The rising cost of RAM and storage has become a growing problem for the tech industry. Apple has largely kept those increases from affecting customers, but according to a recent Wall Street Journal report, that may be about to change.

Speaking to the publication, Apple CEO Tim Cook said price increases are now “unavoidable” as the cost of DRAM memory and NAND storage continues to climb. The surge is being driven largely by the AI boom, as cloud providers and AI companies compete for the same chips used in consumer devices. Apple has largely shielded customers from those increases so far, but Cook indicated that strategy has reached its limits.

Apple held the line longer than most rivals

Apple’s ability to avoid major price hikes has not happened by accident. The company entered 2026 with inventory secured before memory prices accelerated and used its scale to negotiate supply agreements that many competitors could not match. Earlier this year, Apple also relied on product configuration changes, such as removing lower-capacity options from some Macs, instead of directly raising sticker prices.

The challenge is becoming harder as Apple prepares a new generation of AI-focused products. Following WWDC, the company is already testing its next-generation Siri experience and broader Apple Intelligence upgrades. Those features place greater demands on memory, which helps explain why some of Apple’s most advanced Siri capabilities are currently limited to devices with higher RAM configurations.

Apple is also expected to launch new Macs and its long-rumored foldable iPhone later this year, both of which could require larger memory allocations to support increasingly capable on-device AI features. Reports have already suggested that the iPhone 18 Pro could start at around $1,399 this fall, a $300 increase over its predecessor.

AI is forcing Apple’s hand

Cook told the Wall Street Journal that Apple is willing to use its financial resources to help secure memory supply, but he ruled out building Apple-owned memory or storage manufacturing facilities. “We can’t do everything. We know what we’re good at,” Cook said. Despite Apple’s influence over suppliers, that leaves the company exposed to the same market forces affecting the rest of the industry.

With memory suppliers increasingly prioritizing AI infrastructure customers and analysts warning that shortages could persist into 2027, Apple’s long streak of absorbing those costs may finally be coming to an end.

China’s top diplomat Wang Yi announced on Wednesday that Beijing is “accelerating the establishment of a global AI cooperation organization” and invited all countries to join. The comments came as the G7 summit in France wrapped up with discussions about giving “trusted partners” access to leading US AI models, according to Reuters. Two competing visions of AI governance are now diverging in public.

Wang was speaking at the release of China’s global governance whitepaper, which criticised trade wars and emphasised support for the Global South. Vice chair Zhao Haibing of China’s top economic agency pushed back on “closed, exclusive and monopolistic approaches to tech development.” The language was aimed directly at Washington.

The timing is deliberate. The US Commerce Department ordered Anthropic to shut down Fable 5 and Mythos 5 last week, cutting off every foreign user. Anthropic and Google DeepMind used the G7 to call for a US-led AI coalition that would set international rules. Canada agreed. China was not invited.

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

The contrast in approaches is stark. US AI models are subscription-only and increasingly subject to export controls. China’s efforts have focused on cheap or free models that can be downloaded in their entirety. DeepSeek, Qwen, and other Chinese open-weight models are available to anyone with an internet connection. The Global South, which cannot afford enterprise AI subscriptions and was not consulted on the G7’s “trusted partner” framework, has a clear choice between the two.

China is routing its AI diplomacy through existing multilateral bodies. Wang pointed to cooperation through BRICs and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Zhao cited China’s “AI Capacity Building for All” initiative, support for the UN in leading global AI governance, and programmes to help developing countries with technology and talent.

The US and China said last month they would work on AI guardrails together, but few details have emerged. President Xi Jinping proposed a “Global Governance Initiative” at the SCO last summer. Premier Li Qiang announced the global AI cooperation organisation at a Shanghai conference in July 2025, just days after the Trump administration released its own AI action plan supporting US tech development overseas.

The structural split is now visible. The US is building an alliance of wealthy democracies with controlled access to its most powerful models. China is building data exchanges, exporting governance via the Digital Silk Road, and treating AI distribution as a geopolitical tool. For the 6 billion people who live outside the G7, the question is not which system is better. It is which system shows up first.

Tesco is also dealing with migration challenges related to data security because its new, unnamed virtualization software is incompatible with the Veeam and Zerto products it uses.

“Manifestly unfair and excessive” price hike

Tesco initially requested at least 100 million pounds (about $133.6 million) in damages each from Broadcom, VMware, and reseller Computacenter, plus interest.

In its recent filings, Tesco said it turned down at least four offers from Broadcom to continue using VMware and Broadcom’s mainframe tech. One offer charged $23.5 million (about 17.6 million pounds) for VMware Cloud Foundation 9.0 and mainframe software and support services for a year, The Register reported. Tesco said that was “around 175 percent” more expensive than what it believes it should have had to pay for VMware and a 350 percent price hike for the mainframe offerings. The prices were “manifestly unfair and excessive,” one of Tesco’s filings said, according to The Register.

In an amended defense, Broadcom denied that the price hike was unfair, The Register reported. Additionally, Broadcom argued that it shouldn’t have to pay damages in relation to Tesco struggling to find VMware and Broadcom alternatives before Tesco’s support expired, as the retail firm has since found replacement products.

The case is expected to go to court between November 1, 2027, and February 25, 2028, The Register reported. Afterward, it could go to trial.

Although the companies will continue their dispute in UK courts, the disagreement mirrors frustrations that VMware customers and partners around the world have expressed since Broadcom bought VMware. With users often being heavily dependent on VMware products, many have delayed or avoided migration or are only moving some workloads, due to complications around cost, time, support, and compatibility.

Still, virtualization rivals, like Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Nutanix, have been making aggressive pushes to attract disgruntled VMware users.

Simultaneously, Broadcom has stuck to its VMware strategy and has reported financial success, especially among its target of large enterprises. It has also dealt with other public legal disputes with large customers, including AT&T, with which it reached an undisclosed settlement, and Siemens, which Broadcom accused of software pirating in an ongoing case in the US District Court for the District of Delaware.

AI AND ML

Researchers urge developers to see that less is more when it comes to instructions

If you’re exposing your agent to a strong odor, it’s time to clean up your instructions.

Risky or poorly structured code patterns are known as “code smells,” and it turns out coding agent directives can be similarly redolent, leading to wasted tokens and worse output. 

Coding agents rely on configuration files that summarize expected agent behavior. These context-enhancing files are commonly written in Markdown and named either CLAUDE.md for those using Anthropic models or AGENTS.md for pretty much everyone else.

They include various text instructions that advise the coding agent about desired behavior and tool use. And they can get rather wordy. Anthropic advises no more than 200 lines of text because longer files consume model context and may hinder model coherence.

Researchers affiliated with the computer science department of the Federal Institute of Minas Gerais in Brazil recently scoured some 532,000 files to build and analyze a dataset of 100 popular open-source projects containing either an AGENTS.md or a CLAUDE.md file.

“Our results show that configuration smells are widespread,” the authors state. “Lint Leakage was the most common smell, affecting 62 percent of the files, followed by Context Bloat (42 percent) and Skill Leakage (35 percent).”

Linting is the process of running automated tools to check code for programming and style errors. Lint Leakage refers to agent instructions that repeat rules already enforced by linters, format checkers, and static analysis tools. Duplicative rules waste tokens by burdening the underlying model with guidance for a task already handled reliably by programmatic tools.

Context Bloat, as its name suggests, describes the tendency of developers to overspecify code agent behavior. “Bloated configuration files increase token consumption, raise costs, and reduce the visibility of important instructions,” the authors observe, pointing to Anthropic’s recommendation of no more than 200 lines of text.

Skill Leakage, another common configuration smell, occurs when rarely used tools or practices get added to the AGENTS.md file, which gets loaded in every agent session. The agent instructions would be better in a separate skills file (e.g. SKILLs.md) that gets loaded only when needed. Skill leakage also expands the agent’s context unnecessarily and potentially distracts agents from other things.

Other agentic odors include: Blind References, which happens when configuration files reference external documents (e.g. via URLs) without explaining when that resource becomes relevant; Init Fossilization, configuration details set up upon a project’s initialization that are no longer relevant; and Conflicting Instructions, which occur when agent directives contradict each other.

The study authors say that they found at least one of these six smells in 91 of the 100 AGENTS.md files tested.

“These results suggest that developers could benefit from catalogs and tools designed to spot configuration issues in agent configuration files,” they conclude in the preprint paper, entitled “Configuration Smells in AGENTS.md Files: Common Mistakes in Configuring Coding Agents.” The authors are Helio Victor F. dos Santos, Vitor Costa, Joao Eduardo Montandon, Luciana Lourdes Silva, and Marco Tulio Valente.

The message here is that less is more when it comes to code agent configuration files, perhaps even to the point that anything is worse than nothing. 

Similarly, when ETH Zurich boffins examined the impact of context files for agents a few months ago, they found [PDF] that developer-generated instructions raised costs and only improved code performance about 4 percent, while LLM-generated instructions had a small (3 percent) negative impact on agent-generated code.

They concluded “unnecessary requirements from context files make tasks harder, and human-written context files should describe only minimal requirements.” ®