Apple will not make a video iPod. Nobody wants to watch video on an iPod.
Apple will not allow third parties to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native iPhone applications.
Apple will not add copy and paste to the iPhone. Nobody cares about copy and paste.
Apple will not add multitasking to the iPhone. Nobody cares about multitasking.
Apple will not make a tablet. There is no demand for tablets.
I must admit I am lost here. What does any of this have to do with Siri? Did Apple/ Jobs also say "Apple will not add voice support. Apple will not call anything Siri"?
What am I missing here? As far as I can see, what you wrote has nothing to do with the current discussion. In other words Hagger, that is horrible.
Which is why Apple's original mobile operating system was called the iPhone OS, and not iOS until it was enlarged to work on the iPad some 3 years after the iPhone's introduction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sector7G
You have made you're self look a complete tit here. Steve himself on video said they were working on the iPad first. You really need to know what you're talking about. Other than just trolling every post
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
...and because Steve said it, on video no less, it surely must be the absolute truth.
Hey DaHarder,
We've heard Steve say that Apple was working on a tablet first.
And then we've got you saying they didn't.
Why do you think he would just make up that story? Don't you think there are hundreds of people who worked on those projects who would spill the beans if he was lying?
And what possible gain would there be to lie about the origins of the iPad and iPhone anyway? Is this some Da Vinci Code mystery?
Not much of which was done buy Apple researchers given that Apple only bought Siri in April 2010 as a means of competing with Google's voice recognition developments.
According to Wikipedia, Siri came out of CALO, a DARPA project to create a personal assistant for a solider.
"Its five-year contract brought together 300+ researchers from 25 of the top university and commercial research institutions, with the goal of building a new generation of cognitive assistants that can reason, learn from experience, be told what to do, explain what they are doing, reflect on their experience, and respond robustly to surprise."
So it's no surprise that Siri is the best out there, it has the best pedigree. Just like iOS and it's BSD Unix base, when Apple make a consumer product, there's often "industrial strength" underneath.
And I don't think Siri is useless or a gimmick. Think of the things it is good at: appointments, contacts, weather: all things that live on your phone, and the phone is the only device Apple have put it on. If it had been released on the iPad with it's current abilities it would be a gimmick, but Apple didnt do that. It will only migrate to new devices when it's abilities increase, making it a non-gimmick on them too.
Google does offer a separate Voice Search app, which can respond to some basic commands such as send a text or email, get directions or play music, using the company's Voice Actions technology. However, this service is much closer in scope to Apple's simplistic Voice Commands, as there is no real processing of grammar or ability to integrate into services like Yelp, interact with the users' calendar, or remember relationships between your contacts, among other Siri features.
Granted, I've only briefly played with SIRI (no intention on upgrading to a 4S at this point), but from what I've read online, Voice Actions is comparable, especially with its ability to plug into google search:
Where SIRI obviously shines is in its flexibility of its query structure.
Quote:
I was reading today that SIRI seems to be pro-life. Meanwhile, Google is more than happy to help people with murdering their fetuses.
Ask the Siri, the new iPhone 4 assistant, where to get an abortion, and, if you happen to be in Washington, D.C., she won?t direct you to the Planned Parenthood on 16th St, NW. Instead, she?ll suggest you pay a visit to the 1st Choice Women?s Health Center, an anti-abortion Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC) in Landsdowne, Virginia, or Human Life Services, a CPC in York, Pennsylvania. Ask Google the same question, and you?ll get ads for no less than 7 metro-area abortion clinics, 2 CPCs and a nationwide abortion referral service.
I was reading today that SIRI seems to be pro-life. Meanwhile, Google is more than happy to help people with murdering their fetuses.
Ask the Siri, the new iPhone 4 assistant, where to get an abortion, and, if you happen to be in Washington, D.C., she won?t direct you to the Planned Parenthood on 16th St, NW. Instead, she?ll suggest you pay a visit to the 1st Choice Women?s Health Center, an anti-abortion Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC) in Landsdowne, Virginia, or Human Life Services, a CPC in York, Pennsylvania. Ask Google the same question, and you?ll get ads for no less than 7 metro-area abortion clinics, 2 CPCs and a nationwide abortion referral service.
So basically, Apple decides to mess with the minds of young women and rob them of their freedom.
If I was a woman, I'd go to court on that. I would not ask for damages, I'd ask for an official, multiple-newspaper apology. But maybe next Apple idea is "if you ask for the closest islamic, judaic or buddhist cult place, Apple suggest several Protestant cult places to help you to the _right faith_"?
Or maybe, if you ask for a Democrat representative's permanency, you get referred to the Republican equivalent?
I have difficulty believing that (self styled) fans of the "Think Different" company would openly advocate _companies_ deciding what's morally acceptable for their customers.
If women need/want to abort, it is their choice. That's law, that's moral. Whether or not you, SJ or anyone else dislikes it should not impact Siri's results. Of course, I expect you to tell me next that anyway, Siri should not demean itself to answer if you are a black person, or similar bullshit. But maybe you just did not realize the consequences of meddling with search results based on "moral" positions?
I'm theorically pro abortion. I think abortion is bad and should be avoided, but still should be legal. I also think most prolifers (based on the ones I've seen and heard, or read) base their belief on religious (highly debatable, hence) or male-power beliefs. I demand that companies do not force such ideas on me. I want freedom of thought, religion and race equality. I don't want some company to tell me that black people are inferior to white ones, or that women should not be allowed to abort, or that Socialism is a worse system than Liberalism. More importantly, I don't want this company to ACT accordingly by filtering-out the information I asked on islam, abortion, socialism or race-equality.
I hope I made my point clear. It's the same as Majjo's, basically: a machine/company with a political agenda is out-of-bounds in a democracy.
According to Wikipedia, Siri came out of CALO, a DARPA project to create a personal assistant for a solider.
"Its five-year contract brought together 300+ researchers from 25 of the top university and commercial research institutions, with the goal of building a new generation of cognitive assistants that can reason, learn from experience, be told what to do, explain what they are doing, reflect on their experience, and respond robustly to surprise."
So it's no surprise that Siri is the best out there, it has the best pedigree. Just like iOS and it's BSD Unix base, when Apple make a consumer product, there's often "industrial strength" underneath.
And I don't think Siri is useless or a gimmick. Think of the things it is good at: appointments, contacts, weather: all things that live on your phone, and the phone is the only device Apple have put it on. If it had been released on the iPad with it's current abilities it would be a gimmick, but Apple didnt do that. It will only migrate to new devices when it's abilities increase, making it a non-gimmick on them too.
<irony>
What I love with the US is its socialist economy. State-funded research then used for the masses
Which is why Apple's original mobile operating system was called the iPhone OS, and not iOS until it was enlarged to work on the iPad some 3 years after the iPhone's introduction.
It was first called OS X and then rebadged to iPhone OS and then to iOS.
If Siri had an option to use Majel Barret's voice, I would buy the iPhone 4S in an instant! UNtil then, I can wait to see what happens with the next iPhone and iPad...
I really do hope that they made enough recordings of her voice before she passed away to use as the voice of a computer/iPhone/iPad at some point. I bet there are plenty of Trekkers who would pay big $$ for that.
Siri's importance will be dismissed until the competition can figure out how to copy and implement something similar. The strategy thus far has been to wait until Apple creates something, then copy it and add features Apple previously left out and then market their product as better.
Give them time.
The problem with Google's Voice or Microsoft's TellMe, I venture, is that both companies will never take the effort to make their counterpart to Siri to be as capable and versatile in functionality because it will only kill the geese that lay their ads' golden eggs. Google's only game in town is its one-trick pony ads business, and Microsoft has lost billions in its attempts to upset Google's applecart. You will notice in the demonstration that TellMe always bring you to the Bing search interface.
Here Apple has a huge advantage over Google or Microsoft: It has no huge investment in a soon-to-be-outdated search interface.
But the Apple fanboys don't see it as a "technique". Instead, they aggressively defend what is said. But when Apple does release those products or features, those Apple fanboys can't admit that they were wrong. Instead, they change their story and spin it to say "Apple was planning to do it all along".
I guess the key question then is why respond to "fanboys'" irrational response? Why trouble yourself with a response when it is obvious they have "drunk the koolaid"? Why continue to feed into the diatribe cycle when you apparently know better?
OTOH, <you> in fact don't know what Apple has on the bench, what is in development and being refined, now do you? <You> don't know at what point Apple started working on a particular device or feature - you only know when they announce it to the public. Having worked for a company driving a wide swath of innovative products at one time (3M), we had at least three year's worth of product ahead of public release. So driving your argument based on public release is simply inaccurate.
And to be clear, Jobs was being completely honest in those statements - according to the bio and other sources, he had to be convinced to open up to 3rd party apps, he stated they weren't going to do cut/copy/paste until they were able to get the interface right,
that multitasking wouldn't be activated until they were sure it wouldn't be a battery drainer (unlike the Android version), and that they wouldn't make a tablet PC - which of course the iPad most definitely is not. Context is important and using what was actually said, instead of setting up "strawman" statements to knock down.
And everyone else, the DED articles always draw out folks like DaHarder and BettieBlue to sputter irrationally and nonsensically. I too have been guilty of feeding trolls in here, but try to minimize the derailing of the actual content of the article for the thread.
But according to the Right, the government can't do anything right. Why are we trusting them to defend the country?
The only people who want the government to do nothing, i.e. to not exist, are anarchists, and they are usually considered leftist.
The smallest allowable government on the right still runs the military, courts and police, because the free market requires law and order. People won't trade goods if they can just steal them. People won't make long term business deals if contracts are not enforced, and fraud is not a crime.
Obviously Steve was using Muhammad Ali's technique of "Rope-A-Dope", and it apparently worked as Apple caught the market flat footed and he delivered a one-two punch delivery of both video on iPods and iPhones and also hammered the market with the iPad.
I don't know how much of Siri was Steve. In the biog, it's implied that he was given a demo of Siri for the first time at a Board meeting just before he resigned and was at first pessimistic that it could do as claimed. He asked it several questions and was apparently impressed.
If Steve was not heavily involved with Siri, that actually is a positive for Apple. There's an impression that Jobs was a micro-manager who was involved in every design decision and there's a more positive outlook for Apple's future if a wider variety of executives and managers were directly involved in everything we love about Apple's products that frequently gets credited to Jobs.
There is one thing about Siri that bothers me. If it's really only a Beta, then IMO it shouldn't be the focus of Apple's advertising for the phone. Apple wants to have it both ways: if it works, it's a reason to buy the phone and if it doesn't, "well sorry, it's only a Beta."
Comments
Apple will not make a video iPod. Nobody wants to watch video on an iPod.
Apple will not allow third parties to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native iPhone applications.
Apple will not add copy and paste to the iPhone. Nobody cares about copy and paste.
Apple will not add multitasking to the iPhone. Nobody cares about multitasking.
Apple will not make a tablet. There is no demand for tablets.
I must admit I am lost here. What does any of this have to do with Siri? Did Apple/ Jobs also say "Apple will not add voice support. Apple will not call anything Siri"?
What am I missing here? As far as I can see, what you wrote has nothing to do with the current discussion. In other words Hagger, that is horrible.
Which is why Apple's original mobile operating system was called the iPhone OS, and not iOS until it was enlarged to work on the iPad some 3 years after the iPhone's introduction.
You have made you're self look a complete tit here. Steve himself on video said they were working on the iPad first. You really need to know what you're talking about. Other than just trolling every post
...and because Steve said it, on video no less, it surely must be the absolute truth.
Hey DaHarder,
We've heard Steve say that Apple was working on a tablet first.
And then we've got you saying they didn't.
Why do you think he would just make up that story? Don't you think there are hundreds of people who worked on those projects who would spill the beans if he was lying?
And what possible gain would there be to lie about the origins of the iPad and iPhone anyway? Is this some Da Vinci Code mystery?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6--_Z4unLQ0#t=22s
Not much of which was done buy Apple researchers given that Apple only bought Siri in April 2010 as a means of competing with Google's voice recognition developments.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...or_iphone.html
Google's voice recognition developments on their mobile platform which they..... bought. Did you have a point?
Get used to it... He's as clueless as they come. I remember he used to post pictures of his crappy Archos Tablets while ridiculing the iPad.
If you get him riled up, he'll go bat shit crazy and commence to centering all his posts.
Get used to it... He's as clueless as they come. I remember he used to post pictures of his crappy Archos Tablets while ridiculing the iPad.
If you get him riled up, he'll go bat shit crazy and commence to centering all his posts.
Ya' know...
We need a special AI thread category... Something like "Troll Of The Day"...
This has been one of them!
Is there a trophy and an award ceremony?
Ya' know...
We need a special AI thread category... Something like "Troll Of The Day"...
This has been one of them!
Is there a trophy and an award ceremony?
How about a DHrdr day where we all center our posts.
"Its five-year contract brought together 300+ researchers from 25 of the top university and commercial research institutions, with the goal of building a new generation of cognitive assistants that can reason, learn from experience, be told what to do, explain what they are doing, reflect on their experience, and respond robustly to surprise."
So it's no surprise that Siri is the best out there, it has the best pedigree. Just like iOS and it's BSD Unix base, when Apple make a consumer product, there's often "industrial strength" underneath.
And I don't think Siri is useless or a gimmick. Think of the things it is good at: appointments, contacts, weather: all things that live on your phone, and the phone is the only device Apple have put it on. If it had been released on the iPad with it's current abilities it would be a gimmick, but Apple didnt do that. It will only migrate to new devices when it's abilities increase, making it a non-gimmick on them too.
Google does offer a separate Voice Search app, which can respond to some basic commands such as send a text or email, get directions or play music, using the company's Voice Actions technology. However, this service is much closer in scope to Apple's simplistic Voice Commands, as there is no real processing of grammar or ability to integrate into services like Yelp, interact with the users' calendar, or remember relationships between your contacts, among other Siri features.
Granted, I've only briefly played with SIRI (no intention on upgrading to a 4S at this point), but from what I've read online, Voice Actions is comparable, especially with its ability to plug into google search:
http://searchengineland.com/head-to-...-actions-96998
http://www.pcworld.com/article/24219..._showdown.html
Where SIRI obviously shines is in its flexibility of its query structure.
I was reading today that SIRI seems to be pro-life. Meanwhile, Google is more than happy to help people with murdering their fetuses.
Ask the Siri, the new iPhone 4 assistant, where to get an abortion, and, if you happen to be in Washington, D.C., she won?t direct you to the Planned Parenthood on 16th St, NW. Instead, she?ll suggest you pay a visit to the 1st Choice Women?s Health Center, an anti-abortion Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC) in Landsdowne, Virginia, or Human Life Services, a CPC in York, Pennsylvania. Ask Google the same question, and you?ll get ads for no less than 7 metro-area abortion clinics, 2 CPCs and a nationwide abortion referral service.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/2...f-an-abortion/
Steve Jobs was glad that he didn't end up as a victim of abortion. Did Steve Jobs influence SIRI?
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/25/s...m-of-abortion/
admirable, but a machine with its own political agenda is the last thing I want.
I was reading today that SIRI seems to be pro-life. Meanwhile, Google is more than happy to help people with murdering their fetuses.
Ask the Siri, the new iPhone 4 assistant, where to get an abortion, and, if you happen to be in Washington, D.C., she won?t direct you to the Planned Parenthood on 16th St, NW. Instead, she?ll suggest you pay a visit to the 1st Choice Women?s Health Center, an anti-abortion Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC) in Landsdowne, Virginia, or Human Life Services, a CPC in York, Pennsylvania. Ask Google the same question, and you?ll get ads for no less than 7 metro-area abortion clinics, 2 CPCs and a nationwide abortion referral service.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/2...f-an-abortion/
Steve Jobs was glad that he didn't end up as a victim of abortion. Did Steve Jobs influence SIRI?
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/25/s...m-of-abortion/
So basically, Apple decides to mess with the minds of young women and rob them of their freedom.
If I was a woman, I'd go to court on that. I would not ask for damages, I'd ask for an official, multiple-newspaper apology. But maybe next Apple idea is "if you ask for the closest islamic, judaic or buddhist cult place, Apple suggest several Protestant cult places to help you to the _right faith_"?
Or maybe, if you ask for a Democrat representative's permanency, you get referred to the Republican equivalent?
Microsoft and abortion same terrible results.
I have difficulty believing that (self styled) fans of the "Think Different" company would openly advocate _companies_ deciding what's morally acceptable for their customers.
If women need/want to abort, it is their choice. That's law, that's moral. Whether or not you, SJ or anyone else dislikes it should not impact Siri's results. Of course, I expect you to tell me next that anyway, Siri should not demean itself to answer if you are a black person, or similar bullshit. But maybe you just did not realize the consequences of meddling with search results based on "moral" positions?
I'm theorically pro abortion. I think abortion is bad and should be avoided, but still should be legal. I also think most prolifers (based on the ones I've seen and heard, or read) base their belief on religious (highly debatable, hence) or male-power beliefs. I demand that companies do not force such ideas on me. I want freedom of thought, religion and race equality. I don't want some company to tell me that black people are inferior to white ones, or that women should not be allowed to abort, or that Socialism is a worse system than Liberalism. More importantly, I don't want this company to ACT accordingly by filtering-out the information I asked on islam, abortion, socialism or race-equality.
I hope I made my point clear. It's the same as Majjo's, basically: a machine/company with a political agenda is out-of-bounds in a democracy.
According to Wikipedia, Siri came out of CALO, a DARPA project to create a personal assistant for a solider.
"Its five-year contract brought together 300+ researchers from 25 of the top university and commercial research institutions, with the goal of building a new generation of cognitive assistants that can reason, learn from experience, be told what to do, explain what they are doing, reflect on their experience, and respond robustly to surprise."
So it's no surprise that Siri is the best out there, it has the best pedigree. Just like iOS and it's BSD Unix base, when Apple make a consumer product, there's often "industrial strength" underneath.
And I don't think Siri is useless or a gimmick. Think of the things it is good at: appointments, contacts, weather: all things that live on your phone, and the phone is the only device Apple have put it on. If it had been released on the iPad with it's current abilities it would be a gimmick, but Apple didnt do that. It will only migrate to new devices when it's abilities increase, making it a non-gimmick on them too.
<irony>
What I love with the US is its socialist economy. State-funded research then used for the masses
</irony>
Which is why Apple's original mobile operating system was called the iPhone OS, and not iOS until it was enlarged to work on the iPad some 3 years after the iPhone's introduction.
It was first called OS X and then rebadged to iPhone OS and then to iOS.
<irony>
What I love with the US is its socialist economy. State-funded research then used for the masses
</irony>
It's not socialism if it's military research. Military is the job of the government even under capitalism.
I really do hope that they made enough recordings of her voice before she passed away to use as the voice of a computer/iPhone/iPad at some point. I bet there are plenty of Trekkers who would pay big $$ for that.
It's not socialism if it's military research. Military is the job of the government even under capitalism.
But according to the Right, the government can't do anything right. Why are we trusting them to defend the country?
Siri's importance will be dismissed until the competition can figure out how to copy and implement something similar. The strategy thus far has been to wait until Apple creates something, then copy it and add features Apple previously left out and then market their product as better.
Give them time.
The problem with Google's Voice or Microsoft's TellMe, I venture, is that both companies will never take the effort to make their counterpart to Siri to be as capable and versatile in functionality because it will only kill the geese that lay their ads' golden eggs. Google's only game in town is its one-trick pony ads business, and Microsoft has lost billions in its attempts to upset Google's applecart. You will notice in the demonstration that TellMe always bring you to the Bing search interface.
Here Apple has a huge advantage over Google or Microsoft: It has no huge investment in a soon-to-be-outdated search interface.
But the Apple fanboys don't see it as a "technique". Instead, they aggressively defend what is said. But when Apple does release those products or features, those Apple fanboys can't admit that they were wrong. Instead, they change their story and spin it to say "Apple was planning to do it all along".
I guess the key question then is why respond to "fanboys'" irrational response? Why trouble yourself with a response when it is obvious they have "drunk the koolaid"? Why continue to feed into the diatribe cycle when you apparently know better?
OTOH, <you> in fact don't know what Apple has on the bench, what is in development and being refined, now do you? <You> don't know at what point Apple started working on a particular device or feature - you only know when they announce it to the public. Having worked for a company driving a wide swath of innovative products at one time (3M), we had at least three year's worth of product ahead of public release. So driving your argument based on public release is simply inaccurate.
And to be clear, Jobs was being completely honest in those statements - according to the bio and other sources, he had to be convinced to open up to 3rd party apps, he stated they weren't going to do cut/copy/paste until they were able to get the interface right,
that multitasking wouldn't be activated until they were sure it wouldn't be a battery drainer (unlike the Android version), and that they wouldn't make a tablet PC - which of course the iPad most definitely is not. Context is important and using what was actually said, instead of setting up "strawman" statements to knock down.
And everyone else, the DED articles always draw out folks like DaHarder and BettieBlue to sputter irrationally and nonsensically. I too have been guilty of feeding trolls in here, but try to minimize the derailing of the actual content of the article for the thread.
I thank'ee!
But according to the Right, the government can't do anything right. Why are we trusting them to defend the country?
The only people who want the government to do nothing, i.e. to not exist, are anarchists, and they are usually considered leftist.
The smallest allowable government on the right still runs the military, courts and police, because the free market requires law and order. People won't trade goods if they can just steal them. People won't make long term business deals if contracts are not enforced, and fraud is not a crime.
Obviously Steve was using Muhammad Ali's technique of "Rope-A-Dope", and it apparently worked as Apple caught the market flat footed and he delivered a one-two punch delivery of both video on iPods and iPhones and also hammered the market with the iPad.
I don't know how much of Siri was Steve. In the biog, it's implied that he was given a demo of Siri for the first time at a Board meeting just before he resigned and was at first pessimistic that it could do as claimed. He asked it several questions and was apparently impressed.
If Steve was not heavily involved with Siri, that actually is a positive for Apple. There's an impression that Jobs was a micro-manager who was involved in every design decision and there's a more positive outlook for Apple's future if a wider variety of executives and managers were directly involved in everything we love about Apple's products that frequently gets credited to Jobs.
There is one thing about Siri that bothers me. If it's really only a Beta, then IMO it shouldn't be the focus of Apple's advertising for the phone. Apple wants to have it both ways: if it works, it's a reason to buy the phone and if it doesn't, "well sorry, it's only a Beta."