[DJ]: So, Justin... I built a new thing this weekend.
[JM]: Did you?
[JM]: What did you build?
[DJ]: Well, you know, I told you about this stereo system that I put together and how it was kind of deliberately a low-tech system.
[DJ]: Like I focused on buying an amplifier and a pair of speakers that don't have a bunch of built-in connectivity.
[DJ]: They do not require you to download a phone app and agree to a terms of service before you can make sound come out of them.
[DJ]: and etc.
[DJ]: And I've been very happy with that so far.
[DJ]: I have the amp connected to my TV and through that to my gaming PC.
[DJ]: So video games, movies, it comes through that sound system.
[DJ]: I got a record player because I'm a middle-aged millennial and it's the law.
[DJ]: I feel like I probably made that joke on another episode, but you get it twice.
[DJ]: And I've got some records.
[DJ]: It's great.
[DJ]: But the fact is I do still stream music.
[DJ]: We've spoken before about how I ditched Spotify for the charmingly named Qobuz,
[DJ]: which apparently pays artists more money and also provides high-quality music and also has a music store so you can buy DRM-free copies of the music.
[DJ]: These are all things I like.
[DJ]: So with the exception that their apps are a little buggy, I've been pretty happy with Qobuz, and I always like pronouncing that name.
[DJ]: But I ended up wanting a good way to stream Qobuz through this new stereo system.
[DJ]: And one thing that this amp I bought did have is Bluetooth, but I don't really like Bluetooth.
[DJ]: And it certainly doesn't achieve the desire of having a relatively low-tech solution.
[DJ]: Or whether it's low-tech or not, what I should say is that, like, I want a reliable solution.
[DJ]: And having, like, my phone on my Wi-Fi streaming music from Qobuz and then using Bluetooth to send that music to my amp...
[DJ]: is not not a great solution for a variety of reasons. I will leave imagining those reasons as an exercise to the listener, although in addition to whatever you're imagining, the amp also has some weird thing when you have a bluetooth device connected that it keeps activating it at various times. It's annoying -- just take my word for it.
[DJ]: So ultimately, I wanted a better solution, and that's what I built.
[DJ]: So you had actually sent me, Justin, a link to an open source project called Qobine, which is a collection of audio player client apps for Qobuz, including a web UI, which is made to be installed on some sort of small headless computer like a Raspberry Pi...
[DJ]: on your local network, and then you can access this web interface and pick music from Qobuz and play it.
[DJ]: So I managed to get this working on a Raspberry Pi.
[DJ]: I bought a special HAT for the Pi.
[DJ]: That's not just me being cute.
[DJ]: The interface that the Pi uses to let you install extension boards is called HAT.
[DJ]: I don't remember what that stands for.
[DJ]: But as a result, the expansion boards for the Pi are all called HATs, which I think is adorable.
[DJ]: And they do indeed sit on top of it.
[DJ]: So there's a company called Hi-Fi Berry that makes a bunch of these components.
[DJ]: And I bought what is apparently a very high quality DAC HAT.
[DJ]: So the Raspberry Pi has HDMI outputs.
[DJ]: I'm using the Pi 4.
[DJ]: But apparently its audio output is just not very good.
[DJ]: Not very good quality.
[DJ]: So this thing has like a dedicated digital analog converter, and it has your classic RCA jacks.
[DJ]: So I installed it on the Pi.
[DJ]: I bought a case that the same company sells that encloses the Pi and the HAT nicely.
[DJ]: And I hooked the thing up to my amplifier with RCA cables, the way you would hook up any other piece of analog stereo equipment.
[DJ]: And I can get into the details or answer whatever questions you might have, Justin, but just to jump to the end, once I got this working...
[DJ]: It's really sweet because all I have to do is turn on my amp and on any of my devices navigate to this address on my local network.
[DJ]: And I've got a nice web interface and I can stream music.
[DJ]: And instead of all the wireless nonsense, the music is, you know, coming to me over the internet, going to the Pi, which is wired into my router, and then going through wires into the amp.
[DJ]: And like it's fast, it's reliable, it sounds beautiful.
[DJ]: And maybe best of all, this cost me, I don't know, $100 all in or something like that.
[DJ]: Whereas you can buy like streaming amps or streamer components often from the same company that sells you your amp.
[DJ]: But they are, as you might imagine, ridiculously expensive.
[DJ]: So I'm very happy with my DIY hi-fi stream guy, as I've decided to call it.
[JM]: While we are stringing together acronyms, real-time follow-up, a HAT stands for hardware attached on top, which is beautifully direct.
[DJ]: That's almost as good as my favorite computing-related acronym, TWINE, which apparently stands for technology without an interesting name.
[JM]: I think you just described almost all technology.
[DJ]: Also, I screwed that up.
[DJ]: It's TWAIN.
[DJ]: TWAIN is technology without an interesting name.
[DJ]: TWINE would not fit that acronym.
[JM]: I'm glad one of us was paying attention.
[DJ]: That's true.
[DJ]: We can sweep that one down the memory hole.
[DJ]: Hardware attached on top.
[DJ]: That's pretty good.
[JM]: One of the many reasons that I love this solution that you came up with is that because of the service you chose, you are able to use tools like Qobine to access the service that you're paying for.
[JM]: I cannot begin to tell you how much loathing I have for services that make it difficult or impossible for you to do this.
[JM]: To pick the most obvious example, since we are talking about streaming music... Spotify, to my knowledge, does not make it easy or perhaps even possible for you to access the Spotify music streaming service without using software that Spotify provides to you.
[JM]: You can't run some alternative app on your phone.
[JM]: Maybe you could find some workaround on a computer that makes it seem like it's coming from Spotify.
[JM]: I don't even think that's... I've never heard of people using easy-to-download,
[JM]: just drag this to your Applications folder and launch it, and you can access your Spotify streaming service via this alternative app.
[JM]: There might be some hack way to do it.
[JM]: But as far as I'm aware, there's no easy way to do it.
[JM]: And the software that Spotify provides to you and tells you you have to use this, it is terrible.
[JM]: I don't even begin to have words to describe the trash fire that is Spotify software.
[JM]: Every time I launch this thing, I can never find what I'm trying to access.
[JM]: The interface just looks like this mishmash airline cockpit.
[JM]: We just crammed everything into this interface.
[JM]: Good luck trying to find anything you actually want to find.
[DJ]: But don't you want to listen to the Joe Rogan show when you open Spotify, Justin?
[JM]: Weirdly, I do not.
[DJ]: But don't you want to see your Spotify countdown or whatever that thing is called?
[DJ]: But don't you want to buy an audio book?
[DJ]: But don't you want to, you know?
[JM]: Yeah.
[JM]: So I think it's amazing that Qobuz allows you to use whatever software you want to use to access the service, you know, that you're paying for, because you're paying for *that*.
[JM]: You're not paying for their software.
[JM]: You're paying for the ability to stream music via their service.
[JM]: And so I think it's great that the
[JM]: service you chose gives you that freedom and that flexibility and allows for this very cool DIY system that you built to exist.
[JM]: And I can definitely relate to what it's like to try to get wireless systems to work.
[JM]: Bluetooth being one of the worst wireless protocols in existence.
[JM]: In terms of reliability, Bluetooth is very cool in terms of its breadth and support across a wide variety of devices.
[JM]: But in terms of its everyday usability and reliability, it is the butt of many jokes.
[JM]: And I can say, speaking from personal experience, that when trying to use a different wireless protocol, which is presumably Wi-Fi, when paired with
[JM]: AirPlay 2 and using my phone to play music and then using the AirPlay protocol to cast that to a target such as the stereo in my living room or the Mac on my desk or an Apple TV device.
[JM]: There's times where the music will just stop playing and someone will notice and be like, "Wait, did the music stop?"
[JM]: And I look at my phone and I say, and I see sure enough, it's not playing.
[JM]: And I push play and it comes from the *phone*.
[JM]: And then I have to go to the selection thing and then choose the target that it was playing on a moment ago and push play.
[JM]: And then it comes out again.
[JM]: And this is the kind of thing you shouldn't have to deal with.
[JM]: And so when you have things wired up the way you do, where you are using actual wires, wherever you can, you should get much better reliability.
[JM]: So, and apologies if you already described this.
[JM]: The Qobine software that you're accessing, is that an app on your phone?
[JM]: Is it some terminal user interface on your computer?
[JM]: Is it all of the above?
[JM]: Is it none of the above?
[JM]: Tell me more.
[DJ]: No, it's none of the above.
[DJ]: So Qobine is running on the Raspberry Pi, and it is running a component that talks to the Qobuz API.
[DJ]: Which, as you mentioned, it's amazing that Qobuz has one of those.
[DJ]: Now, I will knock on wood a little, because as far as I know, Qobuz does not advertise that they have this API and they want you to build your own software.
[DJ]: But at least for now, they do have an API.
[DJ]: You can authenticate with it.
[DJ]: And then, as you say, you can write your own software that streams music on your Qobuz account, which is awesome.
[DJ]: And it's just one more reason to switch from Spotify to Qobuz.
[DJ]: I'm saying that to you, Justin, you.
[DJ]: Drop what you're doing and switch from Spotify to Qobuz right now.
[JM]: And to be super clear, as a reminder, I do not personally subscribe to Spotify.
[JM]: I am on a guest account on someone else's account.
[JM]: If it were up to me, I would not have any Spotify.
[JM]: It is basically something that's gifted to me and occasionally comes in handy.
[JM]: But otherwise, I would not deal with Spotify at all.
[DJ]: I understand.
[DJ]: So this is a choose-your-battles situation, really.
[JM]: Indeed.
[DJ]: That's fair.
[DJ]: So Qobine is running on the Raspberry Pi.
[DJ]: It's talking to Qobuz's API.
[DJ]: And then it is running a web server with a little web app.
[DJ]: So that's the Pi running the client, like the web client.
[DJ]: And then I just connect to that through a web browser from my phone or my laptop or whatever.
[DJ]: So there's no actual software running on any of my devices whatsoever.
[DJ]: I just use them to control Qobine on the Pi, which is really sweet actually, because again, like as long as the Pi is running, Qobine is running.
[DJ]: So I can just go to this address on my local network and boop, there's the player exactly the way I left it.
[DJ]: And then I can go search for music and start playing something else.
[DJ]: And then on the device, I can just go do whatever, like go do something else.
[DJ]: There's no app running.
[DJ]: The app isn't going to crash.
[DJ]: It's pretty sweet.
[DJ]: I was going to say, obviously, the downside is you can't access the app from outside of my LAN.
[DJ]: But insofar as this thing plays music through the speakers in my living room, I'm not really that interested in being able to access it when I'm traveling.
[JM]: Not being able to access it outside your network is probably more of a feature than a bug or a shortcoming.
[DJ]: Absolutely.
[DJ]: Although it might be interesting to know what my neighbors think I should listen to.
[JM]: Just leave it open and let people know in your neighborhood, like, "Hey, you know, entertain me, surprise me."
[DJ]: Yeah, exactly.
[DJ]: "What's a hot new album I should be paying attention to?"
[DJ]: Just start playing it in my house.
[JM]: Preferably not at three in the morning.
[DJ]: Preferably not.
[JM]: That's cool.
[JM]: And having it accessible via web interface obviously means you can access it from any device in the household, and that's handy.
[JM]: I think for certain people, the partner acceptance factor might be a bit of an issue when interacting with it.
[JM]: But that probably just depends on whether people you may or may not have accessing your music in your house.
[DJ]: That's true.
[DJ]: Although, to that point, once I installed this thing, I remembered that there's an ancient feature in iOS where you can take a website and add it to your home screen.
[DJ]: And when you do that, it behaves a lot like an app.
[DJ]: So it gives you an app icon on your home screen.
[DJ]: The icon is derived from the favicon of the page.
[DJ]: And so in the case of Qobine, it's a little music note on a black background that resembles the style of Qobuz's logo.
[DJ]: And when you tap that, it opens essentially like a kind of a special version of your browser.
[DJ]: Like it just has different browser Chrome because it's not made to go to any website.
[DJ]: And so as far as partner acceptance factor, as you said, if you're using such devices, it is even a little easier than some hyper nerdy solutions to set them up with, hey, if you want to control the living room streaming thingy, just tap this icon and then you can do it.
[DJ]: So it's not a bad solution.
[JM]: That's cool.
[JM]: I experimented with something very similar a few years ago.
[JM]: And somewhere in a drawer, I have a Raspberry Pi with my own HAT and DAC that I had ordered as well, and connected to speakers and did something very, very similar to what you're describing.
[JM]: The main thing that I ran into personally, is the same thing that I've had with I think, every single Raspberry Pi I've ever used.
[JM]: And at some point, it just stops working entirely, presumably because of rights to the micro SD card, mini SD card, nano...
[JM]: I don't remember what size these things are.
[JM]: But the SD card, at some point, that card seems to fail.
[JM]: And I know that...
[JM]: in later revisions of the Raspberry Pi software, you now have more flexibility in terms of how you can boot from it, whether that's a USB flash drive or an NVMe drive.
[JM]: But presumably you are using the micro SD card approach.
[DJ]: I am.
[DJ]: One thing that I did in part to get ahead of this problem, the problem of what happens when this thing falls apart and I have to start over, is from the very beginning, I never connected to the Pi over SSH and installed anything.
[DJ]: When I got this thing, I flashed the SD card with the Raspberry Pi operating system.
[DJ]: I plugged the Pi in, connected it to my network, and then I built an Ansible playbook that does every single thing I want configured on the Pi.
[DJ]: And so as I figured out, what do I want installed on this?
[DJ]: How should it be configured?
[DJ]: I just kept building and editing this playbook and using it to deploy all that stuff to the Pi.
[DJ]: And so one nice side effect of that is if the Pi breaks or hopefully just the SD card breaks and needs to be replaced...
[DJ]: I could flash a new SD card with the operating system, run this playbook, and have the thing back in its current state very quickly.
[DJ]: If this were a computer that I kept user data, data that I want to preserve on, then I would need to go further and have some kind of backup strategy in place.
[DJ]: But...
[DJ]: As of right now, if I just needed to yank the SD card out and replace it, I could have this same thing back up and running, configured exactly the way it's configured now, very quickly, because I built that playbook.
[DJ]: And to the point of what you're describing, one of the reasons I do things that way now is I have been through like half a dozen home server devices of one kind or another in the last 10 years.
[DJ]: And you always get into this place where you slowly cobbled this thing together over the course of a few years.
[DJ]: And then when it breaks or otherwise you want to replace it, you have to go, huh, how did I get that working?
[DJ]: I don't remember.
[DJ]: What did I have in my SSH config?
[DJ]: It's all gone now.
[DJ]: So I really love using a tool like Ansible.
[DJ]: And there's lots of other tools like that so that you get this repeatable configuration.
[JM]: I have used Ansible for more years than I care to count and can vouch for how it does indeed create that repeatable configuration that comes in handy when things fall apart or you need to reconfigure something or set things up again from scratch.
[JM]: And I don't know if I'll use Ansible for this particular project, but one of these days I will go and find that Raspberry Pi and fish it out of a drawer and see if I can find a more durable storage solution than SD cards.
[JM]: So anyway, thank you for inspiring me to pick up this project again and see if I can get it to work more reliably.
[DJ]: Of course.
[DJ]: After all, this is all part of my long game to convince you and your partner to switch to Qobuz.
[DJ]: And I will, Justin.
[DJ]: I will.
[JM]: That is probably going to be a tough sell.
[JM]: Not for me, since, as you know, my preferred music is the local kind.
[JM]: But for streaming, I agree.
[JM]: Qobuz is pretty great.
[JM]: All right, moving on to other news that just broke right before we started recording.
[JM]: Apple has introduced the M6 and M5 Ultra systems on a chip, as well as a couple of machines that use them.
[JM]: So let's first talk a little bit about these SOCs or systems on a chip.
[JM]: The M6 is Apple's first chip using TSMC's two-nanometer architecture,
[JM]: which presumably allows them to get faster speeds at lower powered consumption.
[JM]: And this SOC adds a few extra cores compared to the base M5.
[JM]: So instead of a 10 core CPU, you're getting a 12 core CPU, and it comes with a similar 12 core GPU and a dual 16 core neural engine.
[JM]: As was rumored, and as we talked about in a previous episode, the M6 doesn't come in a Pro, Max, or Ultra configuration and seems like it will probably remain just a base M6.
[JM]: So if I were to take a guess, I don't think that we will see the M6 appear in any of the high-end Mac products.
[JM]: Meanwhile, in addition to the M5 Pro and Max SOCs that were announced, I believe at the end of last year, today Apple announced the M5 Ultra, which they are calling their most powerful chip ever, in part due to something that Apple tried to do in previous Ultras and could seemingly never pull off, which is it uses a quad-die architecture.
[JM]: My understanding is that the Ultra line is traditionally been two SOCs more or less glued together, giving you twice the CPU, GPU, and neural core count.
[JM]: And my understanding is Apple tried at various times in the past to instead of having two of them stuck together, to have four of them stuck together, but could never make this work for who knows what reason.
[DJ]: I think the systems on a chip would naturally form a sort of thruple.
[DJ]: And so there would always be one chip that was left out.
[DJ]: They just couldn't figure out how to have a proper four-person relationship.
[JM]: I imagine that quad-die throuples are indeed very complicated and can see why Apple decided they weren't worth the effort.
[DJ]: Yeah, I think we're still waiting for Johny Srouji to be on an Apple keynote where he discusses how he thinks about ethical non-monogamy in computer hardware.
[DJ]: But, you know, that's just the kind of thing that Apple's never going to really tell you about.
[DJ]: It sounds like they've finally cracked it, though.
[JM]: It does indeed.
[JM]: And the way this works is the M5 Ultra uses something that Apple calls Ultra Fusion to connect two dual-die M5 Max chips to form this quad-die architecture, which again, essentially means they took two M5 Max chips and fused the two of them together, each M5 Max chip having two dies.
[JM]: So you fuse those two together and then you get four.
[DJ]: You're saying Apple applied simple multiplication to the problem, and now, at last, we can have a four-die Ultra.
[JM]: Right.
[DJ]: I like to imagine that Ultra Fusion is basically just solder, like you just solder the chips together, but they had to come up with a cool, badass name.
[JM]: It would be cool if Ultra Fusion is really just code for Elmer's glue, but somehow I'm guessing it's a bit more complicated.
[JM]: Now let's talk about some of the products that are going to use these processors.
[JM]: Today, in addition to these SoCs, Apple also announced a new Mac mini that utilizes the M6 and the M5 Pro.
[JM]: And the base model comes with the M6 processor,
[JM]: and the aforementioned 12 core CPU, 12 core GPU, 16 gigabytes of RAM, a somewhat paltry 256 gigabyte solid state drive for 900 US dollars.
[JM]: So the base model Mac mini is a bit more expensive than it was in the past.
[JM]: In terms of upgrades, if you want to increase from 16 gigabytes of RAM to 32 gigabytes of RAM, that will cost an additional $400.
[DJ]: Oh, sorry.
[DJ]: So half the price of the entire machine to double the RAM.
[DJ]: That's cool.
[JM]: Yes, the RAMpocalypse is the gift that apparently keeps on giving.
[DJ]: By giving, you mean taking money out of our pockets.
[JM]: Taking lots of money, yes.
[JM]: And 32 gigabytes of RAM is the most you can get with the M6 processor.
[JM]: If you want more RAM in your Mac Mini, then you have to switch to the M5 Pro.
[JM]: And with that SoC, you can go to a maximum of 64 gigabytes of RAM.
[JM]: And that upgrade from the base $900 price will cost you an additional $1,800.
[JM]: And again, if you want an actual usable amount of solid state storage, which I'm going to say is roughly around two terabytes in 2026, those upgrades to 64 gigabytes of RAM and a two terabyte SSD will take you to $3,500.
[DJ]: There is something sort of laughable about, we've created these new chips, and one of the things they're advertised as being, and when I say we, I mean Apple.
[DJ]: Apple has created these new chips, and they advertise them as being great for, among other things, AI.
[DJ]: So running large language model inference.
[DJ]: But running large language model inference is typically something that requires a lot of RAM.
[DJ]: And especially if you are running models locally, you're often downloading very large amounts of these model weights, like many, many gigabytes of them, which means you might need a lot of storage.
[DJ]: So this notion of we have this great processor that's great for running AI.
[DJ]: So you should buy our computers so you can run large language models.
[DJ]: But to actually get any of the other hardware that you would need to make that effective, it's going to cost you insane, disgusting amounts of money.
[DJ]: You know, like buy the M6.
[DJ]: It's so good at AI.
[DJ]: Of course, if you want a Mac mini that can actually run large language models, it's going to cost you, you know, five times the base retail price of the Mac mini.
[DJ]: So that's cool.
[JM]: That is indeed a bit frustrating.
[JM]: And it's about to get even more frustrating when we go to the next bit of hardware that Apple has announced.
[DJ]: The Mac frustrating.
[DJ]: Oh, sorry.
[DJ]: That's a typo in my notes.
[DJ]: It's the Mac studio.
[JM]: Indeed, in addition to the new Mac Mini, there is a new Mac Studio featuring the M5 Max and M5 Ultra SoCs.
[JM]: And the base model M5 Max Mac Studio comes with 18 cores for the CPU, 32 core GPU, 36 gigabytes of RAM, and a...
[JM]: slightly less paltry 512 gigabytes solid state drive and starts at $2,500 for that base configuration.
[JM]: Now, as you said, if you are interested in doing local large language model inference and other generative software tasks, you might find that 36 gigabytes of RAM a bit limiting.
[JM]: And if you wanted to say, increase it slightly to 48 gigabytes of RAM, that will cost an additional $600 because as Apple often does,
[JM]: increasing the amount of RAM forces you to do other increases that you might not care about.
[JM]: So in this case, just going from 36 to 48 gigabytes of RAM means that you must also get a $300 upgrade to eight more GPU cores.
[JM]: So that 12 gigabyte increase in RAM costs you $600.
[JM]: To go to 64 gigabytes of RAM is $1,000 more than the base model.
[JM]: And to get the maximum amount that you can get on the M5 Max, which is 128 gigabytes of RAM, that will cost you $2,600 more than the base price or effectively double the base price at $5,100.
[JM]: Now, as of yesterday, my understanding is you couldn't even get any Mac with more than 128 gigabytes of RAM.
[JM]: And presumably the reason was Apple was reserving it for today's announcement.
[JM]: And that does indeed seem to be the case because the M5 Ultra Mac Studio is now the only machine in which you can get
[JM]: a RAM configuration greater than 128 gigabytes.
[JM]: So let's talk about the M5 Ultra.
[JM]: We just covered the M5 Max.
[JM]: The M5 Ultra Max Studio starts at 30 CPU cores, 64 GPU cores, 96 gigabytes of RAM, one terabyte solid state drive.
[JM]: That base model of the M5 Ultra Max Studio is $5,500.
[JM]: Now, where it really gets fun is when you decide that 96 gigabytes of RAM is not enough.
[DJ]: Though I'm pretty sure Bill Gates famously said 96 gigabytes of RAM should be enough for anybody.
[DJ]: But, you know, we live in 2026 now.
[JM]: Well, you're going to need to *be* Bill Gates in order to afford these RAM upgrades.
[JM]: So the step up from 96 gigabytes of RAM...
[JM]: is to 256 gigabytes of RAM, which as before forces a upgrade in the processor, adding six more CPU cores and 16 more GPU cores for an additional $1300 for the SoC upgrade.
[JM]: So the total cost to go from 96 gigabytes of RAM to 256 gigabytes of RAM is $4,000,
[JM]: bringing your total to $9,500 before tax.
[JM]: And once again, if you are doing this, presumably it's because you are downloading and running very large open weights models, which means you are going to need storage for that.
[JM]: Realistically, at least four terabytes for this kind of hardware that we're talking about.
[JM]: That will cost an additional $1,500, bringing your total to $11,000.
[JM]: And I don't know, if you just felt like you had money to light on fire and you want 16 terabytes of solid state storage, that's an additional $7,500 over the base configuration for a total price of $17,000.
[DJ]: If you're thinking about that, you should really decide it's time to play with the big boys and start like courting politicians in your state to let you build a data center.
[JM]: It might cost you less.
[DJ]: Well, yeah, exactly.
[DJ]: Because when you do that, you borrow the money to build the data center, right?
[JM]: Leverage.
[DJ]: Exactly.
[DJ]: If it works for all these giant companies, if they're like, well, we'll just borrow $100 billion to build this data center, well, why can't the average consumer do the same thing?
[DJ]: If you're already thinking about buying a $17,000 computer, I think you should be able to get your fellow citizens to pay for that with their retirement accounts.
[JM]: Makes sense to me.
[JM]: And if for some reason you decide that 256 gigabytes of RAM is not enough money to land on fire, coming allegedly in late October is a 512 gigabyte configuration, which was last available on the M3 Ultra Mac Studio, but disappeared in the early throes of the RAMpocalypse.
[JM]: But somehow Apple has found a way to get their hands on it.
[JM]: So it will allegedly be making a return
[JM]: this fall.
[DJ]: And I assume that when you select this option, the price changes from $17,000 to however much, it just says "As much money as you have".
[DJ]: Like the little thing says, "Plus all the rest of your money."
[JM]: This is the only option that you can't currently pre-order.
[JM]: So we don't know what it will say, but I think your guess is probably right.
[JM]: It probably will say, "All of your money".
[JM]: And while the prices are indeed difficult to fathom, I suppose I'm glad that these configurations are being made available again, that you can buy them if you have truly obscene amounts of money to spend on them.
[JM]: And it will be interesting to see if Apple can keep them in stock even at the prices that they're charging for them.
[JM]: But I assume that they must have some kinds of long-term contracts that allow them to
[JM]: get enough RAM to meet whatever projected demand they expect.
[JM]: In any case, it'll be entertaining to keep an eye on the projected delivery dates for these over the next few days and see how far out that date creeps.
[JM]: Yeah, I think it's cool that Apple shipped these new machines, these new processors.
[JM]: I'm not in the market for...
[JM]: a new Mac mini or a Mac studio at the moment.
[JM]: So I'm probably going to sit this one out.
[JM]: But I suppose if I were in the market for a Mac mini, the M6 Mac mini does seem pretty cool for what you get.
[JM]: Seems like it's a lot of power in a very, very, very small computer.
[DJ]: Yeah, the Mac Mini is one of those computers I've always wished I could justify buying because I do love the form factor, this tiny little desktop computer.
[DJ]: But I'm honestly not in the market for more computing hardware anytime soon either.
[DJ]: And, you know, as we've talked about, like we joke about the RAMpocalypse and all that stuff, but it does feel like the last year or two of massively increased prices and things in the computing market is...
[DJ]: has really underlined the necessity of getting things that last, like having computer hardware that you don't have to replace every couple of years.
[DJ]: That's always been a good idea for a variety of reasons, but especially when you buy something at one point for $2,000, let's say, and then 18 months later, the equivalent thing would cost $3,500.
[DJ]: You really don't want to be in the business of trying to replace these things often.
[JM]: I saw someone comment that the price for a well-specced Mac studio these days is the same price as a Mac SE/30 if you bought it new way back in the day, adjusted for inflation.
[JM]: And I suppose it is hard to argue that you're not getting a heck of a lot more for the same amount of money all these decades later.
[DJ]: That is a fair point, and it's easy to forget that if you go back 30 plus years, computers were comparatively really, really expensive, but they were also a lot less ubiquitous.
[DJ]: Now everybody has more than one computer, so you reasonably expect them to be cheaper compared to all of the other consumer goods.
[DJ]: But it's true.
[DJ]: Like it is really kind of a fun exercise to go back to the 1980s and 90s and take the popular computer models and adjust their retail prices for inflation and realize that they were comparable to what like an entry level car would cost you.
[DJ]: Like computers used to be very, very expensive.
[DJ]: But it does feel a little bit like we're on the upslope or we've been on the upslope of a curve where computing hardware is getting more and more expensive.
[DJ]: Like there was some sweet spot where relative, you know, adjusted for inflation, computers were quite affordable.
[DJ]: And now they've been getting less and less affordable.
[DJ]: So I'm hoping they'll swing back in the other direction.
[DJ]: Because when the Apple SE/30 came out, computers were not as integral a part of as many people's lives as they are now.
[JM]: That is true.
[JM]: Regarding the way that Apple ends up shipping these things, where the M5 comes out at this point, I'm trying to think of how long ago it was.
[JM]: It's less than a year, but not by much.
[JM]: And at that time, they shipped the M5 base model, the M5 Pro.
[JM]: I don't remember if the M5 Max came out at that time.
[JM]: But you fast forward a significant amount of time.
[JM]: It's now in August, and they're shipping the M5 Ultra.
[JM]: And then we have the M6 that's not coming, apparently, in a Pro, Max, or Ultra variant.
[JM]: The MacBook Pro got the M5 at the end of last year.
[JM]: And now we're seeing the first Mac Mini and Mac Studio with the M5.
[JM]: And it's been interesting to see Apple ship products in this way, where various machines
[JM]: get different versions of these processors at different times.
[JM]: And it's hard to guess at whether or not this is the strategy that Apple would optimally use, or whether it relates to supply constraints, marketing strategy objectives.
[JM]: It is not at all clear to me what drives how Apple chooses to ship these things and by how I mean when.
[DJ]: Yeah, it is curious.
[DJ]: So I quickly looked this up and actually the base M5 dropped in October of last year and it only came out in the lower model computers.
[DJ]: So there was a MacBook Pro 14-inch with an M5.
[DJ]: And I remember at the time in my day job going to our IT department and being like, hey, can I get a computer upgrade now?
[DJ]: And they're like, no, we're not going to get the M5 MacBook Pro.
[DJ]: That's not the...
[DJ]: And I realized, oh, yeah, that's right.
[DJ]: And so in March of this year, the M5 Pro and Max came out.
[DJ]: And that's when they revved the MacBook Pro, the 14 and 16 inch model with the Pro and Max version of the M5.
[DJ]: And now in August, the base M6 and the M5 Ultra come out.
[DJ]: And then presumably sometime in the next six months, there will be the M6 Pro and Max or something like that.
[DJ]: And it is hard to know, is this release cadence, like to the consumer, the release cadence is a little confusing.
[DJ]: When the M5 came out, why didn't all the M5s come out?
[DJ]: And it could be because Apple's like, the M5 Max isn't ready yet for whatever reason or can't be manufactured yet.
[DJ]: But we've got the M5, so let's release it in some of our products.
[DJ]: But on the other hand, I can see the argument, even if you could release them all at once, that only gives you one event, right?
[DJ]: So imagine if they had released all the M5 chips in October 2025.
[DJ]: And then they don't update their computers at all for 12 months, 14 months, whenever all of the M6 chips are ready.
[DJ]: But instead, this lets them make an announcement, put their products back in the minds of consumers in October, in March, in August.
[DJ]: I can see why you would want to do that.
[DJ]: Even though it is a little confusing from a product perspective where it's like, well, what's the best version of the Mac Mini right now?
[DJ]: Well, it's not the same as the best version of the MacBook Pro.
[DJ]: And it's, you know, it is a little confusing and yet also makes sense.
[DJ]: But as you say, like it's, I mean, it's certainly hard to know which.
[DJ]: We're probably not going to gain that insight into Apple's supply chain or marketing strategy to tell us.
[JM]: If I had to guess, assuming that there weren't constraints with supply, my guess is that Apple would prefer to ship everything in a more sane cadence because it's weird.
[JM]: And if you look at the past, I believe Apple used to ship things in a more aligned way where products often weren't quite so spread out in terms of when they got upgraded.
[JM]: I think it was due to their ability to get certain processors designed and shipped in enough quantities that caused this situation that we're currently in.
[JM]: And you mentioned that presumably later on over time, we'll see the M6 Pro and Max and whatnot.
[JM]: And my understanding is that according to the rumors that we won't, is that the M6 is going to stay a base model SoC only, and there will never be
[JM]: a Max or whatever variant of the M6.
[JM]: And the reasoning, according to the rumor is that the M7 had a significant enough gain in its neural modules or inference capabilities
[JM]: in terms of its generative software performance, that Apple decided that they were just going to jump straight to an M7 Pro and Max and Ultra.
[JM]: But again, that's just rumor and conjecture, and we'll see when it happens.
[JM]: But there is plenty of precedent for Apple skipping things when they can't quite seem to get it together.
[JM]: So, for example, in spring of last year, the M4 Mac Studio was announced in a Max version and I think also a Pro version.
[JM]: But there was no M4 Ultra, only the M3 Ultra.
[JM]: And only Apple knows why they didn't make an M4 Ultra.
[JM]: But it does seem like some of this just has to do with not only supply, but how the architecture planning and shipping schedules line up.
[JM]: Like at some point, Apple might look at this and say, OK, well, you know what?
[JM]: The M4 Ultra, it's not far enough along.
[JM]: We're already working on the M5 chip.
[JM]: Maybe we should just scrap the M4 Ultra and just not even ship one and we'll do the M5 Ultra instead.
[JM]: And so in addition to there being something relating to supply and availability of capacity, it does also seem to be like,
[JM]: how these different R&D and shipping schedules line up, because at some point they start to overlap and it doesn't really make sense to ship both of those things, to ship an M4 Ultra and then an M5 Ultra, or at least so it seems.
[JM]: All right, moving on to other news.
[JM]: I don't know if you've ever gone to a Walmart, Dan, but I had this experience where I have been in a Walmart and I will go to pay for my sundry goods in the same way that I pay for goods at other retailers.
[JM]: And I will take out my phone and I will activate Apple Pay and hover...
[JM]: my phone over the little terminal and nothing happens because for reasons I assume have to do with, "We're Walmart, so we will do what we want and you will like it because where else are you going to go?"
[JM]: Walmart has not supported, as far as I'm aware, any kind of tap-to-pay, such as Apple Pay, and has always been something that I have found confusing and frustrating when I go to pay in that way and it doesn't work.
[JM]: And then I'm reminded, oh, right, Walmart doesn't support this.
[JM]: I now have to fish out a credit card out of my pocket like a Neanderthal from eons ago.
[JM]: But it appears as if Walmart has finally caved and has announced that they will support tap-to-pay in general, which I assume includes, even though I don't believe it's mentioned explicitly in their press release, Apple Pay in particular.
[JM]: And I have to say, I am somewhat surprised that it took Walmart this long to do it.
[JM]: If I'm not mistaken, Apple announced Apple Pay 12 years ago in 2014.
[JM]: That is a long time ago...
[JM]: for Walmart to be this stubborn about it and say, "Nope, not doing it."
[JM]: "We're going to come up with our own silly system where you hold up some QR code in order to pay for things"... that I've certainly never used.
[JM]: I don't think I know anyone else who does either.
[JM]: So I think after 12 years, this is them finally just capitulating and realizing that they have not been successful at trying to supplant Apple Pay and other tap-to-pay systems.
[JM]: And they're just going to finally give customers what they want.
[DJ]: I remember when Apple Pay was first announced, there was this hubbub among Apple Pay fans anyway about how Walmart and maybe some other retailers were backing this other payment system called CurrentC, which is an extremely awkward pun on the word currency for anyone who's not paying attention.
[DJ]: But I think that might have been the last time I ever thought about Walmart.
[DJ]: So if it's like if it's been 12 years, I'm thinking like, have I ever run into this problem at a Walmart?
[DJ]: And then it's like, it might have been 12 years since I was last since I last set foot in a Walmart.
[DJ]: I am not really a fan of Walmart for a wide variety of reasons that I won't get into here.
[DJ]: But the whole you can't pay the same way as you pay at every other retailer certainly didn't incline me towards patronizing them.
[DJ]: But I have to admit, Walmart, the fact that you now support tap-to-pay is not probably not going to get me in the door either.
[DJ]: Maybe if they announced a sweeping, "We're going to be a less horrible company" initiative, then maybe I would consider it.
[DJ]: But I'm not holding out hope.
[JM]: I wouldn't hold your breath for that one.
[JM]: But this will make the shopping experience a lot more convenient for a lot of people.
[JM]: So just based on that fact alone, this is a net positive announcement for sure.
[JM]: All right, moving on.
[JM]: In other news, France has banned unsolicited telemarketing calls.
[JM]: And I think we have all been the victims of unsolicited telemarketing calls.
[JM]: I know that I have received so many that at this point, I have set my phone to not even ring when an unknown caller calls me because any other setting was just unbearable.
[JM]: So when I saw this news, I thought, yay for France.
[JM]: Good job.
[JM]: I'm glad that this joint call by 11 different French consumer groups got the French parliament to approve this law.
[JM]: I hope that in addition to passing it, that the fines that are going to be imposed on those that ignore the law and make the
[JM]: unsolicited marketing calls anyway are significant enough to dissuade said people from doing that.
[JM]: And more importantly, I hope that this is the kind of legislation that will spread to all of the countries on the planet.
[JM]: As far as I'm aware,
[JM]: Germany has had a similar ban since 2009, but I'm not aware of too many other countries that have this kind of blanket ban on unsolicited telemarketing calls.
[JM]: I know that there's countries that have implemented do not call registries, but I don't think those have been particularly effective.
[JM]: So I hope lots of other countries follow France's lead here.
[JM]: That'd be awesome.
[DJ]: Yeah, it would be nice to just stamp this out at the societal level.
[DJ]: Though I agree that like you, over the years, it's just kind of become the case that traditional telephone calls feel like the equivalent of junk mail, where in 2026, I receive very few things through the postal mail that I care about.
[DJ]: It's not a way that people really communicate anymore.
[DJ]: And the telephone, for me anyway, the telephone is mostly the same.
[DJ]: So I agree with you.
[DJ]: Like when I receive phone calls from unknown numbers, I just don't answer them.
[DJ]: And that has never really gone wrong for me.
[DJ]: Like if it, if it turns out it's like a doctor's office or my bank or something, then usually they'll leave a voicemail or I'll find out some other thing,
[DJ]: through some other method.
[DJ]: But yeah, in general, if my phone rings, by definition, it's something I don't care about.
[DJ]: And so I'm not going to pay attention to it.
[DJ]: And then on top of that, the fact that so often it is this intrusive garbage, it just kind of takes this medium of communication and turns it into a wasteland.
[JM]: Yeah, it's so weird to me whenever I see news like this and I see folks that raise concerns that the call center industry could be negatively impacted by it.
[JM]: And my response to that is, yeah, that's kind of the point.
[JM]: And I have some degree of empathy for the folks who work in said call centers and who might need to find other lines of work.
[JM]: But it's just weird to me to mention this in the context of this kind of legislation.
[JM]: That's not a reason for not passing laws like this.
[DJ]: No, and in fact, put the blame where it lies, because the real reason the call center industry is in trouble is because for profit reasons, businesses are abandoning the use of call center customer support in favor of things like chatbots on their websites.
[DJ]: But this sort of thing always happens, where it's like companies do this thing for profit that has some negative effect, and then when we try to regulate that,
[DJ]: some undesirable behavior, suddenly everyone shows up to go like, oh, well, but you're impacting the call center industry.
[DJ]: It's like, okay, your beef should be over there, not over here.
[DJ]: We're trying to make society better.
[DJ]: They're just trying to make money.
[JM]: Absolutely.
[JM]: All right, everyone, that's all for this episode.
[JM]: Thanks a lot for listening.
[JM]: You can find me on the web at justinmayer.com and you can find Dan at danj.ca.
[JM]: Reach out with your thoughts about this episode via the Fediverse at justin.ramble.space.