Overview

We are experiencing an issue with Safari in all versions from 18.0 to 18.5 that does not occur in version 17. It affects both iPhones and Macs. And does not happen in Chrome or Windows. The problem is impacting our customers, and our monitoring tools show a dramatic increase in error volume as more users buy/upgrade to iOS 18. The issue relates to network connectivity that is lost randomly. I can reliably reproduce the issue online in production, as well as on my local development environment. For example our website backoffice has a ping, that has a frequency of X seconds, or when user is doing actions like add to a cart increasing the quantity that requires backend validation with some specific frequency the issue is noticable... To test this I ran a JS code to simulate a ping with a timer that calls a local-dev API (a probe that waits 2s to simulate "work") and delay the next HTTP requests with a dynamic value to simulate network conditions: Note: To even make the issue more clear, I'm using GET with application/json payload to make the request not simple, and require a Pre-flight request, which doubles the issue. (async () => { for (let i = 0; i < 30; i++) { try { console.log(`Request start ${i} ${new Date().toLocaleString()}`); const res = await fetch(`https://api.redated.com:8090/1/*****/probe?`, { method: 'GET', mode: "cors", //headers: {'Content-Type': 'text/plain'}, headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' }, }); console.log(`Request end ${i} ${new Date().toLocaleString()} status:`, res.status); } catch (err) { console.error(`Request ${i} ${new Date().toLocaleString()} error:`, err); } let delta = Math.floor(Math.random() * 10); console.log("wait delta",delta); await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 1000 - delta)); } })(); For simplicity lets see a case where it fails 1 time only out of 10 requests. (Adjusting the "delta" var on the time interval create more or less errors...) This are the results: The network connection was lost error, which is false, since this is on my localhost machine, but this happens many times and is very reproducible in local and production online. The dev-tools and network tab shows empty for status error, ip, connection_id etc.. its like the request is being terminated very soon. Later I did a detailed debugging with safari and wireshark to really nail down the network flow of the problem: I will explain what this means: Frame 10824 – 18:52:03.939197: new connection initiated (SYN, ACK, ECE). Frame 10831 – 18:52:04.061531: Client sends payload (preflight request) to the server. Frame 10959 – 18:52:09.207686: Server responds with data to (preflight response) to the client. Frame 10960 – 18:52:09.207856: Client acknowledges (ACK) receipt of the preflight response. Frame 10961 – 18:52:09.212188: Client sends the actual request payload after preflight OK and then server replies with ACK. Frame 11092 – 18:52:14.332951: Server sends the final payload (main request response) to the client. Frame 11093 – 18:52:14.333093: captures the client acknowledging the final server response, which marks the successful completion of the main request. Frame 11146 – 18:52:15.348433: [IMPORTANT] the client attempts to send another new request just one second later, which is extremely close to the keep-alive timeout of 1 second. The last message from the server was at 18:52:14.332951, meaning the connection’s keep-alive timeout is predicted to end around 18:52:15.332951 but it does not. The new request is sent at 18:52:15.348433, just microseconds after the predicted timeout. The request leaves before the client browser knows the connection is closed, but by the time it arrives at the server, the connection is already dead. Frame 11147 – 18:52:15.356910: Shows the server finally sending the FIN,ACK to indicate the connection is closed. This happens slightly later than the predicted time, at microsecond 356910 compared to the expected 332951. The FIN,ACK corresponds to sequence 1193 from the ACK of the last data packet in frame 11093. Conclusions: The root cause is related to network handling issues, when the server runs in a setting of keep-alive behavior and keep-alive timeout (in this case 1s) and network timming issue with Safari reusing a closed connection without retrying. In this situation the browser should retry the request, which is what other browsers do and what Safari did before version 18, since it did not suffer from this issue. This behaviour must differ from previous Safari versions (however i read all the public change logs and could not related the regression change). Also is more pronounced with HTTP/1.1 connections due to how the keep-alive is handled. When the server is configured with a short keep-alive timeout of 1 second, and requests are sent at roughly one-second intervals, such as API pings at fixed intervals or user actions like incrementing a cart quantity that trigger backend calls where the probability of failure is high. This effect is even more apparent when the request uses a preflight with POST because it doubles the chance, although GET requests are also affected. This was a just a test case, but in real production our monitoring tools started to detect a big increment with this network error at scale, many requests per day... which is very disrupting, because user actions are randomly being dropped when the user actions and timming happens to be just near a previous connection, where keep alive timeout kicks-in, but because the browser is not yet notified it re-uses the same connection, but by the time it arrived the server is a dead connection. The safari just does nothing about it, does not even retry, be it a pre-flight or not, it just gives this error. Other browsers don't have this issue. Thanks!

Hello, I've a question about performance when trying to render lots of items coming from SwiftData via a @Query on a SwiftUI List. Here's my setup: // Item.swift: @Model final class Item: Identifiable { var timestamp: Date var isOptionA: Bool init() { self.timestamp = Date() self.isOptionA = Bool.random() } } // Menu.swift enum Menu: String, CaseIterable, Hashable, Identifiable { var id: String { rawValue } case optionA case optionB case all var predicate: Predicate<Item> { switch self { case .optionA: return #Predicate { $0.isOptionA } case .optionB: return #Predicate { !$0.isOptionA } case .all: return #Predicate { _ in true } } } } // SlowData.swift @main struct SlowDataApp: App { var sharedModelContainer: ModelContainer = { let schema = Schema([Item.self]) let modelConfiguration = ModelConfiguration(schema: schema, isStoredInMemoryOnly: false) return try! ModelContainer(for: schema, configurations: [modelConfiguration]) }() var body: some Scene { WindowGroup { ContentView() } .modelContainer(sharedModelContainer) } } // ContentView.swift struct ContentView: View { @Environment(\.modelContext) private var modelContext @State var selection: Menu? = .optionA var body: some View { NavigationSplitView { List(Menu.allCases, selection: $selection) { menu in Text(menu.rawValue).tag(menu) } } detail: { DemoListView(selectedMenu: $selection) }.onAppear { // Do this just once // (0..<15_000).forEach { index in // let item = Item() // modelContext.insert(item) // } } } } // DemoListView.swift struct DemoListView: View { @Binding var selectedMenu: Menu? @Query private var items: [Item] init(selectedMenu: Binding<Menu?>) { self._selectedMenu = selectedMenu self._items = Query(filter: selectedMenu.wrappedValue?.predicate, sort: \.timestamp) } var body: some View { // Option 1: touching `items` = slow! List(items) { item in Text(item.timestamp.description) } // Option 2: Not touching `items` = fast! // List { // Text("Not accessing `items` here") // } .navigationTitle(selectedMenu?.rawValue ?? "N/A") } } When I use Option 1 on DemoListView, there's a noticeable delay on the navigation. If I use Option 2, there's none. This happens both on Debug builds and Release builds, just FYI because on Xcode 16 Debug builds seem to be slower than expected: https://indieweb.social/@curtclifton/113273571392595819 I've profiled it and the SwiftData fetches seem blazing fast, the Hang occurs when accessing the items property from the List. Is there anything I'm overlooking or it's just as fast as it can be right now?

I've spent the last few days researching the upcoming laws in Texas and other US states, and how these laws will impact on developers around the world. I want to share what I've learned so far with the community and get feedback on my current understanding. This post is not so much focused on a single API, but more of the bigger picture. Background The law essentially mandates that: (1) app store platforms implement age categorization and verification mechanisms, and (2) developers implement logic to listen to age categorization signals provided by the platform and respond accordingly. You can read the law itself here: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/89R/billtext/html/SB02420S.HTM Most people seem to be interpreting the law as follows: All developers who distribute apps in the USA are effectively required to implement the new APIs (required by Texas, not by Apple). The penalties are heavy, but it's unclear whether developers would actually be pursued and by whom (e.g. would someone seriously pursue an alarm clock app because it could be accessed by a minor?). Putting aside the ethical, privacy, and legal issues (and the damaging precedents this law sets), most people seem to agree that, from a technical perspective, this is a very silly way to implement age blocking (app store collects the info and passes it to dev, dev is responsible for blocking access). It would make way more sense for the platform to block the app directly for affected users (with optional API support for developers who wish to use it). However, I believe the law has specifically mandated that this is how they expect the system to work, so Apple's hands have been tied. Apple has basically complied with their obligations by providing the relevant APIs to developers. Because the law is vague and open-ended, there are a lot of legal and technical uncertainties about what developers actually need to do to be compliant. Understandably, Apple seems reticent to provide any guidance to developers that could be interpreted as legal advice. Apple's docs simply describe what the APIs do with no guidance on what the overall flow is meant to look like or how and when the APIs should actually be used in practice. Americans familiar with the political situation seem to think there's the possibility of an injunction before this law goes into effect, but that looks increasingly unlikely given that it's two weeks away. Developer solutions Many devs seem to be exploring two main workarounds, at least as temporary solutions: (1) Raise your app's rating to 18+. Putting aside the fact that Texas law would effectively be forcing developers to raise their global age rating (resulting in lost revenue that extends far beyond Texas), it remains unclear whether this solution is actually legally compliant, since the law specifically mandates that apps must implement logic to respond to signals from the platform. (2) Geo-block Texas. Again, it remains unclear if this is compliant because geo-blocking is not 100% accurate and it doesn't actually do what the law says you have to do. It also creates issues if you already have users in Texas, and it means performing additional privacy-hostile checks (i.e., detecting the user's location, even users who are not subject to the law). The DeclaredAgeRange API is actually pretty straight-forward to use – although there is still a lack of documentation on certain edge cases and it's difficult to test. In addition, the new APIs are only available in iOS 26.2, so it's unclear what you need to do if you're still supporting < iOS 26.2. Some people are of the opinion that developers can only reasonably respond to the signals that are available, thus pushing responsibility back to the platforms in regards to earlier OS versions. The API provides a bool (AgeRangeService.shared.isEligibleForAgeFeatures), which allows you to determine if the user is someone to whom age checks need to be applied. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/declaredagerange/agerangeservice/iseligibleforagefeatures I'm not 100% sure, but perhaps the simplest action you can take is to check this bool on launch and block access if it's true. In any case, it looks like this API will be very useful because it means we can avoid applying the checks in other jurisdictions and for grandfathered-in users without needing to implement custom geo-tracking code (albeit only in iOS 26.2+). To implement the API, my current thinking is that, on every launch, I should first check the above bool and, if it's true, do the following: (1) get the App Store age rating with let appStoreAgeRating = await AppStore.ageRatingCode ?? 18, (2) request the user's age with let ageRangeResponse = try await AgeRangeService.shared.requestAgeRange(ageGates: appStoreAgeRating), (3) check that the user has agreed to share their age, (4) check that lowerBound >= appStoreAgeRating, and (5) check that the verification method is not one of the self-declared methods. If this procedure fails, I should block access to the app and provide a link to Apple's support page: https://support.apple.com/en-us/122770 I stress, however, that this is just my current idea and there are some edge cases I'm unsure about. Other issues It is possible to do some basic testing of the API, but only using a sandbox App Store account on a physical device. From the Developer section in iOS Settings, you can select from a few different scenarios, like "Texas user aged 14 without parental consent", etc. There's also a whole separate aspect to this law relating to "significant updates". Everyone seems kinda confused about this, but it seems like the general idea is that, if your app's age classification changes in the future, the app should be responsive to that change. My current interpretation is that if I use the AppStore.ageRatingCode as the age gate (as described above) then that should allow me to comply, but I haven't really looked into this aspect of the law yet. There's also another aspect to this law requiring developers to revoke access to the app when requested by the parent. I have not looked into this yet, but as noted above, it doesn't make sense to me why this is the developer's responsibility given that the platforms already provide solid parental controls. Do I need to something else in addition to what I've sketched out above? It goes without saying, of course, that everything above is not legal advice, and I still have some gaps in my understanding. I would really appreciate any feedback on the above, perhaps with recommendations about better ways to approach this.

This is not a question but rather a small bit of documentation on how Accessory Setup Kit actually works. I spent a couple days figuring this out so I thought let's share my findings. The example app is very light and the documentation definitely has room for improvement so here are a couple important notes. Findings: If you're running > iOS 18 and add any property to your Info.plist file you're no longer able to scan for devices by using CBCentralManager.scanForPeriphals. This will no longer return discoverable devices. Below iOS 18 these properties in the Info.plist are ignored by the OS and you can safely use the "legacy" method of connecting to bluetooth devices. If you're running > iOS 26 the removeAccessory will show a prompt to the user. If you're running < 26 you can silently remove the accessory and start each session with a clean state. If you create CBCentralManager before you start the ASK session you'll not get the state = PoweredOn. If you have 0 accessories connected to your application CBCentralManager will never enter the state = PoweredOn when you create the CBCentralManager. Pre-ASK this would be the trigger for iOS to ask the user permission. This is no longer necessary with ASK. If you have have 1 or more accessories authorized to your app this will be returned in the session.accessories after the session has started. This is an important indicator to determine app behavior. If you have 1 or more accessories CBCentralManager.scanForPeripherals will ONLY return previously authorized AND discoverable devices. Use this for when you want to connect to a previously authorized device. If you have 1 or more accessories and the CBCentralManager.scanForPeripherals returns nothing you can (safely) assume the user attempts to onboard a new device. So for my application I take the following steps: Check for iOS version, if > iOS 18 start ASK session. Are there previously authorized devices? -- yes: run CBCentralManger.scanForPeripherals -- no: show the picker Did the scan return any devices? -- yes: show UI to select device or connect with first available device in the list -- no: show the picker Feel free to add any of your findings and @Apple please update the documentation!

I can reproduce the bug that CallKit doesn't active audiosession after the outgoing call put on hold because of an incoming call. VoIP calling with CallKit Steps to reproduce: Download SpeakerBox example app from the link above and start it with XCode Start a new outgoing call Call your phone from other phone Hold and Accept the call After a few secs finish the call from the other phone The outgoing call will be still on hold Click on the call and click Toggle Hold The call won't be active again because the audiosession is activated. Logs: Received provider(_:didDeactivate:) Received provider(_:didDeactivate:) Received provider(_:didDeactivate:) Received provider(_:didDeactivate:) Received provider(_:didDeactivate:) Requested transaction successfully Starting audio Type: stdio AURemoteIO.cpp:1162 failed: 561017449 (enable 3, outf< 1 ch, 44100 Hz, Float32> inf< 1 ch, 44100 Hz, Float32>) Type: Error | Timestamp: 2024-08-15 12:20:29.949437+02:00 | Process: Speakerbox | Library: libEmbeddedSystemAUs.dylib | Subsystem: com.apple.coreaudio | Category: aurioc | TID: 0x19540d AVAEInternal.h:109 [AVAudioEngineGraph.mm:1344:Initialize: (err = PerformCommand(*outputNode, kAUInitialize, NULL, 0)): error 561017449 Type: Error | Timestamp: 2024-08-15 12:20:29.949619+02:00 | Process: Speakerbox | Library: AVFAudio | Subsystem: com.apple.avfaudio | Category: avae | TID: 0x19540d Couldn't start Apple Voice Processing IO: Error Domain=com.apple.coreaudio.avfaudio Code=561017449 "(null)" UserInfo={failed call=err = PerformCommand(*outputNode, kAUInitialize, NULL, 0)} Type: Notice | Timestamp: 2024-08-15 12:20:29.949730+02:00 | Process: Speakerbox | Library: Speakerbox | TID: 0x19540d Route change: Type: Notice | Timestamp: 2024-08-15 12:20:30.167498+02:00 | Process: Speakerbox | Library: Speakerbox | TID: 0x19540d ReasonUnknown Type: Notice | Timestamp: 2024-08-15 12:20:30.167549+02:00 | Process: Speakerbox | Library: Speakerbox | TID: 0x19540d Previous route: Type: Notice | Timestamp: 2024-08-15 12:20:30.167568+02:00 | Process: Speakerbox | Library: Speakerbox | TID: 0x19540d <AVAudioSessionRouteDescription: 0x302c00bc0, inputs = ( "<AVAudioSessionPortDescription: 0x302c01330, type = MicrophoneBuiltIn; name = iPhone Mikrofon; UID = Built-In Microphone; selectedDataSource = (null)>" ); outputs = ( "<AVAudioSessionPortDescription: 0x302c004d0, type = Receiver; name = Vev\U0151; UID = Built-In Receiver; selectedDataSource = (null)>" )> Type: Notice | Timestamp: 2024-08-15 12:20:30.167626+02:00 | Process: Speakerbox | Library: Speakerbox | TID: 0x19540d

Hello, I’m currently reviewing and implementing age assurance and parental approval flows using AgeRangeService and PermissionKit (AskCenter) in the context of Texas regulatory compliance requirements. While the high-level APIs are clear, there are several technical aspects where the intended usage patterns are not fully explicit in the documentation. Clarification on these points would help ensure our implementation aligns with system expectations and regulatory obligations. ⸻ Querying the current approval state for SignificantAppUpdateTopic AskCenter.ask(...) returns Void, and AskCenter.responses(for:) provides an AsyncSequence of approval events. Is there an official or recommended way to determine whether a SignificantAppUpdateTopic has already been approved when the app launches, or is listening for future responses events the only supported mechanism? ⸻ Behavior of AskCenter.responses(for:) regarding past approvals When subscribing to AskCenter.responses(for:): • Does the stream replay previously recorded approval or decline decisions? • Or does it only emit events that occur after subscription? This affects whether the listener must be registered early in the app lifecycle. ⸻ Recommended lifecycle timing for registering a responses(for:) listener What is the intended or recommended time to register a responses(for:) listener? • At application launch • Immediately before calling ask(...) • When entering a specific gated feature Clarification on the expected lifecycle usage would be helpful. ⸻ Repeated calls to ask(...) after approval If AskCenter.ask(...) is called again for the same SignificantAppUpdateTopic after parental approval has already been granted: • Is the request ignored? • Is a new approval request sent to the parent? • Or is the call handled idempotently by the system? ⸻ Delivery of approval results when the child app is not running If a parent approves or declines a SignificantAppUpdateTopic while the child app is not running: • Will the approval decision be delivered as a responses(for:) event on the next app launch? • Or is the app expected to persist approval state locally? ⸻ Persistence of approval state Is the approval decision for SignificantAppUpdateTopic persisted by the system at the OS level, or is the app responsible for storing approval state? Additionally, does the approval persist across: • app restarts? • app deletion and reinstallation? ⸻ Meaning of activeParentalControls.significantAppChangeApprovalRequired How is activeParentalControls.significantAppChangeApprovalRequired determined? • Is this value explicitly configured by a parent (for example via Screen Time)? • Or is it automatically determined by the system based on region, age, or regulatory requirements? ⸻ Relationship between significantAppChangeApprovalRequired and AgeRangeService When activeParentalControls contains significantAppChangeApprovalRequired, is it still expected that apps call AgeRangeService.requestAgeRange(...)? Or can the presence of this flag be treated as sufficient indication that the user is a minor for gating purposes? ⸻ Recommended interpretation of AgeRangeDeclaration Is the intended usage of AgeRangeDeclaration to handle each case individually, or is it acceptable and recommended to interpret the values as different trust levels (for example, self-declared vs. government ID or payment verified)? ⸻ Clarification on these points would help ensure that implementations of age assurance and parental approval flows are consistent with system behavior while meeting regulatory compliance requirements. Thank you for your guidance.

I am trying to run JavaScript only after the page has loaded, and according to here - https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/safari_app_extensions/injecting_a_script_into_a_webpage, I should use DOMContentLoaded. However, it does not seem to work. This is my content.js file: function runOnStart() {     document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function(e) {         document.body.style.background = "rgb(20, 20, 20)";         document.html.style.background = "rgb(20, 20, 20)";                var divElements = document.body.getElementsByTagName('div');         for(var i = 0; i < divElements.length; i++) {             let elem = divElements[i];             elem.style.background = "rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.05)";         }     }); } runOnStart(); If I take the code outside of the event listener, it runs fine, but a lot of the elements haven't loaded in yet so it doesn't work as it should. The function is definitely running, but the event listener simply doesn't work. I appreciate any help you can give!

It looks like ExtensionKit (and ExtensionFoundation) is fully available on iOS 26 but there is no mention about this in WWDC. From my testing, it seems as of beta 1, ExtensionKit allows the app from one dev team to launch extension provided by another dev team. Before we start building on this, can someone from Apple help confirm this is the intentional behavior and not just beta 1 thing?

Hi everyone, Starting today, my Xcode Cloud CI workflow can no longer successfully build iOS/macOS/visionOS targets. The Archive step does not report any errors, but the xcodebuild command hangs indefinitely and eventually fails with the following message: The step invocation hit a user timeout. The xcodebuild archive invocation timed out. No activity has been detected on stdout, stderr or the result bundle in 30 minutes. My iOS and macOS targets can still be built, but the build time has increased by 2-3x compared to before. That's interesting. After I removed the visionOS target, the iOS target also failed to build. Additionally, since today, I’ve noticed a significant increase in network-related errors in Xcode Cloud. There have been multiple failures to download dependencies from Homebrew or GitHub. I have confirmed that CI versions which previously built successfully are now failing, while running the same build commands locally works fine. Based on these observations, I suspect there may be an issue with the Xcode Cloud environment itself. Has anyone else encountered similar problems? Any suggestions or updates would be appreciated! Thanks!

Hi, Problem When playing videos on the Developer app on the Mac, there is no full screen button for the video. So it is not possible to play the video in full screen. Note I am not referring to the app going into full screen, the issue is with there is no option to play the video in full screen. Environment OS: macOS 26.2 (25C56) Developer app: Version 10.8.3 (1083.3.1) Feedback FB21343934 Recording Question Are others also facing this issue? Is there a workaround? Suggestion This seems to be recurring problem that seems get broken with app / OS releases. Please write some UI tests to ensure the full screen button is present. Would really appreciate if this gets fixed.

Hello, Are there any plans to compile a python 3.13 version of tensorflow-metal? Just got my new Mac mini and the automatically installed version of python installed by brew is python 3.13 and while if I was in a hurry, I could manage to get python 3.12 installed and use the corresponding tensorflow-metal version but I'm not in a hurry. Many thanks, Alan

Any view that is content for the tabViewBottomAccessory API fails to retain its state as of the last couple of 26.1 betas (and RC). The loss of state happens (at least) when the currently selected tab is switched (filed as FB20901325). Here's code to reproduce the issue: struct ContentView: View { @State private var selectedTab = TabSelection.one enum TabSelection: Hashable { case one, two } var body: some View { TabView(selection: $selectedTab) { Tab("One", systemImage: "1.circle", value: .one) { BugExplanationView() } Tab("Two", systemImage: "2.circle", value: .two) { BugExplanationView() } } .tabViewBottomAccessory { AccessoryView() } } } struct AccessoryView: View { @State private var counter = 0 // This guy's state gets lost (as of iOS 26.1) var body: some View { Stepper("Counter: \(counter)", value: $counter) .padding(.horizontal) } } struct BugExplanationView: View { var body: some View { ScrollView { VStack(alignment: .leading, spacing: 16) { Text("(1) Manipulate the counter state") Text("(2) Then switch tabs") Text("BUG: The counter state gets unexpectedly reset!") } .multilineTextAlignment(.leading) } } }

I am the sole Account Holder for my Apple Developer Program account and am encountering an issue where the acceptance of the updated Apple Developer Program License Agreement is not syncing correctly between the two developer portals. Issue Details: Agreement Status on developer.apple.com: I successfully accepted and reviewed the updated agreement at https://developer.apple.com/account. The Agreements section confirms the acceptance date as December 11, 2025 (as seen in the attached image). Status on App Store Connect: Despite this confirmation, when I sign into https://appstoreconnect.apple.com/, I still see the following critical warning: "The Apple Developer Program License Agreement has been updated and needs to be reviewed. In order to update your existing apps and submit new apps, the Account Holder must review and accept the updated agreement by signing in to their account." Impact: This prevents me from performing key tasks, such as creating a new app, which triggers an "Agreement Update" alert that only directs me back to the already-accepted agreement on the Developer website. Troubleshooting Steps Taken: I confirmed I am logged in as the Account Holder. I cleared my browser cache and attempted the process on a fresh browser session. My macOS is fully up to date. I have already contacted Apple Developer Support but have not yet received a reply. Request for Assistance This is blocking my ability to submit and update apps. I am aware that direct phone support is often recommended for these issues, but my country is not listed for phone extension support. Has anyone else experienced this sync delay or found a workaround that resolves the "Agreement Update" alert on App Store Connect when the agreement has been accepted on the Developer website? Any advice on the next immediate steps I should take while waiting for my support ticket to be processed would be greatly appreciated.

Can I use them in SK and do the animations work? Thanks, Patrick

Hello, I am in the process of implementing SharePlay support in my visionOS app. Everything runs fine when I test locally, but when my app is distributed via TestFlight, calling try await activity.activate() shows the SharePlay dialog as usual, but then when I start a new FaceTime call, my ImmersiveSpace gets dismissed. This is only happening when the app is distributed via TestFlight, when I run it locally the ImmersiveSpace stays active as expected. Looking at the console on my Mac I found this log: Invalid initial client settings class: UIApplicationSceneClientSettings; expected class: MRUISharedApplicationSceneClientSettings; bundle ID: com.apple.facetime; scene ID: com.apple.facetime:SFBSystemService-DDA8C751-C0C4-487E-AD85-59EF4E6C6050 Does anyone have an idea how I can fix this? It's driving me nuts and I wasted over a day looking for a workaround but so far been unsuccessful. Thanks!

I am constantly reaching my daily ChatGPT limit and even though it's recommending that I log in, I already am. What can I do to fix this?

I'm using this library: https://github.com/Yummypets/YPImagePicker to capture photos. I've modified it slightly, and I'm using an older version. When testing on my iPhone 16e, ios 26, whenever I take a photo, I get the following two error messages: <<<< FigXPCUtilities >>>> signalled err=-17281 at <>:302 <<<< FigCaptureSourceRemote >>>> Fig assert: "err == 0 " at bail (FigCaptureSourceRemote.m:569) - (err=-17281) These error messages appear, but as far as I can tell, the photo comes through OK, and I can save the data no problem. I've even removed all my handling code to see if it was something I was doing. I don't really want to ship with these errors showing, but I also have no idea what can be causing this error to appear. chatgpt was not helpful diagnosing this. Does anyone know what can cause this error Is there a way I can see the source code to figure out if there's something I'm doing wrong here? It really seems like this is an internal apple error, or else I would have expected more details on the error relating to the code I've written. Any clues would be appreciated!

I'm pleased to share some significant updates that have recently been released for our Hypervisor and Virtualization frameworks. We've focused on enhancing efficiency, expanding capabilities, and addressing common developer needs. I believe these will be valuable for many of you. Here’s a look at what’s new: Hypervisor Updates We've introduced support for configuring the intermediate physical address (IPA) memory granularity of a VM. This allows for more granular memory mappings, enabling granularity sizes down to 4KB. This is particularly useful for certain specialized device drivers requiring finer memory control. Virtualization Framework Updates More Efficient VM Image Storage with ASIF: We've integrated support for the Apple Sparse Image Format (ASIF). This results in a smaller disk footprint and optimized transfer for VM disk images when using VZDiskImageStorageDeviceAttachment, improving storage efficiency. Custom Network Topologies with vmnet: We've added support for vmnet custom network topologies. This enables more flexible VM-to-VM communication based on logical networks with customized configurations, useful for complex testing or development environments. See VZVmnetNetworkDeviceAttachment to get started. Simplified VM Queue Discovery: It's now easier to discover a VM’s on-process thanks to a new property on VZVirtualMachine. This should aid in development and debugging when interacting directly with the VM's queue. These are some of the key highlights of the first beta, and I'm looking forward to seeing how these improvements will be utilized. I encourage you to explore the documentation for full details on these features.

The latest version of Xcode available on: https://developer.apple.com/download/applications/ is Xcode 26.2 build 17C52. It was released today, December 12, 2025. However, uploads are failing with error: Validation failed. This bundle is invalid. Apple is not currently accepting applications built with this version of Xcode. I have verified my Xcode is not beta: I think that at least the non-release candidate, latest version of Xcode should be allowed to submit apps.

Apple sent a final reminder asking developers to complete the updated age rating questions in App Store Connect. Final reminder: Answer the updated age ratings questions. We’re reaching out because you have not provided responses to the updated age ratings questions in the App Information section of your app in App Store Connect. If you don’t answer these questions by January 31, 2026, you won’t be able to submit app updates in App Store Connect. The email says that if the age rating questions are not answered by 31 January 2026, you will not be able to submit app updates. What is not clear is what actually happens after that date. Many of us are in the middle of development and may not be ready to submit a new build before the deadline. The email does not explain whether this means: A) You can still submit updates after 31 January 2026, as long as you complete the age rating questionnaire before submitting, or B) The app becomes locked and cannot be updated at all once the deadline passes This is not stated explicitly in the email, which makes it confusing for me. It would be helpful if Apple could clearly confirm what developers should expect after 31 January 2026, especially for apps that are still undergoing active development. Anyone knows?