Pinned Tweet
iPhone Duo may be Apple's hottest product ever.
It currently has the longest lead time of any iPhone in history. By far.
Every Duo variant is currently showing a delivery date of 1/25/27, or 94 days after release––nearly 3x longer than the previous record held by the iPhone X.
etter by the day. $AAPL
Methodology:
All data comes from me scouring the internet for historical lead times. I tried to mirror today's conditions as closely as possible by targeting reports from the first day of preorders, a few hours after they opened.
I took the shortest lead time for any variant of the model available on Apple's US online store. Sometimes there would be one color that had longer times than others; for instance, the Jet Black iPhone 7 Plus had 6-8 weeks of lead time, but other colors were much more accessible, so those are the lead times reflected.
The idea is to show the fastest way to get some version of the model in your hands to best appreciate raw demand for the device itself.
It currently has the longest lead time of any iPhone in history. By far.
Every Duo variant is currently showing a delivery date of 1/25/27, or 94 days after release––nearly 3x longer than the previous record held by the iPhone X.
etter by the day. $AAPL
Methodology:
All data comes from me scouring the internet for historical lead times. I tried to mirror today's conditions as closely as possible by targeting reports from the first day of preorders, a few hours after they opened.
I took the shortest lead time for any variant of the model available on Apple's US online store. Sometimes there would be one color that had longer times than others; for instance, the Jet Black iPhone 7 Plus had 6-8 weeks of lead time, but other colors were much more accessible, so those are the lead times reflected.
The idea is to show the fastest way to get some version of the model in your hands to best appreciate raw demand for the device itself.
Within hours of opening preorders, shipping dates for iPhone Duo are indicating delivery in late January.
Seems like there might have been a little more interest than the Twitter reactions would have had you believe… 🤔 $AAPL
2
1
6
3,896
Random crazy revelation of the night: Mike Tomlin and Patrick Mahomes have the same voice.
1
0
0
262
Even if it didn’t have record-setting lead times and market interest, the amount of bending over backwards people are doing to hate on the iPhone Duo should convince you of how overwhelmingly successful it will be.
“Hated rallies are the strongest.”
“Hated rallies are the strongest.”
I was on the fence about buying a Ferrari F80, but will definitely pass after it failed:
- bat test (windshield breaks when you smash it with a bat, compromising visibility)
- fire test (interior has a tendency to burn when you deliberately light it on fire)
- bend test (carbon fiber chassis bends when you crash the car into a wall at 50mph)
This is a rational opinion and not cognitive dissonance at all.
0
0
1
258
I was on the fence about buying a Ferrari F80, but will definitely pass after it failed:
- bat test (windshield breaks when you smash it with a bat, compromising visibility)
- fire test (interior has a tendency to burn when you deliberately light it on fire)
- bend test (carbon fiber chassis bends when you crash the car into a wall at 50mph)
This is a rational opinion and not cognitive dissonance at all.
- bat test (windshield breaks when you smash it with a bat, compromising visibility)
- fire test (interior has a tendency to burn when you deliberately light it on fire)
- bend test (carbon fiber chassis bends when you crash the car into a wall at 50mph)
This is a rational opinion and not cognitive dissonance at all.
Was on the fence with iPhone Duo. But will definitely pass on the $2,000 phone after it failed:
▫️dirt test (gets stuck in hinge and magnetic closing doesn’t work)
▫️lighter test (inner screen can’t handle 10 seconds of direct flame)
▫️bend test (OLED screen gets line defect)
0
1
5
629
Mark Valorian retweeted
I’ve left Anthropic after more than a year of working on Claude Code and seeing it scale larger than I ever imagined.
I have really loved working at Ant and believe deeply in the mission, and most of all, the idea of a race to the top.
The idea that if we work hard and responsibly, we can raise the bar and inspire others to great outcomes. And if we all push each other to be better, things can be radically good. I will carry the spirit of this with me forever.
My colleagues at Anthropic are the most talented, thoughtful, competent, and earnest people I have ever met. I am glad they are at the wheel and trust them deeply.
To the community on X, thank you for everything. You’ve made this the most fun (and sometimes stressful) job I’ve ever had.
For me, it is time for a bit of a break before diving into something new.
If you want more excellent Claude Code content, you should follow @addyosmani , @lydiahallie, @_catwu, @ClaudeDevs and of course @bcherny who started it all.
I have really loved working at Ant and believe deeply in the mission, and most of all, the idea of a race to the top.
The idea that if we work hard and responsibly, we can raise the bar and inspire others to great outcomes. And if we all push each other to be better, things can be radically good. I will carry the spirit of this with me forever.
My colleagues at Anthropic are the most talented, thoughtful, competent, and earnest people I have ever met. I am glad they are at the wheel and trust them deeply.
To the community on X, thank you for everything. You’ve made this the most fun (and sometimes stressful) job I’ve ever had.
For me, it is time for a bit of a break before diving into something new.
If you want more excellent Claude Code content, you should follow @addyosmani , @lydiahallie, @_catwu, @ClaudeDevs and of course @bcherny who started it all.
2,192
1,091
30,906
5,448,534
Of all the things you could hack…Quest?
Congrats…you got our cholesterol and vitamin D numbers. And broke massive federal laws to do so.
Seems like the same risk profile as punching a US postal worker in the face and stealing a bag of random mail.
Congrats…you got our cholesterol and vitamin D numbers. And broke massive federal laws to do so.
Seems like the same risk profile as punching a US postal worker in the face and stealing a bag of random mail.
Quest Diagnostics has been hacked. Patient data was exposed. They serve roughly half of U.S. hospitals and physicians. Investigation ongoing.
0
1
3
278
Mark Valorian retweeted
Quest Diagnostics has been hacked. Patient data was exposed. They serve roughly half of U.S. hospitals and physicians. Investigation ongoing.
501
2,820
14,031
2,494,871
In 2025, less than 0.7% of Mediastorm employees chose iPhone Air over 17 Pro/Pro Max.
In 2026, over 70% chose iPhone Duo over 18 Pro/Max, despite the multi-month wait and the 18s being available immediately.
I don’t think people are ready for how popular this thing will be.
In 2026, over 70% chose iPhone Duo over 18 Pro/Max, despite the multi-month wait and the 18s being available immediately.
I don’t think people are ready for how popular this thing will be.
iPhone Duo Review: 10,000 Folds Later...
1
0
1
420
Hilariously ironic to make an “analytics” argument, using Shanahan’s 2 Super Bowl appearance in 9 seasons *against* him.
If you want to trust the numbers, maybe listen to the guy who has a 22% Super Bowl appearance rate.
If you want to trust the numbers, maybe listen to the guy who has a 22% Super Bowl appearance rate.
A good way to know how dumb this is. If you are playing against someone for one hand of blackjack would you rather they have a 49% or 51% chance to win? He’s probably cost himself at least 2 super bowls already and still argues for his feel over math
0
0
1
196
The negative reactions to Shanahan’s perspective on “analytics” are great examples of how worshipping at the altar of empirics can rot your brain.
Decisionmaking in football is an infinitely complex and intricate web of interconnected components. Historical trends are informative, but in a game scenario where you know he knows you know—and you have unique matchups/reads on situation-specific tendencies, so subtle that any kind of aggregate statistic would completely erode them away—stubbornly conforming to the guidance of a posteriori generic historical tendencies is just stupid. Especially when the supposed edge is only 1% over random chance.
That’s not to say purely model-derived decisions are bad, but you have to understand the limitations of the model you’re working with and what value its conclusions actually have in real-world scenarios. Especially in complex games, not every variable can be modeled; in that sense, unequivocal deference to model-derived recommendations based solely on the fact that they came out of a mechanical system is simply naïve.
That kind of Blind Number Worship is no different to any other breed of credentialism; people make up their minds that information from a specific source is gospel and turn off their brains—mindlessly accepting anything from The Source and vehemently rejecting anything that contradicts it.
You see just how potent that effect is with these people concluding with unquestioned confidence that Kyle Shanahan—a highly successful coach with a decade of head coaching experience at the highest level and 2 Super Bowl appearances—is somehow “clearly wrong” in an extremely marginal situation while internet randoms with no accolades or even relationship to the game at all are “clearly right.”
Shanahan doesn’t technically characterize it the correct way—talking about limited trials as the motivating factor vs limitations in the prescience of modeled outcomes vs his own intuition—but I have to imagine he actually means his instincts allow him to err towards higher success probability within the margin of error for that one decision. Especially given the example he’s using, with 51% vs 98% model-derived guidance.
Decisionmaking in football is an infinitely complex and intricate web of interconnected components. Historical trends are informative, but in a game scenario where you know he knows you know—and you have unique matchups/reads on situation-specific tendencies, so subtle that any kind of aggregate statistic would completely erode them away—stubbornly conforming to the guidance of a posteriori generic historical tendencies is just stupid. Especially when the supposed edge is only 1% over random chance.
That’s not to say purely model-derived decisions are bad, but you have to understand the limitations of the model you’re working with and what value its conclusions actually have in real-world scenarios. Especially in complex games, not every variable can be modeled; in that sense, unequivocal deference to model-derived recommendations based solely on the fact that they came out of a mechanical system is simply naïve.
That kind of Blind Number Worship is no different to any other breed of credentialism; people make up their minds that information from a specific source is gospel and turn off their brains—mindlessly accepting anything from The Source and vehemently rejecting anything that contradicts it.
You see just how potent that effect is with these people concluding with unquestioned confidence that Kyle Shanahan—a highly successful coach with a decade of head coaching experience at the highest level and 2 Super Bowl appearances—is somehow “clearly wrong” in an extremely marginal situation while internet randoms with no accolades or even relationship to the game at all are “clearly right.”
Shanahan doesn’t technically characterize it the correct way—talking about limited trials as the motivating factor vs limitations in the prescience of modeled outcomes vs his own intuition—but I have to imagine he actually means his instincts allow him to err towards higher success probability within the margin of error for that one decision. Especially given the example he’s using, with 51% vs 98% model-derived guidance.
Kyle Shanahan says a 51% analytics recommendation won’t convince him to go for it because he gets one shot, not an hour at a blackjack table
“I don’t want to hear about it if it’s 51% of the time we should go for it.”
“As I always say, I’m not sitting here playing Blackjack for e at the table, and eventually I’ll get 51% of it. Like, I have this one try, and I have a feel for it. I’ve been doing it too long.”
“But what I want to know from him, when it’s not a feel, when it, no, this is 98%. We don’t even need to talk about it. So we don’t need to talk about it. Tell me when it’s that, and I’ll just do it.”
0
0
1
247
Pretty genius marketing stunt. You’re not only acquiring customers for $30 a head, but deeply integrating them into your product via a live walkthrough use case that organically requires “soft KYC.” And you get a ton of brand awareness on top. Very cool idea.
We're giving away $1,000,000 of free pizza right now
Download and order from the Hark app: hark.com/download
Type "order a free pizza" in chat. It's first-come, first-served, delivered only in the U.S. (review details below)
1
0
3
1,056
Within hours of opening preorders, shipping dates for iPhone Duo are indicating delivery in late January.
Seems like there might have been a little more interest than the Twitter reactions would have had you believe… 🤔 $AAPL
Seems like there might have been a little more interest than the Twitter reactions would have had you believe… 🤔 $AAPL
I take issue with basically every word of this post, but “no clear use case” is particularly hilarious.
The iPhone Duo is simply a better mousetrap for portable computing. And very obviously so.
Fundamentally, what is a phone? It’s a portable computer on which we do 2 primary genres of things:
1) quick administrative tasks
2) consume media
The problem is these conflict with each other; a large, iPad Mini-size display is ideal for consuming media, but prohibitively cumbersome for quick tasks and portability. So the standard format phones have to split the difference—giving you a screen that’s either slightly too big for quick tasks (Pro Max), or slightly too small for consuming media (Pro).
The Duo completely solves this problem. It gives us a condensed display for quick tasks in a highly portable form factor that expands into an expansive display for consuming media when you want.
In every way, it is better than the current candybar format. It blows my mind that people do not just intuitively get this.
Then we get to the price:
iPhone Duo starts at $1,999. iPhone 18 Pro Max starts at $1,299.
If you think people who currently have an iPhone Pro Max are going to balk at another $700 (which, with an Apple Card is effectively $29 more per month when distributed over 24 months) to access a clearly better mousetrap that improves every element of the phone experience, I don’t think you understand Apple customers.
2
0
3
5,553
This is such an interesting take to me.
Do you not consider the proliferation of electric cars good?
You don’t think cars driving themselves and dramatically reducing accident probability is good?
You don’t think it’s good for people in tyrannical societies to have internet access via Starlink when they would otherwise be shut out from the world?
You don’t think it’s good that Neuralink gives disabled people the opportunity to interact with the world again?
How do you even arrive at this position?
Do you not consider the proliferation of electric cars good?
You don’t think cars driving themselves and dramatically reducing accident probability is good?
You don’t think it’s good for people in tyrannical societies to have internet access via Starlink when they would otherwise be shut out from the world?
You don’t think it’s good that Neuralink gives disabled people the opportunity to interact with the world again?
How do you even arrive at this position?
I like how you had to make up something fictional to try and prove he does anything good!
4
0
5
1,075
Another great example of the phenomenon I am talking about.
This is a complete fairy tale.
The $4B figure refers to estimated savings from caps on NIH administrative overhead expenses, not cuts to cancer research. And the whole thing was never actually implemented anyways in court.
You can just look at the numbers directly. NIH spent $7.9B on cancer research in 2024. You want to guess how much they spent in 2025?
Drumroll please….$7.9B. No change whatsoever.
Don’t you think if $4B in cuts were made, some of that might have shown up in the ~8 months of the year where that policy was supposedly active?
This is exactly what I’m talking about. People hate Elon so much that they invent these insane, totally implausible and verifiably false stories to tell themselves just to confirm their biases. And they just believe them without a second thought because of how blinded they are by emotion.
This is a complete fairy tale.
The $4B figure refers to estimated savings from caps on NIH administrative overhead expenses, not cuts to cancer research. And the whole thing was never actually implemented anyways in court.
You can just look at the numbers directly. NIH spent $7.9B on cancer research in 2024. You want to guess how much they spent in 2025?
Drumroll please….$7.9B. No change whatsoever.
Don’t you think if $4B in cuts were made, some of that might have shown up in the ~8 months of the year where that policy was supposedly active?
This is exactly what I’m talking about. People hate Elon so much that they invent these insane, totally implausible and verifiably false stories to tell themselves just to confirm their biases. And they just believe them without a second thought because of how blinded they are by emotion.
This is funny because Elon literally cut 4 billion dollars worth of cancer research funding through @DOGE.
"You'd hate him if he did something good!"
Well.... he's literally doing the exact opposite of that good thing so here we are.
12
2
15
24,153
One of my favorite passive aggressive techniques on Twitter is making lists with mean names and adding people you don’t like to them lol
I will say it is intellectually lazy though. When I disagree with someone, I cant help but articulate my specific disagreement.
I can’t g I disagree with and being lazy enough to eat my actual argument and reduce it to some simplistic ad hominem one-liner. Would be like holding in a sneeze.
I will say it is intellectually lazy though. When I disagree with someone, I cant help but articulate my specific disagreement.
I can’t g I disagree with and being lazy enough to eat my actual argument and reduce it to some simplistic ad hominem one-liner. Would be like holding in a sneeze.
2
1
4
745