Up next in 10
Send in your predictions: https://www.dgriffinjones.com/extraordinary/cult-of-mac-podcast-wwdc26-predictions.html
This week: The leaked colors coming on the iPhone 18 Pro, the powerful software features coming to the folding iPhone, reports that the Vision Pro’s death are greatly exaggerated, reports that smart glasses are greatly delayed, and our WWDC keynote predictions!
Produced by Extra Ordinary for Cult of Mac
Music composed by Will Davenport, arranged by D. Griffin Jones
Chapters:
0:00 - Intro
2:10 - iPhone 18 Pro color mockups
11:02 - iOS 27 split screen support
23:08 - Smart glasses & Vision Pro updates
33:32 - Graham’s Vision Pro
56:19 - WWDC26 Predictions
Follow us!
Threads: https://www.threads.net/@cultofmac
Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@cultofmac
Instagram: https://instagram.com/cultofmac/
X: https://x.com/cultofmac
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
Coming up, the leaked colors coming on
0:02
the iPhone 18 Pro, powerful software
0:05
features coming to the folding iPhone,
0:07
reports that the Vision Pro's death are
0:08
greatly exaggerated, reports that smart
0:11
glasses are greatly delayed, and our
0:13
WWDC keynote predictions. [snorts]
0:19
Welcome to the Cult of Mac podcast. I am
0:21
your host D. Griffin [music] Jones.
0:23
Joining me today from based on his
0:26
image, cloudy and blue San Francisco,
0:28
Lewis Wallace.
0:30
>> Hey, how's it going? Actually, it's
0:31
beautifully sunny here today.
0:33
>> Shocking. Thank god I'm inside
0:36
>> in some sort of batcave.
0:39
Also joining us, we've got our full
0:40
panel of [music] guests. We have Graeme
0:43
Bower and Charlie Surell. Hello.
0:45
>> Hello. Great to be here.
0:48
Whenever you two are on it, it feels
0:49
like uh you know the extended family
0:52
coming over for Christmas.
0:53
>> Oh, that's nice.
0:54
>> Except without Leander here, it's like
0:56
uh I don't know. Dad forgot to thaw the
0:58
turkey and now he's making a trip to
1:00
Walmart.
1:02
>> That's it. [laughter] Yeah. Leander's
1:04
the one who makes the embarrassing
1:05
[snorts] comment at at lunchtime.
1:07
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Let's get a quick vibe
1:10
check from the two of you. You know,
1:12
WWDC is next week. Are you excited?
1:14
>> I'm very excited. I'm pumped. Is that
1:16
the word?
1:18
>> I'm the opposite. I'm I'm
1:21
>> deflated.
1:22
>> Yeah. Yeah. I I've haven't been less
1:24
excited about WDC WWDC and
1:26
>> like Raiders footballs.
1:30
>> Yeah, sure. [laughter]
1:32
>> Uh you two are from the Apple Core
1:34
podcast. This is the first time we've
1:35
had both of you on the show with us. Um
1:38
the the Apple History podcast game. Uh
1:41
it's a slightly more crowded space now.
1:43
Have you heard about um
1:44
>> the new show that Jason Snell is
1:46
launching? Graham,
1:47
>> we have we have serious competition
1:48
there. Yeah. But I I Yeah, there's many
1:51
stories to tell and you know I I think I
1:53
feel like he's popularizing the category
1:55
which is going to lift all the boats in
1:57
the harbor.
1:58
>> It looks like it's going to be a a
2:00
scripted thing like his 20 Max for 2020.
2:03
>> Yeah.
2:04
>> So I think Yeah, I I'm looking forward
2:06
to it. I really like his stuff.
2:07
>> Yeah, me too. Well, enough chitter
2:10
chatter. Let's move on to We've got a
2:12
busy show today. Lewis,
2:14
tell us about the iPhone 18 Pro colors
2:18
>> with the dark cherry on top.
2:19
>> Oh, yes. [clears throat]
2:21
>> Yeah. So, uh, images posted early last,
2:23
not early. Was it early last week? It
2:25
was last week.
2:26
>> I think it was just after we did the
2:28
show like maybe that Friday.
2:29
>> She Christmas images posted last week by
2:33
a leaker known as Sunny Dixon. Maybe
2:34
you've heard him on social media sites.
2:37
They showed uh bunch of dummy units for
2:40
the iPhone 18 Pro that showed four
2:41
different finishes. Um, you know, pretty
2:44
good look at probably what they're going
2:46
to look like. This guy's stuff tends to
2:48
be pretty accurate. Uh, leaked models
2:50
appear in dark gray. Oo, really going on
2:53
a limb with that one. Silver, also
2:55
extremely controversial. Uh, light blue
2:58
and a striking deep red finish called
3:01
dark cherry.
3:04
I like the sound of that. Oh, I wish it
3:05
was Wild Cherry.
3:07
>> Named after the famous funk band from
3:09
what was it? Uh,
3:11
>> yes, that's right. Mingo Junction, Ohio.
3:15
>> If [laughter] you were waiting for me to
3:16
like help you out there, I [snorts] I I
3:19
have no idea.
3:20
>> I'd never even heard of Mingo Junction,
3:22
Ohio. Anyway, play that funky music. Uh,
3:24
let's see. So, Dark Cherry, it's a it's
3:26
been subject to rumors for months, you
3:28
know, expected service signature look
3:29
for the iPhone Pro uh 18 Pro, just as
3:32
the Cosmic Orange was the standout. Uh
3:35
like, oh, it's you definitely have a new
3:37
phone and I can tell color.
3:39
>> Uh supply chain reports have described a
3:42
shade as a wine inspired red rather than
3:45
the brighter reds Apple used on uh you
3:47
know, previous devices. Uh Dixon's
3:50
images line up with leaks from April
3:51
that gave a first glimpse at the range
3:53
of colors of the uh 18 Pro and Pro Max.
3:56
Let's see. Say blah blah blah. they the
3:59
these leaks if this is true, you know,
4:01
this means it it's true that the cosmic
4:03
orange will go away. Kind of sad. I
4:06
don't know.
4:07
>> Yeah, cuz you were an orange fan, right,
4:08
Louis? [snorts]
4:10
>> Yeah. I mean, I've got one. Uh I'm not
4:13
tired of looking at it. It's in a bright
4:15
orange case. I mean, I I don't have a
4:18
problem, you know, telling which phone
4:19
is mine and which one is my wife's,
4:21
which was a real problem when when they
4:23
were just like blue and slightly darker
4:26
blue or gray and slightly blue or gray
4:28
or whatever, you know, year after year,
4:30
same size phone, virtually identical
4:32
cases and everything and constantly, you
4:34
know, getting confused even with the
4:36
always on uh display.
4:38
>> You [snorts] know what bugs me about
4:39
this rumor is the way that they describe
4:41
purple as red. And I don't know why, but
4:44
there's this thing about purple. It's
4:45
normally people describing blue as per
4:48
purple when it's blue. And I I I I I get
4:51
really bugged by people getting the
4:54
frequency ranges of colors wrong. And
4:57
let's be honest, [laughter]
4:58
in no sense is this a red. You could say
5:00
it's in the sort of purple violet area.
5:03
And also, I mean, I love I love cherry
5:06
as a flavor. I love I'm going to make
5:08
cherry pie this weekend because cherry
5:09
>> Oh, yes. back in the northern
5:11
hemisphere. I love cherry. And I'm so
5:13
happy about this news. It would tempt me
5:15
to upgrade just to have a purple phone,
5:17
but I just will not stand people calling
5:20
it red because it is not red.
5:22
>> Cherry is a dark red. That's cherries
5:24
aren't blue or purple.
5:25
>> You know what the color is? It it's like
5:26
the color of cherry yogurt. I I do take
5:29
a little bit of issue with the uh with
5:31
the pictures that Sunonny Dixon took
5:32
here because first of all, he
5:33
photographs them on a brown table uh
5:36
which is not like a neutral color. You
5:38
know, my my office is sort of like
5:39
beigish. I have a lot of brown furniture
5:41
and stuff. So, I mean, I know from
5:43
experience that like it throws off the
5:45
color balance if you try photographing
5:46
something on brown. Uh, and you can also
5:48
tell that because the one that's
5:49
supposedly silver in some of these
5:51
pictures looks like almost as blue as
5:54
the blue one. So, like the the color
5:56
balance is off. So, I don't think we can
5:57
necessarily trust the the the dark
6:00
cherry here.
6:02
>> That's true. So, you're thinking
6:03
everything's looking a bit bluer than it
6:04
should. So this is probably slightly
6:06
less blue and therefore
6:09
>> maybe I mean it throws off like they
6:11
they they don't look the same across the
6:12
different pictures either because the
6:14
lighting is inconsistent. But I mean my
6:16
question for Louis is I mean you you got
6:18
the the the special color last year, the
6:19
orange one. Uh would you get the dark
6:21
cherry this year when you upgrade since
6:23
you're on the upgrade program?
6:24
>> Yeah, I I I I do like the funky colors.
6:27
you know, I I want them to be uh new and
6:30
different, and I want to, you know, just
6:32
encourage Apple to keep doing that
6:33
rather than going with gray and lighter
6:35
gray and darker gray and silver. Um,
6:38
and, you know, this one looks pretty
6:41
good. Although, I got to say, the thing
6:42
that that bugged me the most about the
6:44
orange is also here in that the frame is
6:49
kind of a lot darker than the the glass
6:52
back. And uh that I mean to me that's
6:55
the part of this whole redesign that
6:57
came out last year that that I like the
6:59
least, you know, just visually I just
7:01
like the the the dark part of the orange
7:04
one is pretty dark orange and then the
7:06
back looks like a you know a dreamsicle
7:09
or something. It's it's much lighter and
7:11
it and it really, you know, depends on
7:13
which angle you hold it at. Every iPhone
7:15
that I've ever, you know, had since I've
7:17
started paying attention to the colors,
7:19
they they vary so much when you you you
7:22
know, turn them into light. I wish that
7:23
they they made the the, you know, the
7:25
back of it, like the glass part. I wish
7:27
they made it color match the aluminum a
7:29
little better. I don't maybe that's just
7:31
not possible. I mean, I'm sure, well,
7:33
I'm not sure they've tried, but uh, you
7:35
know, if you look at some of those, you
7:36
look at them head on, they look pretty,
7:39
you know, like one color, but then you
7:41
you look at the one of the, you know, a
7:43
couple of the kind of off angle ones of
7:45
the dark cherry, it's like, oh, looks
7:47
kind of like dark cherry, you know,
7:49
dark, you know, kind of like a, you
7:52
know, light red wine. And then the other
7:54
part looks like uh, like a, you know,
7:56
wine spritzer or something. It's
7:59
>> it's much lighter. And then you look at
8:00
like the curves around like the the
8:01
camera plateau and like so they reflect
8:03
light differently. So parts of it look
8:05
much lighter and other parts and the
8:07
shadows get like much darker. It's a
8:08
very dynamic color. So if you get like
8:10
the you know the if you plan on getting
8:12
like the flagship hero color every year,
8:14
what what color does your wife get? Did
8:16
she just get silver? Uh let's see. This
8:19
year she got the blue one, which I got
8:20
to say, I mean looking at them both side
8:22
by side, I mean the the the blue one
8:24
does look good. It's and it's less of a
8:27
contrast the the back to the sides, you
8:30
know, it looks more uniform. Uh I would
8:32
have been perfectly happy with that, but
8:33
I'm you know, again, it's it's a color
8:36
that's covered mostly by a case.
8:38
>> Yeah.
8:38
>> But uh
8:40
>> you see more of it now that they have
8:41
the giant plateau than you do before.
8:43
>> That's true. And I've heard people say
8:45
like like Leander was in one of the
8:46
newsletters, I could forgot that my
8:48
phone was silver or whatever. Well, how
8:51
do you ever look at the thing? I mean,
8:52
there's a, you know, 2x4 area there
8:55
that's just what color it is.
8:59
[laughter and snorts]
9:00
>> I think the blue looks like the color
9:01
that uh old people dye their hair,
9:04
>> you know, like a blue rinse. Do you have
9:06
that in America or is that just a weird
9:08
British thing?
9:09
>> I I always thought it was to offset the
9:11
nicotine stains that they get in their
9:13
hair
9:13
>> when they think people will be happy
9:15
there's a black one this year. A lot of
9:17
people were bummed there was no black
9:18
last year.
9:19
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think that I think
9:21
these will be a popular if if this turns
9:23
out to be true, I think it'll be a
9:24
popular section of colors. I can imagine
9:26
people will moan about the cosmic orange
9:28
going away, though.
9:30
>> Yeah, I will be. I don't like this new
9:32
purple or cherry. It's too close to
9:34
burgundy, which was my uh school uniform
9:37
color, and I still still have trauma
9:40
>> about that.
9:41
>> Mhm. [snorts]
9:42
>> I mean, not not that you plan on getting
9:43
a new a new iPhone, Charlie, but what
9:45
color would you pick out of these four?
9:47
Uh, probably the probably
9:49
[clears throat] the white one, the
9:50
silver one with a with a with a case
9:52
with a I mean, I've got I have a bright
9:54
case, so like you say, once if it's
9:56
inside the case, I don't like the blue.
9:58
I find it incipid. The black is fine.
10:01
>> Uh, the the cherry is uh blue.
10:06
[laughter]
10:06
>> Maybe that's about
10:09
>> Yeah, they could if if you want help
10:11
naming your colors apple, just uh hit me
10:13
up. [laughter]
10:15
Are there are we going to do like the
10:16
the thing where like you put a bunch of
10:17
stickers on the plateau? You plan on a
10:19
bunch of tiny stickers.
10:20
>> Oh my god.
10:21
>> I can't show you my phone because it's
10:22
I'm using it for the for the video call,
10:24
but I've got I've got little sticker
10:26
I've got like little stickers on.
10:28
>> Do you?
10:29
>> Yeah. One of them is a one of them is a
10:30
sticker off an orange.
10:32
>> I think this you need a special. It's
10:34
like the U2 iPod. This will be like the
10:36
Prince iPhone.
10:38
>> Oh yeah.
10:38
>> Now that's not Prince's purple's way
10:40
more blue than that.
10:41
>> Okay. Well, as we don't know yet, we've
10:44
got to see it for real to know if Prince
10:46
would have used this phone.
10:47
>> I bet Prince had just had people make
10:50
phone calls for it. [laughter]
10:51
>> Yeah,
10:52
>> you'll have to you'll have to see
10:53
Apple's pictures, which will look
10:56
stunning, and then you'll have to go to
10:57
a store to see what it really looks like
10:59
and be
11:00
>> slightly disappointed.
11:02
>> Well, let's talk about a more exciting
11:04
phone, in my opinion, the folding
11:06
iPhone. iOS 27 might finally bring split
11:10
screen multitasking to the iPhone for uh
11:13
you know one specific device. Apple is
11:15
reported working on new multitasking
11:16
features in iOS 27 that would
11:18
automatically adapt any iPhone app for
11:21
landscape and split screen layouts. The
11:24
uh foldable iPhone, I don't know if
11:26
you've heard about it, they're working
11:27
on that will reportedly feature a short
11:30
outer screen about 5 1/2 in for use when
11:33
closed. Then it would open booklike to
11:36
provide the user with a screen akin to
11:37
an iPad mini in landscape about 7.8 in.
11:42
The latest iPhone multitasking rumor
11:44
comes from WBO tipster fixed focused
11:47
digital. I don't know if I recognize
11:50
that name. Uh who wrote over the weekend
11:52
that Apple is working on what some are
11:54
comparing to parallel view on Huawei's
11:56
Harmony OS which is based on Android.
11:59
Various Android devices have supported
12:02
this for a long time. Apple's reportedly
12:04
developing a system that learns how to
12:06
scale apps wider, rearrange layouts, and
12:09
even let apps run in split screen mode.
12:11
So, I mean, they really have that
12:14
already developed. Uh, it's that's just
12:16
iPad OS. They're really just working to
12:18
bring those iPad OS feature flags to,
12:21
you know, different screen sizes and
12:23
device types.
12:24
>> When you have the phone unfolded,
12:26
>> is it roughly the Are you looking at
12:28
screen? It's about the same shape as a
12:30
regular iPhone screen.
12:31
>> So, I actually have a mockup here.
12:32
>> Oh, you fantastic.
12:34
>> 4x3 on each side.
12:36
>> Cuz I'm Yeah, I'm looking at the
12:37
illustration in the article and it looks
12:39
just like a regular phone shape. Yeah.
12:40
Yeah, I've seen this. I I think this is
12:42
kind of It would be neat to have
12:44
something on one side and something on
12:46
the other. Like you could have
12:48
>> Yeah. Yeah. I' I've been thinking about
12:50
this from from an app developers
12:51
perspective and I'm pretty sure you can
12:53
already see exactly what this is going
12:54
to be like because it this is basically
12:57
if you take a a Max or a uh what was the
13:01
other big phone?
13:03
>> The Plus.
13:04
>> The Plus. Thank you. If you take one of
13:06
those and put it in landscape mode, then
13:08
it switches from the size class compact,
13:11
which is the normal iPhone size class,
13:13
to the regular size class, which is what
13:15
an iPad is. uh but it doesn't get all
13:19
the iPad features and I think this is
13:21
what we'll have with
13:22
>> with the foldable iPhone when you open
13:24
it up that there's there so there's the
13:26
size class compact and regular which is
13:28
iPhone and iPad there's also the idiom
13:31
of iPad and iPhone and so when you when
13:34
you when you put a big phone in
13:37
landscape mode you will get the regular
13:39
size class so you'll see a sidebar on
13:41
the left hand side but you don't get
13:43
like multi-windowing you don't get the
13:46
sidear adaptable tab bar. You know, on
13:48
on iPad, the tab bar appears at the top
13:50
of the screen. On an iPhone, it appears
13:52
at the bottom of the screen, but if you
13:54
look in in landscape on uh an iPhone,
13:57
because it's still the iPhone idiom, the
14:00
tab bar stays at the bottom of the
14:01
screen. And I think that's what we're
14:03
going to get here. So, if you'd look at
14:05
a landscape
14:07
uh Max phone right now and imagine it
14:10
was twice as high, that I think is
14:12
exactly what this screen would look
14:14
like. don't believe that Apple will
14:16
cross the streams and and make this
14:18
iPhone pretend to be an iPad. I think
14:21
it's it's idiom it will declare to all
14:23
the apps is oh hi I'm a I'm an iPhone.
14:27
And so apps already some apps already
14:30
support that. You know some app
14:32
developers turn off the rotate thing but
14:34
if you look at what happens to an app on
14:36
a on a plus size or max size phone in
14:40
landscape that's basically what this
14:42
screen is. I I would that if I was a
14:45
betting man that's I I think any clues
14:47
we get next week it will be around that
14:50
and I think that the reason they need to
14:53
bring split screen to the iPhone is
14:57
because it won't have the
14:59
multi-windowing of iPad because it will
15:00
still have the iPhone idiom and so in in
15:03
that sense I think the split screen will
15:05
really come into its own uh when you
15:08
when you kind of open up a fold and then
15:10
you can see two apps side by side Um the
15:12
the curious thing in my mind is what
15:15
will happen if you have two apps side by
15:16
side and then you close the phone. I
15:19
assume that the the app which had focus
15:22
would then just take the whole screen
15:24
and the other one will be behind it. But
15:26
those are all [clears throat] things as
15:27
an app developer I'm very curious about.
15:30
>> This is um something I probably said on
15:31
the podcast before because it just
15:33
annoys me that more people in the in the
15:35
in the press don't understand this, but
15:36
like iOS and iPad OS, Apple talks about
15:39
them as if they're different. They are
15:41
literally the exact same software and
15:43
operating system. Like developers know
15:45
this. You know, you you only have to
15:47
download, you know, whatever version
15:49
26.5 once to get both the iPad and iOS
15:53
versions because they are the exact same
15:55
software. Apple just makes them
15:56
different by enabling different feature
15:58
classes on the different screen sizes
16:00
and like pairing that to a device. So,
16:02
like they declare this device that
16:03
you're running on is an iPhone.
16:04
Therefore, it gets these features, but
16:06
you know, it's still all that stuff is
16:08
still in there like support for
16:10
multi-winding and all the quote unquote
16:12
iPad OS features are still in iOS. The
16:15
difference though, however, is that the
16:18
apps that you run are different. A
16:20
developer can make an iPad app that's
16:23
just on that only runs on the iPad
16:26
version of iOS and they can make an
16:27
iPhone app that are entirely different.
16:29
Uh so that's like the developer story
16:32
here that I I think we'll hear a little
16:34
bit about probably not in the main
16:36
keynote but at like the um at the
16:38
developer state of the union they'll
16:40
probably have like a lot of APIs to talk
16:42
about in that realm and they won't say
16:44
what it's for but everybody can read
16:46
between the lines and say oh suddenly I
16:49
can uh turn my iOS app into an iPad OS
16:52
app basically and they'll be basically
16:53
say interesting. Well, that that's where
16:56
I think you I I don't think you'll get
16:58
the iPad features on a on iPhone because
17:01
I think it will still declare itself as
17:02
an iPhone. But if
17:04
>> it's interesting to see what will be
17:05
there and what won't. Um, so like
17:07
obviously this will be technically
17:08
capable of doing the multi-windowing
17:10
thing on a bigger screen because like
17:12
the it'll have the same screen size as
17:13
the iPad mini and that has it as well.
17:15
But I think but I think it'll only be
17:18
split screen. And I also bet that's why
17:19
they were quick to implement split
17:21
screen in iPad OS 26 shortly after and
17:24
in conjunction with the new
17:25
multi-winding system because they'll
17:27
need both.
17:28
>> If they spend a lot of time showing us
17:30
what sidebyside split screen looks like
17:32
in landscape mode on a Max, that's
17:34
definitely a clue.
17:36
>> Yeah.
17:36
>> You know, what we get at WWDC when they
17:38
tell developers to focus on certain
17:40
things,
17:41
>> it's they they don't tell you why. and
17:44
something like it's it would be an
17:45
extreme edge case to worry about what
17:47
side byside split view looks like in
17:50
landscape on a max but it could be you
17:53
know a precursor to something more
17:54
interesting.
17:55
>> Mhm. Now, what I what I'm hoping for is
17:58
that this could be a device. I mean,
18:00
we've seen this with with iPad. Like,
18:02
this is a device that will be perfectly
18:04
capable of being plugged into an
18:06
external screen and, you know, running
18:08
full-blown like multi-winding
18:11
on a desktop, like you know, 5K display
18:13
just like the iPad can. We've also known
18:16
like the MacBook Neo has proven without
18:18
a doubt, oh, a device running on an A
18:21
series processor is perfectly capable of
18:23
doing like real computer things like
18:24
video editing and, you know, advanced
18:26
multitasking and running a bunch of like
18:27
complex big things at once. And the
18:30
iPhone, the folding iPhone will have an
18:33
A series chip that's two revisions
18:34
better than the MacBook Neo. So, like
18:38
this device will have a really high
18:39
potential. I think a lot of how good it
18:43
is as like a computer replacement or,
18:45
you know, the the the single device you
18:47
can use as your one and only computer
18:49
for like real computer things is
18:51
entirely dependent on how much Apple
18:53
bothers to enable on it.
18:55
>> Yeah, I I totally think that's going to
18:57
be the issue. And I bet if if my
18:59
prediction for like this fall when it
19:01
comes out, if it comes out, is that
19:03
because it's declaring itself as an
19:04
iPhone, it can only do a fraction of
19:06
what people want to do with it. And so
19:08
it'll be like the iPad all over again.
19:10
It's like this is this could be an iPad
19:12
but it's not. Why Apple? Why? Um
19:15
>> I mean as someone who doesn't own a
19:17
laptop and just has a Mac Mini, like it
19:18
would be awesome to know that oh if I
19:20
ever like need to travel, you know, if
19:22
I'm ever invited to an Apple event, how
19:24
cool would it be if I don't need to
19:26
bring anything and I can just use like
19:28
my phone to like record a podcast, plug
19:30
it, you know, do real computer things
19:32
with it? That would be awesome.
19:34
I've got uh a question for you about um
19:38
a phone that is going to be used a lot
19:40
more in landscape mode.
19:42
>> Uh before smartphones, we photos were
19:45
all in landscape mode, videos were all
19:47
in landscape mode. Now we used to, you
19:49
know, everything's in portrait and we
19:50
don't hate we don't even hate portrait
19:52
video anymore.
19:53
>> Uh so do you think if everyone is using
19:57
these phones uh the the iPhone fold or
19:59
whatever in landscape mode that is going
20:02
to be become a thing again? Do you think
20:04
maybe because when Apple does something
20:06
then Samsung will copy and then it will
20:07
become a although Samsung's already
20:09
doing phones and Apple's late to the
20:10
folding phones but you know the fact
20:12
that it's becomes like the a main a main
20:14
thing that everyone's
20:16
a default almost
20:18
>> it could popularize it more for sure.
20:20
>> I mean or not I guess it doesn't matter.
20:22
I just wondered if it's gonna make
20:23
>> I mean that that's predicated on
20:24
everybody having a folding phone and I
20:26
think uh if it's $2,2500
20:31
even if you consider well that's the
20:33
equivalent price of buying an iPhone and
20:34
an iPad and a MacBook Neo people are
20:37
still not going to do that.
20:38
>> Maybe get a case that makes it look like
20:40
your regular iPhone is a folding phone.
20:42
>> That could be interesting.
20:42
>> I think the the square camera sensor
20:45
that they did they introduce it with the
20:47
last iPhone. square camera sensor and
20:49
that will make a lot of sense on the on
20:51
the fold because it can take landscape
20:53
and portrait whichever orientation you
20:56
have it in. And so yeah, if you're like
20:59
18 or under, then you're only interested
21:01
in portrait photos.
21:03
There's no landscape. And so you you
21:05
could have it in landscape mode and
21:07
still take portrait photos if you want.
21:09
>> So it's portrait and and boomer mode is
21:12
what you're [laughter] saying.
21:13
>> Yeah. [snorts]
21:15
I also think it would be really cool if
21:16
uh if they have like a camera that can
21:18
switch between a portrait and landscape
21:20
with like a big square sensor. What if
21:21
you could simultaneously record portrait
21:23
and landscape video and have like orient
21:26
video either way after the fact? That
21:28
would be cool, too.
21:29
>> You should be able to do I mean, if it
21:30
captures the whole sensor, you could
21:31
definitely do that, right?
21:33
>> It just is more storage, but that's kind
21:35
of what happens now with um if if you
21:38
set it into 16 by9 mode. Uh when you
21:41
come to edit it, you get those kind of
21:42
lost pixels. It's just a crop. So,
21:45
>> you know, you can always revert back to
21:46
43.
21:47
>> All this is to say that like the longer
21:49
we wait for this phone, the more the
21:51
more excited I get for it and the more I
21:53
imagine they could do with it. And I I
21:55
think if anything, my disappointment
21:57
will be like on the lost potential. But
22:00
that's just me. Are either of you
22:01
interested in this device? I have no
22:04
need for it and I don't really want it,
22:07
but I'm getting really fascinated by it.
22:10
And I also kind of feel like it's a
22:12
different enough form factor that you
22:14
maybe need to test apps on it as well.
22:16
>> That's your kind of justification to
22:19
>> to get one.
22:21
>> Oh yeah. You just basically have to, you
22:23
know, just professionally speaking, you
22:24
have to.
22:25
>> Yeah. Exactly.
22:26
It just comes with the ter comes with
22:28
the job. It's a, you know, I I'm kind of
22:31
I'm I'm fold curious. I I think it maybe
22:34
it's stupid.
22:35
>> It's maybe a bit stupid, but I'm kind of
22:37
still interested.
22:38
>> I like the look of it, but I won't be
22:39
buying one. I definitely want to check
22:41
one out. I'm most interested to see how
22:42
they've solved the the screen folding.
22:46
>> They're not going to they're not going
22:46
to sell a phone where the screen is
22:48
terrible.
22:49
>> So,
22:49
>> when is when is when is Fairphone going
22:51
to come out with a folding device,
22:52
Charlie?
22:54
[laughter]
22:54
>> Just you can just buy two and put hinge
22:57
them together.
22:57
>> Tape them together. Mhm.
22:59
>> Yeah, it's there already. And you can
23:01
replace the battery. [laughter]
23:01
>> Is anybody working on on Linux to make
23:03
sure it supports pulling devices?
23:05
>> Shut up. [laughter]
23:08
>> Okay. Why don't you tell us about
23:09
another exciting product that uh you're
23:11
never going to buy?
23:13
>> Apple smart glasses, which may not
23:14
arrive until late 2027.
23:17
Okay. So, previous reports uh say that
23:20
it was going to be coming towards the
23:22
end of 2026. Mark German uh Apple guru
23:26
Mark German in his latest power on
23:27
newsletter has said it won't launch
23:29
until late 2027.
23:31
Uh top Apple executives uh which is
23:35
including which includes Tim Cook and
23:37
John Turners are backing the project. Uh
23:39
the vision products group which is
23:41
developing the smart glasses has been
23:43
led for Turners for the last two years.
23:45
>> Okay. And apparently they're not giving
23:47
up on the Vision Pro yet either, which
23:51
is a good thing for Graeme who's just
23:52
bought one. [laughter] Uh
23:55
they're going to be making Gur says
23:56
they're working on a smaller and lighter
23:58
version. Uh but you know that's that's
24:00
going to be years 2028 uh late 2028 says
24:04
German.
24:05
>> Although Mingi Quo just swooped in with
24:08
a with a a kind of counter on that
24:11
saying maybe there wouldn't be a
24:12
successor to the the Vision Pro. And
24:15
last I saw and this is this has all been
24:17
going on today but German and Mingchi
24:19
Quo have been sort of juking it out on X
24:23
this on this one and I
24:25
>> I'd love to see that [laughter]
24:27
>> they should actually do that smackdown
24:29
>> German confusingly said yesterday that
24:32
yes while they're developing it the
24:34
product category has also been put on
24:36
ice so which is a statement that
24:38
conflicts with itself so which is it
24:40
>> making his bets
24:42
>> are they just making one for funsies and
24:44
just never going to release it or what?
24:46
>> My feeling is that all of these rumors
24:48
are sort of coherent if you take the
24:50
spin out of them, which is that there
24:52
was going to be a Visiona Air and that's
24:55
been scrapped
24:57
>> and they're not currently working on a
24:59
successor to the Vision Pro, but they
25:02
probably will do one in due course. Um,
25:05
and [clears throat] I that that sounds
25:08
>> feasible to me. And and I I think one of
25:09
the the things that was inferred from
25:12
some of the early reports was, oh,
25:14
because they're not working on new
25:15
hardware right now, then they've
25:17
scrapped Vision OS. And I mean, we will
25:19
find out next week, but I I very much
25:21
doubt that's the case because I
25:23
>> You very much hope that's not the case.
25:24
>> I hope it's not the case, but I wouldn't
25:27
have bought a Vision Pro if I didn't
25:29
believe in the platform. And I I think
25:32
it's it's strategically important to
25:34
Apple. And it's not like Apple is short
25:36
of a few bobs. Apple Apple can do
25:38
whatever it wants. If Apple thinks
25:40
something is important, they can spend
25:41
money on it for as long as they want to.
25:43
And they did um with other devices like
25:45
the uh Apple TV settop box. Um so
25:49
there's no reason for them not to carry
25:51
on developing vision OS unless they
25:54
really don't want to. Um I I think they
25:57
will stick at it.
25:58
>> Okay. Do you want to hear the bad news
25:59
about the uh the Apple glasses?
26:02
>> Go on then.
26:02
>> Yes.
26:03
>> Uh they are going to rely well I mean we
26:05
knew this anyway but this is called out
26:07
in uh cult article on the sub on this on
26:11
this story. Uh they will rely heavily on
26:14
Siri and Apple intelligence. [laughter]
26:17
So there's you know maybe that's why
26:19
they've been pushed back. Maybe it's not
26:21
maybe it's not the hardware.
26:23
>> What what do we think about this product
26:25
category like that smart glasses? Is
26:27
this a good thing, a bad thing? A creepy
26:29
thing? I know Charlie, you think it's a
26:31
creepy thing, right?
26:32
>> I Yeah, I think it's creepy. I also
26:34
think uh
26:37
>> I don't really see
26:38
>> Well, because you can just video people
26:39
without knowing. And once this is
26:41
connected up to AI stuff and the all of
26:44
the pictures that have been scraped off
26:47
the off the internet, you're going to be
26:49
able to, you know, just see a picture of
26:50
somebody and know about them. It's going
26:53
to be able to like just like in just
26:55
like in the sci-fi.
26:57
Uh yeah, but mostly it's cameras. Uh did
26:59
you see Joanna Stern's uh article video
27:01
this week where she uh paid to have um
27:05
to have the uh indicator light removed
27:07
from her Facebook Ray-B bands
27:10
>> so she could record uh record without
27:12
them, you know.
27:14
>> And ironically, people are selling those
27:15
services on Facebook marketplace.
27:17
>> Yeah, that was the best part.
27:18
>> Yeah. So yeah, I I think and I also
27:22
don't think I think it's a product that
27:26
Apple wants to happen and fa Facebook
27:27
definitely wants to happen because you
27:28
know the creepier the better for
27:29
Facebook.
27:30
>> Uh [laughter]
27:32
you know this just is it creepy? Yes.
27:34
Okay, let's put money in.
27:36
>> Uh but I I'm not sure who who really
27:39
wants it. I mean I there are definite
27:41
uses but as a mainstream thing the phone
27:43
is already that's the thing with a lot
27:44
of this stuff with the with the vision
27:46
pro as well the phone is already good at
27:49
doing all the things we want to do
27:51
>> and the these these newi these new
27:55
products don't necessarily there's no
27:57
obvious thing that they do better they
27:59
don't do anything you know they you
28:00
can't just pull it out of your pocket
28:01
and look at it on um on the on the train
28:04
or the metro you taking a photo with it
28:07
is creepy I mean you could take which is
28:10
just fine with your uh with your phone
28:12
and you don't have to wave your head
28:13
around to do it.
28:14
>> Mhm.
28:15
>> There's they just don't seem to be plus
28:17
the you know the displays aren't going
28:19
to be very good in a in a they just
28:21
can't be you know they're not going to
28:22
be as good as looking at a lovely phone
28:23
screen. Our screens are amazing and huge
28:25
now. Well, I think the rumor was that
28:27
the first smart glasses won't even have
28:28
a display. Like down the line they might
28:31
add a display, but the first Apple smart
28:33
>> I almost I almost wonder if the the
28:35
launch was delayed a year because they
28:38
like scrapped there was before that, you
28:41
know, this year they'll do like the
28:43
basic one that they rushed the
28:44
development of that would just be like
28:45
basically you know a camera and built-in
28:48
AirPods and voice control and that in
28:50
2027 they would have like the first one
28:53
with a basic screen anyway. So, I almost
28:55
wonder if they just like decided the
28:57
basic one isn't worth shipping and
28:59
they're just only going to and and the
29:01
first entrant in this category is going
29:02
to be the one with a tiny screen in it.
29:04
If they were only a few months away from
29:06
like launching it this year anyways
29:09
and like then suddenly it's delayed
29:11
another 12 months. That that seems weird
29:14
to me. [clears throat]
29:15
>> The other thing that's weird to me is
29:16
having sound in these because like you
29:18
talked about integrated AirPods and they
29:20
could do that but I think that would
29:21
make it look really geeky, wouldn't it?
29:23
the end of your glasses were like
29:25
AirPods that go into your ears. I don't
29:27
know if that's a look that people would
29:29
want.
29:29
>> You just need little speakers in the
29:31
stems that point in the direction of
29:32
your ears.
29:33
>> Like uh Vision Pro has, but everyone can
29:35
hear Vision Pro like you know
29:37
>> and so I don't pretty large modules as
29:40
well.
29:40
>> Speakers in glasses. So I don't believe
29:43
it will have sound. I I think it will
29:45
work with AirPods. You put AirPods in
29:47
your ear, you put these on, which means
29:49
the only thing it really does is is have
29:51
a camera. And potentially, there were
29:52
some rumors saying that it would be able
29:55
to support the same awesome hand
29:56
gestures that Vision Pro has. But then
29:59
there were other people saying that's
30:00
impossible because Vision Pro uses loads
30:02
of cameras to do that and these smart
30:04
glasses won't have those cameras. But I
30:06
have found one thing since I got the
30:08
Vision Pro a couple of weeks ago. I love
30:11
those hand gestures and I start trying
30:13
to use them in my whole everyday life.
30:15
If I want to shut someone up, I just go
30:17
and I tap my fingers and I want them to
30:19
shut up. You know, like as you close the
30:22
window by looking at it, looking at the
30:24
the cross button and
30:26
>> I even I even wear a watch on my wrist,
30:27
but I still do the thing like where I
30:29
try to like look at my hand and then
30:31
turn it over to see the time.
30:33
>> I catch myself doing that all the time.
30:35
>> It's so great these gestures. And so if
30:37
they can bring those gestures to a
30:40
smartwatch so you can control your, you
30:42
know, because you've got on your
30:43
AirPods, you can do all this weird stuff
30:45
where you fiddle with the the stem of
30:47
your AirPod and it's really fiddly. And
30:49
if I'm on a run and I'm doing that, then
30:51
I worry I'm going to yank the AirPod out
30:53
by mistake. But if you could just do a
30:56
Vision Pro style hand gesture without
30:58
lifting your hands, that would be
31:00
amazing if that's something that this
31:02
this could do. But I have also seen
31:03
rumors saying that that rumor is
31:05
preposterous and that you would need so
31:07
many cameras to make that work and it ju
31:09
it's just not feasible.
31:12
>> You need a screen as well, right?
31:14
Because part of it part of the gestures
31:16
is that you look at things and you
31:17
perform the gestures on them.
31:19
>> Well, that's you'd have to be able to
31:20
see stuff.
31:21
>> You do like the taps that you do on the
31:24
uh um the stem of your AirPod. You could
31:28
do that anyway. So like just one one tap
31:30
of your fingers to pause or
31:32
>> I wonder what I wonder what's that the
31:34
streets are going to look like if this
31:35
these things take off and they do have
31:36
gestures because we went from the only
31:39
people walking down the street talking
31:40
to themselves or crazy people now
31:41
everyone does it and you can't really
31:42
tell you know are they on a phone call
31:44
or are they are they in that case and
31:46
now everyone's going to be walking
31:47
around twitching
31:49
>> and you're going to think well do they
31:50
have are they wearing Apple glasses or
31:52
>> picking invisible glue as Lewis
31:55
described it
31:55
>> they're making gestures at me or are
31:57
they making gestures at their glasses is
31:59
>> Mhm.
32:00
>> You know, one of the things I was
32:01
thinking about here is if it does have a
32:03
camera and if it has stereoscopic
32:05
cameras, then it can take spatial
32:08
photos. And that's another reason why
32:10
Apple might not have given up on the
32:12
Vision Pro. And I I know I'm kind of
32:15
beating a dead horse here maybe, but the
32:18
even when you have like they talk about
32:20
these waveforming or beam forming uh
32:23
glasses where it's like augmented
32:25
reality
32:26
uh overlay on real life lenses and you
32:31
can do that. I've tried some products
32:32
that that do that already and they are
32:35
quite impressive and combining that with
32:37
Apple's AR technology would be quite
32:40
impressive. And you know, I I I'm sure
32:42
Apple's heading that way, but that will
32:44
never be a good way of looking at photos
32:46
because the problem is that the the
32:49
images it can create are translucent
32:52
because they don't matt out the light of
32:55
whatever's behind them. So, it it gives
32:57
you that it gives you a really cool 3D
32:59
effect, but it it's like a kind of
33:01
holographic display in a Star Wars movie
33:04
or something. It's not like something
33:06
you would actually want to look at your
33:08
photos when they're being overlaid with
33:10
real life. So that that's another reason
33:12
why even if they get to the the holy
33:15
grail of this category, which is genuine
33:19
see-through lenses that are overlaying
33:21
an augmented reality experience, it's
33:23
still not a way that you would really,
33:25
in my view, want to watch movies or look
33:27
at photos. Uh I think you would still
33:30
want something more like the Vision Pro
33:31
for that. Well, speaking of the vision
33:33
prayer, since we keep coming back to
33:34
that, why don't you tell us about yours,
33:36
Graham?
33:38
>> Okay. So, uh you you put this in in the
33:41
show notes, and of course, I'm more than
33:43
happy to talk about the Vision Pro for
33:45
as long as you want me to talk about it.
33:47
Um I wrote a a piece for Cult uh just
33:50
last week about the Vision Pro. And I
33:53
the reason I wrote this piece was
33:54
because I thought and I know some people
33:58
do think I was a bit weird for doing
34:00
this because literally it was about a
34:02
month ago that uh Mac Rumors published
34:05
it its bombshell piece saying that all
34:08
development work had ceased on Vision
34:10
Pro and it was you know it was a dead
34:13
parrot. It had ceased to be. And the
34:17
thing is that I've been holding off on
34:18
getting a Vision Pro because when it
34:20
came out a couple of years ago, I was
34:22
just launching a new business and I
34:23
needed to be a little bit sensible with
34:25
my money.
34:27
>> And so I just thought, you know, I'm
34:29
going to be the sensible adult here and
34:31
wait. And I but it didn't sit well with
34:36
me because I have been an early adopter
34:39
of almost every Apple platform that that
34:41
came out. I mean, I literally 2001 when
34:44
the original iPod came out, you know,
34:46
the original FireWire iPod that only
34:48
worked with with Macs. Uh, I was at Mac
34:51
Expo at the Islington Design Center in
34:53
London. I was one of the first people in
34:55
the UK to buy it. And I flew to New York
34:59
to be one of the first people to buy the
35:01
original iPad from the the Soho Apple
35:03
Store in New York. So, this is my level
35:05
of dedication to kind of new Apple
35:08
platforms. And um
35:09
>> just to say I had a friend uh buy one
35:11
and send it to me.
35:13
>> Oh, okay. Yes. So, [laughter]
35:15
>> could have done that.
35:17
>> It did not Well, I like I like going to
35:19
New York anyway. So, [laughter] it
35:22
wasn't a chore, right? So, it it didn't
35:25
sit well with me that there's this whole
35:27
amazing Apple platform that I I didn't
35:29
have a device for. And not only that,
35:32
but I'd never even used the thing. And
35:35
you know I so I was like really curious
35:37
and it had been in on my mind and you
35:39
know fast forward a couple of years and
35:41
I was thinking you know I could actually
35:42
afford to buy this now it wouldn't be
35:44
such a crazy thing and then this this
35:47
Mac rumors bombshell report drops that
35:50
you know vision pro is no more. Well,
35:52
actually, I was chatting to you,
35:54
Griffin, about it. And uh I think you
35:57
partly convinced me because you said,
35:59
"Well, you should get one anyway because
36:01
you know, you just want one, so just
36:04
>> and I thought that's kind of true. I
36:06
mean, life's too short, you know, but it
36:08
it also, as I was thinking about it, I
36:10
do genuinely believe that Apple does its
36:13
be best work when it's on its back foot,
36:16
you know, when it's the underdog. It's
36:18
it's they they're a clutch company,
36:20
right? And so I just feel like where
36:24
Vision OS is now, they're like the the
36:27
Vision OS team is like the renegade team
36:29
at Apple with this this product that,
36:32
you know, even the CEO is like, you
36:34
know, got question questions about. And
36:36
I think that's no bad thing because
36:37
they've got a lot to prove. And if you
36:40
look about everything about Apple's
36:43
comeback in the early Oorts, I I think
36:47
back then Steve Jobs was leading a
36:49
company that was like swimming against
36:51
the current and so they had to swim
36:53
twice as fast as everyone else just to
36:55
stay in business. And that was as a
36:58
result an incredible time of innovation
37:01
for Certino. And I think since then uh
37:05
you know I'm actually not at all
37:07
negative on the Tim Cook period. I I
37:09
think that they have just executed
37:11
incredibly on all the plans that that
37:15
Steve Jobs set out and maybe executed
37:17
better than Steve Jobs even could have
37:18
done. Right. So they they've had an
37:20
incredible run. Um, but I I do think,
37:24
you know, with success comes a degree of
37:27
complacence. And it's great that they
37:29
have a product that's struggling a bit
37:31
because I I just don't think that
37:33
they're quitters. And I think they're
37:35
going to they're going to mess around
37:37
with this until they figure it out. And
37:40
uh I'm I and I want to be part of that
37:42
journey is another point that I made in
37:43
my piece for Cult of Mac. In the early
37:46
days of a product with a new user
37:48
interface, third party developers can
37:50
play a big role in figuring out how that
37:53
interface should work. So, uh, a good
37:56
example of this was, uh, I can't
37:58
remember his name, the developer of
37:59
Tweety, the early indie, uh, Twitter.
38:04
>> Yeah.
38:04
>> Yeah.
38:05
>> And, uh, he he came up with the the pull
38:08
down to refresh. And so it it was a it
38:12
was a really nice gesture because if
38:13
you're like scrolling on Twitter and you
38:15
get to the top and there's no more
38:17
stories and then you pull then that
38:19
actually calls to refresh the view and
38:23
uh so if there are any more stories then
38:24
they they load into the list and uh it
38:27
was a really neat simple idea and it and
38:29
Apple was so impressed with this idea
38:31
they implemented it as a systemwide
38:33
gesture that the developers could
38:35
support and so I have a few ideas. I'm
38:38
not going to share any right now
38:40
because, you know, I I want to make my
38:42
own little ding in the universe. But as
38:44
I've been thinking about taking my apps
38:46
to Vision OS, I have a few ideas I think
38:50
are going to be pretty neat about how
38:51
you can use volumes and the the 3D
38:55
interface uh to to good effect, you
38:59
know, and so that was another reason
39:01
like I I although it makes absolutely no
39:03
sense to to port my apps to Vision OS so
39:08
that me and Griffin can use them, um
39:10
[laughter]
39:12
I'm still going to do it. Um because it
39:15
it's just really intriguing and a lot of
39:17
fun and uh so yeah, that that was my
39:19
story. I I'm not saying that I think
39:22
Vision Pro will ever be, you know, a
39:24
smashship product like iPhone, but I I
39:27
don't believe all the doom and gloom.
39:32
The final point that I made in the
39:33
article was if you look at what Vision
39:36
Pro has already contributed to Apple,
39:38
then I I think it's a lot. We've got
39:40
spatial photos and we've got uh liquid
39:42
glass have very much come from vision
39:45
pro and I know liquid glass is is quite
39:47
divisive with some but a lot of the
39:50
aesthetic of everything I was looking at
39:52
the WWDC keynote from last year and all
39:55
the way in which they presented the
39:57
screens and stuff it was all like vision
39:59
pro style windows and so I just think
40:03
what you have with vision pro is like an
40:06
ideas factory where they can really be
40:08
more experimental try things out and you
40:12
know things that work they can then
40:13
bring them to other platforms and so I
40:15
think for all of those reasons it's like
40:17
a really neat skunk works project that I
40:20
think has a role in an organization like
40:22
Apple where a lot of what they do quite
40:25
rightly has to be very sensible and
40:27
focused on you know a tiny decision that
40:30
we make could have massive ramifications
40:32
when we ship hundreds of millions of
40:34
products and vision pro gives them
40:36
something different to play with and I
40:38
think they they need that so I I think
40:39
it it has a role in the organization as
40:41
well
40:42
>> and to your point even though you know
40:44
it's it's a whole other platform like
40:46
Apple is a huge company with unlimited
40:48
resources and I mean compared to like
40:52
the incredible like tens of billions of
40:54
dollars that every other company is
40:56
pouring into AI. Apple can afford to
40:58
like sync I mean this is small potatoes.
41:01
They can afford to like have you know a
41:03
team of people working on vision OS
41:06
at no loss to their bottom line. The
41:08
only reason to stop development on
41:10
Vision OS is if they just don't want to
41:12
do it. And I I don't believe they don't
41:14
want to do it. [clears throat]
41:16
>> Even if they don't plan on making new
41:17
hardware, like you know, sure they don't
41:19
have millions of people with vision pros
41:22
out there, but the people who do have
41:23
them are Apple's most loyal customers.
41:26
They would be incredibly irritated if
41:27
Apple just said, "No, we're done."
41:30
>> I think the most important role for for
41:32
the Vision Pro to fill is that of the
41:33
Mac Pro. So, so fans can be desperate
41:37
for uh you know, year after year can
41:39
still tell themselves that there's a new
41:40
one coming.
41:41
>> Well, I mean with the Mac Pro, I think
41:43
it's an interesting analogy there
41:44
because I was thinking about that as
41:45
well. Is it is it another Mac Pro that
41:47
they will kind of keep it in the lineup,
41:49
but it will get, you know, progressively
41:51
older and long in the tooth. The
41:53
different and there are a few key
41:55
differences, but I think that the main
41:56
one to me is that if Apple made one
41:58
mistake with the Vision Pro, in my view,
42:02
it was probably the price. And the price
42:05
was a necessary evil because they
42:07
brought it out when this technology was
42:08
so cutting edge. Um, normally, and it's
42:12
true embarrassingly with the Mac Pro,
42:15
they they leave the price the same even
42:18
when the value proposition degrades over
42:20
five or six years to the point it's
42:22
embarrassing to have it still on the
42:24
website. But to be honest, if Apple
42:26
decided, well, we're not going to do new
42:28
hardware, but we are going to, you know,
42:31
cut the price at some point to something
42:33
more affordable,
42:35
you know, in three or four years time. I
42:37
I think the current Vision Pro still
42:39
looks like a credible product. It would
42:41
still be probably the best AR VR headset
42:44
on the market by
42:46
>> I mean, they the thing about the Mac Pro
42:48
is that it was not the only computer in
42:49
the world. every other computer got
42:51
faster and better and smaller. Whereas
42:52
the Mac Pro stayed exactly the same.
42:56
The Vision Pro, like there's no other
42:57
Vision Pro. There's only the one. It's
42:58
the only spatial computer of its kind.
43:00
They can leave it exactly at $3,500 and
43:02
say, "Well, it's still worth $3,500."
43:04
Whereas the other one that makes this
43:06
one less of a bad value. They they could
43:09
I I do I do hope they break the habit of
43:10
lifetime though and see an opportunity
43:13
to cut the price on it to bring it more
43:16
into the affordability range of more
43:18
people because I think there is so much
43:20
there's so magical about this product
43:23
and a lot of people would be in the
43:24
position that I was in two years ago of
43:26
like I just cannot justify spending that
43:29
much money
43:30
>> and you know if they could at least get
43:31
it to the point where it's half the
43:32
price it is today I think a lot more
43:35
people would be tempted because you know
43:37
just to something for looking at photos
43:39
and movies. It's incredible. But no
43:41
one's going to spend, you know, three
43:42
and a half grand just for something to
43:44
look at at photos and video, however
43:48
great it is. And so I I I I think it's
43:51
it's an an amazing product they need to
43:53
get into more people's hands. And in
43:55
order to do that, they need to do
43:56
something on the price.
43:58
>> So, what have you liked about using your
43:59
Vision Pro? What what did you what was
44:01
what exceeded and what was kind of below
44:03
your expectations? I think what exceeded
44:05
my expectations was just what a pleasure
44:10
it was to use and the [clears throat]
44:12
what do you call it? The non-functionals
44:13
of it. It's just a joy to use this
44:16
device and it's actually surprisingly
44:17
intuitive.
44:19
>> Um that that's what impressed me most.
44:21
Plus this incredible thing when you're
44:23
looking at the actual immersive videos
44:25
that Apple does,
44:27
how real they are to the point at which
44:30
like I think they have like a Metallica
44:31
concert and I was watching a bit of that
44:33
and I don't know who the front man of
44:34
Metallica is but I was invading his
44:36
personal space like I would never stand
44:39
this close to someone
44:42
>> really uncomfortable and I want to take
44:43
a step back
44:45
>> but I can't and I'm like right there in
44:46
his space and you know and he's gonna
44:48
hit me and that was an incredible
44:51
experience because it the physicality of
44:53
it is like nothing else. Um, and the the
44:58
thing the one thing that I'm
44:59
disappointed by and I'm hoping we'll
45:01
we'll get some progress on this next
45:04
week is uh the object occlusion. Like if
45:09
I raise my hands, say when I'm in an
45:11
immersive environment, uh it it doesn't
45:14
do a good job of occluding my hand. It's
45:16
a bit fuzzy and there is a degree of lag
45:19
to it.
45:20
>> And if someone walks in front of one of
45:23
my displays,
45:25
they don't walk in front of the display.
45:27
The display stays in front of them.
45:29
>> And if someone, which I can I I could
45:32
think, well, you might say that's a
45:34
feature, not a bug. Because why would
45:36
you want someone to stand in front of
45:37
the thing you're looking at? And I could
45:39
see that, but with widgets, it's a
45:41
different story. You know, with Vision
45:43
Pro, you can put widgets on the wall.
45:44
And it's weird if I put a clock on the
45:46
wall and then someone walks in front of
45:48
that widget and the clock is in front of
45:51
them. It destroys the whole spatial
45:54
metaphor. So I I think they can do a
45:57
better job on object occlusion,
45:59
especially for widgets. But also I I
46:01
think for for windows, they can maybe
46:03
identify your attention. If you're
46:04
looking at the window, then they
46:07
shouldn't do object occlusion of
46:08
something in front of the window. But if
46:10
you're not looking at it, I think it
46:12
should look more like a part of the
46:14
environment. If you think about it, when
46:15
you I love the way that if I drag a
46:18
window around my living room, it casts a
46:20
shadow on the floor. And that's amazing.
46:22
But then if I just put it beyond the
46:24
coffee table, so it's a bit behind the
46:25
coffee table, it sort of floats in front
46:28
of it. And again, and that that
46:30
undermines the spatial metaphor. So
46:32
yeah, object occlusion was the the thing
46:34
I was disappointed about. And
46:36
>> that that bugs me as well. Like I use
46:38
the I use a Vision Pro usually on a sofa
46:40
and um if there's like a pile of pillows
46:43
to my left, I I don't want a I don't
46:46
want a window that's supposed to be
46:47
behind it to appear in front of it. So
46:49
I'll like actually move the pillows. If
46:51
there's like a if I have things on my
46:52
coffee table that are appearing in front
46:54
of window, I'll like move them to a
46:56
different place so that it the illusion
46:57
isn't broken. It's It's really uncanny
46:59
when you have a window that's supposed
47:01
to be five feet away appearing in front
47:03
of like a cup that's, you know, only
47:06
three feet away. It I I don't like it at
47:08
all.
47:08
>> That sounds mindbending.
47:10
>> It's It's really strange.
47:11
>> Have Have you used one, Lewis?
47:13
>> No, I have not. I am so embarrassed. I I
47:15
tried like crazy, but I just couldn't
47:17
get it to work because I'm so blind. Uh
47:19
>> yeah, I I tried um Grahams last weekend.
47:22
It's the first time I tried one. And I I
47:23
I couldn't see. I had to do a lot of
47:25
squinting cuz I couldn't wear my glasses
47:27
inside. But I was despite that I was I
47:31
was impressed. I thought I I mean I
47:33
would I can't see why anyone would buy
47:35
one. Can't see a use for it. But the
47:37
it's like watching Well, I guess uh the
47:40
movies, the videos, the the immersive
47:43
stuff is and the gestures I found all of
47:45
those super super good. Really really
47:48
nice. suggestions, especially the the I
47:50
wish you could have the the control
47:52
center, the command center thing like
47:54
this, the twisting the finger twisting
47:56
trick. Uh I wish you had that on the Mac
47:58
because I hate the [laughter] hate the
48:00
control center on the Mac. I just do
48:02
anything I can to avoid it.
48:04
>> Control center and notification center
48:05
on Vision Pro, they they need some work.
48:08
It's like they're they're sort of built
48:09
into one interface, but like so you have
48:11
the thing where you look at your hand
48:12
and you see a dot. You flip it over and
48:14
you see a little widget that has like
48:15
the time and the battery. You click your
48:16
fingers on that and then it brings up
48:18
control center. And then notification
48:20
center is another screen further inside
48:22
of that. And even then you don't have
48:24
all like the regular control center
48:25
buttons. It's like its own custom thing.
48:27
So like there's not like a full screen
48:29
like focus mode thing. It's not it's it
48:32
needs a little like I really love Vision
48:34
OS, but like that whole system could
48:36
need like another another revision or
48:38
two. And also the home screen just
48:40
bothers me immensely. Uh, I actually
48:43
prefer the old Vision OS home screen
48:46
more than the current one. Before it was
48:48
like it would just put all of your apps
48:49
in alphabetical order except for the
48:51
first screen that was a little bit
48:52
special. I I kind of liked that
48:54
honestly. Like now you can c fully
48:57
customize the home screen except editing
48:59
the home screen on the vision on vision
49:01
OS is like the most frustrating
49:03
experience of all because
49:05
>> is it worse than on the iPhone and the
49:06
iPad?
49:07
>> Oh yeah. Yeah. Because you can go like
49:08
that. It's like seven. You can see 17
49:11
icons at a time. And you although it's
49:14
like this, it takes up it's supposed to
49:16
take up like my entire field of vision.
49:18
They limit it to only seeing one page at
49:20
once. And so like trying to move things
49:23
between screens is incredibly slow. And
49:26
like you're you're moving it off to an
49:28
invisible imaginary area to the left to
49:30
like go to another page. It's it's it's
49:34
frustr I just want like one screen and
49:36
an app library and I don't know why they
49:38
won't do that for me.
49:39
>> I listened to uh last week's episode was
49:42
it or the the week before where you uh
49:45
tidied up Leander's home screen and I I
49:48
got to say it made me feel anxious just
49:51
the idea of [laughter] it.
49:54
I'm not letting Griffin anywhere near my
49:56
home screen because he's just going to
49:58
be deleting icons left, right, and
49:59
center. I thought Lanna was very brave.
50:02
Maybe that's why he's not here this
50:03
week.
50:03
>> Oh, yeah. He's
50:05
>> still trying to put it together.
50:06
>> Trying to get his phone to work again.
50:09
>> Ever since uh that little tip from
50:11
Griffin, I have realized I never ever
50:14
ever
50:16
scroll to the second and third or fourth
50:18
screen on my iPhone. It is complete
50:20
waste of I mean, Griffin's 100% right. I
50:22
still haven't done it. I still haven't
50:24
like taken it and remade it the way you
50:28
did. But I I can't imagine that it's uh
50:31
you know any worse than what I currently
50:32
have. I mean there's probably only three
50:35
apps that I regularly maybe five that I
50:38
regularly tap on the screen. The rest of
50:40
them I search for
50:42
>> and they're not even on the screen. You
50:43
know, like I might use them more than
50:45
anything and I haven't bothered to, you
50:48
know, shake up my precious home screen.
50:50
It's probably been that way for 10 years
50:52
or something, you know. Oh, I got to
50:55
have it nested in this folder and tap
50:57
twice. And
50:58
>> speaking of searching for apps, there's
51:00
no way to do that on Vision OS unless
51:01
you have a connected Bluetooth keyboard.
51:03
There's no there's no interface for
51:04
summoning Spotlight or anything. You
51:07
could like typing on it if you don't
51:09
have a keyboard is like the most
51:11
frustrating experience in the world.
51:12
Honestly, what I do is I use the voice
51:14
assistant. I just say open Safari and I
51:16
look in the direction I want the window
51:17
to appear. That's that's way faster than
51:20
going to the home screen and then
51:22
swiping across like seven different
51:24
pages to find to find
51:26
>> I never use the the voice the voice
51:28
stuff in um like in public with my phone
51:31
but I mean with the vision pro I mean
51:33
once you're down that road you know
51:35
you're already got [laughter]
51:37
>> it's it's interesting you say that
51:39
because there was a rumor I think a year
51:41
ago that the team working on Vision OS
51:44
were frustrated by how bad Siri was and
51:47
they felt that voice was a really key
51:49
part of the Vision OS experience, but
51:52
they just couldn't make it work the way
51:53
they wanted to.
51:54
>> I mean, I will I will say the voice
51:56
assistant isn't good on the Vision Pro.
51:58
It just does that one thing better than
52:01
like swiping through the awful home
52:02
screen.
52:03
>> Yeah. So, but I I I think given that
52:06
we're supposedly getting an all new Siri
52:09
powered by Gemini next week,
52:11
>> I would think that that's going to be a
52:13
big part of the Vision OS story of of
52:15
like more voice support in Vision OS.
52:19
>> I just had one more question.
52:20
>> Oh, go for it.
52:21
>> Uh, so Charlie, uh, what did you think
52:24
when you're sitting in the room with
52:25
Graham and he has that thing strapped to
52:27
his head? [laughter]
52:29
>> Uh, and vice versa. I don't I mean I
52:33
didn't really see him in in the room,
52:34
but I've I've se Martin's been um sh we
52:36
have like a a shared group and he's been
52:39
taking lots of pictures of of Graeme
52:40
doing different bits and pieces like he
52:42
had to buy a set of straws to drink his
52:44
coffee cuz you can't drink when you're
52:45
in the Vision Pro.
52:46
>> Mhm.
52:47
>> So, we were teasing him about that.
52:49
>> Yeah. Then there's a just a what was
52:52
there was another picture of you doing
52:53
some strange hand gesture and I can't
52:56
remember what that was. a picture of you
52:58
like sitting uh
52:59
>> well what frust
53:01
is you know uh one of the cool things
53:04
well I don't know if it's a cool thing
53:05
or it's a stupid thing but one way or
53:06
the other vision pro puts a picture of
53:08
your eyes on the front of the vision pro
53:11
so that everyone else can see what
53:12
you're looking at but I never get to see
53:14
that because the way that it works is
53:17
you it's based upon your persona that
53:19
you set up when you set up the vision
53:20
pro so it's your eyes that it's showing
53:23
>> if you if you you know if I let Charlie
53:25
use my vision pro then I have to enable
53:27
guest mode. And so guest mode doesn't
53:30
have a persona of Charlie. So you just
53:32
see this weird sort of purple and red
53:35
oil slick animation.
53:37
>> It should have it should have googly
53:38
eyes on there
53:39
>> when Charlie's using it or when when any
53:41
any guest is using it. So I've never
53:43
actually got to see what it looks like
53:44
with the eyes and other people tell me.
53:46
So I say, "What does it look like? Does
53:48
it look good?" And it's like, "Well, not
53:49
really." And can you see my eyes? Yeah,
53:52
I suppose.
53:53
>> And it's like you need to go to a
53:55
bathroom mirror. Yeah. Can you do that?
53:57
>> I I don't see them in the mirror. And I
53:59
think
53:59
>> Or is that like crossing the streams in
54:00
Ghostbusters? You just shouldn't
54:01
[laughter] do it.
54:02
>> Well, I think it it only activates the
54:04
display if it sees another person in in
54:08
otherwise I think the display is blank.
54:10
That's something that I figured out.
54:11
>> Um cuz like I
54:13
>> uh I think in a mirror it maybe it would
54:15
work if it detected me as a person.
54:18
>> That's what it does for me. That's
54:19
that's how I see it.
54:20
>> Okay.
54:20
>> You just spend your days in front of the
54:22
mirror. Look with the vision pro.
54:23
[laughter]
54:25
I really want to see what that looks
54:26
like. I'm intrigued.
54:27
>> You could give it to Charlie and then
54:29
just tell him your passcode as if
54:31
Charlie is using it as you to if you
54:33
really wanted to see it.
54:35
>> Yeah, you don't know Charlie at all,
54:36
Griffin.
54:37
>> No, [laughter] that would be a bad idea
54:38
>> if you think if you think that that's
54:40
ever going to happen.
54:41
>> No, no, he shouldn't do that. [laughter]
54:45
>> Martin, maybe you probably trust him a
54:46
little bit more.
54:48
>> One one thing I did notice, Louis, is
54:50
that the dogs just don't care. They
54:52
don't they don't see it as like really
54:54
eyes on your face.
54:55
>> It's probably all about the smell.
54:57
>> Yeah. They were just sitting there and
54:58
looking bored sitting there on the sofa.
55:00
>> Yeah. Yeah. I can I can talk to my dog
55:02
with the Vision Pro on and Label, our
55:05
dog, she's absolutely fine with it. She
55:07
doesn't
55:07
>> I uh the only person I've been around
55:09
who's had one on is Leander. And and I
55:12
just I it was just a weird unsettling
55:15
feeling sitting there, you know, it's
55:16
like I'm talking to an astronaut or
55:17
something. I I just and that's to me
55:20
that's the main problem with this this
55:22
this thing. I mean I just can't imagine
55:25
wearing it around somebody else,
55:28
you know? I mean it seems like the kind
55:30
of thing that's perfect for bachelors
55:31
and that's it.
55:32
>> But what if they were wearing one, too?
55:36
>> Well, maybe that's fine. I don't know.
55:38
Uh
55:39
>> that's worse.
55:40
>> I mean, I I have yet to ever even see a
55:44
picture of two. Well, that's not true.
55:45
There w there was some picture of like
55:47
at a developer event and there were like
55:49
eight or 10 or 20 people in a room with
55:52
vision pros and it was it was I mean I
55:54
don't know it was like that's why this
55:56
thing is never going to be you know a
55:58
mainstream success because it looks like
56:00
a a weirdo convention. It's just it's
56:03
just weird something. I I don't know. I
56:06
I I find it I cuz I mean I was sitting
56:08
there I was talking to Leander and he
56:10
could see me and I could see him but
56:12
it's like so there was like it was like
56:15
you know like the boy in the bubble or
56:17
something. It was just weird.
56:19
>> All right. Well, the time has come.
56:22
>> Oh, I've been trying to put this off.
56:24
>> I know. It is time for us on the Cult of
56:26
Mag to lay out our predictions for
56:28
Apple's WWDC 26 keynote. Like last year,
56:32
we're joined by Graeme and Charlie. This
56:34
is the second predictions game of the
56:35
year. Uh I won previously in March, but
56:39
uh the outlook is looking good for my
56:41
competitors because I I went through the
56:42
statistics. I've never won a WWDC uh
56:45
predictions game. In fact, Lewis has won
56:47
all of them, so it's looking very good
56:49
for him in particular. Uh we'll see if
56:52
that pattern continues. No pressure,
56:53
Lewis. [laughter]
56:55
These are the rules. We've agreed on a
56:58
list of predictions for the event. For
56:59
each one, we will vote yes or no.
57:01
whether we think it will happen. Votes
57:03
will be placed in order of who won the
57:05
previous game. So this time I will go
57:07
first, Lewis second, Graham third, and
57:10
Charlie fourth. Uh Leander's absent, but
57:12
I I sent him the the form, so hopefully
57:14
he'll fill in his answers as well. Or
57:17
maybe that maybe that's why he's not
57:19
here this week. He was too afraid. Uh
57:21
one point will be awarded for each
57:22
correct guess. Any disputes and judgment
57:24
must be rolled on by Dave Snow. Uh
57:26
responsibility he has not been informed
57:28
of, much less agreed to. I don't think
57:30
he listens to the show. [laughter]
57:32
>> Wow. Last time it was Ed, right?
57:35
>> Yeah. Well,
57:36
>> spreading the pain
57:38
>> or the power. [laughter]
57:41
>> You know, I I I think Ed got a little
57:43
little mad with power. I I consulted him
57:45
on a few on a few questions last
57:46
[laughter] time and uh I'm trying out a
57:49
different judge. [clears throat] He's
57:50
too familiar with the game now. So,
57:52
moving on. Listeners can submit their
57:54
own votes using a Google form which you
57:57
can find on my website or by going to
57:59
dgriffinjones.com/servey.
58:02
That is dgriffinjones.com/servey.
58:05
The highest score submitted before the
58:07
event begins will be honored in the next
58:09
episode. Without further ado, let's move
58:12
on. I'm going to check the order again.
58:14
Yes, it's okay. Me, Lewis, Graham, then
58:17
Charlie. Starting with question one.
58:21
Liquid glass UI significantly dialed
58:24
back. This is a theory that some people
58:27
have or maybe liquid glass haters that
58:29
Apple's going to roll back to basically
58:31
like an iOS 18 style design. Uh you can
58:35
probably sus out that my vote on this
58:38
one is a no because I'm not terribly
58:41
convinced that this is going to happen.
58:42
I'm voting no.
58:44
>> Okay. Uh and I always try to get real
58:48
lawyerly with this stuff. This means
58:50
that it will be by
58:52
default
58:53
dialed back and you can't I mean because
58:55
I think that they and there's tons of
58:57
rumors that there's going to be like a
58:58
slider so you can do it on your own but
59:00
you're saying it will be systemwide
59:03
dialed back.
59:04
>> Let's say like the default mode is less
59:07
liquid glass than before.
59:09
>> No platform all the platforms
59:11
>> iOS I think iOS sets the pace for all
59:14
the other ones. That's their their most
59:15
favorite operating system. So if if it's
59:19
significantly dialed back on iOS, but
59:21
for some reason nothing else, I think
59:22
that would still count as dialing it
59:24
back. If they dial it significantly dial
59:26
it back anywhere, I would say.
59:28
>> Okay. So if if it stays exactly the same
59:30
on iPhone, but it's dialed back on Mac,
59:33
that would count as significantly dialed
59:35
back.
59:36
>> Yeah. Yeah. They're significantly
59:37
dialing it back somewhere.
59:39
>> Well, that makes it trickier.
59:41
>> Yeah. See, these questions are a little
59:43
sloppy.
59:45
>> [laughter]
59:46
>> I potential to be vague and and hard to
59:48
judge.
59:50
>> Lucky Dave.
59:51
>> Mhm.
59:53
>> Yeah. You got to think about how he
59:55
would adjudicate this.
59:57
>> Oh man.
59:59
Fivedimensional chess. [laughter] It's
1:00:01
more like five dimensional guess. Just
1:00:03
pick one.
1:00:05
>> Oh, my one I I will say uh no.
1:00:09
>> Same. No. I'd love it if they did, but I
1:00:12
don't think I don't see it happening. I
1:00:13
I mostly have this question in for for
1:00:15
all those conspiracy theorists. They
1:00:17
might they Hey, not I guess not to judge
1:00:18
them. They might be they might be
1:00:19
listening. [laughter]
1:00:21
Okay, next question. Software updates
1:00:24
explicitly called out as improving
1:00:26
stability and performance.
1:00:29
Um I know Apple is a pretty prideful uh
1:00:32
company, but this has happened before
1:00:33
where they they they sort of like throw
1:00:35
in a line, oh yeah, you know, we really
1:00:36
focused on making this year's updates
1:00:38
run a lot better. So, I'm actually going
1:00:41
to go ahead and say yes.
1:00:44
>> Uh, I'm going to say no because I don't
1:00:46
think they would ever say that, oh, it's
1:00:48
going to be more stable. I don't think
1:00:50
they would ever admit out loud that
1:00:51
things are unstable. I I think they'll
1:00:53
talk about the performance, but I don't
1:00:55
think they'll say, "Yeah, this is this
1:00:56
is more stable than it was."
1:00:59
>> Yeah, I I agree with Lewis on this one.
1:01:02
I think I think it it's true with like
1:01:04
Snow Leopard. They did kind of sort of
1:01:06
say that, but it's a very different
1:01:08
company today and it's a very different
1:01:10
media environment today. And so if they
1:01:12
were to go out with that radical honesty
1:01:15
message today, the the story in in all
1:01:19
the kind of media and social media and
1:01:21
mainstream media would be, oh, Apple
1:01:24
acknowledges they screwed up. That would
1:01:26
be the story. And uh so they're not
1:01:28
they're not going to do that.
1:01:30
>> Okay. Okay. And Charlie,
1:01:32
>> I was going to say no until by this just
1:01:34
this is the advantage of going last.
1:01:36
>> Uh I was going to say uh no, I was going
1:01:38
to say yes until until I heard Graeme
1:01:41
>> because I think you know maybe they
1:01:42
maybe they're going to say something
1:01:43
like
1:01:45
this is our most stable and performant
1:01:48
iOS yet. But I don't know. I'm Yeah,
1:01:52
exactly. I'm going to go and say no.
1:01:54
>> Okay.
1:01:54
>> As you as you've already written.
1:01:57
>> Thank you. Thank you for predicting my
1:01:58
prediction. [laughter] He's got a vision
1:02:00
pro. He can see the future.
1:02:01
>> Yeah.
1:02:03
[snorts]
1:02:03
>> Next, Apple reintroduces smarter agentic
1:02:06
Siri with personal context. So, there
1:02:09
are we we all know they're they're going
1:02:11
to do something. Um, but you know, there
1:02:14
there are three things sort of hidden in
1:02:15
here. Smarter Siri that actually answers
1:02:18
your questions and understands them.
1:02:20
Agentic Siri that can do things probably
1:02:22
with the, you know, shortcuts in app
1:02:25
intense API that they've been telling us
1:02:26
to do for the last two years. Uh, and
1:02:28
also with the personal context, which is
1:02:30
the, you know, you know, when's my mom's
1:02:32
flight landing stuff. So,
1:02:35
uh, I'm going to I'm going to vote yes
1:02:37
for this just because I've been doing
1:02:38
it, uh, every every predictions game for
1:02:41
the last two years. Uh, and, you know,
1:02:44
I'll eventually be right. Right. Yeah.
1:02:47
Yeah. What do you think, Lewis?
1:02:48
>> Uh, yeah. I think they're gonna at least
1:02:51
reintroduce it.
1:02:53
It's like the personal contact stuff and
1:02:55
maybe even the agentic stuff may not
1:02:56
arrive right off the bat, but I think
1:02:58
they're going to play it up. So, yes,
1:03:02
[snorts]
1:03:02
>> I would go yes on this as well. I think
1:03:04
it kind of has to happen now. And I it
1:03:07
sounds like they have all their ducks in
1:03:08
a row with with Gemini and so forth. So
1:03:12
I I I think it has to happen and it
1:03:14
probably I also think it probably will
1:03:17
have to be in the beta because they
1:03:18
can't get away with mentioning it and
1:03:20
saying oh you know sometime in the next
1:03:23
12 months because that's just kicking
1:03:25
the can down the road again. I think I'm
1:03:27
not sure if I was in Applecom's team if
1:03:31
it was a you know at some point in the
1:03:33
next 12 months I'm not sure I would
1:03:35
announce it at all at this point. It's
1:03:37
better to just keep them until you can
1:03:39
actually say here it is. Otherwise, it's
1:03:41
just a uh is it the boy who cried wolf
1:03:44
or something? I just they can't they
1:03:46
can't announce it and it not be
1:03:48
available again. It has to be in the
1:03:50
developer beta next week.
1:03:52
>> I believe uh Certino's favorite term of
1:03:54
art there is in the coming year,
1:03:57
[laughter] which which they they said
1:03:58
last year and was like, what does that
1:04:00
mean? Uh what what it means changes
1:04:02
based on whatever they need it to mean.
1:04:04
Uh Charlie, what do you think? I'm gonna
1:04:06
say yes as well. Now, now they're using
1:04:09
Google's LLM. They actually have
1:04:12
something that works. So, I think they
1:04:14
can do it.
1:04:14
>> That is reintroduces. I I mean, they
1:04:17
definitely won't position it as being
1:04:18
reintroducers. If I was to guess, I'd
1:04:21
think that they will not make any
1:04:22
acknowledgement of WWC 24 at all. They
1:04:26
just won't talk about that. They'll just
1:04:28
focus on the future. Apple doesn't do
1:04:29
the past. It's like, you know, so I I
1:04:32
don't think they will position it as
1:04:33
reintroducers, but I I still said yes
1:04:35
because I think, you know, well, they
1:04:37
will have reintroduced it even if they
1:04:39
don't acknowledge that.
1:04:39
>> Well, do you think they'll be like, "Oh,
1:04:40
we have some exciting new features for
1:04:42
you all." Like
1:04:43
>> Oh, yeah. I think that's what they'll
1:04:45
do.
1:04:46
>> Okay.
1:04:47
>> I could totally see Federig getting up
1:04:49
there and putting up a slide and says,
1:04:50
you know, Siri, this time we mean it.
1:04:53
>> Oh, yeah.
1:04:54
>> You know, they they do crack jokes like
1:04:56
that.
1:04:57
>> Yeah. They well they make a joke like
1:04:58
that but they wouldn't say reintroduced
1:05:00
or
1:05:01
>> but yeah I could see they would make
1:05:03
some funny illusion to it. Yeah.
1:05:05
>> Speaking of Google though the next pick
1:05:07
Apple says Google powers some new Apple
1:05:10
intelligence features in the main
1:05:13
keynote. Are they going to admit that
1:05:14
they've got this uh you know partnership
1:05:17
with Google? I I think they won't say it
1:05:20
about Siri, but I think they will
1:05:24
mention Google and in in a few other
1:05:26
ways because, you know, Apple
1:05:27
intelligence is broad
1:05:29
web of features. Siri is only one of
1:05:31
them. Uh maybe the only one that people
1:05:33
actually want, but I think there will be
1:05:34
at least one feature that Apple will
1:05:37
admit includes Google in some capacity.
1:05:42
>> So, I'm going to put myself down as a
1:05:43
yes.
1:05:44
>> Yeah, I I think that's a yes, too. I
1:05:46
think that it'll be like a oh, you can,
1:05:48
you know, this is what they're moving
1:05:49
toward. You can use whatever AI you
1:05:51
want, you know, and they'll
1:05:52
>> Yeah, exactly.
1:05:53
>> But yeah, I I I also think you're
1:05:55
probably right that they're not going to
1:05:57
go out of their way to mention that
1:05:58
Google fixed Siri. [snorts]
1:06:01
>> And what do you think?
1:06:02
>> I'm going to go for a no with this. I
1:06:05
think it's entirely possible in the way
1:06:07
in which you can get Siri can hand off
1:06:09
to Chachi BT today that they add support
1:06:12
for Claude and Gemini as well. But I to
1:06:16
me that's not the same as saying that
1:06:17
Google is powering this. I think they
1:06:19
will say it's Apple intelligence. And it
1:06:22
to me it's exactly the same as Intel
1:06:24
inside. You know when when Apple
1:06:25
switched to Intel chips and people asked
1:06:29
you know are you going to put Intel
1:06:30
stickers on on your Macs? And Steve Jobs
1:06:33
said oh we prefer our stickers and I
1:06:35
think this is a similar thing. you know,
1:06:37
I'm sure they're using as far as Apple
1:06:39
is concerned, Google Geminis is just a
1:06:42
technology provider like anything else
1:06:44
and it has absolutely nothing to do with
1:06:45
the user experience. And if if anything,
1:06:48
I think it would be a reason for them,
1:06:50
even if they were planning to add
1:06:53
handoff to Gemini like they currently
1:06:55
have handoff to chatbt, I think they
1:06:57
probably won't mention it next week just
1:07:00
because immediately the media will leap
1:07:02
on that and make it the story that Apple
1:07:05
leans on Google for. So I I think
1:07:08
actually again if I was the Apple's com
1:07:10
team, I would just go through this with
1:07:11
a fine teeth comb and it's like we're
1:07:12
not going to mention Google anywhere,
1:07:16
you know? I think yes. I'm gonna I'm
1:07:19
just going to copy Lewis because uh he
1:07:21
always wins. And also I think [laughter]
1:07:26
I think that the yeah the I think exact
1:07:29
what Lewis said ex that Apple will can
1:07:32
say something about you know you can
1:07:33
choose whichever uh AI you want. You
1:07:36
know it works with lots of it works with
1:07:38
this this and this or can work with in
1:07:40
the future. I think I mentioned
1:07:41
something. It's weird like they in WWC
1:07:45
2024 around then they like Greg Josbyak
1:07:48
a few executives explicitly mentioned
1:07:50
Google several times um and it never
1:07:54
came to anything they still haven't
1:07:55
announced any Google Gemini powered
1:07:57
features until now you know despite
1:07:59
integrating chat GPT into a number of
1:08:01
things but uh it'll be interesting for
1:08:03
sure we'll know
1:08:05
>> I'm also going to predict that um Apple
1:08:07
announces that it's going to be putting
1:08:08
Google stickers in the iPhone boxes.
1:08:13
>> Yeah. Yeah. Next [snorts] up, this is
1:08:15
one of your suggestions, Graeme. Xcode
1:08:18
for iPad. I mean, this would be this
1:08:20
would be great. People developers have
1:08:22
been asking for this for years. And, you
1:08:24
know, what better time to introduce it
1:08:26
than, you know, in the age of, you know,
1:08:28
LLM agentic coding tools. I mean,
1:08:31
imagine how awesome it would be if you
1:08:33
could talk to an agent on your iPad and
1:08:36
or you know your your iPhone and build
1:08:38
and deploy it on the device, deploy it
1:08:41
to the app store all from one system.
1:08:44
Uh, however, I'm going to say no.
1:08:47
[laughter] Although it would be awesome.
1:08:48
I know that, you know, this is Apple
1:08:49
we're talking about. Uh, so I don't
1:08:51
think and and the iPad we're talking
1:08:53
about Apple's, you know, Apple has a
1:08:55
lovehate relationship with their own
1:08:57
iPad. So, I'm not optimistic that it's
1:09:00
going to happen, but I mean I I could
1:09:03
definitely see the argument that you
1:09:04
would vote for it.
1:09:05
>> What do you think, Lewis?
1:09:07
>> Uh, I guess I'll say no just because I
1:09:08
heard a single have not heard a single
1:09:10
rumor about it. And also, they need to
1:09:12
sell Max.
1:09:14
>> It's true. That's true.
1:09:15
>> Yeah.
1:09:16
>> Well, they need to sell iPads, too. I'm
1:09:17
I'm going to say yes on this. Um,
1:09:20
>> it it's partly me being hopeful. I guess
1:09:22
we already sort of kind of have Xcode on
1:09:24
iPad in Swift Playgrounds. You can
1:09:26
develop apps in Swift Playgrounds on
1:09:28
iPad today.
1:09:30
>> Um, I think if you talk to developers,
1:09:33
aside from the cut that Apple takes on
1:09:36
app store revenue, the biggest single
1:09:39
gripe that most developers have is that
1:09:41
Xcode is terrible. it. And this is a
1:09:45
really great shame because, you know,
1:09:46
going back to Apple history, when Mac OS
1:09:49
10 came out, Xcode was one of the really
1:09:52
important things about the the Mac OS 10
1:09:54
launch and Steve Jobs really prioritize
1:09:57
these great developer tools. And I think
1:09:59
it was one of the things that made the
1:10:01
original Coco uh app development
1:10:04
environment so popular was these amazing
1:10:06
tools that Apple gave developers uh like
1:10:09
the UI builder and all these different
1:10:11
things, interface builder. It was it was
1:10:13
a really great development environment,
1:10:17
but that was like, you know, 25 years
1:10:20
ago and it's the same thing today, but
1:10:24
over the decades they've bolted stuff
1:10:26
onto it and it's become a beast and it's
1:10:30
really hard to use and they make some
1:10:32
improvements to it, but it's all sort of
1:10:34
sticking past plaster patches. And the
1:10:37
impression that I get is Apple needs to
1:10:41
really start again and probably build a
1:10:43
new Xcode based upon Swift playgrounds
1:10:46
and maybe some of the stuff that's like
1:10:49
Xcode today is kind of like where iTunes
1:10:51
was at 10 years ago where it became the
1:10:54
app that did absolutely everything and
1:10:56
that's what Xcode is like today. And I I
1:10:59
think they they kind of I don't know if
1:11:02
it'll be this year, but I'm saying yes
1:11:04
because I'm trying to manifest this.
1:11:06
[laughter] They need to they need a a
1:11:09
brand new Xcode. And they can still call
1:11:12
it Xcode, but probably based upon Swift
1:11:14
playgrounds and maybe lots of the stuff
1:11:17
which Xcode currently does could be in
1:11:19
in separate tools and stuff and and just
1:11:22
just give developers what they want,
1:11:24
which is really a great development
1:11:25
environment that does the things that
1:11:26
modern IDs do like has a server for
1:11:29
other languages and all kinds of stuff.
1:11:31
That is what the new Xcode needs to be.
1:11:34
And if they were building it from
1:11:35
scratch, I think why wouldn't you have
1:11:37
it running on iPad as well? So to me,
1:11:40
the reason I'm saying yes to iPad is not
1:11:41
because I think iPad is very important
1:11:43
as a development environment because I
1:11:45
don't think it is. But it's because if
1:11:47
if they do
1:11:49
refactor Xcode from scratch, then why
1:11:52
wouldn't you make it run on iPad as
1:11:53
well?
1:11:54
>> Maybe it'll be iPad first and you get a
1:11:56
catalyst version of Xcode on the Mac.
1:11:58
>> Oh, Charlie, please don't say that.
1:12:00
Don't give them ideas.
1:12:02
>> Well, you you mentioned iTunes and you
1:12:04
know, everybody's like, "Oh, we hate
1:12:05
iTunes." until iTunes went away and it's
1:12:07
like, "Oh, please bring back iTunes.
1:12:09
[laughter] Apple Music is awful." I'm
1:12:12
going to say I'm going to say no. Uh I
1:12:15
think they could. I'd be very interested
1:12:17
to see how they did it because uh they
1:12:20
when Apple brought uh Logic Pro to the
1:12:23
iPad, they did a really good job of
1:12:25
that. It seemed like it might be
1:12:26
impossible because it's such a comp
1:12:27
complex app. Um and they in some ways
1:12:30
it's better than the the Mac version. I
1:12:32
prefer it. M uh but I don't think it's
1:12:36
going to happen with that.
1:12:37
>> Here's another cursed idea. They bring
1:12:38
Xcode to the iPad, but it's part of a
1:12:40
new Apple Development Studio
1:12:42
subscription.
1:12:43
>> Oh yeah. [laughter]
1:12:45
>> And you say that I would say yes.
1:12:47
>> I really hope Certino is not listening
1:12:49
to these ideas. [laughter]
1:12:52
>> Unfortunately, I am told we do that some
1:12:54
Apple employees do.
1:12:55
>> Oh, pro tip. if you uh want to if you if
1:12:59
you still want to subscribe to the old
1:13:02
uh $5 a month version of um of Logic Pro
1:13:08
for the iPad. If you've got a device
1:13:10
that's still on iOS 18, you can do it
1:13:12
there because you can't uh get the new
1:13:14
one on iOS 18.
1:13:17
>> So, it still lets you do it. I did that.
1:13:19
>> Next up, we have uh another I think
1:13:21
conspiracy theory. This one from
1:13:23
Twitter. Uh, Mac OS 27 is called Big
1:13:26
Bear. I think this so on on Twitter,
1:13:29
they have like the the special like icon
1:13:32
that they use after the hashtag and
1:13:33
people did some digging into the like
1:13:36
web tools there and they found that Big
1:13:38
Bear was like part of one of the the
1:13:40
file names. Uh, so people are thinking,
1:13:42
oh, and I think that's like a California
1:13:44
location as well. So people are trying
1:13:47
to put the two and two together and
1:13:48
think that Mac OS 27 is going to be
1:13:50
called Big Bear. Um, despite that
1:13:52
though, I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm gonna
1:13:54
put myself down as a no.
1:13:57
>> I mean, it is it is just dumb enough to
1:13:59
be an official name for a Mac OS
1:14:01
release.
1:14:02
>> Yeah, I can see it happening.
1:14:04
>> But it it's going to remind way too many
1:14:07
people of the grocery store in the
1:14:09
Midwest. [clears throat]
1:14:09
>> Yeah.
1:14:11
>> Also, it sounds like Bug Bear, which is
1:14:13
not good.
1:14:14
>> Yeah.
1:14:14
>> Uh, I say no. I I like the uh other
1:14:17
rumor that uh I don't know where this
1:14:19
came from, but some people were saying
1:14:20
that oh, they should call it Emerald Bay
1:14:23
because it's it's a building on Tahoe,
1:14:27
right? Like what? So Sierra and High
1:14:29
Sierra or whatever.
1:14:30
>> Yeah.
1:14:30
>> So I thought that was kind of cool. And
1:14:32
also that sounds kind of cool. Emerald
1:14:33
Bay. Mac OS Emerald Bay. Or actually,
1:14:35
yes, they were just saying it was going
1:14:36
to be called Mac OS Emerald, which
1:14:38
that's not going to happen. It'd be
1:14:40
Emerald Bay.
1:14:42
>> What do you think, Graeme? I love this
1:14:44
name, but I just can't I mean I I could
1:14:47
sort of see it happening, but it just
1:14:48
seems quite unlikely to me. And bearers
1:14:52
also has like negative connotations at a
1:14:55
time when they're they're switching CEOs
1:14:58
and people might be bearish about Apple.
1:15:00
I don't know. I I think no.
1:15:02
>> Okay. And Charlie,
1:15:04
>> I'll say no because I happen to know
1:15:06
what the actual code name is [laughter]
1:15:09
and it's going to be um Mac OS
1:15:11
Tenderloin. Oh yeah. Okay. [laughter]
1:15:15
That's a famous uh famous famous uh
1:15:17
tourist spot of San Francisco.
1:15:20
>> Yeah, very touristy. [laughter]
1:15:22
>> Good good good tip there. Okay.
1:15:26
[sighs and gasps]
1:15:26
Uh next up, last in the software
1:15:28
category, Vision OS gets more than five
1:15:31
minutes of screen time.
1:15:34
[laughter]
1:15:35
>> I'm gonna vote yes. Uh because I'm
1:15:37
blindly optimistic like Graham. Oh
1:15:40
[sighs] god, I always miss these. I can
1:15:42
never and every time that you put one of
1:15:44
these in there, I start going, "Oh,
1:15:46
wait. How long is a typical segment?"
1:15:50
>> Like, are they going to
1:15:52
wish this was more like will they spend
1:15:54
more time on this than TVOS?
1:15:56
>> I don't [laughter] know.
1:15:58
>> Five minutes. I don't know. Uh, I'm
1:16:01
going to say no because I think this
1:16:02
one's going to I think this whole
1:16:03
keynote is going to be all about AI. I
1:16:05
don't think it's going to be all that,
1:16:07
you know, specific to Vision OS.
1:16:09
>> Okay, Graham.
1:16:12
Well, I'm obviously going to say yes,
1:16:13
but actually the the the rational reason
1:16:16
for this is I went back and looked at
1:16:18
last year's WWDC in anticipation and it
1:16:22
was like six or seven minutes that they
1:16:24
spent on on Vision OS and they really
1:16:27
only introduced a handful of features.
1:16:28
It wasn't a big update. Um, and I think
1:16:32
they'll do something similar this year.
1:16:34
I think they'll give us some of the
1:16:35
things we want, but they won't give us a
1:16:36
lot of the things we want. Um, and I
1:16:38
think it does take if they're going to
1:16:40
if they're going to do a section on
1:16:42
Vision OS, I think it probably needs to
1:16:44
be at least five minutes if you look at
1:16:46
the way these things are structured. So,
1:16:48
I'm going with
1:16:49
>> Okay.
1:16:50
>> Oh, I'm not sure. I'm going to say no
1:16:52
because I just, you know, five minutes
1:16:53
is a lot and who cares about the Vision
1:16:55
Pro.
1:16:56
>> Mhm.
1:16:56
>> And that also uh continues in perfect
1:16:59
sync with Lewis. [laughter]
1:17:00
>> Yeah. Oh. Oh, yeah. There's that, too.
1:17:02
I'm I'm looking I'm desperately looking
1:17:04
at the the other questions on the list
1:17:06
>> to see where I might can disagree with
1:17:08
Lewis.
1:17:09
>> And
1:17:10
>> we're running out of room.
1:17:11
>> Yeah. [laughter]
1:17:14
>> Coming up, we have the hardware category
1:17:17
with a whopping one question. Updated
1:17:21
Mac Mini and Mac Studio with M5 chips.
1:17:26
Uh it's about time for them to come out.
1:17:28
I'm sort of vamping because I haven't
1:17:30
made up my mind on this yet. I think as
1:17:32
of like up to like a couple of weeks
1:17:35
ago, I would be like an unambiguous yes.
1:17:37
I think that's coming. Um, and we're
1:17:39
we're seeing like the the current
1:17:41
configurations of the Mac Mini and Mac
1:17:43
Studio like dip out. You know, they're
1:17:46
slowly disappearing. Is it even a
1:17:47
product they sell anymore? Who knows?
1:17:50
Um, screw it. This is probably why I
1:17:52
lose WWDC every year. But you know what?
1:17:55
I'm gonna put myself down as a yes
1:17:56
again. They've got to like they they're
1:17:58
they're running out of those computers
1:18:01
[laughter] they don't have anymore.
1:18:03
>> Yeah, this is a tough one. I mean, all
1:18:04
the rumors say as early as WWDC
1:18:09
26. The I'm going to say no. And because
1:18:13
for one thing, Tim Cook said in the uh
1:18:16
earnings call that they're, you know,
1:18:17
supply constraint on all these
1:18:19
processors and memory and everything
1:18:22
through July.
1:18:24
And I don't know how exciting it is to
1:18:26
say, "Hey, we've got a slightly faster
1:18:29
chip in all these machines. I, you know,
1:18:32
if it was a a new model or something,
1:18:35
>> I think this would actually be the event
1:18:37
to do it because the Mac Studio, I mean,
1:18:39
especially with like the, you know,
1:18:40
insane high amounts of RAM and the
1:18:42
insane processes that they put in those
1:18:44
those are like, you know, developer
1:18:45
favorite machines, especially now in the
1:18:48
age of agentic AI things. people want to
1:18:50
run AI on on a Mac and you know this is
1:18:52
their developers conference. I think it
1:18:54
would be a good fit but the Mac Mini
1:18:57
also a super popular you know
1:18:58
development tool. Mark just bought like
1:19:00
48 of them.
1:19:02
>> I [laughter] mean I know they're
1:19:03
popular. I just I just you know what is
1:19:04
there to say about it really? I mean
1:19:05
they've already talked up the M5 chips.
1:19:08
>> So what they just going to go here's the
1:19:10
same computer with a better chip and
1:19:12
it'll be available sometime in July once
1:19:14
we get the supply chain stuff
1:19:15
uncinkedked.
1:19:15
>> Not the M5 Ultra. I agree. There's not
1:19:18
much to say about it, but also I think
1:19:20
they've got so much to say about the
1:19:21
platforms this year. WWDC often doesn't
1:19:25
have hardware announcements because they
1:19:27
just want to talk about their platforms.
1:19:29
And I think that this year absolutely
1:19:32
that it will be all the platforms and
1:19:34
and how AI is affecting them. And uh I I
1:19:38
think they're trying to make these a bit
1:19:40
more snappy now because they really did
1:19:42
start dragging on. So, I I wouldn't be
1:19:45
at all surprised in the next few weeks
1:19:47
that there's just a press release about
1:19:48
this, but I don't I don't expect it to
1:19:50
be part of the WWDC announcements.
1:19:53
>> Okay. Does this question
1:19:56
it says updated Mac Mini and Mac Studio
1:19:58
with M5 chips? Do they have to announce
1:19:59
it or can it just like show up?
1:20:02
>> If they just appear online,
1:20:04
>> I guess I guess before I before I I
1:20:07
judge the answers, so before next
1:20:08
Thursday, they if they just drop them, I
1:20:11
guess they that would be counted, right?
1:20:13
I think it's all about the key keynote
1:20:14
though or
1:20:15
>> Yeah. Okay. I I think then no at the
1:20:18
keynote, but if it's if it's at the
1:20:20
keynote, I'm going to say no. But if
1:20:23
it's uh
1:20:24
>> Well,
1:20:24
>> if it's because maybe they come out on
1:20:26
the same day even. I just don't think
1:20:27
they need to mention a a chip bump.
1:20:30
>> If if it's anything that like happens
1:20:31
on, you know, even if it's just like
1:20:33
limited to Monday, like anything that
1:20:34
happens on Monday, I think is fair game
1:20:36
to judge these things.
1:20:38
>> No, I'll say yes then.
1:20:40
>> Okay,
1:20:40
>> there you go. Just just to be different
1:20:41
from Lewis.
1:20:42
>> Okay. [laughter]
1:20:43
>> Got to do it at some point.
1:20:44
>> Just just to pivotal question.
1:20:46
>> Yeah.
1:20:47
>> Okay. Yep. You're a Yes. Now we go to
1:20:50
the miscellaneous category.
1:20:52
Steven Lame appears on screen or in
1:20:55
voiceover. This is their their new head
1:20:58
honcho of user interface design. Well,
1:21:01
Alan Dice featured very heavily last
1:21:03
year about Liquid Glass. Will Steven
1:21:05
Lameé appear there to uh talk about
1:21:08
their new user interface tweaks if they
1:21:11
have any? Steven Lmay, although he's,
1:21:13
you know, the the top of this division,
1:21:14
he actually hasn't appeared in any
1:21:16
keynotes before. So, I'm going to say
1:21:20
no. My guess is no. He won't be there.
1:21:23
What do you think, Lewis? Uh,
1:21:27
I'm gonna say yes, just because I think
1:21:28
they probably want to introduce him. you
1:21:30
know, they that whole Allen died thing
1:21:33
was such a you know, that that that was
1:21:35
not a good week or so for Apple and uh
1:21:38
>> Mhm.
1:21:39
>> you know, they they rushed this guy out
1:21:41
pretty prominently pretty quickly to say
1:21:42
like, "Hey, look, uh, you know, we've
1:21:44
got somebody who's, you know, really a
1:21:46
veteran. He's really great and, you
1:21:47
know, we're in good hands." So I I think
1:21:50
yeah the I think the uh just I don't
1:21:52
know in what way but I bet he's got a
1:21:55
little bit of a little bit of uh you
1:21:58
know exposure I get in this.
1:22:00
>> Mhm. What do you think Graham?
1:22:03
>> I think no because I don't think that
1:22:05
Certino thinks there's any problem with
1:22:08
liquid glass at all. I just [laughter]
1:22:11
I think they acknowledge that there's
1:22:12
some fine tuning that needs to be done
1:22:14
but Apple does not really talk about
1:22:17
fine-tuning. You know, I I and if they
1:22:20
did on on the Mac platform, I think in
1:22:22
particular there there is a need for
1:22:24
some fine tuning and I could imagine
1:22:26
Craig Federigi
1:22:29
alluding to it as an aside. You know, we
1:22:31
we've done these things to make Liquid
1:22:33
Glass look even better on a Mac. I could
1:22:35
imagine him saying that. Yeah. But the
1:22:38
thing is, if you wheel out someone like
1:22:40
Steven Lame, it uh it has to he then
1:22:44
needs to talk for a while. You can't
1:22:45
have him just talking for oh like hey
1:22:47
I'm Steven Lame I tidied things up. Bye.
1:22:50
[laughter]
1:22:52
We're not going to do that. And so I I
1:22:55
just don't think this isn't the time.
1:22:57
And I also think it would correctly be
1:22:59
interpreted as um a mayor culpa on
1:23:02
Apple's part and putting all the blame
1:23:05
on Alan Dy. And I do think it's one of
1:23:08
the erroneous things about the way that
1:23:10
Apple is covered. Um and I I guilty of
1:23:13
it sometimes myself. It's almost
1:23:15
irresistible to like pin things on to
1:23:18
people. So, Federigi did this or Turnis
1:23:20
did that. Turnis is bearish on Vision
1:23:22
Pro. Uh, Steven Lame hates liquid glass.
1:23:26
And these things are just not true
1:23:28
because people can have complex opinions
1:23:30
and stuff. My understanding from all the
1:23:32
stuff I've read is Steven Lame was very
1:23:34
involved in liquid glass. And actually
1:23:36
if you look at a lot of the liquid glass
1:23:38
things like the the almost biological
1:23:40
way in which they animate and stuff
1:23:42
that's all Steven Lmé and so here he's
1:23:46
all over liquid glass you know and so I
1:23:49
find it funny when I listen to these
1:23:52
I'm not going to name the podcast but
1:23:53
some podcasts I listen to and I listen
1:23:55
to a lot this one [laughter] I do listen
1:23:58
to this one but you didn't you didn't
1:24:00
say that
1:24:00
>> is it one that you accidentally started
1:24:02
listening to
1:24:03
>> Alan Dy is is a design Ignoramus and
1:24:06
Steven Lame is here to save the day. I
1:24:09
just think it's nonsense. They were all
1:24:11
part of the same team that came up with
1:24:12
liquid glass and liquid glass. If you
1:24:15
follow Apple design trends, you can see
1:24:18
it has its roots in Vision OS. It has
1:24:20
its roots in Mac OS 10. It has its roots
1:24:22
even in like the dynamic island. And
1:24:25
they explained all of this in WWDC last
1:24:28
year. This is something which involves
1:24:30
decades of design evolution at Apple.
1:24:33
And so it's not something that was a
1:24:35
mistake and it's not something that
1:24:36
needs to be fixed and it's not something
1:24:38
that some new personality needs to come
1:24:40
in because Apple is like an OT movie and
1:24:44
a new director comes in and everything
1:24:45
changes. That's just not what Apple is.
1:24:47
Apple is a company with thousands of
1:24:49
employees and loads of people working on
1:24:51
these things and there is a direction.
1:24:54
If you ever worked in a big
1:24:55
organization, you know, it's actually
1:24:57
quite hard to make a big organization
1:24:59
change direction. I think Coutino is not
1:25:02
stupid. So, they're aware that some
1:25:03
people don't like liquid glass, but
1:25:05
they're also aware that you get a lot of
1:25:07
noise in the blogger sphere and it
1:25:10
doesn't necessarily represent what real
1:25:12
users think.
1:25:14
>> Uh, I think no, I don't think he's going
1:25:17
to appear because because
1:25:20
uh what's he going to say really? I
1:25:23
mean, he's is they're going to bring him
1:25:24
[laughter] in is what is there going to
1:25:27
be some big new design change which he
1:25:29
needs to explain?
1:25:30
>> The glowing Siri. He could he could
1:25:31
introduce the glowing Siri and that's
1:25:33
it.
1:25:33
>> It's going to be something uh something,
1:25:36
you know, something like that that he's
1:25:37
otherwise, you know, you don't need to
1:25:39
bring yet another person on there and
1:25:41
and was it Gran that said, you know,
1:25:43
he's Yeah, he has to come on for more
1:25:45
than just to say one thing.
1:25:47
>> So, I don't think so. Have you noticed
1:25:49
that uh Apple has been slowly getting
1:25:52
rid of its designers design heads with
1:25:54
only threeletter surnames? [laughter]
1:25:59
I think there's something in that.
1:26:00
>> So, Lame might be safe. Five letters.
1:26:04
>> Yeah, exactly.
1:26:04
>> He'll last 40% longer than Johnny Ive.
1:26:07
>> I think you write that down and we'll
1:26:10
see.
1:26:10
>> Okay. Tim Cook appears on screen for
1:26:14
more than three minutes. There's uh, you
1:26:17
know, this is likely going to be his
1:26:19
last keynote. Is he going to have a
1:26:22
smaller role because, you know, John
1:26:23
Turnis is going to take it over or is he
1:26:25
gonna, you know, appear in it more
1:26:28
because he wants to like give like a,
1:26:29
you know, parting words uh in the
1:26:32
keynote. I haven't really settled on
1:26:35
which way I'm going, but I'm going to
1:26:37
say yes. I think he he'll probably be a
1:26:41
little sentimental. I think he'll
1:26:43
probably have like, you know, a few
1:26:44
things to say. They they might be do a
1:26:46
whole thing about it to to a small
1:26:49
degree. What do you think, Louis? I
1:26:50
>> mean, for God for God's sake, it takes
1:26:52
him 30 seconds to walk out and say good
1:26:54
morning.
1:26:56
>> Yeah.
1:26:56
>> Yeah. He'll be on there for more than
1:26:57
three minutes.
1:26:58
>> Mhm.
1:26:59
>> Yeah. I I think uh I looking at at his
1:27:02
previous appearances, like last year, he
1:27:04
was on screen for more than around three
1:27:08
three minutes is tricky because he was
1:27:09
on screen for about three minutes last
1:27:11
year. And when he just tops and tails
1:27:13
it, that is is three minutes. I I think
1:27:17
he is going to have his usual level of
1:27:19
involvement this year. And I don't think
1:27:21
he necessarily will allude to his
1:27:24
departure or as he would position it,
1:27:25
his new role at Apple because uh that's
1:27:29
not happening until the autumn. So right
1:27:31
now, he's still the CEO. And I think
1:27:34
that it would be appropriate for him to
1:27:36
just do it like he always does it. I'm
1:27:38
not sure that he needs to say anything.
1:27:40
I I feel like he will do something
1:27:42
really special when he's moving into his
1:27:45
new role, but he's not doing that yet.
1:27:47
So, I I feel like it's a little bit
1:27:49
premature. I think he'll be on screen
1:27:50
for about 3 minutes. I'm sure we all see
1:27:54
lots of Turners, but we always do
1:27:57
anyway, but yeah. So, I think he'll be
1:27:59
on for about 3 minutes. Maybe not. So,
1:28:01
it's a bit tricky because it could be
1:28:03
two minutes and 50 seconds or it could
1:28:04
be three minutes and 10. I'm gonna say
1:28:06
yes because I think the the gist of this
1:28:09
is like, you know, is he making a swan
1:28:11
song or I I think he's he's just going
1:28:14
to be he's going to be on it and he's
1:28:15
not going to reference his departure at
1:28:17
all.
1:28:17
>> So, do you think he'll appear in the
1:28:20
September keynote? Because I think
1:28:22
that's really like a 50-50 guess whether
1:28:23
he will at all or not.
1:28:25
>> I think he won't because at that point
1:28:27
he will have handed over. But I think at
1:28:29
the point of which you see that because
1:28:31
when they have the when they announce
1:28:33
new iPhones in the fall,
1:28:34
>> that's what they'll want their focus on.
1:28:36
They won't want their focus to be on Tim
1:28:37
Cook. So I think you will have some
1:28:40
really nice tasteful but understated way
1:28:44
of marking his switch to his new role.
1:28:47
>> Maybe he could uh call in from Johnny
1:28:49
Ives hyperbaric chamber. He'll he'll do
1:28:52
like an an interview with with someone
1:28:55
or there will be something to mark the
1:28:57
occasion and uh you know his new role. I
1:29:00
don't think it and he'll stress it's not
1:29:01
goodbye, it's a new role.
1:29:03
>> I'm afraid that they'll turn it into
1:29:04
like one of the like opening bits like
1:29:06
the little movie that they do at the
1:29:07
beginning either for this event or the
1:29:10
next one. And I'm just cringing in
1:29:11
advance of that.
1:29:13
There will be a tear in his mind when
1:29:15
he's when he's at the rounding up at the
1:29:17
end when he say this is why we do what
1:29:19
we do and it will be his eyes will be a
1:29:23
bit glossy. I think that's what you'll
1:29:24
get.
1:29:25
>> Well, much as I'd like him to go out on
1:29:28
a high and you know like prank call a
1:29:30
coffee shop in the Bay Area
1:29:33
>> live which which would be amazing.
1:29:35
>> Tenderloin.
1:29:36
>> Oh, [laughter] do they have co Yeah, a
1:29:39
coffee shop in serving instant coffee.
1:29:41
Uh, [laughter]
1:29:43
I think he's going to be like Graeme
1:29:45
says around three minutes. I'm going to
1:29:46
go less. I think he's going to top and
1:29:47
tail it. And I think Turnis is going to
1:29:49
be on a bit more than usual.
1:29:53
>> If if we were doing like the full set of
1:29:55
20 questions, I would have also had a
1:29:56
question on whether, you know, how much
1:29:57
John Turnis appears as well because, you
1:29:59
know, like you said, this isn't a
1:30:01
hardware event. Uh, he doesn't really
1:30:04
have a reason to be here other than
1:30:06
being the upcoming CEO.
1:30:08
Although, I guess I voted on this being
1:30:10
a hardware event. So, [laughter]
1:30:12
who am I to talk?
1:30:14
>> Yeah, that makes me think that maybe he
1:30:16
will they will announce the M5, Mac
1:30:18
Mini, and Mac Studio
1:30:20
>> in the keynote just talk about because
1:30:22
it would it would be commented on if
1:30:24
he's not in it at all. So, that's a
1:30:26
really good point. That would be a
1:30:28
reason to do it.
1:30:30
>> That's the best argument I've heard for
1:30:31
it yet.
1:30:32
>> What did What did I vote for there? I
1:30:34
voted yes, didn't I? Huh? [laughter]
1:30:38
>> Yes.
1:30:39
Okay, so we will obviously judge these.
1:30:41
Again, if you're listening and you'd
1:30:42
like to uh be a part of this madness,
1:30:45
you can go to dgriffinjones.com/servey.
1:30:48
There's a Google form where you can
1:30:49
submit your votes. Uh if you'd like uh
1:30:51
to put a message on the show, [music] uh
1:30:53
you know, if something you'd like to
1:30:54
plug if you were to win, you know, there
1:30:57
there's an optional question for that as
1:30:58
well. Thank you to Graham and Charlie
1:31:01
for joining us this week. They will be
1:31:03
back next week as well as we talk about
1:31:04
the announcements. You can find them on
1:31:07
the Apple Core podcast. Leave a fivestar
1:31:10
review in Apple Podcast if you listen if
1:31:12
you got through this far. I know this is
1:31:14
like a superersized episode. I've got a
1:31:16
lot of editing to do. Louis has to
1:31:17
really get onto the newsletter. So, I
1:31:19
really should stop talking, but I'm also
1:31:21
going to say that if you'd like to send
1:31:22
in [music] questions or feedback, you
1:31:24
can text us [email protected].
1:31:28
See you all later. Goodbye. Bye. Bye.
1:31:32
See you. Good soon, you guys.
#Science