Overview

When i use the MFMailComposeViewController in visionOS, there is no cancel button for the controller. The button at the bottom closes the app. Is anyone else experiencing this? if([MFMailComposeViewController canSendMail]) { MFMailComposeViewController* controller = [[MFMailComposeViewController alloc] init]; controller.mailComposeDelegate = (id <MFMailComposeViewControllerDelegate>)view; [controller setToRecipients:toAddresses]; [controller setSubject:subject]; [controller setMessageBody:body isHTML:isHtml]; [view presentViewController:controller animated:YES completion:nil]; }

This is a bit complicated to explain so bare with me. I am working on building an app that allows you to send real time video/camera captures from one Apple device to another. I am using a custom UDP protocol built on top of NWListener, NWBrowser, and NWConnection APIs. It works fine, but there are a few issues that seems to all be related to awdl: When transmitting via WiFi over the router (not using peer-to-peer), there are periodic interruptions when the wireless card on the device changes channels for awdl polling. This is resolved by changing the 5GHz WiFi channel on the router to channel 149 (or disabling AWDL altogether which is not really feasible). In order to work around number 1, I decided to build in an option to toggle/prefer peer-to-peer transmission in the app thinking that if everything goes over a peer-to-peer connection the jitter caused from the channel switching should go away. This also works, but with an important caveat. The default transmission is extremely choppy until you take an OS action that “elevates” the AWDL connection into “realtime” mode. I am using includePeerToPeer on the listener, browser, and connection as well as serviceClass interactiveVideo. For number 1, you can understand that asking users to change the channel on their router is not a great user experience, but the problem is the peer-to-peer connection workaround is also not great by default. For number 2, as an example of the behavior, I can send a stream from my Mac to my iPad over a peer-to-peer connection and it works but the video is very choppy until I move my cursor from my Mac to my iPad to trigger Universal Control. I captured the OS logs while doing this and can confirm that something happens to trigger “realtime” mode on the AWDL connection. After that, the streaming is totally smooth with zero latency. Some log samples: 2026-03-19 12:42:01.277968-0400 0x1ae294c Default 0x0 495 3 rapportd: (CoreUtils) [com.apple.rapport:CLinkD] Update client from UniversalControl:697 2026-03-19 12:42:01.278031-0400 0x1ae294c Default 0x0 495 0 rapportd: (CoreUtils) [com.apple.CoreUtils:AsyncCnx] CLinkCnx-6089: Connect start: 'CLink-ed3b9618b4e0._companion-link._tcp.local.%13' 2026-03-19 12:42:01.278149-0400 0x1ae294c Default 0x0 495 0 rapportd: (CoreUtils) [com.apple.CoreUtils:AsyncCnx] CLinkCnx-6089: Querying SRV CLink-ed3b9618b4e0._companion-link._tcp.local.%13 2026-03-19 12:42:01.279454-0400 0x1ae253a Info 0x0 382 0 wifip2pd: [com.apple.awdl:datapathInitiator] Created AWDLDatapathInitiator clink-ed3b9618b4e0._companion-link._tcp.local <To: 2e:f2:5a:15:76:52> 2026-03-19 12:42:01.279498-0400 0x1ae294c Default 0x0 495 0 rapportd: (CoreUtils) [com.apple.CoreUtils:AsyncCnx] CLinkCnx-6089: Resolving DNS f970afcc-1f1c-47af-a3f3-0236c9f9bbb0.local.%13 2026-03-19 12:42:01.279588-0400 0x1ae253a Default 0x0 382 0 wifip2pd: [com.apple.awdl:datapathInitiator] AWDLDatapathInitiator clink-ed3b9618b4e0._companion-link._tcp.local <To: 2e:f2:5a:15:76:52> was started 2026-03-19 12:42:01.282537-0400 0x1ae294c Default 0x0 495 0 rapportd: (Network) [com.apple.network:path] nw_path_evaluator_start [5C54D967-624D-4269-B080-6C7AE63218C7 IPv6#1e905043%awdl0.49154 generic, attribution: developer] path: satisfied (Path is satisfied), interface: awdl0[802.11], dns, uses wifi 2026-03-19 12:42:01.596450-0400 0x1ae253a Debug 0x0 382 0 wifip2pd: [com.apple.awdl:driver] Received event realtimeMode 2026-03-19 12:42:01.596589-0400 0x1ae253a Default 0x0 382 0 wifip2pd: [com.apple.awdl:interface] Realtime mode updated true I noticed that on iOS 26 and iPadOS 26 a realtime mode was added specifically to the Wi-Fi Aware API which I assume does what I want: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/wifiaware/waperformancemode/realtime, but I am looking for a solution that works with the existing network API and also on previous OS versions. I have already tried a lot of things, but is there any way to programmatically trigger “realtime” mode? For additional context, the goal here is to have extremely low latency that also works for gaming. The actual latency introduced in 1 is approximately 30-50ms around once a second… adding a buffer to the stream makes the video completely smooth, but the extra delay on the receiver end is not acceptable for this use case. Any help or ideas would be appreciated. I can’t easily share a reproduce case right now, and even if I could, getting multiple devices into the exact state along with the router configuration in order to reproduce is going to be pretty difficult anyway.

After building the sample and enabling the file system extension the mount command is freezing. Any tips how to diagnose that? The logs show the following: log stream --style compact --info --debug --predicate 'subsystem == "com.apple.FSKit" OR process CONTAINS[c] "samplecode"' Filtering the log data using "subsystem == "com.apple.FSKit" OR process CONTAINS[c] "samplecode"" Timestamp Ty Process[PID:TID] 2026-03-17 15:15:51.832 I mount[16111:d88caa] [com.apple.FSKit:default] FSClient setting up connection to fskitd 2026-03-17 15:15:51.833 Db fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] -[liveFilesMountServiceDelegate listener:shouldAcceptNewConnection:]: start 2026-03-17 15:15:51.833 Df fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] Incomming connection, entitled 0 2026-03-17 15:15:51.833 Db fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] -[liveFilesMountServiceDelegate listener:shouldAcceptNewConnection:]: accepting connection 2026-03-17 15:15:51.833 Df fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] Hello FSClient! entitlement no 2026-03-17 15:15:51.834 Df mount[16111:d88caa] [com.apple.FSKit:default] Setting remote protocol to all XPC 2026-03-17 15:15:51.834 Df fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] About to get current agent for 501 2026-03-17 15:15:51.834 I fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] About to call to fskit_agent 2026-03-17 15:15:51.835 I fskit_agent[10123:d877d9] [com.apple.FSKit:default] Getting extensions 2026-03-17 15:15:51.836 Db fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] -[fskitdAgentManager currentExtensionForShortName:auditToken:replyHandler:]_block_invoke: Found extension for fsShortName () 2026-03-17 15:15:51.837 I fskitd[589:d88a5f] [com.apple.FSKit:default] Probe starting on 2026-03-17 15:15:51.837 Db fskitd[589:d87c31] [com.apple.FSKit:default] -[FSResourceManager getResourceState:]:found: 2026-03-17 15:15:51.837 Db fskitd[589:d87c31] [com.apple.FSKit:default] -[FSResourceManager addTaskUUID:resource:]:: Adding task () 2026-03-17 15:15:51.837 Df fskitd[589:d87c31] [com.apple.FSKit:default] About to get current agent for 501 2026-03-17 15:15:51.837 I fskitd[589:d87c31] [com.apple.FSKit:default] About to call to fskit_agent 2026-03-17 15:15:51.837 I fskit_agent[10123:d877d9] [com.apple.FSKit:default] Getting extensions 2026-03-17 15:15:51.838 Db fskitd[589:d87c31] [com.apple.FSKit:default] -[fskitdXPCServer getExtensionModuleFromID:forToken:]_block_invoke: Found extension , attrs 2026-03-17 15:15:51.838 Db fskitd[589:d87c31] [com.apple.FSKit:default] applyResource starting with resource kind 4

Environment OS: iOS 26.2 ~ 26.3 SDK: Xcode 16.4 (Target: iOS 17.6) Framework: StoreKit 2 Environment: Production (Cannot reproduce in Sandbox or Xcode Configuration) Issue Description We are encountering a critical purchase failure that occurs exclusively in the Production environment. When a user who has a "Pending Downgrade" (scheduled for the next renewal date) attempts to re-purchase their current higher-tier product to cancel the downgrade, StoreKit 2 returns an error. Steps to Reproduce User is currently on "Product A" (Higher Tier). User schedules a downgrade to "Product B" (Lower Tier). The status changes to "Pending Downgrade". User attempts to purchase "Product A" again via Product.purchase(). The system purchase sheet appears, and the user confirms the purchase. Immediately after authentication, a system alert from StoreKit appears saying: "Cannot process request at this time. Please try again later." (現在リクエストを一時的に処理できません。しばらくしてからもう一度お試しください。) After dismissing the alert, the app receives StoreKitError code 2 (unknown) with the localized message: "Request could not be completed" (リクエストを完了できません). Technical Observations Transaction.currentEntitlements: Does not change. App Store Server Notifications (V2): No notifications are sent to our server. Sandbox Behavior: Works perfectly. Re-purchasing Product A successfully cancels the downgrade and the subscription remains at the Higher Tier. AppStore.sync(): Running a manual sync does not resolve the pending state after the error. Question Since we cannot debug production-level logs, we are stuck. Is this a known regression in the StoreKit 2 commerce engine regarding state synchronization for downgrades? Has anyone found a workaround for this specific scenario? Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

**Environment Platform:** iOS Distribution: TestFlight Product type: Consumable In-App Purchase Account used for testing: Real Apple ID (not Sandbox) StoreKit: StoreKit 1 iOS version: iOS 17+ (also reproduced on earlier versions) Issue Description We are encountering an issue when testing consumable in-app purchases in a TestFlight build using a real Apple ID. Under normal circumstances, consumable products should be purchasable repeatedly. However, in TestFlight, after a successful purchase flow, the same product may become unavailable for repurchase, and the transaction appears to be stuck, even though: • finishTransaction: is correctly called • The transaction state is .purchased • No pending transactions are left in the payment queue Once this happens, subsequent purchase attempts result in behavior similar to a non-consumable product (e.g. “already purchased” or no purchase UI shown).

Hi, Please review my app I’m reaching out regarding an issue with my app review process. I was expecting a call last week but unfortunately didn’t receive any contact. I would really appreciate it if someone from the team could either review the app as soon as possible or contact me directly. I’m available anytime for a call. thanks

Hi everyone, I'm working in a strictly offline (intranet) environment and cannot use the standard online installation process to download and install the Claude Agent for Xcode. What I've tried: I manually copied the Agent binary/folder from an online machine to the following path: ~/Library/Developer/Xcode/CodingAssistant/Agents/Versions/26.3/claude The Issue: Even though the files are in the correct directory, Xcode fails to recognize the agent. It doesn't appear in the settings, and the Coding Assistant remains unavailable. Questions: Is there a specific metadata file (e.g., a .plist or .json index) that needs to be updated for Xcode to "see" the manually added agent? Are there any code signing or quarantine issues (like xattr) that need to be addressed when moving the agent between machines? Does anyone know if there are other dependencies or cache folders (besides ~/Library/Developer/Xcode/CodingAssistant/) that need to be synchronized? Environment: macOS: 26.3 (25D122) Xcode: 26.3 (17C519) Any guidance on the manual registration process for these agents would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Hello everyone, I recently submitted my iOS app for review, but it was unfortunately rejected under Guideline 2.1(a) - Performance - App Completeness. For context, my app is a healthcare application built with Ionic. According to the App Review team's message, they found the app to be incomplete. They stated they were unable to review the app because they couldn't get past the login screen. The Root Cause: Upon investigating, we discovered the issue is related to IP Geo-blocking. Because the app handles sensitive healthcare data, our API provider strictly blocks all network traffic originating from outside of Italy to legally comply with European GDPR regulations. Since the App Review team tests from the US, their requests are being entirely blocked by the firewall, causing the login to fail and the app to look broken on their end. What I have verified so far: I have provided valid demo account credentials in the App Store Connect App Review Information section. I have tested the app thoroughly on physical devices and simulators (iOS 16/17) in Italy and couldn't reproduce any crashes or login issues. My Questions for the Community: Has anyone successfully navigated this situation before? Will Apple accept a detailed video demonstration of the app functioning correctly from an Italian IP? Is it possible to request that they review it using a local VPN? Or is the only reliable solution to build a completely separate "mock" environment with dummy data just for the App Review team? Are there any common pitfalls I might be overlooking here? Any advice on how to properly address this with the App Review Board would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

My investors are losing their minds. We’ve had our app available on Google since late December, but our experience with Apple has been a nightmare. First, despite paying the developer fee, nobody responds to emails or reaches out. The one time we got Apple on the phone, we spoke to someone who said she was in charge of the testing team reviewing our app. The call was frustrating—she didn’t seem familiar with basic app testing for a location-based product (for example, how to emulate a different location), and it left us feeling helpless. The technical ability of the testing process has been shocking. We spent a month just trying to get reviewers to understand the basic app concepts. Our app also isn’t available in the United States, which seemed to confuse the review team. We’ve been able to address feedback quickly—sometimes within an hour—yet here we are nearly five months later still stuck. Right now we are averaging about a week at best to two weeks. Our app works; we know this because it’s been live for over five months on Google. We are not some AI slop app—this is a startup built by a team of people and private capital—and we can’t be taken seriously by anyone under these conditions. What do we do? What do we pay you for? What do I tell my investors? How do we get in contact with someone who can actually help? HOW DO WE GET REAL TESTERS?????

My app has been rejected repeatedly for showing 3rd party content but the content they flagged is owned by me. I believe it was caused by me charging the display name of the app, however the add id is the same and the bundle id is the same as before. Any time I submit with those comment, it is still being rejected. If you have any suggestions it would be helpful.

My team is evaluating an iOS companion app for our own network-connected device, and we want to understand whether the planned architecture would likely create an App Review problem under Guideline 2.5.17. Our situation is: We are building our own device and our own companion app. We do not intend to market the device as a Matter-certified device initially. We do not intend to support Apple Home or broad third-party Matter ecosystem interoperability in the first release. We are under a tight schedule and are considering reusing Matter/CSA-derived libraries, data models, and protocol concepts internally to reduce engineering effort and move faster toward eventual certification. Our current understanding is that there are already many iOS apps that communicate with LAN-connected devices using proprietary protocols, so our initial assumption is that a vendor-specific local-network device workflow should generally be acceptable. The point we are trying to clarify is whether that changes if the implementation under the hood is based in part on Matter-derived components. The idea we are considering is: Ship an initial release where the device and app use a vendor-specific onboarding and communication flow. The implementation would likely use something based on connectedhomeip under the hood, but the shipped protocol would be intentionally modified so that it is proprietary in practice and not interoperable with the broader Matter ecosystem. In other words, the device would not present as a normal Matter accessory, and other Matter controllers/devices would not be able to communicate with it as if it were a standard Matter device. Later, after full Matter certification work is complete, we would deliver an OTA update to enable proper Matter ecosystem interoperability. The question we are trying to answer is whether the mobile app itself would likely be acceptable on the App Store during that first phase. More specifically: If our app communicates only with our own device and not with Apple Home or third-party Matter controllers, but internally reuses Matter-derived software/protocol components, would Apple still likely consider that an app that “supports Matter” for purposes of Guideline 2.5.17? If the app includes something based on connectedhomeip or a modified subset of such a library, but the shipped device/app behavior is intentionally not interoperable with the general Matter ecosystem, is that still likely to be treated as use of a non-Apple Matter software component that must already be CSA-certified for iOS? From App Review’s point of view, what matters most here: whether Apple’s Matter pairing framework is used, whether the product is presented to users as a Matter accessory, whether the protocol remains interoperable with third-party Matter ecosystems, or simply whether Matter-derived software/components are included in the app at all? Is there a meaningful App Review distinction between: a proprietary device protocol designed entirely in-house, and a vendor-specific protocol that reuses Matter-derived transport/session/data-model components internally but is intentionally incompatible with standard Matter interoperability in the shipped product? We are trying to understand whether this staged approach is fundamentally incompatible with App Review, or whether it can be acceptable as a vendor-specific device workflow during development toward full certification.

Hi, I have a list with section headers as pinned views. I'm trying to programmatically scroll to a view inside a section using a proxy.scrollTo(id, anchor: .top). I was expecting the view to be aligned to the top of the scroll view but after the pinned header. Instead, it's aligned to the top of the scroll view overlapping with the header, hiding most of the row. Here is a code snippet to reproduce: import SwiftUI struct ContentView: View { var body: some View { ScrollViewReader { proxy in ScrollView { LazyVStack( pinnedViews: .sectionHeaders ){ ForEach(1...10, id: \.self) { count1 in Section(content: { Text("First row") .id("\(count1), row1") Text("second row") Text("third row") }, header: { Text("Section \(count1)").font(.title) .background(.red) }) } } } .safeAreaInset(edge: .bottom) { Button("Tap me") { proxy.scrollTo("3, row1", anchor: .top) } .padding() } } } } Any idea how this could be solved?

We are facing a critical issue with our Apple Developer account that is currently blocking app releases. Context: Organization account (Apple Developer Program) Account Holder: Ben Kunkel Apple Business Manager integrated with Okta (SCIM) Issue: The original Account Holder was deleted from Apple Business Manager and re-created via SCIM The recreated account now shows as “Staff” (Source: Custom Sync) and cannot be modified In Apple Developer, Ben is still listed as Account Holder but does not see any options to accept agreements or manage the account A transfer request was initiated to me before he left the company, but I am unable to complete identity verification (“Invalid Submission” error) Result: No active Account Holder can take action Unable to accept the updated Apple Developer Program License Agreement App submissions and updates are blocked (production impact) This appears to be a cross-system identity mismatch between Apple Business Manager and Apple Developer due to SCIM provisioning. Has anyone faced a similar issue? Any guidance on resolving this or getting it escalated internally would be greatly appreciated. We already have open cases with Apple Support, but progress has been slow. Thanks in advance.

We've noticed, that size of our ipa started to vary from time to time. We've found that all the difference was in the LC_CODE_SIGNATURE command under the _LINKEDIT segment of binary. The main reason of that change was the different number of hash slots due to different value of page size: 4096 on macOS SEQUOIA and 16384 on macOS TAHOE. So the size of the final binary was dependent on the machine, it was produced on. I didn't find out any information on why the default page size changed on TAHOE. Apple’s codesign supports a --pagesize argument. For regular builds that setting can be passed via OTHER_CODE_SIGN_FLAGS=--pagesize 16384. But it seems that xcodebuild export ...` completely ignores it: i've tried to pass invalid size (not the power of two), and the export still succeded. I've also managed to get xcodebuild logs via log stream --style compact --predicate 'process == "xcodebuild" OR process == "codesign"' --level trace They have no occurrences of --pagesize: 2026-03-24 13:43:27.236 Df xcodebuild[93993:a08c53] [IDEDistributionPipeline:verbose] invoking codesign: <NSConcreteTask: 0x8a1b21bd0; launchPath='/usr/bin/codesign', arguments='( "-f", "-s", 8C38C4A2CB0388A3DB6BAEFE438F20E044EE6CB2, "--entitlements", "/var/folders/w_/5t00sclx2vlcm4_fvly7wvh00000gn/T/XcodeDistPipeline.~~~T3Dcdf/entitlements~~~c2srXx", "--preserve-metadata=identifier,flags,runtime,launch-constraints,library-constraints", "--generate-entitlement-der", "--strip-disallowed-xattrs", "-vvv", "/var/folders/w_/5t00sclx2vlcm4_fvly7wvh00000gn/T/XcodeDistPipeline.~~~T3Dcdf/Root/Payload/App.app/Frameworks/FLEXWrapper.framework" )'> So here I have some questions: How is the default page size selected? Why the default page size may change between SEQUOIA and TAHOE? How to provide page size to xcodebuild's export or it's a bug that it doesn't look at the value of OTHER_CODE_SIGN_FLAGS?

Hello, My DSA (Digital Services Act) verification in App Store Connect has been in review for over 10 days. I have already submitted all required documents, and I have not received any updates or requests for additional information. This is currently blocking my ability to update or manage my app. Has anyone experienced a similar delay? Is there anything I can do to speed up the process? Thank you.

Hi Apple Developer Support, We are reaching out to request guidance on a testing constraint we have encountered related to iOS Universal Links and Associated Domains entitlements. As part of aligning with updated recommendations from our authentication provider, we have transitioned our mobile apps to use HTTPS redirect callbacks (Universal Links) instead of custom URI schemes. This works as expected in production and on real physical devices. However, we are encountering a significant issue in our cloud-based device testing environment. When our testing platform re-signs the app to run it on their infrastructure, the re-signing process strips the Associated Domains entitlement from the app bundle. As a result, iOS no longer honors our Universal Links, which breaks the authentication redirect flow — the callback cannot route back into the app after the user authenticates. We have identified a potential workaround that would involve disabling app re-signing in the testing platform, but this requires provisioning under an Apple Enterprise Developer account. This introduces considerable operational complexity, as it would require us to maintain separate signing and distribution paths alongside our existing Apple Developer Program membership. Before pursuing that path, we wanted to understand Apple's perspective on the following: Is there a supported or recommended approach for preserving Associated Domains entitlements when an app is re-signed by a third party (e.g., a cloud testing platform)? Are there any provisioning or entitlement configurations that would allow Universal Links to function correctly in re-signed builds without requiring an Enterprise Developer account? Does Apple have documented best practices for validating Universal Link–based flows in automated or cloud-based testing environments? Are there any alternative deep linking patterns that would be more resilient to re-signing while still meeting App Store and platform security requirements? Any guidance or recommendations from Apple on how to handle this within the bounds of the standard Apple Developer Program would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time.

Our app supports UIScene. As a result, launchOptions in application(_:didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:) is always nil. However, the documentation mentions that UIApplication.LaunchOptionsKey.location should be present when the app is launched due to a location event. Given that our app is scene-based: How can we reliably determine whether the app was launched due to a location update, geofence, or significant location change? Is there a recommended pattern or API to detect this scenario in a Scene-based app lifecycle? This information is critical for us to correctly initialize location-related logic on launch. Relevant documentation: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/corelocation/cllocationmanager/startmonitoringsignificantlocationchanges()

When using ShareLink in SwiftUI to share an image, the “Save Image” action dismisses not only the share sheet but also the presenting SwiftUI view. The behavior differs depending on whether the photo library permission alert appears. Observed behavior: The first time the user taps Save Image, the system permission alert appears. After granting permission, the image saves successfully and the share sheet dismisses normally. On subsequent attempts, the image is saved successfully, but both the share sheet and the presenting view are dismissed unexpectedly. Expected behavior: After saving the image, only the share sheet should dismiss. The presenting SwiftUI view should remain visible. Steps to Reproduce Present a SwiftUI view using .sheet. Inside that view, add a ShareLink configured to export a PNG image using Transferable. Tap the ShareLink button. Choose Save Image. Grant permission the first time (if prompted). Repeat the action. Result: On subsequent saves, the share sheet dismisses and the presenting view is dismissed as well. Sample code ` internal import System import UniformTypeIdentifiers import SwiftUI struct RootView: View { @State private var isPresented: Bool = false var body: some View { ZStack { Color.white Button("Show parent view") { isPresented = true } } .sheet(isPresented: $isPresented) { ParentView() } } } struct ParentView: View { @State private var isPresented: Bool = false var body: some View { NavigationStack { ZStack { Color.red.opacity(0.5) } .toolbar { ToolbarItem() { let name = "\(UUID().uuidString)" let image = UIImage(named: "after")! return ShareLink( item: ShareableImage(image: image, fileName: name), preview: SharePreview( name, image: Image(uiImage: image) ) ) { Image(uiImage: UIImage(resource: .Icons.share24)) .resizable() .foregroundStyle(Color.black) .frame(width: 24, height: 24) } } } } } } struct ShareableImage: Transferable { let image: UIImage let fileName: String static var transferRepresentation: some TransferRepresentation { FileRepresentation(exportedContentType: .png) { item in let fileURL = FileManager.default.temporaryDirectory .appendingPathComponent(item.fileName) .appendingPathExtension("png") guard let data = item.image.pngData() else { throw NSError(domain: "ImageEncodingError", code: 0) } try data.write(to: fileURL) return SentTransferredFile(fileURL) } } } `

I’m seeing a visual glitch with toolbar buttons when building with Xcode 26 for iOS 26. During transitions (both pushing in a NavigationStack and presenting a .sheet with its own NavigationStack), the toolbar button briefly flashes the wrong background colour (black in dark mode, white in light mode) before animating to the correct Liquid Glass appearance. This happens even in a minimal example and only seems to affect system toolbar buttons. A custom view with .glassEffect() doesn’t have the issue. I’ve tried: .tint(...), UINavigationBarAppearance/UIToolbarAppearance, and setting backgrounds on hosting/nav/window but none of those made any difference. Here’s a minimal reproducible example: import SwiftUI struct ContentView: View { @State private var showingSheet = false var body: some View { NavigationStack { List { NavigationLink("Push (same stack — morphs)") { DetailView() } Button("Sheet (separate stack — flashes)") { showingSheet = true } } .navigationTitle("Root") .scrollContentBackground(.hidden) .background(.gray) .toolbar { ToolbarItem(placement: .topBarTrailing) { Button("Action") {} } } .sheet(isPresented: $showingSheet) { SheetView() } } } } struct DetailView: View { var body: some View { Text("Detail (same stack)") .frame(maxWidth: .infinity, maxHeight: .infinity) .background(.gray) .navigationTitle("Detail") .toolbar { ToolbarItem(placement: .topBarTrailing) { Button("Action") {} } } } } struct SheetView: View { var body: some View { NavigationStack { Text("Sheet (separate stack)") .frame(maxWidth: .infinity, maxHeight: .infinity) .background(.gray) .navigationTitle("Sheet") .toolbar { ToolbarItem(placement: .topBarTrailing) { Button("Action") {} } } } } } Has anyone else seen this or found a workaround outside of disabling this background completely with .sharedBackgroundVisibility(.hidden)? I have filed a bug report under FB22141183

I have a very important voice memo that I have recorded on my iPad, as I was recording it, it seemed to have completely worked, but for some strange reason the voice memo will not play, download to my filess, I am unable to send it to anyone, and it basically just pops up blank every time I just try to share it. I cannot listen to it and have not been able to listen to it. This is the same on both my iPad and my phone, when I went to Apple, they said to come on here and ask for guidance, and that it might be because my regular iPhone is updated normally but on my iPad, which was the Voice Memo was recorded on is updated To beta. please give me some advice and if there’s any way, I could recover even the transcript of the voice message because it is truly so important to me. The sound waves are there and everything and I just don’t understand why it will not play on either device. I have also tried copying it. I have also tried trimming the beginning and it’s like the data is there, but it will not play.