Abolish Drafts: The 2024 iPad Draft


00:00:00   [music]

00:00:08   From Relay FM, this is Upgrade, episode 505. Today's show is brought to you by Squarespace, Vitally and Ladder.

00:00:18   My name is Mike Hurley and I am joined by Jason Snow. Hi, Jason.

00:00:22   Hi, Mike. I can't drive 505 because that's too fast. My car doesn't go that fast.

00:00:27   Ah, that was a... I was lost there. You know, I said 505 and you said it back to me and I had no idea.

00:00:33   Reference there. 505. 505 is the name of an interstate highway in California. So a little 505 trivia for you there.

00:00:43   I love it, thank you. Yes, you did hear the draft music. We are going to be doing a draft late run in today's episode.

00:00:50   It is an action-packed episode today. Surprise draft. Surprise draft. That includes a surprise draft.

00:00:55   We'll get to that later on in the show. But first, I must ask you a Snell Talk question.

00:01:00   This one comes from Andy who wants to know, "Jason, will you be getting a Blake Snell jersey since he has just signed with the Giants?"

00:01:09   Yes, San Francisco Giants signed Blake Snell, the winner of the Cy Young Award, which is for the best pitcher in the National League last year with the Padres.

00:01:15   He was a free agent all winter long and at the very end of the free agency season, signed a two-year deal with him opt-out.

00:01:23   Basically a one-year deal with the Giants. So for the first time ever, my favorite team, my childhood team,

00:01:29   employs a player, a star player, but regardless, a player with my last name. No relation, by the way.

00:01:38   No relation. And Andy, the answer is, "Will I be getting a Blake Snell jersey?" I think the entire family will be getting Blake Snell jerseys.

00:01:47   I think it's like, look, personalized journey. I'm assuming all of the merch that could be produced in this one-year period, you will buy all of them.

00:01:58   Personalized jersey, you normally have to pay to have it be personalized with your name and stuff.

00:02:03   Not gonna have to do it. I'm just gonna say, "Give me the Blake Snell number seven."

00:02:07   Got it. Boom. Done. And I'll just keep that for like ever. I look forward to what I'm assuming is gonna be like

00:02:15   dad joke of every game where you're like broaching the plate, "It's Snell," and you're like, "Oh, off I go!"

00:02:21   You know? One of those? We saw him pitch in San Diego a couple years ago.

00:02:26   And every time he would strike somebody out or something, the scoreboard would have this

00:02:34   thing. It'd be like, "Snell!" And Lauren and I were just laughing. I took pictures of it. I took some

00:02:39   video of it. It's just like, it's really nice to have your whole... It's like when I was using

00:02:44   my aunt and uncle when they lived in Florida and we went to a Jacksonville Suns game and their entire

00:02:48   store was just things that were JS. And I said, "I don't know what I'm gonna do here.

00:02:57   Can I buy it all? Because the entire stadium is monogrammed for me." I bought a hat. I have a JS hat.

00:03:05   It's great. Pretty good. But yeah, it's a little like that. It's weird. In fact, if I wanted

00:03:12   a different number other than his number seven that he's gonna wear, it would actually cause some

00:03:16   cognitive dissonance, right? People would be like, "Well, why are you wearing a six?" So it's just all

00:03:22   at least seven. People like seven. That's a nice number. Lucky seven it is. And Jamie was born on a

00:03:29   seven. So I'll put it down that way too. Andy, yes. The answer is yes and probably much, much more.

00:03:37   That's the answer. If you would like to send in a question to help us open a future episode of

00:03:42   Upgrade, just go to upgradefeedback.com and send in your Snell Talk question. Saddle up partner,

00:03:48   it's time for a rumor round up. Oh yeehaw. Wow, the horses got here early today. Very early. There's

00:03:53   stuff going on in this episode. Lots of other stuff. They were scared away from the courthouse

00:03:57   and so here they are. Oh wow. That's what you gotta get. They shouldn't be there. They should not be

00:04:02   at the courthouse. Were they shooed away by like a bailiff? Did a bailiff go, "Get out of here, you

00:04:08   rumor horses. We don't want you here." And they were "Nayyyy." And he said, "Uh, yes." Yay. Yay. I think

00:04:13   it would be right. And they left. Mark Gurman and his power on newsletter has reported that iOS 18,

00:04:19   previously dubbed Apple's biggest update ever, will see new tools and options for home screen

00:04:25   customization. MacRumors followed this up with their own sources saying that Apple will quote,

00:04:31   "introduce the ability to create blank spaces, rows, and columns between app icons. The grid layout will

00:04:37   remain, but we will be able to operate more freely within that grid." So like Android, although I will

00:04:43   also say you can free place widgets on the iPad. You can. That's a thing that people, a lot of people

00:04:49   don't know, but like you could free place widgets. You can take a widget out of the grid and put it

00:04:54   like down in the corner and it just stays there. So they've already, that was the first like, "Oh,

00:04:59   look at this. Something is happening that's different." So I think this is good. I've been,

00:05:04   you know, I've been playing with all those Android e-readers and stuff and like, it's really nice to

00:05:08   be able to say, "I'll put this icon here and just have it be there instead of playing the weird

00:05:15   kind of like puzzle game you do where you move one thing and then everything else moves around it."

00:05:20   And you're like, "No, that's not what I wanted." So that's, I mean, it only took them how long,

00:05:24   but here we are. So hooray. Something else that I like that you can do on the iPad is you can have

00:05:32   different app/widget layouts depending on portrait and landscape. Also nice. Yes. Absolutely. I'm a

00:05:41   big fan of that. Good stuff. I imagine that that is all informing where they're going next with

00:05:47   iPhone home screens. Yeah. Which will be very cool. Yeah. Along with all the AI stuff. Sure.

00:05:55   Also, the Wall Street Journal talking about AI stuff is reporting that Apple is holding

00:06:03   conversations with OpenAI and Baidu as well as Google to offer AI features for the phone.

00:06:09   This would seem to suggest that what Apple is most likely going to be doing is creating the

00:06:15   capability for a user to choose which chatbot, I guess we could call them, just for the ease of

00:06:20   understanding service that they would like to work with. In the same way that you can choose your

00:06:25   default browser, right? So Baidu would be in China and then you'd have probably OpenAI and Gemini

00:06:34   elsewhere. So yeah, probably there'll be a preference and someone will pay a lot of money

00:06:40   for that. I expect Google, like who's going to be first, who's going to be your default.

00:06:46   But this is an interesting idea and I think would make a lot of sense. It would be surprising if

00:06:54   they're going to offer this stuff and everyone's going to have it ready for September, but it's a

00:06:57   great opportunity. So I'm sure it would be prioritized by whoever Apple decides to work with.

00:07:01   On one level, you could literally make a query that says, "Please respond in this form

00:07:08   that Apple uses to parse this," and that it would actually respond in that form. I do wonder if this

00:07:13   is general purpose chatbot feature or if some of this is, "What do I use as a data source when I

00:07:20   need to get more data back from something that I don't have through one of my other data sources?"

00:07:26   And how much of this is... It could be swappable. It could happen dynamically based on the results

00:07:33   that you want. I wonder about the business model because people pay to use ChatGPT. So there's a

00:07:39   question like, "Is Apple going to pay them to use their services?" Does it work out where you're like,

00:07:48   "Well, no, but I pay OpenAI, so I want to use their..." I don't know. It's going to be

00:07:52   interesting to see the way that the business relationship gets sketched out here too.

00:07:57   But I'm also wondering, does Apple view these sources as interchangeable or is Apple trying to

00:08:03   make different deals for different markets or for different functionality? I think it's all open.

00:08:10   - Or maybe you can only do this if you're an iCal+ subscriber, otherwise it goes to the web.

00:08:16   - I don't know. Maybe. I also wonder if there's a distribution of volume going on here where,

00:08:25   like in the US and other regions that have OpenAI, GPT and Google Gemini, if one of the concerns we

00:08:34   mentioned last week, which is that this could potentially be the most AI volume ever for one

00:08:41   of these things, and are there enough resources for this thing to stay functional? Well, one way

00:08:48   you could make there be enough resources would be to spread it out and say, "We're not just using

00:08:53   Google. We're using Google and we're using OpenAI and maybe others for different queries."

00:08:59   And then put your Siri interface in front of it. I don't know.

00:09:03   - This episode is brought to you by our friends at Squarespace, the all-in-one platform for

00:09:10   building your brand and growing your business online. You can stand out from the crowd of a

00:09:14   beautiful website. You can engage directly with your audience and sell your products,

00:09:18   services, even the content that you create with Squarespace. They've got everything you need

00:09:23   all in one place. It's so easy to get started. Squarespace has beautiful,

00:09:28   professionally designed website templates that are ready for every category and use case of website.

00:09:33   You can so simply customize the look of the site that you want to make. You can update the content

00:09:38   and add features to fit your unique needs. You can make any Squarespace template do exactly what you

00:09:43   want so your idea, brand, or business will stand out on every device and it's going to look great

00:09:48   in all of them. You can take advantage of this by using Fluid Engine, Squarespace's next generation

00:09:53   website design system. This allows you to unlock your creativity more easily than ever before. It's

00:09:58   a reimagined drag and drop technology and it works on desktop or mobile. You can stretch your

00:10:03   imagination online with Fluid Engine. It's making your Squarespace sites or even the more customizable

00:10:09   and it's on any new Squarespace site that you want to make. When you are looking at building a

00:10:14   business with Squarespace, one of the things that will be super important to you is analytics. You'll

00:10:18   be able to learn where your site visitors and sales are coming from. You can analyze which channels

00:10:22   are most effective for you. You can improve your website and build a marketing strategy based on

00:10:26   your top keywords or most popular products and content. Part of that marketing strategy could be

00:10:31   to have email campaigns and you can do this to Squarespace too. You can encourage your visitors

00:10:35   to sign up as email subscribers. Start them on a journey to becoming loyal customers. Once again,

00:10:40   like with any of their templates, it's so easy. You just choose the style you want but it's easy

00:10:44   to update and change the colors and the layout and the logo and there's analytics on every send as

00:10:51   well. Squarespace is so powerful. It's got so many features and it only grows and gets better over

00:10:56   time. I've been a very happy Squarespace customer for over 15 years and it's so easy to get started.

00:11:02   Just go to squarespace.com/upgrade. You can sign up for a free trial. You can build your entire

00:11:07   website and see how it's going to work and fit for you. Then when you're ready to launch it to

00:11:11   the world, you sign up for a plan. If you use the code upgrade at checkout, you'll get 10%

00:11:16   of your first purchase of a website or domain. That is squarespace.com/upgrade and the code

00:11:21   upgrade when you decide to sign up to get 10% off your first purchase and show your support

00:11:26   for the show. Our thanks to Squarespace for their support of this show and all of Relay FM.

00:11:30   It's time for DMA today. Literally today. The European Union has published a press release

00:11:39   stating that Apple will be involved in a DMA non-compliance investigation along with Meta

00:11:46   and Google. We've touched on this briefly. Lots of companies are involved in the DMA stuff, but

00:11:51   we just focus on Apple here because it's already too much of just Apple. I can't focus on alphabet

00:12:00   meta as well in this stuff. Looking at the press release that they put out, the EU is concerned

00:12:06   that Apple is still trying to steer users away from pricing and offers that other developers offer.

00:12:14   The EU believes that Apple is not adequately providing choices for default apps and they

00:12:20   are concerned that the fee structure, I am assuming they mean the core technology fee,

00:12:25   may be "defeating the purpose" of the DMA as well. The investigation that they have launched could

00:12:32   last up to 12 months and presumably if Apple has not changed things during this period,

00:12:40   and if they are found in non-compliance of the DMA, the fines will begin. Remember,

00:12:45   it can be up to 10% of global revenue. So there's a lot along the line.

00:12:49   It's a different form of the same thing we've been saying all along, which is one of the challenges

00:12:58   with Apple in Europe with the DMA is Apple... So the EC has been supportive of the idea that Apple

00:13:10   as a platform owner needs to do things to protect the security of the platform and they want Apple

00:13:18   to continue to innovate. There are all sorts of things that they say they're not trying to do.

00:13:23   The challenge is that Apple is making changes but also pointing to its role as a platform owner to

00:13:33   say, "But we need to keep this secure, so we're going to do it this way." And I think a lot of

00:13:37   these conflicts are visible here where Apple is saying, "Well, we need to do... Let's take the

00:13:51   browsers or we could take the core technology fee." There's this balance or the access to

00:13:59   sideloading and say, "Well, to keep it safe, we're going to erect a very high barrier that very few

00:14:07   people are going to ever go over." And that ends up being a conversation which is like, "Well,

00:14:12   wait a second." And as we've said in many of these segments over the last few weeks,

00:14:16   it's like, "Wait a second. You've set the rules of the thing that you're doing to comply

00:14:22   to make it so that nobody will want to do it." And it's not entirely surprising that the EU

00:14:28   regulators would come back and say, "Well, that wasn't the purpose." The purpose of these

00:14:33   regulations is for you to open things up so that people will take advantage of it. So doing it,

00:14:40   but making it so poisonous that nobody wants to actually implement it, in their mind, is not

00:14:47   complying. And that's what's going on here. And this is one of those dangers of Apple having this

00:14:52   incremental approach, is they're saying, "You didn't go far enough." And the question is,

00:14:58   and I don't know enough about how the EU's system works here, but is this something where Apple is

00:15:04   now going to get fined? Or is this more like Apple now has a ticking clock and the EU is going to

00:15:10   come in and say, "Here are the things you need to do, or we're going to give you a giant fine."

00:15:15   Because at some point there has to be a hammer. We've seen Apple make changes in the last few

00:15:21   weeks. And the question is, what's the hammer? What motivates them to do that? What is hovering

00:15:28   over them that's like, "If you don't do this, do this or else," essentially? What's the "or else?"

00:15:33   And that big fine is the "or else." That enormous fine is the "or else." Because you're talking

00:15:40   about what is it like? It's billions of dollars. It's 10% of global revenue, but it apparently can

00:15:48   go up to, I think, 20% if there are multiple infractions, I guess. So it's not one of these

00:15:55   "pay $100 million and ignore the law" kind of things. It's designed to have teeth. So that's

00:16:02   what's hovering over Apple. And I don't know. I think the question is also, what do the regulators

00:16:11   want? Do the regulators want Apple to do what they say? Or do the regulators want to make an example

00:16:17   of Apple? And I don't know the answer to that question. I think they want Apple to comply.

00:16:22   There's a question about, do they want to do a big fine just because it'll be like Landmark

00:16:28   and everybody will point to it and be like, "Oh boy, here we go. You got to do what they say."

00:16:33   - Yeah, there are a lot of ramifications to that though, which is like, you might want the fine,

00:16:39   but what happens to Apple's business in the European Union if they're going to keep getting

00:16:44   these fines? If for whatever reason they are completely unwilling to make the changes.

00:16:51   I think realistically, I think you're right. They just want Apple to comply because then the EU

00:17:01   looks strong and they get what they want, which they believe, you've got to hope that they believe

00:17:06   is the right thing to do, whether, whatever. - But again, there's no pre-clearance though,

00:17:11   which is the funny thing about the way this is structured. As far as I can tell,

00:17:15   it's not like Apple took their entire plan to the regulators and said, "Okay, here's what we're

00:17:19   planning on doing. Do you have any comments for us? Well, you should do this more. Okay,

00:17:23   we'll get back to you on that." - I agree, but we've also spent the last month saying,

00:17:28   "We don't think this looks right." You know what I mean? There was a way they could have

00:17:32   crafted their policies to be, "To not defeat the purpose of the DMA." Me and you have sat here and

00:17:40   been like, "That doesn't seem right still." - And that's not their strategy. That's not their

00:17:44   strategy. It's to do what they think is the letter of the law and then basically be told by the EU,

00:17:50   "That's not good enough." And so here we have this action, which is essentially saying,

00:17:54   "We're investigating this because we don't think it's good enough." And I get it. We've had

00:18:01   numerous examples where we've said, "This seems contrary to the purpose of the DMA, the way that

00:18:06   Apple has chosen to do it." When the DMA was passed, we had a lot of theoretical thoughts,

00:18:14   theoretical stuff like, "Oh, this means Apple's going to open this," or "This means Apple's going

00:18:20   to change this policy." And what ended up happening was Apple opened this to a limited group defined

00:18:26   in a very narrow way by Apple. Apple added this feature in a limited way with a limited set of

00:18:35   ability for developers to implement it. - And they changed policy X, created a new policy,

00:18:41   which inherent to the new policy would take us all the way back to the start again because

00:18:46   you've changed it, but yet it's changed in such a way that no one wants to change.

00:18:50   - Right. And I don't know if I really anticipated it being quite like that, where it was like,

00:18:58   "Well, you say we have to do an app marketplace or sideloading. So we're going to do an app

00:19:06   marketplace and not sideloading," which turns out was not what they intended. And in order to do

00:19:12   sideloading, here are all the rules and here's the money you have to put aside and here are the other

00:19:17   ways you have to qualify. And then they build up a whole bureaucratic structure on top of it,

00:19:22   which I didn't think it would be quite that strategy, which is, "We're going to do what

00:19:29   you say, but make it impossible for almost anybody to actually use it." And that leads to this, which

00:19:37   is we've already seen them say, "Oh, sideloading, yeah, we're going to add that later," where they

00:19:42   were obviously told this is not going to be acceptable. And then by opening this up,

00:19:45   the noncompliance investigation, it feels like it's an escalation, but it's almost like an

00:19:51   intentional escalation. At least from the outside, I look at this and I think, "This is the EU

00:19:58   arming its..." Well, you can't arm a hammer, but lifting the hammer, cocking the hammer.

00:20:05   Well, if they had a jackhammer, they plugged it in.

00:20:10   No, what it is, so there's a compliance hammer to be used here. This is them, if not picking it up

00:20:16   and putting it over Apple's head, they took it out of the drawer, and now it's sitting right there,

00:20:25   like, "I could pick up this hammer at any point." But that's what this is. So it's an escalation.

00:20:30   It's a reminder of what the fines are for not listening to them. And then it's also a,

00:20:36   "Be prepared for us to demand that you make specific changes to your behavior," which

00:20:41   Apple hates. But this is the game they're playing, is they brought this on themselves by saying,

00:20:46   "We're going to do the minimum, and then you're going to have to tell us where we did it wrong."

00:20:51   And they are, they're going to do it. I understand that there are a lot of people that

00:20:57   don't like the spirit of the law argument, that people want there to be letter of law,

00:21:05   and that's the way it goes. I understand that. I understand how complicated it can be to legislate

00:21:11   a spirit of the law, da-da-da-da-da. I think that legislation like this has to be part in spirit,

00:21:17   as well as the letter. Because if you, but Apple has, you could argue Apple has complied by the

00:21:23   letter of the law, but that compliance has gotten us to a point where it was kind of a waste of time

00:21:32   for everybody. Yeah, I don't want to, I don't want to go off on a tangent here, but I'll just say,

00:21:38   anything written can be willfully misinterpreted by an interested party.

00:21:43   Anything can be willfully misinterpreted, where you think you passed a law that was very clear.

00:21:49   I was just reading the story about this, about how there was a, some sort of, I forget what it was,

00:21:55   state law that was passed somewhere, and they're like, "Aha, we did it, we did it, it's all very

00:21:59   clear now." And then like one court case completely inverted the intent of the state law. Whoa,

00:22:06   because they encouraged a judge to read the case in a different way. And so, I think, implied in

00:22:15   the whole purpose of having a regulatory regime in the European Union is when they do the DMA,

00:22:23   they're saying, "Here's the big picture of what needs to happen. Here's why it needs to happen."

00:22:31   And the regulator will ensure that it happens. And that gives the regulator some authority to say,

00:22:38   "Yes, I know you parsed," like for example, "I know you parsed the thing about marketplaces and

00:22:45   sideloading to have it be an either/or, and then you're not doing sideloading. We've decided that

00:22:51   you're doing sideloading." Right? And I know people can get upset and be like, "Well, but,

00:22:55   you know, it's an either/or, look at the," and then they're doing that thing, right, where you're

00:22:59   reading the words on the page and saying, "But look, but your honor, this says we don't have to

00:23:04   do it." And that's why you put a regulator behind it. And the regulator is instructed, "You know

00:23:11   what we want," right? They're giving orders to the regulator, like, "Here's the laws we've written,

00:23:15   and you know what we want to get out of this." And it's your judgment about, not the judgment of a

00:23:21   judge who's listening to the regulated, it's your judgment about whether this is fulfilled or not.

00:23:29   And that puts it in the hands of the European Commission.

00:23:31   - Two reasonable people having a disagreement would listen to each other, and if something was

00:23:37   misunderstood and corrected, they would try to work together to deal with it. That is not how

00:23:41   the legal system works, right? Where it's this idea of like, "Well, we read it this way, and we

00:23:45   can get someone to agree with us," and that's the end of it. And I just personally don't particularly

00:23:51   vibe with that. I know it's what has happened, but I don't necessarily think that just because

00:23:55   something has been a way, it should be that way forever. And I think that even though this is

00:23:59   complicated and brings its own set of issues that you have to work through, that this method of

00:24:05   legislating, if you'll call it that, this method of rule-making, where you're kind of trying to

00:24:11   have a conversation with the regulatory body and deal with it properly, so you're getting to the

00:24:16   intention of the law in the first place, I think that jives more with what I want from the world.

00:24:24   Rather than just a couple of smart people finding a loophole in a document.

00:24:28   Yeah, so you end up with a set of regulators who, it's their job to... And again, ultimately,

00:24:37   it's a government for a region that has been given power over commerce in that region,

00:24:41   instructing an arm of the government to work with the companies that want to do business in the

00:24:48   region to follow the rules. If we take it to the big picture, it's like, "Who are these people to

00:24:53   tell Apple what to do?" Well, the answer is, it's Europe. And Apple can be in Europe, but if you're

00:24:59   going to be in Europe, you have to follow the laws in Europe, just like how Apple follows the laws in

00:25:02   China. If you want to be there, you got to follow... Those are your choices. Follow it or leave,

00:25:08   those are your choices. And as a result, you've got to listen to the regulators. And if it's a

00:25:16   tough regular... Again, I think the regulators are very focused on specific things that Apple does,

00:25:21   but are actually kind of open to arguments from Apple on all sorts of other things.

00:25:25   I think they're just less impressed with the idea that Apple is going to erect huge barriers to

00:25:30   things that are mandated by the DMA in the name of security. Because again, with creating that proxy

00:25:39   for a developer in good standing of two years in the App Store and a million downloads, if I

00:25:44   was a regulator, and I'm not, I would look at that and say, "You've gone against the spirit of what

00:25:51   we're trying to do here and sort of claiming that you can't police your own developer system, and

00:25:58   that therefore you're going to erect this huge barrier." And my thought would be, "Your barrier

00:26:02   needs to be a lot lower. And if you're afraid about fraud, it's your job to stop people from

00:26:10   fraudulently becoming members of your development community. You can't put it on the regulation and

00:26:17   say, "Well, we're going to just make it impossible for people to use this feature because we can't

00:26:21   police our own App Store and our own developer membership system." And that's the back and forth

00:26:27   that's got to be going on right now. All right, let's close the book on law and

00:26:32   legislation and antitrust today in Europe as we welcome our new segment DOJ Today.

00:26:40   The US Department of Justice, 15 states and the District of Columbia sued Apple last Thursday on

00:26:48   the grounds of anti-competitive actions related to the iPhone related products. It is a very

00:26:54   complicated 88 page document that Jason has read. So I read Jason's article and we're going to use

00:27:00   that, which is very good. Felt to me anyway. Everybody out there can just listen to Mike and

00:27:04   it will go from the Department of Justice to me to Mike to you. Yep, that's how it works. And we're

00:27:08   going to use that as a framework for discussion today. So you broke this down into a bunch of

00:27:12   segments and we'll start by, you know, if we're looking at antitrust, we start by saying there's

00:27:17   a monopoly, right? That's how we get to this point. So the DOJ is suing Apple on the grounds

00:27:22   of anti-competitive behavior, anti- is it anti-competitive or antitrust? Is that, are they

00:27:27   the same? They are the, yeah, antitrust. A trust is like a monopoly. It's a, it's a, from the,

00:27:32   it goes dates back to the days of railroads and oil companies being monopolies. Wonderful,

00:27:36   wonderful, wonderful, great. Uh, so we need to first define a monopoly. So the Department of

00:27:41   Justice has tried to do that. Um, a 60% share of the US smartphone market, which is what Apple has,

00:27:48   is not a monopoly. It's not enough, right? It's not a monopoly. Doesn't seem like it.

00:27:52   So they are kind of carving it up, um, in a few ways. One, the Department of Justice is using

00:27:59   revenue generate instead of units sold. They've created a new sub market of smartphone called

00:28:04   performance smartphone, which pushes Apple up to 70%. And they also accuse Apple of attempting

00:28:11   to create a monopoly through various tactics. So even if they haven't got like 90% of the market,

00:28:17   they're really trying to get it. Is that fair? I mean, I've just summarized your summary, but.

00:28:22   Yeah. Yeah. The idea here is they need to establish why this is a monopoly and it's actually

00:28:26   kind of hard. And so they have said, well, it's just in the US and it's just revenue. And it's,

00:28:33   and if that's not good enough, it's just performance smartphones, which gets us up to,

00:28:39   you know, 70% revenue share. And then I'd say the other thing they do that in my mind suggests that

00:28:45   they, that they, uh, know that their numbers aren't very strong and they're just trying to,

00:28:52   they're, they're trying to make their case here. Um, at one point they do finally get to a number

00:28:57   that I think most people would say is verging on a monopoly, which is a number that, uh, starts at 90.

00:29:04   And they do that by making the bold claim that 90% of the smartphone market is controlled by Apple

00:29:12   and Google and Samsung put together, which is so amazing, right? Where they're like,

00:29:16   ah, we got to 90 by adding in two competitors who are not part of this lawsuit. I don't,

00:29:22   it's bananas. But the truth is historically what defines a monopoly is not like a number. It is,

00:29:29   it has to do with the power exerted over the entire market as defined, what that market is,

00:29:34   that's defined. And, um, it also can vary based on even the regions of the, the circuit courts

00:29:43   of the federal, uh, judicial system. And if you, um, if you're wondering why they filed in New

00:29:50   Jersey, New Jersey, this circuit court had a case where they found that a company involved in making

00:29:57   like dentures and accessories or something had a 60 some percent market share. And they said they

00:30:03   were a monopoly because of the way that they use their power. And they undoubtedly picked this

00:30:09   court because of that. So I, you know, I'm not a lawyer. I look at this and I think it doesn't

00:30:14   pass the sniff test of being a monopoly, but they will make some very clever, as we said before,

00:30:19   you can argue anything and you could say, well, Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the sense of

00:30:24   being 90% of the market, but the power they exert over the smartphone market is such that they are

00:30:31   behaving as a monopoly. That would be the argument. It's just, you know, this would be easier if

00:30:36   Apple's real market share was 70%. This would be way easier if it was 80%. And this would be,

00:30:42   I would say a slam dunk if it were 90%. So I think it is an issue where they really have to,

00:30:47   they have to make the case that Apple exerts huge control over this market. And Apple's defense is

00:30:53   going to be that it's a highly competitive market and that Apple, everything Apple is doing is

00:30:59   because they have brutal competition, not just in the U S but all around the world. And the more

00:31:04   they can globalize it, the lower their market share gets because the U S is their best market.

00:31:08   So this is kind of interesting because it dovetails from what we were just talking about.

00:31:12   So like for me, this is like, I don't care about percentages like me personally, because

00:31:18   that last point that Apple attempts to create a monopoly through various tactics, and we're going

00:31:23   to go through those tactics that the DOJ is setting out. I think that that is the key to it,

00:31:29   that like Apple is trying really hard and if they could, they would very happily take that 90% and

00:31:37   treat it exactly the same. Sure. Sure. Yeah. The challenge, the challenge is that legal tactics

00:31:44   by a regular company become illegal when a monopoly does them. So there's this fuzzy line,

00:31:52   and you can make the historical claim, right? That Apple's market share has actually grown a

00:31:58   little bit, but like they are locked in a battle with Google and Android in general, and Samsung in

00:32:05   particular in the premium category, and that this is a fierce competition and that Apple's decisions

00:32:13   are based on that and not based on control. Like, cause in the end it's about is Apple just trying

00:32:18   to take its power to reap, you know, all these benefits or is it doing it because it is locked

00:32:26   in a struggle with the competition and it's competing. And that's one of the things we have

00:32:30   to deal with. I should also say for people who don't, you know, have not spent any time thinking

00:32:33   about antitrust law or aren't in the US, you may be saying to yourself, why does it matter? Like,

00:32:41   they obviously have a big market share and they're very powerful and you can put them together with

00:32:44   Samsung and Google and get them over 90%. And really, if you look at it as iOS and Android,

00:32:49   it's a hundred percent essentially of the smartphone market. And that gives Apple as one

00:32:54   of two major players and gatekeepers enormous control over the market, right? Which is what

00:32:58   the EU's argument is, right? Except for this, you gotta, in order to have a lawsuit, you gotta have

00:33:06   a law. It's gotta be illegal. They gotta do something illegal. And the United States has been

00:33:14   very bad at passing new laws about things like... The DMA is a law and then they broke the law and

00:33:22   then said you have to comply with it. Yeah. And they wrote it with the big tech companies in mind.

00:33:27   The Sherman Antitrust Act is what the Department of Justice is using. It is well over a hundred

00:33:33   years old. It was written for the era where there were huge monopolies and things like,

00:33:38   in cutting edge industries like trains and oil. And, but this is the thing is, that's all they

00:33:45   got. That's all they got. And monopoly law and antitrust law has evolved over time. And there are

00:33:53   lots of complex definitions of it now because you have to kind of evolve it. Otherwise,

00:33:58   all you're going to get is the Rockefellers and the Stanfords of the world, right? From the 19th

00:34:05   and early 20th centuries. And so it has evolved, but this is what they have to use. So if you're

00:34:11   wondering, like, why are we even arguing about if Apple's a monopoly? Why can't we just talk about

00:34:15   Apple's behavior? The fact is that if the Department of Justice can't definitively prove

00:34:21   that Apple is behaving as a monopoly, they have no case. Because Apple's not being accused of doing

00:34:27   anything that's illegal in general. They're being accused of doing things that are illegal

00:34:33   for people with monopoly power to do. And that's the huge difference. So everything is about the

00:34:40   monopoly. In my opinion, I mean, it's not just my opinion, one of the worst things that happened here

00:34:44   is Epic took Apple to court. Because there is nothing in here about the App Store, right? Like,

00:34:51   about Apple's control of the App Store. Because Epic and Apple have already had this fight,

00:34:58   and Epic lost. And I feel like if the Department of Justice could have included in here,

00:35:06   things about the App Store, then we'd be talking about a different

00:35:10   kettle of fish. Yeah, I think this would be a different case.

00:35:13   Yeah, I mean, there's stuff in there. They mentioned it, but they are steering away from it.

00:35:17   And this is okay. There's a lot of talk about this. This has been out there for a little while

00:35:24   now. And there are people who are like, aha, take it to big tech. And there are other people who are

00:35:29   like, this is ridiculous. This is such a stupid thing. It's a waste of everybody's time. I would

00:35:35   say my frustration with this is that there are lots of things Apple does that I don't like,

00:35:44   and that I think are questionable in terms of their behavior, in terms of things that I think

00:35:53   that Apple is doing that seem very unfair, and that they're using their power and their control

00:35:59   of their platform to be anti-competitive. There are lots of examples of that. Very few of them

00:36:08   are in this lawsuit. And part of it is that already in the Epic Games case, a lot of this

00:36:16   stuff was sort of run up the flagpole and found to be not super convincing. It doesn't mean they

00:36:19   can't make those arguments again. And this legal panel could say, actually, we do believe those

00:36:25   arguments. But it makes it harder. And I think it also suggests, given some of the weak arguments

00:36:30   that are in this first filing, I would say anything you don't see in here is probably not because they

00:36:35   forgot about it. It's because it felt even weaker to them to allege. And as a result, I'm frustrated

00:36:43   by this because I look at this and I think, it's kind of misguided. You missed a huge opportunity.

00:36:49   And some of the stuff that you are picking is dumb. Is this the best you can do is sort of how

00:36:56   I walk away from this? Because I don't think that there aren't any competitive urges that Apple has

00:37:03   that they have been exercising over more than a decade. But two things. One, is it illegal?

00:37:10   And that's on Congress, right? That's on the lawmakers to make laws about is it legal or not,

00:37:17   as opposed to just feels real icky. And so, is it illegal or not? And then the other thing is the

00:37:26   Department of Justice, do they even get it? Is my other concern. Remember when we talked about the

00:37:40   humane AI pin? And one of the things that we picked out about it was, there's this, it's a cool demo

00:37:48   and it's a cool product. And I think it's actually very instructive that if you don't have a smart

00:37:51   home platform that you own that's dominant, it's very hard for you to even make a presence in the

00:37:57   market. Which again, it's not illegal, but I think it's troubling about where the market is now with

00:38:03   the two huge companies that control it. But the big thing about the humane AI pin was also that

00:38:11   their whole thing is sort of like, isn't it great? You can be freed from your smartphone.

00:38:15   And you and I both were talking about how people like their phones, right? They're looking at them

00:38:22   all the time. They like them. I've yet to see one of those, like those late night commercials that

00:38:27   are like, oh, I'm tired of opening cans. I hate it. I open cans all day. And somebody was like,

00:38:33   I've got a can opener for you. Right? It's a little like that, which is like, oh, I'm tired

00:38:37   of looking at my phone all the time. There's all these games and I can scroll in social media.

00:38:41   I wish, help me AI pin, right? That doesn't exist. And I think of that about this lawsuit too,

00:38:47   which is the lawsuit has a real tenor. Like, people don't like the iPhone when in fact,

00:38:52   customer satisfaction, as Tim Cook would tell us, very high on the iPhone. People love the iPhone.

00:38:56   They love it. And there is a, there was an undercurrent in this suit of this idea. Cause one

00:39:01   of the things that they're really trying to challenge is lock in the idea that Apple traps

00:39:04   its customers and its ecosystem and it can't get out. And there is no doubt, no doubt, no denying

00:39:09   the fact that Apple sees lock in as a benefit and Apple likes lock in. Apple likes making it

00:39:15   stickiness. And I bet they have so much discovery, like documents and emails that confirm that part

00:39:22   of executive saying, yeah, we love it. We love it. Why would we, why would we give,

00:39:27   make it easier to switch to our competition? Which is not illegal if you're not a monopoly.

00:39:31   But Apple is just very good at it. But the tenor of the, of the way the,

00:39:35   the document is written is very much like aha through nefarious means Apple has trapped people

00:39:41   in their ecosystem. They don't want to be there anymore. They want to escape, but they can't,

00:39:46   they've been trapped. And it has this, it really has this whiff of that classic argument that

00:39:50   people who buy Apple hardware or Apple products in general are just dupes of marketing and seamless.

00:39:57   And exactly. And that, and then they're trapped and then they're just harvested for all their

00:40:02   cash by Apple. And it's like both of these. So, so Apple desiring making decisions that enable lock in

00:40:09   and making their ecosystem sticky is a thing. Right. But when I read about it in this case,

00:40:15   I think to myself, is your end argument that people don't want to be on the iPhone,

00:40:21   but they're stuck there? Cause I don't think that's actually true. Right? Like I think

00:40:27   it's not a prison. But they can make the argument that because of Apple's actions,

00:40:33   people can't even dare to think. Right? Like that's the argument they can make.

00:40:37   Yes. And this is what something you and I have talked about a lot here too, which is

00:40:41   I always have thought Apple behaves, Apple should have more confidence in itself. And I know people

00:40:49   are like, what do you mean Apple's very arrogant? It's like, yeah, but Apple, we did that episode

00:40:54   where it's like, they own the field, they own the refs. And I it's like, why compete is Apple's

00:40:58   attitude. It's like, why compete if we don't have to? And I think Apple does believe that their

00:41:03   products are superior, but they also believe that they shouldn't have to compete because why,

00:41:07   why bother? And, and a lot of these regulatory exercises we're going through here are those

00:41:13   groups saying one by lawsuit, by regulation, whatever, saying, no, you need to, you need to

00:41:18   actually compete on the merits, which I think is funny because I think Apple competes fine on the

00:41:23   merits. And in some areas where they don't compete on the merits, I think it's true that they would

00:41:27   work harder if they had to compete. Again, is that illegal or not? Depends on if they're a monopoly,

00:41:33   depends on a bunch of other things, but it is, they, they kind of bring this on themselves because

00:41:37   what they're doing is saying we want it to be sticky. We want lock-in, uh, because why wouldn't we?

00:41:43   And as a result, that's evidence of them saying we don't want competition, which is not great if

00:41:49   you're in a antitrust lawsuit. I just, you know, we're going to get into some of the details here,

00:41:54   but like there is just like a, like a thing for me, or it's like, I don't think a company can make

00:41:58   $22 billion a quarter and not expect to be regulated. Right. Yeah. You know, like this was

00:42:05   going to happen. It's just happening this way. I mean, one of my pet theories is always that

00:42:10   Apple's whole corporate culture is based on when they were the little guy who was about to go out

00:42:14   of business, going up against enormous adversaries who had monopoly power and that they were just

00:42:19   trying to survive and that they still have that attitude, even though the shoe was on the other

00:42:23   foot now. And I think you see that in stuff like this, where you, yes, if you and one of your

00:42:29   competitors, I so grossed, we said that wrong. Let me say $90 billion a quarter, sorry, not 20.

00:42:36   That was just one product is what I was thinking of. Let's, let's, let's, let's break it down.

00:42:41   And again, this is not about law. This is just about like common sense, right? Smartphone is

00:42:47   basically required for everybody, every human on planet earth. And there's only two kinds.

00:42:53   Yeah. Google and Apple. Yeah. Within, I mean, again, I'm sure next year is the year of Linux

00:42:59   in the pocket, but, um, like really AI in the bin. And I know there's different, different androids

00:43:05   in China. There's two, there's two platforms here for the most important product in the world,

00:43:13   essentially most important tech product in the world. Do we not think that if there are only two

00:43:20   that they have enormous amounts of power over the human race? And do we not think that perhaps

00:43:26   governments might want to have a say about how they perform some aspects of their business?

00:43:31   I think it's not unreasonable to say that. And also when there are two and one of them has more

00:43:36   than half, right? Yeah. That's the problem. And in the US they do have more than half,

00:43:42   but the problem is the governments don't work on vibes. They work on laws. And in the US,

00:43:47   there are not a lot of laws that directly address this stuff. So they gotta, they gotta go with

00:43:51   something like the Sherman 80 trust act, which has been used, used against Microsoft. Um, anyway,

00:43:57   yeah, it's, so this is where we are is I think, I think you and I have come back to one of my

00:44:02   initial points, which is feels like there's something here and this doesn't feel like it's it,

00:44:06   but this is what we got. It might be though, like maybe it might be enough, right? Like it might be

00:44:13   enough because let's go through some of these things. Yeah. Yeah. I was going to say it might

00:44:18   be enough in the sense that it might spur apple to make changes that are substantial. It might be

00:44:25   enough for a judge to agree with. Sure. Sure. Depending on the details. Absolutely. Because,

00:44:32   okay, let's, let's, let's, we have all of these points and I saw someone say this and I, and I,

00:44:37   and I thought that it was a really good argument. Like some of these points seem strange unless

00:44:42   maybe they have a lot of evidence that makes them make sense, right? Where like, you can say,

00:44:46   look, apple does this thing. We know it because here's the emails. One of them is suppressing

00:44:51   cross platform technologies. Uh, the idea that apple makes it harder for developers to release

00:44:57   software that works the same on iOS and Android, therefore making it harder for users to switch

00:45:02   and know that they would have a comparable experience if they had a different, uh, phone.

00:45:06   The department of justice site that some of these things are suppressed are cloud streaming games,

00:45:14   third party messaging apps, not being able to receive incoming SMSs. So you are pushed into

00:45:19   iMessage, which I actually thought was enlightening. It's an unexpected argument,

00:45:24   but the argument is basically apple built iMessage on the fact that it was the default

00:45:27   message receiver. I think that is a super strong argument to me, right? They, they put their

00:45:34   messaging service in the SMS app. Exactly. Uh, smartwatches other than the apple watch,

00:45:41   not being able to be fully featured digital wallets. And the one that is the weirdest to me,

00:45:46   super apps, super apps, super apps are mostly popular in Asia and there are a few different

00:45:54   ones. Uh, we chat is often cited, but WhatsApp is actually one really in India, especially.

00:46:01   Yeah. And there's a, there's like a Tata something, um, super app in India too, but

00:46:07   one app where you do loads of stuff. So one app where you message, you have payments,

00:46:12   you can order food, you can order cars, right? Like it's a whole thing. They build little mini

00:46:17   apps. They basically build a platform that is the app. And then they have little mini apps inside it

00:46:22   that they control. And so you end up in a, in a situation in China where one of the things about

00:46:26   the Chinese market, and I know we talk about this when we do the quarterly stuff here is that in

00:46:31   China, if everything you do is in WeChat, then, um, you can go to an Android phone. And as long

00:46:39   as there's WeChat, which there is, you can do everything there too. And you can go to iPhone

00:46:43   and there's WeChat. So you do everything there. And this is the whole cross platform thing. What

00:46:48   the department of justice is trying to say is apple makes it hard to switch and that that is a,

00:46:53   an anti-competitive action and it should be easier to switch. And there, I think there are,

00:46:57   if you try to unravel that it gets really weird because I think that behind it is,

00:47:02   is a technological naivety, naivety about, about platforms being different. And the idea that,

00:47:09   that, uh, you know, we're not going to say all software must be developed with the same APIs,

00:47:15   right? Like that, that's bizarre. And yet if they're different, the more different they are,

00:47:20   the harder it is to switch between them. Also, I would argue that, you know, if I were to switch

00:47:25   from iOS to Android today, I would lose my Apple watch because it's not compatible, but I could

00:47:29   replicate everything else I do on Android. Right? So switch the cost of switching. I'm, I'm a little

00:47:34   bit skeptical of, but I think it's an interesting lens for them to view this situation, which is to

00:47:38   say how easy it is to switch. And in China, it's very easy to switch. Now, the problem with that is

00:47:44   that there's another monopoly, which is the super app, which is itself a monopoly. I can't believe

00:47:51   that the department of justice in an antitrust case is asking for Uber to be the place where I

00:47:57   live my life, which is essentially what I would have. Right. Which is so here's the idea, Mike,

00:48:02   the idea, and this, this comes in somewhere else, which is the whole argument in this document,

00:48:07   which is that the only reason we're here today is because the DOJ sued Microsoft, which something,

00:48:12   something, something big question mark allowed Apple to flourish, which is not true. It's, it's

00:48:17   a, it's a laugh. Uh, it is them patting themselves on the back. Um, but if you, if you view it through

00:48:22   the lens of that, then the super app thing, you could say, oh, well, this is great. Cause it'll

00:48:26   give them work. Um, for the next decade, when a super app comes to monopoly, they can sue them.

00:48:32   The department of justice, the Apple have total control. They exert power over the platform to

00:48:40   limit developers and users. Yeah. Can't argue with that one. No, I mean, that's right. Not,

00:48:47   not a bad, so yeah, cross-platform total control, um, are I think, and lock in, right. Those are the,

00:48:54   those are the big arguments. And they keep releasing new products that work with each

00:48:59   other and they keep trying to go into new markets and over time they will just do that more and more

00:49:05   and more until they can try and control all of the stuff. And that is, that is definitively,

00:49:11   I would say the, the, the defining characteristic of an illegal monopoly is that you have a huge

00:49:17   power base in one area. And then from there you can exert it elsewhere and your competitors can't,

00:49:25   can't compete elsewhere with you because of your base in your monopoly, because it's very hard

00:49:31   to compete with somebody who's got that level of power. And so with Microsoft, the argument was

00:49:36   Microsoft wasn't allowing browser competition because it had operating system dominance and

00:49:41   they lost that case. Basically they, they, they changed how they did it and they had to unbundle

00:49:46   IE and all of those things happened and then Apple came along. So look, hooray. So, um, that,

00:49:52   that's one of the challenges here is these, um, the, are, are they using that power in a narrowly

00:50:00   defined monopoly to, I mean, the smartwatch thing is a good example where like what they're not

00:50:07   saying, the DOJ is not saying really is, uh, Apple not bringing the Apple watch to Android is

00:50:14   monopolistic, right? Like that, that's a very weird argument to make to say, if you don't support

00:50:21   other platforms, you're bad. Like it's illegal to release it for your only your own platform.

00:50:26   It's not what they're saying. It is weird though, that Garmin doesn't have an API, right? To be able

00:50:33   to get messages. And there's arguments that they, that there is that to some degree, and I want to

00:50:37   see the evidence, but the, the argument that I think has more resonance, if it's true is Apple.

00:50:43   And it sounds like something Apple would do, right? Which is Apple built a whole bunch of APIs

00:50:48   for the Apple watch so that the Apple watch would work well. And I don't think anybody would say

00:50:53   that is fundamentally bad. I think people would, I mean, maybe there's somebody at the department

00:50:57   of justice, but I think it's a reasonable person would say Apple innovating with its own product

00:51:01   and building a whole bunch of stuff to let its own product work is not inherently bad.

00:51:06   The challenge that the DOJ sees here is, and I don't know whether it's at the time it ships

00:51:12   or within a reasonable amount of time is Apple built all that stuff for the Apple watch. And the

00:51:17   argument goes, and the allegation is that other smartwatches try to get access to all of that

00:51:23   close tie-in with the system that allows them to function at the same way that they do on Android

00:51:30   and they can't. And that's their argument is that Apple, and then it goes to cross-platform and,

00:51:37   and lock in by saying, essentially, if you want to use a smartwatch on an iPhone, you can only use

00:51:42   Apple's because the others aren't very good because they're being anti-competitive. And of course,

00:51:49   it doesn't work on the other platform. So if you switch, you're not just buying a new phone,

00:51:52   you have to buy a new watch now. And that's all about lock in and anti-competitiveness. That's

00:51:56   the argument that they're making. And I think, again, the idea that at some point Apple needs

00:52:01   to let other smartwatches work on the iPhone, they can't just make it that the, well, the Apple watch

00:52:06   works the best. That if somebody wanted to put in the investment, if Google wanted to put the

00:52:10   investment to have one of the Google smartwatches work as well with iOS as the Apple watch does,

00:52:16   they should be able to do that. That's the argument. They also say that Apple uses security

00:52:23   for convenience. I'm going to read a quote from you, which includes a quote from the Department

00:52:27   of Justice. It calls Apple's privacy and security justifications an elastic shield that can stretch

00:52:33   or contract to serve Apple's interests. Yes, go off DOJ. They do do this. They do. They absolutely

00:52:43   do. And the problem is, I mean, elastic shield is actually really great because implication in there,

00:52:49   this is my favorite line in the whole document. The implication there is it stretches or contracts

00:52:55   to serve its interests. What it's not saying is Apple says, like we've heard these troll arguments

00:53:02   before, right? Which is like, well, Apple says that privacy and security matter, but it don't

00:53:06   really, all that matters to them is money. It's like, that's not true. Privacy and security

00:53:11   absolutely matter to Apple. And it's absolutely a priority for them. It is also true that Apple's

00:53:17   behavior is not only prioritizing privacy and security. It also is about their own interests,

00:53:26   about money, maybe about lock-in. Those things are also in there. And once you let those things

00:53:33   creep in, it makes it easier for, say, the Department of Justice to point at it and say,

00:53:39   you're hiding behind security. Like we said about the rules in Europe for letting somebody into the

00:53:45   store where they're like, oh, well, yeah, you can do sideloading. You just have to spend two years

00:53:50   in a penalty box and find a way to get a million downloads in Europe. And then you're free to do

00:53:54   what you want. And we have to do this because of platform security. And it's like, well, there are

00:54:01   probably other ways to answer that problem, but you've decided to make it about platform security.

00:54:05   What I would say is, it's not consistent. There are examples where Apple is doing features that

00:54:11   benefit privacy and security, that it's entirely about privacy and security. There are cases where

00:54:17   it's mostly about privacy and security, but they also look at it and say, oh, we could also make

00:54:21   some money here. And it has the added effect of having a little lock-in. It's good for us. And

00:54:26   they do it. And then there are other ones where they talk about the privacy and security and you

00:54:30   look at it and you go, really? Because it seems to me like your real motivator here is that this

00:54:35   gives you more power or control or money or some combination of those. And that's been, and again,

00:54:43   they have nobody but themselves to blame because they could, they muddy these waters. They muddy

00:54:49   these waters with their business decisions. And it is like one of the things that you cannot avoid

00:54:56   from this. And I think one of the things that's going to continually come back to buy Apple is

00:55:01   they are always talking about the tight integration between hardware and software. That that is what

00:55:06   they care about. They promote heavily on this. Is it now said that this is illegal to do?

00:55:13   I don't know, but the fact that they have been so hell-bent on this idea that only their stuff

00:55:23   can work together, that's now going to become a problem for them. This is one of the more

00:55:29   existential threats to Apple, is this idea that Apple's whole idea of integrated devices is

00:55:35   actually illegal given how successful they are on the iPhone. I don't think

00:55:41   that that's quite right though. I think there's a model here that's in clear view

00:55:49   and I don't know the details, but like the Apple watch is a good example. We could use others.

00:55:56   Apple does this thing where they announce a new product and it's like, I mean, AirPods are like

00:56:01   this too, right? Where it's like, Oh, well Bluetooth wasn't good enough. So we invented

00:56:05   a new thing and it makes our headphones way better than anybody else's headphones on our platform.

00:56:10   I don't think that that is in any way illegal. That's Apple's business model. That's how they

00:56:18   make good products. The challenge, and this might make the whole thing untenable, which is the

00:56:23   danger for Apple. The challenge is if you read that as being, we built a bunch of stuff that only

00:56:29   we ever get access to and it means that our product in this category will always be better

00:56:33   than any of the other products in this category. And you can buy other earbuds if you really want

00:56:37   to, but they're never going to be as good as ours. So you might as well just buy ours, right?

00:56:42   - Oh, I have a good example. Find My, the Find My network. So they built their own

00:56:50   privacy tracking device. So their tracking device, right? The AirTag. But Apple knew this was going

00:56:55   to be a problem for them because they were already in trouble with about tile, right?

00:57:00   - Right.

00:57:00   - So they created a system where you can make a product like this and apply, and you would be in

00:57:05   the Find My network, which benefits from the majority of features that AirTag has.

00:57:12   So they've shown they can do this.

00:57:15   - Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, the latest example is the journaling app, which includes all sorts of

00:57:21   things that are about your phone watching what you do, what music you play, what podcasts you listen

00:57:25   to, where you've been, what photos you've taken. A lot of stuff that has to happen on device

00:57:30   because it's monitoring you, right? But it's your device and it's monitoring you because it's with

00:57:36   you all the time. And then you decide what you want to do with it. And what Apple, in the past,

00:57:41   I would argue, what Apple would have done is announced the journaling app and release it.

00:57:44   And only Apple's app would have access to all that data. And instead, what they did is they built an

00:57:49   API and they released an app that uses the API and they opened that API up to other apps to get that

00:57:55   same data. And I know there's details there. I don't want to get into it. My point is, this is

00:58:00   the kind of thing that is the model potentially, which is, so you do the Apple watch. The question

00:58:07   is what's Apple's burden to allow others access to this stuff? I think the argument would be,

00:58:12   Apple, you cannot create private APIs, essentially, for your integrations that no one else gets access

00:58:23   to so that you can exert your platform ownership power to prevent any competition on the platform.

00:58:31   Now, there are a lot of arguments inside there, which is, does that mean that every time,

00:58:35   because the way that would hamper innovation is saying to Apple, every time you do anything

00:58:40   innovative at all, you immediately need to release a detailed API spec and have everything be public

00:58:46   so that somebody else can come in very quickly and write to all of those APIs. And there are cases

00:58:52   where that's probably really fair. You're a third party who's been trying to serve this market. I

00:58:56   mean, I don't know, you're Pebble back in the day for smartwatches. You're day one or you're an app

00:59:03   that's desperately wanted an API for something and then Apple decides to make an app like your app

00:59:08   and now there's an API for it. The least they could do is let you also access the API. So the

00:59:13   question is, does that have to happen when they ship it? Because that's going to increase the

00:59:16   burden on Apple. It would be the equivalent. I mean, this is the wrong example because it

00:59:21   was in the early days of the iPhone, but it'd be the equivalent of saying you can't ship the iPhone

00:59:25   until you have an app store. It's that kind of thing, right? Where they're like, no, no, no,

00:59:29   we need time. We don't even have the developer tools built yet. We ship the product. We can do

00:59:33   the product, but doing the developer documentation and all those things, it's going to take more

00:59:37   time. We still are having to work on that. It's like, okay, fair enough. That's where we are with

00:59:41   stuff like this, which is it's probably okay for Apple. It's okay for Apple to innovate.

00:59:47   It's probably okay for Apple to ship a product that does some amazing new things.

00:59:50   But I think what the argument would be is it's not okay for Apple to take all of the extra

00:59:55   connective tissue that they built that makes their integrated product work and keep it to themselves

01:00:01   as the platform owner so that no one else can make a competitive product and have access to

01:00:07   that same stuff. Therefore, everybody who uses an iPhone is really going to be predisposed to

01:00:12   buy AirPods because AirPods work better. I think that's the biggest potential danger and change.

01:00:21   And why this thing talks about private APIs, I think is like, it's a huge, to me, that's a

01:00:26   huge thing because that's the one that blares out to me as being anti-competitive, which is,

01:00:32   it's not about Apple innovating. It's about Apple innovating and keeping all of the innovations on

01:00:38   the hardware side as special to the platform owner, leading to a situation where nobody can compete

01:00:47   with a platform owner on its platform anywhere in any other product. And that's, I mean, this goes

01:00:51   back to our complaints about things like the Kindle books and stuff like that, where it's like,

01:00:57   Apple has built a product on its platform and made it impossible for anyone to compete with them.

01:01:03   That seems anti-competitive to me, right? That's where it bugs me. And some of that's in here,

01:01:09   not all of it, some of it's in here. - So obviously Apple's gonna fight this.

01:01:13   They've released a statement. This is from 9to5Mac. "We believe this lawsuit is wrong on the

01:01:18   facts and the law, and we will vigorously defend against it. And this is gonna take years. There'll

01:01:23   be lots of hearings. We'll learn lots of interesting things maybe." - Microsoft took a decade.

01:01:28   - Yeah. - Microsoft took a decade.

01:01:29   - There'll be lots of documents released from discovery process, which will be fascinating.

01:01:33   I'll look forward to reading through those. - Oh yeah, a lot of emails from people who

01:01:36   shouldn't have been using email. - Yep, yes. If there's one thing

01:01:40   in the last few years I've told anyone, you shouldn't use email. But what you also shouldn't do

01:01:45   is say, let's not use email, 'cause Google did that and then they lost. So you need to say in

01:01:50   person to everyone, don't write anything down. And then you end up in a problem where no one

01:01:55   can work 'cause nothing's written down. - Yeah, I know. That's the trick.

01:01:59   - Write it all down on paper. Hey Apple, I have some notepads to say if you want them.

01:02:01   - I don't know how to break this to you, Mike, but that's how this whole thing started is this

01:02:06   paper is subpoena-able. - But then you can shred it.

01:02:09   Just like, uh-oh. Just write it all down on paper, shred it at the end of the day.

01:02:12   - The upgrade program does not endorse the idea of destroying evidence.

01:02:18   - Well, here's the, it's like Schrodinger's evidence, right? At what point is something

01:02:24   evidence? How do you know it's evidence? You know? - Yeah, when they sue you.

01:02:29   - But then it's gone. You shredded it. - Yeah, maybe.

01:02:33   - So we're probably gonna need a new name for this segment 'cause now we have DOJ today and

01:02:37   DMA today. - I don't want two different

01:02:40   things based on jurisdictions and this doesn't help us when there's something in Korea that happens.

01:02:44   - Well, at first it didn't seem like we needed, we didn't know we were gonna need it. You know

01:02:49   what I mean? So, answers on a postcard. Go to upgradefeedback.com, give us your suggestions.

01:02:55   I asked chat GPT for some suggestions, Jason. - Oh, no.

01:02:59   - Well, I just thought it might be an intro, you know, you never know what you're gonna get.

01:03:03   But what I wanted specifically was I wanted something with up, right? Up something.

01:03:08   - Uh-huh. - 'Cause we've done that in the past.

01:03:10   The best that it gave me, which I don't like, but the best that it gave me was uphold.

01:03:15   But I don't like it. - No.

01:03:19   - We'll see. We'll come up with it. Send in your suggestions, upgradefeedback.com. If you have what

01:03:23   you think is a good name for- - Overarching for Apple and legal issues.

01:03:28   - All legislation stuff, send it in. 'Cause this is how we got upshift.

01:03:31   - It's true. - But we've raised that.

01:03:33   - And we need to replace, we lost that one, so we gotta get a new one in. But yeah, I think DMA

01:03:39   today is gonna be retired because now we need a broader Apple under scrutiny thing, whatever

01:03:46   it might be. So yes, send in upgradefeedback.com. We would love to hear from you.

01:03:49   - This episode is brought to you by Vitally. Customer success teams today, they're facing

01:03:57   a problem. How do they connect customer data back to their work? Vitally changes this. It is a new

01:04:03   kind of customer success platform, an all-in-one collaborative workspace that combines your

01:04:08   customer data with the capabilities you expect from today's project management and work platforms.

01:04:14   Because it's designed for today's customer success team, that is why Vitally operates

01:04:19   with unparalleled efficiency, improves net revenue retention and delivers best in class

01:04:24   customer experiences. It is the solution to helping your customer success teams keep a better

01:04:29   pulse on your customers, maximizing productivity, visibility and collaboration along the way.

01:04:35   You can boost your bottom line by driving more revenue per customer with Vitally. It is that

01:04:40   simple. And if you take a qualified demo of Vitally, you can get yourself a free pair of

01:04:46   AirPods Pro. So if you're a customer success decision maker actively seeking CS solutions,

01:04:51   working at a B2B software as a service company with 50 to 1,000 employees, and you're willing

01:04:57   to explore changing customer success platforms, if you have one in place, schedule your call today

01:05:03   just by going to vitally.io/upgrade and get that free pair of AirPods Pro. That's vitally.io/upgrade

01:05:12   for a free pair of AirPods Pro when you schedule a qualified meeting. Our thanks to Vitally for

01:05:17   their support of this show from Real AFM. It's draft time!

01:05:21   We wanted to have some fun because we've been talking a lot about legislation and you know

01:05:27   what's on the horizon? iPads. So it hasn't happened yet, which is fantastic. I was checking

01:05:32   the Apple newsroom furiously today, but as of recording on Monday the 25th of March, there have

01:05:39   been no iPad announcements. So we're doing an iPad draft. What this will also do is hopefully give us

01:05:45   at least three drafts this year, which is good from a scoring perspective when it comes to drafts.

01:05:51   These are the rules. Gotta make some drafts where we can. Yeah, we gotta do it. This is a great idea

01:05:57   from you. I'm happy that you came up with it, especially because we're going to be talking

01:06:01   about so much legal stuff. It's not our first preemptive draft, right? Like, you know, we've done

01:06:05   it before, but I felt like I was listening to Connected last week and I had that moment where

01:06:09   I thought, you know, there's a lot of unknown things. And fortunately, Mark Gurman on Sunday did not

01:06:15   have big iPad news to share and he's off next week. So I thought this would be a really good time for

01:06:22   us to just be on the details of the iPad and then we'll see what happens when it happens and we'll

01:06:28   score it then. These are the rules. There will be eight rounds. 16 overall picks. The winner of the

01:06:34   previous draft gets first pick. That is me. There are some slight amendments to these rules because

01:06:39   of the way we're doing it. The items that we're going to be picking from are chosen from a

01:06:43   predetermined list that we have agreed upon and are not ridiculously obvious. For an item to count,

01:06:49   it must be known for certain before scoring begins. That's the difference this time.

01:06:55   Stephen Hackett, because it's not like there's not going to be an event probably, and we're going to

01:06:58   leave it all the way up until we score it. Stephen Hackett will adjudicate in case of a scoring

01:07:03   stalemate. There are no partial points. The points awarded on the episode of final want to finalize

01:07:08   during the scoring segment. In the case of a tie, there is a tiebreaker question. Loser gets a pick

01:07:14   of tiebreaker question. The winner becomes draft champion and displays the champion pennant. The

01:07:20   loser becomes the draft challenger and displays the challenger pennant. You can find interactive

01:07:25   scorecards for this draft and all drafts over at upgrade.cards. Thanks to our friend Zach Knox.

01:07:32   You can buy your own draft t-shirt anytime at upgradeyourwardrobe.com if you would like to

01:07:38   show off your love for the draft. In 2023, there were three drafts. WWDC, September, October. I

01:07:46   won all of them. And I was also the 2023 draft champion, obviously, if I won all three. There

01:07:54   have been three drafts historically in March. Jason has won them all. Fun fact. Mike, I think

01:07:59   we should do a draft in March. The 2022 March draft was the last time Jason won a draft.

01:08:06   I am on a losing streak. We're going to have to abolish drafts pretty soon. You think that's the

01:08:10   way we're going to deal with this? Interesting. That's very interesting. In case of, as I

01:08:18   mentioned before, if there's a tiebreaker question, Jason is going to be able to set an over/under on

01:08:26   the tiebreaker we decided, which is what will be the iPad Pro starting price? So Jason, you set the

01:08:32   number and I will set whether it's over or under. So I guess this is for the 11 inch, right?

01:08:39   The lowest price that you can buy into a new iPad Pro. If they keep an old model around,

01:08:44   which they won't, but if you do, that doesn't count. Current iPad Pro, do you know the starting

01:08:48   price? $799 for the 11 inch. Yep. I am going to say...

01:08:57   Jason, this is from Spold in the chat. Does Mike have a draft monopoly? Someone alert the Department

01:09:05   of Justice. Yeah, I know. That's right. You're using your draft monopoly against me. You want

01:09:12   to say that it's just competition, but I'm going to say... So $799 is the current. I'm going to say

01:09:21   $950. That's the starting price. $950 is the starting price, yes. Under.

01:09:31   Hmm. Okay. I think that's... So you get $949 and $899 and even $799 if they keep it the same.

01:09:43   Yeah. I thought about going at $899 or $900. I think it's going to be $999.

01:09:52   It could well be, but I'm going to take the under on it because it's a big jump, right?

01:09:59   It's a big, big jump. It is. It is. And we'll talk about why, but I think I'm going to take the under

01:10:04   on it. All right. So we're not doing categories in this. We have lots of different picks across

01:10:09   all of the various iPads that we're going to choose from, but we're just doing this as like

01:10:15   eight rounds. So my first pick, both iPad Pro models have an OLED screen. Okay. All right.

01:10:26   This feels real obvious. Yeah. But I didn't line it out like I did some of them. Yeah.

01:10:32   I still think that there's a non-zero chance that they'll pull a gacha and they'll be like...

01:10:38   I agree. Like the low end model won't have OLED after all. And look, or they just don't even do,

01:10:45   you know what I mean? Like we thought they were going to do mini LED on the 11 inch and they never

01:10:50   did it. So I feel like it's until for something like this, like a technology like this, I do feel

01:10:56   like there is a possibility that it could change at any moment because of an issue until they've

01:11:01   done it once. You know what I mean? And until they've had an OLED iPad Pro, they've not had one.

01:11:07   It's Schrodinger's OLED. It's like I read something over the weekend. I didn't, but it just keeps

01:11:13   coming into my mind. Good old Schrodinger. Okay. I'm going to go with there's a new Apple Pencil.

01:11:20   Okay. I had this in, so I make a provisional list. I hope we both do this, right? Like we,

01:11:26   and we rank them. I had this at number 10 on my potential pick list.

01:11:30   I just feel like now's the time for it. I mean, it is possible that they will, they will do it

01:11:35   later, but I feel like if there's new iPad Pro model and there's a new Apple Pencil coming,

01:11:39   that this would be the time to do it. So why not do it right now? We have a lot of potential

01:11:43   Apple Pencil picks. So let's not give, let's not talk about the Apple Pencil yet in case it comes

01:11:49   up through other things. Okay. My second pick will be a very popular one if it happens, which

01:11:57   is that the webcam is on the horizontal edge of the iPad Pro. Yep. That's a good call. It feels

01:12:05   like this one feels like it's got to happen because they did it on the iPad and like,

01:12:09   it would really, this feels to me that you, they did it on that one because that was the first one

01:12:16   that they changed after making that decision. And now it should come to the other products,

01:12:20   in my opinion. Yeah. No makes sense to me. And if they have a brand new design of the iPad Pro,

01:12:27   then like, I imagine it would be hard to have a new revision of the previous iPad Pro and do that

01:12:33   because they designed that iPad in a certain way. But you've got to imagine if this iPad Pro has

01:12:39   new technology in it, like an OLED screen, that was going to need to be some change to the way

01:12:45   that the product was made. And so if you're going to go back to the design drawing board again,

01:12:49   that you would, you would also include something that like this, which makes a lot of sense.

01:12:53   Yeah, I agree. I think it's coming to all of them. The only question would be again,

01:12:58   that Apple disappoints us and we're like, Oh yeah, yeah, yeah. It'll be the next time. And they're

01:13:01   like, no, no, we couldn't. To be fair. That is the, that is the under, like the underwriting

01:13:06   current of all drafts is we can be, it's the Apple may disappoint us. It's always there.

01:13:11   It's always there. Now we aren't allowing anybody to pick there will be a new Magic Keyboard

01:13:17   because that feels fairly strong. So I'm going to choose a larger track pad on the Magic Keyboard.

01:13:23   Okay. I just try to think of a laptop like Magic Keyboard, which is what Mark Gurman has reported.

01:13:30   And I think one of what's the, what's one of the real knocks on the Magic Keyboard is the size of

01:13:35   the track pad. So if they made it larger, just a little bit, if they made it laptop like then

01:13:41   maybe it's not going to have that wild cantilever thing. If you don't have to do that and you give

01:13:45   everything more space, right? Exactly. Yeah. That would be nice. I would like that.

01:13:49   My third pick, the iPad Air comes in current iPad Pro sizes. Ah, yes. Right. So this is the idea

01:13:59   that the iPad Air will be compatible with, uh, with the two sizes of iPad Pro. Yeah. And we'll

01:14:08   use the existing, uh, accessories for the current model iPad Pro. So there'll be a, uh, what is it?

01:14:14   An 11 and a 12.9. An 11. Yeah. I mean, and that would make sense from that, right? Especially if

01:14:19   they're going to move on the Magic Keyboard, maybe they, your old Magic Keyboard will go with this,

01:14:24   right? And it's like, great. Now you can move that down the line. The potential issue I see

01:14:29   with this pick, the iPad Air might be bigger. Could be. Could be. Or the story that they're

01:14:36   going to do a big iPad Air is not true, as it turns out. Exactly. That's a possibility. Also

01:14:41   possible. But yeah, I think if they're going to do it, they do it this way. And I do think now is

01:14:47   the time you could do it if the iPad Pro is going to take a jump. And just, just for fun, I think

01:14:53   they could call that product the iPad Air Plus. I hope they don't, but they could. That's just a

01:14:58   little funsy. A little tip of the hat. Nice. I'm going to say the base model iPad receives an

01:15:03   update. Okay. New base iPad. 11th generation. This feels like something you wouldn't pick

01:15:12   if it was a video, right? I just feel like they're going to refresh everything. Yeah. But like, I

01:15:19   mean, if there was an event, maybe you would. Oh yeah. Like, would they even mention it? Well,

01:15:23   sure. They'll mention that the low cost iPad. Yeah, they will. But it's probably a minor

01:15:27   update from the 10th because the 10th was a big update, but there'll be, there'll be something

01:15:31   and they may get rid of the ninth. We'll see. All right. My fourth pick, bringing us halfway.

01:15:37   The iPad Pro starts at a higher price. Oh, interesting. I do think it will be more expensive.

01:15:48   I don't know if it's going to be from seven, was it 799 to 959? 899? Yeah, right. Right. I could

01:15:57   imagine 899. I think too much higher and it's maybe too much. Oh, I agree. It doesn't mean

01:16:06   they'll stop it. So here's my thought. I agree that making them incredibly expensive is not,

01:16:15   is problematic in some ways, but if they're trying to differentiate the iPad

01:16:19   Air from the iPad Pro and they've got OLED on these devices and 999 is right there. That's,

01:16:26   that's my gut feeling is, is this would be an opportunity for Apple to kick the iPad Pro

01:16:31   way up the product line, started at 999. And you know, I hope they don't. I, right. I hope they,

01:16:40   it's 799 honestly. But yes, they could be introducing the larger iPad Air purely to

01:16:47   increase the price of the iPad Pro. Right. But yeah. And I do think that that's possible. I'm

01:16:53   just not sure it's going to go up that high. Like I imagine that the, the 12.9 inch that,

01:16:58   that will be, that might get a bigger bump, but I'm not sure if the 11 would. Could be. Although

01:17:04   keep in mind that the 12.9 has the fancy backlighting now and they're both getting OLED. So

01:17:09   what does that mean? They're both coming from sort of a different place display wise. Yeah.

01:17:13   I don't know. I don't remember. We had those rumors that they're going to be hugely expensive

01:17:16   and then we had the rumors that said, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no,

01:17:18   no. They're not going to be, I don't know what to think anymore. The unit. I don't know what to

01:17:22   think anymore. Okay. I am going to go again, be the change you want to see in the world. Okay.

01:17:29   I am choosing an iPad Pro case is offered in a color that is not gray, white or black. My word,

01:17:36   Jason Snow. In my opinion, they currently sell a smart folio that's blue. It's dark blue,

01:17:43   but it's blue. Okay. Marine blue. So I'm holding out hope that there'll be like, and we've got

01:17:50   again, you know, midnight in the forest, green, whatever it is that there's some color, not,

01:17:57   not saying the magic keyboard necessarily. Right. Cause that's probably not, that's probably going

01:18:00   to be boring, but that there'll be a case that will not be for the iPad Pro that will not be

01:18:06   gray, white or black. So right now there is a case. Yes. One. One. All right. Midnight blue,

01:18:15   midnight blue, Mike midnight blue, but it's not black. It's blue. You're riding on the fact that

01:18:20   they will, they will have a replacement for this essentially. Right. Like that's what you're hoping

01:18:25   for. Well, I mean, I suppose if they don't change the size of the iPad Pro at all, and they use the

01:18:32   existing cases, then that would also be true. But I'm, I'm thinking they will have to do new cases

01:18:37   cause the shape will be different and they will have their usual, which is like, it comes in,

01:18:44   it comes in monochrome and also this one very vaguely colored one. I don't think you're going

01:18:49   to do like bright pink. Right. But there'll be one that is dark green or dark blue, something like

01:18:56   that. All right. This could be an interesting one to score. We'll see how that goes. Wish you the

01:19:03   best of luck there. Cause colors always fun. Thank you. This episode is brought to you by Ladder.

01:19:10   Let's be real people, including me. We have a tendency to put things off until the last minute,

01:19:15   whether it's that trip to the DMV, arranging a dental checkup, getting to that hole in the fence,

01:19:21   you know, the kind of things I'm talking about. Well, most of the time it works out. The one thing

01:19:25   in life you cannot afford to wait on is setting up term coverage life insurance. You may have seen

01:19:30   life insurance commercials on TV. You may have heard them on the radio, seen them in newspapers.

01:19:35   You're like, I'll get to that later on, but this isn't something you should wait on. Choose life

01:19:39   insurance through Ladder today. Ladder is 100% digital. There are no doctors, no needles, no

01:19:44   paperwork. When you apply for a $3 million in coverage or less, you just answer a few questions

01:19:50   about your health and an application. They make it so simple to do that as customers rate them

01:19:56   4.8 out of five stars. They've got that on trust pilot and they made fours best life insurance list

01:20:01   in 2021. All you need is a few minutes and a phone or a laptop to apply. Ladder's smart algorithms

01:20:07   are working real time. So you're going to find out if you're instantly approved. There are no

01:20:11   hidden fees you can cancel at any time and you'll get a full refund if you change your mind in the

01:20:16   first 30 days. Ladder policies are issued by insurers of long proven histories of paying

01:20:21   claims. They're rated A and A+ by A and Best. And since life insurance costs more as you age,

01:20:27   now's the time to cross it off your list. Go to ladderlife.com/upgrade today and you'll see

01:20:34   if you're instantly approved. That's ladderlife.com/upgrade one last time ladderlife.com/upgrade.

01:20:42   Our thanks to Ladder for their support of this show and Relay FM.

01:20:45   Okay, round five. The Magic Keyboard has a USB-C port.

01:20:54   Wow. Well, the current one does. So.

01:21:02   Yeah. Oh, well, then wait a second. No, I did that wrong then.

01:21:05   Well, I, I, I, I. Apple already offers an iPad Pro case in a color. So.

01:21:11   No, but, but my, my reason to not line this out was that it, that it works for not charging. It's

01:21:17   like with data support. Well, then get rid of that. I don't want it. You're not going to pick

01:21:21   it then. No, I don't want it. Although just saying that I will say that maybe we could have lined out

01:21:26   your iPad Pro case one considering it's like they already do it, but nevertheless, we'll let it fly.

01:21:31   Honestly, when they do a new one, it is a serious risk that they just go back to monochrome.

01:21:35   I know. So I'm going to go every time you're rolling the dice there.

01:21:38   My fifth pick now is the new Magic Keyboard has a function row.

01:21:43   Has a function row. That is a better pick. Good job.

01:21:45   I'm going to go with that pick instead. Okay.

01:21:47   Because I'm not taking the data support. I'm not taking that.

01:21:51   That's what made that outlandish, which is why I couldn't believe that you picked it. Okay. Function

01:21:55   row. I, you know, again, be the change you want to see in the world. It would be so.

01:21:59   You got the space, hopefully. I hope so. Like the function row is so useful.

01:22:04   And when I use an iPad Pro with external keyboards that have it, it's so great because I can do media

01:22:10   control and brightness control. And then you get to the Magic Keyboard, which is a product that I

01:22:15   love, but like no function row is brutal. So I hope that that would be like the obvious things,

01:22:22   right? This function row and trackpad size. Yep. I would think. I would hope.

01:22:28   Oh, do I have to pick one now? That is how it goes. That's how it goes.

01:22:33   Man. I don't like these at all. Okay. This is vague enough that I'm going to pick it and just

01:22:40   hope for the best, which is iPad Pro has a new OS feature that takes advantage of Magic Keyboard.

01:22:45   Okay. That's the thing we have. Can we try and talk about what we think that might be just

01:22:49   for context? Uh, oh, you know, can I change this pick to be a new accessory?

01:22:57   I just want to, I want to see if there's a software feature that they introduce, right?

01:23:03   That's not in current iPad OS that, that, that an accessory is involved with, right? Like a new

01:23:11   feature or, or I could take it back to it has a new OS feature, but like, I want to, I want it to

01:23:16   be like, oh, here's the thing the iPad couldn't do before that it does now. The iPad Pro has a new

01:23:24   OS feature that takes advantage of a new accessory. Like, that's kind of got to be the two things

01:23:28   combined. Cause then it's not super like, you know, just a new OS feature might be a little too

01:23:33   uh, broad, but at least this is like, maybe there's, maybe the pencil does something new,

01:23:37   like hover, right? Right. It's that, it's that there's a reason we're waiting for an

01:23:42   OS update for these things. And it's because I'm going to say an accessory that needs a thing

01:23:47   to do a magically new thing that we haven't seen before. Yep. All right. My pick six was that one.

01:23:56   Haha. Finally. I'm doubling down and I'm going to say the iPad air webcam is on the horizontal edge.

01:24:08   Oh, okay. I'm doubling down. All right. So you believe it's horizontal everywhere. Yeah.

01:24:18   I mean, if I, I mean, maybe not on the iPad mini, if it gets updated and all that,

01:24:23   but basically you're like, no, no, this is the time where they're going to the horizontal.

01:24:26   They should do it. So, and they have done it. So I feel like they should just continue that.

01:24:34   Why just iPad, you know, let's do them all. Okay.

01:24:40   Um, I'm going to pick more colors are nonsense. Magic keyboard comes color matched to iPad pro

01:24:55   models. I like this one. Right. So the idea here is that the reports are that it's going to have

01:25:00   an aluminum element to it. Yes. And if you've got, if you've got a starlight and midnight or a space

01:25:06   gray and silver iPad pro, presumably they would color match them, right? Because the current ones

01:25:13   are in two colors, but they're not matched to anything because there's no material like that

01:25:18   on the iPad pro right now. But if they have an aluminum element on the keyboard, presumably they

01:25:26   would want to color match it to the aluminum on the iPad. That's the idea. Yeah. I mean,

01:25:32   if they're going to make it out of aluminum, they 100% should do this. Right. So I would like to see

01:25:38   it. Right. Can you imagine them selling a space gray model and not having a space gray keyboard?

01:25:42   That's weird. I mean, I can't imagine it. I can't imagine it. I hope that they don't do that,

01:25:48   but don't do it. So my next pick is one that I feel like when I say it, considering how we've

01:25:54   been pretty scrutinized, we might actually remove it, but it was in the list. So I'm going to say it.

01:25:58   The new Apple pencil charges magnetically. Yeah. Well, so here's the idea here is there are,

01:26:05   we have an Apple pencil now that charges via USB-C. Yeah. One of the theories might be that if they,

01:26:13   if it attaches magnetically, but can they charge it magnetically when they're also moving the webcam?

01:26:20   We'll find out. I'm going to pick it. Okay. I think that would be a serious regression.

01:26:25   I agree. They did that. I put in charge via USB-C and then I thought, well, let's do both

01:26:30   sides of this and see what happens. Yeah. Right. Um, you know, there's a thing here for me where

01:26:36   it's like, they might be able to just make it work by doing the charging on one side and the webcam

01:26:41   on another side and the way that the keyboard cases and stuff might work would be based on that

01:26:47   idea. Yeah. You know, we'll see. But yeah, I, I can see why they would change it. I would be

01:26:57   really surprised if they couldn't have found a way to deal with this. Yeah, I think so.

01:27:04   Um, magic keyboard only works with 2024 iPad pro models. Okay. Just it's a new keyboard. It only

01:27:12   works with a pro it's for the pro. There's going to be something about it. I think it's going to be

01:27:15   the attachment because it's going to be more laptop-like and that's going to require very

01:27:19   specific iPad hardware that is allowed, allowing it to do that attachment via magnets or whatever.

01:27:27   And it's not going to be backward compatible with any other models of iPad because of that.

01:27:31   All right. Eight pick final pick. I'm looking at my list here. Yeah, I know. A little short list.

01:27:43   Oh boy. Um,

01:27:45   I have two that I'm really struggling with to choose from. One is one that I think could happen.

01:27:58   The other is, is something I want to happen. Oh, go with your, go with what you want to happen.

01:28:04   No, no, no. That's how you lose a draft. Tell me about it. Tell me about it.

01:28:12   I'm going to go with, all right, I'm going to go with one that splits the difference. It's

01:28:16   one that I think should happen and one that I think will happen. The iPad pro gets mag safe.

01:28:22   Oh, I don't think this will happen. Now it's got magnets on the back, but that's not what you're

01:28:29   saying here, right? You're saying mag safe for charging. Yeah. Mag safe for charging.

01:28:37   But here's what I'll say, right? About this. The only reason I've picked this, there are two types

01:28:43   of mag safe. There are two types of mag safe. And I don't think it's going to get iPhone mag safe.

01:28:48   Yeah. You think it's going to get Mac mag safe? Yeah. Because iPhone mag safe to me doesn't make

01:28:52   sense for this product. Or a new third iPad mag safe. Yeah. I mean, you know what? There might

01:28:57   be another one. You get it. You get it if that happens. They might say, uh, like, you know,

01:29:02   like, oh, now the keyboard attaches magnetically and charges via mag safe. It's like a completely

01:29:07   different thing. Uh, but they got like, you know, you attach the, the lat, the iPad to the keyboard

01:29:14   and the keyboard has some new mag safe thing. But yeah, I think mag safe cause magnet magnetic

01:29:21   charging is good. Apple has two different types of it. At least one of those should come to the

01:29:26   iPad. Stop making me plug it in. I agree. I agree. Okay. I'm going to go with my last pick. Uh,

01:29:35   I'm going to pick new Apple pencil has an eraser. Okay. Now, now, now I'm, I'm going to leave this

01:29:42   open. One of the rumors about the Apple pencil is that it's going to have swappable tips.

01:29:47   If one of the swappable tips is an eraser, I get this pick. If it's got an eraser on the backside,

01:29:53   I get this pick. If it's got a button that you hold down, it doesn't matter to a racer. I get

01:29:58   the pick. If they like to find a racer function in the Apple defined by Apple in hardware. Yes,

01:30:05   you get this pick and there are multiple ways to do it. And I'm an eraser. This is not so the pick

01:30:11   that I was choosing from was the Apple pencil has at least one button, which is a thing I've been

01:30:16   asking to do since the first one, right? Actual button. Cause I feel like now they might do a

01:30:22   solid state button cause they've gotten better at that. Right. That's true. Yeah. Yeah. As somebody

01:30:26   who, you know, the current Apple pencil, I never use their like double tap kind of thing. Cause

01:30:32   it's not, cause it's not very good. It's not very reliable. It's not reliable enough, but if they

01:30:35   can have a little button or something like that or, and the swappable tips. And, and the reason

01:30:40   I picked the eraser also is that I think fundamentally this will be the, if it, if it

01:30:44   exists, the fourth Apple pencil. Yeah. How can you have a thing called pencil and never have an

01:30:50   eraser? It's bananas. Especially when like at first, all right, fine. You put the charging

01:30:56   thing there, but then you didn't do that. You know, and like they said, and also for people

01:31:00   that think if it's got a button on it, I'm going to press it all the time. Trust me. You won't. I

01:31:03   use a Wacom tablet. It has a button exactly where your finger goes. You just don't, you,

01:31:08   you just know how to hold it from a pressure perspective without engaging it. Yeah. Yeah.

01:31:13   The Apple will build in a very particular level of resistance and it's not rocket science. And then,

01:31:18   and then it's a physical button. Yeah. It doesn't want to actually put a little button in there.

01:31:23   Yeah. That is the iPad draft. Maybe we'll score it next week. Maybe it's the week after, maybe it's

01:31:29   four months from now. Right? Like we've done this. This is for whenever these iPads happen.

01:31:35   And I guess basically the way we'll do this is it's whenever they have iPad pros. Should we just

01:31:42   use that as the thing? Yeah. If yeah, yeah, yeah. We're not gonna, what we're not gonna do is

01:31:46   partially score the draft and wait for the iPad air to come out. This is dependent on the iPad pros

01:31:51   being released and we'll score it whenever that happens, which hopefully will be in the next couple

01:31:55   of weeks. I hope so. Again, if you would like to score along, go to upgrade.cards. There will be

01:32:03   a scorecard there from our wonderful friend, Zach Knox, who puts those together for us. No ask

01:32:08   upgrade this week, but if you want to send in your questions for our next episode, go to upgradefeedback.com.

01:32:15   You can check out Jason's work at sixcolors.com. I really recommend going and reading Jason's

01:32:19   article in full. It's in the show notes as well about the Department of Justice stuff,

01:32:23   because there was much more detail there. It's a really, really good article. Genuinely,

01:32:28   like I read it and was like, I don't, I feel like I don't need to read anything else. So thank you

01:32:31   so much for doing that work for me, Jason. You took like an hour off my prep today. Great. You

01:32:37   can also hear Jason's shows here on Relay FM and at the incomparable.com. You can listen to me here

01:32:42   on Relay FM too and check out my work at cortexbrand.com. If you want to find us online, Jason

01:32:47   is at Jsnell, J S N E double L. I am @imike. Yes. I am trying to shorten this. All right. I've

01:32:55   heard your feedback. I'm doing my best. You can watch video clips of the show on TikTok, Instagram

01:33:01   and YouTube. We are @upgraderelay. Thank you to our members who support us of Upgrade Plus. Go

01:33:06   to getupgradeplus.com. You can sign up today. We're going to talk about all of the things that

01:33:10   were on the draft list that we didn't pick. Thank you to our sponsors, Ladder, Vitaly and Squarespace.

01:33:16   But most of all, thank you for listening. We'll be back next week. Until then, say goodbye to Jason

01:33:21   Snell. Order in the court. Goodbye, Mike.

01:33:25   [Music]

01:33:47   [ Silence ]