterations of macOS, visionOS, watchOS, and tvOS. This move signifies a noteworthy change in how Apple categorizes its software, aspiring for a more streamlined and cohesive versioning framework across its platforms.

### The Existing Version Number Landscape

Apple’s present versioning approach has often resulted in perplexity among users. For example, the newest iterations of various operating systems consist of:

– **iOS 18**
– **iPadOS 18**
– **tvOS 18**
– **watchOS 11**
– **macOS Sequoia**
– **visionOS 2**

The discrepancies in version numbers can pose difficulties for users attempting to monitor updates and features across devices. For instance, while iOS and iPadOS share the same version number, watchOS and macOS employ different numbering methodologies, complicating users’ efforts to recall which version matches which system.

### A Suggested Remedy: Jumping to iOS 20

In light of the ambiguity surrounding version numbers, some have suggested that Apple should consolidate its operating systems under a singular versioning framework. One idea was to completely bypass iOS 19 and advance directly to iOS 20, harmonizing all systems under a more memorable and consistent numbering scheme. This concept, while captivating, appeared unrealistic to many, as it would necessitate Apple to relinquish years of entrenched versioning practices.

### The Rationale Behind iOS 26

Gurman’s report implies that Apple’s choice to advance to iOS 26 is a calculated strategy to streamline the user experience. By aligning all operating systems to a uniform version number, Apple can foster a clearer comprehension of the features and updates accessible across devices. This alteration not only mirrors the upcoming year but also alleviates the necessity for users to remember which version correlates to which year.

### Advantages of a Cohesive Versioning Framework

1. **Clarity and Uniformity**: A cohesive versioning framework would afford users a simple means to grasp the capabilities of their devices. Instead of navigating disparate version numbers, users can swiftly identify the most recent updates.

2. **Improved Marketing**: Debuting all operating systems under the same version can forge a more compelling marketing narrative. Apple can advertise its products as integrated within a cohesive ecosystem, boosting attractiveness to consumers.

3. **Decreased Confusion**: With a consistent versioning approach, users are less likely to be bewildered regarding which updates pertain to their devices, resulting in a seamless user experience.

### Final Thoughts

Apple’s speculated shift to iOS 26 and a unified versioning framework for its operating systems signals a substantial advancement in how the company oversees its software. By embracing a more coherent strategy towards version numbers, Apple aspires to improve user comprehension and streamline the experience across its devices. As we anticipate the future of Apple’s operating systems, this transition could herald a new chapter of clarity and uniformity for users worldwide.

13 Router Models to Steer Clear Of: Suggestions from the FBI

**Title: Caution Regarding Compromised Routers: A Guide to Steering Clear of Vulnerable Models**

In response to recent cybersecurity threats, particularly the concerning information that numerous ASUS wireless routers have been infiltrated by a botnet, many consumers are contemplating the purchase of new routers. However, a recent warning from the FBI has underscored certain models that ought to be avoided due to their weaknesses.

As per a report from the FBI, cybercriminals are taking advantage of at least 13 older router models, mainly marketed by Linksys under the Cisco label. These routers fall into the “end-of-life” category, indicating they no longer receive software updates and are vulnerable to known security issues. The malware linked to these breaches is referred to as TheMoon, which has been active since 2014. This malware permits attackers to gain remote control over infected routers, disseminate to other devices, and redirect web traffic through proxy networks.

The FBI has addressed this predicament by confiscating two proxy services, Anyproxy and 5Socks, which were reportedly operated by these compromised devices. Below is an enumeration of the specific router models identified by the FBI that consumers should steer clear of:

– E1200
– E2500
– E1000
– E4200
– E1500
– E300
– E3200
– WRT320N
– E1550
– WRT610N
– E100
– M10
– WRT310N

It is essential to highlight that there has been some ambiguity concerning the E100 and E300 models. Reports suggest that these may pertain to products from Cradlepoint, which are not end-of-life routers. Cradlepoint’s parent company, Ericsson, clarified that the advisory incorrectly listed ‘E100’ instead of ‘E1000.’

Notwithstanding this confusion, if your router appears on the list provided and has not undergone a software update in years, it is advisable to replace it. Furthermore, if you are thinking of acquiring an older router for cost-saving purposes, it is wise to refrain from selecting these particular models to safeguard your network’s integrity.

In summary, remaining aware of the security status of your networking devices is vital in today’s digital environment. By steering clear of these vulnerable router models, you can contribute to the protection of your home network against potential cyber threats.