Mark your calendar, this could be the iPhone 17 launch date
The dates have been shared by German site iphone-ticker.de, which claims to have 'internal information from German mobile phone providers' (translated).
If accurate, it means the iPhone 17 launch is just over a month away, and will take place just 20 days after Google's Pixel 10 event on August 20.
This is important because: This is the first iPhone 17 release date leak which feels like it might have some weight behind it, helping us zero in on when we'll learn about Apple's next generation of smartphones, and when they'll go on sale.
Previous iPhone launches have been held in early-mid September, so the latest date leak does fall in line with expectations.
iPhone 17 (2025) – rumored Rumored launch date: Tuesday 9 September
Rumored release date: Friday 19 September iPhone 16 (2024) Launch date: Monday 9 September
Release date: Friday 20 September iPhone 15 (2023) Launch date: Tuesday 12 September
Release date: Friday 22 September iPhone 14 (2022) Launch date: Wednesday 7 September
Release date: Friday 16 September iPhone 13 (2021) Launch date: Tuesday 14 September
Release date: Friday 24 September
Why should I care? Apple's iPhone launch events continue to be one of the biggest tech events of the year, with interest from people around the world.
Once an iPhone launch date is locked in, things tend to slide into place. Apple's pattern of launch and release sees new iPhones go on a sale the Friday of the following week after launch – which lines up nicely with this new leak.
New iPhone pre-orders tend to open the Friday of launch week, which if this rumor is accurate would mean iPhone 17 pre-orders could open on Friday 12 September.
So if you're tempted by what Apple might have up its sleeve, we'd recommend you start getting your finances in order now.
Recommended Videos
Okay, what's next? We're penciling in an Apple event for September 9 on our calendar, with a potential iPhone 17 on sale date for September 19. We'll have to wait for Apple to confirm the exact date however.
Apple tends to send out invites to its September launch event around two weeks before, so we could be looking at August 26 for invites to land.
Rumors suggest we'll get the usual quartet of new handsets in the form of the iPhone 17, iPhone 17 Plus, iPhone 17 Pro and 17 Pro Max – but they could be joined by a new, fifth option for this year.
There has been a lot of chatter around a super slim iPhone 17 Air, set to rival the Galaxy S25 Edge – so keep your eyes peeled for this svelte offering.
Via MacRumors
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Apple's $500 Billion Investment Into America Just Got Larger: Does That Mean You Should Buy the Stock?
Key Points Apple is increasing its U.S. spending plans from $500 billion to $600 billion, although this figure is a bit misleading. The company's revenue growth is recovering, but it's still slower than other big tech players. The stock looks expensive relative to its growth. 10 stocks we like better than Apple › A splashy $600 billion announcement may have just gotten Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) in the White House's good graces. After months of worries over how tariffs will affect costs for iPhones made in China or India, Apple just projected a $100 billion increase in its spending plans over the next four years in the United States, including an investment in homegrown semiconductors. Apple stock shot up over 10% on the news. Does this new spending plan mean you should load the boat with Apple stock? Here's the big picture that investors need to understand today. A $100 billion spending increase .... over four years Last week, Apple claimed it would spend $600 billion in the United States. This is a large number, but it's also a bit misleading compared to other recent announcements from major tech companies such as Alphabet. The parent company of Google is forecasting $85 billion of capital expenditures this year, with much of that going to artificial intelligence (AI). Meanwhile, Apple's spending is over four years. The latest increase adds $25 billion in annual spending, bringing the grand total up from $500 billion to $600 billion. What's more, this includes various expenses such as employee salaries, data center buildouts, money paid to suppliers, and more -- it's not exclusive to capital expenditures. Other big tech peers are likely spending this amount or more if you cast as wide a net Apple does when calculating total spending. The announcement may put Apple in good standing with the U.S. government, but it's not a radical change from management. The company is still doing the bulk of its manufacturing in China, and this new commitment only represents a slight deviation from its previously announced plans. Improving financial performance Financial performance and earnings power are what matter for Apple stock. Last quarter, revenue growth hit its highest level since 2022, though it was still below 10% year over year. The growth is coming from its software services division as well as the iPhone, the key drivers for the business over the last decade. iPhone sales showed strong growth but have posted many quarters of stagnation, which should worry investors. This is a mature product that has seen declining unit volumes and upgrade cycles for years. Services revenue keeps growing quickly but is at risk of losing its cash cow Google Search payment if an antitrust lawsuit goes the wrong way. Apple receives an estimated $20 billion a year from Google to make it the default search engine, or about 15% of Apple's overall operating income. This could be wiped out overnight if the lawsuit doesn't work out for them. The big picture with Apple stock In totality, Apple's announced spending plans may seem ambitious but are actually not a huge change from its long-term roadmap. It was already investing in component manufacturing in the United States, and this is just a modest increase in that context. The stock's 12% month-to-date gain may be fleeting as a result. But should investors buy the stock today? Apple is the slowest-growing company among the "Magnificent Seven", outside of Tesla, which is grappling with declining sales. The others are putting up solid double-digit revenue growth quarter after quarter. Despite this slow growth, Apple stock trades at a premium to several of its peers on a price-to-earnings basis. Its P/E ratio of 35 is also significantly higher than that of the S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 indexes. This leads me to believe that Apple is overvalued, especially following its recent gains from the $600 billion spending announcement. Should you invest $1,000 in Apple right now? Before you buy stock in Apple, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Apple wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $663,630!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,115,695!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,071% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 185% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 13, 2025 Brett Schafer has positions in Alphabet. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Apple, and Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Apple's $500 Billion Investment Into America Just Got Larger: Does That Mean You Should Buy the Stock? was originally published by The Motley Fool
Business Insider
11 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Claude Code turned a 3-week project into a 2-day task — but nearly broke it
Hugh Williams, former Google and eBay engineering VP, recently spent two days deep in the weeds with Claude Code, Anthropic's AI-powered coding assistant. His verdict? "It's like being a carpenter who suddenly has awesome power tools." Williams built a fully functional system running on AWS in 48 hours, a task he says would normally take at least three weeks. He didn't just write code; he learned a new graph database (AWS Neptune) on the fly, delivering clean, modular, and scalable output. Claude Code had problems, too, though. Williams warned that every hour or so, the coding assistant compressed its conversation context, and things broke. "I learnt to wrap up a 'milestone,' update the README, and start a new conversation afresh before compaction occurs," he wrote on LinkedIn. Williams also made the now-classic mistake of asking Claude to "clean up" code directories, and watched it wipe out important features, working code, and data in one stroke. "I learnt the hard way to back up code every hour or so manually, so I could go back to previous versions when things went awry," he explained. Occasionally, Claude Code would add random extra or duplicative features, so he needed to inspect the code holistically every hour or so to make sure his projects were headed in the right direction. Still, Williams believes Claude Code is a true accelerator for those who already know how to code. For junior devs or non-coders? Not yet. He estimates Claude Code can already take on 50% of the workload for a seasoned engineer, and that might top out at roughly 75%, a productivity jump with serious implications. Bottom line: For experienced builders, Claude Code is here, and it's powerful. Just don't forget to back up your work!
Gizmodo
12 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Open-Sourced AI Models May Be More Costly in the Long Run, Study Finds
As more businesses adopt AI, picking which model to go with is a major decision. While open-sourced models may seem cheaper initially, a new study warns that those savings can evaporate fast, due to the extra computing power they require. In fact, open-source AI models burn through significantly more computing resources than their closed-source rivals when performing the same tasks, according to a study published Thursday by Nous Research. The researchers tested dozens of AI models, including closed systems from Google and OpenAI, as well as open-source models from DeepSeek and Magistral. They measured how much computing effort each required to complete identical tasks across three categories: simple knowledge questions, math problems, and logic puzzles. To do this, they used the number of tokens each model used to solve and answer questions as for computing resources consumed. 'Open-weight models use 1.5–4× more tokens than closed ones—and up to 10× for simple knowledge questions—making them sometimes more expensive per query despite lower per-token costs,' the study authors wrote. In AI, a token is a piece of text or data—it could be a word, part of a word, or even punctuation—that models use to understand language. Models process and generate text one token at a time, so the more tokens they use, the more computing power and time a task requires. Since most closed-source models don't reveal their raw reasoning process or chain of thought (CoT), the researchers measured their computing efficiency by counting the tokens they used instead. Because models are billed by total output tokens used in their reasoning process and outputting the final answer, completion tokens serve as a proxy for the effort needed to produce a response. This is an important consideration for companies using AI for many reasons. 'First, while hosting open weight models may be cheaper, this cost advantage could be easily offset if they require more tokens to reason about a given problem,' the researchers wrote. 'Second, an increased number of tokens will lead to longer generation times and increased latency.' The study found that open models consistently use more tokens than closed models for the same tasks, sometimes three times as many for simple knowledge questions. The gap narrowed to less than twice for math and logic problems. 'Closed models (OpenAI, Grok-4) optimize for fewer tokens to cut costs, while open models (DeepSeek, Qwen) use more tokens, possibly for better reasoning,' the study authors wrote. Among open models, llama-3.3-nemotron-super-49b-v1 was the most efficient, while Magistral models were the most inefficient. OpenAI's models were standouts as well. Both its o4‑mini and the new open-weight gpt‑oss models showed impressive token efficiency, especially on math problems. The researchers noted that OpenAI's gpt‑oss models, with their concise chain-of-thoughts, could serve as a benchmark for improving token efficiency in other open models.
