Overview

Overview In iOS 26, a List embedded in a NavigationStack inside a TabView exhibits a visual glitch when switching tabs. When the list is scrolled such that some rows are partially obscured by the navigation bar, the system correctly applies a fade/opacity effect to those rows. However, if the user switches to another tab while rows are in this partially obscured (faded) state, those rows briefly flash at full opacity during the tab transition before disappearing. This flash is visually distracting and appears to be inconsistent with the intended scroll-edge opacity behavior. The issue occurs only for rows partially obscured by the navigation bar. Rows partially obscured by the tab bar do not exhibit this flashing behavior. Steps to Reproduce: Run the attached minimal reproduction on iOS 26. Open the first tab. Scroll the list so that some rows are partially hidden behind the navigation bar (showing the native faded appearance). While rows are in this partially faded state, switch to the second tab. Observe that the faded rows briefly render fully opaque during the tab switch. Expected Behavior: Rows that are partially obscured by the navigation bar should maintain consistent opacity behavior during tab transitions, without flashing to full opacity. import SwiftUI @main struct NavBarReproApp: App { /// Minimal repro for iOS 26: /// - TabView with two tabs /// - First tab: NavigationStack + List /// - Scroll so some rows are partially behind the nav bar (faded) /// - Switch tabs: those partially-faded rows briefly flash fully opaque. Partially faded rows under the tab bar do not flash private let items = Array(0..<200).map { "Row \($0)" } var body: some Scene { WindowGroup { TabView { NavigationStack { List { ForEach(items, id: \.self) { item in Text(item) } } .navigationTitle("One") .navigationBarTitleDisplayMode(.inline) } .tabItem { Label("One", systemImage: "1.circle") } NavigationStack { Text("Second tab") .navigationTitle("Two") .navigationBarTitleDisplayMode(.inline) } .tabItem { Label("Two", systemImage: "2.circle") } } } } }

I used to develop iPhone apps about a decade ago and am now back at it with an iPhone and companion Apple Watch app. Why does it suck so bad? I a must be doing something wrong, but what I am doing is out of the box. The majority of the time when I go to build on the watch I get: Previous preparation error: A connection to this device could not be established.; Timed out while attempting to establish tunnel using negotiated network parameters. Which I then first try to force quit the app on the watch and if that does not work, reboot the watch (which is pretty ridiculous). I tried Gemini and it gave me the following explanation: This is arguably the single most frustrating error in the entire watchOS development ecosystem. As an expert, I can tell you that you are not doing anything wrong; you are fighting a fragile architecture. Here is the technical breakdown of why this happens and a workflow to mitigate it without constant reboots. The Technical "Why" This error message reveals that the issue lies in the CoreDevice (and formerly usbmuxd) infrastructure, specifically in the secure transport layer. The "Tunnel" Failure: Xcode attempts to establish a secure, encrypted tunnel (DTXConnection) to the Apple Watch to push the debugger and the app binary. Unlike the iPhone, which can sustain a high-bandwidth connection easily, the Watch aggressively manages its radios (Bluetooth vs. WiFi vs. AWDL) to save battery. The "Handshake" Timeout: If the Watch is on Bluetooth (Low Energy) when Xcode initiates the tunnel, the bandwidth is insufficient. The system tries to escalate the connection to WiFi (or Apple Wireless Direct Link). If this negotiation takes even a few milliseconds too long—due to 2.4GHz interference, router mDNS configuration, or the Watch CPU being throttled—the handshake times out. The "Previous Preparation Error": This is the insidious part. Once the handshake fails once, Xcode’s device service caches that failure state for the device UUID. It marks the device as "unreachable" to prevent the IDE from hanging indefinitely on subsequent tries. Why you see it constantly: You aren't actually triggering a new connection attempt; you are hitting the cached "failed" state immediately. Unfortunately, the solutions it gives me are: The "Wired Proxy" Method (Most Reliable) This is the gold standard for watchOS debugging. Do not rely on "Connect via Network" for the Watch directly if you can avoid it. Disable WiFi on your Mac (temporarily) or ensure the Mac and iPhone are on the exact same SSID. Plug your iPhone into the Mac via USB. Ensure the Watch is paired to that iPhone. Result: Xcode will tunnel the instructions through the USB connection to the Phone, and the Phone acts as a high-bandwidth proxy to the Watch. This eliminates the "Mac-to-Watch" WiFi negotiation failure point. Do you hit this regularly? What do you do to make for a smooth development and deployment process? Or is it really this fragile? Thanks for any help! Bryan

Hi, I’m encountering an issue in my app’s Wallet Extension, specifically within the Non-UI Extension, where we are unable to retrieve payment passes bound to a user’s account. The same code that successfully retrieves these bound cards in the main app does not work when used in the Non-UI Extension. Case-ID: 8932090 Steps to Reproduce: Set up In-App Provisioning: Ensure that the app has the necessary In-App Provisioning permissions. This functionality works correctly in the main app, confirming that the permissions are properly configured. Configure Wallet Extensions: Follow the Wallet Extensions documentation to configure the app, including all required settings for the Non-UI Extension. Add Code to Retrieve Payment Passes: In the main app’s LoginView, implement the following code in the handleLogin() method to retrieve payment passes: // Get the identifiers of payment passes that already exist in Apple Pay. paymentPassLibrary = self.passLibrary.passes(of: .secureElement) for pass in paymentPassLibrary { if let identifier = pass.secureElementPass?.primaryAccountIdentifier { if pass.isRemotePass && pass.deviceName.localizedCaseInsensitiveContains("Apple Watch") { remotePassIdentifiers.insert(identifier) } else if !pass.isRemotePass { passIdentifiers.insert(identifier) } } } Verify Functionality in Main App: Run the app and verify that the code successfully retrieves the payment passes bound to the user’s account. Implement Code in Non-UI Extension: Add the same code to the Non-UI Extension, specifically in the WNonUIExtHandler class within the override func status(completion: @escaping (PKIssuerProvisioningExtensionStatus) -> Void) method. Test in Wallet Extension: Run the Wallet Extension and observe that the payment passes are not retrieved when the code is executed in the Non-UI Extension. Has anyone encountered a similar issue or can provide insight into why the code might not work in the Non-UI Extension compared to the main app? Support Information: iOS Version: 17.5.1 Development environment: Xcode 15.4 (15F31d), macOS 14.3 (23D56) Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

Based on https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension/nednssettings/searchdomains , we expect the values mentioned in searchDomains to be appended to a single label DNS query. However, we are not seeing this behavior. We have a packetTunnelProvider VPN, where we set searchDomains to a dns suffix (for ex: test.com) and we set matchDomains to applications and suffix (for ex: abc.com and test.com) . When a user tries to access https://myapp , we expect to see a DNS query packet for myapp.test.com . However, this is not happening when matchDomainsNoSearch is set to true. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension/nednssettings/matchdomainsnosearch When matchDomainsNoSearch is set to false, we see dns queries for myapp.test.com and myapp.abc.com. What is the expected behavior of searchDomains?

有一个用户反馈7月8日充值了3笔后一直无法发起新的购买，总是提示已经购买。我们查了是之前的交易无法结束，我们使用StoreKit2，已经调用await transaction.finish()成功结束交易了，但是每次发起新支付时，Transaction.unfinished还会返回之前已完成的交易信息。 是设备或AppleID的问题么？用户尝试了重启设备、重新登录AppleID都没用。有什么办法解决呢？ 用户无法结束的苹果交易id为：200002703899379、200002703900716、200002703902023。 A user reported that after making 3 purchases on July 8th, they have been unable to initiate new purchases, always receiving a prompt that the item has already been purchased. Upon investigation, we found that the previous transactions couldn't be finalized. We use StoreKit2 and have successfully called await transaction.finish() to end the transactions. However, every time a new payment is initiated, Transaction.unfinished still returns information about the previously completed transactions. Could this be an issue with the device or Apple ID? The user has tried restarting the device and re-logging into their Apple ID, but these attempts were unsuccessful. Is there any way to resolve this? The Apple transaction IDs that the user is unable to finalize are: 200002703899379, 200002703900716, 200002703902023.

Apple is encouraging VPN apps on macOS to transition to Network Extension APIs, if they haven't done so yet, see: TN3165: Packet Filter is not API WWDC25: Filter and tunnel network traffic with NetworkExtension Using Network Extension is fine for VPN apps that are distributed via the Mac App Store. Users get one pop-up requesting permission to add VPN configurations and that's it. However, VPN apps that are distributed outside of the App Store (using Developer ID) cannot use Network Extension in the same way, such apps need to install a System Extension first (see TN3134: Network Extension provider deployment). Installing a System Extension is a very poor user experience. There is a pop-up informing about a system extension, which the user has to manually enable. The main button is "OK", which only dismisses the pop-up and in such case there is little chance that the user will be able to find the correct place to enable the extension. The other button in that pop-up navigates to the correct screen in System Settings, where the user has to enable a toggle. Then there is a password prompt. Then the user has to close the System Settings and return to the app. This whole dance is not necessary for VPN apps on the Mac App Store, because they work with "app extensions" rather than "system extensions". As a developer of a VPN app that is distributed outside of the App Store, my options are: Implement VPN functionality in an alternative way, without Network Extension. This is discouraged by Apple. Use a System Extension with Network Extension. This is going to discourage my users. I have submitted feedback to Apple: FB19631390. But I wonder, why did Apple create this difference in the first place? Is there a chance that they will either improve the System Extension installation process or even allow "app extensions" outside of the Mac App Store?

I have a UIHostingController on which I have set: hostingController.sizingOptions = [.intrinsicContentSize] The size of my SwiftUI content changes with animation (I update a @Published property on an ObservableObject inside a withAnimation block). However, I notice that my hostingController.view just jumps to the new frame without animating the change. Question: how can I animate the frame changes in UIHostingController that are caused by sizingOptions = [.intrinsicContentSize]

Hello, I have already paid developer account fees with my this id. But Still I can see this https://gyazo.com/db985d124b85d0759a1662cf05b9d82a with my developer account. Can any one help me what's the issue with my account? How can I get solution for this account?Thanks

We have developed an IOPCIFamily based custom KEXT to communicate with Thunderbolt interface storage device. This KEXT is working fine with Apple machines with Intel CPUs in all types of machines (iMac, iMac Pro and MacBooks). We tested this KEXT with Apple Silicon M1 machine where we are observing crash for the very first command we send to the Thunderbolt device. We observed that there is difference in number of bits in Physical Address we use for preparing command PRPs. In Intel machines we get 28-Bit Physical Address whereas in M1 we are getting 36-Bit address used for PRPs. We use inTaskWithPhysicalMask api to allocate memory buffer we use for preparing command PRPs. Below are the options we have used for this: options: kIOMemoryPhysicallyContiguous | kIODirectionInOut capacity: 16kb physicalMask: 0xFFFFF000UL (We want 4kb aligned memory) According to below documentation, we have to use inTaskWithPhysicalMask api to get memory below 4gb. https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Darwin/Conceptual/64bitPorting/KernelExtensionsandDrivers/KernelExtensionsandDrivers.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40001064-CH227-SW1 Some devices can only handle physical addresses that fit into 32 bits. To the extent that it is possible to use 64-bit addresses you should do so, but for these devices, you can either use IODMACommand or the initWithPhysicalMask method of IOBufferMemoryDescriptor to allocate a bounce buffer within the bottom 4 GB of physical memory. So just want to know what's the difference between Intel and ARM64 architecture with respect to physical memory access. Is there any difference between byte order for physical memory address..?? Crash log is given below: panic(cpu 0 caller 0xfffffe0016e08cd8): "apciec[0:pcic0-bridge]::handleInterrupt: Request address is greater than 32 bits linksts=0x99000001 pcielint=0x00020000 linkcdmsts=0x00000800 (ltssm 0x11=L0)\n" Debugger message: panic Memory ID: 0x6 OS release type: User OS version: 20C69 Kernel version: Darwin Kernel Version 20.2.0: Wed Dec 2 20:40:21 PST 2020; root:xnu-7195.60.75~1/RELEASEARM64T8101 Fileset Kernelcache UUID: 3E6AA74DF723BCB886499A5AAB34FA34 Kernel UUID: 48F71DB3-6C91-3E62-9576-3A1DCEF2B536 iBoot version: iBoot-6723.61.3 secure boot?: YES Paniclog version: 13 KernelCache slide: 0x000000000dbfc000 KernelCache base: 0xfffffe0014c00000 Kernel slide: 0x000000000e73c000 Kernel text base: 0xfffffe0015740000 Kernel text exec base: 0xfffffe0015808000 machabsolutetime: 0x12643a9c5 Epoch Time: sec usec Boot : 0x5fe06736 0x0009afbc Sleep : 0x00000000 0x00000000 Wake : 0x00000000 0x00000000 Calendar: 0x5fe067fd 0x0006569d CORE 0 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015971798 CORE 1 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c5c CORE 2 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c5c CORE 3 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c5c CORE 4 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 CORE 5 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 CORE 6 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 CORE 7 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 Panicked task 0xfffffe166ce9e550: 75145 pages, 462 threads: pid 0: kernel_task Panicked thread: 0xfffffe166d053918, backtrace: 0xfffffe306cb4b6d0, tid: 141 lr: 0xfffffe0015855f8c fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b740 lr: 0xfffffe0015855d58 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b7b0 lr: 0xfffffe0015977f5c fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b7d0 lr: 0xfffffe0015969914 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b880 lr: 0xfffffe001580f7e8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b890 lr: 0xfffffe00158559e8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bc20 lr: 0xfffffe00158559e8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bc90 lr: 0xfffffe0015ff03f8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bcb0 lr: 0xfffffe0016e08cd8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bd60 lr: 0xfffffe00166bc778 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4be30 lr: 0xfffffe0015f2226c fp: 0xfffffe306cb4be80 lr: 0xfffffe0015f1e2f4 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bec0 lr: 0xfffffe0015f1f050 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bf00 lr: 0xfffffe0015818c14 fp: 0x0000000000000000 Kernel Extensions in backtrace: com.apple.driver.AppleEmbeddedPCIE(1.0)[4F37F34B-EE1B-3282-BD8B-00009B954483]@0xfffffe00166b4000->0xfffffe00166c7fff dependency: com.apple.driver.AppleARMPlatform(1.0.2)[5CBA9CD0-E248-38E3-94E5-4CC5EAB96DE1]@0xfffffe0016148000->0xfffffe0016193fff dependency: com.apple.driver.IODARTFamily(1)[88B19766-4B19-3106-8ACE-EC29201F00A3]@0xfffffe0017890000->0xfffffe00178a3fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOPCIFamily(2.9)[5187699D-1DDC-3763-934C-1C4896310225]@0xfffffe0017c48000->0xfffffe0017c63fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOReportFamily(47)[93EC9828-1413-3458-A6B2-DBB3E24540AE]@0xfffffe0017c64000->0xfffffe0017c67fff com.apple.driver.AppleT8103PCIeC(1.0)[35AEB73B-D51E-3339-AB5B-50AC78740FB8]@0xfffffe0016e04000->0xfffffe0016e13fff dependency: com.apple.driver.AppleARMPlatform(1.0.2)[5CBA9CD0-E248-38E3-94E5-4CC5EAB96DE1]@0xfffffe0016148000->0xfffffe0016193fff dependency: com.apple.driver.AppleEmbeddedPCIE(1)[4F37F34B-EE1B-3282-BD8B-00009B954483]@0xfffffe00166b4000->0xfffffe00166c7fff dependency: com.apple.driver.ApplePIODMA(1)[A8EFA5BD-B11D-3A84-ACBD-6DB25DBCD817]@0xfffffe0016b0c000->0xfffffe0016b13fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOPCIFamily(2.9)[5187699D-1DDC-3763-934C-1C4896310225]@0xfffffe0017c48000->0xfffffe0017c63fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOReportFamily(47)[93EC9828-1413-3458-A6B2-DBB3E24540AE]@0xfffffe0017c64000->0xfffffe0017c67fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOThunderboltFamily(9.3.2)[11617399-2987-322D-85B6-EF2F1AD4A794]@0xfffffe0017d80000->0xfffffe0017e93fff Stackshot Succeeded Bytes Traced 277390 (Uncompressed 703968) ** System Information: Apple Silicon M1 BigSur 11.1 Model: Macmini9,1 Any help or suggestion is really appreciated. Thanks

Since recently, when I try to close a thread I created on an answer of mine, I get the following error: Trying later, next day, does not solve it. In the list of all threads, the post is not marked as answered. But if I look via Chrome or plain Safari, I see the answer itself is marked as correct: Which is not the case when opening in Safari Technology Preview (Release 233) where the same answer is still to be accepted:

I'm scanning for peripherals, and keep references to multiple CBUUIDs - one for each peripheral. I then start a connection to the peripheral. I never get a callback to say the connection succeeded, failed, or disconnected. I have a Mini-Moreph Bluetooth sniffer. The sniffer shows that the iPhone never tried to connect to any of the peripherals. The iPhone HCI logs show that a create connection request was sent, but a cancel connection request was sent 0.018 seconds later. No feedback was given to my application through CoreBluetooth. I've filed this through Feedback Assistant, but expect nothing will come of the report.

I enrolled in the Apple Developer Program on February 3, 2026. The payment was completed successfully at the time of enrollment, but my membership status has remained “Pending” since then. So far: No request for additional documents or identity verification No phone call from Apple No follow-up email other than the payment confirmation Apple Developer Support has been contacted, but no response yet I understand that verification can take some time, but the complete lack of communication is concerning, especially since this is blocking active development and release planning. If this is a known backlog or system-wide delay, some transparency from Apple would help. I’d also appreciate hearing whether others who enrolled in early February are seeing the same prolonged “Pending” state. Thanks in advance to anyone who can share recent experiences or escalation paths.

I'll try to ask a question that makes sense this time :) . I'm using the following method on NSFileManager: (BOOL) getRelationship:(NSURLRelationship *) outRelationship ofDirectoryAtURL:(NSURL *) directoryURL toItemAtURL:(NSURL *) otherURL error:(NSError * *) error; Sets 'outRelationship' to NSURLRelationshipContains if the directory at 'directoryURL' directly or indirectly contains the item at 'otherURL', meaning 'directoryURL' is found while enumerating parent URLs starting from 'otherURL'. Sets 'outRelationship' to NSURLRelationshipSame if 'directoryURL' and 'otherURL' locate the same item, meaning they have the same NSURLFileResourceIdentifierKey value. If 'directoryURL' is not a directory, or does not contain 'otherURL' and they do not locate the same file, then sets 'outRelationship' to NSURLRelationshipOther. If an error occurs, returns NO and sets 'error'. So this method falsely returns NSURLRelationshipSame for different directories. One is empty, one is not. Really weird behavior. Two file path urls pointing to two different file paths have the same NSURLFileResourceIdentifierKey? Could it be related to https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/813641 ? One url in the check lived at the same file path as the other url at one time (but no longer does). No symlinks or anything going on. Just plain directory urls. And YES calling -removeCachedResourceValueForKey: with NSURLFileResourceIdentifierKey causes proper result of NSURLRelationshipOther to be returned. And I'm doing the check on a background queue.

I keep getting a fails to open page message when I try to sign in using my Claude ai Pro account. The request was for an http url instead of an https url.

I'm currently using another provider for CI/CD. They've been offering Apple Silicon builds for over a year now. When we switched over, we saw our build times cut in half. I've seen similar results locally, back when I bought an M1 Mac. So, recently, I tried to use Xcode Cloud on my project. My build time is nearly 45 minutes, where my build time on my current system is about 15 minutes, max. Since I work on a team, and we make regular commits, having a 45 minute turnaround is not ideal. When I looked at the logs of my Xcode Cloud project, I saw a lot "x86_64" stuff in there, which led me to believe that Xcode Cloud is still building on Intel machines. Additionally, I run tests on my builds. The build time alone (before running tests) was almost 20 minutes. The 15-minute time I cited with my current CI/CD included build time & tests running. So, a whole cycle finishes on my current setup before tests are even run. I noticed that there was a bunch of x86_64 in the logs, which made me think that Xcode Cloud is still using Intel. Is this true? I've just gotten really used to faster build times, and I can't move onto a system like this, where the times are so drastically different. Like, I wouldn't mind build time that would add only a few more minutes to what I have now. But going from 15 -> 45 minutes is a real problem.

Hi guys, I am new to the Apple Developer Program (enrolled a few days ago) and this is my first app notarization attempt. I've been experiencing significant delays - all submissions have been stuck at "In Progress" for over 24 hours. Details: macOS app signed with Developer ID Application certificate Using xcrun notarytool with app-specific password Hardened runtime enabled codesign --verify --deep --strict passes Team ID: QVHM976XC5 Submission IDs (all stuck "In Progress"): 5f494a89-0db0-4cc6-944f-ca2fe399e870 (latest - 8+ hours) 938f6b8d-0d00-45f5-861d-68fe470df6c2 d0edcbfe-8464-455f-b077-bebaa5b9aab7 I understand new developers may experience longer initial processing, but 24+ hours seems excessive. Is there anything I should check or any additional steps required for new accounts? Any guidance appreciated.

Currently in our app, to identify a network switch in device we are doing NEHotspotHelper.register and then NEHotspotHelperHandler block. When the command type is evaluate and if the network.didJustJoin, we are identifying it as a network switch. As a part of moving our code base to iOS 26, if is found that NEHotspotHelper is deprecated. What is the proper replacement for this?

I am requesting assistance with an issue involving my Advanced App Clip Experience, which has remained in the “Received” state for more than few months, preventing the App Clip from becoming available when invoked via QR code. App Details App Name: Yellow Label Verification App Store Bundle ID: com.acviss.demoindia App Clip Bundle ID: com.acviss.demoindia.Clip Team ID: F2RLQ4VV59 App Version (Live): 1.4 Domain: acviss.com Issue Summary My Advanced App Clip Experience is stuck in the “Received” status. The “Publish” and “Build Assignment” options never appear, even though: The updated AASA file is correctly published at: https://acviss.com/.well-known/apple-app-site-association It contains the correct appclips → appID and paths entries It is served with the correct application/json content type Domain validation in App Store Connect shows Validated The App Clip build is already approved and live on the App Store Safari-based App Clip invocation works as expected Despite this, the Advanced App Clip Experience has not transitioned from “Received” to “Processing” or “Published.” Because of this, QR-based invocation consistently shows “App Clip Unavailable”, indicating that the App Clip Experience has not yet been activated on Apple’s backend. Reproduction Steps Publish correct AASA file with appclips array and paths Validate domain (shows green “Validated” in App Store Connect) Open the Advanced App Clip Experience in App Store Connect Status stays as Received “Build Assignment” or “Publish” buttons never appear QR scanning of the App Clip URL continues to show App Clip Unavailable Request Could you please check the backend processing of my App Clip Experience and manually trigger the sync or processing It appears that the App Clip Experience is not being processed even though all configuration, AASA, and domain validations are correct. I would greatly appreciate your assistance in resolving this so the App Clip can be invoked successfully via QR. Thank you very much for your help and support.

Has anyone experienced all review delays? We usually get reviewed very fast or within 24 hours. Our last version was stuck in "waiting for review" for 6 days. We resubmitted a newer version yesterday and it's been stuck in the same status. I know apple has introduced a new app submission UX, maybe that's the issue? Anyone is having same delays?

Hello, in my widget the user displays images filling the whole widget with overlayed texts (via ZStack). Via shadows or text background color the text gets better readable. However, when a user chooses transparent or tinted colors for the home screen, the text is barely or not readable anymore since e.g. white text on white image background. How to resolve this issue?