or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google says voice is the future of web search, introduces Siri-like app for iOS
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google says voice is the future of web search, introduces Siri-like app for iOS - Page 2

post #41 of 157
"To achieve that, Google will need to follow the lead of Apple's Siri, which was designed to figure out the question users were posing, rather than simply finding potential answers to property formed questions."

"A full 80 percent of the active user base are suck with a version of Android 2.x, which came out 2010."

Did anyone proof this before it was published?
post #42 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

Yeah, what's next? 

 

They gonna start making 7 inch tablets to compete with the ipad mini which came first?

Or are they gonna make a 4-inch screen to compete with the iphone 5, which had the big screen first?

Or are they gonna make a TV to compete with the iTV, which came first?

 

All great Apple products which were ripped off by Google and their partners using and their time machine. lol.gif

Still don't get that its not simply 'first', but 'first done right', huh?

post #43 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by noneareleft View Post

"To achieve that, Google will need to follow the lead of Apple's Siri, which was designed to figure out the question users were posing, rather than simply finding potential answers to property formed questions."
"A full 80 percent of the active user base are suck with a version of Android 2.x, which came out 2010."
Did anyone proof this before it was published?

Looks fine to me.  Android and suck in the same sentence.

post #44 of 157

Tallest Skill - you're flat wrong about that icon and voice commands in general.  Google has had that icon for years.

 

Apple didn't invent technology like Siri or even demonstrate it first. The whole natural language craze was brought into the spotlight when IBM had Watson compete on Jeopardy well before Siri became a feature of the iPhone.  Watson was far superior at processing natural language than Siri is.

 

Beyond that, Apple didn't even create Siri.  They acquired it.  It was an app in the App Store before they did.  Good for them. This is not a criticism of Apple by any stretch. The issue is people that think anytime Apple uses an existing technology in their product, suddenly the idea is 100% OWNED and invented by Apple. Now anyone that does something similar is incapable of an original idea.

 

SIRI WASN'T APPLE'S IDEA IN THE FIRST PLACE.

 

They acquired the idea, and the technology was most likely inspired by IBM's Watson performance and it does a better job than Siri.

 

Get over it.  Stop letting your hatred for Google become the focus of every conversation on this forum.  Siri is fine.  Apple is fine.  It is people acting like Google is a criminal for emulating technology that pre-dates Siri- that is what is driving me crazy.


Edited by rednival - 8/8/12 at 2:06pm
post #45 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

Surely you are aware that Google Now is MUCH more than just question and answer. It actually gives you information without you having to ask since it understands what you like, where you work, where you drop off your kids, your fav team, where you live, what bus you take, what train you take....it KNOWS you. 

Of course, some people have privacy issues with it, obviously, but its opt in. You can choose to ask siri about the same thing everyday, if the train is on time, what the weather is, who won the game, etc

OR you can have Google Now give you these things automatically without you doing a thing. 

Well....that is if the google search feature is Google Now functionality, and not just search functionality. If it is just search, well then yeah, i see your point. The only advantage would be speed, as many youtube tests have shown Google voice search is faster and more natural sounding. 

Wow - so lets get this right, Google, the do no evil (cough, choke) company spies on us and collects data on just about every aspect of our life including who we are sleeping with, every time we take a crap and where we will be next. And would give that data up to someone in authority that asks. What a comforting thought. Now go back to sleep sleepy.
post #46 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

How about not changing my name when quoting me. 

Actually, I do wish he would change your tedious, pointless quotes/posts rather than your name.

post #47 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post

Beyond that, Apple didn't even create Siri.  They acquired it.  ....Get over it.

When one acquires something, one gets to do what one wants with it. The same does not apply if you steal or copy something.

 

Siri belongs to Apple. Apple is taking it to the future. Get over it.

post #48 of 157
Originally Posted by rednival View Post

The issue is people that think anytime Apple uses an existing technology in their product, suddenly the idea is 100% OWNED and invented by Apple.

 

I guess iTunes isn't owned or invented by Apple, then. It's just a rehash of SoundJam. Apple can't make anything their own; they just buy companies with the real ideas.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #49 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

When one acquires something, one gets to do what one wants with it. The same does not apply if you steal or copy something.

Siri belongs to Apple. Apple is taking it to the future. Get over it.

True but using your logic Siri is stolen. The entire point of Watson was to show that a computer could interpret natural language, search the Internet, and answer the question. If Google stole Siri, Apple stole Watson. I don't believe what either did qualifies as theft.
post #50 of 157

What you say is true. Apple, the company, seeks out like others do what will bring the best results. They took SIRI when others did not. They reworked it to be amazing in it's ability to figure out the real question, rather than respond to pre-tabled key words and throw several answers at you. 

Your point is valid, but now that SIRI is a piece of the Apple, I guess I could say that Apple brought us the capacity. Certainly their hardware and software, integrated seamlessly, is a new generation of the use of voice technology Artificial Intelligence.

 

Thank you for responding Lamewing

post #51 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Apple didn't have to start the lawsuits. They could swallowed their pride. "They copied! No, they copied!" The time and effort wasted on these lawsuits is just silly Now, as you said, they are going to loose out on much of what Google has to offer.

 

Where, by "swallowed their pride" you mean "allowed Google, et al. to completely rip them off". I suggest if your home is ever robbed, or your car stolen, you just "swallow your pride" and don't bother filing a police report.

post #52 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I guess iTunes isn't owned or invented by Apple, then. It's just a rehash of SoundJam. Apple can't make anything their own; they just buy companies with the real ideas.

Your sarcasm misrepresents my point. I think Apple acquiring companies like Siri shows foresight and vision. I would not claim they have no original ideas. You're branding me something I'm not because you and others think that anyone that disagrees with you or defends Google must hate Apple.

My only point is that Watson came before Siri, and no one wants to address that because they have no rebuttle. Instead all you want to do is try to paint my comment as Apple Bashing or trolling when all it was intended to be about was fact checking.
Edited by rednival - 8/8/12 at 2:39pm
post #53 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

... I think Google's motivation is not to damage Apple but do what they do with Chrome. ...

 

I don't think you understand Google. Google deeply believes (and they may be correct) that they can only succeed by destroying others. They are a fundamentally destructive, as opposed to creative, company.

 

The whole point of Chrome is to destroy the browser market for everyone else -- Microsoft, Mozilla (they'll be pulling the plug on them shortly), Apple -- so that Google ends up controlling all access to the web and can monitor everyone using it, without having to worry about their javascript based surveillance software and cookies being blocked

post #54 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

uhhh, that icon was used since BEFORE siri. Ever heard of voice actions? Yep, same mic. Been using that mic FOR YEARS.

But of course, all you are aware of is Apple products, therefore would not be aware of that and would assume everything apple does, Apple does first. 

Hope you don't go saying Samsung is following Apple by increasing the size of their phone screens next year. 

Apple used that icon with Voice Control which came out before Voice Actions.
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
post #55 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post


True but using your logic Siri is stolen. The entire point of Watson was to show that a computer could interpret natural language, search the Internet, and answer the question. If Google stole Siri, Apple stole Watson. I don't believe what either did qualifies as theft.

 

This post demonstrates why the world is such a messed up place.

post #56 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

This post demonstrates why the world is such a messed up place.

 

In what way?

post #57 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

Wasn't Google's response when Siri was introduced that having a voice assistant was the wrong approach for mobile phones?
Exactly what I thought...
post #58 of 157
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post
Where, by "swallowed their pride" you mean "allowed Google, et al. to completely rip them off". I suggest if your home is ever robbed, or your car stolen, you just "swallow your pride" and don't bother filing a police report.

 

May I modify that analogy, since nothing is being physically stolen?

My mother, when she bought the house in which she currently lives, set out a garden plan for it. The house itself (full two story, about 100 years old now) had just been moved, as a whole, all the way across town on a semi (traffic stopped on the main thoroughfares, power lines taken down, the whole nine yards) and was sitting on a bare plot of grass. She laid out string in the grass where she wanted the border of the garden and my father spraypainted over that line. They then got a variety of bushes, trees, and flowers and they went to town.

 

Now, everyone (literally) else in the city had their landscaping right up against their houses in the two or so feet of land around the foundation (the bare square that all houses will have), with only ever trees in their yards further out. My mother's plan was far more organic, curving all around the house in flowing shapes, also with trees.

 

When our landscaping was finished, my mother began to notice dozens of other people in town driving by, stopping, and taking pictures of our house. She was put off and worried by that until she asked one of them what they were doing.

 

They wanted her plans. Now every house in the city has landscaping like ours.

 

We also have the oldest backyard fence in the city. And now you see fences everywhere. I wouldn't mention that at all since 'putting up a fence' isn't usually something you'd consider 'unique', but the council actively protested us doing it (it's a beautiful wooden fence, not some gaudy metal trash), and everyone else in town, for decades, apparently didn't have the stones to go up against them to protect their children. But once they let us do it, boy howdy.

 

Now, the validity of the analogy ends here, as my mother didn't expect, want, or receive compensation for her landscaping plans being photocopied, but everyone knows on whose plans theirs are based.

 

She also wasn't the first to have landscaping around the house, but ask anyone, and they'll tell you she was the first to do it right.

 

Originally Posted by rednival View Post
My only point is that Watson came before Siri, and no one wants to address that because they have no rebuttal.
 

That's only because it doesn't have anything to do with it.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #59 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

That's only because it doesn't have anything to do with it.

 

Thanks for making my point.  If Apple mimics a concept pioneered by someone else, it is irrelevant.  If Google mimics an idea you think was pioneered by Apple, it is theft.

 

You people are so blinded by bias you can't even think rationally.

post #60 of 157
Originally Posted by rednival View Post

You people are so blinded by bias you can't even think rationally.

 

Of course.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #61 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3 View Post

Surely you are aware that Google Now is MUCH more than just question and answer. It actually gives you information without you having to ask since it understands what you like, where you work, where you drop off your kids, your fav team, where you live, what bus you take, what train you take....it KNOWS you. 

Of course, some people have privacy issues with it, obviously, but its opt in. You can choose to ask siri about the same thing everyday, if the train is on time, what the weather is, who won the game, etc

OR you can have Google Now give you these things automatically without you doing a thing. 

Well....that is if the google search feature is Google Now functionality, and not just search functionality. If it is just search, well then yeah, i see your point. The only advantage would be speed, as many youtube tests have shown Google voice search is faster and more natural sounding. 

I'm sorry, if I want someone bossing me around and telling me what I think, I'll ask my wife.

I want no part of Google running every part of my life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Apple didn't have to start the lawsuits. They could swallowed their pride. "They copied! No, they copied!" The time and effort wasted on these lawsuits is just silly Now, as you said, they are going to loose out on much of what Google has to offer.

Nonsense. Read this:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/08/half_of_the_tv_audience_mistook_samsung_galaxy_tab_for_ipad_in_ads.html

Apple can't afford to let everyone lie to and mislead its customers and make them think they're buying Apple products when they're actually buying something else. Aside from the obvious loss of sales, when the customer who bought a fake iPad or iPhone finds out how much it stinks, it reflects badly on Apple.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #62 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Now, the validity of the analogy ends here, as my mother didn't expect, want, or receive compensation for her landscaping plans being photocopied, but everyone knows on whose plans theirs are based.

 

She also wasn't the first to have landscaping around the house, but ask anyone, and they'll tell you she was the first to do it right.

 

Your mother was not in the landscape business and had nothing to lose by other people using similar garden styles. If she was in the landscape business and drew up some plans that another contractor got hold of and reproduced them with his own logo and went about selling his service to your mother's prospective clients, then she would have cause for concern. As it is, she only lost a sense of uniqueness although on the other hand she might have been flattered. I don't think Apple is flattered when competitors borrow their patented designs because a corporation shouldn't have emotions of either pride or hate, just good business. Unfortunately Apple does exhibit too much pride and hate and sometimes 'cuts off nose to spite face'.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #63 of 157
Quote Phone-UI-Guy:

Making a 7" tablet isn't really hard or particularly innovative. The hard part is making one a success.

Bagging on Apple for keeping the 4" displays to maintain application usability and compatibility is ignorant. Their methodical selection of displays and careful adaptations for changes is one of the reasons they have been so successful. Android has suffered immensely as an ecosystem due to differentiation among devices and manufacturers.

In some ways I see Apple as a "micro-innovator" on hardware, software, and systems. The small refinements that they make to their products end up being quite substantial over time. This goes for everything such as usability, performance, and even to features like AirTunes and it's evolution to AirPlay, etc. While you can argue that even these are not revelations, or sometimes not even first to market, they end up being ubiquitous across most of Apple's products which provides immense value to users of their product ecosystems.
ReplyQuote Multi

I'm glad somebody finally summed it up the way you did. Some people accuse Apple of playing "catch up" when they are actually doing what you said.

Cannot include quotes on beta iOS 6.0
Edited by Conwaycf - 8/8/12 at 3:43pm
post #64 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


That's a mean thing to say about them.

ah, the cruel truth...

post #65 of 157

It's Siri, right…? For all intents and purposes…

 

Watching that video, even with the context of it being a "Google App" I found myself thinking "It behaves a lot like Siri, but something is a bit off…"

 

Siri IS "search by voice" with context… the Siri voice is a tad less annoying… this one talks too much about the results...

 

I thought Google didn't think this was the way to go. I guess the success of the Siri-phone has changed their collective minds, or…?

post #66 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

Wasn't Google's response when Siri was introduced that having a voice assistant was the wrong approach for mobile phones?

I don't remember. I do remember a lot of talk about "That's nothing. We had that a year ago!"

I guess they figured out there was a bit of a difference between what they had and what Siri was.

post #67 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post


True but using your logic Siri is stolen. The entire point of Watson was to show that a computer could interpret natural language, search the Internet, and answer the question. If Google stole Siri, Apple stole Watson. I don't believe what either did qualifies as theft.

Your supposition isn't really accurate though. First, Apple bought Siri… they didn't steal it.

 

Yes, Watson proved that a computer could be used to interpret natural language questions. It didn't do it very well, but concept proven.

 

Fast WAY forward… Siri "interprets" fairly abstract REAL TIME SPEECH, and extrapolates a response across a very broad range of possible topical results… 

 

The way Siri "behaves", and considering its overall feature set, is WAY beyond anything Watson was capable of and so I see something "evolutionary" there, one case perhaps building on another, but not a direct emulation, copy or "theft" of technology.

 

I'm not directly accusing Google of that either, but…. Looking at the video for this 'google voice search', I basically saw "Siri reproduced with Google's name on it".

 

It isn't "evolutionary" or building something new… it's for all intents and purposes functionally the same thing as Siri, right down to the mildly annoying female "voice" coming back with clever, conversational responses to 'voice queries'… 

 

Measured simply on the surface (as it's being represented/marketed in this video) how is it materially different from Siri?

 

And, regardless of whether Siri's arguable "similarities" to Watson are "infringements"… that doesn't invalidate the question mark regarding Google voice search and Siri. I think Google is treading a fine line here… for sure...

post #68 of 157
I'm confused. When Siri came out many Fandroids wrote here upon this very blog that Android already had the same thing and had had for ages.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #69 of 157
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post
I'm confused. When Siri came out many Fandroids wrote here upon this very blog that Android already had the same thing and had had for ages.

 

They're still saying that. Somehow this isn't any different from what they've had on their phones since before Steve Jobs was born.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #70 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

When was the last original idea out of Google?

 

More than anything else, this looks like a panicked reaction to Siri routing search away from Google and their ads.

How about search  and AdSense?

 

Oh yeah, stolen from Yahoo.

post #71 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

700

 

There's not a single microphone on the face of the planet that looks different. Nope. Google had to use that icon.


Also, it's just Samsung that copies. Regular Android and the stuff Google does aren't copies at all.

http://team-nocturnal.tumblr.com/post/26388747742/proof-apple-stole-from-google-boycottapple

 

That microphone icon has been on Android for quite a while.

post #72 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


What I find interesting is they always put Apple's products in their ads. They don't use a Galaxy Nexus S for example or any of the leading Android devices. That says to me the people at Google are willing to admit who deserves the credit. I think Google's motivation is not to damage Apple but do what they do with Chrome. Take a core product from Apple and offer it to a wider audience than Apple's philosophy allows. Webkit is now the world's most popular rendering engine and the world is better off for it.
Despite competing with Apple, I'm happier that Google will satisfy this audience than Microsoft.

I thought it was interesting that the ad in the article not only uses an iPhone but also looks and sounds like an Apple ad in tone and production.

post #73 of 157

 

That's a hilarious image. It's astounding the lengths to which the Androiders will go to justify Google's gang-raping of phones.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #74 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by noneareleft View Post

"To achieve that, Google will need to follow the lead of Apple's Siri, which was designed to figure out the question users were posing, rather than simply finding potential answers to property formed questions."
"A full 80 percent of the active user base are suck with a version of Android 2.x, which came out 2010."
Did anyone proof this before it was published?

It looks like tit.

What's your problem woth the proofreeding og the aricle?

post #75 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by noneareleft View Post

"To achieve that, Google will need to follow the lead of Apple's Siri, which was designed to figure out the question users were posing, rather than simply finding potential answers to property formed questions."
"A full 80 percent of the active user base are suck with a version of Android 2.x, which came out 2010."
Did anyone proof this before it was published?

Apparently not, and the article cites no official sources for the alleged claims made by Google. It reeks of anti-Google bias.

post #76 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

That's only because it doesn't have anything to do with it.

Thanks for making my point.  If Apple mimics a concept pioneered by someone else, it is irrelevant.  If Google mimics an idea you think was pioneered by Apple, it is theft.

You people are so blinded by bias you can't even think rationally.

I don't believe that anyone is saying that the concept of voice-recognition/interpretation as a basis for queries or commands is owned by Apple. All that is being pointed out, I think, is that Google seems to have implemented an interface rather coincidentally similarly to Siri. A topical observation given the current legal action, and somewhat ironic since they seemingly both pooh-poohed the idea and said that they had been doing it for years already back when Siri was released.
post #77 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


I don't believe that anyone is saying that the concept of voice-recognition/interpretation as a basis for queries or commands is owned by Apple. All that is being pointed out, I think, is that Google seems to have implemented an interface rather coincidentally similarly to Siri. A topical observation given the current legal action, and somewhat ironic since they seemingly both pooh-poohed the idea and said that they had been doing it for years already back when Siri was released.

Siri is still in beta, Google search with voice is a product for iOS.

 

There is a lot of gray area here. Some things are natural evolution and others are more market response or even copying. For example when Siri comes out with Spanish language will it be a natural evolution or is it a copy of a feature that Google has had since day one?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #78 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

I don't believe that anyone is saying that the concept of voice-recognition/interpretation as a basis for queries or commands is owned by Apple. All that is being pointed out, I think, is that Google seems to have implemented an interface rather coincidentally similarly to Siri. A topical observation given the current legal action, and somewhat ironic since they seemingly both pooh-poohed the idea and said that they had been doing it for years already back when Siri was released.
Siri is still in beta, Google search with voice is a product for iOS.

There is a lot of gray area here. Some things are natural evolution and others are more market response or even copying. For example when Siri comes out with Spanish language will it be a natural evolution or is it a copy of a feature that Google has had since day one?

Unless Google invented Spanish then I think the answer to that is rather obvious.
post #79 of 157
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post
Unless Google invented Spanish then I think the answer to that is rather obvious.


Yep: the Android crowd will claim that Apple is only copying Google, just as they have since 2007 when they first released a smartphone.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #80 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


Unless Google invented Spanish then I think the answer to that is rather obvious.

Since neither company invented voice recognition the answer may be less than obvious.

 

Google for one built their voice recognition algorithms from scratch, in house, over a long period of time by deploying their now deprecated GOOG411 service for the voice samples. Apple on the other hand simply bought their technology a number of years later. It is worth mentioning that Apple had fooled around with voice recognition as far back as 1993 or when ever the Quadra 840 AV came out. I had that machine but the voice recognition was lousy and it is not the foundation of their current technology.

 

Of course you could argue that Google stole peoples' voices because they did not disclose the real purpose of deploying the GOOG411 service and when they discontinued it people were upset to discover what was their real intention.


Edited by mstone - 8/8/12 at 5:45pm

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Google says voice is the future of web search, introduces Siri-like app for iOS
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google says voice is the future of web search, introduces Siri-like app for iOS