120: One Magical Wire


00:00:00   I'm back playtime is over. Yeah

00:00:02   Are we gonna get past follow-up tonight, sir? Well, I don't I have to talk to you about your drink before we start

00:00:08   This is the preflight we were doing off the air

00:00:10   Marco wanted to know what your what your liquid situation was surrounding your computer

00:00:15   And I remember hearing maybe maybe on the podcast that wasn't on you talking about your stupid cup thing that weevils wobble

00:00:21   But they don't fall down

00:00:22   Technology is employed in yep

00:00:24   And I think you're kind of missing the point the point is not to get a cup

00:00:28   If you if you knock it over on top of your computer

00:00:31   Will hopefully through the design of the cup not have any liquid fallout or some magical cup that is impossible to knock over that you

00:00:38   Could hit it with the oncoming freight train and this couple not tip over

00:00:42   all of those things are

00:00:45   Fixing the problem in the wrong way

00:00:46   You gotta you have to accept the fact that the cup will tip over and spill water out

00:00:51   Even if you think you come a won't tip over a B won't spill liquid just accept that both of those things

00:00:55   It's it's like servers. You know servers will fail hardware will fail

00:00:59   Just accept it and then build a system where when your cup falls over starts dripping liquid

00:01:05   Explodes whatever the liquid. What was that?

00:01:09   That was not the cup don't worry

00:01:11   I'll show you in a second all right that the liquid that does come out

00:01:15   Will fall down with gravity away from your computer, which is up higher than it, so this is the system

00:01:20   I implore you to get going on so I'm going to

00:01:24   I'm going to tweet at you too because I don't want to make a public public public tweet

00:01:30   A picture of my setup at mom and dad's and let me show you

00:01:34   It's something that will bake you even more excited over my setup

00:01:39   We hear mom and dad so give me just a moment

00:01:42   So is that what you mean John put it up above the computer so it spills directly onto the computer, that's the idea

00:01:52   That's kind of the worst setup I've ever seen I think.

00:01:55   (laughing)

00:01:56   - I like the fact that you have to reach across

00:01:58   both your microphone and the computer to get to the cup.

00:01:59   (laughing)

00:02:02   - No, I put that there just temporarily.

00:02:03   - Why don't you maybe tie the microphone cable

00:02:05   around the base of the cup?

00:02:07   (laughing)

00:02:08   - Oh goodness, no I did that just temporarily just for you.

00:02:12   - Anyway, my point is don't put your faith in weird cups.

00:02:15   (electronic beeping)

00:02:17   - By the way, I love that we kicked John out of the show

00:02:20   for one episode, and he goes and forms two new podcasts.

00:02:23   - Yeah, seriously, apparently it takes--

00:02:25   - What do you mean two new podcasts?

00:02:26   I didn't form two new podcasts, what are you talking about?

00:02:27   - Robot or not?

00:02:28   - Oh, that wasn't when I was, whatever.

00:02:31   The timelines are all messed up.

00:02:32   All these things happened way before last episode.

00:02:36   - All I'm saying is, apparently it takes two podcasts,

00:02:40   one with Merlin Mann and one with Jason Snell,

00:02:42   to equal the awesomeness that is ATP.

00:02:45   - Reconcilable Difference is the other one.

00:02:46   That's the one that launched today on Relay,

00:02:48   which is awesome.

00:02:48   which actually all snark aside is unbelievably good.

00:02:52   I am stunned at how unbelievably,

00:02:55   well, I'm not really that surprised actually at all,

00:02:56   but it is really, really, really good.

00:02:59   And I absolutely love the first episode.

00:03:01   - Yeah, me too.

00:03:02   Both of them are interesting and exciting

00:03:04   and are using innovative scheduling technologies

00:03:08   to fit themselves into my schedule.

00:03:10   - Yeah, I am genuinely surprised that you signed up

00:03:13   for doing even one new podcast regularly, let alone two.

00:03:18   though my understanding is you've kind of cheated the system with robot or not a little bit.

00:03:22   Well, no all of this like ATB is the standard one every week we show up we record it goes out

00:03:26   You know that's what people expect, but the other ones are done in creative ways to fit into all of our schedules

00:03:33   We're all busy people, but we want to do new interesting things and they're not podcasts about tech

00:03:39   So it gives me an outlet aside from the incomparable which I continue to do to talk about non tech stuff

00:03:46   Excellent all right, so

00:03:48   We should probably do a little bit of follow-up, and I might have skipped over a little bit that you might want to talk about John

00:03:55   Feel free to take it away. Well now. It's probably it's probably too late right. We don't have to talk about it

00:04:00   No, it is not too late

00:04:02   Last time and you guys were so busy like patting yourselves in the back

00:04:06   But look at the timestamp when you end a follow-up

00:04:10   It was the same amount of times usually you just spent a lot of time

00:04:13   Complaining about follow-up and not doing follow-up until you said okay now finally follow-up is over. It's not like you save time

00:04:18   Anyway, all I wanted to do for the for all the various step tracker GPS phone

00:04:24   accuracy watch accuracy things was to note the we'll put in this a

00:04:29   linked Apple's

00:04:31   support article about this and note the interesting bit about

00:04:35   tracking your distance

00:04:37   when running with both a watch and a phone is

00:04:40   that

00:04:42   The reason it might be off is because it the devices apparently and hinted at by this Apple document are trying to save energy by

00:04:50   Not using the GPS all the time by trying to use the step tracker by trying to calibrate the step tracker either in the phone

00:04:56   Or in the watch or both and just use the accelerometer to count your steps rather than having the GPS going the whole time tracing

00:05:01   Your route because a lot of people are asking how can if you if you go with the watch and the phone

00:05:06   How can it be any worse or different in any way than a Garmin GPS watch?

00:05:10   wouldn't it be exactly the same as in GPS GPS what is the big difference here and the difference appears to be from

00:05:15   This knowledge base article and people's experience that the Apple devices are trying to cheat to save battery and say well once we get calibrated

00:05:24   Stepping for the accelerometer everything we'll use that most of the time and maybe check in on GPS periodically

00:05:29   Which is another interesting trade-off and I think something that Apple will probably

00:05:33   adjust with time as they get more battery strength and maybe if they want to be taken more seriously in the sort of

00:05:39   hardcore sports fitness market those type of people like look just use my battery the whole point of bringing you with me is because I

00:05:45   want an exact route of where I ran

00:05:47   All right, well that was it after there's like two pages of this in the show notes

00:05:52   I know, but it's kind of old now. We had a bunch of people write in about it with links

00:05:56   we'll put them in the in the show notes. There's a couple of people tweeted about the

00:06:00   People's upcoming reviews like sort of hardcore fitness device reviewers

00:06:07   review of the Apple watch on the iPhone

00:06:09   They're not done yet. Apparently these people who do these reviews, but when they do come out

00:06:14   Maybe it will finally pin down these devices say just how accurate are they? What are their characteristics?

00:06:18   because all we've got now is a bunch of people saying I

00:06:20   Did some exercise with some collection of Apple devices and I feel like it did or didn't count

00:06:27   My steps or heart rate or exertion correctly and of course because these people are in the same zone as Marco where they're a slave

00:06:34   to the green rings, they demand that their green rings reflect their activity, and so

00:06:39   they're upset by it.

00:06:40   Oh man, the green rings are getting harder to fill.

00:06:43   Like now, I had to walk for an hour today to get, I think, 25 minutes worth of credit

00:06:48   on it.

00:06:49   Oh, seriously?

00:06:50   Yeah, because like, well, part of it might be the way it's measuring.

00:06:53   A bigger part of it is that because I keep filling it every day, I'm getting into better

00:06:58   shape.

00:06:59   And so, I think this is how things work, I don't know.

00:07:03   but I think my body is having to exert itself less

00:07:06   to do the same hills every day.

00:07:09   - No, it scales it.

00:07:10   It scales the amount.

00:07:11   It starts you off with a small goal.

00:07:13   You only have to do X amount of activity,

00:07:14   and if you keep meeting that goal,

00:07:16   it'll say, "Okay, now you gotta do X plus two,

00:07:17   "X plus three, X plus four."

00:07:19   - Well, I don't think that's,

00:07:21   first of all, I don't think it automatically adjusts.

00:07:23   It prompts you to adjust.

00:07:25   - Yeah, I think it does automatically adjust.

00:07:27   I remember reading that, but the people saying

00:07:29   like that the activity that you have to do

00:07:31   It starts off very easy so you feel like

00:07:33   you're achieving something, but if you repeatedly

00:07:35   achieve it, it will push the goal farther out from you.

00:07:37   And you're also right about the heart rate stuff.

00:07:39   - Well, yeah, first of all, I question whether that's true,

00:07:42   but the heart rate is 30 minutes.

00:07:45   The goal's always 30 minutes.

00:07:46   I don't know what the threshold is

00:07:48   considered to be an elevated heart rate.

00:07:51   Is it 120?

00:07:52   I have no idea.

00:07:53   I'm estimating it's something around 120,

00:07:55   but I really don't know.

00:07:56   I can't really tell.

00:07:58   - I think the only other follow-up item I had

00:08:00   was from the episode.

00:08:01   wasn't on where you were talking about the Johnny I of promotion or whatever you want

00:08:05   to call it to from his what was his previous position like chief senior vice president

00:08:11   of design I think or something like that right and now he's collateralized that obligation

00:08:15   instead right so his his new title I think the various articles written about this covered

00:08:23   all the points but as always it's like the mixture and you guys when you talked about

00:08:27   mixture of what to emphasize. I mostly agree that this change in title is

00:08:35   making up for the fact that

00:08:37   he, not that he wants to leave, but that he

00:08:43   he wants to do different things and that itch can turn into wanting to leave

00:08:50   but it just seems like

00:08:53   What I keep thinking of is if you were Johnny I've and you've done all the things that he's done

00:08:57   What do you have left to prove in the making electronic devices space?

00:09:01   Maybe the car is like again if you're thinking of what would keep Johnny I've around what would keep him excited. Is he excited about

00:09:09   laptops desktops

00:09:12   Airport things or whatever like maybe he still is excited

00:09:15   But I'm just gonna say that he has nothing left to prove in those categories

00:09:17   Like if he never doesn't it designs another thing

00:09:19   He's still going to be one of the most well-known designers of the century he lived in right

00:09:25   And so if you don't have anything left to prove, but you are an artistic person

00:09:28   And you you want new challenges interesting things

00:09:31   That's why I think the whole thing's like he's gonna participate in designing the stores

00:09:34   I bet I bet he really wants to do that because that's slightly different than what he's been doing before

00:09:37   And if they're doing a car I bet he's super into that and I bet he was super into the watch because it's a little bit

00:09:43   different so I

00:09:44   Don't think he's like he was out the door and they had to do this to keep him around

00:09:48   But I do see this as a move he's he's stepping towards the door slowly

00:09:52   Finding interesting things to pick up on his way to the door, and I think that's fine and the other thing is

00:09:58   talking about this position of like well if you're delegating to these people if

00:10:02   Alan Dye or whatever is doing the software and what's the other guy's name Haworth or something Richard Howard?

00:10:07   Yeah, he's and he's gonna do the hardware, and it's like like you're just delegating everything

00:10:13   And maybe you're gonna be looking at the store

00:10:14   How can you be the chief of design the design chief of anything if everyone else is doing the actual work?

00:10:20   And almost all the discussions except for good old Gruber always

00:10:25   His article on this topic was one of those cases where he hit every single point

00:10:30   I would if I was writing a thing about this I was reading his thing. I'm like, okay. Yeah, but he's gonna say this

00:10:34   Yeah, okay. I wonder what this point. Yeah. Okay what he did every single point. I was gonna hit it was like

00:10:38   Just read that article that is exactly my opinion and the one point that I saw a few people hit

00:10:43   but he did was

00:10:45   CDO who was the previous CDO Steve Jobs? He didn't do anything. All he did was oversee other people doing the things

00:10:51   How can you have how can you have any influence on design if you don't design anything?

00:10:55   That's basically what Steve Jobs did

00:10:56   He didn't like run the company his CEO Tim Cook did that right and the other people did all the actual work of

00:11:02   Making the hardware making the software doing different mock-ups, you know, he was the chief design officer

00:11:08   That was his main job and everyone says oh without Steve Jobs

00:11:11   I can't but then when Johnny I've moves into essentially the exact same position that Steve Jobs had people like oh god

00:11:16   He can't have any influence

00:11:17   He's out the door with Steve Jobs out the door because he didn't do any of the work

00:11:20   Now granted Johnny I've has the ability to do a lot of the work that Steve Jobs didn't but I think it is

00:11:25   Perfectly possible for Johnny I've in his current position to exert the same amount if not more control than he did

00:11:31   Before because he will have more authority and he this is a higher-level position

00:11:35   Even if it is a step towards the door

00:11:37   So and then like you guys said I don't I don't think it's the end of the world if he leaves because I think at this

00:11:43   point

00:11:44   He should go do more interesting things and if he wants to design

00:11:48   Thermostats or airplanes more power to him

00:11:51   I think Apple is in good hands

00:11:53   And it's kind of like any car company that has a designer that sort of defines the signature look of the car company eventually

00:11:59   The car company wants a different look and just hope the next guy come who comes in isn't you know a bangle or whatever?

00:12:04   Yeah, I was gonna say Chris Bangle though, everyone kind of wanted him out and in this case everyone wants Johnny to stay

00:12:10   So it's it's similar but yet very different all at the same time

00:12:14   Well, but like Bangle was a change from the old BMW look which was very conservative

00:12:17   And so all the cars kind of look the same and this was definitely you may not like the new look

00:12:22   But it was a change the same thing with Mercedes which was on the other direction

00:12:24   They used to look like kind of boring cars and then their new design direction was much more daring

00:12:28   Seriously, you think the new Mercedes is look daring? Oh, yeah much more dare. Are you kidding?

00:12:34   go look at what they look like in the 80s and even in the early 90s then all of a sudden they got swoopy and

00:12:38   Much more interesting looking designs. They don't didn't all look the same

00:12:42   And I like the new ones way better than the old ones. Yep

00:12:46   but but anyway, like regardless of what your opinion any sort of brand identity or design has to go through some

00:12:53   You can't use the same design forever and we've talked about this in terms of material science like aluminum and glass

00:12:59   It's probably gonna ask you last a really long time

00:13:02   But at a certain point maybe three design revisions from now like three three look revolutions three decades

00:13:07   Or you know three sets of 20 years. They'll be a materials revolution and actually now

00:13:12   It's not a question of how we shape aluminum and glass and whatever into different things

00:13:16   But it's entirely different materials that have different properties and Johnny

00:13:19   I would be long gone by them, but anyway

00:13:20   I don't see it as the end of the world if he leaves in a couple years all right any other follow-up

00:13:27   So, Jeff Williams is the Senior Vice President of Operations,

00:13:30   not the COO, as previously stated on the program.

00:13:33   - Yep, my mistake.

00:13:35   - Alright, cool.

00:13:35   What's awesome these days, Marco?

00:13:37   - Our first sponsor this week is Harry's.

00:13:40   Go to harrys.com, H-A-R-R-Y-S dot com,

00:13:44   and use promo code ATP for five bucks

00:13:46   off your first purchase.

00:13:48   Harry's offers high quality razors and blades

00:13:51   for a fraction of the price of the big razor brands.

00:13:55   It was started by two guys who wanted a better product

00:13:57   without paying an arm and a leg.

00:13:58   They make their own blades from their own factory.

00:14:01   This is actually an old blade factory

00:14:02   that they bought in Germany.

00:14:04   They liked it so much they just bought it.

00:14:06   And these are very high quality German manufactured blades,

00:14:09   very high performance, crafted by shaving experts.

00:14:12   The factory is something like 90 years old.

00:14:14   Harry's is new, but the factory isn't.

00:14:17   They really know what they're doing with these blades.

00:14:19   This gives you a better shave

00:14:20   that respects your face and your wallet.

00:14:23   And this really is, this is factory direct pricing

00:14:25   at a fraction of the price of what you'll pay

00:14:27   for like a Gillette or something like that.

00:14:29   They really are, if you compare,

00:14:31   they're about half the price.

00:14:32   I've used Harry's Blades a lot,

00:14:34   and I would say that they are very, very similar

00:14:38   in shave quality to the Gillette Fusion,

00:14:40   the five blade Gillette Fusion.

00:14:42   And the Gillette Fusion costs about four bucks each.

00:14:45   When you buy the razor packs in the store,

00:14:47   it's about four bucks each.

00:14:48   The Harry's Blades are about $2 each or less.

00:14:52   If you buy a lot, they're even less than $2 each.

00:14:54   they really are a fraction of the price.

00:14:57   It's really about half the price or less.

00:14:59   An eight pack is 15 bucks, a 16 pack is 25 bucks.

00:15:03   Really, really good prices on these blades.

00:15:05   And the experience of buying Harry's is very different too.

00:15:08   When you buy the big brands in the drugstores,

00:15:12   you gotta go to the anti-shoplifting case

00:15:14   and call somebody over to help you

00:15:16   or take a card somewhere to go redeem it

00:15:18   for your expensive razor blades.

00:15:20   Then you end up paying your $35

00:15:22   and you get this little tiny box.

00:15:23   It's stupid.

00:15:24   Harry's is great.

00:15:25   It's modern.

00:15:26   You order them online from a really nice website, and they ship right to you.

00:15:30   Shipping is free, and it's fast.

00:15:33   It's great.

00:15:34   I can't say enough good things about the difference in experience between buying blades anywhere

00:15:39   else and buying Harry's blades.

00:15:41   They also have moisturizing shave cream.

00:15:45   They have gel if you want that instead.

00:15:46   They've got a whole line of other stuff that goes along with it to really soothe your skin,

00:15:51   it better, make it nicer for you. They are for a starter set, 15 bucks, you get a razor,

00:15:57   shave cream or gel, and three razor blades for just 15 bucks. That's a really good deal.

00:16:02   Even the packaging is really nice. I mean, and the designs of these, of these, the handles

00:16:07   and the blades and the packaging, it's just, it's really modern, it's tasteful. And we've

00:16:11   heard, this came up in our discussion about appealing more to women, and we talked about

00:16:18   male-focused advertisers like Harry's and whether that was a problem. I actually had

00:16:22   a call with Harry's this week and we talked about this and they told me some interesting

00:16:26   things. First of all, that a pretty big portion of their customers are women. And we heard,

00:16:31   when we talked about this on the show, we heard from lots of women in our feedback saying

00:16:37   that they use Harry's too. So, you know, while it is marketed to men, you know, on the site

00:16:43   and everything, they certainly have a lot of female customers and their razors work

00:16:48   great for men and women. And you cannot beat the value, you cannot beat the performance,

00:16:54   it's really really great. So, with Harry's you get the convenience and ease of ordering

00:16:58   online, high quality blades, a great handle and shaving cream, an excellent customer service

00:17:03   if you ever need it, all this at half the price of the big brands. So get started with

00:17:08   that starter set today, handle three blades and shaving cream or gel for just fifteen

00:17:12   including shipping right to your door.

00:17:15   Go to harrys.com, H-A-R-R-Y-S.com.

00:17:18   Use promo code ATP for five bucks off your first purchase.

00:17:22   Thank you very much to Harry's

00:17:23   for sponsoring our show once again.

00:17:26   - Alright, so not to take a page out of

00:17:30   Connected's playbook, but since we are also

00:17:34   a photo management podcast, there's been some news.

00:17:38   And Google Photos is a thing.

00:17:40   So Google had IO, what was it, last week, is that right?

00:17:45   - It was the day after we recorded last week's episode.

00:17:48   - Of course it was.

00:17:49   - That was well planned.

00:17:50   ♫ Happy to die, Joe

00:17:51   - And so they released Google Photos,

00:17:53   which from what I gather is what everyone wanted

00:17:57   from photo management, maybe.

00:18:00   (laughs)

00:18:01   So what it allows you to do is it allows you

00:18:03   to upload all of your photos.

00:18:06   You can have an unlimited amount of storage,

00:18:08   unlimited amount of storage if you allow Google to recompress your pictures. It's

00:18:14   very cheap if you want to give them money to store full res

00:18:19   pictures. And from everything I've heard, I haven't had a chance to try this yet,

00:18:23   from everything I've heard it has unbelievable search capabilities. So I

00:18:29   think it might have been Russell Vanovich that had searched for sleeping

00:18:33   or something like that and there were a bunch of pictures of him and other

00:18:37   people asleep. And I'm sure it was him. He searched for the opera house in Sydney. And

00:18:44   not only did it find pictures with the opera house in Sydney in it, but it found a picture

00:18:50   of a picture of the Sydney Opera House, which I guess, in a lot of ways it makes sense,

00:18:57   but it's just that's kind of crazy all at the same time. So it is supposed to be really,

00:19:02   really good from everything I've gathered. Have you either of you guys had a chance to

00:19:06   Marco, have you tried it?

00:19:08   - You know, the world of tech is a really big place,

00:19:11   and there's only so much you can reasonably try

00:19:14   and put real effort and spend real time with.

00:19:17   And, you know, I'm not gonna try,

00:19:20   I never have tried everything that comes out,

00:19:23   and I never will, I will never have time for that,

00:19:25   nor is that really interesting to me.

00:19:26   So, I have not tried this either.

00:19:28   So, you know, I can comment on it

00:19:29   as a person who uses Apple's version of this,

00:19:32   as a person who uses Apple versions of most things,

00:19:35   as a person who has a lot of photos.

00:19:37   And to me, first of all, I think it's worth noting

00:19:42   that this is basically the only thing

00:19:43   anybody's talking about from Google I/O.

00:19:45   Like this was the big announcement, I think.

00:19:48   I think it's worth pointing out that Google

00:19:50   is kind of taking this, it seems,

00:19:54   taking this year to mature things

00:19:56   and do some less interesting

00:19:58   but necessary improvements everywhere.

00:20:00   Which is exactly what we're kind of hoping Apple will do.

00:20:02   Right?

00:20:03   - Oh, absolutely.

00:20:05   So that I think is interesting and I hope Apple takes the same opportunity.

00:20:10   But anyway, so Google Photos, I think it's really interesting.

00:20:12   I think the big things everyone seems to be talking about are what you said are the pricing

00:20:19   and the unlimited storage tier with the asterisk of recompressing and not supporting RAW, but

00:20:25   the unlimited star storage tier and the really, really good intelligence of recognizing things

00:20:31   and being able to search for things.

00:20:34   Those are really nice, however, neither of those really appeal to me. I've never done

00:20:40   like keywording or much metadata entry for my photos. And that's just, you know, some

00:20:46   people do, some people don't. I just don't. So I browse things just by date and I find

00:20:52   them looking for that way very, very easily just by skimming the timeline view and everything

00:20:56   in Apple stuff. So the thing about being able to search for things, like that's, it's a

00:21:02   a very impressive technical achievement

00:21:03   that solves a problem I don't have.

00:21:05   And then the unlimited storage thing

00:21:07   with the asterisk is nice.

00:21:10   A lot of people will use that.

00:21:12   I don't want that.

00:21:14   I want, if I'm gonna invest time and bandwidth and data

00:21:18   and possibly money into a photo storage solution,

00:21:23   I want it to store my originals,

00:21:25   and that includes massive files,

00:21:27   and that includes raw files.

00:21:28   And that's only, like, you know,

00:21:30   limit right now is 16 megapixel, I believe,

00:21:32   and it's using JPEG recompression to lower the rate

00:21:36   even further.

00:21:37   That, to me, like, again, I can see a lot of people

00:21:42   will be just fine with that, but I'm about to,

00:21:46   like, my camera for the last, oh god, I don't know,

00:21:49   six, seven years has been a 5D Mark II,

00:21:52   and that's already, you know, from six, seven years ago,

00:21:55   granted, it was a high-end camera back then,

00:21:56   but that already is, like, 22 megapixels,

00:22:00   or 21 megapixels, that's already past the limit.

00:22:03   Every camera on the market today that's really good

00:22:07   usually starts at 16 megapixels.

00:22:10   Like all the Micro Four Thirds cameras

00:22:13   and the Fuji X system and the little Sonys

00:22:17   that are not the Alpha 7 full frame series.

00:22:21   Almost all of those are 16 megapixels starting.

00:22:25   And many of them are now 24, some of them are even 36 now.

00:22:29   6 now and Canon just released a 50 megapixel camera. So, like, there's, if you're buying

00:22:35   nice cameras, then you will be classified as a "pro" and all these consumer level solutions

00:22:41   are going to either limit you or not appeal to you and they seem to not care. They seem

00:22:46   to be okay to give you up. Unfortunately, I kind of fall on that side of that line just

00:22:52   by a little bit. So, like, I fall on the pro line just enough to want fancy editing controls

00:22:58   like what Lightroom gives me, and just enough to have a nice enough camera where I want

00:23:02   to shoot 24 megapixel images, but not so far that I want to abandon these systems completely

00:23:06   and give up all the cool sync stuff that they offer.

00:23:08   I have two minds on this sort of asterisk recompression thing. On the one side you say,

00:23:15   "Boy, this is actually kind of dangerous," because a lot of people asked when this came

00:23:17   out, "Oh, hey, can I use Google Photos to back up my photos?" And the answer is, if

00:23:22   you're using the free thing, no, because you're not really getting a backup. What you're getting

00:23:26   is a place where you can see your pictures but it is changing them, it's recompressing

00:23:30   them so it's not really a backup.

00:23:31   But on the other hand, by making it free and unlimited, it is way more attractive to people

00:23:37   who would otherwise do nothing to organize their photos.

00:23:40   And therefore it does serve as, "hey it's a hell of a lot better than nothing" kind

00:23:44   of backup for the people who previously just left all their pictures on their phone for

00:23:47   instance, right?

00:23:48   Like all, just all their pictures are on their Android phone and then they drop their phone

00:23:51   in a lake and they're like, "oh yeah, where are my pictures?"

00:23:54   This is a great solution for those people because even though it recompresses, the fact

00:23:58   that it's free and unlimited, they don't care about the asterisk and it's way better than

00:24:02   what they were doing before which is probably nothing.

00:24:04   So I think this probably hits the sweet spot of Google's target user which is the mass

00:24:09   market and not people who have fancy cameras, basically people who take pictures with their

00:24:13   phones.

00:24:14   Phones aren't yet 16 megapixels, they will be in a few years, but I think it is the right

00:24:20   solution for their audience and it also has the added benefit of making Apple's pricing

00:24:26   look terrible because even though it's not apples to apples, nobody knows or cares about

00:24:30   that.

00:24:31   If you were to explain to somebody, "No, you don't get it," Google re-compresses their

00:24:33   image and you try to explain what that means and they say, "Okay, show me the pictures."

00:24:35   They're like, "Oh, they look the same to me."

00:24:37   And realistically, they do.

00:24:38   Like we're not going to be zooming way in on someone's eyeball on a 16-megapixel image

00:24:41   to show them, "See how Google re-compresses it and it looks like a mess?"

00:24:44   They're like, "Yeah, but I look at them like this and they look fine.

00:24:46   They look the same."

00:24:47   I think this is the right compromise,

00:24:49   even though it was disappointing when I learned

00:24:52   free and unlimited that that asterisk was there,

00:24:54   for me personally, but for everybody else,

00:24:57   definitely a good deal.

00:24:59   - Real quick, real time follow up,

00:25:00   the Galaxy S6 is 16 megapixel.

00:25:04   - There you go, we're already there.

00:25:05   Oh, that's right, the Nokia whatever

00:25:08   had the super high megapixel camera a couple years ago,

00:25:11   so we're probably a couple years into that.

00:25:12   - There's also, I think we might be about

00:25:14   to have a big megapixel spike,

00:25:16   because there's a couple of cameras in the market,

00:25:19   and I think one or two phones that even do this,

00:25:21   where, so, you know, we've seen over the last few years

00:25:25   how many of the, many of the cameras

00:25:27   and many smaller phones, or many phones,

00:25:29   including the iPhone 6 Plus,

00:25:31   has optical image stabilization,

00:25:32   and they do this by sensor shift.

00:25:34   They basically have accelerometers,

00:25:36   and they shift the sensor around really quickly

00:25:39   and adjust for camera shake and motion.

00:25:43   Well, somebody figured out recently

00:25:45   that you can use sensor shift to basically interpolate

00:25:49   a super high resolution picture from multiple captures.

00:25:53   So what they do is in very quick succession,

00:25:56   when you hit the shutter button in this special mode,

00:25:58   some of these cameras can basically use the image stabilizer

00:26:01   system to shift the sensor very slightly

00:26:04   in different directions over the course of a few seconds

00:26:07   to kind of interpolate a higher megapixel mode.

00:26:10   That can make a 16 megapixel sensor

00:26:12   take like a 50 megapixel image.

00:26:15   This could get, especially in the spec-obsessed,

00:26:18   hyper-competitive, camera-obsessed smartphone market,

00:26:21   it would not surprise me at all if this becomes

00:26:25   a very, very common feature among smartphone cameras.

00:26:29   And even though the optics will still be kinda crappy,

00:26:32   and even though the sensors will still be kinda crappy

00:26:34   with really tiny pixels, this will be a way

00:26:36   for many phones and many cameras

00:26:37   to claim ridiculous megapixel counts.

00:26:40   And there is additional resolution to be had there.

00:26:42   It's not, you know, it isn't as good as if you actually had

00:26:46   a giant sensor that big in most cases.

00:26:48   But it's better than not doing this at all.

00:26:52   So--

00:26:53   - I think people will use that for digital zoom

00:26:55   because I see people do that all the time.

00:26:56   They don't understand the quality loss

00:26:58   inherent in digital zoom.

00:26:59   But if you have 50 megapixels,

00:27:01   'cause it's not, you know, why do you need 50 megapixels?

00:27:03   Unless you're printing out something poster size

00:27:04   or you're going to print it super high D,

00:27:07   like no one's gonna do that.

00:27:08   They just want pictures that are like human size

00:27:10   that are on their mantle.

00:27:11   you know, eight megapixels is fine for that,

00:27:13   16 megapixels is fine.

00:27:14   So if you have 50, what does that buy you?

00:27:16   That buys you the ability to pinch

00:27:18   while you're taking the picture,

00:27:19   to zoom in and out instead of like walking closer

00:27:21   or farther away,

00:27:22   and still get a 10 megapixel image out of it.

00:27:25   - Yeah.

00:27:26   No, I think the key piece to me

00:27:29   is what you had said, Marco, a little while ago,

00:27:31   that I really, I personally love the idea

00:27:34   of having this really robust search engine on my pictures.

00:27:38   I'm not really interested in weighing the pros and cons

00:27:41   giving my pictures to Google, but the problem I have with it is if I'm going to get into

00:27:46   this position where I have all of my pictures on Google Photos, I'm going to want that to

00:27:51   also serve as a backup in addition to being a really robust search engine.

00:27:55   And I know I've talked about Picture Life quite a lot on and off over the last few months,

00:28:00   but I really love Picture Life for a bunch of reasons, including them having a good search

00:28:06   engine, mostly around dates or locations.

00:28:09   as advanced as what Google Photos is doing, but also because they'll take every file as

00:28:14   it sits on the computer, including raw files.

00:28:17   And granted, you have to pay for it.

00:28:19   And I think I pay $15 a month for a limited storage.

00:28:22   I think I might be quoting that wrong.

00:28:26   But it serves not only as a nice repository, it does the time hop style thing where it

00:28:32   says, "Oh, this day, one year ago, two years ago, three years ago, this is what you were

00:28:35   doing."

00:28:36   But it also allows me to search for pictures very easily.

00:28:38   It allows me access to all of my pictures while I'm on the go.

00:28:42   It does a lot of the stuff that Google Photos and actually Photos app and iCloud Photos,

00:28:48   iCloud Photo Library, whatever, should and intends to do.

00:28:52   But man, I would absolutely pay for and switch to Google Photos if I felt like it got me

00:29:02   things that Picture Life didn't.

00:29:04   And right now it's getting me a search engine, but it's not getting me, I don't think, a

00:29:08   a lot of the other stuff that I really love,

00:29:09   like the Timehop.

00:29:10   - It'll get you like better face recognition

00:29:12   and it does some weird AI thing

00:29:14   where it composes a nice picture for you

00:29:16   and makes albums based on good stuff.

00:29:18   But anyway, you can get this, you can pay.

00:29:20   You can pay Google, you know,

00:29:21   it just goes towards your Google account storage.

00:29:22   If you pay for like terabyte of storage,

00:29:24   then it will back up whatever the hell you want.

00:29:26   Like, and that's the other thing that's a shame

00:29:28   about the asterisk, is people might dismiss it then,

00:29:31   the nerdy people listening say,

00:29:31   "Oh, well, I don't want it to recompress my images."

00:29:33   That's just for the free one.

00:29:35   If you pay Google money,

00:29:36   you could store whatever the heck you want

00:29:38   because they charge you for the amount of storage you use.

00:29:40   And the rates for storage are not, they're not cheap,

00:29:42   but they're cheaper than Apple still.

00:29:44   - Yeah, it's about half the price.

00:29:45   - Yeah, and as many of the competitors are,

00:29:48   as I went over last time,

00:29:49   Apple is still a little bit out of whack in the thing.

00:29:51   - Same as Dropbox, right?

00:29:53   10 bucks a month for a terabyte?

00:29:54   That's Dropbox, right?

00:29:55   - I don't remember their pricing,

00:29:56   but Dropbox is still below Apple for the big,

00:29:59   especially for the big tier.

00:30:00   - Yeah.

00:30:02   - And I have to tell you, I'm tempted by this Google thing

00:30:05   because the features it has, and more importantly,

00:30:07   the performance characteristics that I assume it has

00:30:10   based on all my experience with server-side stuff,

00:30:12   that it's like, look, it doesn't matter

00:30:14   how fast my computer is, because most of the magic

00:30:17   is happening on the server side.

00:30:18   It's sort of like why I use Gmail.

00:30:20   I have a ton of email, ton of filters.

00:30:22   All I ever see on my screen is one set of email things.

00:30:25   So it doesn't matter that this label or folder

00:30:28   or whatever has 60,000 emails in it.

00:30:31   I can switch to it and immediately see what's there,

00:30:34   because it just shows one screen full.

00:30:35   And I don't mind clicking next to go to the next screen full

00:30:38   as opposed to clicking something in Outlook

00:30:40   and watching it grind and beach ball my thing

00:30:41   so it can display a scrolling list view

00:30:44   with 60,000 email messages, right?

00:30:46   This is the advantage of server side versus client side.

00:30:48   The disadvantage is you don't get a nice scroll bar

00:30:50   to do it, but the advantage is everything

00:30:51   is always responsive.

00:30:52   So I would imagine that Google Photos, like Google Search,

00:30:57   would let me find all the pictures of a particular person

00:31:00   with its face recognition,

00:31:01   which I have to assume is superior to Apple's,

00:31:03   even if just in that it doesn't grind my computer to death

00:31:06   when it's detecting faces,

00:31:07   it grinds Google's computers to death

00:31:09   when it's detecting faces.

00:31:10   And same for all the other stuff

00:31:11   where you can just type in receipt

00:31:12   and it'll find all your receipts.

00:31:13   You can type in Sydney Opera House,

00:31:14   you can type in statue, you can type in grass,

00:31:17   like whatever, you know,

00:31:18   they have lots of smarts behind this

00:31:20   that are not going to be duplicated in a local computer.

00:31:23   It's like Google's giant computing cluster

00:31:25   and the fact that they share all the information

00:31:27   about image detection

00:31:28   and that it makes the whole system smarter and all that.

00:31:30   All of these are features I like

00:31:32   and their rates are cheaper than Apple

00:31:33   and they were saving the uncompressed stuff.

00:31:36   But for photos, I'm gonna give Apple's photos app,

00:31:39   despite it being super slow and everything,

00:31:41   a little bit more time to mature because this is the 1.0,

00:31:44   it's basically a complete rewrite.

00:31:46   So far it has been reliable,

00:31:49   if only incredibly slow and maddening.

00:31:52   And there's one update on my Apple photos complaints.

00:31:56   There's one new behavior that's really pissing me off.

00:31:59   In addition to being super slow

00:32:01   When I'm going through pictures of like hit the right arrow,

00:32:03   the left arrow, add a keyword,

00:32:05   hit the period key to favorite.

00:32:06   I'm trying to come up with like a nice keyboard only

00:32:08   workflow for sort of going through my pictures

00:32:10   after I take them to organize them and tag them.

00:32:12   Frequently I'll come upon one that I want to delete

00:32:15   'cause it's crappy and I'm not doing like the one star thing

00:32:17   anymore, I just delete now 'cause I have just have fave

00:32:19   and non-fave, so if I see something that's one star,

00:32:21   just delete immediately.

00:32:22   Delete of course takes forever, fine, take forever,

00:32:25   sit there for, sometimes I count one, two, three, four,

00:32:30   Oh, there it went.

00:32:31   It deleted, right?

00:32:32   And then the next picture comes up.

00:32:34   And then I'll hit the arrow key or hit delete.

00:32:38   I'll hit the arrow key and then I'll see

00:32:40   the next picture I wanna delete.

00:32:41   And I'll hit delete.

00:32:43   And I'll look up at the screen

00:32:44   and I'll see what has happened is,

00:32:46   after I went to the next picture,

00:32:48   I deleted one and then I went to the next picture.

00:32:51   Now, like my delete, like iCloud has caught up

00:32:53   with my delete and it has moved sort of my cursor

00:32:56   from the picture I was looking at

00:32:58   to the one that was before the one I deleted.

00:33:00   So then whatever key I hit, like favoriting or whatever,

00:33:03   applies to the picture before the one I just deleted

00:33:05   instead of the next one.

00:33:06   Like it doesn't preserve my position,

00:33:09   my selection state in the thing

00:33:11   because the collection view like reshuffles

00:33:13   behind the scenes and I will find myself looking

00:33:14   at a picture I wasn't looking at before.

00:33:17   Maddening, like that's a potential for,

00:33:19   if someone was not paying enough attention,

00:33:23   they might not realize what happened.

00:33:24   They might not realize that you thought

00:33:25   you were on the next picture,

00:33:26   Really after you hit next picture it said no no no here you are on the picture before you were deleted

00:33:31   and you might not realize that you tagged that wrong or

00:33:33   deleted it or something else and if it happened to do that delete fast enough when you were looking down like I

00:33:38   Can imagine that being a data loss bug waiting to happen and stuff like that in addition to being super slow

00:33:44   It's like this is so slow and laggy that it is it is breaking the model of the UI like it's like outlook

00:33:50   2011 all over again where the selection state is changing underneath my my cursor

00:33:55   So I'm really not liking the experience with photos

00:33:59   other than the fact that it is accepting all of my uploads

00:34:03   and presumably preserving them

00:34:05   and they're all in a cloud and blah, blah, blah.

00:34:07   - Well, and to me, that I think is the most important part.

00:34:10   If you have an Android phone and you use Google stuff,

00:34:15   then by all means use Google's photo thing.

00:34:18   That makes the most sense.

00:34:19   My most frequently used camera is my iPhone.

00:34:23   And the fact is that nothing integrates better

00:34:27   with my most frequently used camera

00:34:29   than Apple's Photo Storage thing.

00:34:31   And so Apple's Photo Storage thing would have to be

00:34:34   really bad for me to not use it

00:34:37   and to instead go over to something else.

00:34:40   Because the convenience aspect

00:34:42   is really incredibly powerful.

00:34:44   Of just having the integration,

00:34:46   having things like just instantly be over on my big computer

00:34:49   or on different devices.

00:34:50   - Well let's not say instantly,

00:34:52   because one of the complaints,

00:34:53   performance eventually becomes a feature deficit.

00:34:55   One of the complaints for people with large libraries

00:34:57   is you take a photo with your iPhone

00:34:59   and then you, maybe a couple seconds pass,

00:35:02   and then you wanna see that photo in your photos collection

00:35:06   and you go to photos and it's not there yet.

00:35:08   And why isn't it there yet?

00:35:09   You just took it.

00:35:10   Why is it not there yet?

00:35:11   Because you have a giant collection

00:35:12   and it takes a while to,

00:35:13   I don't know what the hell it's doing.

00:35:15   I don't think it's going anywhere.

00:35:16   You took it on the phone.

00:35:17   Surely it should show up in your photos collection,

00:35:19   but there's a lag if you have large photo collection.

00:35:21   And that's a leg that wasn't there before like this is one of my wife's complaints you turned on this iPhoto library

00:35:26   whatever thing

00:35:27   Because the photos are in her computer and because Apple doesn't understand how families work the photos have to be on one computer and blah

00:35:32   blah blah we've complained about this before so

00:35:34   She gets to have them on her phone and all it has done is made her camera on her phone less pleasant and made her

00:35:40   photo pickers in every single app way slower and so again 1.0

00:35:44   Hopefully this will be addressed

00:35:45   This is a perfect thing for them to do in iOS 9 which we'll talk about when we get to

00:35:49   WWDC predictions. So I'm gonna give the Apple one a chance, but I don't have many hang-ups about

00:35:54   Google Photos, especially the ones where I'm paying for the storage because I feel like that is a I

00:35:59   understand the relationship there. I give you money, you store my photos. I store more photos,

00:36:03   I give you more money, and I love all the features they have for all their searching, face detection, and organization,

00:36:09   and all that good stuff. So

00:36:12   Apple better get its act together.

00:36:14   Yeah, in a lot of ways

00:36:15   I feel like this is Google at its best because it's leveraging all of its machine learning,

00:36:19   all of its humongous server farms and whatnot in order to get something that's really very

00:36:24   impressive and really awesome to use as a consumer. So I'm curious to see where this

00:36:30   goes but I'll probably be checking it out at some point or another. With that said,

00:36:35   what else is awesome, Marco?

00:36:36   >> So our second sponsor this week is our friends, the nicest people in the world really,

00:36:41   our friends at Studio Neat.

00:36:42   >> Oh, they're the best.

00:36:43   Aren't they?

00:36:44   They're just, they're such nice guys, really.

00:36:46   I mean, they're genuinely nice people,

00:36:47   and they make really cool stuff.

00:36:48   So, studioneat.com/atp is where you go to see

00:36:53   all this cool stuff.

00:36:54   Studioneat.com/atp.

00:36:56   Use code ATP for 10% off anything in their store.

00:37:00   Now, order soon, because they're gonna probably

00:37:04   have a big rush for Father's Day, if I can take a guess,

00:37:06   because their stuff makes fantastic Father's Day

00:37:09   and even graduation gifts.

00:37:11   A lot of their stuff is cool iPhone things.

00:37:14   A lot of their stuff is cool stuff about drinks,

00:37:16   making drinks at home, Father's Day, graduation,

00:37:19   really big holidays for the kind of stuff they make.

00:37:22   They also have a new app, before I get into their stuff,

00:37:24   they have a new app for iPhone called Highball.

00:37:27   It's a free app and it's really big,

00:37:30   almost as a companion to their cocktail products.

00:37:33   When you download the app, you can tap the plus button

00:37:35   on the home screen, then add from library,

00:37:37   and then you can actually find special cocktail recipes

00:37:40   inspired by the three ATP hosts.

00:37:43   So really cool guys, they listen to our shows,

00:37:45   you know, cool inside jokes.

00:37:47   So check out their iPhone app, Highball.

00:37:49   Now, their regular products, I love this stuff,

00:37:51   I have a lot of their stuff.

00:37:52   They have the Glyph, which is an iPhone tripod mount,

00:37:56   and kind of like a built-in mini tripod.

00:37:58   Really great, very, very handy.

00:38:00   It came out a while ago, they've updated it

00:38:01   a couple times since then.

00:38:03   And the new one is adjustable, so it can work

00:38:05   with multiple phone generations, most likely.

00:38:07   They also have the Cosmonaut, which is an iPad stylus,

00:38:11   or iPhone stylus, which I've tried a bunch

00:38:13   of the various styli that exist for the touch screens.

00:38:16   The Cosmonaut is by far my favorite one.

00:38:18   It is so, so good.

00:38:19   Now, their cocktail products are really interesting too.

00:38:23   They have the Neat Ice Kit, and this is what we were

00:38:25   talking about a lot last time I sponsored, I believe.

00:38:28   The Neat Ice Kit lets you create crystal clear ice at home.

00:38:32   And this is another one of the things,

00:38:34   I've tried a couple of other things that attempt

00:38:36   to make clear ice various Kickstarter projects and stuff.

00:38:40   None of them have been as nicely working

00:38:43   and as easy to use as the Neat Ice Kit,

00:38:46   which I also have, and it's so much better.

00:38:49   And it's easy, it's friendly.

00:38:51   The Neat Ice Kit is very, very simple.

00:38:53   All you do is they have this cylinder of water

00:38:57   that you put in the freezer,

00:38:59   and then it gives you this solid rectangle of ice,

00:39:03   and one half of it is cloudy,

00:39:05   and one and a half of it is clear.

00:39:06   And so you take the included chisel

00:39:09   to just cut it down the middle basically,

00:39:12   and then you have a perfectly clear ice cube

00:39:14   that you can then cut and shape however you want

00:39:16   or just leave it as one giant cube.

00:39:17   It is really, it is so easy to use.

00:39:20   They also have the Simple Syrup Kit.

00:39:23   Now this is something, I make simple syrup all the time.

00:39:25   I make simple syrup in the summer mostly

00:39:28   for my iced coffee recipe, which I'll link to somewhere.

00:39:30   Simple syrup, you would think that making it without,

00:39:34   you know, making it yourself without a custom kit,

00:39:37   it's, you know, pretty straightforward.

00:39:38   You combine water and sugar and mix it up

00:39:40   and put it in a bottle somehow.

00:39:42   So you would think your product like this

00:39:43   wouldn't be necessary.

00:39:45   I cannot tell you how good this is.

00:39:47   I was smiling the whole time I was using it

00:39:49   because it's like, yeah, you can make simple syrup

00:39:51   without this, but there are parts of it that are annoying,

00:39:54   there are parts of it that are kinda hard,

00:39:56   kinda tricky to get right, and once you make it,

00:40:00   you still have to have some kind of container

00:40:02   to put it in and pour it out of.

00:40:04   And really, they nailed it.

00:40:07   Like every part of the simple syrup kit,

00:40:09   they completely nailed it.

00:40:11   The process of making it is simple.

00:40:14   They have this little jar that's labeled perfectly

00:40:16   for the ratios.

00:40:17   You really don't have to measure anything.

00:40:19   You just pour it in until it goes to the line.

00:40:21   You can swish it around with that, no utensils needed.

00:40:23   The pour spout that they have on this bottle is perfect.

00:40:27   It doesn't dribble, it doesn't leak.

00:40:29   You can shake it and nothing comes out.

00:40:31   It does, like it's, they thought of everything.

00:40:33   The bottle is exactly the right size

00:40:36   to fit on any fridge shelf.

00:40:38   They took every part of this process

00:40:40   and they made it way better, so much so

00:40:43   that I will never make simple syrup again

00:40:45   without using their product.

00:40:46   Like it's just so good.

00:40:48   This also makes a great gift.

00:40:50   Holidays, wedding gift, graduation, Father's Day,

00:40:52   whatever you want, this is great.

00:40:54   So, check out Studio Neat.

00:40:57   These are such cool things.

00:40:58   They're just cool products made by cool people.

00:41:02   I think I've tried most of their products now,

00:41:05   or even all of their products now,

00:41:07   and they're all great.

00:41:08   Like, I can't point to anything they've made

00:41:10   that's been a dud.

00:41:11   Check it out, really.

00:41:12   Great stuff, reasonably priced, great gifts

00:41:15   for fathers, jay, graduations, birthdays, whatever.

00:41:18   Studio neat dot com slash ATP.

00:41:21   That's studio neat dot com slash ATP,

00:41:24   and use coupon code ATP for 10% off

00:41:27   anything in their store.

00:41:28   Thanks a lot once again to Studio Neat for sponsoring our show.

00:41:30   Let me just pile on for two seconds.

00:41:32   One, love the Neat Ice Kit used all the time.

00:41:35   Two, you should check out the stop motion video they did for the Simple Syrup Kit.

00:41:39   It's just very, very well done and very clever.

00:41:41   And they had a blog post about it at some point or another about how they did it.

00:41:45   And that's also very interesting.

00:41:46   So you should check that out.

00:41:48   In other news, so apparently we know what Thunderbolt 3 is and it looks just like USB-C.

00:41:55   Not just like USB-C, there's an important difference that we'll get to in a bit, but

00:41:59   yes, if you didn't think it was confusing enough, now we have two different things that

00:42:06   use the same connector.

00:42:07   It's kind of like we finally got rid of the USB Type-A connector where it's symmetrical

00:42:12   on the outside but asymmetrical on the inside so you have to try three times to get it plugged

00:42:15   in the right way.

00:42:16   Finally, you know, we talked about the USB Type-C connector, that's gone, it goes in

00:42:19   either way, it's perfect, no more cabling problems.

00:42:22   We've now swapped that for plug in this adapter, plug it into the display.

00:42:26   Does it not work?

00:42:27   Oh, that must be the Thunderbolt one.

00:42:28   It doesn't work with MacBook one.

00:42:29   Try the other one.

00:42:30   Plug that one.

00:42:31   You have to try two different things to plug in.

00:42:33   It doesn't matter which way you plug it in, but you have no idea if the one you're using

00:42:36   is the right one for your device.

00:42:38   This will be a transitional period too, but it is a little bit frustrating that Apple

00:42:42   actually shipped machines with USB-C connectors that are not Thunderbolt 3, and so they'll

00:42:47   forever be this weird, not forever, but until they go away, they'll be these weird, weird

00:42:52   weird machine that has a connector that's not a Thunderbolt connector but it looks like

00:42:56   all the other machines that have a Thunderbolt connector.

00:42:57   Yeah, it is a little bit weird. Yeah, it does seem like kind of a kind of

00:43:02   weird timing to have released the MacBook One because if you look here, it's a brand

00:43:07   new computer, this brand new line. There was not like massive pressure for them to release

00:43:13   the MacBook One when they did, you know, and it seems like six months away from when Skylake

00:43:21   will be out most likely from when Thunderbolt 3,

00:43:25   which will come with Skylake in all likelihood,

00:43:27   when that will be available.

00:43:28   So it seems like they released the MacBook One

00:43:30   like six months too early.

00:43:32   - Yeah, they should have just made a retina MacBook Air.

00:43:34   We talked about that before, and like,

00:43:35   oh, I would have liked that machine better, blah, blah, blah.

00:43:37   But now forget about who would like what machine better.

00:43:39   Just in terms of product line planning and succession

00:43:41   and like transition between ports,

00:43:43   it would have been better overall for everybody now,

00:43:45   knowing what we now know about Skylake availability

00:43:48   and Thunderbolt 3 to have made retina MacBook Airs,

00:43:53   like in the exact form they are in now.

00:43:55   Same connector, same everything, same battery,

00:43:57   just put a retina screen on it,

00:43:58   put the lower power chips, right?

00:44:00   'Cause that would be, it would be a more boring machine,

00:44:03   but then you'd have a clean transition front.

00:44:05   These were the old world laptops,

00:44:06   and then here are the new ones,

00:44:08   and they all have Thunderbolt 3 and USB-C connectors,

00:44:11   and it's all uniform.

00:44:12   This machine, this MacBook One is looking more and more

00:44:15   like this weird sort of transitional platypus thing

00:44:20   that is, you know, and like, and you can't,

00:44:24   you can't tell the future is like, oh,

00:44:25   they should have known exactly what Intel's availability be.

00:44:28   It's like the schedule has slipped

00:44:31   when all these things were planned many months or years ago,

00:44:34   you can't exactly predict the future.

00:44:36   So it was kind of a shame.

00:44:38   We'll get over it, but yeah,

00:44:40   that's what happens when schedules slip,

00:44:42   you end up doing strange things.

00:44:44   And apparently this supports 4K displays,

00:44:49   two of them in fact, is that right?

00:44:51   - Yeah, it's enough bandwidth to support two 4Ks at 60 hertz

00:44:55   which if you do enough tricks,

00:44:58   that is also enough bandwidth to support

00:44:59   a single 5K display over one cable.

00:45:02   - But the weird thing is they keep saying

00:45:04   it's DisplayPort 1.2, not 1.3.

00:45:06   And I don't remember the limitations of the spec,

00:45:09   but I mean, does that all fit together?

00:45:11   a single 5K display over a display.

00:45:14   I guess it's ganging two DisplayPort 1.2 connections

00:45:17   over the single cable, right?

00:45:18   Like technically speaking, that's what it's doing.

00:45:20   You don't have to have two wires connected anymore,

00:45:22   but under the covers, do you imagine

00:45:24   that it is basically two DisplayPort 1.2 channels?

00:45:27   - That's certainly how the little information

00:45:30   we have about it, that's how it reads to me.

00:45:32   That's what it's doing, that it is doing

00:45:34   dual DisplayPort 1.2s, 'cause it can do 4K at 60 hertz

00:45:38   using DisplayPort 1.2, it can do two of those.

00:45:41   So that certainly does seem like that's what it's doing.

00:45:44   - This is essentially what everyone's been talking about

00:45:47   since the '80s or the '70s even.

00:45:50   Someday there will be one interconnect to rule everything.

00:45:53   That was some of the early hype about FireWire,

00:45:55   if you can believe it.

00:45:56   Those of us who were around back before FireWire

00:45:58   was actually a thing.

00:45:59   It was like, I know you got all these connections

00:46:01   in the back of your Mac,

00:46:03   but this one bus is gonna do everything.

00:46:05   Forget about USB, that's just for mice and keyboards.

00:46:08   This FireWire thing, because it's like peer-to-peer

00:46:10   and daisy chainable and doesn't require the then much weaker CPUs to do work to get data

00:46:17   along.

00:46:18   It's the best of all possible worlds and it's serial instead of parallel and the connectors

00:46:21   are small and they're easy to plug and unplug and you know it didn't quite work out for

00:46:24   FireWire but the slow consolidation of all the differently shaped holes in the sides

00:46:29   of our computers into a single kind of port.

00:46:33   There's only one kind of hole and we can have multiple ones of them and it's uniform and

00:46:36   they can do everything.

00:46:38   what we're finally finally getting to and I think it was an incredibly wise

00:46:42   smart forward-looking perhaps necessary move for Thunderbolt to to do both of

00:46:49   the things that did the first thing it did was we're not gonna make a new

00:46:52   connector for Thunderbolt we're gonna piggyback on many display port because

00:46:55   by the way we support display so it was like you can connect your drives but

00:46:59   also your display and also kind of your docking station or whatever it's kind of

00:47:02   like a parasite or one of those little, not lamprey, not eel, but the actual word for

00:47:10   the little sucker fishy thing that stick on the side of a shark.

00:47:12   We're going to hitch a ride on an already existing successful port.

00:47:16   And so they hitch a ride on Mini DisplayPort because in that time Thunderbolt was presenting

00:47:21   itself as a cool bus to connect your high speed stuff, but also your display, and in

00:47:26   fact both at once.

00:47:27   And now it has found a much more attractive host.

00:47:30   Forget about Mini DisplayPort.

00:47:32   USB-C, it's delicious. It's an awesome connector. We love it. We're super jealous of that symmetrical connector. It's smaller

00:47:37   It's going to be everywhere we get on that train then finally we can legitimately have computers that just have

00:47:44   one or more hopefully more on the pro machines

00:47:47   USB-C type connector that literally does everything that the computer can do

00:47:52   With a series of adapters and all sorts of other stuff, so that's still a little bit annoying

00:47:58   But it is the the future that we expected the only difference is

00:48:01   It is not one magical bus instead it is one magical wire over which we shove all the existing old stuff

00:48:08   So display port is still going over there and you've got USB going over it and you've also got what you know

00:48:13   The the PCI Express lanes for your graphics card or whatever other stuff you have externally so it's it's one cable

00:48:19   But it's lots of different protocols and sort of channels and buses all going over that one cable

00:48:24   Which I guess is better than nothing

00:48:27   It's still not quite the uniform world where we imagined everything would be speaking one

00:48:30   protocol and they'd all be jumping on this one big beautiful bus that just powers everything,

00:48:35   but maybe we'll get there someday.

00:48:38   And it is definitely an improvement over what we have today, which is, you know, Thunderbolt,

00:48:43   first of all, I've, and I think you agree, I've never liked the amazing DisplayPort as

00:48:47   a port, as a physical port, as a cable end.

00:48:50   Better than SCSI.

00:48:51   Yeah, but that's not a very high bar.

00:48:55   - I would say it's also better than USB Type-A

00:48:57   because it is smaller and externally asymmetrical.

00:49:00   - Well, maybe, but it also doesn't feel

00:49:03   like it's very securely inserted most of the time.

00:49:05   It feels like it can slide out partially very, very easily,

00:49:09   whereas USB has always gripped in there pretty well.

00:49:11   - Well, I can't tell if that's like,

00:49:13   because I have, there are some USB Type-A things

00:49:17   that feel very secure and some that feel loose

00:49:19   or get looser over time, so it's hard to tell

00:49:21   if that is a construction thing

00:49:23   or it's the fault of the port itself.

00:49:25   I believe it's possible to have a secure-feeling Thunderbolt

00:49:28   port, just like I know that it's possible to have

00:49:30   a secure-feeling USB Type-A port and also a really loose one

00:49:34   that feels crappy.

00:49:36   Well, maybe.

00:49:37   But regardless, I've never felt a Thunderbolt port

00:49:39   that felt really secure to me.

00:49:41   And the kind of stuff you're plugging in there,

00:49:43   usually it's stuff like advanced drive arrays or a network

00:49:48   adapter for the laptop or something.

00:49:50   It's things where you really don't want it to just

00:49:53   randomly fall out as you're using it,

00:49:55   like that would be inconvenient or cause problems.

00:49:58   So it is, that always kind of makes me feel

00:50:01   a little weird about it.

00:50:02   But USB-C really like locks in places.

00:50:05   USB-C is a very secure feeling connector.

00:50:08   It does not at all have that problem,

00:50:10   as far as I could tell from my brief time with one.

00:50:13   So that I think is a massive improvement.

00:50:17   You know, also now we have the 5K issue fairly solved,

00:50:21   it looks like.

00:50:23   so that also helps.

00:50:24   Again, I think though you're right

00:50:26   that the problem is now the complexity of,

00:50:31   well, this thing can be plugged into this USB-C port,

00:50:34   but not that USB-C port,

00:50:36   and there's no visual way to identify which is which,

00:50:38   and you're gonna have--

00:50:39   - Is it a USB-C port?

00:50:40   What is the, how would you even call the port now?

00:50:43   Because is it the Thunderbolt 3 port?

00:50:46   Do you call it by the name of the highest speed bus

00:50:48   that can run over a wire that you connect into that port?

00:50:51   It's weird.

00:50:52   Like when the presumed Skylake MacBook Pros come out with ports whose connector is the

00:50:59   shape of the USB Type-C connector, will all those ports be called Thunderbolt ports?

00:51:04   Will we call them all USB ports?

00:51:07   Will we call them anything different when two DisplayPort 1.2 things change to two DisplayPort

00:51:13   1.3s and you can have four 4K displays on some future machine?

00:51:18   Is it still a Thunderbolt 3 port or is it a Thunderbolt 3.1 port?

00:51:21   Like names become meaningless. It is just a wire over which we multiplex all sorts of

00:51:26   signals. The standards and protocols of those signals advance over time and the maximum

00:51:31   throughput of the wire itself advances over time. But we just keep calling them, maybe

00:51:35   we'll just call them ports. Like maybe we'll just, our grandkids will just be like, how

00:51:39   many ports does your computer have and how fast do those ports go? And it becomes less

00:51:43   important to have a name for it. I don't even know.

00:51:46   But it's gonna make it very difficult for everybody,

00:51:50   especially non-super-informed geeks like we hope we are.

00:51:54   But it's gonna be a big problem for everybody,

00:51:57   where like, okay, I have a computer

00:51:59   that has this port on it.

00:52:00   I want to buy this peripheral.

00:52:02   Or I'm out of ports, I wanna buy a hub

00:52:05   to give me more ports.

00:52:07   And then half your devices stop working,

00:52:09   'cause it's a USB-C hub,

00:52:10   and half your devices are Thunderbolt.

00:52:11   And you have no way to know that, really, ahead of time.

00:52:15   Things, right now, you can look at the ports that you have

00:52:19   and you can look at devices and cables

00:52:20   and peripherals and hubs, and you just know,

00:52:24   oh, this is the shape port,

00:52:26   I have two of those on my computer,

00:52:27   I can plug that into that and it will probably work.

00:52:30   - Use your skills learned on a shape sorter

00:52:32   when you were a toddler.

00:52:33   (laughing)

00:52:34   - Right, like in this new world where we have this,

00:52:37   we have one port that is most likely

00:52:40   going to be very common, and there's already tons

00:52:45   tons of cables and hubs and devices on the market for USB-C now. There's already tons

00:52:52   of them and all those hubs that exist now that everyone's buying now with their MacBook

00:52:57   1s, they're gonna, you know, in two years they're still gonna have that. They're

00:53:00   gonna have a different laptop maybe and it's not gonna work with half their stuff. It's

00:53:04   gonna be a weird situation that I'm not sure is a good thing overall.

00:53:09   >> Well, as people in the chat room are pointing out, like, and as Intel has been pushing with

00:53:14   technologies that is trying to attach to Skylake or make part of the same sort of

00:53:19   push for new products we talked about in past shows, the whole idea of wireless

00:53:23   connectivity which maybe isn't here yet, maybe isn't up to snuff for Apple

00:53:29   standards yet, but going to a uniform connector everywhere with different

00:53:35   protocols put over it is an improvement over the status quo and eventually you

00:53:38   would imagine that the things that can be wireless sort of high speed, high

00:53:42   bandwidth near field low power wireless can we get that to the point where the

00:53:49   ports just stop being used for anything except for maybe power you know sort of

00:53:55   the zero port thing that we talked about with it with the MacBook one that's not

00:54:00   I don't think that far in the future in the order of you know the good old five

00:54:05   to ten years thing so I think this is a step up from where we were we'll just

00:54:11   deal with the confusion and what comes out on the other side of it is not a final unification

00:54:16   on a single protocol on a single wire but rather the slow deterioration of the wire

00:54:21   is an important thing that you plug into your devices for anything other than charging.

00:54:24   I mean we're already there with iOS devices, we've just convinced the entire world you

00:54:28   don't plug anything into this thing except for a cable to charge it.

00:54:33   Everything else you do with it you do wirelessly.

00:54:35   Even though that's not technically true you can plug all sorts of things into it.

00:54:38   I think people like the idea of the wireless stuff, even as flaky and as unreliable as

00:54:43   it is now.

00:54:44   New versions of Bluetooth, near fields for the Apple Pay stuff, future protocols that

00:54:50   do similar things for displaying, doing air, what is it, air display?

00:54:55   What the hell is that called?

00:54:57   Airplay.

00:54:58   Airplay, doing airplay over different protocols.

00:54:59   They'll keep calling it airplay, but whatever the weird wireless high definition display

00:55:05   standard that Intel comes up with several years from now. Building that in

00:55:10   instead of doing it the way Apple does it now with H.264 compression over a

00:55:13   regular old Wi-Fi, like that I think is the the long-term end state of this. But

00:55:18   in the meantime I am very excited about a future line of computers period, not

00:55:24   just laptops, but I'm excited about a new trashcan Mac Pro with a bunch of

00:55:29   Thunderbolt 3 ports on the back, whatever the hell you want to call it, like just

00:55:33   the back of this machine will just be bristling with little tiny USB 3D shaped holes even

00:55:38   more than there are Thunderbolt ports and it'll have more capabilities and it will be

00:55:45   less of a hassle to plug things into it.

00:55:47   This is the final point on Thunderbolt 3.

00:55:49   They've finally seen the light on another thing which is the stupid Thunderbolt cables

00:55:54   that cost 50 bucks because they have chips in the connectors and it makes the connectors

00:55:57   really long and like one inch long stiff part that can't bend because that's where the chip

00:56:01   is and they actually get warm when you use them. They have a standard for passive wires.

00:56:05   It only goes half the speed, 20 gigabits instead of 40, although that half speed, that's the

00:56:09   maximum speed of the current Thunderbolt 2, isn't it? 20?

00:56:12   I'll take that. Right. So basically for the current speed that

00:56:16   you have now, you can get cheap, flexible wires that don't heat up when you use them

00:56:22   with no chips in them, and you get 20 gigabits. And so that's great. This is the fastest turnaround

00:56:28   time I've ever seen on a interconnect standard learning from all the mistakes

00:56:32   the previous iteration of this interconnect standard made because first

00:56:35   of all Thunderbolt's already up to version 3 and it's like barely used and

00:56:38   only used on Apple computers and it is already like correcting all of its past

00:56:42   mistakes. Better connector, piggybacking on USB, a passive thing for people who

00:56:46   don't care while still pushing the envelope of like actually we have double

00:56:52   that speed if you're going to use the chip connector things or whatever so I'm

00:56:55   I'm really excited about next year's crop of Macs,

00:56:58   one of which I may actually buy

00:57:00   if my 2008 Mac Pro lasts that long.

00:57:04   - You know, I wonder,

00:57:06   because they're attaching Thunderbolt to USB,

00:57:11   and we know that Apple is very unlikely,

00:57:14   extremely unlikely, to ship a computer where like,

00:57:18   these ports are USB 3, but these ports are USB 2,

00:57:21   like they're just gonna go all out on one or the other.

00:57:23   Thunderbolt requires direct PCI lanes

00:57:27   right from the chipset, and it's most likely,

00:57:31   I would imagine, I don't know offhand,

00:57:32   but I would imagine it's much more expensive

00:57:34   to have a Thunderbolt port on a motherboard,

00:57:36   on a computer than a USB port.

00:57:38   It might not be possible to have more than two USB-C ports

00:57:44   on anything but a Mac Pro,

00:57:46   just because of the chipset limitations.

00:57:47   So, look at the iMacs today.

00:57:50   iMacs have four USB ports in the back.

00:57:52   Are they gonna have four USB-C ports on the next version?

00:57:55   I kinda doubt it, because I would doubt

00:57:59   that whatever chipsets Intel uses

00:58:00   for the consumer level stuff,

00:58:02   they might not support that many lanes

00:58:03   for Thunderbolt to use.

00:58:05   - I think they listed the chipsets.

00:58:06   Like they were gonna make one super low power one.

00:58:08   This is a lot of people writing in

00:58:09   to explain the MacBook One,

00:58:10   although it doesn't really make sense

00:58:12   because the MacBook One doesn't use Thunderbolt 3.

00:58:13   But anyway, they're gonna have one low power chipset

00:58:15   that can only support one of these ports, right?

00:58:18   The whole idea is like, we're only gonna support one,

00:58:20   but it is a true Thunderbolt 3 port

00:58:21   It does everything on, you know, it's for the MacBook One,

00:58:24   it's a classic machine, and it really only does support one.

00:58:26   So yeah, you could have a second one that, like you said,

00:58:28   is, well, this one isn't Thunderbolt.

00:58:30   I know it looks the same, but this one is actually

00:58:31   just plain old USB.

00:58:33   They didn't have, with the current MacBook One,

00:58:36   they didn't have that problem.

00:58:37   You could have made them both identical,

00:58:38   but with the new one, with Thunderbolt 3,

00:58:39   you can have one Thunderbolt 3 port with this chipset,

00:58:42   because that's all we have the lanes for,

00:58:43   and then you can have other, like, plain USB ports,

00:58:45   which Apple may or may not do.

00:58:47   But then the next step up,

00:58:48   with the sort of better laptop things,

00:58:50   I think it was like,

00:58:52   now you can have two Thunderbolt 3 ports.

00:58:55   - Do you know if that will qualify for the MacBook Air?

00:58:57   - The MacBook what?

00:58:59   (laughing)

00:59:00   I like it.

00:59:01   Do we think that this machine is still gonna be a thing?

00:59:03   Not without a retina screen.

00:59:05   I don't see that living.

00:59:05   I don't see a 26 new iteration of the MacBook Air

00:59:08   coming in 2016 unless they put a retina screen in it.

00:59:10   And I'm not entirely convinced they're gonna do that yet.

00:59:13   But yeah, and so you're right.

00:59:16   They will be faced with this problem,

00:59:17   especially for the iMac.

00:59:18   'Cause the iMac, you don't have the excuse of like,

00:59:19   Well, because the iMac you could just basically put an internal hub inside there and have

00:59:23   one of the Thunderbolt 3 things branching out into basically an internal USB hub and

00:59:28   then you have one, I mean they're still faced with the same problem.

00:59:30   You're gonna have a bunch of connectors that are all shaped the same, one of which has

00:59:33   a little different symbol painted on it and tiny paint that no one can actually read because

00:59:36   it's behind the computer and nobody can see back there because it's dark, right?

00:59:39   But if you swivel it towards you it'll light up.

00:59:41   Oh god.

00:59:42   Yeah, well not on the Mac Pro, the iMac, right?

00:59:45   They have plenty of room, they have plenty of room inside the iMac to have five ports

00:59:49   on the back of it. One of them is going to be like the good port, like the Thunderbolt

00:59:53   port and all the rest of them are going to be these are just plain old USB. And they

00:59:56   can do that with a quote unquote two port chipset from Intel, right? Or just like I

01:00:01   said, they could have two Thunderbolt three ports and then five USB, but not that Apple

01:00:07   would ever do this because they're so stingy with ports, but then five USB ports just running

01:00:10   off of like a plain old USB three control. Like they technologically, this is all possible

01:00:14   and all it comes down to is the confusion factor. And on the back of the iMac, I think

01:00:18   if you separated them, even though they're the same shape, if you separated them from

01:00:21   each other, like if you had a bunch in a row and then a big space on the other ones, or

01:00:25   even put them on separate sides of the machine, I don't know. I feel like if I had to make

01:00:29   the choice, I would rather have more ports, even if some of them are only differentiated

01:00:33   by a stenciled symbol like laser etched onto the aluminum. That's what I would want, but

01:00:37   I'm not entirely sure that that's what Apple is going to want. I would imagine Apple is

01:00:41   going to put a smaller number of ports on it and just, you know, deal with the short-term

01:00:47   griping. Oh yeah, I mean if you want a lot of ports of various mixing and matching

01:00:52   of things you're definitely looking at the wrong brand of computers. And the Mac Pro,

01:00:55   you know, they'll do use whatever crazy chipset that has the most insane

01:01:00   number of PCI Express lanes and they'll put as many ports on the back of that

01:01:03   thing as they can and that'll just continue in its current form but the

01:01:07   shape and size of the ports in the back will shrink. Who knows, maybe they could

01:01:10   even add ports to that thing. On the Mac Pro that is the only model I can actually

01:01:13   imagine them saying, "These are all Thunderbolt 3 ports, blank space, these two are plain

01:01:19   old USB-C, connect your mouse and keyboard here."

01:01:22   Because why the hell not?

01:01:23   Like they're all so tiny, there's so much stuff inside that computer, it wouldn't be

01:01:27   a big deal to do that.

01:01:29   And it would free up like the good ports for your crazy multi-SSD disk arrays or whatever

01:01:34   the hell you're connecting to it.

01:01:36   And you still won't buy one.

01:01:37   I might, you know, I've got to buy a new computer eventually in theory.

01:01:41   On an infinite time scale.

01:01:42   - Oh God. - I don't know.

01:01:44   That one terabyte SSD really did give this Mac new life.

01:01:48   I do not, when I sit down in front of this computer now,

01:01:50   the only thing I notice is that, you know,

01:01:52   my wife's screen is better than mine.

01:01:53   But other than that, it feels great.

01:01:55   - I suspect you're gonna keep using it

01:01:57   until it drops OS support for the latest OS.

01:02:00   - That would probably do it.

01:02:02   I'm kind of glad that I've just been under the wire

01:02:05   for the few updates and they haven't even been

01:02:07   advancing that.

01:02:08   The last few OSes have all not changed

01:02:10   the hardware requirements.

01:02:11   - Yeah, they cut off Merlin's old Mac Pro

01:02:13   and then just stopped cutting off old Mac Pros.

01:02:14   - That's right, that was the last one in the door

01:02:16   and then it's like, that's it.

01:02:18   Everything else is 64-bit Intel, you're good to go.

01:02:20   - Exactly.

01:02:22   All right, our final sponsor this week is Warby Parker.

01:02:25   Warby Parker believes that prescription eyeglasses

01:02:27   simply should not cost $300 or more.

01:02:30   They bypass the traditional channels

01:02:32   and sell higher quality, better looking

01:02:34   prescription eyeglasses at a fraction

01:02:36   of the usual retail prices, starting at just $95.

01:02:40   at their website, warryparker.com/atp.

01:02:42   This is the same people as Harry's, right?

01:02:45   Or at least one of the same founders?

01:02:46   - I think that's right.

01:02:47   - Yeah, there's a lot in common here.

01:02:50   Disrupting an old industry that's overpriced and awful

01:02:53   with high quality stuff sold very reasonably online

01:02:57   at a very good price.

01:02:58   Warry Parker, we have some of their glasses here.

01:03:00   We love them, you guys have them.

01:03:02   They're very, very good glasses.

01:03:04   They're very fashionable.

01:03:05   These are designs that are vintage inspired

01:03:08   with a contemporary twist.

01:03:10   Every pair is custom fit, they all have anti-reflective,

01:03:13   anti-glare polycarbonate lenses,

01:03:15   and every pair comes with a very, very nice

01:03:17   hard case and cleaning cloth.

01:03:19   So there's no like, you know, weird overpriced accessories

01:03:22   you have to buy with them, they all come with these

01:03:24   really nice cases and cloths.

01:03:26   They also now offer progressive lenses,

01:03:28   starting at just $295 including those frames.

01:03:31   So progressive lenses have a distance prescription at the top

01:03:33   and they transition to a reading lens near the bottom.

01:03:35   This is like in the olden days, people would use bifocals

01:03:38   to do this kind of thing.

01:03:39   things are way better and you have progressive lenses. It's a nice smooth transition.

01:03:43   Warby Parker's progressives are digital freeform lenses. It's the most advanced

01:03:47   progressive technology on the market today with higher precision and a larger field of vision

01:03:51   than traditional progressive lenses. Now, buying glasses online sounds

01:03:55   like it would be risky because you know, you gotta know how does it fit on your face?

01:03:59   How does it, how do they look on you? Warby Parker has you covered

01:04:03   there. So first of all, their website has a very, very good set of tools that

01:04:07   that you can use your computer's webcam

01:04:09   and they'll help you estimate and measure your face,

01:04:12   measure your eye distance and your face shape, et cetera,

01:04:15   to get the fit exactly right.

01:04:17   And the best thing, and we actually did this with my wife,

01:04:19   and it was extremely close to her actual measurements

01:04:23   once we got them.

01:04:24   And they know that you're gonna wanna actually

01:04:27   try these things on in your house.

01:04:28   You're gonna actually want to see them on you,

01:04:31   have your spouse or significant other see them on you,

01:04:34   and be able to see them and kinda live with them

01:04:36   for a day or two.

01:04:37   So they have the home try-on program.

01:04:40   You can borrow up to five pairs of frames risk-free.

01:04:43   They ship them to you for free.

01:04:45   You can try them on in the comfort of your own home for up to five days, and then you

01:04:49   send them back with a prepaid free return label.

01:04:53   There's no obligation to buy after that either.

01:04:55   So you can just go to warbyparker.com/atp, browse around, pick out five frames that you

01:05:00   think you might want, and then just borrow them, and they will ship them to you, again,

01:05:04   for free.

01:05:05   there, try them on for five days, free shipping back, no obligation to buy anything. If you

01:05:10   do decide to buy it though, it's great. They also offer prescription and non-prescription

01:05:15   sunglasses and these are polarized sunglasses. I love polarized sunglasses. And they do a

01:05:20   lot of good stuff too. They also believe in giving back to the world. So for every pair

01:05:24   of glasses Warby Parker sells, they donate another pair to somebody in need through various

01:05:28   vision charities around the world. So go to warbyparker.com/atp and check out their great

01:05:35   selection of premium quality affordable eyewear. Go get a home try-on kit risk-free. Give it

01:05:41   a try, you won't be disappointed. Thank you very much to Warby Parker for sponsoring our

01:05:44   show once again.

01:05:46   Excellent. So is anything going on next week?

01:05:49   From the late breaking rumors, it seems like a lot less is going on than we thought.

01:05:52   You want to tell us what you're talking about there, Jon?

01:05:56   Well, I always list that this is the WOC prediction section and have this list of like the hardware

01:06:00   and software and things we're going to talk about and the late breaking story from the

01:06:03   York Times is what seems like the final in a series of stories about the ever-rumored

01:06:09   Apple TV replacement that was like, "Oh, it has a new remote.

01:06:13   It's coming.

01:06:14   It's going to have an SDK.

01:06:15   Apple is working with companies to provide a way for you to watch first-run shows by

01:06:20   paying them money.

01:06:21   Like the Apple TV dream is going to come true for everyone except for Gene Munster because

01:06:25   it's not an actual television set."

01:06:27   And then the final one, posted in the New York Times shortly before recording began,

01:06:31   was, "Oh, looks like Apple TV,

01:06:33   the new Apple TV is not gonna be a WDC after all."

01:06:35   This follows on the previous story, which was like,

01:06:38   "Hmm, looks like Apple's having trouble

01:06:39   setting up all those content deals that it wants to set up."

01:06:42   And they were like, "Well, even without the content deals,

01:06:44   they can release new hardware.

01:06:47   Still, the new remote might be cool

01:06:49   and they can always release the hardware now

01:06:51   and then later on when they finally get all these deals

01:06:53   ironed out with all these content owners,

01:06:55   then your hardware that you have would get better."

01:06:58   But if this rumor is to be believed,

01:07:00   no new Apple TV hardware, no Apple TV SDK,

01:07:04   off the menu for WWDC.

01:07:05   Again, it seems like the past three years

01:07:08   that the Apple TV has been like, I don't know, they could,

01:07:11   the current one is really old.

01:07:13   And well, like this one was like,

01:07:14   oh, they did a price drop on the old one.

01:07:16   That means a new one is coming

01:07:17   and we were all ready for it and no.

01:07:19   And so I obviously entirely pessimistically believe

01:07:22   these rumors that there will be no Apple TV.

01:07:24   I hope I'm wrong and I'm really excited

01:07:26   pleasantly surprised because my current Apple TV is flaking out big time and I've switched

01:07:31   to using TiVo for Netflix. That's how far it's gone. So yeah, what do you guys think

01:07:35   about that? Are you basically crossing off the Apple TV in your hearts?

01:07:38   Well, I had already kind of done that because at the recommendation of Dan Morin, and I

01:07:45   think we talked about this on the show, I got an Amazon Fire TV stick and I love it.

01:07:50   It is the first thing I turn to to do any sort of media consumption when I'm trying

01:07:55   to do that at home or when I'm traveling, if I choose to take it with me. It has been

01:08:00   far more reliable than my Apple TV has been. It works really, really well. Netflix is great

01:08:07   on it. Plex actually exists on it, which is wonderful, and that works really well. So

01:08:13   I rarely use my Apple TV anymore, but the only thing I use it for is for AirPlay, like

01:08:19   we were talking about earlier. And even then, in a pinch, I can do that using a really hacky

01:08:26   third-party app on the Fire TV stick. So I would love to see a new Apple TV and see what

01:08:32   they're going to do with it, but I don't know. I went from loving my Apple TV to kind of

01:08:38   not really caring about it in the span of about a year. Now, maybe this is all DiscoveryD

01:08:42   issues masquer- or, you know, this is DiscoveryD issues causing me to hate it, and it's really

01:08:47   not the Apple TV at all, but one way or another,

01:08:51   I just haven't really cared about the Apple TV in a while.

01:08:53   Now Marco, you had just posted something recently

01:08:55   about yours not working for the 8 millionth time,

01:08:57   is that right?

01:08:59   - First of all, it's hilarious that now

01:09:01   we are all Gene Munster-ing Apple.

01:09:04   Now everyone's like, "Oh, when are you gonna do

01:09:05   "the Apple TV?"

01:09:06   It's a slight variation, but it's pretty much

01:09:08   the same thing.

01:09:09   Second of all, I think it's hilarious that

01:09:11   the A5 just won't die.

01:09:13   Like, it's an, the A5, how this chip that was released

01:09:17   in 2011 is now still in the non-retina iPad Mini,

01:09:21   which is still for sale, the current generation

01:09:26   of iPod Touch, which is still for sale,

01:09:29   the current generation of the Apple TV,

01:09:31   which is now also still for sale,

01:09:34   the A5, and we don't even know what the watch is,

01:09:36   maybe the watch is using an A5.

01:09:38   This chip will not die, and developers keep having

01:09:41   to support it forever.

01:09:42   But anyway, and I think that's probably, honestly,

01:09:46   there's no Apple TV.

01:09:48   I think the A5 became sentient and took over at Apple

01:09:53   and has some dirt on Tim or something

01:09:55   and is just holding the company hostage now.

01:09:58   That's why there's no new Apple TV.

01:09:59   - Of all the things that are wrong

01:10:01   with the current Apple TV puck,

01:10:03   the incredibly weak CPU is actually, I think,

01:10:07   not one of them because it's obviously strong enough

01:10:09   to handle full resolution HD video,

01:10:11   which is basically what's expected

01:10:12   of a puck-like device at this point.

01:10:16   And everything we complain about is bugs.

01:10:19   It's not like, oh, everything is slow

01:10:21   because the CPU is slow.

01:10:22   The responsiveness is okay as far as

01:10:25   set-top boxes go when things work.

01:10:28   And so we desperately do need a new puck.

01:10:31   And the reason, you say, oh, we're gene-munstering

01:10:35   Tim Cook on this 'cause he keeps saying,

01:10:36   where is the Apple TV?

01:10:37   But it's not us doing that.

01:10:38   It's Tim Cook and Apple speaking with the corporate voice

01:10:41   saying, we still believe in TV, we're interested in TV.

01:10:45   They're not just like not saying anything

01:10:46   and then it's just left us to figure out

01:10:48   that the iPod touch isn't coming back or whatever.

01:10:49   Like they keep talking about TV

01:10:51   and like how they're still pursuing that

01:10:54   and they think there's a,

01:10:55   it's a venue for possible future disruption

01:10:59   and advancement and whatever that like,

01:11:00   they keep talking about it.

01:11:01   So if you keep talking about it

01:11:02   and you drop the price on your system,

01:11:03   it's like, all right, so what are you talking about?

01:11:05   Are you talking about the stupid $79 puck

01:11:06   that we all hate now because it's buggy and old

01:11:08   and slow and getting worse with time instead of better

01:11:10   and messing up our networks

01:11:12   because of Discovery D or whatever?

01:11:14   They have to do something.

01:11:17   They're sending mixed messages here.

01:11:19   And one of the messages we really care about television

01:11:22   and we're interested in the future television

01:11:23   and the other message is what they're actually doing

01:11:26   which is just keeping the same product around

01:11:29   way past its prime and the only thing they've done

01:11:31   is drop the price.

01:11:32   - Well, I think it's very clear that they are,

01:11:36   there's so much smoke around this.

01:11:39   They are definitely working on some kind of major update

01:11:42   to it, but it's just not done yet.

01:11:44   You know, that's very clear.

01:11:46   And whether this was like a last minute slip,

01:11:49   or whether everyone was mis-predicting the launch before,

01:11:51   I mean--

01:11:52   - Or it could come out, like, yeah,

01:11:54   this is just a rumor, but it seems like

01:11:56   we're all writing it off.

01:11:56   It seems like we're saying,

01:11:57   we believe the New York Times story,

01:11:59   now we are completely prepared for there to be no Apple TV.

01:12:02   - Well, it has everything about a controlled leak

01:12:05   written all over it.

01:12:06   Like, this sure looks like Apple PR,

01:12:08   this is a controlled leak, no question.

01:12:10   So, you know, I believe that it's been kicked out

01:12:14   of the keynote, whether it was there or not

01:12:16   in the first place, we don't know whether this is setting

01:12:17   expectations based on new information or just tamping down

01:12:22   rumors that have gotten out of hand

01:12:23   and would disappoint people, who knows, doesn't matter.

01:12:26   The fact is, I believe these things to say

01:12:28   it's not gonna be there.

01:12:30   Anyway, there's nothing saying that they have to release

01:12:33   this at WWDC, like everyone always assumes

01:12:37   that Apple has to release new platforms at WWDC

01:12:41   that will have SDKs so that developers can get started on them

01:12:43   and that's simply not the case.

01:12:45   Look at the watch.

01:12:46   The watch was an entirely new platform

01:12:47   that has now many apps for it.

01:12:51   The watch has not seen WWDC yet.

01:12:53   It's about to, but the entire watch kit SDK was launched

01:12:59   last November with no event, well with the watch event,

01:13:02   but no developer event, no developer gatherings

01:13:07   any sort, because the fact is, WBCC holds about 5,000 people, and there's hundreds of

01:13:13   thousands of Apple developers. So, they can never satisfy everybody at these events, so

01:13:18   they have to do things online, they have to have these different systems and everything.

01:13:22   So, they can launch an Apple TV with an SDK whenever they want. They don't have to do

01:13:27   it next week. So, if something has slipped where it's not quite ideal timing for PR reasons,

01:13:33   like they're gonna want to ship this device along with a really compelling customer story,

01:13:40   a really compelling reason why people want to buy it besides, "Hey, we made a different

01:13:44   box. It runs the same crappy software that you're used to."

01:13:48   Do you always need that reason though? Because they release new Mac hardware without a new

01:13:55   OS or any new capabilities. This is what happens if you neglect your products and just say,

01:14:01   well, the Apple TV have is fine.

01:14:03   Like there's something to be said for,

01:14:05   yes, just coming out with the new box

01:14:07   with a faster CPU and GPU,

01:14:10   with lower power, less heat, smaller size,

01:14:14   like just basic hardware advancement.

01:14:17   I'm not saying you gotta do that every year

01:14:18   for the Apple TV,

01:14:19   'cause it's not maybe an every year kind of product,

01:14:20   but every once in a while, that type of change,

01:14:24   you can't put that off wherever.

01:14:25   I understand that like, oh, we wanna have content deals,

01:14:27   we wanna have a new remote, we wanna have an SDK.

01:14:30   Like there's all these things that we see for the future of our little baby Apple TV

01:14:33   But if those things keep getting delayed for whatever reason that's fine

01:14:37   But in the meantime, it's okay just to do a hardware update and they did when they bumped it to 1080p

01:14:42   But then they just said that's it. We're like it's like now they're being stubborn

01:14:46   We're not going to touch anything until we have everything to show you especially if this rumor is true that like

01:14:51   You know the content deals were falling through it and I can imagine someone going well

01:14:56   Why would we bother releasing that's not like our headline feature like the SDK fine, whatever but our headline feature is hey

01:15:02   now you can be a cord cutter and you can actually use this to watch like quote unquote real TV and

01:15:06   It seems like they're saving it all up to say, you know, imagine they did it with the watch

01:15:10   Imagine if they said you know what we are not launching this without pulse ox, right and the FDA thing is holding it up fine

01:15:16   We're just not gonna go we'll delay it for another year

01:15:18   they didn't do that with the watch because it's seen as a much more important product and there was no existing one and

01:15:23   At this point the Apple TV is so long in the tooth that I just wish they would

01:15:27   You know

01:15:28   They don't have to pull a MacBook one and release something that might be weird and awkward and they really they replace it but like

01:15:32   Release the hardware that you know will work for your future software plans and at this point that hardware must exist

01:15:39   and

01:15:40   If the software is not ready for it

01:15:42   Like they should have if they had a contingency plan

01:15:44   Like let's just let ship the new hardware with the old software and yeah now it'll have a Showtime thing that you can pay

01:15:48   $11 a month and get Showtime just like you can with HBO go HBO now or whatever

01:15:53   That's still an okay product.

01:15:55   Keep selling the $79 one, sell this one for,

01:15:58   so hell, sell this one for 149 or something.

01:16:00   Maybe you don't sell a lot of them,

01:16:01   but eventually you'll have a selling proposition

01:16:03   where you can say, oh, if you have the new Apple TV,

01:16:06   you can get all these amazing features

01:16:08   and these new content deals and whatever.

01:16:11   I don't know, I'm just getting frustrated with the Apple TV,

01:16:13   both my specific hardware product

01:16:15   that I'm slowly using less and less,

01:16:17   and the fact that Apple won't put out a new one.

01:16:18   And the reason for that,

01:16:19   and this gets into a question I have for Casey,

01:16:21   is I have a lot of stuff that I bought on iTunes.

01:16:24   Why do I buy them on iTunes?

01:16:25   I guess because it's really easy.

01:16:27   I just go and press the button

01:16:28   and the kids are watching a movie.

01:16:30   But now, you know, we all know this.

01:16:32   The best of us know it, but we still do it anyway.

01:16:35   Didn't you know you were buying things

01:16:36   you could only watch on Apple devices?

01:16:37   Yes, I knew, but I always assumed

01:16:39   there would be some passable Apple device

01:16:40   that I could use to watch it.

01:16:41   So now, why do I go to the Apple TV?

01:16:43   Because the kids wanna watch a movie

01:16:45   that we have purchased from iTunes.

01:16:46   So Casey, do you have a lot of iTunes purchases?

01:16:49   I guess not if you're abandoning it entirely

01:16:51   the Amazon thing. I have a fair bit of iTunes music purchases, but those were already abandoned

01:16:57   in favor of Spotify. I know for some people that works, for some people that doesn't,

01:17:00   but that's what I've done. I don't know that I've ever purchased a movie on iTunes. I do have a

01:17:06   couple of ultraviolet movies, so I've gotten the Blu-ray and that comes with a digital copy,

01:17:14   and you can typically redeem that in one of several proprietary systems, and I've redeemed

01:17:19   that copy within iTunes. But generally speaking, I will, if I'm buying a movie or if I want a movie

01:17:27   for like my birthday or something, generally speaking, what I'll do is I'll ask for it on

01:17:31   Blu-ray. And then I will rip it and stick it on my NAS using Don Melton scripts in order to get it so

01:17:40   that it's accessible without the disk. Though if I were to sit down and watch a movie, just like

01:17:46   like Aaron and I, for example,

01:17:48   I would put in the Blu-ray if I have it available,

01:17:50   which I know makes me weird in a lot of ways.

01:17:52   - As your bouncing baby boy gets bigger,

01:17:54   I can imagine you will find yourself

01:17:56   in a similar situation to most parents,

01:17:58   which is kids wanna watch a movie,

01:18:00   you're sure as hell not gonna order a DVD,

01:18:02   get it, rip it to Plex, and have them watch it later.

01:18:04   You're going to pull up whatever you need to pull up

01:18:07   to buy the movie now and start watching it.

01:18:08   And maybe for you, that will be your Amazon, whatever,

01:18:11   a Fire TV stick, like that Apple,

01:18:14   that your impulse purchases of movies

01:18:16   that you're not interested enough in to watch on Blu-ray,

01:18:18   but that you want your kid to see

01:18:19   and want to be always available,

01:18:21   you'll buy them on the stick

01:18:22   rather than buying them on the Apple TV.

01:18:24   But for us, we've already bought a ton of them on Apple TV

01:18:27   and I imagine Marco has too, like, you know, kids movies.

01:18:30   - Oh yeah, the vast majority of movies that we own

01:18:33   through iTunes are Pixar movies.

01:18:34   - Those are important enough to me

01:18:35   that I get the fancy Blu-rays for,

01:18:37   but I'm just talking about like other random stuff

01:18:39   or even movies for myself, like, I don't know,

01:18:42   just like a Marvel movie that I'm not that into,

01:18:44   but I wanna see it.

01:18:45   I'll just go and buy it on iTunes.

01:18:47   And I've even done iTunes rentals,

01:18:49   which I thought I would never do,

01:18:50   because they're so expensive.

01:18:51   And I was like, look, if you think the movie's

01:18:52   important enough to rent, like, and I have Netflix,

01:18:54   like why are you renting a movie from iTunes?

01:18:55   It's just, we're so incredibly lazy

01:18:58   that you don't want to wait for a disc to arrive.

01:19:00   And if it's not available on streaming,

01:19:02   you're just gonna be like, you know what?

01:19:03   Let me just rent it on iTunes.

01:19:04   It's $3.99 for two people to watch a movie.

01:19:06   It's way cheaper than going to the movies.

01:19:08   It's fine.

01:19:09   And then at this point, we're never just buying them,

01:19:10   because if you rent it, you rent it once,

01:19:12   and then the kids want to see it,

01:19:13   it because it's a family movie, then you rent it twice, you should have just bought it anyway.

01:19:16   So I don't know. Anyway, the point is all of my movies are trapped in the iTunes ecosystem,

01:19:20   so I desperately want Apple to at least maintain some sort of confidence and update their hardware

01:19:25   so I can continue to watch the movies that I paid for. Because unlike music, they haven't

01:19:28   gone DRM-free, so I can't sort of take them out of their cage and put them someplace else.

01:19:33   Well, to put it in perspective, just a few days ago, I decided to buy the movie Sneakers

01:19:38   from the early 90s, and it did not even cross my mind

01:19:42   to look on iTunes.

01:19:43   I immediately went to Amazon, found a Blu-ray,

01:19:45   and shipped it to myself.

01:19:46   That was the first thing I did.

01:19:47   I didn't even consider doing anything else.

01:19:49   - Well, you should get sneakers and Blu-ray,

01:19:50   'cause that's an important movie.

01:19:51   - I agree, it's a wonderful movie.

01:19:53   - That Marco hasn't seen or probably ever heard of.

01:19:55   - Yeah, exactly.

01:19:56   - I've heard of it.

01:19:57   I don't know if I've seen it, or I might have seen it,

01:20:00   like back when it was current, I might have seen it.

01:20:04   - It's a great, great movie.

01:20:05   Have you seen War Games, Marco?

01:20:06   - Yes.

01:20:08   - Okay, you're not completely without hope then,

01:20:10   says pot to kettle.

01:20:11   - No, most of the movies I haven't seen

01:20:14   came out like after 2002.

01:20:16   - Oh, this was '92, so you don't really have any excuses.

01:20:19   - Right, exactly.

01:20:20   Yeah, '90s I have covered pretty well.

01:20:23   - Yeah, good deal.

01:20:24   What else do we think is happening at WWDC?

01:20:27   What are we getting on the watch?

01:20:28   Are we getting third party complications?

01:20:31   I say no way.

01:20:32   - There have been a couple of rumors that said yes.

01:20:34   I don't know.

01:20:36   Right now, I made my big post last week about,

01:20:39   I have so many questions about the Apple Watch Native SDK.

01:20:43   We know that we're getting it, that's been confirmed.

01:20:46   So we know that we are getting the Native Watch SDK.

01:20:48   We don't know how limited it will be,

01:20:51   what it will and won't be able to do,

01:20:53   what it will and won't be allowed to do by policy.

01:20:56   There are so many questions on that,

01:20:59   that all we can say is we're getting a Native SDK.

01:21:03   But I have no idea, from my point of view,

01:21:05   whether an overcast app will be possible,

01:21:08   whether it will not suck.

01:21:10   You know, like I have, whether it's possible

01:21:12   to make one that doesn't suck, I have no idea.

01:21:15   So I'm looking forward to it.

01:21:16   It's very impressive.

01:21:17   To me, it sounds like a very aggressive timing

01:21:20   to have this already so soon after the launch of the watch.

01:21:23   But hey, if they can do it, great.

01:21:26   - Is it kind of weird that they pre-announced the SDK?

01:21:29   Like, I mean, I'm trying to think of why bother

01:21:32   pre-announcing it?

01:21:33   Like we all kind of expected it was coming,

01:21:34   but why not just save the surprise?

01:21:35   Like is it so pressing that there was pressure on them

01:21:38   to have to say, no, seriously, it's coming.

01:21:39   'Cause they told us it was coming.

01:21:41   They said like, this is what you have now.

01:21:43   You have watched it, native SDK in the future.

01:21:45   They could have just said,

01:21:47   and that could have been the last you heard from it.

01:21:48   And then we all would have assumed it said WWDC.

01:21:50   It would have been at WWDC.

01:21:52   Would it have been slightly more exciting

01:21:53   for them not to have confirmed shortly before WWDC?

01:21:57   Oh, by the way, remember when we said,

01:21:58   well, have the SDK in the future?

01:21:59   Well, the future is WWDC.

01:22:00   That's exactly when you're gonna see it.

01:22:01   Why bother spoiling that minor surprise?

01:22:05   - Yeah, sure, but maybe when they decided

01:22:08   to say that publicly, which is what, about a week ago,

01:22:12   when they decided, maybe that's also when they decided

01:22:14   the Apple TV wasn't gonna make the cut,

01:22:16   or maybe they, I hope they knew by then

01:22:19   whether the Apple TV wasn't going to make the cut,

01:22:21   and so maybe this is kind of a two-stage PR management move

01:22:25   where you're trying to give people good news first

01:22:29   so then the bad news doesn't sting as badly, I don't know.

01:22:31   But that's just a guess.

01:22:33   - I don't think it matters one way or the other.

01:22:34   It's just, it's like a difference of, you know, it used to be that Apple would keep

01:22:37   every possible secret it could, even when everybody knew, like it's so obvious they

01:22:41   were going to do something, they wouldn't say anything.

01:22:43   I mean, and speaking of obvious, iOS 9 and a new version of OS X, everyone I guess assumes

01:22:49   that the OS updates will exist.

01:22:51   Apple hasn't announced, maybe they probably have, like come see what's new in the next

01:22:56   version of iOS, that's probably in the WOEC literature somewhere, I didn't even bother

01:22:59   looking but that's kind of an assumption based on their yearly schedules.

01:23:03   They won't tell you what they're gonna be called,

01:23:04   their names, there's still a little bit of surprise there,

01:23:07   but I assume we all agree that those two things,

01:23:09   do we think either one of those things

01:23:11   are going off a yearly schedule,

01:23:12   or do we just assume there will be

01:23:13   new major versions of both of those?

01:23:15   - They'll be there. - Yeah.

01:23:17   All right, so now what's in them?

01:23:19   Let's start with iOS 9.

01:23:20   What characterizes iOS 9?

01:23:23   - That's a tough thing.

01:23:25   I don't know of any low-hanging fruit

01:23:30   that I really, really, really want to see changed.

01:23:34   For the like of me, I can't think of anything

01:23:37   that irks me on a regular basis.

01:23:39   And a lot of people have been calling for,

01:23:42   you know, taking watch-style complications

01:23:45   and putting them on the lock screen

01:23:46   or even potentially putting them in springboard.

01:23:49   And I don't know, maybe that's one of those things

01:23:51   that once it arrives, I'll be like,

01:23:52   "Oh yes, I can't imagine not having this anymore."

01:23:55   But I don't really feel like I want any of that stuff.

01:23:59   And so to me, I just feel like I want everything to be a little less buggy and a little more

01:24:06   reliable.

01:24:07   And I don't know if I mean iOS specifically, I don't know if I mean iCloud since I've been

01:24:11   burned by that over the last few days, but I would just love to see a slowed down release.

01:24:17   And I think that's what we're going to get.

01:24:19   I think we're going to get less whiz-bang features than we do, generally speaking, but

01:24:25   we'll still get a handful.

01:24:27   But I think that there will be a public,

01:24:30   admission isn't the word I'm looking for,

01:24:32   but a public statement that this is about

01:24:35   tuning things up and cleaning things out.

01:24:37   I don't know, what do you think, Marco?

01:24:39   - I'm mostly with you.

01:24:40   I do think that there's a lot of stuff they could do

01:24:44   to improve things user-facing that wouldn't be

01:24:49   totally out of the blue.

01:24:49   Like, last year they introduced

01:24:51   this amazing extension system.

01:24:53   There are still a few places where extensions

01:24:55   could be useful and welcome.

01:24:56   So possibly new extension points, possibly enhancement

01:25:01   to existing extension points, things that you can extend

01:25:04   from, and some small seeming but very helpful things

01:25:08   such as apps being able to launch specific extensions

01:25:14   from specific people, that would be nice.

01:25:16   Or one of the big ones, mail app supporting extensions,

01:25:20   that would be nice 'cause it's kind of weird

01:25:22   and really annoying that it doesn't.

01:25:25   So if the Apple Mail app could launch extensions,

01:25:27   that would be amazing.

01:25:29   So there's stuff like that.

01:25:30   There's a lot of enhancements to things

01:25:33   we already have generally, but they can make them better

01:25:35   or they can expand them.

01:25:37   Lots of that stuff is what I'm looking for,

01:25:39   what I'm hoping for, in addition to the refinement.

01:25:43   I mean, if you just look at what we're seeing

01:25:46   over the last few days with the 10.10.4 beta

01:25:50   replacing DiscoveryD with the old mDNS responder,

01:25:54   that I think, based on what I've read

01:25:58   and the research I've done

01:25:59   and what everyone else has been saying,

01:26:01   I think that replacing Discovery D

01:26:04   with the old reliable MDNS responder

01:26:07   is going to solve more than half of the issues

01:26:10   I face every day with Apple products.

01:26:13   - Yeah, I agree.

01:26:15   I never really got as bugged by it

01:26:18   as like you and Chalkenberry did.

01:26:20   I mean, I certainly had, you know,

01:26:21   KCLS MacBook Pro one, two, three, four.

01:26:25   But it seemed to me that a lot of the issues

01:26:28   that you guys had, like you had said, Marco,

01:26:30   about your printer was constantly having issues.

01:26:33   I don't have a fancy printer,

01:26:34   so I never ran into any of that sort of thing.

01:26:36   But just my gut, and maybe it's because

01:26:39   I've just listened to everyone talk about it all the time,

01:26:41   but my gut tells me that some of these things

01:26:43   that I can't really attribute what they're for,

01:26:45   like Apple TV wonkiness, it's very rare

01:26:48   that I can get my Apple TV to kick on

01:26:51   when I try to AirPlay to it.

01:26:53   I have to go over to it and turn it on.

01:26:55   And then half the time when I turn it on,

01:26:57   the darn thing won't be visible in my AirPlay devices.

01:27:01   I'm starting to wonder if a lot of these little

01:27:03   kooky, weird things that are starting to drive me up a wall

01:27:06   are DiscoveryD and MDNS responder issues.

01:27:09   - Yeah, I don't know how widespread these problems are

01:27:12   because from what I've seen from all the reports on them,

01:27:14   the nature of the problems that makes them

01:27:16   so incredibly maddening is that they're sort of like a poisoning of your environment.

01:27:21   A lot of the fixes are like, look, unplug your Apple TV, turn off your router, shut

01:27:26   everything down, and then start them up in this order.

01:27:30   Because if you don't, a feature of the new Discovery Do You Thing or whatever are existing

01:27:35   features of the various Apple devices, they will hang on to mappings between Mac addresses

01:27:39   and names and other stuff.

01:27:41   They will keep that information even when the machines from which that information originated

01:27:45   are turned off. So merely restarting your Mac doesn't fix it because there's your Apple TV

01:27:49   off in the corner that you forgot about that's holding on to those poisoned addresses and forcing

01:27:53   your Mac to pick a different number or whatever. Like I don't understand the details of it, but a

01:27:57   lot of the analyses I've read have pointed to a sort of distributed problem where it's not just

01:28:02   a local problem on your machine where some software that's behaving badly, it's that bad

01:28:06   information spreads across your network and if you don't sort of flush it out in the most heinous way

01:28:11   possible you're screwed and that even if you do flush it out it could still come back or

01:28:16   whatever so those problems are incredibly frustrating but it also means that I think

01:28:20   there are a lot of people myself included who have never had any of these problems at

01:28:24   all because the poison has not seeped into our network for whatever reason.

01:28:29   I remember when I had the loaner Macbook at WWDC last year with the Yosemite on it I immediately

01:28:35   saw the two, three, four numbers going up just from using that computer machine alone

01:28:41   by itself at WWDC, seeing my number increase.

01:28:43   And I'm like, oh, well, that's a bug, right?

01:28:46   But when I got everything home on my home network, everything just seemed to work.

01:28:51   And with Yosemite, my entire usage of Yosemite, I haven't had any Wi-Fi problems.

01:28:55   I haven't had any printing problems.

01:28:57   I haven't had any networking problems.

01:29:00   I have seen the numbers every once in a while, but they've never gone over two or something.

01:29:05   So I don't know, again, this is the nature of the problem.

01:29:09   This is definitely a problem and it's the worst kind of problem because the people who

01:29:11   have it, it's like, I don't know, like an infestation of insects or something.

01:29:15   You gotta just burn the house down and then rebuild a new house and even then they might

01:29:18   come back.

01:29:19   So yeah, this seems like a big misstep and it's a shame because this type of move, like

01:29:26   why replace mDNS responder with discovery?

01:29:28   Well anyone who has spent a long time with OS X remembers the complaints about mDNS responder

01:29:33   being flaky and having to kill it and installing old versions of MDNSResponder because the

01:29:37   old version was better than the new version.

01:29:39   That was a thing in many years past, that MDNSResponder was a source of all sorts of

01:29:44   bugs and stuff or whatever.

01:29:45   And eventually it shakes out, but it's like someone comes in and says, "Look, the reason

01:29:49   MDNSResponder was all buggy is because it's actually kind of the wrong design and the

01:29:53   features are distributed in the wrong way, and we really need a clean sheet approach

01:29:57   here."

01:29:58   And then DiscoveryD is their clean sheet approach, it gets a new name, it does different things,

01:30:02   it's bugging it's got some terrible bugs that manifest in terrible ways and everybody hates it right and

01:30:06   The wrong lesson to take from this is never try to radically change anything ever

01:30:11   I think you have to and those are the type of moves from a CoreOS group that I want to see that's why I wrote

01:30:17   An entire section about launchd which is a replacement for the init program, which is like old-school Unix

01:30:22   How can you replace init? That's like why would you get rid of that? It works perfectly fine

01:30:26   It's been around for decades part of FreeBSD and BSD and Unix and everything like you're gonna get rid of init

01:30:31   You're gonna replace it with what some weird thing that sort of also does the same thing as crumb

01:30:35   But also watches for IO and triggers jobs based on device like I don't even know what you're doing here

01:30:40   You're biting off more than you can chew its second system syndrome

01:30:42   Launchd is a stupid idea, but I totally applaud launchd

01:30:46   That's why I wrote about it, and I think it's great

01:30:48   And I think the launchd you know it had a bumpy start

01:30:51   But launchd is what's running all your Macs now that is a success discovery D. Not so much a success so I

01:30:59   Hope Apple's core OS group or whoever is responsible to discovery D keeps doing things like discovery D because

01:31:06   That's what that's what they should be doing. They should not be resting on their laurels

01:31:11   They should not accept the Unix underpinnings as they exist

01:31:14   They should always be trying to make them something better just you know work on the execution

01:31:18   All right, I was gonna say one more thing on OS 9 as in likely this is the release where we you know

01:31:23   Focus on stability and make things nice and blah blah

01:31:27   You know and like Marco said in addition to doing all the usual stuff like a million bug fixes and all the frameworks and small

01:31:33   New features stuff like that. This is kind of not that they did it on purpose this way, but it is it is a beautiful

01:31:39   symmetrical

01:31:41   PR win for Apple because last year

01:31:43   We were all jazzed at WRC like look whole new language crazy new OS all sorts of things that you couldn't do before

01:31:51   You know

01:31:53   Last year was the keyboards like new keyboards and stuff right that was an extensions like Wow just stars in our eyes

01:31:59   Everything we always wanted from Apple. This is great, right and this year, you know

01:32:04   After the long year of bugs and weirdness and stuff like that this year everyone is kind of grumbly

01:32:10   Apple can get the same rounds of applause and good feelings from developers by saying the exact opposite this year

01:32:16   We're gonna buckle down and make everything better and everyone will applaud and applaud like

01:32:20   They have that it's two totally different messages both years

01:32:24   They're going to make developers happy and it's not like this evil plot to do it

01:32:27   But it's like that's what you have to do

01:32:30   Like what do we have to do to make developers happy last year?

01:32:33   What they had to do was give them all the things they've been withholding for a long time this year

01:32:37   All they have to do is say we've heard your complaints and we're gonna really buckle down and we're gonna make this like a polishing

01:32:44   Year and make everything better and they'll get the exact same amount of applause as they got last year

01:32:48   So that's totally what I expect to happen. I

01:32:50   Want them to emphasize that they're working on stability and refinement and I want those to be the big applause lines from the disgruntled developers

01:32:59   I

01:33:00   Can't imagine this year that they would say we're going even faster into the future and iOS 9 is gonna have more new features than iOS

01:33:06   8 does and it's gonna be crazy because developers will be like

01:33:09   Really? Can you just fix the bugs in the frameworks that you have like this is one of those years

01:33:14   And so I think the cycle is natural and it just may be exaggerated because of the huge

01:33:19   bonanza last year and what I imagine to be the sort of doubling down on reliability and

01:33:25   refinement and polish this year.

01:33:27   Well, and also they have the watch SDK to take some of the PR burden, to be a big part

01:33:35   of like the wow factor this year so that iOS and Mac OS can kind of rest for a second.

01:33:42   They're not gonna rest for long,

01:33:44   but they can take a brief nap while the watch does its thing.

01:33:48   - An app nap?

01:33:49   - Wow.

01:33:51   (laughing)

01:33:54   - Yeah, that'll be nice.

01:33:55   Like the watch, it'll also be fun to see the phone

01:34:00   not be the hottest product at WWDC

01:34:02   and how that affects the poor phone's ego.

01:34:04   The Mac had to endure it.

01:34:07   They're like, this used to be my conference

01:34:08   and now it's iOS this and iOS that,

01:34:10   and they have more sessions than we do

01:34:11   and everyone cares about the Mac.

01:34:13   And now it's gonna be like, oh, the watch is the new hot.

01:34:15   I guess the phone still goes long,

01:34:16   'cause it's like, look, watch, you get nothing without me.

01:34:17   All your apps come from me.

01:34:19   (laughing)

01:34:20   So that'll probably still work out.

01:34:22   And as for OS X,

01:34:23   people are talking about, oh, they did 1010.

01:34:28   If they're gonna change the X to an 11

01:34:31   or some bogus crap like that,

01:34:32   this would be the time to do it.

01:34:33   I don't know, I don't think there's any pressure

01:34:36   to rename that thing.

01:34:37   I think it'll just be 1011.

01:34:38   It'll be a different California place name.

01:34:40   What will be in it?

01:34:41   I think they can get away with the same thing saying you know

01:34:44   Discovery D alone is

01:34:47   Enough reason that people in the room would applaud if they emphasize that the new version of OS X

01:34:52   Refines the existing features although I still feel like there's more pressure on OS X to have something new like every year they have

01:34:58   Something they want to show you

01:35:01   If they're like last year piggyback than iOS 8 so much

01:35:05   It's like Oh extensions and share things and whatever and you need to share a lot of the same code like it was

01:35:09   It was as I wrote in my review to OS is moving together

01:35:12   Forward like we all have the same features together handoff is a feature that we share

01:35:17   Extensions is a feature that we share like even though they they manifest in different ways

01:35:21   The feature that the abilities are the same and they only make sense together

01:35:25   If iOS 9 says this is this is like a rebuilding polishing year

01:35:29   Does OS 10 say the same thing? This is a rebuilding polishing year

01:35:33   Can you give OS 10 features at this point without them having equivalents in OS 9?

01:35:38   I don't even know, I can't,

01:35:39   other than obviously a new file system, whatever.

01:35:41   But you know. - Ding, ding.

01:35:42   - If that happens, I'm gonna retire.

01:35:44   Like I'm not gonna ever go to WRC again,

01:35:46   'cause I got one year to make a new language,

01:35:48   I got another year to make a new file system,

01:35:49   I should just never bother going again,

01:35:51   'cause it's all downhill from there.

01:35:52   - Or you should go every year,

01:35:54   see what else they come up with.

01:35:55   - Yeah.

01:35:56   - No, I mean like, I think with macOS,

01:35:58   you're gonna have, you know,

01:35:59   you have similar opportunities as you do with iOS

01:36:02   for things like enhancements to the extension system.

01:36:07   extensions in more places, different kinds of extensions.

01:36:10   Like just stuff like that.

01:36:12   There is lots of room for little things like that.

01:36:14   I mean, a lot of times, as no one knows better than you,

01:36:16   John, a lot of times with the OSs,

01:36:19   the big headlining features of macOS

01:36:24   are just like, are things like enhancements to mail.

01:36:27   Like, you know, enhancements to like some of the basic

01:36:29   system apps that are built as OS features.

01:36:31   And then there's also a bunch of underlying changes

01:36:34   to nice stuff or new APIs.

01:36:36   Like, that's the kind of thing I would expect

01:36:39   for Mac OS this year.

01:36:40   Like, a couple of marketing features

01:36:42   like in some of the built-in apps or in Finder or something.

01:36:45   Not like a really heavy duty kind of thing.

01:36:48   And then just a whole bunch of API enhancements

01:36:51   under the hood and refinements to extensions,

01:36:54   stuff like that.

01:36:55   I'm not expecting big stuff.

01:36:57   If they do a new file system,

01:36:58   that would be amazing for you and for the show.

01:37:01   I wouldn't expect it, honestly.

01:37:04   - Yeah, I mean, I don't expect it either.

01:37:05   So people were asking about the file systems lab.

01:37:07   I didn't check last year's schedule,

01:37:09   but isn't that always a lab?

01:37:10   Isn't that always one of the labs about file system stuff?

01:37:12   - I think so.

01:37:14   - Yeah, like it's not, they're just there to talk about

01:37:15   like, you know, how to use KQ or whatever

01:37:17   to watch for file changes or the, you know,

01:37:19   all the different cocoa APIs for monitoring file changes

01:37:24   and dealing with extended attributes and how to copy file.

01:37:27   Like, that's just, I think that's just a standard thing

01:37:29   they have every year.

01:37:30   So I read nothing into it.

01:37:31   I don't expect a new file system.

01:37:33   I never expect a new file system.

01:37:35   So whatever, whatever Apple, I'm not mad,

01:37:39   just disappointed.

01:37:40   (laughing)

01:37:41   - Oh God.

01:37:42   I have a question.

01:37:44   So in years past, it wasn't every year,

01:37:46   but in many years past,

01:37:48   we could kind of figure out what was coming with hardware

01:37:52   based on what kind of got winks and nudges

01:37:56   when they discussed new APIs.

01:37:59   The classic example of this,

01:38:01   and the only one I can think of off the top of my head is,

01:38:02   you know, auto layout and size classes.

01:38:05   We're clearly indicating that you need to start

01:38:08   as a developer thinking about sizes

01:38:10   that aren't the one that we have now,

01:38:13   or two if you've included non-retina.

01:38:15   And then the next thing you know,

01:38:17   you know, in that fall, we got iPhone 6 and 6 Plus.

01:38:21   I was thinking as I was driving around earlier today,

01:38:26   you know, what is it that we're probably gonna see

01:38:30   in new APIs that indicates what new hardware might bring.

01:38:35   And the thing that jumped to my mind was Force Touch.

01:38:38   And what I was planning on asking you guys was,

01:38:41   how did they tell us to develop for the potential

01:38:46   for Force Touch without tipping their hand

01:38:48   that the next iPhone will have Force Touch?

01:38:50   And then it occurred to me, well, to a degree,

01:38:53   they already have that API in WatchKit.

01:38:55   And so maybe what they'll do is,

01:38:58   There won't be any mention of it during WWDC,

01:39:01   but when the time comes for this to be spreading across iOS,

01:39:06   it'll be a very similar looking API.

01:39:08   Hopefully that makes sense.

01:39:09   So my question to you guys is,

01:39:11   is there anything you can think of

01:39:12   that would be like the canary in the coal mine

01:39:14   for new hardware features?

01:39:17   - There's the split screen thing

01:39:19   where you divide the screen up into pieces for the big iPad.

01:39:22   Like that code was in there,

01:39:23   what it was in there for iOS 8,

01:39:25   and they just, you know,

01:39:26   someone found it in there for iOS 8,

01:39:27   and you could actually execute it and watch it do its thing.

01:39:30   I assume that code is still being worked on

01:39:34   and there's probably no reason for it to exist

01:39:37   until a larger iPad appears,

01:39:38   or maybe it's a headlining feature of iOS 9,

01:39:41   but that's a feature that,

01:39:42   I think they could put that in iOS 9,

01:39:45   and I'd be like, wait a second,

01:39:46   I thought iOS 9 was a rebuilding year.

01:39:47   It's like, yeah, but we basically have this feature

01:39:49   as iOS 8, it just wasn't ready, it didn't make the cut,

01:39:51   or it didn't make sense with that larger hardware.

01:39:53   So I could see them releasing that

01:39:56   without telling you that they're also gonna make

01:39:58   a bigger iPad Air.

01:40:00   And on the Force Touch thing, I think you nailed that.

01:40:02   I think that it'll be the Force Touch APIs

01:40:03   for native watch things.

01:40:04   We all know Force Touch is coming to other devices.

01:40:07   When it does come, they'll be like,

01:40:07   "Hey, and it's the same API that you're used to

01:40:09   "from WatchKit, done and done."

01:40:11   - Well, the only trick about that though is,

01:40:14   first of all, I mean, on the watch,

01:40:16   it's probably gonna be a really simple API.

01:40:18   The big trick with that is that on the watch,

01:40:22   Force Touch is only the entire screen.

01:40:25   You don't force touch a location.

01:40:28   You force touch the screen.

01:40:29   - But that's not a limitation of the hardware.

01:40:31   That's how they've chosen to implement it, right?

01:40:33   - As far as we know, you're correct.

01:40:34   On the Mac, the force touch is a positional thing.

01:40:37   It's basically an alternate click

01:40:39   at wherever the mouse currently is.

01:40:41   On iOS, presumably, just because of the size of the devices,

01:40:46   I would expect force touch on iOS to also be positional

01:40:49   the way it is on the Mac.

01:40:51   So I would actually guess it has very little to do

01:40:53   with the watch implementation.

01:40:56   That being said, it's also such a,

01:40:59   you would expect it's not a very complicated API either.

01:41:02   Like it's probably just another gesture

01:41:04   or another touch event you can respond to.

01:41:06   So that's the kind of thing that, you know,

01:41:09   like in previous years, like when Underscore wrote

01:41:13   Podometer++, he wrote that entire app in like a week

01:41:17   because Apple added the Motion API,

01:41:21   like when they announced the new iPhones.

01:41:23   not at WVDC that year, but that September or whenever

01:41:26   when the iPhones were announced that had the new M7 chip

01:41:28   in them, that's when they added that.

01:41:30   So they could do the same thing this year,

01:41:32   where they could totally leave it out of WVDC,

01:41:35   and just in September or whenever they have

01:41:37   the iPhone event, announce it then,

01:41:39   release iOS 9.1 beta with that,

01:41:43   or 9.1 GM even with that,

01:41:45   and just have you submit apps within that week or two

01:41:48   that you have, and that will be it.

01:41:50   They don't really need to do it at this event.

01:41:53   - Yeah, I think though that the differences for the M7,

01:41:56   it was, and maybe you were kind of hinting at this,

01:41:58   but it was a very, very simple API.

01:42:01   Whereas like you had said, the Force Touch API,

01:42:04   while it's pretty simple on WatchKit,

01:42:06   that may be less simple for when it hits iOS.

01:42:10   And so I think that they could hold onto some things

01:42:15   like the M7 until the 11th hour,

01:42:17   something that's a little bit bigger and more complex

01:42:20   or in again, auto layout and size classes

01:42:23   are a great example of this.

01:42:24   They had to at least tip their hat a little bit about it.

01:42:28   And I don't know, I just thought it was an interesting

01:42:30   thought exercise as to what might we see in the,

01:42:34   what smoke might we see in the API

01:42:37   that indicates a fire coming this fall?

01:42:38   - Well, there's two aspects of it.

01:42:40   One is like the different callbacks and delegate methods

01:42:42   and event types or whatever,

01:42:43   and they don't have to really reveal those.

01:42:45   But the other is you would imagine

01:42:47   when Force Touch comes to iOS devices,

01:42:49   what it will come with is at least a handful of places

01:42:54   where UI gets native control set is responsive

01:42:58   to Force Touch in some way.

01:42:59   Like maybe is it a new controller or a new picker

01:43:02   or some existing control that Force Touch has a function on?

01:43:04   Because I also agree with Marco

01:43:05   that I believe it will be positional.

01:43:07   Although it would be fun to have the toddler fist gesture

01:43:09   for your iPad where they just smack the whole screen

01:43:11   with their fist and it says, you know what?

01:43:13   I'm interpreting that like a watch Force Touch

01:43:15   where I'm just saying whole screen,

01:43:16   like that should take you home or something,

01:43:18   you know, back to the home.

01:43:18   Anyway, that type of thing where they're trying to show you

01:43:22   what the hell, they're not gonna force touch

01:43:24   on their iOS hardware and say,

01:43:26   we don't use this feature at all,

01:43:27   but you developers can figure it out for something.

01:43:29   Like they're gonna ship force touch on an iOS device,

01:43:32   it's going to have uses in iOS, in native controls,

01:43:36   in the apps that Apple ships.

01:43:38   And by doing that, they could be like,

01:43:39   well, here's the API for the event

01:43:41   and here are the callbacks methods that you can get

01:43:43   for on the begin and end of these type of things

01:43:46   and positions and do all that stuff.

01:43:47   But by the way, these native controls,

01:43:50   these particular things or these OS features

01:43:52   already use that.

01:43:53   So if you want to make an app with this new control,

01:43:56   this new control has the ability to do something special

01:43:58   on Force Touch, you hook up your stuff to here to do that.

01:44:01   And by the way, if they Force Touch here,

01:44:02   it brings up the multitask switcher

01:44:05   and you may have to be ready that that could happen

01:44:07   during this screen where previously it couldn't,

01:44:08   stuff like that.

01:44:09   So I expect Apple to lead on the Force Touch on iOS devices

01:44:14   And I think it can do that leading

01:44:17   without much pre-announcement of an API.

01:44:19   Because I really do think that the vast majority

01:44:22   of the new surface area of the API

01:44:24   is hooking into OS-related things

01:44:28   and Apple standard controls.

01:44:29   And everything else is like, well, in your own thing,

01:44:31   if you wanna handle these events yourself,

01:44:32   it's just a new kind of event and maybe some new callbacks

01:44:34   and then do whatever the hell you want.

01:44:37   - I'm also like, just in general with Force Touch,

01:44:40   and you know, I said this about the Macs too,

01:44:42   I'm not that excited about Force Touch.

01:44:45   I don't really see it changing things

01:44:48   dramatically for the better for much.

01:44:51   I see where it was necessary on the watch,

01:44:53   and it isn't great on the watch even,

01:44:56   but I could see why, it seems like it's a compromise

01:44:58   where you have a very, very small screen

01:45:01   and not a lot of room for buttons or menus or anything,

01:45:04   so this is like the compromise of,

01:45:05   well, you don't have room for buttons and menus in your app,

01:45:08   so you can do the special gesture in most places

01:45:11   and you'll get some additional options.

01:45:13   On iOS devices though, I think there's enough screen space

01:45:16   and there's enough established in UI paradigms there

01:45:20   that you really don't need forced touch.

01:45:23   You really don't need like the secondary gesture.

01:45:25   There's already so many weird hidden gestures

01:45:28   and combos you can do on iOS devices

01:45:30   to do certain things that almost nobody knows about

01:45:32   and just serve to confuse people.

01:45:34   I fear this might just be another one of those things.

01:45:36   Like we really don't need this ability

01:45:40   to basically right-click everywhere on iOS

01:45:43   and search for functionality that is undiscoverable,

01:45:46   that it worries me a little bit.

01:45:48   It seems like kind of a thing that is something cool

01:45:52   that they figure out how to do in the hardware,

01:45:54   but that has very limited usefulness,

01:45:57   and it seems like it's gonna be overused for a while

01:45:59   in the short term.

01:46:00   But again, I'm also a skeptic about forced touch on the Mac.

01:46:04   I also think that it seems like it's this weird third click

01:46:09   that is not a right click, that is about as discoverable

01:46:13   as right click, and is this additional thing

01:46:17   that does different things depending on what you click

01:46:19   and how you click, it just, it seems, to me,

01:46:22   force touch seems like this kinda like,

01:46:24   it seems like a, it's like Apple's fad of the year,

01:46:28   and I don't like it as much as they seem to.

01:46:31   - Well, I think you're thinking of it too much

01:46:33   as a binary thing, like it is on the watch,

01:46:35   because, and I don't know, I don't know the limitations

01:46:37   of the sensors, but I can imagine on something the size of an iPad or even a phone that the

01:46:42   sensors can be better and more sophisticated and it stops being a binary thing where it's

01:46:47   either you're tapping or you're force touching.

01:46:49   And it starts being, oh, can we approximate pressure sensitive tablets or pressure sensitive

01:46:54   finger presses to make a finger painting app where a little kid can smoosh with their finger

01:46:58   around and make thicker and thinner lines with their finger?

01:47:00   Is it sensitive enough to do that?

01:47:01   Because again, you have the position and you have the force.

01:47:03   It's just a question of whether the sensors have that kind of resolution no matter where

01:47:07   you press on the thing.

01:47:08   If you stop thinking of it as a binary on/off thing, it makes actually the most sense on

01:47:13   iOS devices.

01:47:14   Because on the watch it's like, yeah, the whole surface is force-touch because it's

01:47:17   too small for you to be precisely doing or whatever.

01:47:19   It's a decision they made there.

01:47:21   Maybe limited by the size of the sensors they have to have.

01:47:24   On the Mac, same deal.

01:47:27   You're not writing on the screen, you're not touching the screen, it's this other thing

01:47:30   or whatever.

01:47:31   on an iPad or a phone, if Force Touch can be, think of it instead of being Force Touch,

01:47:37   think of it as the screen is now pressure sensitive.

01:47:41   That has lots of implications for any kind of interface where you want different degrees

01:47:47   of pressure, not just on or off, but a whole gradation of, I don't know, 256, a couple

01:47:53   thousand levels of pressure depending on how sensitive they are, for drawing apps, for

01:47:58   even for if they can come up with a control

01:48:01   in the same way that the current standard controls

01:48:04   for scrolling are sort of speed sensitive,

01:48:06   as in how fast you flick and how long your path is.

01:48:10   A long, slow swipe moves the thing differently

01:48:12   than a short, fast one, and tapping it stops it.

01:48:15   Like those are all gestures where velocity is used

01:48:18   as an interface element, and that velocity is not

01:48:21   on or off, fast or slow, it's a gradation of speeds.

01:48:24   So if they can use a gradation and pressure

01:48:26   to provide interface elements that behave even more

01:48:30   sort of in a way that is familiar

01:48:32   to being under our fingers.

01:48:33   Like it feels giving a sort of weight to the controls

01:48:36   or new gestures that involve pressing a little bit harder,

01:48:39   a little bit lighter influencing how things move

01:48:42   or maybe how much friction there is

01:48:43   between your finger and the imaginary surface

01:48:45   that's being simulated by the lights under the screen.

01:48:48   I'm a little bit more optimistic about it,

01:48:49   but it really all depends on,

01:48:51   I don't know the capabilities

01:48:53   of what they consider their Force Touch hardware.

01:48:55   It really is binary and I still think they could use it to do stuff like in the interface

01:49:00   Especially the stupid home button, but you can tap a million different ways

01:49:03   I don't know if force touch makes that worse or better, but it's clear that they're kind of overloading a lot of things with

01:49:08   Multi tap multi finger gestures. I would probably trade a couple of those for the hard press versus soft press

01:49:16   But maybe that just makes it worse. Maybe they'll never give up things. Maybe they'll just keep adding more and more textures

01:49:20   This is like a hard three finger force touch in the upper left corner and that would be crazy

01:49:25   But I'm really hoping that the capabilities and the sensors they can fit in a device that size have more capabilities

01:49:31   and then it can finally be the sort of input device that

01:49:35   Reads different degrees of pressure and does smart things with them

01:49:38   Well and the the force touch trackpad on the max

01:49:41   I think it does have like because they talk about how you could like draw the signature with pressure

01:49:46   Sensitivity and stuff and the fast forward on the video even like you fast forward slowly and fast forward the harder your press

01:49:51   I just don't know how how many

01:49:53   How many levels there are and it's a lot easier to do multi levels on the trackpad?

01:49:57   Than it is to do on a big eye like on a big iPad screen if I'm pressing exactly dead center with a certain amount of force

01:50:05   Does that register the same as pressing in the lower left corner with the exact same amount of force?

01:50:10   Maybe you need more than sensors at the corners. Maybe it centers all around maybe it's sense

01:50:14   I don't know the tech behind it.

01:50:17   You would hope that it's gonna be like

01:50:18   one of those Wacom tablets or whatever

01:50:20   where they put the pressure sensitivity in the pen,

01:50:22   which is a clever way around this entire problem,

01:50:24   but we need this to work with fingers or hot dogs

01:50:27   or whatever people are using to, or cosmonauts,

01:50:29   whatever they're using to poke at their

01:50:31   capacitive touchscreen.

01:50:32   - Well also, I have a concern also.

01:50:35   I would not necessarily think that force touch

01:50:38   in iOS devices is a sure thing yet,

01:50:40   because if you look at the teardowns, the way it works,

01:50:43   it basically puts strain gauges on the four corners

01:50:46   of the glass surface that it's being put on.

01:50:50   Glass flexes when you push it.

01:50:54   And on the watch, you know, the watch is,

01:50:57   whether it's glass or sapphire,

01:50:58   it's a pretty small surface area

01:51:00   and it's a pretty thick screen on top of there.

01:51:03   So I wouldn't expect there to be any flex there.

01:51:05   That would be a noticeable problem on these strain gauges.

01:51:08   But-- - It's also arced,

01:51:09   which helps the strength.

01:51:10   Like the watch is like a tent that helps it stiffen it.

01:51:13   - Exactly, on the Mac track pads, you can see,

01:51:16   when you see them in the store, if you have one,

01:51:18   you can see the thickness of the glass.

01:51:21   Like if you look on the edge of the track pad,

01:51:24   you notice that, oh, this is actually

01:51:26   a visibly thick piece of glass that I'm pushing here.

01:51:30   And if you think about the sizing,

01:51:32   the track pads, these ForceTux track pads,

01:51:35   are, I think they're all smaller than the iPhone 6 Plus.

01:51:39   And they're definitely smaller than iPads.

01:51:41   So if you think about force touch coming to phones

01:51:44   and iPads, the ratio of the thickness of the glass

01:51:48   that covers phones and iPads to the relatively large

01:51:52   surface area is very different.

01:51:53   It's much thinner glass than the force touch track pads

01:51:57   or the Apple Watch screen.

01:51:59   And so I wonder then, can you just put strain gauges

01:52:03   on the corners of those things and have the natural,

01:52:06   like if you force touch in the middle of the display

01:52:09   and there's strain gauges on all four corners

01:52:10   where you're pretty far from them.

01:52:12   Will it be able to reliably consider

01:52:15   the flexing of the glass or will that be a problem?

01:52:18   Not only will it, of course, might it be a problem

01:52:20   for breaking the glass, but that's another problem.

01:52:25   So I wonder if they really can do this

01:52:27   for, say, an iPad Air, or if they do make a 12-inch iPad,

01:52:31   the problem gets even worse.

01:52:34   - Yeah, that's what I was saying,

01:52:35   rather than just the four corners,

01:52:36   maybe all around the edges,

01:52:38   and you sort of take the average of them all

01:52:40   account for the flex or maybe you have sensors underneath the screen because you do have

01:52:43   way more room to work with than the watch.

01:52:45   So I imagine you have more options, especially on the iPad but I think also on the phone.

01:52:51   And on the phone, since the screen is smaller, it would flex less and the glass on the phone

01:52:55   is also a little bit curved or whatever.

01:52:56   So I think this is technologically possible but again I don't know.

01:53:03   The Force Touch is a marketing term so it could be that they have several different

01:53:06   approaches to achieving this feature on the different devices.

01:53:09   That's what I'm hoping for best case and I really do think the next, if not the 6s or

01:53:15   whatever the heck the revision of the 6 that we all expect is going to be, certainly on

01:53:19   the 7 or whatever, the one where they really redesigned it.

01:53:22   Of course people said that about NFC for years and it took forever to come to but I really

01:53:26   do expect Force Touch to come even if it is the stupid right click that nobody uses just

01:53:30   because I think they have the room to use it and it's on the watch and like you said,

01:53:35   you know, like if it's a fad or a why the hell not

01:53:38   or whatever, they seem pretty convinced

01:53:39   that it is an important thing that, I mean,

01:53:42   the hell they brought to the Mac for crying out loud.

01:53:43   So it's gonna come to iOS.

01:53:45   (laughing)

01:53:46   - Can't innovate anymore my ass.

01:53:48   (audience laughing)

01:53:51   - So I have a random question.

01:53:52   Are we seeing code samples in Swift, Objective-C

01:53:56   or both in regular sessions?

01:53:58   - Both, always both.

01:53:59   - I would, yeah, I would say knowing Apple,

01:54:03   knowing how they work, I would say it depends on the session.

01:54:08   - You see them in C++.

01:54:09   - Yeah, I would say you'll probably see

01:54:12   one language per session, but that it will vary

01:54:15   depending on what framework the team is working on,

01:54:18   like what department they're in.

01:54:20   - Don't you feel like, I expect to see slides

01:54:22   where they say, and the API looks like this,

01:54:25   and again, if you have to do it in Objective-C,

01:54:27   it looks like this, which is a little uglier,

01:54:28   or the reverse, and the API looks like this,

01:54:30   and in Swift, it can look a little bit nicer.

01:54:32   Like, for the people who are on one side

01:54:33   or the other of like they're excited about how their API can be cleaner and

01:54:38   Swift they'll be excited to show you the two to compare and contrast and which

01:54:42   which one is the primary which one do they show you the examples from and say

01:54:44   oh by the way this is how it looks in the other I think that will vary from

01:54:47   presentation to presentation and in my experience Apple does not speak with one

01:54:52   voice at WWDC when it comes to when it comes to low-level technical things that

01:54:58   individual developers and teams have opinions about those opinions are

01:55:01   expressed through, you know, subtle wording on slides or asides or

01:55:09   expressions or snark or whatever. So I fully expect that each individual

01:55:15   presentation and framework and team will take a slightly different approach to

01:55:21   how they mix their Swift and Objective-C. I think some will be uniform, some will

01:55:26   be a mix, and some of the mix will be like, we'll have a slant to the mix. Like

01:55:31   Like you'll be able to tell, is someone really excited

01:55:33   about how this looks in Swift?

01:55:34   Or are they annoyed that you can also do it in Swift

01:55:38   and they have to show you that slide too?

01:55:40   - Yeah, I mean like I think that Swift is only one year old

01:55:45   in the public eye and a lot of Apple hadn't seen it

01:55:49   before we saw it.

01:55:50   And so like people were speculating like,

01:55:52   oh, will the watch native app SDK be Swift only?

01:55:55   And technically there's no reason for that.

01:55:58   They might do a policy thing to do that.

01:56:00   I doubt it, but they might, but there's technically

01:56:03   no reason for that because the watch is older than Swift.

01:56:06   Like, they started development on the watch

01:56:08   before Swift was a thing, and so, you know,

01:56:11   the watch's code that runs on the watch that Apple wrote

01:56:14   is almost certainly using very little or no Swift.

01:56:17   We also heard from a number of people

01:56:20   that Apple's internal build system

01:56:23   didn't even support Swift as of not that long ago,

01:56:26   and maybe it does now, but that's a slow process

01:56:30   to get that in there.

01:56:31   - And by the way, the watch isn't technically older

01:56:33   than Swift, it is older than Swift's revelation

01:56:36   to the wider Apple, that's why it's older then, right?

01:56:39   - Well, that's true, yes, fair enough, okay.

01:56:41   So, Swift is gonna come on slowly, it's not gonna be like,

01:56:45   oh, flip a switch and everything's now Swift.

01:56:47   It's gonna keep happening slowly.

01:56:48   I am though very interested to see what Swift has become,

01:56:54   Like, you know, what announcements do we see

01:56:56   about Swift next week?

01:56:57   How has it changed?

01:56:59   They've done a number of revisions over the last year.

01:57:02   So I'm wondering, like, you know,

01:57:03   have we already seen most of the changes

01:57:05   or is it gonna be larger changes that happen

01:57:08   that are announced next week?

01:57:10   - They teased it on Twitter.

01:57:11   Like the official Swift account was like,

01:57:13   oh, exciting things in store.

01:57:14   I expect to see bar graphs showing compilation times.

01:57:17   Being better, I expect to see some silly performance bake-offs

01:57:20   showing how much faster Swift has become

01:57:21   and maybe how much faster it is than Objective-C.

01:57:24   and they had those last year, they're gonna have them again.

01:57:26   And if there are any cool new features,

01:57:29   especially involving all of the crazy stuff

01:57:32   they've added to Swift to bridge the Objective-C world

01:57:36   to all the sort of attributes and stuff they've added

01:57:39   to work nicely with Arc and the Objective-C APIs.

01:57:42   Oh, here you can annotate, we, Apple, annotate

01:57:45   all our Objective-C things and all our Swift bridges,

01:57:48   so they all do the right thing so you don't have to do

01:57:50   all sorts of weird stuff with optionals.

01:57:53   they'll probably talk about how to do that, how to make your Objective-C APIs so that they're

01:57:59   nicely callable and Swift and vice versa. So I imagine there'll be a lot of sessions about that.

01:58:03   Certainly, Swift has advanced so much in its one year of life. Certainly they've held back some

01:58:08   cool new features to show off. So there'll be a lot of that, of like, "Look how much better Swift

01:58:14   is now than it was before. Look how much cooler Playgrounds are here. Look at this demo of this

01:58:18   thing you couldn't do in Playgrounds before." Even though we all think we've seen it all, like,

01:58:21   like haven't we seen all that stuff?

01:58:22   They've been releasing new versions of Swift all year.

01:58:24   Like what is there left to show us?

01:58:25   I imagine there is enough left to show

01:58:28   to make for some fun demos.

01:58:30   - Right, and there's also gonna be enhancements

01:58:31   to the tools, you know, you mentioned playgrounds.

01:58:34   There's almost certainly gonna be Xcode WiFi debugging

01:58:37   just for the watch so you can do native watch apps.

01:58:40   Stuff like that, like there's gonna be enhancements

01:58:42   to that that's all gonna be exciting.

01:58:43   Like oftentimes what you hear in the platform

01:58:47   State of the Union, which is the big session

01:58:48   in the afternoon of the keynote day

01:58:50   that's not live streamed usually,

01:58:52   oftentimes the things you hear there matter more

01:58:55   to developers than what you hear in the keynote.

01:58:57   Because that's where they usually talk about things

01:58:59   like major Xcode improvements and stuff like that

01:59:01   that just are really helpful in day to day work.

01:59:04   So I'm just looking forward to all this stuff.

01:59:06   Even if there aren't a lot of major headlining features

01:59:10   that are important to me,

01:59:13   every year Apple does really useful things

01:59:16   in the tools and the APIs that I benefit from.

01:59:19   So I'm just looking forward to that.

01:59:21   - So no new car?

01:59:23   (laughing)

01:59:25   Is that an appropriate WWDC announcement?

01:59:27   I guess if you can't develop for it.

01:59:29   - Yeah, but you could drive it.

01:59:30   - Yeah, I'm gonna say no car.

01:59:32   - Worldwide drivers championship?

01:59:35   - Well.

01:59:37   - Hey, they had a Ferrari at WWDC last year.

01:59:40   - They did, yeah, it was on the third floor somehow for,

01:59:44   I don't know, how does it get there?

01:59:45   - I was so annoyed when that disappeared.

01:59:46   I'm like, surely that will be here all week

01:59:48   and I can go over and lovingly stroke it

01:59:50   in between sessions, but it disappeared so quickly.

01:59:52   I barely, I got like one picture of it on my iPod Touch

01:59:55   and then it came out of a session, it was gone.

01:59:57   - Well, can you imagine like, you know,

01:59:58   developers like reaching into that big bowl of Skittles

02:00:00   in the afternoon and then going over to touch the Ferrari,

02:00:02   like that's, yeah, they don't want that, come on.

02:00:05   - They can wash the car, it's worth it, come on.

02:00:08   - Thanks a lot to our three sponsors this week,

02:00:10   Harry's, Studio Neat, and Warby Parker,

02:00:12   and we will see you next week.

02:00:15   Now the show is over, they didn't even mean to begin

02:00:20   'Cause it was accidental, accidental, accidental

02:00:26   John didn't do any research, Marco and Casey wouldn't let him

02:00:31   'Cause it was accidental, accidental, accidental

02:00:37   You can find the show notes at ATP.fm

02:00:43   And if you're into Twitter, you can follow them

02:00:48   S-C-A-S-Y-M-I-S-S-K-C-S-M-A-R-C-O-A-R-M-N-T-M-O-C-O-P-M-E-T-S-I-R-A-C

02:01:03   USA, Syracuse, oh it's accident, accident, accident

02:01:09   I've painted a wheel like a chair, no accident, accident

02:01:15   I've taken a bite, and it's been so long

02:01:18   Oh, I forgot in the follow-up section, I forgot my other item of follow-up

02:01:22   which was the Velveeta shells and cheese tastes like melted PVC plastic

02:01:25   [laughter]

02:01:28   Kraft Mac and cheese forever

02:01:30   [laughter]

02:01:32   I don't even know what to say here because Kraft mac and cheese has no taste.

02:01:41   It doesn't taste like anything.

02:01:44   In fairness it tastes like salt.

02:01:46   Keep in mind that I'm a supertaster, Casey.

02:01:48   So I don't have that problem.

02:01:49   Oh.

02:01:50   Well, it just must suck to be you.

02:01:52   It actually must suck to be you.

02:01:53   No, it's great.

02:01:54   It tastes like a thousand pears, Lex will tell you.

02:01:57   Wait, pears in the fruit?

02:02:00   That's a reference.

02:02:01   Don't worry about it.

02:02:02   I should have known.

02:02:03   What kind of pear?

02:02:04   Because different pears taste different.

02:02:05   It's a reference.

02:02:06   I hope it's a reference.

02:02:07   I'm going to Google it.

02:02:08   I don't know why you two have me doubting.

02:02:10   You shouldn't be able to make me doubt about my references.

02:02:13   Bosc pears are the best pears.

02:02:15   I can't.

02:02:16   I genuinely...

02:02:17   Like, obviously, taste is completely subjective.

02:02:21   As much as I joke, I'm not saying that you're wrong, especially if you are a supertaster,

02:02:25   I just really don't understand having had Kraft mac and cheese and Velveeta

02:02:31   Like I can understand if you said well, maybe the consistency of Velveeta is not my thing or perhaps

02:02:36   I don't know. Maybe you just don't like the taste but with Kraft it's like

02:02:41   There's nothing to taste. It's just there. It's the water of mac and cheese. It's just there

02:02:49   Velveeta like I was not joking with the taste like melted plastic

02:02:53   It has a weird plasticy aftertaste, which maybe you're not picking up, but it is definitely

02:02:58   there, right?

02:02:59   It looks like, it smells like, and to me it tastes like plastic, right?

02:03:03   And that's not a pleasant thing.

02:03:05   Kraft Mac and Cheese is not high art.

02:03:06   I'm just saying, if you're going to pick your junk food, I would not pick junk food that

02:03:10   has a weird aftertaste.

02:03:11   It's like those Olestra potato chips.

02:03:13   Just give me regular potato chips.

02:03:15   The regular potato chips, in this analogy, is the Kraft one.

02:03:20   Yeah, I would agree with that.

02:03:22   I don't know just Kraft mac and cheese. It's so bland. You got all those recipes for putting chilies in it that our readers

02:03:28   our listeners sent us. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

02:03:30   I'm like it's I can understand I'm less bothered by people not liking Velveeta

02:03:34   than I am about people swearing that mac and cheese is so much tastier because it just doesn't taste like freaking anything

02:03:41   It's not so much tastier. It's the Velveeta is so vile. That's what it is

02:03:45   It's like it's not we're not moving Kraft up the continuum to say this is like great food

02:03:49   We're just saying that we're pushing Velveeta down the continuum. And by the way, I did a Google for it. I was close

02:03:53   It's hundred pairs and a million pairs not a thousand. So I was right in the middle there

02:03:57   I have no idea what you're talking about. I still meant here that Bosque pairs are the best pairs

02:04:01   Also, I don't I don't understand hard pair people

02:04:03   Yeah, I don't are there hard pair people like oh yes, I'll eat a hard pair right I'm not against it

02:04:11   But you're saying people who like don't like soft pairs like it goes too soft and they're like, oh, that's it

02:04:15   I can't handle it. Yeah, people who just basically treat pears like apples and just bite them

02:04:19   when they're as solid as a rock. I mean, I can do that. I'm not against that, but I agree

02:04:24   that they get it. It's like banana ripeness. You've seen the variability in the ripeness

02:04:29   of bananas people are willing to eat. Some people eat them super green where you feel

02:04:33   like they're going to get a stomachache. Some people wait for them to go entirely brown

02:04:36   on the outside, and some people are in between. I think pears, maybe the continuum is more

02:04:41   abbreviated, but I don't know, I will eat a pear

02:04:44   when it's way too hard because it's better

02:04:46   than not having a pear, and I will reject a pear

02:04:49   when it's gone way too soft, but I'm probably more

02:04:52   towards your opinion of what the sweet spot is,

02:04:54   which is definitely on the soft end.

02:04:56   - I would rather not have a pear than have a hard pear.

02:04:59   - Well, there's hard and then there's like,

02:05:01   I am having trouble biting this.

02:05:03   You know, like apples, apples you can always bite.

02:05:05   Apple hardness, I will eat the pear.

02:05:07   - I will wait, for a Bosc pear,

02:05:10   I will wait until it is almost as soft as a ripe avocado

02:05:14   before eating it, and it is delicious that way.

02:05:16   - That's maybe a little too far for me.

02:05:19   - I just don't like pears.

02:05:20   I have nothing to add to this conversation.

02:05:22   - You don't like pears?

02:05:24   - Nope.

02:05:25   - What kind of person doesn't like pears?

02:05:27   What is objectionable?

02:05:28   Do you not like apples?

02:05:29   - No, I love apples.

02:05:31   - Like pears, what is objectionable about them?

02:05:33   They're sweet and like, oh, I don't understand that at all.

02:05:38   - I just, I don't care.

02:05:39   I don't care for pears.

02:05:40   I don't know what you want me to say. I just don't think they're very tasty. Don't like plums.

02:05:43   Plums are weird. Plums look like a gel fruit. I can understand you being turned off.

02:05:47   Pears are just like an apple but taste different. But taste better, I think.

02:05:50   And they're bigger and they last longer.

02:05:52   Everything about pears is better.

02:05:54   Some of them are fuzzy on the outside that can be turned off.

02:05:56   What? I've never seen that kind.

02:05:58   Pears, you know, they have a little like furry texture on the outside.

02:06:01   I don't think I've ever seen a furry pear.

02:06:03   They're out there.

02:06:05   Crazy.

02:06:07   All right, "Accidental Food Podcast." Yay.

02:06:10   Well, you started it.

02:06:12   No, you did with your damn...

02:06:14   No, this was follow-up. That was follow-up from last week with your big conversation

02:06:17   talking about mac and cheese and fast food chains and stuff. I'm following up that. Doing

02:06:23   follow-up for the world. I forgot. I forgot it in the first part.

02:06:27   I think Declan's teething, and so I slept for like three or four hours yesterday and

02:06:32   and I wanna die.

02:06:34   That's my sob story of the day.

02:06:36   How's potty training?

02:06:37   - Yeah, I guess we were supposed to start that.

02:06:41   (laughing)

02:06:42   - Is this the royal we?

02:06:44   Who is the we you're talking about here?

02:06:46   - The world was supposed to start that.

02:06:49   - You're expecting Adam to take some initiative in this area?

02:06:51   - Yeah, or the government, I don't know.

02:06:54   (laughing)

02:06:56   - They come in the night and potty train your child,

02:06:58   if only that's how it worked.

02:07:00   Potty training as a service?

02:07:01   - Is there like P camp?

02:07:02   Can you like send them to like a camp and just learn?

02:07:05   - Your house is P camp, get ready.

02:07:07   (laughing)

02:07:09   Your whole house is one giant toilet.

02:07:11   (beep)