In this Tech Insight, we look at Microsoft’s newly promoted set of seven Windows 11 tips—designed to help users get more from the operating system ahead of Windows 10’s looming end-of-life deadline.

Hoping To Smooth The Upgrade Path

With support for Windows 10 set to end on 14 October 2025, Microsoft is stepping up efforts to showcase the benefits of its newer Windows 11 OS. The latest push is all about encouraging users to explore Windows 11’s built-in features, from multitasking tools to biometric login, in the hope of smoothing the upgrade path and unlocking better everyday experiences.

For businesses, these seven tips may seem minor at first glance but, taken together, they may be seen to reflect a growing emphasis on usability, focus, and personalisation. These are traits that can support productivity and security across both office and remote work environments.

So, what exactly are the tips, and what value do they offer?

1. Make the Start Menu Your Own

Microsoft’s first tip focuses on the Start Menu, which has shifted from its traditional left-hand corner to a sleek, centralised layout in Windows 11. The company recommends personalising it by pinning frequently used apps, rearranging shortcuts, and resizing tiles to suit individual workflows.

For organisations standardising device setups across teams, this functionality allows for cleaner, more consistent interfaces, thereby helping users find what they need faster.

Adopting this tip could improve navigation efficiency and can be customised to match common app usage per role or department.

2. Master Snap Layouts for Multitasking

Snap Layouts allow users to arrange multiple apps and windows on-screen with ease. Hovering over the maximise button reveals several layout options, such as side-by-side or grid views.

This is particularly useful for professionals working across several platforms simultaneously, e.g. spreadsheets, emails, browsers, and collaboration tools.

This tip could have value in reducing screen clutter and enhancing productivity for multi-tasking roles, even on single-display setups.

3. Create a Desktop for Every Project

Windows 11 supports multiple desktops, allowing users to group open apps and documents by task or project. For example, one desktop can house a user’s day-to-day admin work, while another holds presentations or creative tools.

Switching between desktops is as simple as pressing Windows + Tab, offering a smooth way to stay organised, especially in project-based roles or client-facing work.

This tip could help users maintain context and stay focused across varied workstreams without overwhelming a single workspace.

4. Use Widgets to Stay Updated

Widgets provide a snapshot of useful updates like weather, news, calendar appointments, and task lists, all accessible via a swipe or the Windows + W shortcut.

Microsoft pitches this as a way to streamline day-to-day information needs without opening multiple apps. Users can customise what they see and remove any widgets they don’t need.

Making more use of widgets could be ideal for quick, on-the-go updates, particularly for team members juggling schedules, appointments, or news-based roles.

5. Use Focus Sessions to Minimise Distraction

Focus Sessions, found within the Clock app, allow users to set structured time blocks for concentrated work. They sync with Microsoft To Do and reduce notifications during each timed session.

This tip supports better time management, encouraging workers to break large tasks into manageable chunks and avoid common distractions.

Using Focus Sessions could encourage better concentration habits and support mental well-being, particularly in hybrid or home-based settings.

6. Log In with Windows Hello

Windows Hello replaces passwords with biometric authentication e.g., facial recognition or fingerprint scanning, provided the device supports it.

Microsoft highlights this as a faster, more secure login method that also cuts down on password fatigue and reduces the risk of compromised credentials.

Using Windows Hello could strengthen endpoint security, simplify login workflows, and reduce password-related support issues, all of which could be of real value to businesses.

7. Enable Dark Mode for Comfort

Although it may sound like it, Dark Mode isn’t just a design choice, but is actually a feature designed to reduce eye strain, especially in low-light settings or during extended screen use. Windows 11 offers a system-wide toggle under Personalisation settings.

Users working late or on portable devices may find Dark Mode more comfortable, helping to reduce visual fatigue.

Using Dark Mode could actually improve long-term comfort for screen-heavy roles and can reduce energy consumption on OLED displays.

Why These Tips Matter

Together, these seven tips could be seen to demonstrate how Windows 11 is evolving beyond just a visual upgrade. They highlight Microsoft’s efforts to align the OS with modern working needs, prioritising comfort, personalisation, and smarter workflows.

For IT managers and business leaders, they also present an opportunity to:

– Improve the onboarding experience for new Windows 11 users.

– Drive better day-to-day productivity through built-in tools.

– Strengthen device-level security with passwordless login.

– Encourage healthier digital habits across teams.

The key here is raising awareness, i.e. while these tips are all native to the operating system, few are actively promoted during setup, and many users still don’t explore them fully without guidance.

Not Without Challenges

Despite Microsoft’s efforts, for many people the road to better Windows 11 adoption isn’t entirely smooth.

For example, while some features, like Snap Layouts and Focus Sessions, are underused simply because users don’t know they exist, others (such as Windows Hello) require compatible hardware that may not be standard across all fleets. Also, while personalisation is encouraged, a lack of training or policy guidance could lead to inconsistent user experiences.

There’s also the broader challenge of change management. Businesses still on Windows 10 may face staff resistance to visual shifts like the central Start Menu or the introduction of widgets. Without clear benefits being communicated, users may default to old habits or disable new tools entirely.

For organisations managing hybrid or remote teams, this could mean greater emphasis on setup guides, onboarding materials, and hands-on support during the transition.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Microsoft’s seven tips serve as a reminder that Windows 11 isn’t just about aesthetics, but is also about functionality, productivity, and preparing users for a more flexible, digital-first way of working. The operating system is already packed with features designed to make daily tasks easier and more secure, but these benefits only actually materialise when users know where to find them and feel confident using them.

For UK businesses in particular, the timing matters. With the Windows 10 support deadline fast approaching, organisations are under pressure to modernise their desktop environments without causing unnecessary disruption. If applied well, Microsoft’s tips could ease that transition, helping teams get to grips with new interfaces and routines more quickly. In hybrid and remote contexts, where consistency and self-sufficiency are key, small gains in usability and performance can translate into real operational value.

That said, the success of this guidance will depend heavily on how well it’s communicated, not just by Microsoft, but by IT teams, MSPs, and internal champions. Raising awareness is one thing but embedding new habits across diverse user groups is another. Businesses that invest in upfront user education, clear setup protocols, and device standardisation will be better placed to unlock the full value of Windows 11’s toolset.

For Microsoft, this latest push is both practical and strategic. By encouraging users to make the most of what’s already under the hood, it positions Windows 11 as a platform that’s ready for the future, not just a necessary upgrade, but a smarter way to work. Whether that message sticks will depend on how well the tech is backed by real-world support, and whether users can see clear advantages in making the switch. For now, the tools are there – it’s just a question of how many take the time to use them.

A judge has ruled that the UK government’s legal dispute with Apple over encrypted data access must be heard in public, rejecting claims that secrecy was needed for national security reasons.

The Encryption Battle That Spilled Into the Open

At the heart of this case is Apple’s Advanced Data Protection (ADP) system, a tool designed to give users enhanced privacy by encrypting their iCloud data so only they, and not even Apple, can access it. However, that level of security put the tech giant on a collision course with the UK Home Office.

Earlier this year, the government issued a Technical Capability Notice under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), demanding that Apple give law enforcement access to data protected by ADP. The move, described by campaigners as a call for a “backdoor,” would have allowed the government to access not just British users’ files, but potentially data from global users as well.

Apple responded by pulling ADP from the UK entirely in February and launching a legal challenge in March, but not before a flurry of criticism from privacy groups and US lawmakers.

The UK government then attempted to have the case heard in secret, claiming even acknowledging the existence of the proceedings could harm national security. However, in the latest development in this matter, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal has issued a sharp rebuttal.

Open Justice Wins (For Now)

In its published ruling, the tribunal said it would be “a truly extraordinary step” to conduct a hearing in total secrecy without even acknowledging that a hearing was happening at all.

“For the reasons that are set out in our private judgement, we do not accept that the revelation of the bare details of the case would be damaging to the public interest or prejudicial to national security,” the tribunal added.

While it’s still possible that parts of future hearings could be held behind closed doors, the decision sets a clear precedent, i.e. that legal disputes with wide-ranging implications for the public shouldn’t be kept out of sight.

Why Does This Matter So Much?

Far from being just a symbolic move, Apple’s decision to withdraw ADP from the UK had real-world consequences for businesses, particularly those relying on Apple’s ecosystem to handle sensitive information. For example, Apple’s ADP offers end-to-end encryption for iCloud data, meaning that not even Apple can decrypt the contents. That includes files like:

– Business documents stored in iCloud Drive.

– Notes containing intellectual property.

– Photos, messages, and device backups.

For firms that operate internationally, ADP is, therefore, a vital part of their data security posture. Without it, UK-based businesses are now left with fewer tools to protect critical data, a point that hasn’t gone unnoticed in the cybersecurity industry.

Worse still, the idea of a government demanding backdoor access could push other vendors to either reduce their own security standards to comply, or retreat from UK markets altogether.

A Chilling Message to the Tech Sector?

Apple has consistently maintained a firm stance against building any form of backdoor or master key into its products or services. The company has long argued that such mechanisms would undermine user trust and pose unacceptable security risks, not just to individuals but to broader digital infrastructure. Apple has been keen to stress that, despite pressure, such as from the UK government, it remains committed to offering its customers the highest level of data protection. Also, while the ADP feature has been removed from the UK for now, Apple has signalled that it hopes to reintroduce it in the future, but only if it can do so without compromising on its encryption standards.

For now, therefore, it seems clear that Apple will not alter ADP to satisfy the UK government’s demands, even though other tech firms, particularly smaller vendors, might struggle to resist such orders or afford lengthy legal battles.

If the Home Office ultimately prevails in its attempt to force Apple’s hand, it could pave the way for future notices targeting other encrypted services. That’s caused alarm among privacy experts, who warn that the UK could become a test bed for surveillance-friendly legislation.

Privacy Advocates Applaud the Ruling

Groups like Open Rights Group, Big Brother Watch, and Index on Censorship, who intervened to oppose secret proceedings, have welcomed the tribunal’s stance.

“This is bigger than the UK and Apple,” said Jim Killock, executive director of Open Rights Group. “The Court’s judgment will have implications for the privacy and security of millions of people around the world.”

Big Brother Watch’s interim director Rebecca Vincent was even more direct, saying: “The Home Office’s order to break encryption represents a massive attack on the privacy rights of millions of British Apple users, which is a matter of significant public interest and must not be considered behind closed doors.”

Also, Privacy International has added that decisions “affecting the privacy and security of billions of people globally should be open to legal challenge in the most transparent way possible”.

National Security and Civil Liberties

As for the UK Home Office, it maintains that its priority is to “keep people safe” and insists the powers in question are tightly targeted and subject to judicial oversight, i.e. that it is not seeking blanket access to user data.

For example, as a Home Office spokesperson was recently quoted as saying: “There are longstanding and targeted investigatory powers that allow the authorities to investigate terrorists, paedophiles and the most serious criminals,” and they “are subject to robust safeguards including judicial authorisations and oversight to protect people’s privacy.”

Not Just Governments To Worry About

However, critics argue that demanding access to encrypted systems, especially those which don’t even allow the vendor to unlock data, could weaken security for everyone. Once a backdoor exists, they warn, it’s not just governments who might exploit it. Cybercriminals, hostile nation-states, and rogue insiders could all potentially discover or gain access to such vulnerabilities, thereby turning a tool meant for law enforcement into a global security risk. History has shown that even tightly controlled security features can leak or be reverse-engineered, making backdoors an attractive target for attackers looking to access sensitive personal, corporate, or state-level data.

Ripple Effects for Tech, Trust and Trade

This dispute has already triggered broader conversations about how democratic governments balance national security with digital rights. It has also raised fresh concerns about the UK’s post-Brexit regulatory environment, especially for tech companies deciding whether to invest or offer full services in the country. For example:

– Messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal, which also use end-to-end encryption, have previously threatened to exit the UK market if forced to compromise security.

– International businesses may reassess how they handle data belonging to UK users if privacy protections appear weaker.

– Cybersecurity vendors could find themselves caught between compliance obligations and user trust.

In short, the ruling that this case must be public is just one chapter in a much bigger battle, and one that could shape the future of encrypted technology, digital trade, and civil liberties in the UK and beyond.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The tribunal’s decision to reject secrecy in the Apple case upholds the principle of open justice in matters where both privacy and state power are at stake. Many may say that’s not just a win for transparency, but it also sets a precedent that future legal efforts to reshape the digital privacy landscape must be exposed to public scrutiny.

For UK businesses, the implications are immediate and practical. Many rely on Apple’s secure ecosystem to manage client data, protect sensitive communications, and comply with international privacy standards. Without access to features like ADP, these organisations may now face greater exposure to cyber risks, along with legal and reputational complications when dealing with overseas clients or partners. The uncertainty surrounding encryption standards could also force some firms to rethink their digital strategies altogether, particularly those in regulated sectors like law, finance, or healthcare.

There are also broader questions around competitiveness. If the UK is perceived as an outlier in how it treats encryption, global tech firms may respond by limiting product availability, delaying security updates, or withdrawing features altogether, steps we’ve already seen with Apple. Smaller tech providers may lack the resources to fight back, thereby making them more likely to comply or exit the market, potentially skewing the playing field and reducing the range of secure digital services available to UK consumers and businesses alike.

Also, privacy and civil liberties groups see the ruling as a crucial moment in defending end-to-end encryption, not just as a technical measure, but as a fundamental right. Their argument is that breaking encryption doesn’t just weaken the security of criminals, it weakens it for everyone. As governments around the world watch this case unfold, the UK risks becoming a proving ground for policies that could reshape how digital rights are protected (or compromised) for decades to come.

While this ruling keeps the spotlight on the Apple-Home Office standoff, the underlying conflict is far from resolved. As the case continues through the courts, the balance between public safety, privacy, and corporate responsibility will remain under intense scrutiny. For now, what’s clear is that encryption has become more than just a technical debate, i.e., it’s essentially a litmus test for how the UK defines trust, accountability, and digital sovereignty in a rapidly evolving world.

Meta is introducing stricter controls on how teenagers interact with its apps – including new parental permissions for Instagram and an expanded rollout of Teen Accounts to Facebook and Messenger.

More Built-In Restrictions for Younger Teens

Meta’s Teen Accounts are getting tougher. Originally launched in September 2024 for Instagram, these accounts are designed to give 13 to 15-year-olds a more protected experience by default. Now, new restrictions are being layered on top, and the whole setup is expanding to Facebook and Messenger for the first time.

Teen Accounts come with a suite of safety-first settings, i.e. private profiles, stricter content filters, overnight notification pauses, and limited messaging capabilities. Teens can’t be messaged by strangers, and they get reminders to step away from the app after an hour. So far, Meta says the changes have been well-received, with a reported 97 per cent of younger teens sticking to the default restrictions.

However, with growing pressure from regulators, charities and concerned parents, Meta says it’s now raising the bar even further.

Stricter Limits on Live Streaming and Messages

The biggest headline change is that teens under 16 will now need a parent’s permission to go live on Instagram. Meta says this is in response to widespread concerns from parents about the risks of strangers watching (or contacting) their children in real time.

There’s also a clampdown on direct messages. For example, Instagram’s existing tool to blur suspected nude images in DMs will remain on by default, and teens under 16 won’t be able to turn it off without a parent’s sign-off.

These updates are due to roll out in the coming months. According to Meta, the aim is to “give parents more peace of mind across Meta apps” and strengthen the platform’s age-appropriate protections.

Coming to Facebook and Messenger

Until now, Teen Accounts were exclusive to Instagram but, from this week, it seems that Facebook and Messenger will be joining the club.

For example, teen users in the UK, US, Australia and Canada will be automatically moved into Teen Accounts, with more countries to follow soon. Much like Instagram, the Facebook and Messenger versions will restrict who can interact with young users, limit what kind of content they see, and introduce features to encourage healthy screen time habits.

Mock-up screenshots released by Meta show Facebook users receiving alerts that their account will soon become a Teen Account, along with messaging prompts like “Soon your settings will be updated automatically to protect you from unwanted contact.”

This shift is part of Meta’s broader attempt to create a consistent safety experience across its ecosystem, but it also hints at a more strategic goal, i.e. heading off regulation by acting before governments step in.

Regulation, Reputation and Parental Pressure

This latest move by Meta is, therefore, being motivated by a mix of factors, the main ones being:

– Public and political scrutiny intensifying. For example, in the UK, the Online Safety Act now legally requires platforms to prevent children from encountering harmful and illegal content. Failing to do so could land companies like Meta with serious consequences from Ofcom, which now holds enforcement powers.

– Meta has faced reputational damage for years over teen safety, from whistleblower claims about Instagram’s impact on teenage mental health to reports of underage users being served inappropriate content by the algorithm.

– Meta appears to be really listening to parents. A recent Ipsos survey commissioned by the company found that 94 per cent of US parents believe Teen Accounts are helpful. The company says these accounts were created “with parents in mind,” and the latest changes respond to their most common worries, particularly around unwanted contact and exposure to sensitive content.

Critics Say It’s Not Enough – or Still Too Vague

Despite the PR-friendly messaging, not everyone is convinced. For example, campaigners have argued that Meta still hasn’t proven whether Teen Accounts are actually making a difference. Some have commented on the apparent silence from Mark Zuckerberg about the effectiveness of Teen Accounts and have questioned whether teens are still being algorithmically recommended harmful content – something Meta hasn’t publicly clarified.

Matthew Sowemimo, head of child safety policy at the NSPCC, has welcomed the new measures but stressed that they must be paired with proactive content moderation. In his words, “dangerous content shouldn’t be there in the first place.”

There are also some concerns about enforcement. For example, Teen Accounts depend heavily on users being honest about their age, but Ofcom research suggests 22 per cent of 8 to 17-year-olds claim to be over 18 on social media platforms. Meta has said it’s working on that, using AI tools and video selfies to better verify age, but even that raises its own ethical questions.

Some other critics have argued that Meta should take more responsibility anyway for its data-driven commercialised practices, which essentially control young users’ experiences on Meta’s social platforms.

What Are Other Platforms Doing?

Meta isn’t alone in having to respond to several sources of pressure on this issue. Examples of other platforms taking similar measures (for similar reasons) include:

– Online platform for creating and playing user-generated games, Roblox, which has recently introduced new parental controls that allow parents to block individual games or experiences.

– YouTube and TikTok have both added time limits and privacy defaults for teen users, though their approaches differ in terms of enforcement and transparency.

That said, it seems that (too) few platforms have rolled out something as broad as Teen Accounts across multiple services. This move could represent a kind of rebalancing in the social media landscape, where platforms are now vying to be seen as the safest environment for young users, not just the most addictive. However, questions remain over how effectively any system can block determined teens from sidestepping restrictions.

What This Means for Parents, Platforms and the Public

The expansion of Teen Accounts appears to be a signal that Meta is taking the issue of online safety more seriously – or at least wants to be seen as doing so.

For parents, it offers a more unified, manageable set of controls across Instagram, Facebook and Messenger. For regulators, it may buy Meta some goodwill, though it doesn’t exempt the company from scrutiny. Also, for competitors, it may set a new benchmark in platform-wide teen protections.

That said, as with all digital safety initiatives, the effectiveness will depend on execution, transparency, and the company’s willingness to be held accountable. Some may say that whether this is a genuine shift or just another layer of corporate risk management remains to be seen.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For a company often accused of doing too little, too late, this multi-app expansion suggests a more joined-up approach to protecting younger users. However, it also highlights the growing complexities in balancing child safety with platform growth, user freedom, and commercial goals.

The scale and scope of the changes, from parental controls on live streaming to AI-led age verification, appear to indicate that Meta is serious about creating a more ring-fenced space for teens. However, it remains to be seen whether these technical safeguards will hold up in practice. After all, digital workarounds are nothing new for today’s tech-savvy teenagers, and critics are right to question the real-world impact without full transparency on outcomes and data.

UK businesses in the digital and tech space should be paying close attention. As regulation like the Online Safety Act continues to tighten, the onus on companies to demonstrate proactive, meaningful protections will only increase. Platforms offering youth-focused content or services may now face growing pressure to match, or even exceed, what Meta is implementing. For agencies and developers, this could mean rethinking how parental consent, privacy defaults and content moderation are built into products from day one – not just bolted on later.

Meanwhile, parents may feel some relief from the growing consistency across Meta’s apps, but they shouldn’t be left holding the reins alone. As experts have pointed out, it’s not enough for tech firms to hand families the tools – they also need to take responsibility for the ecosystem they’ve built, including the algorithms and engagement models that still shape user experiences behind the scenes.

It seems, therefore, that the introduction of stricter Teen Account controls is a step in the right direction, but whether it sets a new gold standard or simply buys Meta more breathing room will depend on what comes next. For now, the move raises the bar, but also the questions.

WhatsApp users are pushing back against the forced rollout of Meta’s new AI chatbot, which appears in the app without warning and offers no option to disable it.

Forced AI Integration Leaves Users Fuming

Meta AI, a chatbot integrated into WhatsApp, is being promoted as a virtual assistant that can answer questions and spark ideas, but its uninvited arrival has triggered an outcry. The feature is currently being rolled out in the UK and other countries, where it appears as a glowing blue circle in the search bar or activates when users type “@Meta AI” in chats or groups.

While Meta describes it as a helpful tool powered by its Llama language models, users have taken to social media to voice their frustration. For example, one X user compared the experience to “getting a clingy new roommate”, while another branded it “the most pointless and irritating AI integration into an app so far”. Others said they were switching platforms entirely because of Meta AI.

No Off Switch – And No Clear Explanation

A key frustration appears to be the inability to opt out. Meta has not provided any settings to turn the feature off or hide it, and it hasn’t addressed why users weren’t given the choice. For many, the lack of transparency and consent is as troubling as the AI itself.

It’s been reported that some users have tried switching to WhatsApp Business to avoid the chatbot, and while some appear to have been successful, others have said the blue circle still appears. This inconsistency has also added to the confusion, and Meta has yet to confirm whether WhatsApp Business will remain AI-free.

Other Platforms Too

It seems this isn’t an isolated experiment. For example, Meta AI is being pushed across multiple platforms including Facebook and Instagram, as part of Meta’s wider vision to integrate generative AI into everyday digital interactions. In the UK, it first appeared in Facebook Messenger in late 2024 and is now slowly extending into WhatsApp.

Some Users Say It’s Unhelpful and Intrusive

Beyond the issue of consent, it seems that many simply don’t find Meta AI useful. The chatbot often triggers when users are trying to search for chats or contacts, getting in the way rather than helping. This has left some disgruntled users describing it as “overkill” while others have expressed frustration about being perfectly capable of writing their own messages and not needing AI to write for them.

There also appears to be some scepticism over the chatbot’s actual utility. For example, early testers have reported that the responses are basic, repetitive, and in some cases completely irrelevant. Also, unlike standalone tools like ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini, Meta AI appears hardwired into an app many people use for private and professional communication.

Implications

For businesses that rely on WhatsApp, including customer service teams, delivery firms, and sole traders, the sudden appearance of an unremovable chatbot could create real problems. For example, if a customer sees the AI button and assumes it’s part of the company’s service, they might expect human responses that never arrive. Similarly, internal teams using WhatsApp for logistics or support may be distracted by or accidentally trigger the feature.

The bigger concern, though, may be around trust. For example, businesses increasingly choose platforms based on reliability, privacy, and user control. By pushing AI into WhatsApp without consent or clear controls, Meta perhaps risks undermining that trust, especially among SMEs and regulated industries where transparency and data protection matter.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

If your business uses WhatsApp to communicate with customers or colleagues, now’s the time to take a closer look at how Meta AI could impact your workflows. The feature might not seem disruptive at first glance, but confusion, miscommunication, or reputational damage could follow if customers or employees don’t understand how it works, or who’s really responding.

Meta’s AI push may be part of a long-term strategy to embed generative tools across its ecosystem, but this backlash shows that users expect more control over how and when they engage with AI. For now, switching to WhatsApp Business might delay the issue but it’s unlikely to be a permanent fix.

In the longer term, this controversy highlights a bigger shift in how users relate to everyday platforms. AI might be coming whether we like it or not but the question is whether companies like Meta will give us a say in how it’s deployed and used.

Microsoft has quietly reintroduced its controversial Recall feature in the Windows 11 Release Preview channel for Copilot+ PCs, ahead of a broader launch in 2025.

Recall uses AI to take automatic screenshots every few seconds, storing them locally so users can search their screen history using natural language. It’s pitched as a time-saving tool, but one that effectively logs everything viewed on a PC.

The feature was shelved in 2024 after strong backlash from security experts and privacy advocates. Critics warned that Recall could capture sensitive data, like passwords or private messages, that may be exposed if a device is compromised.

Microsoft now says Recall is opt-in, requires Windows Hello authentication, and stores data locally without sharing it with Microsoft or third parties. Users can pause, delete, or switch it off at any time.

Despite these safeguards, experts say the feature still poses risks, including data leaks and privacy issues affecting others whose information is captured without consent.

To stay secure, businesses should disable Recall unless essential, enforce strong authentication, and train staff on privacy risks, especially when deploying Copilot+ devices.

Scientists at the University of Oregon have found a cleaner, electrochemical way to create pure iron metal using saltwater and iron oxide, potentially slashing the carbon footprint of one of the world’s dirtiest industries.

Why Ironmaking Needs a Rethink

Iron is the backbone of global infrastructure. From bridges to buildings and car bodies to cookware, it’s everywhere. Most of it is used in the form of steel, an alloy primarily made by extracting iron from ore, then refining it. However, one major challenge is that producing iron the traditional way is incredibly polluting.

The dominant method still involves blast furnaces, i.e. giant industrial reactors that reach 1,500°C and rely heavily on coal.

Huge Amounts of CO₂

According to the International Energy Agency, the iron and steel industry is responsible for roughly 7 per cent of global CO₂ emissions. In 2024 alone, nearly 2 billion metric tonnes of steel were produced worldwide. In short, in order to make a real impact on cutting carbon emissions, cleaning up steelmaking is essential.

Scientists Develop Electrochemical Route To Iron – No Blast Furnace Required

In answer to this environmental challenge, a team of chemists at the University of Oregon, led by Paul Kempler, have developed an electrochemical process that could reinvent how iron is produced without relying on coal or high-temperature blast furnaces.

Their method uses saltwater and iron oxide, passed through an electrically charged solution to extract pure iron metal. The technique takes place at around 80–90°C, which is far lower than the searing 1,500°C temperatures inside a conventional furnace, and it creates chlorine gas as a useful by-product.

This cleaner process avoids the need for fossil carbon, thereby offering a practical and potentially scalable route to iron production that aligns with global decarbonisation goals.

The Science Behind the Simplicity

The method hinges on passing an electric current through a sodium hydroxide solution containing suspended iron oxide particles. The electrical energy drives a reaction that reduces the iron oxide (Fe₂O₃) into elemental iron (Fe).

This might sound straightforward, but it seems that the real magic lies in the details—specifically, the shape and surface structure of the iron oxide particles.

Postdoctoral researcher Anastasiia Konovalova and graduate student Andrew Goldman discovered that porous, sponge-like particles with a high surface area delivered the best results. These particles dissolved more easily in the solution, speeding up the reaction and producing more iron per square centimetre of electrode.

“With the really porous particles, we can make iron really quickly on a small area,” Goldman said. “The dense particles just can’t achieve the same rate.”

This insight is critical because it addresses one of the biggest barriers to industrial adoption, i.e. cost. Large-scale electrochemical reactors require expensive materials, and their profitability depends on how much product they can generate per unit of electrode area.

The team’s results suggest that with the right materials and conditions, iron could be produced for under $600 per metric tonne, which is actually comparable to conventional blast furnace operations.

Challenges of Scaling Up

While the lab results appear promising, there’s still a long road ahead before electrochemical ironmaking can truly compete with traditional methods at an industrial scale.

For example, a key challenge lies in the raw materials. The researchers saw strong performance using carefully prepared iron oxide powders in controlled settings, but natural iron ores are a different matter. These real-world materials tend to be dense, irregular in shape, and filled with impurities, making them far less suited to the same electrochemical process.

To address this, Kempler’s team is now reported to be developing ways to process lower-grade ores into more porous, high-surface-area forms that mimic the lab-made powders shown to perform best. They’re also collaborating with civil engineers and electrode manufacturers to explore practical applications and tackle the technical challenges of scaling up the system.

The economics behind their so-called “chlor-iron” process are also being put to the test. As well as producing pure iron, the reaction produces chlorine and sodium hydroxide, two valuable industrial chemicals. If these co-products can be captured and used efficiently, it could significantly improve the commercial viability of the method.

Even so, the process still requires considerable upfront investment, and the performance of the electrochemical cells will need to remain consistently high for the financial model to work long term.

Cleaner Steel

If commercialised, the approach developed by Kempler’s team could significantly reduce the carbon intensity of iron and steel production. For countries like the UK, where the future of steelmaking is under scrutiny due to decarbonisation targets, developments like this are more than academic curiosity. For example, this new method could really help in terms of:

– Environmental impact. Electrochemical ironmaking could eliminate fossil fuel combustion, slashing CO₂, sulphur dioxide, and particulate emissions.

– Energy efficiency. Lower operating temperatures mean less energy is required, especially if the electricity comes from renewable sources.

– Industrial compatibility. The chlorine by-product could serve as a feedstock for other chemical industries, potentially creating circular economy benefits.

According to the UK Steel sector, the British steel industry emits around 12 million tonnes of CO₂ annually, which is around 2.7 per cent of the country’s total emissions. A greener iron production method could, therefore, play a key role in the nation’s Net Zero ambitions.

Rethinking Industrial Solutions

Kempler and his team appear to be cautiously optimistic about their discovery and although they acknowledge that there’s still work to be done, they see the breakthrough as part of a bigger move towards sustainability. As graduate researcher Andrew Goldman says: “We haven’t solved all the problems yet, of course,” adding “But I think it’s an example that serves as a starting point for reimagining what solutions can look like. We can still have industry, technology, and medicine—but we can do it in a way that’s clean. And that’s awesome.”

The underlying message here appears to be that innovation doesn’t have to mean compromise. Cleaner industrial systems are possible and they’re already starting to take shape.

Challenges

Critics, however, may point to the practical hurdles of overhauling a centuries-old industry. For example, transitioning to electrochemical systems will require new equipment, re-training, and significant investment, all while competing with cheaper, established blast furnace methods.

Key Questions Still to Be Answered

It seems, therefore, that the next few years will be crucial in determining whether this technology can live up to its potential. For example, some of the key unknowns include:

– Can porous iron oxide feedstocks be manufactured affordably at industrial volumes?

– Will the system perform consistently when using lower-grade ores?

– How will the chlorine by-product be managed safely and profitably?

– Can the process be integrated into existing steel supply chains without major disruption?

Despite the challenges, the University of Oregon’s findings at least appear to have opened the door to a future where steelmaking doesn’t have to come with a climate cost.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

The University of Oregon team’s breakthrough is still in its early stages, but it appears to add real momentum to the growing push for low-carbon iron and steel production. By moving away from blast furnaces and towards electrochemical methods, scientists may be laying the foundations for a cleaner, more circular form of industrial manufacturing, i.e. one that doesn’t rely on burning fossil fuels to function.

For the UK, which is already under pressure to modernise its steel industry and meet legally binding Net Zero targets, this kind of innovation could be important. While Britain’s domestic steel production has declined in recent decades, the sector still supports thousands of jobs and underpins key supply chains in construction, automotive manufacturing, and energy. If electrochemical ironmaking becomes viable at scale, it could offer UK steelmakers a route to both decarbonise and compete globally, especially if paired with renewable electricity and smart use of co-products like chlorine and sodium hydroxide.

There are wider implications too. For technology developers, chemical suppliers, infrastructure planners and even policymakers, this research opens up new territory. It challenges the assumption that heavy industry must always be dirty and carbon-intensive, and invites a broader rethink of what sustainable manufacturing could look like.

That said, none of this is guaranteed. Scaling from lab to factory floor is rarely straightforward. The process still faces major technical, economic and logistical hurdles, and it’s likely to take years, not months, to prove itself in real-world conditions. However, the concept appears to have passed a crucial test i.e., it works. That in itself is no small achievement in a sector that’s notoriously difficult to decarbonise.

What happens next will depend on how quickly researchers, funders, and industrial partners can build on this early promise. If the pace of progress continues, electrochemical ironmaking could become more than just a scientific milestone and could be a real turning point for one of the world’s most polluting industries.