PodSearch

Upgrade

627: Do Not Use, Do Not Turn Off

 

00:00:00   From Relay, this is Upgrade, episode 627. Today's show is brought to you by Decagon, Squarespace,

00:00:17   and Factor. My name is Mike Hurley and I'm joined by Jason Snow. Hi, Jason.

00:00:21   Hi, Mike Hurley. How are you?

00:00:23   I'm very good. I have a Snow Talk question for you.

00:00:25   Oh, okay.

00:00:26   It comes from Joseph, who wants to know, I've now been to WWDC twice and so have therefore

00:00:32   received two Apple-branded water bottles as a result. Does Jason have a shelf in his house

00:00:37   somewhere with 30 assorted Apple-branded water bottles?

00:00:40   You know, they didn't used to give water bottles out. I do have some Apple water bottles and

00:00:46   I don't have any place to put them because they're so tall.

00:00:51   Yes.

00:00:51   And most of my shelves are not that tall. And I have better water bottles is the other

00:00:57   thing. I have like good water bottles. And these are like, they're like recyclable. They're

00:01:02   like thin aluminum water bottles that feel like they could be single use, but they could

00:01:06   also be multi-use, which is fine. But I have other water bottles that are better. So right

00:01:11   now they're actually over by my, and people watching the video version of the show will

00:01:15   see me gesturing over by my washing machine right next to that, just in a pile with a

00:01:21   bunch of other junk where it's like, I need to put these somewhere and I don't know where

00:01:24   to put them. And I may end up just recycling them, honestly, because I just don't need that

00:01:30   many water. How many water bottles does one person need?

00:01:32   The problem is, well, not the problem. There is a situation that I have been in the two times

00:01:37   that I've been to WWDC, which is being in the podcast studio. So when you go to the podcast

00:01:44   studio, they give you water bottles. They put a water bottle out for you that is full

00:01:47   of water, which is very kind and thoughtful of them to do. But because of the fact that

00:01:51   they're putting them out, they say, please take it because they don't reuse them because

00:01:56   they don't want to contaminate people. So I, in both 23 and 26, left with three water bottles.

00:02:04   I have two from this year.

00:02:07   So this year I have three of the WWDC ones and I have one behind me and I have two sitting

00:02:14   on the table that I have that you know that exists when you come in. They are now my guest

00:02:19   water bottles. So when people come to the studio, they can use those. In 2023, they did not give

00:02:25   away extras of the water bottle that was in the tote bag, like the little gift bag. It

00:02:30   was a different bottle made by a company called Swell. And I have two of those and those are

00:02:36   incredible.

00:02:36   Those are really good.

00:02:38   They're like insulated water bottles where like I've recently where it's been hot, like I'll leave

00:02:43   the house in the morning, one of those in my bag of water and ice in it. And it's like 35 degrees.

00:02:49   It was one day or whatever. And I'm walking down the street with that in my bag. The ice is still

00:02:53   in cubes at the end of the day. So I was very happy with those.

00:02:56   Those are good. Now, now what they give away is these super thin. They might as well be.

00:03:00   They're basically the same thing you'd get at like a sporting event for a beer. It would be in an

00:03:05   aluminum can shaped like a bottle. That's what it is.

00:03:08   Yeah. But those bottles, they didn't in 23, they didn't give away those. In 23, they gave the little

00:03:13   fellow coffee cup thing, which is also amazing.

00:03:16   Also a great. Yeah. No, this is a, I mean, it's fine. They don't need to give us anything.

00:03:21   No, honestly. Merch was a thing. I can say merch. The little gift bags, they were a thing

00:03:26   that started post COVID, right? Especially for the media, at least.

00:03:29   Um, yeah, for the media. I mean, what, what I was going to say is I don't know because the

00:03:35   challenge of my memory of WWDC is for a while there at Macworld, we just bought WWDC badges.

00:03:43   Yeah. They weren't that expensive and you could just buy, we bought a five pack and literally

00:03:47   they sold it as a five pack and then just distributed them to people and take a badge and go for a

00:03:51   day or go for the whole week to the event and they all get gift bags.

00:03:55   Yeah.

00:03:56   Right. Cause they're developers. And then we started getting like, do members of the media

00:04:01   get the same little, little tchotchke bag or not? Um, and I, I think it varied from year

00:04:06   to year, but yeah, since COVID they've had this thing where it's this small event and that everybody

00:04:10   gets a little bag when they get there, which is, I mean, it's nice and all, I mean, it's mostly

00:04:14   just like I said, pins, but we got the, got the, um, little Mac, little Mac guy, little

00:04:20   finder guy, little finder guy. Yeah. Got his, got his pen, which was cute. And a water bottle,

00:04:26   which is, which is practical, right? Because you're there and you need to drink water and

00:04:31   you know, hydration break.

00:04:32   I believe one year or maybe the second year they put sunscreen in the bag, which they did

00:04:37   cause a little, that was the first, the first year back there was sunscreen in the bag, which

00:04:41   is odd that they haven't kept doing exit or, or they put, they put up a, they put up a larger

00:04:46   canopy. So there's almost no sun and the sun exposure you get isn't very much, but they

00:04:50   did. They gave us sunscreen and a hat, which is a good, that was a good idea. I think it's

00:04:55   a black on black apple hat too, which is not ideal for the heat. No, but it's what they

00:04:59   gave us. I think I have that hat. It's a black hat with a black apple on it. Cause I got that

00:05:04   tote bag, even though I spent that WWDC in a hotel room. Yes. Because somebody took pity

00:05:09   on you. Apple sent me a, like a gift basket full of things to make me feel better, including

00:05:15   like, uh, Dayquil and, and it was very, which was very helpful. And a bunch of, did it make

00:05:21   you feel better? It did. Okay. It did. It did make me feel better. Lots of snacks and

00:05:26   medicines. I like to think about that as the, as the WWDC where we got to record an episode

00:05:33   of upgrade at my house outside. That yes. Where? Yes. That was really nice. That part of it

00:05:39   in an out burger. Oh man. That was one of my favorite episodes of upgrade ever because somebody

00:05:43   treated me like a human being. Yeah. Cause understandably everybody was avoiding me like

00:05:49   the literal plague that week. However, you and I were at the opposites of a long ends

00:05:55   of the table. Which I am, I insisted that we, we did that. Cause you were like, Hey, we're

00:05:59   outside and we'll be fine. But I was like, no, I want to sit very far away from you. Cause

00:06:03   I feel too bad. So it was kind of Putin-like. It was amazing. I'm all the way down here.

00:06:07   It was amazing. At the end of this table. But yeah. And the birds are, you know, there's

00:06:10   a lot of time. My neighbor feeds birds. So there's bird chirps in the background. That's

00:06:13   a classic. I hope we'll do that again. Maybe, maybe when I come for. I would

00:06:17   love to do another outdoor episode. We were going to do it. The last time you were here,

00:06:22   we were going to do it, but it was just cold and foggy. And so we didn't do it. We did it

00:06:25   inside instead. And I think they were re-roofing the house next door or something. It was terrible.

00:06:28   Yeah. That was bad noises happening. That was 2023, wasn't it? After the Vision Pro, the episode

00:06:34   after the Vision Pro. Yeah. Yeah. That's it. That's right. Yes. Because your, um, your wife

00:06:39   was, um, had to watch our, our new, our new dog. Yeah. She was amazing. Being basically

00:06:46   licked uncontrollably. Licked her all over. And Jeremy Burge as well. And Jeremy Burge.

00:06:50   Yes. Good times. Yeah. Good times. Anyway. If you would like to send in a Snell Talk question

00:06:55   for us to open a future episode of the show, just go to upgradefeedback.com and send yours

00:07:00   in. We have some follow-up, Jason Snell. The Kickstarter is now done. Thank you so much to everybody

00:07:05   that supported Design in California. We finished at 303030, which is incredible. I don't know

00:07:11   how that happened. Uh, the two of us actually got on stream for the countdown to the end. Uh,

00:07:18   so that's on YouTube. If people want to watch that, we're kind of reflecting on it and talking

00:07:21   about some of our plans in the immediate future for Design in California. So that's available

00:07:26   to you. I'll put a link in the show notes in case people want to, want to go and watch

00:07:29   that. That's it. That's the thing that you can do. A special Glenn guest. Yes. Glenn

00:07:33   Flashman. Glenn, our Kickstarter whisperer. Yeah. For this whole, whole process also joined

00:07:39   us for a little bit too. And so we were kind of like reflecting on, on what the Kickstarter

00:07:43   and how it'd gone and that kind of stuff that's available. So, uh, we'll, we'll talk more about

00:07:48   Design in California again later. Uh, just for now we're heads down. Yeah. A new podcast is

00:07:54   going to come from us this fall. And if you didn't get a chance and you still want to sign

00:07:58   up for a membership, if you go to designed.fm, you can still do it's called the late pledge,

00:08:03   but it's basically just the member price. And at some point when we get stuff up and running

00:08:07   on relay, that'll be where you can get a membership. But also, yes, there will be a regular version,

00:08:11   uh, with ads and stuff that will be available. And we'll tell you when it, when it comes out.

00:08:15   Mm-hmm. Yeah. Uh, an anonymous feedbacker wrote in and said, regarding AI helping, uh,

00:08:22   Apple fix bugs in the new OSs. I can confirm from various friends at Apple that most of their

00:08:28   software engineering team is now heavily leveraging clawed code specifically. I'm a software engineer

00:08:33   too. And the workflow of engineers in San Francisco and Silicon Valley has completely changed in the

00:08:38   last 12 months from AI sometimes being useful to being the expected first step or the primary

00:08:44   tool. I have zero doubt that clawed heavily contributed to the bug fixes and performance

00:08:49   improvements. As mentioned, it excels at those. And I do remember there was a report a while ago,

00:08:56   I think from Mark Gurman saying that Apple was encouraging people to use, uh, clawed in their

00:09:02   work. And this was what was leading us to believe that they may go with Anthropoc for, for, for helping

00:09:09   with their, uh, uh, AI efforts, but they ended up going with Google.

00:09:12   They're using, they're partnering with everybody in different ways, which is kind of funny. I, I did a

00:09:18   story last week, uh, on six colors about, um, security fixes. They released a 26.5.2 update that, um,

00:09:29   it's actually the features, the, the security fixes that were in the 26.6 public beta. But after a month,

00:09:34   they're like, can we just release these? Cause the public beta is not over yet. Um, the beta cycle

00:09:38   is not over yet, but, um, they want the, they want the fixes out. So they released it as a, in a 26.5.2,

00:09:44   um, and talking to them about it, they made it clear that one of the reasons is obviously AI makes

00:09:49   it, you know, a new beta comes out, it's got bug fixes. People can use the AI analysis to figure out

00:09:55   what they're, what bugs they're fixing. And as long as those bugs have not yet been fixed, they can use

00:10:00   them for attacks. Um, they can add them to the, their, their library of, of tools. Um, but the

00:10:06   other part of it that they said to me, and I asked is absolutely Apple is using front, you know, frontier

00:10:13   models to search for security flaws. And I got the distinct impression, you know, they, they make these

00:10:19   announcements of sort of like, here are the credits for all the security researchers who pointed out bugs

00:10:23   that we fixed. Um, but they don't generally talk about the bugs that they fixed that no researcher

00:10:30   can like, and, and that's the impression I get is they're using AI tools, um, very much to find

00:10:36   security issues. So it's not surprising they're using for bugs. And yeah, I think that as this anonymous

00:10:40   person points out, this is just a thing that's happening now in software professionally is you would

00:10:46   be, uh, a friend, a friend of mine said to me, every time a new model comes out, what you need to do

00:10:52   is pointed at your code and say, look for bugs. Yeah. Just, and then just keep doing it.

00:10:59   I mean, I'm kind of at the feeling of like, why not? Like, why would you not do that? You know?

00:11:03   I mean, Marco Arment did a beta of Overcast and he said, look, I had four bugs that have been

00:11:09   intermittent that I couldn't figure out what they were in my code base. And I pointed the AI at them

00:11:12   and it found them. Yeah. And I fixed them. That fixed the bug that I've been dealing with

00:11:17   overcast since the redesign. Yeah. Little subtle, little subtle bugs that the

00:11:22   developer can't figure out. And then it gets pointed out to him by the AI and he goes,

00:11:26   Oh, oh, right. Like, but it's a different, you know, it's a different logic engine looking at

00:11:33   your code and that's, yeah, that's just how it's done now. Alan wrote in and said,

00:11:38   an important factor in new iPhones and price increases, a carrier deals and contracts,

00:11:43   $200 price increase spread over the 36 month cycle is just $5.55 a month. The iPhone Pro on Apple's

00:11:52   homepage is currently advertised at $45.79 a month. So that it would just be $51.34. Apple may begin to

00:12:00   lean more into the monthly pricing rather than the base. There was also that weird $30 deal during the

00:12:06   iPhone 12 launch where it made the appear as $7.99 instead of the actual $8.29 price. Maybe a similar

00:12:14   thing like that or things like this could happen again. I think it's a fair point that iPhone pricing

00:12:21   is complicated by carrier relationships and carrier marketing. And while a lot of us think of iPhone

00:12:28   price as what does it cost to just go to apple.com on the day and pay for an unlocked phone or pay for a

00:12:35   phone that's attached to your carrier for a discount, but it's like, you don't have a

00:12:39   commitment. And, um, but so many phones are sold and they talk about this in the, in the analyst

00:12:46   calls every quarter. So many of the phones are sold, sold through partners on installment plans.

00:12:52   And then Apple also has its own. Honestly, like it's kind of ridiculous to do what I do,

00:12:57   which is to buy the phone outright because I'm paying every month with my carrier anyway. Like,

00:13:02   yeah, but I just like to, to know I can get my phone when I want and not have to jump through

00:13:07   the hoops. It's important for my job, but it makes some, if you're on the plan, which you're going to

00:13:12   be on anyway, be on that plan for a 36 months, 48 months, 12 months, whatever, and pay it monthly,

00:13:18   you know, it spreads it out. And yeah. I know people who are on the annual plan and you get the new phone

00:13:24   every year and you get the new phone every year, you pay monthly. And at the end of the,

00:13:30   you hand it back and you get the new phone again and that's it. Like there are, and your carrier will

00:13:35   give you a free, whatever I keep seeing, you know, during the world cup, there are all these T-Mobile

00:13:39   ads that are basically like, we will give you a free iPhone 17 pro if you switch to T-Mobile and we'll,

00:13:45   yeah, it like, yeah. So I, and in regarding the changes now, like I'm sure that the price profile

00:13:53   of the iPhone is going to change, but one of the reasons they may not have changed it now is because

00:13:57   it's not as easy for Apple to change iPhone prices because it's not a traditional channel. That's the part

00:14:05   right now that I think is probably relevant is it's not a traditional channel because you have carrier

00:14:10   partners and the carrier partners, the carriers have a deal for what they're paying for, for that phone.

00:14:16   And then they're obviously reselling it to their customers essentially. And like, there's got to be

00:14:21   a whole other layer of complexity and different carriers and different markets. And so it's probably,

00:14:26   again, I'm just guessing here, but it may be that Apple looked at it and said, no, the way we need to

00:14:32   do this is set new prices for the new phones in the fall with all our carrier partners. And then those

00:14:36   will be the new prices. Because if you think like, you know, even, even all of the posters,

00:14:41   all of the materials that every carrier around the world would need to change where they would

00:14:46   naturally have new ones in September. So if you can hold it off, hold it off.

00:14:50   Do you go back to T-Mobile and say, okay, we're going to charge you $50 more for every iPhone. And

00:14:55   they're like, well, we're not going to, we have a contract and we have this thing where we're giving

00:14:58   them away for free and we're not going to pay you an extra $50. And like, it's a whole thing. So

00:15:02   I think Alan makes a good point here that this is probably one of the reasons why the iPhone is

00:15:08   a more complex thing. But that's also why I would anticipate in the fall, that's when you do it,

00:15:12   because you've got a new price that you set. And every year they are setting a price with all their

00:15:16   partners of like, this is what the price is. And this is what you pay and whatever those,

00:15:21   all those deals are, are then based on that price that Apple cuts with them.

00:15:26   Yeah. And they may be able to find some way of dressing the price up so that it doesn't seem to be

00:15:33   so catastrophic, let's say. We'll see. So, uh, Jason activated a selection of punsters

00:15:42   on the last episode when I said punsters assemble when they did, he mentioned the location of the

00:15:49   install base, uh, which is in regard to us talking more about maybe software in the future than

00:15:56   hardware because all this pricing stuff. Uh, so Sonny said install base. Is that next to Dongletown?

00:16:02   Is that where boot camp is? They probably train to the east in of the blue screen of death valley.

00:16:09   And on the weekend pass, they visit jailbreak ridge, which overlooks sandbox beach or go rock climbing at

00:16:17   the notch. No. Okay. Some of them too far for you. And then you lost me. Okay. That's a pun run too

00:16:22   far. And Connor says, I believe you're thinking of software by the sea, a small village north of Dongletown is

00:16:28   where the web surfers purchased their softwares. Softwares. Yeah. I just want to stay for the

00:16:34   record. Sonny and Connor got in. The door is closed on this. Yeah. Like you can send your puns to me and

00:16:41   I will read them. I'm not going to keep reading them on the show. All right. Just no, we have no

00:16:47   thunderbolt thunderbolt dock. Very important. Um, and then, you know, we're going to leave the rest to your

00:16:55   imagination until our next t-shirt sale. Exactly. Yeah. We might ask for them when we need to make merch.

00:17:00   Until then, keep it to yourself. Uh, Apple has announced that its next quarterly earnings report

00:17:08   will be on July 30th. Uh, this is notable because it's going to be Cook's last public commitment for

00:17:14   Apple, most likely. I can't imagine there'll be something else between now and September. You never

00:17:18   know. Um, but this, this is set to be the last thing. Uh, there will surely be a lot of conversation

00:17:24   about pricing strategies on this call would be my expectation. Um, I'm sure lots of analysts will

00:17:29   have lots of discussions. You can look forward to that conversation at the beginning of August on the

00:17:34   show. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We'll do it. We'll do it. That may be a, uh, we do to travel that maybe

00:17:40   me and a special guest talking about playing the money jingle and all that episode. So Jason,

00:17:45   we'll bring in a special guest. I know how much you like it, but I'll bring it up. I do really like it.

00:17:50   And I, and I, I had lots of consideration as to how to change it, but I just can't, we're going to be

00:17:56   out on the East coast and we need to leave for the airport before we would finish recording. So

00:18:01   there's just no way of doing it. Yeah. This episode is brought to you by Decagon. If your

00:18:08   team is dealing with more support tickets, more channels and higher expectations from your customers,

00:18:13   you've probably thought about using AI for customer support. And you've probably seen how limited or

00:18:18   time consuming most options are. And that's where Decagon comes in. Decagon helps companies create

00:18:24   personalized concierge style customer experiences with AI agents across chat, email, voice, and SMS.

00:18:31   They're available 24 seven feel natural to talk to and can resolve customer requests on their own.

00:18:36   So businesses can keep up with requests without losing a personal touch. Decagon plugs directly

00:18:43   into your existing systems. So agents can get live quickly. And because workflows can be updated using

00:18:48   natural language teams can make changes themselves without long engineering cycles. That means less

00:18:54   time spent managing workflows, more time focused on customers and return on investment in weeks.

00:19:00   Once live agents, once live agents can pull up today information, take actions and requests and

00:19:06   understand the context behind any conversation. Plus Decagon gives your team full visibility into why

00:19:12   agents make decisions and what's happening across every conversation. So it's easier to spot trends and

00:19:17   improve the experience over time. Decagon helps power millions of conversations for everyday brands,

00:19:23   you know, you know, and love like Avis, Affirm, Fanatics, and Ura. Are you ready to transform your customer

00:19:28   support? Go to Decagon.ai/upgrade to get a personalized demo and see what Decagon can do for your team.

00:19:35   Check out Decagon at Decagon at D-E-C-A-G-O-N dot A-I slash upgrade. That is Decagon dot A-I slash upgrade. Our thanks to Decagon for their support of this show and relay.

00:19:48   So it is the summer of fun. And for the summer of fun today, summer of fun, double follow up.

00:19:56   We got more. I got more follow up for you. Whoa, what? Bloomberg has confirmed that Apple is indeed trying to buy RAM from China, but they're saying that Apple is actually in talks of two companies that are on the Pentagon blacklist. Bloomberg say it's expected that this RAM, if they're able to, if they do secure it, would be used for devices sold in China, allowing Apple to allocate their other RAM inventory to devices that are on the Pentagon Blacklist.

00:20:01   Bloomberg has confirmed that Apple is indeed trying to buy RAM from China, but they're saying that Apple is actually in talks of two companies that are on the Pentagon Blacklist. Bloomberg say it's expected that this RAM, if they're able to, if they do secure it, would be used for devices sold in China, allowing Apple to allocate their other RAM inventory to devices that are on the Pentagon Blacklist.

00:20:15   Again, Apple are within their legal rights to do this. Like they can just do this if they want to. Nothing is stopping them. Because especially if it's for Chinese devices. However, without the blessing of the government, the US government, they will,

00:20:45   face significant political backlash. Like it won't go well for them if they do it, even though they can do it. They're not importing the RAM or anything like that, but things would get messy for them. However, I was reading this report. I think that if even if the president's like, go for it, I don't think it's they're not. I think they're still going to get a lot of significant backlash politically. Like just if Trump says it's OK, it's not going to make the rest of everybody else happy about this.

00:21:15   So, you know, it kind of feels like damned if you do, damned if you don't. Like I don't, you know, it's like, OK, if the Pentagon's like, yeah, don't worry about it, you can do this. It's not like every senator and every congressperson is going to be like, we agree, you know?

00:21:33   It has been a fraught thing because it's perceived as being like Chinese Communist Party and People's Liberation Army related. And it becomes a source of like national security arguments.

00:21:48   And are they subsidized and unfairly competing arguments? And really, there's a lot of it that's just this is an easy way to beat up on China kind of arguments from various politicians from both parties in the US.

00:22:04   Then again, what I've been saying all along is if this is a deal, you know, the president of the United States enjoys making a deal.

00:22:13   If this is a deal that he likes, where it's like Apple's going to make some firm commitments to, for example, have chips made in the US at Intel in exchange for something like this.

00:22:26   If that deal comes to be, he'll just do it, right? Like he'll just say, it's fine. I say it's fine. And I'm not sure anybody's going to stop anybody from doing that.

00:22:36   I guess the fear is that there is a chance that Apple would make a deal with these companies and then Congress would basically step in and say, no, these are barred now.

00:22:47   Or some other organization would say these are barred completely and Apple seeking a guarantee that they wouldn't be barred.

00:22:53   I look at this and think in a moment like this, where it's so extreme in terms of RAM availability, using some Chinese suppliers to make some RAM for the Chinese market and allowing Apple to then use the existing RAM supply elsewhere.

00:23:06   I don't know. I mean, it seems, seems okay to me in the, with these very limited issues, but the argument would be, yeah, but you're giving money to the, to, to these Chinese RAM companies.

00:23:19   And that's what they want you to do, right? Like they're, you're propping them up and giving them an infusion of cash.

00:23:26   And that's the last thing that we want for these unfair, you know, communist party and people, the liberation army tied organizations.

00:23:35   So there's politics, it's all politics, right? This is, but you, you, hashtag Mike was right.

00:23:41   This is what's going on here is Apple would really, really like access to some more RAM and it's right there.

00:23:48   Is there a deal to be struck? And that's, you know, in another era, I would say this seems like it's not going to happen just because of the political opposition.

00:23:55   But I don't feel like I can say that. I think that if the guy in charge says, this is a deal I want to make, then everybody's going to say, yes, sir.

00:24:03   Yep.

00:24:03   John Prosser has finally filed a response in the lawsuit Apple brought against him.

00:24:09   So Jay Peters at The Verge has written a good breakdown of Prosser's response, but I want to go through some key points.

00:24:15   So this is a quote from Peters.

00:24:18   Prosser denied that he planned or participated in any conspiracy or coordinated scheme for the purpose of injuring Apple.

00:24:26   Prosser admitted to recording a FaceTime call showing unreleased iOS software.

00:24:32   He says he did not pay Ramakiotis, his co-defendant, up front, but agreed to share revenue from the YouTube videos he made as a result of the information being shared of him.

00:24:43   Now, I'm not a lawyer, Jason.

00:24:45   But that feels like six of one, half dozen of the other to me.

00:24:50   I mean, there are some legal reasons why you would make this argument.

00:24:55   Right.

00:24:56   Because Prosser is not, Prosser is protected by the First Amendment, first and foremost, from reporting, you know, he's allowed to report about information that comes his way.

00:25:12   The question is about, um, did he induce this to happen?

00:25:17   Did he offer money to pay for this guy to, um, surreptitiously access his friend's development iPhone?

00:25:29   Um, that's where it gets messy, and so I can see why they're making the argument they're making here.

00:25:34   It is absolutely throwing the other guy under the bus.

00:25:39   Yes.

00:25:39   But at the same time, the other guy, you could argue, by cooperating, is throwing Jon Prosser under the bus.

00:25:46   And we know, so like, I want to be skeptical about this, but we know that Apple really wants to punish Jon Prosser.

00:25:54   Right.

00:25:55   Ultimately, Ramisadi doesn't matter.

00:25:59   Right.

00:26:00   Like, I mean, maybe they'll prosecute him.

00:26:01   I mean, if he's, if he really bribed an Apple employee to share secret information, that's not good.

00:26:07   But like, what makes this an interesting story and what makes, I think, Apple more inclined to deal with Ramisadi is that there's Jon Prosser and they want to put the hurt to Jon Prosser.

00:26:21   So, of course, so, so I think, you know, where's the truth here is, is a little bit of a mystery.

00:26:27   I'm not sure.

00:26:28   I understand Prosser's defense here.

00:26:30   I'm not sure it makes sense to me that this other guy would be like, oh yeah, I was talking to Jon Prosser and he said, you know, he could get me money if I would do this.

00:26:41   And Jon Prosser's like, oh, I never said anything like that.

00:26:44   I just said, oh, tell me more or whatever.

00:26:45   It's like, did that?

00:26:47   I try to play back those conversations and I'm not sure, but it's possible.

00:26:51   And the argument that Prosser's attorney will probably make is that Ramisadi assumed that there would be a benefit, but that Prosser only implied that he wanted the material and did not offer money for breaking the law.

00:27:08   But like at some point, like they say, he like Prosser admits that he agreed he would share YouTube revenue.

00:27:16   When naturally would that come up?

00:27:18   You know what?

00:27:19   That would come up after?

00:27:20   Like, no.

00:27:21   Afterward.

00:27:21   You would bring that up before you receive the information.

00:27:24   This is what I'm saying is when I try to emulate this conversation in my head, I have a hard time believing Prosser's series of events, but I understand why he's making those claims.

00:27:35   And I just want to be aware that Apple wants to put the hurt to Prosser and Ramisadi cooperating, presumably for less strict punishment benefits everybody who's trying to put the hurt on Prosser.

00:27:54   So Prosser claims that Ramisadi is completely responsible for the disclosure of trade secrets.

00:28:00   Prosser said he was unaware of how Ramisadi got the information and that he, quote, disconnected communication with him once he learned how it was acquired.

00:28:11   Yeah, I mean, yeah, again, he's like, look, I didn't know.

00:28:14   I just, I just am here with a big bucket catching rumors as they fly into it.

00:28:21   That's all.

00:28:22   I'm just catching them.

00:28:23   Yeah.

00:28:23   They come.

00:28:24   I don't know where they come from.

00:28:25   It's not my business, which on one level is defensible.

00:28:29   That's the whole idea is you're not inducing people to break their confidentiality agreements or steal their friends' phones.

00:28:36   The information you get, and you can, I mean, I hear from people about this a lot where it's like, you shouldn't do that.

00:28:44   That's secret.

00:28:45   It's like, okay.

00:28:45   But legally, legally, if somebody gives you the stuff, you can report on it.

00:28:51   In the United States, it's First Amendment, where you get into trouble is with inducing the breaking of contracts and laws.

00:29:01   That's where it becomes, you're now a participant in the crime, essentially, instead of just publishing information given to you is not a crime.

00:29:12   Inducing somebody to go steal some stuff and give it to you is a crime.

00:29:16   Yeah.

00:29:16   Not the publishing of the information, the inducing of the crime.

00:29:19   So that's what this hinges on here, really.

00:29:23   We're going to see how it goes.

00:29:25   I'm intrigued.

00:29:28   Let's see where it goes.

00:29:30   Apple Creator Studio, the Apple Creator Studio apps, got a selection of enhancements and new features.

00:29:36   I think the top lines are Pixelmator Pro is now more tightly integrated into other apps.

00:29:42   So if you're editing Final Cut, you can grab a frame, edit that frame, bring it back in.

00:29:47   There are better tools to create thumbnails and stuff like that in Pixelmator Pro.

00:29:51   There are more AI-powered tools in Final Cut, like generating captions automatically and auto-masking.

00:29:57   Yeah.

00:29:57   I've heard good things about the masking.

00:29:59   People were saying cool things about the masking.

00:30:03   And yeah, everything got a Pixelmator Pro, like open in Pixelmator Pro, get from Pixelmator.

00:30:09   They put in all of those connections.

00:30:12   I made a joke on social media about how, what about all the great updates to keynote pages and numbers that are a very important part of this suite.

00:30:21   And I got a very polite email from somebody at Apple saying, just for the record, there are things that are updated in those two.

00:30:27   I was like, my mistake.

00:30:28   Keynote pages and numbers are also adding some highly requested features.

00:30:32   Keynote gains stunning new transition and builds.

00:30:35   Pages on iPhone and iPad adds auto-hyphenate and show invisibles.

00:30:39   Numbers makes navigating complex spreadsheets faster than ever with the ability to hide or color-code individual sheets.

00:30:47   Yep, yep.

00:30:48   And then there are some features that are tied to the Creator Studio in terms of like Pixelmator Pro connectivity and stuff like that.

00:30:54   But they did add features.

00:30:56   And this is just, you know, this is their challenge is they have to communicate now what features everybody gets and what features are only in the studio bundle for keynote pages and numbers.

00:31:06   And I just want to say again that it's incredibly stupid that those things are in that bundle.

00:31:12   And as a user of a bunch of these apps, I continue to be eternally frustrated because I keep getting told I need to update to a new version of an app and I just haven't done it yet.

00:31:23   And it's like, it's a nightmare across all the devices that I use.

00:31:27   I hate the way they did this.

00:31:29   I think they completely bungled the launch.

00:31:31   It's adding too much overhead into my decision making when I just want to use numbers.

00:31:37   Like, I find it really frustrating the way that they did this.

00:31:40   And now it's too late.

00:31:42   Even if they come up with a solution, it's just too late now.

00:31:44   They bungled it, in my opinion.

00:31:46   And I understand why.

00:31:47   Like, I've seen this decision making, right?

00:31:50   That, like, the team, you know, like, the creators, whoever would be responsible for Apple for being the creator studio team.

00:31:58   They really wanted to do this, but they could not get the engineering resources to launch it in a different way.

00:32:04   So they just had to kind of bolt it on to the existing app store infrastructure.

00:32:08   And it just ended up being a mess.

00:32:11   Yeah, it's, I know why, you and I know why they did it.

00:32:16   We can understand completely why they did it and why they had to do it the way they did it.

00:32:21   I would just say they shouldn't have done it.

00:32:25   Yeah.

00:32:26   I just, in the end, I don't think it's worth it to include productivity apps in your creative bundle if it has to be under these terms.

00:32:35   If there was a separate, like, bonus bundle for keynote pages and numbers that was optional, I'd be okay with it.

00:32:42   If it didn't mess up the existing apps, I'd be okay with it.

00:32:47   Because it seems like keynote pages and numbers are the ones that have been most impacted by this.

00:32:53   Like, when I open Final Cut or Logic, I'm not getting these pop-ups telling me to go get the new app or whatever.

00:32:59   Because you can buy them, right?

00:33:02   Like, so they're not trying to necessarily incentivize you to go get the subscriber version.

00:33:06   Exactly.

00:33:06   And, yeah, it's just like, I know at some point I'm going to have to do this.

00:33:10   If not, I need to do it now.

00:33:12   Yeah.

00:33:12   Because it's going to be features.

00:33:13   No, you should.

00:33:14   You know, it's like, I will get around to it.

00:33:16   But it's like, I think I did it on one Mac, but not the other.

00:33:18   And it's like, I'm just trying to live my life.

00:33:20   You know, like, I have a spreadsheet to fill out.

00:33:23   Leave me alone.

00:33:24   But that's just the way it goes.

00:33:26   Every Mac has turned 30.

00:33:31   Jason, what is EveryMac?

00:33:32   It's a website that has specs of every Mac ever released.

00:33:38   Along with iPods and iPhones and all this kind of stuff, too.

00:33:41   I mean, you got to move with the times.

00:33:43   You know, 30 years ago, it was just EveryMac.

00:33:45   This website hasn't, which I do kind of love about it, if I'm being honest.

00:33:49   I mean, you build a site and then you just go with it.

00:33:52   It says established 1996.

00:33:53   So, yeah, it looks like a site that was established in 1996.

00:34:00   I always like these things because when I was at Mac user, we had a product called the Mac Catalog.

00:34:07   And it was a guy named Mark Simmons who compiled it.

00:34:12   And it was a FileMaker database of all the Apple specs.

00:34:15   And then the way it was distributed was he saved out a version of it.

00:34:19   You could do this back in the day.

00:34:20   You basically could save it out as a standalone app.

00:34:23   So, you didn't need FileMaker to run it.

00:34:25   FileMaker let you save out, like, a database as an app.

00:34:28   Or FileMaker Developer Edition did or something.

00:34:30   I don't know.

00:34:31   The license has changed over time.

00:34:33   FileMaker has gone through so many different lives.

00:34:36   So, I was going through my catalogable magazines.

00:34:41   And it says, you know, go to our CompuServe.

00:34:43   And then later it was you can download this from our website.

00:34:45   And it's this app that has the complete Mac Catalog.

00:34:48   And then Mark would update it.

00:34:50   I come into the story because I thought, because I was in charge of Mac users' website.

00:34:55   We should get this on the website.

00:34:57   And I did.

00:34:59   But I did it through what, in hindsight, is the most ridiculous.

00:35:02   It was the way to do it at the time.

00:35:04   But it was the most ridiculous way possible.

00:35:06   Because this is the early days of the web.

00:35:08   So, there was an app that bridged a web server with FileMaker.

00:35:19   I think, and I got to go back, because this also evolved over time.

00:35:22   Ultimately, FileMaker became its own web server.

00:35:24   Ultimately, there was a whole standalone product called Lasso that did this.

00:35:29   Ultimately, there was also a product that would rip out, like, modern static generation pages.

00:35:35   Are you thinking of Bento?

00:35:36   No.

00:35:37   Okay.

00:35:38   Because FileMaker made that, right?

00:35:40   Yeah.

00:35:41   Well, that was just an organizer.

00:35:42   Okay.

00:35:42   No, there was an app called Lasso that did this.

00:35:46   FileMaker did their own web server.

00:35:48   And ultimately, yeah, there was also an app that I can't remember the name of that did a static generation thing, basically, where you could point it at a FileMaker database.

00:35:58   And it would generate a website full of pages based on your rules.

00:36:02   And I used that a lot.

00:36:04   My fiction magazine from the 90s Intertext, that was how that site got generated was it got generated out of FileMaker.

00:36:10   Because that was the way, back in those days, that was the easiest way.

00:36:14   You weren't running live databases on the internet or anything like that.

00:36:17   Except that when Mac user launched the Mac catalog on the web, that's exactly what it was.

00:36:22   It was a web server running on a Mac, running classic Mac OS in the Mac user lab.

00:36:28   And every time somebody clicked on, like, sort this or give me a detailed view of that particular Mac, it would make a request to that Mac web server, which would make a request to FileMaker to go to that record in the database.

00:36:43   And it would get the data out of it, and then it would put it in a web page and return it.

00:36:48   Every single request.

00:36:50   There was no caching.

00:36:51   It was a single, single-threaded Mac running classic Mac OS, running Mac OS 8.

00:36:56   Yeah, baby.

00:36:57   And it worked because the web wasn't that big back then, and there weren't that many people on it using this thing.

00:37:04   This is funny because I just got to the part of Jobs in Exile when they talk about Tim Berners-Lee using the NextCube to set up the CERN data.

00:37:11   And it's like a similar thing where they said he wrote in, like, red ink on the side of the NextCube, do not turn this off.

00:37:18   Oh, yeah.

00:37:18   Our server at the journalism school at UC Berkeley was a Mac, actually, in the PC lab in the corner, and it had a big sign on the screen that said, do not use, do not turn off.

00:37:33   And so, yeah, that was, it was just, I was essentially, it was my experiment in what would it be like to have a more dynamic database-driven website, which today seems like so obvious.

00:37:45   But that's like Web 2.0.

00:37:48   This was not Web 2.0.

00:37:49   This was Web 1.0.

00:37:50   Yes.

00:37:51   And it was a really fun experiment.

00:37:53   It would have created enormous technical debt problems down the road.

00:37:57   But the good news is they shut down Mac user, and I went to work at Mac World, and all that stuff got shut down.

00:38:02   And so I didn't have to deal with it anymore.

00:38:04   We just shut it all down.

00:38:04   But anyway, so I have fondness for a thing like every Mac, because that is absolutely a project that I worked on.

00:38:12   At almost the same time that every Mac started, I was working on that at Mac users.

00:38:15   So that was pretty, pretty great.

00:38:16   But yeah, folks, don't, don't run.

00:38:19   Look, I wrote a whole book with Carl Stedman about running web servers and other services on classic Mac OS.

00:38:26   And I think about it now, and I'm like, don't do that.

00:38:28   Don't do that.

00:38:30   But there was a, there was the style at the time.

00:38:32   Run a web server on Mac OS 8.

00:38:33   Like, why would you, but you, we did it.

00:38:36   We did it, and we liked it.

00:38:38   I also, while we're talking about FileMaker, I want to have a little FileMaker tangent to just say that last week.

00:38:45   So I'm on a Discord of people who played on Jeopardy.

00:38:49   Oh, look at you.

00:38:52   Yeah.

00:38:53   And it's fun.

00:38:54   There's a lot of, it's high, very high volume.

00:38:57   But I'm doing Learned League now, which is like an online trivia league.

00:39:01   And there's a bunch of fun conversation among trivia people in there about that.

00:39:05   I've really been enjoying that.

00:39:06   And then there's comments about like the day's Jeopardy games and all of that.

00:39:09   And somebody posted the other day that they're hiring a writer at Jeopardy full time.

00:39:14   We'll put a link in the show notes if you'd like to write Jeopardy, but you better hurry because you have to write essentially two complete game boards plus three final Jeopardy questions.

00:39:22   And you have to get them all into Sony and it all has to be submitted by like the end of the week.

00:39:31   It's like really fast, really fast.

00:39:33   July 10th.

00:39:36   So you've got very little time if you want to become a writer at Jeopardy and move to Culver City, California.

00:39:41   But you can, if you want, I'm not going to, I've got, I got to, I just got a new job.

00:39:44   Yeah.

00:39:45   Designed in California.

00:39:47   So I can't do it.

00:39:48   But here's the part about it that I wanted to mention here.

00:39:51   I'm scrolling through the list.

00:39:53   I'm like, cause I almost did it.

00:39:55   I almost applied for the job just for fun.

00:39:57   Cause I think it would be fun to assemble Jeopardy boards and just to see.

00:40:01   And then maybe they'd be like, well, Jason, you know, you, you, you're not going to move to LA, but maybe we'll use you as a freelancer or something like that.

00:40:06   I thought about it, but I'm not going to do it.

00:40:08   Cause I got too much going on.

00:40:09   I got a rate design in California episodes.

00:40:10   I got to do a public beta preview.

00:40:12   Like there's all this stuff going on, but I'm scrolling and I get to preferred qualifications for this job.

00:40:19   And there are two.

00:40:20   One is membership in the writer's guild of America, which I do not have.

00:40:24   So that's be a TV writer and in the union preferred.

00:40:28   Great.

00:40:29   It's a union shop.

00:40:30   If you got the job, you'd need to join the union.

00:40:32   The second bullet point is familiarity with FileMaker Pro.

00:40:37   And I was like, dang, I can nail that part.

00:40:43   I'd be like, whoa, what you really want to hire is me because I used to be a Jeopardy player and I like trivia.

00:40:50   And most importantly, I have developed so many FileMaker databases over the years.

00:40:55   Oh my God.

00:40:56   My other reaction was, you know, every so often I ask myself when I, when Apple mentions that Clarus is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple and they're still in business and they're still doing FileMaker Pro.

00:41:07   I think to myself, who's still using FileMaker Pro?

00:41:10   And now I have an answer, which is apparently the Jeopardy database is in FileMaker.

00:41:15   I expect there's lots of stuff like this still floating around because they've used it 20 years ago and they continue.

00:41:21   That's the answer.

00:41:22   That's, that's why, why is FileMaker still around?

00:41:24   I think in large part, like so many of these products, um, they have a, they have a installed base with, uh, deeply integrated to their systems.

00:41:34   This is like, it's like a version of the, why is there still COBOL code running on a server somewhere from the sixties?

00:41:39   The answer is there's a thing that is deeply integrated into a production workflow somewhere and to remove it would be an enormous amount of work and it still works.

00:41:51   So why would you change it?

00:41:53   And there's a business to be made supporting those people.

00:41:57   And it turns out there's a business to be made supporting the producers and writers of Jeopardy who use FileMaker for some aspect.

00:42:04   I assume the questions and answers and all of that on, uh, on their show using FileMaker.

00:42:10   So shout out, if there's any, any Jeopardy writers out there, uh, I, I swear I'm not going to apply for that job.

00:42:15   So you can talk to me and tell me about this, but, uh, anyway, FileMaker at Jeopardy made me laugh.

00:42:20   So I really fell into a FileMaker shaped hole last week and it was fun.

00:42:24   I, I had to do command shift D to define my fields.

00:42:27   I had to do command one to look at the scripting interface.

00:42:30   And then I did command Q and got out of there.

00:42:33   Is there any possibility that there will be an episode about FileMaker and design in California one day?

00:42:39   Maybe if we've run out of stuff to talk about?

00:42:41   No, there, Mike, put it on the list.

00:42:44   There is 100% a series about Claris.

00:42:49   Okay.

00:42:49   Claris.

00:42:50   Yep.

00:42:51   Which includes FileMaker.

00:42:52   Claris works too, right?

00:42:53   I know that was maybe a bigger deal.

00:42:55   Yeah.

00:42:56   Claris emailer.

00:42:57   I just added it.

00:42:59   It's underneath Sherlocking now in our long list of things.

00:43:02   Great.

00:43:02   Great.

00:43:05   This episode is brought to you by our friends over at Squarespace.

00:43:08   They are the all-in-one website platform that is designed to help you stand out and succeed online.

00:43:14   Whether you're just getting started or scaling a business, Squarespace will give you everything that you need to claim your domain, showcase your offerings through a professional website, grow your brand, and get paid all in one place.

00:43:25   So, I love that Squarespace grows and it has so many different functions that it's added over time.

00:43:31   So, no matter what type of website you have, you can build things with it, right?

00:43:35   And you can keep, sorry, what type of business you have, you can build the right website for it.

00:43:39   So, like, you know, I have and have had various projects over the years.

00:43:43   Like, right now, I have kind of like an about page that's on Squarespace.

00:43:46   But you can also have, like, full businesses that use it.

00:43:50   You can offer your services and get paid with Squarespace from consultations to events and experiences.

00:43:54   So, you can showcase your offerings of a customizable website that is designed to attract clients and grow your business.

00:44:00   Think about built-in appointment scheduling, email marketing tools, and more.

00:44:04   You can keep everything cohesive with on-brand invoices and get paid easily with online payments.

00:44:09   So, it's not just about selling physical or digital goods.

00:44:12   You can also sell your services.

00:44:14   You can also upload video content and have a video library.

00:44:17   You can showcase these all on beautiful video pages.

00:44:19   But then you can sell access to that video library of the paywall to your content,

00:44:23   which is perfect for online courses, exclusive tutorials, and premium workshops.

00:44:28   Go to squarespace.com slash upgrade and you can sign up for a free trial today.

00:44:32   And when you're ready to launch, use the code UPGRADE to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain.

00:44:38   That is squarespace.com slash UPGRADE and the offer code UPGRADE.

00:44:42   That will get you 10% off your first purchase and show your support for the show.

00:44:46   Thanks to Squarespace for their support of this show and all of Relay.

00:44:50   Rumor round up time, Jason Snell?

00:44:53   Yeah, let's do it.

00:44:55   9to5Mac is reporting via Digitimes saying that there will be a, quote,

00:45:00   major redesign coming this year for the Apple Watch Ultra 4 with, quote,

00:45:04   significant upgrades to sensing functions.

00:45:07   And Mac Rumors is reporting, according to Leaker Instant Digital,

00:45:12   that the Apple Watch X rumor is back,

00:45:15   saying that a big redesign is coming for it into 2027 for the series line of watches.

00:45:21   That would be, you know, kind of, that would be what series for the 12, 13?

00:45:26   13?

00:45:27   Yeah, because the last one was 11, 12 is this year, that would be 13.

00:45:31   Yeah.

00:45:31   Instant Digital implied that it could change the way that bands connect to the Apple Watch,

00:45:38   which would mean compatibility of existing watch bands will finally end.

00:45:43   Mark Gomer's original reporting for this big redesign,

00:45:46   which was that he was expecting would have came at the 10-year anniversary,

00:45:50   but it didn't come,

00:45:51   would be for a magnetic band attachment, thinner case, and a micro-LED screen.

00:45:57   Mac Rumors points out that historically,

00:46:00   Apple has revised the design of the Apple Watch kind of around every three years,

00:46:04   so next year would be the time for a change of some kind

00:46:07   if they're going to finally pull the trigger on this bigger design.

00:46:11   By the way, I got an email from somebody who wanted to pedantically point out

00:46:15   that current watch bands have magnets in them.

00:46:18   I don't think they do.

00:46:19   I got that email too, and I think that person's wrong.

00:46:25   I don't believe the Apple Watch band has a magnet in it.

00:46:28   I don't, I mean, I don't care,

00:46:30   because what it does is it slides in and there's like a little tooth,

00:46:33   and it kind of clicks, and then you have to push it back out again,

00:46:36   so it's primarily a physical attachment to the watch,

00:46:41   and what this report is suggesting is that it would be primarily a magnetic attachment to the watch.

00:46:46   That's the difference.

00:46:47   The challenge there is that if you don't have any physical guiding principle there,

00:46:51   you risk having your watch pop off under force, which is not great.

00:46:57   Yeah, I wonder how they're going to do it.

00:46:58   I've always been dubious of magnetic, but the Nintendo Switch 2 has,

00:47:03   the Joy-Cons magnetically attach, and those things do not come off.

00:47:07   So, you know, there is a way to do it,

00:47:11   but then, you know, like Nintendo has this big, like, physical switch that you kind of pull,

00:47:16   and it provides enough grip that it will come off.

00:47:21   I'm intrigued of how that's going to work, and if it's going to be better.

00:47:25   I want to hear, I mean, I heard you talk about this on Connected last week.

00:47:29   The idea is, what's the reason they give here?

00:47:34   And honestly, it could be as simple as, we have a new design,

00:47:38   and so, you know, we weren't going to be constrained.

00:47:42   We've designed 12 of these with the exact same, 13 of these with the exact same connector,

00:47:48   and we're not going to do it anymore because we wanted to be unconstrained

00:47:53   so we could create an entirely new design.

00:47:55   That's enough, but I do wonder.

00:47:58   There have been lots of rumors about, forever, about the idea,

00:48:04   could you put some intelligence in the band?

00:48:10   And if they, that would be a real reason to do this, right?

00:48:13   To have a new band format that allowed them to potentially put sensors in the band.

00:48:20   Not necessarily even, I know we always talk about, like, the, like, blood sugar or whatever,

00:48:25   but, like, if they can make, for example,

00:48:28   what if they can take some sensors out of the watch,

00:48:32   or change sensors in the watch,

00:48:34   because they'll be supplemented by sensors on the opposite side of the wrist?

00:48:39   I'm sure they've experimented with this,

00:48:41   and maybe they've just decided it's totally not worth it,

00:48:44   but the current format, you can't do it,

00:48:47   because it's just not, it's not made for that.

00:48:52   So, could there be a new format?

00:48:53   There's no way to transmit data, right?

00:48:57   It just doesn't exist.

00:48:58   No, or power.

00:48:58   I mean, you could create, like, a powered band,

00:49:01   but then you're, like, charging your band,

00:49:02   and it's just not going to make any sense.

00:49:04   But they could, so that would be an interesting thing they could do,

00:49:07   but they could also just simply say,

00:49:09   you know what?

00:49:10   It's time to do something new.

00:49:13   And we've built so many of these based on,

00:49:16   I mean, if you think about it,

00:49:18   that original Apple Watch,

00:49:19   which was announced in 2014,

00:49:22   a band from that fits in a current series of watch.

00:49:28   So, that's a long time to be designing slightly different versions of the watch,

00:49:33   and it constrains their design.

00:49:35   It undoubtedly does.

00:49:37   So, if they want to, they could break compatibility.

00:49:39   And when these rumors were out there a few years ago,

00:49:42   I was a little more bummed out about breaking compatibility,

00:49:44   but as the years go on, I am less and less concerned about it,

00:49:48   because it's like, it's been a good run, everybody.

00:49:52   Right?

00:49:53   Yes.

00:49:53   It's been a good run.

00:49:55   And if we get a significant redesign for the Apple Watch,

00:49:58   I will happily let go of my bands,

00:50:00   because I, you know, I want it to look different,

00:50:03   like, in a meaningful way.

00:50:05   And, like, because I just, I'm very tired of the overall look now.

00:50:11   I'm really intrigued about the Apple Watch Ultra 4.

00:50:16   Like, what, is that going to be a precursor to this?

00:50:20   Or, like, what are they going to do with that, right?

00:50:23   That's coming this year, expectedly.

00:50:25   And what is a significant upgrade to sensing function?

00:50:30   Like, what does that mean?

00:50:31   Yeah, what, is it better sensors?

00:50:34   Is it different sensors?

00:50:35   It's a big watch, so packing them in there,

00:50:38   it sort of makes sense for that.

00:50:40   It's funny, because I wasn't sure that I would be upgrading

00:50:44   my Apple Watch this year,

00:50:45   because I'm expecting to buy two iPhones.

00:50:47   But maybe they'll get me, you know?

00:50:50   Maybe they'll get me.

00:50:51   That's, this is, look, Apple didn't become a company

00:50:55   that's worth a gazillion dollars

00:50:56   by making products you don't want to buy.

00:50:59   Exactly.

00:51:00   I mean, there was a period,

00:51:01   but they learned their lesson.

00:51:03   Last week, Indian-based supplier Tata Electronics

00:51:07   suffered a large data breach

00:51:09   that with it has exposed imagery and details

00:51:12   of the upcoming iPhone 18 Pro.

00:51:14   These images have been spreading across the dark web, Jason,

00:51:18   with some leaking out more broadly.

00:51:20   One of the, there's a video that's got circulated,

00:51:23   a bunch of a drop test

00:51:24   of a silver version of the 18 Pro.

00:51:27   Among these leaks, though,

00:51:28   are details on suppliers, parts,

00:51:30   and specifications of the upcoming iPhones,

00:51:33   which Apple is really not happy about.

00:51:36   I think they seem to,

00:51:37   I would think that they care a lot more

00:51:40   about the parts information

00:51:41   and the supplier information than the images,

00:51:43   because, like, it just looks like the iPhone 17 Pro.

00:51:47   Yeah, not great, but I was surprised,

00:51:50   like, in reading this, like,

00:51:51   oh, this doesn't happen.

00:51:52   Like, I'm surprised this doesn't happen more.

00:51:54   They've got so many companies they're working with.

00:51:56   Well, it, I assume that what this is,

00:52:00   is since this is a different company

00:52:02   in a different country,

00:52:04   that this is going to get a bunch of people yelled at

00:52:07   about why they, why this happened there

00:52:10   and it doesn't happen in their other factories.

00:52:13   And somebody will get in trouble

00:52:15   and their policies will change

00:52:17   and they'll tighten up their privacy

00:52:18   because they know that Apple is mad.

00:52:20   And, yeah, I, that's what I,

00:52:24   we accept some amount of leakage,

00:52:26   but you're right,

00:52:26   there's certain kinds of things that leak out

00:52:28   and certain kinds of things that don't,

00:52:30   and this is unusual in that way,

00:52:32   so we'll just have to see how they deal with it.

00:52:34   But that was my thought,

00:52:36   is that somebody's,

00:52:37   somebody's going to get yelled at,

00:52:39   there's going to be an investigation,

00:52:40   somebody's going to get fired,

00:52:41   that's what's going to happen.

00:52:42   Mark Gurman is reporting

00:52:45   on Apple's spring 2027 hardware lineup

00:52:48   that includes new iPad Pros

00:52:50   and a new MacBook Pro.

00:52:51   The iPad Pro update

00:52:53   will mostly focus on the internals,

00:52:55   there will be faster processors,

00:52:57   presumably the M6,

00:52:58   and the vapor chamber cooling

00:53:01   will be coming to the iPad,

00:53:02   I think, for the first time.

00:53:03   So that's cool.

00:53:04   I think that's,

00:53:06   my iPhone did not get hot

00:53:08   until I put the beta on it.

00:53:09   When I put the beta on it,

00:53:10   it got hot.

00:53:10   It's the first time my iPhone got really hot.

00:53:13   So that vapor chamber cooling

00:53:15   in the 17 Pro is the real deal.

00:53:18   Like, they did a good job there.

00:53:19   The MacBook Pro

00:53:21   that we're talking about here

00:53:23   in spring 2027

00:53:24   will have a revamped design.

00:53:26   It'll be the entry-level model,

00:53:28   so the 14-inch

00:53:29   is what we're talking about here.

00:53:30   Well, it's the 14-inch base model, right?

00:53:32   Yeah, sorry.

00:53:33   We're talking about the M5 MacBook Pro.

00:53:36   So this will be an M6

00:53:39   or maybe an M7,

00:53:40   depending on timing,

00:53:41   but it's that base model

00:53:42   that doesn't have the Pro

00:53:43   or Max chip in it.

00:53:44   Yeah.

00:53:44   This design,

00:53:46   it will be more in line

00:53:47   with whatever the touchscreen model

00:53:48   of the MacBook Pro looks like

00:53:50   whenever that may happen.

00:53:51   It was some months before

00:53:53   it will be introduced.

00:53:54   I think in his reporting,

00:53:56   Mark is being opaque

00:53:58   about what processor will be

00:54:00   in this redesigned base model.

00:54:02   So in the report,

00:54:04   he mentions,

00:54:04   quote,

00:54:05   that Apple had already finished work

00:54:07   months ago

00:54:08   on a refreshed entry-level MacBook Pro,

00:54:11   which has been planned for this year

00:54:12   with the current design

00:54:13   and a new base M6 chip.

00:54:16   Then he talks about Apple,

00:54:18   quote,

00:54:18   aiming to debut its first M7 processor

00:54:20   as early as the first half

00:54:22   of the next year as well.

00:54:23   It's targeting a fast transition

00:54:25   from the coming M6 generation.

00:54:27   So,

00:54:28   assumedly,

00:54:29   this means there will be

00:54:30   an M6 this year

00:54:31   and then an M7

00:54:32   maybe six months later.

00:54:33   And that is what would be

00:54:35   in this MacBook Pro redesign.

00:54:36   but I don't think

00:54:37   his reporting is clear

00:54:38   and I think that is a function

00:54:40   of the fact that maybe

00:54:41   Apple doesn't know,

00:54:44   I think,

00:54:44   what they're going to do.

00:54:46   Or at least the people,

00:54:47   it's unsettled enough

00:54:48   that the people

00:54:49   that Mark Gurman

00:54:50   is talking to don't know

00:54:51   or they don't know

00:54:51   if what they've heard

00:54:52   is the latest.

00:54:53   Yeah.

00:54:53   My guess would be

00:54:54   that it would be an M6

00:54:55   and then

00:54:57   they could put an M7 in it

00:55:00   but they don't necessarily

00:55:01   have to put it in it

00:55:02   like right away

00:55:03   because they will have

00:55:04   just turned that one over.

00:55:05   Yeah.

00:55:05   So,

00:55:06   but,

00:55:07   you know,

00:55:08   I don't know

00:55:08   what the timing is.

00:55:09   Maybe the MacBook Pro

00:55:10   just doesn't get the base M6.

00:55:12   It just goes to M7

00:55:13   and maybe there's M6 Pro

00:55:15   and Max chips

00:55:15   that go into the bigger ones.

00:55:17   I don't know.

00:55:18   No,

00:55:19   no M6 Pro Max chips.

00:55:20   They don't exist.

00:55:20   Well,

00:55:20   then they just jump in completely.

00:55:21   I forgot about that part.

00:55:22   Yes.

00:55:23   Oh,

00:55:24   it's the,

00:55:24   I'm thinking of the M5 Ultra

00:55:26   is still assumedly coming,

00:55:28   right?

00:55:29   There was in the,

00:55:30   that would be,

00:55:30   that would be for the Mac Studio.

00:55:32   But I,

00:55:32   I just,

00:55:33   I knew there was a hangover chip

00:55:34   of some description

00:55:35   and that is the one.

00:55:37   Yeah,

00:55:37   it's very

00:55:38   The hangover chip.

00:55:39   Confusing right now.

00:55:40   It's a much less popular movie.

00:55:41   Maybe,

00:55:42   maybe the base M6

00:55:43   just goes in the iPads

00:55:44   and they just move on.

00:55:46   Fascinatingly weird.

00:55:48   you know,

00:55:49   maybe,

00:55:49   or maybe it's,

00:55:50   they put it in the,

00:55:51   in MacBook Air

00:55:52   and I don't know.

00:55:55   I mean,

00:55:55   I think you could do it.

00:55:56   I think there's no reason not to

00:55:58   unless the,

00:56:00   the M6 and M7

00:56:01   are coming so,

00:56:01   so close together that

00:56:03   my,

00:56:04   my feeling is that probably

00:56:05   some of these products

00:56:06   have already been designed,

00:56:07   right?

00:56:07   Like the M6 iPad Pro

00:56:09   and the M6 low end,

00:56:11   MacBook Pro

00:56:12   and maybe the M6

00:56:13   MacBook Air

00:56:15   have already been designed.

00:56:16   Well,

00:56:16   he says that.

00:56:16   And that may be the reason

00:56:17   they haven't killed the M6

00:56:19   entirely.

00:56:19   Because they could,

00:56:20   right?

00:56:21   There's like a scenario here

00:56:22   where you just kill the M6

00:56:23   and the thing that you used

00:56:25   to call M7

00:56:26   is now the M6.

00:56:27   And they're not doing that.

00:56:29   That's what I'm wondering.

00:56:30   Yeah.

00:56:31   I guess,

00:56:32   I guess they're not doing that.

00:56:33   But it's,

00:56:34   they're not,

00:56:35   it's not clear.

00:56:37   I mean,

00:56:38   obviously,

00:56:39   because we don't know,

00:56:39   but,

00:56:40   and I can,

00:56:40   like this,

00:56:41   this MacBook Pro

00:56:42   with an M6 chip.

00:56:43   Kind of,

00:56:44   what's the point

00:56:45   of doing this?

00:56:47   If you're going to bring out

00:56:47   the M7 one

00:56:48   within like six months?

00:56:49   Like,

00:56:50   I don't,

00:56:50   why do that?

00:56:51   It's a good question.

00:56:53   I mean,

00:56:53   I,

00:56:54   my,

00:56:54   my answer would be

00:56:55   they already designed

00:56:56   the M6 versions here

00:56:57   and it's good enough

00:56:59   and it takes the pressure

00:57:00   off of whenever

00:57:01   they have to ship

00:57:02   the base M7

00:57:02   and maybe they've got

00:57:05   a contract with TSMC

00:57:06   for these chips

00:57:07   on their line

00:57:08   and they need to produce them.

00:57:09   Yeah.

00:57:10   Obviously,

00:57:11   we don't know the reason,

00:57:12   but they could have swept

00:57:15   the whole generation

00:57:16   under the rug

00:57:17   if they wanted to

00:57:18   and they didn't,

00:57:18   so they've got a reason.

00:57:19   Yeah.

00:57:20   We'll see.

00:57:22   Mac Rumors is reporting

00:57:24   that developer and designer

00:57:25   Sam Henry Gold

00:57:26   discovered some code

00:57:27   in iOS 27

00:57:28   that could be referring

00:57:30   to the AirPods of a camera.

00:57:31   Quote,

00:57:32   the code mentions

00:57:32   a product code named

00:57:33   B790

00:57:34   that can relay

00:57:36   two images

00:57:37   from cameras

00:57:38   on either side

00:57:39   of a user's head.

00:57:39   Of course,

00:57:40   this could also be

00:57:41   for smart glasses

00:57:42   but feels more likely

00:57:43   to be AirPods

00:57:44   based on the timeline

00:57:45   we expect this product.

00:57:46   Mac Rumors

00:57:48   also reported,

00:57:49   though,

00:57:49   that a leak

00:57:50   of Kotsumi

00:57:51   says that this product,

00:57:52   the AirPods of a camera,

00:57:53   has now been suspended

00:57:55   but no more information

00:57:56   on that.

00:57:57   Yeah,

00:57:58   I think

00:57:58   Mark Gurman

00:57:59   also reported

00:58:01   that this product

00:58:02   was originally targeted

00:58:03   for the end of this year

00:58:04   and now it's being talked about

00:58:05   for next year,

00:58:06   end of next year.

00:58:07   they pushed it back

00:58:07   a whole year.

00:58:08   I'm starting to wonder

00:58:09   if AI wearables

00:58:12   of cameras

00:58:12   have a future

00:58:14   in general.

00:58:15   I think

00:58:15   there's a stigma

00:58:18   forming again,

00:58:20   right?

00:58:20   I think we got away

00:58:22   from it,

00:58:22   people were excited

00:58:23   about the metal ray-bans

00:58:24   and now everyone's

00:58:25   upset about the metal ray-bans.

00:58:27   so this is why

00:58:29   I think it's interesting

00:58:30   that the AirPods

00:58:31   with a camera thing

00:58:32   has recently resolved

00:58:34   to be like,

00:58:35   well,

00:58:35   these are not

00:58:36   cameras for taking pictures.

00:58:38   They're cameras

00:58:40   to feed information

00:58:41   into AI

00:58:42   for data purposes

00:58:44   and I do wonder

00:58:46   if that is

00:58:47   foreshadowing

00:58:48   a future method

00:58:49   of selling

00:58:50   these devices

00:58:51   as like,

00:58:52   no,

00:58:52   no,

00:58:53   those aren't cameras.

00:58:54   You can't take pictures

00:58:55   with them.

00:58:55   They're just censors.

00:58:57   I just don't know

00:58:58   if that's a thing

00:58:59   you can get people

00:59:00   to understand.

00:59:00   I don't know.

00:59:01   I mean,

00:59:02   Apple could try.

00:59:03   Apple could say,

00:59:04   we're different.

00:59:04   We're not letting people

00:59:06   peep with these things.

00:59:07   They're just feeding

00:59:08   data.

00:59:08   These aren't cameras.

00:59:09   These are just cameras

00:59:10   for AI.

00:59:11   It's like maybe worse.

00:59:12   Mike,

00:59:13   these aren't cameras.

00:59:14   These are sensors.

00:59:15   Yeah.

00:59:16   But if they look like,

00:59:18   you know.

00:59:19   Look,

00:59:19   I mean,

00:59:20   marketing is all about

00:59:21   selling people on things

00:59:22   that they don't want.

00:59:22   So we'll see.

00:59:24   But you may be right.

00:59:25   I mean,

00:59:25   I think right now

00:59:27   the big issue is,

00:59:28   first off,

00:59:29   we all have cameras

00:59:29   in our pocket.

00:59:30   I know.

00:59:31   So you could take those.

00:59:32   You could take those out.

00:59:33   Well,

00:59:33   no,

00:59:33   but the counter argument

00:59:34   would be,

00:59:34   I've got a camera

00:59:35   in my pocket.

00:59:36   I can take it out

00:59:36   if I need to.

00:59:37   Do I need something

00:59:38   that's always hanging around

00:59:39   on my face

00:59:40   or in my ears?

00:59:40   Or is that good enough?

00:59:42   As an owner of them,

00:59:43   there is an incredible

00:59:45   technology to be able

00:59:46   to take pictures

00:59:46   in moments like that.

00:59:47   However,

00:59:48   I now don't feel

00:59:49   comfortable wearing

00:59:50   my Meta Ray-Bans

00:59:51   anymore,

00:59:51   like,

00:59:52   because the tide

00:59:54   has changed on it,

00:59:55   which is very upsetting

00:59:56   for me because they're

00:59:57   very expensive,

00:59:57   but like,

00:59:58   I've just kind of

00:59:59   let them go now.

00:59:59   Yeah.

01:00:00   Yeah,

01:00:01   so I think that's

01:00:02   the question is

01:00:04   if you're Apple

01:00:06   or anybody else,

01:00:07   you've got to kind of

01:00:08   like see where it goes,

01:00:10   right?

01:00:10   You don't want to be

01:00:11   left behind if it turns

01:00:13   out that it's okay.

01:00:13   And again,

01:00:15   I wouldn't put it past

01:00:16   Apple to try to kind of

01:00:18   say,

01:00:18   tell a privacy story,

01:00:20   right?

01:00:21   And like,

01:00:21   we're not using these

01:00:22   for those reasons.

01:00:22   But I think the bottom

01:00:24   line is

01:00:25   the way you get people

01:00:28   to wear those

01:00:29   is by providing

01:00:30   real benefit

01:00:32   from having them,

01:00:34   like serious benefit

01:00:35   from having them.

01:00:36   And what I've seen

01:00:37   so far

01:00:39   of like visual intelligence

01:00:41   and Apple sort of

01:00:42   navigation stuff

01:00:43   and all of that

01:00:44   when you're in,

01:00:46   you know,

01:00:47   GPS

01:00:47   shadows

01:00:49   in a tall city,

01:00:50   big city with tall buildings.

01:00:52   Like,

01:00:53   I just don't know

01:00:54   if it's there.

01:00:54   That's like,

01:00:56   okay,

01:00:56   sell me on why

01:00:58   I need to wear those glasses

01:00:59   or sell me on why

01:00:59   on why

01:01:00   I need to

01:01:01   have those AirPods

01:01:02   that have the cameras

01:01:03   in them.

01:01:04   What's my big benefit?

01:01:05   And again,

01:01:06   if the best you can gin up,

01:01:08   if the best that the wizards

01:01:09   of Silicon Valley

01:01:10   can gin up

01:01:10   is

01:01:11   I'm going to ask

01:01:14   this dog

01:01:16   what kind of dog

01:01:17   it is

01:01:17   when their owner

01:01:18   is standing right there.

01:01:19   If that's the best

01:01:21   they can do,

01:01:22   that ain't it.

01:01:23   It's not going to happen.

01:01:23   Or take a picture

01:01:24   of this band poster

01:01:25   and add it to your calendar.

01:01:26   I'm like,

01:01:26   no.

01:01:27   Yeah.

01:01:28   Well,

01:01:29   at that point,

01:01:29   yeah.

01:01:29   And again,

01:01:30   again,

01:01:31   if you really want to do that,

01:01:33   take out your phone.

01:01:33   Like,

01:01:34   why am I buying a whole thing

01:01:35   and charging it

01:01:36   and all of that?

01:01:37   What is the ongoing benefit

01:01:38   of feeding?

01:01:39   And like,

01:01:40   it may be

01:01:41   that they have an answer

01:01:42   which is like,

01:01:42   we're going to log

01:01:43   who you talk to

01:01:44   and make notes

01:01:45   so you can go back later

01:01:47   and say,

01:01:47   when did I talk to that person

01:01:48   in the real world

01:01:49   like it was a note

01:01:50   or a message

01:01:51   on your phone

01:01:51   but do it in a way

01:01:53   that Apple says

01:01:53   is private and secure

01:01:54   and contextual

01:01:55   and consensual

01:01:57   and all of these things,

01:01:58   right?

01:01:58   They could try that

01:01:59   but like,

01:02:00   that's what it's going to take.

01:02:01   It's going to take something

01:02:02   like a major benefit

01:02:04   for society

01:02:05   to accept this.

01:02:06   Just saying,

01:02:06   oh,

01:02:07   you can just look wherever

01:02:08   and snap a picture

01:02:08   is not,

01:02:10   I think,

01:02:10   enough.

01:02:11   Jason,

01:02:12   it's time to lawyer up.

01:02:14   Clunk, clunk.

01:02:15   We haven't had a chance

01:02:17   to get back to this.

01:02:18   I promise we'll get back to it

01:02:19   and we're not going to talk about it

01:02:20   in enough detail today

01:02:21   but Apple and the EU,

01:02:23   they've been exchanging

01:02:24   a war of words

01:02:25   with Siri AI

01:02:26   and the DMA.

01:02:27   I'm going to put a link

01:02:29   in the show notes

01:02:30   to a really good post

01:02:32   that Michael Tsai

01:02:34   has been adding to

01:02:37   over time,

01:02:37   kind of like

01:02:38   as this story

01:02:39   has been unfolding

01:02:40   so I'll put that in

01:02:41   to the notes

01:02:42   but essentially,

01:02:43   Apple is saying

01:02:45   that they want to work

01:02:47   with the EU

01:02:47   and are willing

01:02:48   to create

01:02:49   a new technology

01:02:50   to allow

01:02:51   for secure

01:02:51   interoperability

01:02:52   with AI agents,

01:02:53   right?

01:02:53   It's like,

01:02:54   the technology

01:02:55   is called

01:02:56   Trusted System Agent

01:02:59   is the technology

01:03:00   they proposed

01:03:01   but Apple said

01:03:02   they don't want

01:03:02   to put the work

01:03:03   into it

01:03:04   until they're told

01:03:05   it will be approved

01:03:06   by the EU.

01:03:06   The EU is saying

01:03:08   they cannot approve it

01:03:09   until they see it working

01:03:10   and they will not

01:03:12   just allow Apple

01:03:13   to bring Siri AI

01:03:14   to the region

01:03:15   in the meantime

01:03:15   which is what

01:03:16   Apple want to do.

01:03:17   Apple want to launch

01:03:17   Siri AI,

01:03:18   spend a year and a half

01:03:19   to make this technology

01:03:20   and then ship it.

01:03:21   I'll get to this

01:03:22   in more in a second.

01:03:23   The Financial Times

01:03:25   is now reporting

01:03:26   that Tim Cook

01:03:27   had a, quote,

01:03:27   constructive meeting

01:03:29   with Hena Verkinen

01:03:31   who is the

01:03:32   Executive Vice President

01:03:33   of the European Commission

01:03:34   for Technological Sovereignty,

01:03:36   Security and Democracy.

01:03:37   Big business card

01:03:39   for Hena,

01:03:40   I feel like.

01:03:40   There's a big...

01:03:41   A4.

01:03:42   Yeah,

01:03:42   you're really going for it.

01:03:43   According to the FT,

01:03:44   quote,

01:03:45   the meeting included

01:03:46   a discussion

01:03:46   of how Apple

01:03:47   can launch

01:03:48   its reinvented Siri

01:03:49   in Europe

01:03:50   while avoiding

01:03:51   millions of dollars

01:03:51   in fines

01:03:52   for violating

01:03:53   the bloc's

01:03:53   flagship competition rules

01:03:55   according to

01:03:56   two people

01:03:56   familiar with the talks.

01:03:57   Who knows

01:03:59   where this leads

01:03:59   but Cook

01:04:00   is settling nicely

01:04:01   into his diplomacy role

01:04:03   for Apple.

01:04:05   Someone at the European Commission

01:04:06   told the FT

01:04:07   that the trusted system

01:04:08   agent technology

01:04:09   that Apple proposed

01:04:10   was not presented

01:04:11   to them in a way

01:04:12   that they considered

01:04:13   to be any more

01:04:14   than just a concept

01:04:14   and they believed

01:04:16   that Apple wanted

01:04:17   to get a green light

01:04:18   on this to allow them

01:04:19   to kind of delay

01:04:20   getting full compliance

01:04:22   and that they would

01:04:23   then have kind of

01:04:24   like nearly two years

01:04:25   of competitive advantage

01:04:26   of its users

01:04:27   essentially rendering

01:04:28   the competition useless

01:04:30   by the time

01:04:30   they ship the feature

01:04:31   which is

01:04:32   in reflection

01:04:34   kind of like

01:04:34   alternative app marketplaces

01:04:36   right

01:04:36   they're essentially

01:04:38   useless

01:04:39   because

01:04:40   people just use

01:04:41   the app store

01:04:42   and I think

01:04:42   Europe want to

01:04:43   kind of avoid that

01:04:44   but who knows

01:04:45   where this is going

01:04:46   but it's interesting

01:04:47   that there's been

01:04:48   a war of words

01:04:49   I would say

01:04:50   between Apple

01:04:51   and the European Union

01:04:52   over the last month

01:04:54   and at least

01:04:56   there is some

01:04:57   constructive conversation

01:04:58   going on

01:04:58   between the two

01:04:59   entities currently

01:05:00   and it seems

01:05:03   that the UK

01:05:04   will be the next

01:05:06   in pushing Apple

01:05:07   to offer alternative

01:05:08   payment methods

01:05:09   the CMA

01:05:11   the Competition Markets

01:05:12   Authority

01:05:13   has now said

01:05:13   that this is something

01:05:14   that they want

01:05:15   we'll see what comes

01:05:16   of this

01:05:16   it doesn't appear

01:05:17   that they're asking

01:05:18   for alternative

01:05:19   app marketplaces

01:05:20   just the like

01:05:21   give people

01:05:22   different ways

01:05:22   to pay

01:05:23   nevertheless

01:05:24   though

01:05:24   from my perspective

01:05:25   pointless

01:05:26   because

01:05:27   Apple will continue

01:05:28   to levy

01:05:29   the convoluted fees

01:05:30   that they have

01:05:31   in every other

01:05:31   market

01:05:32   that they're forced

01:05:33   to do this

01:05:33   so it kind of

01:05:34   amounts to nothing

01:05:35   other than maybe

01:05:36   some massive companies

01:05:37   saving 0.6%

01:05:39   right

01:05:40   like

01:05:40   it doesn't really

01:05:41   seem to do

01:05:42   anything for competition

01:05:43   because of

01:05:44   no one

01:05:45   no one's got

01:05:46   the guts

01:05:47   to make them

01:05:49   do something more

01:05:51   the only person

01:05:52   who has had the guts

01:05:53   I think so far

01:05:54   is Judge

01:05:54   Yvonne Gonzalez

01:05:55   Rogers

01:05:56   but that's

01:05:57   that's all

01:05:58   kind of like

01:05:59   filtering back

01:05:59   through the Supreme

01:06:00   Court

01:06:00   we'll talk about

01:06:01   that

01:06:01   the Supreme

01:06:01   Court

01:06:02   now

01:06:02   yeah

01:06:02   exactly

01:06:03   that was a

01:06:04   that was a thing

01:06:05   that actually

01:06:06   happened last

01:06:06   last Tuesday

01:06:07   so we didn't

01:06:08   talk about it

01:06:08   but the Supreme

01:06:09   Court took

01:06:10   the case

01:06:11   in Apple

01:06:12   versus Epic

01:06:12   and what they

01:06:14   what they wanted

01:06:15   only

01:06:15   and they were

01:06:16   very specific

01:06:17   the only

01:06:18   thing

01:06:19   that they're

01:06:19   going to judge

01:06:20   because Apple

01:06:21   wants to be like

01:06:22   this whole court

01:06:22   is out of order

01:06:23   throw it all out

01:06:24   you're out of order

01:06:25   the Supreme

01:06:26   Court was like

01:06:27   we will judge

01:06:28   this one thing

01:06:30   which is

01:06:31   can Judge

01:06:32   Gonzalez Rogers

01:06:33   hold Apple

01:06:34   in contempt

01:06:35   remember that

01:06:36   that was what

01:06:36   she did

01:06:37   is she said

01:06:37   look

01:06:37   you have been

01:06:38   in contempt

01:06:39   and now I'm

01:06:39   going to set

01:06:40   the rules

01:06:40   and she

01:06:42   ruled them

01:06:43   in contempt

01:06:44   because she

01:06:45   felt like

01:06:46   their

01:06:47   response

01:06:48   to her

01:06:48   order

01:06:49   was

01:06:51   not

01:06:52   reflecting

01:06:52   the spirit

01:06:54   of her

01:06:54   order

01:06:54   but instead

01:06:56   got very

01:06:57   technical

01:06:57   in a way

01:06:58   that minimized

01:06:59   what they

01:06:59   had to do

01:07:00   and Apple's

01:07:02   argument that

01:07:02   the Supreme

01:07:03   Court said

01:07:03   they were

01:07:03   willing to

01:07:04   hear

01:07:04   was

01:07:05   essentially

01:07:05   what do

01:07:07   you mean

01:07:07   the spirit

01:07:07   of the

01:07:07   law

01:07:08   the letter

01:07:10   of the law

01:07:10   is the letter

01:07:11   of the law

01:07:11   if you didn't

01:07:12   want us to

01:07:12   do it

01:07:12   tell us

01:07:13   but we

01:07:13   can't

01:07:14   like

01:07:14   you may

01:07:15   disagree

01:07:16   with what

01:07:16   we did

01:07:17   but to

01:07:17   hold us

01:07:17   in contempt

01:07:18   when

01:07:19   everything

01:07:20   we did

01:07:20   was to

01:07:21   the letter

01:07:21   of your

01:07:22   order

01:07:22   is

01:07:23   not

01:07:24   right

01:07:25   which is

01:07:26   just

01:07:27   weaselly

01:07:27   enough

01:07:27   that it

01:07:28   might

01:07:28   work

01:07:28   we'll

01:07:29   see

01:07:29   but that's

01:07:30   the only

01:07:30   thing that

01:07:30   the Supreme

01:07:31   Court is

01:07:31   judging

01:07:31   in that

01:07:32   case

01:07:32   they're

01:07:32   not

01:07:32   Apple

01:07:33   again

01:07:33   wants

01:07:33   them

01:07:34   to be

01:07:34   like

01:07:34   throw

01:07:34   everything

01:07:35   out

01:07:35   we're

01:07:35   fine

01:07:36   and

01:07:36   the Supreme

01:07:37   Court

01:07:37   even

01:07:37   you know

01:07:38   even

01:07:38   the Supreme

01:07:38   Court

01:07:38   was like

01:07:39   no no no

01:07:39   but we

01:07:40   are intrigued

01:07:40   by this

01:07:41   issue

01:07:41   of

01:07:42   can she

01:07:44   you know

01:07:45   is Apple's

01:07:46   obvious contempt

01:07:47   for the ruling

01:07:47   not contempt

01:07:49   of court

01:07:50   if they're

01:07:51   still

01:07:51   pedantically

01:07:52   following the

01:07:53   letter of the

01:07:53   law even

01:07:54   though they

01:07:54   know what

01:07:55   she's asking

01:07:55   for and

01:07:56   they refuse

01:07:57   to give

01:07:57   it to

01:07:57   her

01:07:57   I don't

01:07:59   know if

01:07:59   this will

01:07:59   go the

01:08:00   way Apple

01:08:00   hopes

01:08:00   but it's

01:08:01   interesting

01:08:01   and so

01:08:03   that means

01:08:03   we're going

01:08:03   to get a

01:08:04   Supreme

01:08:04   Court

01:08:04   argument

01:08:05   from

01:08:05   Apple's

01:08:06   lawyers

01:08:06   which is

01:08:07   also

01:08:07   interesting

01:08:08   so that's

01:08:09   all to

01:08:09   come

01:08:10   in the

01:08:11   next

01:08:11   court

01:08:11   term

01:08:11   I don't

01:08:11   know why

01:08:12   this is

01:08:12   it feels

01:08:13   weird to

01:08:13   me but

01:08:13   it does

01:08:13   about

01:08:14   lawyers

01:08:15   arguing

01:08:15   about

01:08:16   how

01:08:17   lawyers

01:08:19   interpret

01:08:20   like how

01:08:21   judges

01:08:22   arguing

01:08:23   about how

01:08:23   judges

01:08:24   interpret

01:08:24   law

01:08:25   there's

01:08:26   just like

01:08:26   something

01:08:27   very

01:08:28   like

01:08:28   yeah

01:08:30   circular

01:08:31   about

01:08:31   this

01:08:32   that's

01:08:32   that's

01:08:32   the

01:08:33   a lot

01:08:34   of the

01:08:34   Supreme

01:08:34   Court

01:08:34   stuff

01:08:35   is

01:08:35   that

01:08:35   though

01:08:35   it's

01:08:35   like

01:08:36   was

01:08:36   this

01:08:36   judge

01:08:37   right

01:08:38   to

01:08:38   judge

01:08:38   it

01:08:38   this

01:08:38   way

01:08:38   we

01:08:39   will

01:08:39   judge

01:08:39   if

01:08:39   the

01:08:40   judge

01:08:40   was

01:08:40   right

01:08:40   and our

01:08:41   judgment

01:08:41   is the

01:08:42   judgment

01:08:42   of all

01:08:43   yeah

01:08:44   and then

01:08:44   what they'll

01:08:45   do

01:08:45   I mean

01:08:46   if I had

01:08:46   to throw out

01:08:46   just a quick

01:08:47   prediction

01:08:47   is they'll

01:08:48   say that

01:08:48   Apple

01:08:48   has some

01:08:49   merit

01:08:49   and the

01:08:49   Supreme

01:08:50   Court

01:08:50   will

01:08:50   remand

01:08:50   this

01:08:51   back

01:08:51   to

01:08:51   Judge

01:08:51   Gonzales

01:08:52   Rogers

01:08:52   with

01:08:53   an

01:08:53   instruction

01:08:54   and the

01:08:54   instruction

01:08:54   will probably

01:08:55   be like

01:08:56   why don't

01:08:56   you tell

01:08:57   Apple

01:08:57   you know

01:08:58   we're going

01:08:58   to say

01:08:58   that Apple

01:08:59   isn't in

01:08:59   contempt

01:09:00   and why

01:09:01   don't you

01:09:01   give them

01:09:01   a new

01:09:02   order

01:09:02   and then

01:09:03   and be

01:09:04   basically

01:09:04   be more

01:09:05   specific

01:09:05   and what

01:09:07   that I

01:09:07   think would

01:09:08   do is

01:09:08   it would

01:09:09   mean that

01:09:11   her

01:09:11   order of

01:09:12   Apple

01:09:12   having to

01:09:13   take much

01:09:14   less

01:09:14   percentage

01:09:15   would be

01:09:16   set aside

01:09:17   and she

01:09:18   would have

01:09:18   to give

01:09:19   them a new

01:09:19   chance

01:09:20   to make

01:09:20   a new

01:09:21   way to

01:09:24   follow her

01:09:24   orders

01:09:24   perhaps

01:09:25   based on

01:09:26   a new

01:09:26   set of

01:09:26   orders

01:09:26   from her

01:09:27   that's

01:09:29   my guess

01:09:29   is it's

01:09:30   kind of

01:09:30   going to

01:09:30   be a

01:09:30   big

01:09:31   nothing

01:09:31   and it's

01:09:32   just

01:09:32   going to

01:09:32   extend

01:09:32   this

01:09:33   and

01:09:33   run out

01:09:33   the

01:09:33   clock

01:09:34   even

01:09:34   further

01:09:51   willpower

01:09:51   problem

01:09:52   it's a

01:09:52   setup

01:09:52   problem

01:09:53   which is

01:09:53   exactly

01:09:54   what

01:09:54   Factor

01:09:54   is here

01:09:55   to help

01:09:55   with

01:09:55   with

01:09:56   Factor

01:09:56   you can

01:09:57   hit

01:09:57   your

01:09:57   nutrition

01:09:57   goals

01:09:58   this

01:09:58   season

01:09:58   without

01:09:58   the

01:09:59   planning

01:09:59   grocery

01:09:59   runs

01:10:00   or

01:10:00   cooking

01:10:00   Factor

01:10:01   has

01:10:02   meals

01:10:02   built

01:10:02   around

01:10:02   your

01:10:03   goals

01:10:03   whether

01:10:03   that's

01:10:04   weight

01:10:04   loss

01:10:04   overall

01:10:05   nutrition

01:10:05   more

01:10:06   protein

01:10:06   or

01:10:06   GLP-1

01:10:07   support

01:10:07   and for

01:10:08   strength

01:10:08   and workout

01:10:09   recovery

01:10:09   check out

01:10:10   Factor's

01:10:11   muscle

01:10:11   pro

01:10:11   collection

01:10:12   Factor

01:10:13   meals are

01:10:13   fresh

01:10:14   and never

01:10:14   frozen

01:10:14   there are

01:10:15   over 100

01:10:16   rotating

01:10:16   weekly

01:10:17   meals

01:10:17   including

01:10:17   globally

01:10:18   inspired

01:10:18   flavors

01:10:19   like

01:10:19   Mediterranean

01:10:20   and Asian

01:10:20   so there's

01:10:21   always

01:10:21   something new

01:10:22   to look

01:10:22   forward to

01:10:23   all of

01:10:24   their meals

01:10:24   are ready

01:10:24   in just

01:10:25   two minutes

01:10:26   Factor

01:10:26   shops

01:10:27   preps

01:10:27   cooks

01:10:27   and delivers

01:10:28   straight

01:10:28   to your

01:10:29   door

01:10:29   so you

01:10:29   have more

01:10:30   time

01:10:30   for everything

01:10:31   you love

01:10:31   this spring

01:10:32   Jason

01:10:32   can you

01:10:33   tell me

01:10:33   a little

01:10:33   bit

01:10:33   about

01:10:34   how

01:10:34   Factor

01:10:35   helps

01:10:35   save

01:10:36   time

01:10:36   as well

01:10:37   as

01:10:37   what you

01:10:38   like

01:10:39   about

01:10:39   the

01:10:39   quality

01:10:39   of

01:10:39   the

01:10:40   ingredients

01:10:40   the

01:10:41   way

01:10:42   you

01:10:42   save

01:10:42   time

01:10:42   is

01:10:42   you

01:10:42   make

01:10:43   it

01:10:43   something

01:10:43   you

01:10:43   can

01:10:43   microwave

01:10:43   and

01:10:44   so

01:10:44   these

01:10:44   things

01:10:44   are

01:10:44   microwavable

01:10:45   in

01:10:45   two

01:10:45   or

01:10:46   three

01:10:46   minutes

01:10:46   and

01:10:47   so

01:10:47   you

01:10:47   know

01:10:47   it's

01:10:47   lunchtime

01:10:48   and

01:10:48   you

01:10:48   need

01:10:49   to

01:10:49   eat

01:10:49   or

01:10:49   maybe

01:10:50   even

01:10:50   work

01:10:50   at

01:10:50   your

01:10:50   desk

01:10:50   and get

01:10:51   back

01:10:51   to

01:10:51   it

01:10:51   and

01:10:51   the

01:10:52   last

01:10:52   thing

01:10:52   you

01:10:52   want

01:10:52   to

01:10:52   do

01:10:52   is

01:10:53   heat

01:10:53   up

01:10:54   a

01:10:54   pan

01:10:54   or

01:10:54   heat

01:10:54   up

01:10:54   the

01:10:54   oven

01:10:55   or

01:10:55   do

01:10:56   you

01:10:56   have

01:10:56   something

01:10:56   in

01:10:56   the

01:10:57   fridge

01:10:57   that

01:10:57   you

01:10:57   can

01:10:57   make

01:10:57   a

01:10:57   sandwich

01:10:58   with

01:10:58   or

01:10:58   whatever

01:10:58   and

01:10:59   with

01:10:59   this

01:11:00   you

01:11:00   know

01:11:00   two

01:11:01   or

01:11:01   three

01:11:01   minutes

01:11:01   later

01:11:01   you

01:11:02   are

01:11:02   done

01:11:02   and

01:11:03   like

01:11:03   there

01:11:03   are

01:11:03   other

01:11:04   meals

01:11:04   that

01:11:04   you

01:11:04   can

01:11:04   microwave

01:11:05   that

01:11:05   will

01:11:05   be

01:11:06   done

01:11:06   in

01:11:06   two

01:11:06   or

01:11:06   three

01:11:06   minutes

01:11:07   but

01:11:07   the

01:11:07   other

01:11:08   thing

01:11:08   that

01:11:08   impresses

01:11:09   me

01:11:09   about

01:11:09   factor

01:11:09   is

01:11:09   the

01:11:10   quality

01:11:10   of

01:11:10   their

01:11:10   ingredients

01:11:11   they

01:11:11   have

01:11:11   worked

01:11:12   it

01:11:12   out

01:11:12   about

01:11:13   how

01:11:13   to

01:11:13   get

01:11:13   microwave

01:11:14   stuff

01:11:15   even

01:11:15   meat

01:11:15   to

01:11:16   taste

01:11:16   good

01:11:16   after

01:11:17   two

01:11:17   or

01:11:17   three

01:11:17   minutes

01:11:18   and

01:11:18   that's

01:11:18   the

01:11:18   trick

01:11:18   right

01:11:19   like

01:11:19   like

01:11:19   Lauren

01:11:20   doesn't

01:11:21   eat

01:11:21   microwave

01:11:22   reheated

01:11:22   chicken

01:11:23   because

01:11:23   she

01:11:23   hates

01:11:23   the

01:11:24   taste

01:11:24   but

01:11:25   she

01:11:25   will

01:11:25   eat

01:11:25   factor

01:11:26   chicken

01:11:26   meals

01:11:27   because

01:11:27   I

01:11:28   have

01:11:29   some

01:11:29   theories

01:11:29   about

01:11:29   what

01:11:30   factor

01:11:30   is

01:11:30   doing

01:11:30   I

01:11:31   don't

01:11:31   think

01:11:31   they

01:11:31   cook

01:11:31   them

01:11:31   all

01:11:32   the

01:11:32   way

01:11:32   I

01:11:32   think

01:11:32   they

01:11:32   let

01:11:32   them

01:11:32   finish

01:11:33   their

01:11:33   cooking

01:11:33   in

01:11:33   the

01:11:33   microwave

01:11:34   that's

01:11:34   just

01:11:34   my

01:11:34   theory

01:11:35   but

01:11:35   like

01:11:36   whatever

01:11:36   they've

01:11:36   done

01:11:37   the

01:11:37   stuff

01:11:37   that

01:11:37   comes

01:11:38   out

01:11:38   tastes

01:11:38   good

01:11:39   in a

01:11:39   way

01:11:39   that

01:11:40   reheated

01:11:40   leftovers

01:11:41   for

01:11:49   head to

01:11:49   factomeals.com

01:11:51   slash

01:11:51   upgrade50

01:11:52   off

01:11:53   and use

01:11:53   the code

01:11:53   upgrade50

01:11:54   off

01:11:54   to get

01:11:55   50%

01:11:55   off

01:11:56   and free

01:11:56   daily

01:11:56   greens

01:11:57   per box

01:11:57   with

01:11:58   new

01:11:58   subscription

01:11:58   only

01:11:59   while

01:11:59   supplies

01:11:59   last

01:12:00   until

01:12:00   september

01:12:01   27th

01:12:02   2026

01:12:02   see the

01:12:03   website

01:12:03   for more

01:12:04   details

01:12:04   that's

01:12:05   factomeals.com

01:12:06   slash

01:12:06   upgrade50

01:12:07   off

01:12:07   and the

01:12:08   code

01:12:08   upgrade50

01:12:09   off

01:12:09   and thanks

01:12:10   to

01:12:10   factor

01:12:10   for the

01:12:11   support

01:12:11   of this

01:12:11   show

01:12:12   and all

01:12:12   of

01:12:12   relay

01:12:13   it

01:12:14   is

01:12:14   time

01:12:15   for

01:12:15   some

01:12:15   ask

01:12:16   upgrade

01:12:16   questions

01:12:17   jump

01:12:19   right

01:12:19   center

01:12:19   says

01:12:20   do

01:12:20   you

01:12:20   think

01:12:20   the

01:12:21   rising

01:12:21   cost

01:12:21   of

01:12:22   storage

01:12:22   components

01:12:23   will

01:12:23   cause

01:12:23   apple

01:12:24   to

01:12:24   raise

01:12:24   the

01:12:24   price

01:12:25   of

01:12:25   iCloud

01:12:26   storage

01:12:26   believe it

01:12:28   or not

01:12:28   this is a

01:12:29   no

01:12:29   storage

01:12:31   components

01:12:32   aren't

01:12:32   really

01:12:32   going up

01:12:32   SSDs

01:12:33   are going

01:12:33   up

01:12:33   and

01:12:34   cloud

01:12:35   storage

01:12:35   in bulk

01:12:36   is

01:12:36   spinning

01:12:36   hard

01:12:37   drives

01:12:37   I think

01:12:38   still

01:12:38   and

01:12:39   I

01:12:39   think

01:12:39   those

01:12:39   are

01:12:39   not

01:12:40   going

01:12:40   up

01:12:40   because

01:12:41   they

01:12:41   don't

01:12:41   use

01:12:41   RAM

01:12:42   really

01:12:43   and

01:12:43   they

01:12:43   don't

01:12:43   use

01:12:44   processors

01:12:44   really

01:12:45   they're

01:12:45   just

01:12:45   spinning

01:12:46   disks

01:12:46   and

01:12:46   I

01:12:47   don't

01:12:47   think

01:12:47   the

01:12:47   spinning

01:12:47   hard

01:12:47   drive

01:12:48   industry

01:12:48   I

01:12:49   haven't

01:12:50   checked

01:12:50   the

01:12:50   prices

01:12:50   on

01:12:50   spinning

01:12:50   hard

01:12:52   drives

01:12:52   are

01:12:52   going

01:12:52   up

01:12:53   then

01:12:53   sure

01:12:53   I

01:12:53   think

01:12:54   they

01:12:54   might

01:12:54   be

01:12:54   I've been

01:12:55   looking at

01:12:55   some

01:12:55   spinning

01:12:56   hard

01:12:56   drives

01:12:57   prices

01:12:57   because

01:12:57   I'm

01:12:58   looking

01:12:58   at

01:12:58   Synology

01:12:59   stuff

01:12:59   Jason

01:13:00   they're

01:13:00   so

01:13:00   expensive

01:13:01   yeah

01:13:02   and

01:13:02   some

01:13:03   of

01:13:03   that

01:13:03   maybe

01:13:03   they're

01:13:03   like

01:13:04   we

01:13:04   got

01:13:04   them

01:13:04   where

01:13:04   we

01:13:04   want

01:13:05   to

01:13:05   raise

01:13:05   the

01:13:05   price

01:13:05   of

01:13:05   spinning

01:13:06   hard

01:13:06   drives

01:13:06   I

01:13:07   know

01:13:08   spinning

01:13:08   hard

01:13:08   drives

01:13:08   have

01:13:08   RAM

01:13:08   but

01:13:09   they

01:13:09   don't

01:13:09   have

01:13:09   much

01:13:09   RAM

01:13:10   like

01:13:10   okay

01:13:11   John

01:13:12   here's

01:13:12   the

01:13:12   answer

01:13:12   yeah

01:13:13   if

01:13:13   they

01:13:13   can

01:13:14   get

01:13:14   away

01:13:14   with

01:13:14   it

01:13:14   they

01:13:14   will

01:13:15   because

01:13:15   they

01:13:15   just

01:13:15   want

01:13:15   more

01:13:16   money

01:13:16   I

01:13:17   think

01:13:17   about

01:13:17   that

01:13:18   I

01:13:18   think

01:13:18   we

01:13:19   can

01:13:20   expect

01:13:20   little

01:13:20   increases

01:13:21   in

01:13:21   lots

01:13:21   of

01:13:21   places

01:13:22   to

01:13:22   try

01:13:22   and

01:13:22   offset

01:13:23   the

01:13:23   increases

01:13:23   they're

01:13:23   trying

01:13:24   to

01:13:24   stop

01:13:24   from

01:13:24   happening

01:13:25   you

01:13:25   know

01:13:25   like

01:13:26   they

01:13:27   want

01:13:27   to

01:13:27   do

01:13:28   what

01:13:28   they

01:13:28   can

01:13:28   do

01:13:29   to

01:13:29   make

01:13:29   sure

01:13:30   that

01:13:30   they

01:13:30   don't

01:13:30   have

01:13:30   to

01:13:30   put up

01:13:31   the

01:13:31   iPhone

01:13:31   as

01:13:32   much

01:13:32   as

01:13:32   possible

01:13:32   so

01:13:33   they

01:13:33   increase

01:13:33   the

01:13:33   price

01:13:33   on

01:13:34   the

01:13:34   Apple

01:13:34   TV

01:13:34   by

01:13:34   twice

01:13:35   and

01:13:35   then

01:13:35   put

01:13:36   iCloud

01:13:37   up

01:13:38   by a

01:13:38   dollar

01:13:38   you

01:13:39   just

01:13:39   made

01:13:39   millions

01:13:39   of

01:13:40   millions

01:13:40   of

01:13:40   dollars

01:13:40   I

01:13:41   think

01:13:42   it

01:13:42   all

01:13:42   go

01:13:42   in

01:13:42   the

01:13:43   margins

01:13:43   are

01:13:43   really

01:13:44   huge

01:13:44   in

01:13:44   Apple

01:13:44   services

01:13:45   business

01:13:45   they're

01:13:47   varied

01:13:47   like

01:13:50   Apple

01:13:50   has

01:13:51   not

01:13:51   been

01:13:51   afraid

01:13:51   to

01:13:51   raise

01:13:52   the

01:13:52   cost

01:13:53   of

01:13:53   its

01:13:53   services

01:13:53   and

01:13:54   so

01:13:54   perhaps

01:13:54   that

01:13:54   will

01:13:55   continue

01:13:55   it

01:13:56   wouldn't

01:13:56   surprise

01:13:56   me

01:13:57   but

01:13:57   that's

01:13:57   not

01:13:57   just

01:13:58   about

01:13:58   components

01:13:59   it's

01:13:59   about

01:13:59   inflation

01:14:00   and

01:14:02   about

01:14:02   finding

01:14:02   places

01:14:03   to get

01:14:03   your

01:14:03   profit

01:14:04   margin

01:14:04   to

01:14:04   go

01:14:04   up

01:14:05   so

01:14:05   you

01:14:06   know

01:14:06   anyway

01:14:07   I

01:14:07   if

01:14:09   the prices

01:14:09   of hard

01:14:10   drives

01:14:10   are going

01:14:10   up

01:14:10   it's

01:14:11   I

01:14:11   would

01:14:12   say

01:14:12   it's

01:14:12   probably

01:14:12   more

01:14:13   about

01:14:13   opportunism

01:14:14   than

01:14:14   actual

01:14:15   physical

01:14:15   costs

01:14:16   but

01:14:16   why

01:14:17   not

01:14:17   make

01:14:17   them

01:14:17   more

01:14:17   expensive

01:14:18   everything

01:14:18   else

01:14:19   is

01:14:19   Chris

01:14:20   says

01:14:21   I

01:14:21   have

01:14:21   an

01:14:21   archive

01:14:22   of

01:14:22   pre

01:14:23   iPhone

01:14:24   digital

01:14:24   photos

01:14:25   that

01:14:25   I

01:14:25   want

01:14:25   my

01:14:25   wife

01:14:26   and

01:14:26   I

01:14:26   to

01:14:26   have

01:14:26   access

01:14:27   to

01:14:27   via

01:14:27   Apple

01:14:28   photos

01:14:28   I've

01:14:29   been

01:14:29   procrastinating

01:14:30   about

01:14:30   uploading

01:14:31   them

01:14:31   to

01:14:31   a

01:14:31   shared

01:14:32   library

01:14:32   for

01:14:32   as

01:14:33   long

01:14:33   as

01:14:33   shared

01:14:33   libraries

01:14:33   have

01:14:34   been

01:14:34   a

01:14:34   thing

01:14:34   but

01:14:35   I

01:14:35   haven't

01:14:35   because

01:14:35   I

01:14:35   don't

01:14:36   like

01:14:36   having

01:14:36   my

01:14:36   photos

01:14:37   split

01:14:37   across

01:14:37   two

01:14:38   libraries

01:14:39   I'm

01:14:40   wondering

01:14:40   if

01:14:40   the

01:14:40   full

01:14:40   resolution

01:14:41   shared

01:14:41   album

01:14:42   feature

01:14:42   in

01:14:42   iOS

01:14:43   27

01:14:43   makes

01:14:44   having

01:14:44   a

01:14:44   shared

01:14:45   library

01:14:45   mostly

01:14:46   redundant

01:14:46   is

01:14:47   there

01:14:47   anything

01:14:47   I've

01:14:48   been

01:14:48   missing

01:14:48   out

01:14:48   on

01:14:48   by

01:14:49   using

01:14:49   the

01:14:49   shared

01:14:50   album

01:14:50   approach

01:14:51   I

01:14:52   want

01:14:52   to

01:14:52   start

01:14:52   by

01:14:52   saying

01:14:53   I

01:14:53   don't

01:14:54   understand

01:14:54   I

01:14:55   don't

01:14:55   like

01:14:55   having

01:14:56   my

01:14:56   photos

01:14:56   split

01:14:56   across

01:14:57   two

01:14:57   libraries

01:14:58   that's

01:14:59   not

01:14:59   how

01:14:59   the

01:15:00   shared

01:15:00   library

01:15:00   works

01:15:01   the

01:15:02   shared

01:15:02   library

01:15:02   you

01:15:03   have

01:15:03   a

01:15:03   library

01:15:03   and

01:15:04   it

01:15:04   has

01:15:04   photos

01:15:04   that

01:15:05   are

01:15:05   in

01:15:05   two

01:15:05   states

01:15:05   one

01:15:06   of

01:15:06   which

01:15:06   is

01:15:07   it's

01:15:07   just

01:15:07   in

01:15:08   your

01:15:08   library

01:15:08   and

01:15:09   the

01:15:09   other

01:15:09   is

01:15:09   that

01:15:10   it's

01:15:10   a

01:15:10   shared

01:15:10   photo

01:15:11   it's

01:15:11   in

01:15:11   the

01:15:12   shared

01:15:12   space

01:15:12   this

01:15:12   is

01:15:13   what

01:15:13   Chris

01:15:13   is

01:15:13   saying

01:15:14   though

01:15:14   right

01:15:14   like

01:15:14   depending

01:15:16   on

01:15:16   so

01:15:16   okay

01:15:16   me

01:15:17   and

01:15:17   Edina

01:15:17   have

01:15:17   a

01:15:17   shared

01:15:18   library

01:15:18   and

01:15:18   everything

01:15:19   goes

01:15:19   in

01:15:19   the

01:15:19   library

01:15:20   right

01:15:20   yeah

01:15:21   so

01:15:21   we

01:15:21   have

01:15:21   one

01:15:22   photo

01:15:22   library

01:15:22   essentially

01:15:23   and we

01:15:23   share

01:15:23   it

01:15:24   I

01:15:24   think

01:15:24   that

01:15:24   there

01:15:25   are

01:15:25   some

01:15:25   people

01:15:25   who

01:15:25   are

01:15:26   like

01:15:26   I

01:15:26   don't

01:15:26   want

01:15:27   to

01:15:27   share

01:15:27   all

01:15:27   of my

01:15:28   photos

01:15:28   with

01:15:28   someone

01:15:28   even

01:15:29   you

01:15:29   don't

01:15:29   have

01:15:29   to

01:15:29   do

01:15:29   it

01:15:30   that

01:15:30   way

01:15:30   but

01:15:30   I

01:15:30   think

01:15:30   that's

01:15:31   the

01:15:32   thinking

01:15:32   but

01:15:32   that's

01:15:33   what

01:15:33   I'm

01:15:33   saying

01:15:33   is

01:15:33   there's

01:15:33   a

01:15:33   setting

01:15:33   for

01:15:34   that

01:15:34   you

01:15:34   can

01:15:34   have

01:15:34   it

01:15:34   not

01:15:35   contribute

01:15:35   to

01:15:35   the

01:15:35   shared

01:15:35   library

01:15:36   and

01:15:36   you

01:15:36   can

01:15:36   choose

01:15:36   I

01:15:37   just

01:15:37   want

01:15:37   to

01:15:38   be

01:15:38   clear

01:15:38   here

01:15:38   I

01:15:39   don't

01:15:39   like

01:15:39   having

01:15:40   my

01:15:40   photos

01:15:40   split

01:15:41   across

01:15:41   two

01:15:41   libraries

01:15:41   is

01:15:42   not

01:15:42   the

01:15:42   right

01:15:42   way

01:15:43   to

01:15:43   phrase

01:15:43   this

01:15:43   I

01:15:44   don't

01:15:44   like

01:15:44   having

01:15:45   to

01:15:45   maintain

01:15:46   which

01:15:46   ones

01:15:46   are

01:15:47   shared

01:15:47   and

01:15:47   which

01:15:47   ones

01:15:47   are

01:15:47   not

01:15:48   like

01:15:48   I

01:15:48   get

01:15:49   that

01:15:49   but

01:15:49   it's

01:15:50   not

01:15:50   like

01:15:50   you

01:15:50   have

01:15:50   two

01:15:50   different

01:15:51   libraries

01:15:51   and

01:15:51   you

01:15:52   open

01:15:52   one

01:15:52   and

01:15:53   the

01:15:53   photos

01:15:53   are

01:15:53   over

01:15:53   there

01:15:54   and

01:15:54   you

01:15:54   open

01:15:54   another

01:15:54   Apple

01:15:55   has

01:15:55   made

01:15:55   it

01:15:55   so

01:15:55   that

01:15:56   you

01:15:56   can

01:15:56   view

01:15:56   one

01:15:56   or

01:15:56   the

01:15:57   other

01:15:57   or

01:15:57   both

01:15:57   of

01:15:58   the

01:15:58   photos

01:15:58   that

01:15:58   are

01:15:59   in

01:15:59   those

01:15:59   states

01:15:59   and

01:16:00   the

01:16:00   your

01:16:02   partner

01:16:03   also

01:16:03   has

01:16:04   access

01:16:04   to

01:16:04   the

01:16:04   ones

01:16:04   that

01:16:05   are

01:16:05   in

01:16:05   the

01:16:05   shared

01:16:05   state

01:16:05   and

01:16:06   they

01:16:06   can

01:16:17   everybody

01:16:19   updates

01:16:19   to

01:16:19   27

01:16:20   when

01:16:20   it

01:16:20   comes

01:16:20   out

01:16:21   the

01:16:21   new

01:16:21   feature

01:16:22   of

01:16:22   shared

01:16:22   libraries

01:16:23   where

01:16:23   it's

01:16:23   full

01:16:23   res

01:16:24   yeah

01:16:25   it's

01:16:25   full

01:16:25   res

01:16:25   but

01:16:26   it's

01:16:26   in

01:16:26   your

01:16:27   partner's

01:16:28   library

01:16:28   it's

01:16:28   in

01:16:28   the

01:16:28   shared

01:16:29   albums

01:16:30   thing

01:16:31   because

01:16:31   it's

01:16:32   a

01:16:32   shared

01:16:32   album

01:16:32   and

01:16:32   not

01:16:32   a

01:16:32   shared

01:16:33   library

01:16:33   and

01:16:34   if

01:16:35   they

01:16:35   want

01:16:35   it

01:16:35   in

01:16:35   their

01:16:35   library

01:16:36   they

01:16:36   will

01:16:36   need

01:16:36   to

01:16:36   import

01:16:37   it

01:16:37   into

01:16:37   their

01:16:37   library

01:16:38   in

01:16:38   order

01:16:38   to

01:16:38   do

01:16:38   things

01:16:39   with

01:16:39   it

01:16:39   at

01:16:40   which

01:16:40   point

01:16:40   there

01:16:41   are

01:16:41   now

01:16:41   two

01:16:41   photos

01:16:42   in

01:16:42   your

01:16:42   shared

01:16:42   iCloud

01:16:43   space

01:16:43   if

01:16:43   you're

01:16:43   doing

01:16:43   that

01:16:44   and

01:16:44   I

01:16:44   don't

01:16:44   think

01:16:44   that

01:16:45   those

01:16:45   dedupe

01:16:45   I

01:16:46   think

01:16:46   that

01:16:46   that's

01:16:46   just

01:16:46   more

01:16:47   iCloud

01:16:48   space

01:16:48   and

01:16:49   it

01:16:49   creates

01:16:50   that

01:16:50   now

01:16:51   your

01:16:51   partner

01:16:51   has

01:16:52   to

01:16:52   choose

01:16:52   if

01:16:52   they

01:16:52   want

01:16:53   to

01:16:53   import

01:16:54   them

01:16:54   or

01:16:54   just

01:16:55   look

01:16:55   at

01:16:55   them

01:16:55   and

01:16:55   what

01:16:55   do

01:16:56   they

01:16:56   want

01:16:56   to

01:16:56   do

01:16:56   with

01:16:56   them

01:16:56   so

01:16:56   like

01:16:57   I

01:16:58   think

01:16:58   they're

01:16:58   very

01:16:58   different

01:16:59   features

01:16:59   I

01:16:59   don't

01:17:00   think

01:17:00   that

01:17:00   this

01:17:00   makes

01:17:00   having

01:17:01   a

01:17:01   shared

01:17:01   library

01:17:01   redundant

01:17:02   at

01:17:02   all

01:17:02   however

01:17:03   if

01:17:04   you're

01:17:04   somebody

01:17:04   like

01:17:04   Chris

01:17:04   who

01:17:05   is

01:17:05   like

01:17:05   I

01:17:05   just

01:17:05   don't

01:17:06   want

01:17:06   to

01:17:06   do

01:17:06   shared

01:17:06   libraries

01:17:07   because

01:17:07   it's

01:17:07   too

01:17:07   complicated

01:17:08   for

01:17:08   me

01:17:08   even

01:17:09   though

01:17:09   I

01:17:30   on

01:17:30   Jeremy

01:17:31   Burge

01:17:31   boat

01:17:31   there

01:17:33   was

01:17:33   like

01:17:34   a

01:17:34   shared

01:17:34   album

01:17:34   and

01:17:35   like

01:17:35   it's

01:17:36   great

01:17:36   but

01:17:36   it's

01:17:36   not

01:17:37   full

01:17:38   res

01:17:38   or

01:17:39   you

01:17:39   know

01:17:39   I

01:17:40   have

01:17:40   other

01:17:40   events

01:17:41   like

01:17:41   that

01:17:41   where

01:17:41   Apple

01:17:42   savvy

01:17:42   people

01:17:42   and I

01:17:43   have

01:17:43   done

01:17:43   something

01:17:43   and

01:17:43   we've

01:17:44   made

01:17:44   a

01:17:44   little

01:17:44   shared

01:17:44   album

01:17:44   I

01:17:45   love

01:17:46   that

01:17:46   because

01:17:46   now

01:17:46   I

01:17:46   know

01:17:47   that

01:17:47   those

01:17:47   photos

01:17:47   that

01:17:47   I

01:17:48   can

01:17:48   get

01:17:48   out

01:17:48   of

01:17:48   there

01:17:48   are

01:17:48   full

01:17:49   resolution

01:17:49   and

01:17:49   it's

01:17:50   not

01:17:50   a

01:17:50   person

01:17:51   I'm

01:17:51   gonna

01:17:51   share

01:18:00   you

01:18:00   and

01:18:00   your

01:18:01   partner

01:18:01   have

01:18:01   very

01:18:01   specific

01:18:02   ways

01:18:02   that

01:18:03   you

01:18:03   want

01:18:03   to

01:18:03   handle

01:18:03   your

01:18:03   photo

01:18:04   libraries

01:18:04   the

01:18:05   shared

01:18:05   photo

01:18:05   library

01:18:05   is

01:18:06   I

01:18:06   think

01:18:06   for

01:18:06   most

01:18:07   people

01:18:07   a

01:18:07   much

01:18:08   better

01:18:09   solution

01:18:09   certainly

01:18:09   doesn't

01:18:10   this

01:18:11   does

01:18:11   not

01:18:11   make

01:18:12   that

01:18:12   redundant

01:18:12   at

01:18:13   all

01:18:13   I'll

01:18:15   say

01:18:15   for

01:18:15   me

01:18:15   like

01:18:16   I

01:18:16   you

01:18:17   know

01:18:17   saying

01:18:18   about

01:18:18   like

01:18:18   just

01:18:18   the

01:18:19   shared

01:18:19   photo

01:18:19   library

01:18:20   thing

01:18:20   you

01:18:20   know

01:18:21   like

01:18:21   why

01:18:21   would

01:18:21   you

01:18:21   use

01:18:22   it

01:18:22   I

01:18:23   love

01:18:24   that

01:18:24   it's

01:18:24   automatic

01:18:25   right

01:18:26   so

01:18:26   because

01:18:26   Adina

01:18:27   and I

01:18:27   want

01:18:28   to

01:18:28   do

01:18:28   this

01:18:28   I

01:18:29   really

01:18:29   like

01:18:29   that

01:18:30   I

01:18:30   don't

01:18:30   have

01:18:30   to

01:18:31   work

01:18:31   to

01:18:31   add

01:18:31   photos

01:18:32   to

01:18:32   a

01:18:32   library

01:18:33   or

01:18:33   to

01:18:33   an

01:18:34   album

01:18:34   in

01:18:34   this

01:18:35   case

01:18:35   that

01:18:35   Chris

01:18:35   is

01:18:36   presenting

01:18:36   as

01:18:37   maybe

01:18:37   a

01:18:37   thing

01:18:37   he

01:18:37   would

01:18:37   want

01:18:38   to

01:18:38   do

01:18:38   I

01:18:40   like

01:18:40   that

01:18:40   both

01:18:41   me

01:18:42   and

01:18:42   Adina

01:18:42   it's

01:18:42   only

01:18:43   about

01:18:43   just

01:18:43   removing

01:18:43   the

01:18:44   photos

01:18:44   that

01:18:44   we

01:18:44   don't

01:18:45   want

01:18:45   to

01:18:45   have

01:18:45   in

01:18:45   the

01:18:46   shared

01:18:46   library

01:18:46   otherwise

01:18:47   it's

01:18:47   incredible

01:18:48   we have

01:18:49   all

01:18:50   these

01:18:50   photos

01:18:50   especially

01:18:51   since

01:18:51   we

01:18:51   had

01:18:51   a

01:18:51   kid

01:18:52   right

01:18:52   like

01:18:52   but

01:18:52   we

01:18:52   were

01:18:53   doing

01:18:53   it

01:18:53   from

01:18:53   before

01:18:53   anyway

01:18:54   because

01:18:54   we

01:18:55   were

01:18:55   doing

01:18:55   things

01:18:55   together

01:18:56   right

01:18:56   going

01:18:56   to

01:18:56   places

01:18:57   together

01:18:57   doing

01:18:57   things

01:18:58   together

01:18:58   it

01:18:58   made

01:18:58   sense

01:18:59   to

01:18:59   just

01:18:59   share

01:19:00   all

01:19:00   of

01:19:00   our

01:19:00   photos

01:19:01   and

01:19:01   I

01:19:02   love

01:19:02   that

01:19:02   it's

01:19:02   in

01:19:02   the

01:19:02   camera

01:19:03   and

01:19:03   all

01:19:03   that

01:19:03   kind

01:19:04   of

01:19:04   stuff

01:19:04   so

01:19:04   yeah

01:19:05   I

01:19:05   think

01:19:05   it's

01:19:05   great

01:19:06   but

01:19:06   you

01:19:08   know

01:19:08   I

01:19:09   would

01:19:09   say

01:19:10   go for

01:19:10   it

01:19:10   but

01:19:10   if

01:19:12   you

01:19:14   don't

01:19:15   want

01:19:17   to

01:19:19   do

01:19:19   it

01:19:21   might

01:19:22   want

01:19:22   to

01:19:22   look

01:19:23   at

01:19:23   but

01:19:23   doesn't

01:19:23   need

01:19:23   to

01:19:23   maintain

01:19:25   in

01:19:25   any

01:19:25   way

01:19:26   then

01:19:27   it's

01:19:27   probably

01:19:27   fine

01:19:27   right

01:19:28   like

01:19:28   I

01:19:28   think

01:19:28   it's

01:19:30   but

01:19:30   the

01:19:30   question

01:19:31   is

01:19:31   does

01:19:32   it

01:19:32   make

01:19:32   it

01:19:32   mostly

01:19:32   redundant

01:19:33   and

01:19:33   I

01:19:33   say

01:19:33   absolutely

01:19:34   not

01:19:34   but

01:19:35   there

01:19:35   are

01:19:36   going

01:19:36   to

01:19:36   be

01:19:36   this

01:19:36   may

01:19:37   be

01:19:37   a

01:19:37   case

01:19:37   where

01:19:37   for

01:19:38   this

01:19:38   particular

01:19:39   set

01:19:39   of

01:19:40   photos

01:19:40   you

01:19:41   don't

01:19:41   need

01:19:42   to

01:19:42   bother

01:19:42   with

01:19:42   that

01:19:43   because

01:19:43   you

01:19:44   can

01:19:44   just

01:19:44   toss

01:19:44   them

01:19:44   in

01:19:45   here

01:19:45   but

01:19:45   I

01:19:45   think

01:19:45   the

01:19:45   ongoing

01:19:46   photos

01:19:46   of

01:19:46   your

01:19:46   life

01:19:47   and

01:19:47   having

01:19:48   family

01:19:48   members

01:19:49   be able

01:19:49   to

01:19:49   take

01:19:49   photos

01:19:50   at

01:19:50   the

01:19:51   same

01:19:51   place

01:19:51   and

01:19:51   different

01:19:52   places

01:19:52   and

01:19:52   have

01:19:52   them

01:19:52   all

01:19:53   just

01:19:53   kind

01:19:53   of

01:19:53   come

01:19:53   together

01:19:54   that

01:19:55   I

01:19:55   think

01:19:55   that

01:19:55   is

01:19:56   that's

01:19:56   great

01:19:56   we

01:19:56   used

01:19:57   to

01:19:57   have

01:19:57   to

01:19:57   do

01:19:57   a

01:19:57   photo

01:19:58   merge

01:19:58   at

01:19:58   the

01:19:58   end

01:19:58   of

01:19:58   year

01:19:59   when

01:19:59   we

01:20:00   work

01:20:00   on

01:20:00   our

01:20:00   calendar

01:20:00   for

01:20:01   next

01:20:01   year

01:20:01   where

01:20:02   Lauren

01:20:02   would

01:20:02   have

01:20:02   to

01:20:02   import

01:20:03   all

01:20:03   her

01:20:03   photos

01:20:03   that

01:20:03   she

01:20:03   had

01:20:04   taken

01:20:04   over

01:20:04   the

01:20:04   year

01:20:04   into

01:20:05   my

01:20:06   photo

01:20:06   library

01:20:07   so

01:20:07   we

01:20:07   would

01:20:07   have

01:20:07   them

01:20:08   all

01:20:08   in

01:20:08   one

01:20:08   place

01:20:08   so

01:20:09   that

01:20:09   we

01:20:09   could

01:20:09   build

01:20:09   a

01:20:10   calendar

01:20:10   and

01:20:10   that's

01:20:11   so

01:20:11   dumb

01:20:11   and

01:20:12   yeah

01:20:12   now

01:20:13   you

01:20:13   could

01:20:13   make

01:20:13   it

01:20:14   like

01:20:14   a

01:20:15   two

01:20:15   step

01:20:15   process

01:20:16   where

01:20:16   she

01:20:17   creates

01:20:17   a

01:20:18   shared

01:20:19   library

01:20:20   of her

01:20:20   photos

01:20:20   for the

01:20:21   year

01:20:21   that

01:20:21   she

01:20:21   wants

01:20:21   to

01:20:21   put

01:20:22   in

01:20:22   consideration

01:20:23   and

01:20:23   then

01:20:24   come

01:20:24   to

01:20:24   my

01:20:24   computer

01:20:25   and

01:20:25   drag

01:20:26   them

01:20:26   in

01:20:26   and

01:20:26   now

01:20:27   we've

01:20:27   got

01:20:27   that

01:20:29   but

01:20:29   our

01:20:30   system

01:20:30   is

01:20:30   better

01:20:31   because

01:20:31   we

01:20:31   just

01:20:32   throw

01:20:32   most

01:20:33   of

01:20:33   our

01:20:33   photos

01:20:33   in

01:20:33   the

01:20:33   same

01:20:34   bin

01:20:34   together

01:20:34   and

01:20:35   I

01:20:36   only

01:20:36   turn

01:20:36   that

01:20:36   feature

01:20:37   off

01:20:37   when

01:20:37   I'm

01:20:37   shooting

01:20:37   pictures

01:20:38   of

01:20:38   people

01:20:39   at

01:20:39   WWDC

01:20:40   or

01:20:41   something

01:20:41   like

01:20:41   that

01:20:41   where

01:20:41   it's

01:20:41   like

01:20:42   no

01:20:42   she

01:20:42   doesn't

01:20:42   even

01:20:42   need

01:20:43   this

01:20:43   in

01:20:43   the

01:20:44   shared

01:20:44   library

01:20:44   but

01:20:45   so

01:20:46   I

01:20:46   think

01:20:46   it's

01:20:47   got

01:20:47   a

01:20:47   lot

01:20:47   of

01:20:47   benefits

01:20:47   but

01:20:48   not

01:20:48   necessarily

01:20:48   for

01:20:49   all

01:20:49   instances

01:20:50   next

01:20:52   question

01:20:53   comes

01:20:53   from

01:20:54   Jason

01:20:54   who

01:20:55   says

01:20:55   not

01:20:55   you

01:20:56   I've

01:20:56   read

01:20:57   that

01:20:57   26.6

01:20:58   will

01:20:58   pre-index

01:20:59   the

01:20:59   iPhone

01:21:00   so

01:21:00   that

01:21:00   when

01:21:00   users

01:21:00   update

01:21:01   to

01:21:01   iOS

01:21:01   27

01:21:02   in

01:21:02   the

01:21:02   fall

01:21:02   the

01:21:03   Apple

01:21:03   intelligence

01:21:03   features

01:21:04   will

01:21:04   be

01:21:04   ready

01:21:04   to

01:21:04   go

01:21:05   is

01:21:05   the

01:21:05   index

01:21:06   included

01:21:06   in

01:21:06   iCloud

01:21:07   backup

01:21:07   or

01:21:08   will

01:21:08   my

01:21:08   phone

01:21:08   need

01:21:08   to

01:21:09   be

01:21:09   re-indexed

01:21:10   when

01:21:10   I

01:21:10   upgrade

01:21:10   to

01:21:11   the

01:21:11   18

01:21:11   pro

01:21:11   four

01:21:12   days

01:21:12   after

01:21:13   iOS

01:21:13   27

01:21:13   releases

01:21:14   when

01:21:15   you

01:21:15   get

01:21:15   a

01:21:15   new

01:21:15   device

01:21:16   the

01:21:16   index

01:21:17   has

01:21:17   to

01:21:17   be

01:21:17   built

01:21:17   again

01:21:17   that's

01:21:18   just

01:21:18   how

01:21:18   it

01:21:18   works

01:21:19   that's

01:21:19   because

01:21:19   they do

01:21:19   all that

01:21:20   stuff

01:21:20   on

01:21:21   device

01:21:21   and

01:21:21   they

01:21:21   don't

01:21:21   want

01:21:22   it

01:21:22   has

01:21:22   to

01:21:22   be

01:21:22   done

01:21:23   again

01:21:23   it's

01:21:23   not

01:21:24   in

01:21:24   the

01:21:25   backup

01:21:25   it's

01:21:26   not

01:21:26   the

01:21:26   backup

01:21:27   not

01:21:27   to

01:21:27   my

01:21:28   knowledge

01:21:28   it's

01:21:29   never

01:21:29   been

01:21:29   before

01:21:29   that's

01:21:30   never

01:21:30   ever

01:21:31   been

01:21:31   before

01:21:31   I

01:21:32   assume

01:21:33   it

01:21:33   would

01:21:33   I

01:21:33   just

01:21:34   assumed

01:21:34   it

01:21:34   would

01:21:34   have

01:21:34   to

01:21:34   be

01:21:35   so

01:21:35   like

01:21:35   I

01:21:36   know

01:21:36   that

01:21:36   I

01:21:36   know

01:21:36   the

01:21:37   indexing

01:21:37   was

01:21:37   the

01:21:38   thing

01:21:38   but

01:21:38   this

01:21:38   new

01:21:38   spotlight

01:21:39   indexing

01:21:40   takes over

01:21:40   a week

01:21:41   to do

01:21:42   yeah

01:21:43   they've

01:21:44   got to

01:21:45   find a way

01:21:45   to do

01:21:46   this

01:21:46   to have

01:21:46   it

01:21:47   transferred

01:21:47   I

01:21:48   mean

01:21:48   this

01:21:48   is

01:21:49   the

01:21:49   thing

01:21:49   they

01:21:49   worked

01:21:49   out

01:21:49   with

01:21:50   faces

01:21:50   right

01:21:51   like

01:21:51   faces

01:21:51   in

01:21:52   photos

01:21:52   was

01:21:52   like

01:21:53   a

01:21:53   whole

01:21:53   problem

01:21:54   no

01:21:54   no

01:21:55   I

01:21:55   mean

01:21:55   this

01:21:56   is

01:21:56   the

01:21:56   thing

01:21:56   with

01:21:56   photos

01:21:57   is

01:21:58   anything

01:21:58   you

01:21:59   manually

01:21:59   tag

01:22:00   is

01:22:01   marked

01:22:01   so

01:22:02   if

01:22:02   you

01:22:02   manually

01:22:02   tag

01:22:03   a

01:22:03   face

01:22:03   as

01:22:03   being

01:22:03   a

01:22:03   person

01:22:04   yeah

01:22:04   that

01:22:05   stuff

01:22:05   crosses

01:22:06   over

01:22:06   but

01:22:06   the

01:22:06   actual

01:22:07   facial

01:22:07   analysis

01:22:08   does

01:22:08   not

01:22:09   I

01:22:10   don't

01:22:10   understand

01:22:11   the

01:22:11   difference

01:22:11   the

01:22:13   way

01:22:13   Apple's

01:22:14   photo

01:22:14   stuff

01:22:14   works

01:22:15   at least

01:22:16   last time

01:22:16   I checked

01:22:17   but I

01:22:17   don't

01:22:17   think

01:22:17   it's

01:22:17   changed

01:22:18   is

01:22:18   they

01:22:18   rescan

01:22:19   your

01:22:19   entire

01:22:19   photo

01:22:19   library

01:22:20   on a

01:22:20   new

01:22:20   device

01:22:20   every

01:22:21   device

01:22:21   you

01:22:21   own

01:22:21   has

01:22:22   a

01:22:22   different

01:22:22   scan

01:22:22   but

01:22:23   if

01:22:23   you

01:22:24   mark

01:22:28   this

01:22:32   is

01:22:32   a

01:22:33   this

01:22:34   is

01:22:34   this

01:22:34   person

01:22:35   because

01:22:35   it'll

01:22:35   ask

01:22:35   you

01:22:36   like

01:22:36   is

01:22:36   this

01:22:36   this

01:22:36   person

01:22:37   that

01:22:38   human

01:22:39   interaction

01:22:40   identifying

01:22:40   a

01:22:41   face

01:22:41   syncs

01:22:42   is

01:22:44   my

01:22:44   understanding

01:22:44   but

01:22:45   the

01:22:45   actual

01:22:46   like

01:22:46   mass

01:22:47   scanning

01:22:47   data

01:22:48   does

01:22:49   not

01:22:49   sync

01:22:50   they

01:22:50   need

01:22:51   to

01:22:51   work

01:22:51   out

01:22:51   a

01:22:51   way

01:22:51   to

01:22:52   sync

01:22:52   these

01:22:52   things

01:22:52   over

01:22:52   from

01:22:53   device

01:22:53   to

01:22:53   device

01:22:54   if

01:22:54   you

01:22:54   do

01:22:54   an

01:22:54   iCloud

01:22:54   backup

01:22:55   like

01:22:55   I'm

01:22:55   sorry

01:22:56   this

01:22:56   is

01:22:56   ridiculous

01:22:56   this

01:22:57   is

01:22:57   ridiculous

01:22:58   and

01:22:59   maybe

01:22:59   there's

01:22:59   something

01:22:59   in

01:23:00   here

01:23:00   we

01:23:00   don't

01:23:00   know

01:23:00   about

01:23:00   that

01:23:01   makes

01:23:02   it

01:23:02   more

01:23:02   portable

01:23:02   this

01:23:03   time

01:23:03   but

01:23:03   right

01:23:04   now

01:23:04   all

01:23:04   your

01:23:05   devices

01:23:05   the

01:23:05   problem

01:23:06   is

01:23:06   your

01:23:07   new

01:23:07   device

01:23:08   does

01:23:09   it

01:23:09   have

01:23:10   access

01:23:10   to

01:23:10   the

01:23:10   same

01:23:10   information

01:23:11   if

01:23:11   you

01:23:12   let me

01:23:13   give you

01:23:14   an

01:23:14   example

01:23:14   if

01:23:16   you

01:23:16   don't

01:23:17   have

01:23:17   all

01:23:17   that

01:23:17   email

01:23:17   on

01:23:18   your

01:23:18   new

01:23:18   device

01:23:18   but

01:23:19   it's

01:23:19   got

01:23:19   the

01:23:19   transfer

01:23:20   of

01:23:20   the

01:23:20   data

01:23:21   from

01:23:21   the

01:23:21   email

01:23:21   that

01:23:21   you

01:23:21   had

01:23:22   now

01:23:22   it's

01:23:23   got

01:23:28   this

01:23:28   I

01:23:28   agree

01:23:28   there

01:23:29   is

01:23:29   also

01:23:29   a

01:23:29   privacy

01:23:29   thing

01:23:30   here

01:23:30   where

01:23:30   Apple

01:23:30   has

01:23:30   decided

01:23:31   we're

01:23:31   never

01:23:31   going to

01:23:32   let

01:23:32   all

01:23:32   this

01:23:32   intensive

01:23:33   metadata

01:23:33   off

01:23:34   your

01:23:34   device

01:23:34   and

01:23:35   if

01:23:35   they

01:23:35   put it

01:23:35   in

01:23:35   the

01:23:36   backup

01:23:36   then

01:23:37   it's

01:23:37   off

01:23:37   your

01:23:37   device

01:23:38   and

01:23:38   I

01:23:58   balance

01:23:58   between

01:23:59   functionality

01:24:01   and

01:24:01   speed

01:24:02   and

01:24:02   feeling

01:24:03   I

01:24:04   think

01:24:04   philosophically

01:24:05   like

01:24:05   that

01:24:05   stuff

01:24:05   shouldn't

01:24:06   leave

01:24:06   your

01:24:06   device

01:24:06   because

01:24:07   it's

01:24:07   device

01:24:07   specific

01:24:08   but

01:24:09   yeah

01:24:09   so

01:24:09   this

01:24:10   pre

01:24:10   look

01:24:11   it's

01:24:11   all

01:24:11   26

01:24:12   6

01:24:12   not

01:24:13   just

01:24:13   iOS

01:24:13   and

01:24:14   so

01:24:15   obviously

01:24:16   what

01:24:16   they

01:24:16   want

01:24:17   is

01:24:17   if

01:24:18   it's

01:24:18   a

01:24:19   brand

01:24:19   new

01:24:19   device

01:24:19   you

01:24:19   get

01:24:20   that

01:24:20   week

01:24:20   you're

01:24:20   going

01:24:20   to

01:24:20   have

01:24:20   to

01:24:21   go

01:24:21   through

01:24:21   the

01:24:21   whole

01:24:21   thing

01:24:21   that

01:24:21   will

01:24:25   continue

01:24:25   I

01:24:25   think

01:24:26   as far

01:24:26   as I

01:24:26   can

01:24:26   tell

01:24:27   that

01:24:27   will

01:24:28   continue

01:24:28   but

01:24:29   that

01:24:29   Mac

01:24:29   you

01:24:29   update

01:24:30   to

01:24:30   27

01:24:31   will

01:24:32   pick

01:24:33   up

01:24:33   that

01:24:33   should

01:24:34   pick

01:24:34   up

01:24:34   that

01:24:34   index

01:24:34   and

01:24:34   be

01:24:35   fine

01:24:35   and

01:24:36   you're

01:24:36   probably

01:24:36   not

01:24:36   getting

01:24:36   a

01:24:36   new

01:24:37   Mac

01:24:37   that

01:24:37   day

01:24:37   that

01:24:37   this

01:24:38   pre

01:24:38   indexing

01:24:39   is

01:24:39   really

01:24:39   for

01:24:39   devices

01:24:40   that

01:24:40   are

01:24:40   going

01:24:40   to

01:24:41   stay

01:24:41   are

01:24:41   going

01:24:41   to

01:24:41   just

01:24:41   update

01:24:42   and

01:24:42   it'll

01:24:42   be

01:24:43   available

01:24:43   if

01:24:43   you

01:24:43   replace

01:24:44   your

01:24:44   device

01:24:44   you're

01:24:45   resetting

01:24:46   the

01:24:46   clock

01:24:46   basically

01:24:46   zero

01:24:47   days

01:24:47   since

01:24:48   the

01:24:48   last

01:24:48   accident

01:24:48   at

01:24:49   factory

01:24:49   they

01:24:50   need

01:24:50   to

01:24:50   work

01:24:51   this

01:24:51   out

01:24:51   in

01:24:51   my

01:24:51   opinion

01:24:52   this

01:24:52   all

01:24:53   this

01:24:53   information

01:24:53   should

01:24:54   be

01:24:54   encrypted

01:24:54   and

01:24:55   shared

01:24:55   from

01:24:55   iCloud

01:24:56   backup

01:24:56   to

01:24:56   iCloud

01:24:57   backup

01:24:57   even

01:24:57   if

01:24:58   you

01:24:59   do

01:24:59   something

01:25:00   where

01:25:00   you

01:25:00   create

01:25:01   a

01:25:02   device

01:25:02   to

01:25:02   device

01:25:03   connection

01:25:05   sure

01:25:06   to move

01:25:06   this

01:25:07   information

01:25:07   over

01:25:08   well

01:25:08   and

01:25:08   you're

01:25:09   saying

01:25:09   it's

01:25:09   devices

01:25:09   of a

01:25:10   kind

01:25:10   too

01:25:10   so

01:25:10   it's

01:25:10   like

01:25:10   one

01:25:11   iPhone

01:25:11   to

01:25:11   the

01:25:11   other

01:25:11   so

01:25:12   all

01:25:12   the

01:25:14   issue

01:25:14   we're

01:25:14   trying

01:25:15   to do

01:25:15   this

01:25:15   from

01:25:15   the

01:25:15   iPhone

01:25:15   to

01:25:16   the

01:25:16   Mac

01:25:16   for

01:25:16   what

01:25:16   you

01:25:16   mentioned

01:25:17   right

01:25:17   you're

01:25:17   not

01:25:17   going

01:25:17   to

01:25:17   have

01:25:17   the

01:25:18   same

01:25:18   apps

01:25:18   you're

01:25:18   not

01:25:18   going

01:25:18   to

01:25:18   have

01:25:19   the

01:25:19   same

01:25:19   data

01:25:19   exactly

01:25:19   but

01:25:20   like

01:25:20   when

01:25:20   I

01:25:20   change

01:25:21   device

01:25:21   I

01:25:22   should

01:25:23   not

01:25:23   be

01:25:23   getting

01:25:23   a

01:25:23   different

01:25:24   experience

01:25:24   if

01:25:25   I'm

01:25:25   choosing

01:25:25   to

01:25:25   do

01:25:26   a

01:25:26   backup

01:25:26   right

01:25:26   my

01:25:26   new

01:25:27   iPhone

01:25:27   and

01:25:27   my

01:25:27   old

01:25:27   iPhone

01:25:28   should

01:25:28   basically

01:25:29   be

01:25:29   the

01:25:29   same

01:25:29   so

01:25:30   they

01:25:30   should

01:25:30   be

01:25:30   able

01:25:30   to

01:25:30   transfer

01:25:30   that

01:25:31   information

01:25:31   yeah

01:25:32   I

01:25:33   I

01:25:33   I

01:25:34   just

01:25:34   I

01:25:35   think

01:25:35   I

01:25:36   think

01:25:36   I

01:25:37   have

01:25:37   heard

01:25:38   I

01:25:38   think

01:25:38   somebody

01:25:38   I

01:25:38   know

01:25:39   asked

01:25:39   Apple

01:25:39   about

01:25:39   this

01:25:40   and

01:25:40   they

01:25:40   were

01:25:40   basically

01:25:40   said

01:25:41   you know

01:25:41   that's

01:25:41   not

01:25:41   how

01:25:42   we

01:25:42   do

01:25:42   it

01:25:42   but

01:25:42   I

01:25:43   would

01:25:44   love

01:25:44   to

01:25:44   be

01:25:44   proven

01:25:44   wrong

01:25:45   if

01:25:45   they've

01:25:45   invented

01:25:45   a new

01:25:46   way

01:25:46   to

01:25:46   do

01:25:46   this

01:25:46   that

01:25:46   will

01:25:47   solve

01:25:47   this

01:25:47   problem

01:25:47   but

01:25:47   that's

01:25:48   not

01:25:48   what

01:25:48   I'm

01:25:48   hearing

01:25:48   please

01:25:50   Apple

01:25:51   find a

01:25:52   way

01:25:52   find a

01:25:53   way

01:25:53   there

01:25:54   is

01:25:54   a

01:25:54   will

01:25:54   from

01:25:55   me

01:25:55   so

01:25:55   I

01:25:56   would

01:25:56   like

01:25:56   you

01:25:56   to

01:25:56   find

01:25:56   a

01:25:56   way

01:25:57   you

01:25:57   know

01:25:57   great

01:25:58   it

01:25:59   would

01:25:59   be

01:25:59   so

01:25:59   much

01:25:59   better

01:26:00   though

01:26:00   than

01:26:01   having

01:26:01   to

01:26:01   do

01:26:01   the

01:26:01   indexing

01:26:02   every

01:26:02   time

01:26:02   come

01:26:03   on

01:26:03   and

01:26:04   cause

01:26:04   also

01:26:05   it's

01:26:05   like

01:26:05   a

01:26:05   bad

01:26:05   experience

01:26:06   for

01:26:06   users

01:26:06   right

01:26:07   cause

01:26:07   their

01:26:07   battery

01:26:07   is

01:26:08   bad

01:26:08   like

01:26:08   the

01:26:09   phone

01:26:09   works

01:26:09   slow

01:26:09   like

01:26:10   it's

01:26:10   not

01:26:10   a

01:26:10   great

01:26:11   it's

01:26:12   already

01:26:13   not

01:26:13   a

01:26:13   great

01:26:13   first run

01:26:14   experience

01:26:14   and

01:26:15   I

01:26:15   expect

01:26:16   that

01:26:16   this

01:26:16   indexing

01:26:17   is

01:26:17   much

01:26:17   more

01:26:17   intensive

01:26:18   than

01:26:18   the

01:26:18   one

01:26:18   it's

01:26:18   replacing

01:26:19   but

01:26:19   anyway

01:26:20   finally

01:26:21   Amar

01:26:21   asks

01:26:22   with

01:26:22   Apple

01:26:22   focusing

01:26:23   heavily

01:26:23   on

01:26:24   resizable

01:26:24   iPhone

01:26:25   apps

01:26:25   in

01:26:26   iOS

01:26:26   27

01:26:27   so

01:26:27   landscape

01:26:27   apps

01:26:28   on

01:26:28   iPhone

01:26:28   resizable

01:26:29   apps

01:26:29   mirroring

01:26:30   on

01:26:30   the

01:26:30   Mac

01:26:30   is

01:26:31   it

01:26:31   safe

01:26:32   to

01:26:32   assume

01:26:32   that

01:26:32   the

01:26:32   foldable

01:26:33   iPhone

01:26:33   will

01:26:34   not

01:26:34   run

01:26:34   iPad

01:26:34   apps

01:26:35   in

01:26:35   full

01:26:35   screen

01:26:35   on

01:26:36   the

01:26:36   inner

01:26:36   display

01:26:37   but

01:26:37   in

01:26:37   fact

01:26:37   iPhone

01:26:38   apps

01:26:38   yes

01:26:40   yeah

01:26:40   but

01:26:42   most

01:26:44   iPhone

01:26:44   apps

01:26:44   are

01:26:44   iPad

01:26:45   apps

01:26:45   sure

01:26:45   so

01:26:46   I

01:26:46   just

01:26:47   don't

01:26:47   think

01:26:47   this

01:26:47   is

01:26:47   I

01:26:47   think

01:26:48   this

01:26:48   is

01:26:48   a

01:26:48   it's

01:26:50   a

01:26:50   distinction

01:26:50   almost

01:26:51   without

01:26:51   a

01:26:51   difference

01:26:52   I

01:26:52   think

01:26:52   though

01:26:52   the

01:26:52   idea

01:26:53   is

01:26:53   yes

01:26:53   these

01:26:53   are

01:26:53   going

01:26:54   to

01:26:54   be

01:26:54   iPhone

01:26:55   apps

01:26:56   that

01:26:56   have

01:26:56   new

01:26:56   size

01:26:56   classes

01:26:57   and

01:26:58   new

01:26:58   size

01:26:59   resizing

01:27:00   functionality

01:27:01   that

01:27:01   will

01:27:02   allow

01:27:02   them

01:27:02   to

01:27:02   adapt

01:27:03   to

01:27:03   these

01:27:03   smaller

01:27:04   screens

01:27:04   that

01:27:04   are

01:27:04   smaller

01:27:05   than

01:27:05   any

01:27:06   iPad

01:27:06   has

01:27:06   been

01:27:07   but

01:27:08   in

01:27:08   the

01:27:08   end

01:27:09   I

01:27:09   don't

01:27:09   know

01:27:10   like

01:27:10   these

01:27:11   are

01:27:11   all

01:27:11   iPad

01:27:12   apps

01:27:13   are

01:27:17   they're

01:27:17   all

01:27:17   the

01:27:17   same

01:27:18   so

01:27:18   I'm

01:27:19   not

01:27:19   too

01:27:19   concerned

01:27:19   about

01:27:20   this

01:27:20   detail

01:27:20   but

01:27:20   yes

01:27:21   if

01:27:21   they

01:27:23   didn't

01:27:23   need

01:27:23   to

01:27:23   do

01:27:24   anything

01:27:24   because

01:27:24   they

01:27:24   were

01:27:24   just

01:27:25   going

01:27:25   to

01:27:25   use

01:27:25   the

01:27:25   iPad

01:27:25   stuff

01:27:26   they

01:27:26   wouldn't

01:27:27   have

01:27:27   rolled out

01:27:27   a whole

01:27:28   bunch

01:27:28   of

01:27:28   new

01:27:28   technology

01:27:30   to

01:27:30   do

01:27:30   this

01:27:30   but

01:27:30   they

01:27:31   have

01:27:31   which

01:27:31   implies

01:27:32   that

01:27:32   what

01:27:32   they're

01:27:32   really

01:27:32   saying

01:27:33   is

01:27:33   and

01:27:34   there's

01:27:35   a reason

01:27:35   for

01:27:35   that

01:27:35   too

01:27:35   right

01:27:36   which

01:27:36   is

01:27:36   like

01:27:36   there's

01:27:36   still

01:27:36   apps

01:27:37   that

01:27:37   like

01:27:37   they

01:27:37   prioritize

01:27:38   the

01:27:38   iPhone

01:27:38   or

01:27:38   they're

01:27:39   only

01:27:39   on

01:27:39   the

01:27:39   iPhone

01:27:39   and

01:27:40   Apple

01:27:40   is

01:27:40   basically

01:27:40   saying

01:27:41   no

01:27:41   you

01:27:41   need

01:27:41   to

01:27:41   do

01:27:42   this

01:27:42   too

01:27:42   now

01:27:42   it

01:27:43   may

01:27:43   benefit

01:27:43   the

01:27:44   iPad

01:27:44   as

01:27:44   well

01:27:45   I

01:27:45   think

01:27:45   it

01:27:45   will

01:27:45   because

01:27:46   now

01:27:46   a bunch

01:27:57   iPad

01:27:58   apps

01:27:58   this

01:27:58   is

01:27:59   not

01:27:59   that

01:27:59   this

01:27:59   is

01:28:00   going

01:28:00   to

01:28:00   be

01:28:00   that

01:28:00   iPhone

01:28:01   that

01:28:02   iPhone

01:28:03   think

01:28:03   of

01:28:03   your

01:28:03   iPhone

01:28:03   app

01:28:04   getting

01:28:04   bigger

01:28:04   not

01:28:04   your

01:28:05   iPad

01:28:05   app

01:28:05   getting

01:28:05   smaller

01:28:06   yeah

01:28:06   they

01:28:07   and

01:28:07   if

01:28:07   there

01:28:07   are

01:28:07   iPad

01:28:08   only

01:28:08   experiences

01:28:09   they're

01:28:10   not

01:28:10   going

01:28:10   to

01:28:10   run

01:28:10   on

01:28:10   this

01:28:10   folding

01:28:11   iPhone

01:28:11   which

01:28:12   I

01:28:12   think

01:28:12   was

01:28:13   a

01:28:13   thing

01:28:13   that

01:28:13   people

01:28:13   had

01:28:13   hoped

01:28:14   right

01:28:14   it

01:28:14   would

01:28:14   be

01:28:14   iOS

01:28:15   on

01:28:16   the

01:28:16   outside

01:28:16   iPad

01:28:17   OS

01:28:17   on

01:28:17   the

01:28:17   inside

01:28:18   that's

01:28:18   not

01:28:18   it

01:28:19   well

01:28:20   yeah

01:28:20   and

01:28:20   the

01:28:20   multitasking

01:28:21   isn't

01:28:21   going

01:28:21   to

01:28:21   work

01:28:21   the

01:28:21   same

01:28:22   like

01:28:22   there's

01:28:23   if

01:28:23   there's

01:28:23   split

01:28:24   well

01:28:24   there's

01:28:24   going

01:28:24   to

01:28:24   be

01:28:24   like

01:28:25   split

01:28:25   view

01:28:25   probably

01:28:26   there

01:28:26   will

01:28:27   be

01:28:27   some

01:28:27   multi

01:28:28   app

01:28:29   features

01:28:29   but

01:28:30   they're

01:28:30   not

01:28:30   going

01:28:30   to

01:28:30   be

01:28:30   the

01:28:30   iPad

01:28:30   multitasking

01:28:31   no

01:28:31   it's

01:28:32   going to

01:28:32   be a new

01:28:32   one

01:28:33   what we need

01:28:34   or the

01:28:34   old

01:28:35   one

01:28:35   we need

01:28:37   a new

01:28:37   multitasking

01:28:38   thing

01:28:39   because

01:28:39   hey

01:28:40   they didn't

01:28:40   do one

01:28:40   this year

01:28:41   so

01:28:41   you know

01:28:42   here's

01:28:42   another

01:28:43   one

01:28:43   let's

01:28:43   do

01:28:43   that

01:28:44   instead

01:28:44   they

01:28:44   did

01:28:45   do

01:28:45   it

01:28:45   this

01:28:45   year

01:28:45   we

01:28:45   just

01:28:45   haven't

01:28:46   seen

01:28:46   it

01:28:46   yet

01:28:46   you

01:28:48   can

01:28:50   send

01:28:50   us

01:28:50   your

01:28:50   questions

01:28:51   and

01:28:51   also

01:28:52   your

01:28:52   feedback

01:28:52   and

01:28:53   follow

01:28:53   up

01:28:53   by

01:28:53   going

01:28:53   to

01:28:54   upgrade

01:28:54   feedback

01:28:55   dot

01:28:55   com

01:28:55   i would

01:28:56   like

01:28:56   to

01:28:56   thank

01:28:56   our

01:28:57   members

01:28:57   who

01:28:57   support

01:28:57   us

01:28:58   every

01:28:58   week

01:28:58   of

01:28:58   upgrade

01:28:59   plus

01:28:59   go

01:28:59   to

01:28:59   get

01:29:00   upgrade

01:29:00   plus

01:29:00   dot

01:29:00   com

01:29:01   and

01:29:01   you

01:29:01   can

01:29:01   get

01:29:01   longer

01:29:02   ad

01:29:02   free

01:29:02   versions

01:29:03   of

01:29:03   this

01:29:03   show

01:29:03   each

01:29:04   and

01:29:04   every

01:29:04   week

01:29:05   you

01:29:05   can

01:29:06   find

01:29:06   us

01:29:06   on

01:29:06   youtube

01:29:07   by

01:29:07   searching

01:29:07   for

01:29:08   the

01:29:08   upgrade

01:29:09   podcast

01:29:09   i'd like

01:29:10   to thank

01:29:10   our

01:29:10   sponsors

01:29:11   of this

01:29:11   week's

01:29:12   episode

01:29:12   that

01:29:12   is

01:29:13   decagon

01:29:13   squarespace

01:29:14   and

01:29:15   factor

01:29:15   but most

01:29:16   of all

01:29:16   i'd like

01:29:17   to thank

01:29:17   you for

01:29:17   listening

01:29:18   until

01:29:18   then

01:29:19   until

01:29:20   next

01:29:20   week

01:29:20   i should

01:29:21   say

01:29:21   say

01:29:21   goodbye

01:29:21   jacob

01:29:22   goodbye

01:29:23   mike

01:29:23   hurley