HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
You going to credit Apple with 3D maps when that comes out too?
You going to credit Google with inventing Android?
You do not get the right to claim ownership of an idea you bought and tweaked.
Since a lot of you like to slam Google for having bought Android the same thing goes in all directions.
I don't want to call a lot of you hypocrites or anything.
What posters are pointing and laughing at is Google (and no doubt MS too, though their speech toy is embarrasingly poor) mocking Siri as pointless gimmickry, then quietly announcing the own version a few weeks later. People are right to mock this - no-one cares who invented what, Apple made it a pervasive feature and now everyone else is too.
HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
What phone had a voice assistant before the iPhone? Oh that's right none. Siri is far beyond speech recognition, i know the Microsoft drones and fandroids just do not get it.
Google and Microsoft first say no one wants something like Siri. then they say they already do everything Siri does, and now they are working on a clone. Funny how that works. Where have we seen this play out before.... Apple innovates, everyone else copies.
You could say the same for Apple. Voice recognition software has been around for quite some time. Apple was just the first company to make a commercial success of it. Man, I hate these users out there that just think Apple designed all the cool stuff in the world and calls anyone else that does it copy-cats.
I seem to remember vast hordes of deranged people and mindless Fandroids all over the internet, mocking SIRI and downplaying it when the iPhone 4S was released.
I guess that their tune has changed now all of a sudden, and these pathetic morons have taken a complete 180, and all of a sudden voice controlled assistants are cool and great, now that Google is feverishly trying to implement their own version of it, all because of SIRI.
Apple was just the first company to make a commercial success of it. .
That's actually quite a feat, and it's something that Apple is quite good at.
Take tablets for example. They've been around for a long, long time. Apple didn't invent the tablet obviously. But none of those other people were able to make it a success, and they tried over and over again for many, many years releasing model after model. Along comes Apple with the iPad and BOOM! Slam Dunk!
Really? If that's true, what is Googles not-yet-existing cheapo Siri clone? Robby the Robot?
.
Hey, Robby the Robot was awesome, way better than 3PO. He was strong, could drive a car, obeyed every command, and could synthesize anything . . . Krell steel, fine fabrics, gemstones, even whiskey. Smooth, as I recall.
HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
Actually, Apple has a good deal of in-house prior art dealing with speech recognition. The speech recognition capability component of the "PlainTalk" technology available with the Classic Mac OS (i.e. pre-os X) circa 1993 being a prime example. The R&D that went into that can be traced back to 1990. So, Apple has about 20 years of experience with speech recognition.
Be careful about tossing around accusations of ignorance - they can came back to bite you.
I know my 3gs had voice recognition, and that was 2 and a half years ago. Granted the extent of what it can do is repeat and play song titles I tell it to play. But still, it's recognizing my voice.
Only when you used predetermined instructions, that's the big difference.
Hypothetically speaking...if this rumor is true...and Majel is better than Siri...what then?
Will it still be a "me too" feature or will it be like many iOS "borrowed" features and improving upon an existing technology?
Or is improving existing tech only allowed if it's from Apple?
If it's an advancement it's and advancement. Show me where Google took WebKit and made a better JS engine and people claimed it was just a "me too" JS engine? They didn't, Google made it better.
The problem is Apple had about 2 years to build in client and server-side code that would integrate Siri into their OS and 3rd-party engines. Your "hypothetical" weighs heavily on Google besting everything Siri does in a much shorter amount of time. That's not likely.
We also have this rumour tying it only to Google search whereas Apple ties it to very specific services on the internet that cater to specific tasks. On top of that, we have no knowledge of Google tying Mejel to the Android OS for tasks the way iOS 5.0 on the iPhone 4S does. These things are important.
Chances are we can look at Google's attempts to add copy/paste to Android compared to how Apple added copy/paste to iOS as core differences in the way these companies approach usability. Google added copy/paste first, but it wasn't consistent, it wasn't natural, it simply wasn't good; but Apple thought it through making it consistent throughout the entire OS and easy to use from day one even though it took looker to make it off the finish line. Has Google even fixed it for ICS? Another example is the way the UI works between OSes.
Apple may not have invented Siri, but it's smart enough to see something amazing and acquire it, integrate it. Siri is original in that there are few to no programs that can compare to its functionality, and Apple purchased it and integrated it. I dont see Google doing that... if they had... well... they would have Siri.
Apple doesnt deserve the credit for Siri's initial capabilities, but integrating it seamlessly and progressing it from here on out it does and should get credit for.
At this point, I dont care if Siri or voice recognition/commands is original. I do care that its integrated and that it works. At the end of the day all that matters is does it improve my experience with my device, and it does that. Who cares who invented it.
I don't understand why this is such a big deal. Google's been working on voice control for several years now and no one should be surprised that it gets upgrades and improvements over time. They're not copying Apple. That they'll be releasing another upgrade to it was known when the 4S and Siri were announced. I'm pretty sure I mentioned reading it was set for the first quarter of next year back when Siri was first discussed as an iPhone feature. The whole idea that Google is somehow scrambling around trying to patch something together as a "Siri-answer" is silly. If anything it would be more reasonable to see Apple's purchase of Siri as a move to answer Google's expected feature improvements since Apple didn't have the means to do so yet. The more well-read members here know that Google has been doing voice control development for a relatively long time now. Another update would be a normal and expected thing whether Siri had been purchased by Apple or not.
FWIW, I don't personally see why one has to fail for the other to succeed. I think it was a brilliant move by Apple to incorporate Siri as they would have been well behind the curve by spring if they had not.
It seems people have already forgotten that Google's Voice Actions was just a response to Apple's Voice Control in the 3GS. Two years from now, people will believe Siri was just a response to whatever Google coughs up.
Comments
HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
No, of course not, what would Apple know about speech and computers?.
How is Siri original?
In that it actually works .
Well hey...Apple had to buy it...
remember that.
You going to credit Apple with 3D maps when that comes out too?
You going to credit Google with inventing Android?
You do not get the right to claim ownership of an idea you bought and tweaked.
Since a lot of you like to slam Google for having bought Android the same thing goes in all directions.
I don't want to call a lot of you hypocrites or anything.
What posters are pointing and laughing at is Google (and no doubt MS too, though their speech toy is embarrasingly poor) mocking Siri as pointless gimmickry, then quietly announcing the own version a few weeks later. People are right to mock this - no-one cares who invented what, Apple made it a pervasive feature and now everyone else is too.
HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
What phone had a voice assistant before the iPhone? Oh that's right none. Siri is far beyond speech recognition, i know the Microsoft drones and fandroids just do not get it.
Google and Microsoft first say no one wants something like Siri. then they say they already do everything Siri does, and now they are working on a clone. Funny how that works. Where have we seen this play out before.... Apple innovates, everyone else copies.
LOL - Try having an original idea.
You could say the same for Apple. Voice recognition software has been around for quite some time. Apple was just the first company to make a commercial success of it. Man, I hate these users out there that just think Apple designed all the cool stuff in the world and calls anyone else that does it copy-cats.
I guess that their tune has changed now all of a sudden, and these pathetic morons have taken a complete 180, and all of a sudden voice controlled assistants are cool and great, now that Google is feverishly trying to implement their own version of it, all because of SIRI.
Voice recognition software has been around for quite some time.
Yeah, no kidding. I had it on my Macs more than a decade ago.
SIRI does represent a significant advancement compared to the other stuff that has been available.
Apple was just the first company to make a commercial success of it. .
That's actually quite a feat, and it's something that Apple is quite good at.
Take tablets for example. They've been around for a long, long time. Apple didn't invent the tablet obviously. But none of those other people were able to make it a success, and they tried over and over again for many, many years releasing model after model. Along comes Apple with the iPad and BOOM! Slam Dunk!
And I don't deny that...never did. Just saying Apple didn't invent, they innovated and implemented.
And Thomas Edison didn't invent the lightbulb. But it is him that people remember, not anybody else.
Really? If that's true, what is Googles not-yet-existing cheapo Siri clone? Robby the Robot?
.
Hey, Robby the Robot was awesome, way better than 3PO. He was strong, could drive a car, obeyed every command, and could synthesize anything . . . Krell steel, fine fabrics, gemstones, even whiskey. Smooth, as I recall.
Google's voice recognition hardly sucks. In fact, it's remarkably good.
The results from dictating a text to my iPhone 4S and my Samsung Galaxy S2:
iPhone "This is a test."
S2 "This is a test full stop"
Ah well!
*Andy was talking out his butt
*Google is working around the clock to challenge a beta product.
User: What is the life expectancy of someone in Mexico City?
Majel: I don't know but what I do know is that you could use I cold coca cola and a grab bag size of cheetos corn chip.
HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
Actually, Apple has a good deal of in-house prior art dealing with speech recognition. The speech recognition capability component of the "PlainTalk" technology available with the Classic Mac OS (i.e. pre-os X) circa 1993 being a prime example. The R&D that went into that can be traced back to 1990. So, Apple has about 20 years of experience with speech recognition.
Be careful about tossing around accusations of ignorance - they can came back to bite you.
I know my 3gs had voice recognition, and that was 2 and a half years ago. Granted the extent of what it can do is repeat and play song titles I tell it to play. But still, it's recognizing my voice.
Only when you used predetermined instructions, that's the big difference.
Hypothetically speaking...if this rumor is true...and Majel is better than Siri...what then?
Will it still be a "me too" feature or will it be like many iOS "borrowed" features and improving upon an existing technology?
Or is improving existing tech only allowed if it's from Apple?
If it's an advancement it's and advancement. Show me where Google took WebKit and made a better JS engine and people claimed it was just a "me too" JS engine? They didn't, Google made it better.
The problem is Apple had about 2 years to build in client and server-side code that would integrate Siri into their OS and 3rd-party engines. Your "hypothetical" weighs heavily on Google besting everything Siri does in a much shorter amount of time. That's not likely.
We also have this rumour tying it only to Google search whereas Apple ties it to very specific services on the internet that cater to specific tasks. On top of that, we have no knowledge of Google tying Mejel to the Android OS for tasks the way iOS 5.0 on the iPhone 4S does. These things are important.
Chances are we can look at Google's attempts to add copy/paste to Android compared to how Apple added copy/paste to iOS as core differences in the way these companies approach usability. Google added copy/paste first, but it wasn't consistent, it wasn't natural, it simply wasn't good; but Apple thought it through making it consistent throughout the entire OS and easy to use from day one even though it took looker to make it off the finish line. Has Google even fixed it for ICS? Another example is the way the UI works between OSes.
How is Siri original?
Apple may not have invented Siri, but it's smart enough to see something amazing and acquire it, integrate it. Siri is original in that there are few to no programs that can compare to its functionality, and Apple purchased it and integrated it. I dont see Google doing that... if they had... well... they would have Siri.
Apple doesnt deserve the credit for Siri's initial capabilities, but integrating it seamlessly and progressing it from here on out it does and should get credit for.
At this point, I dont care if Siri or voice recognition/commands is original. I do care that its integrated and that it works. At the end of the day all that matters is does it improve my experience with my device, and it does that. Who cares who invented it.
FWIW, I don't personally see why one has to fail for the other to succeed. I think it was a brilliant move by Apple to incorporate Siri as they would have been well behind the curve by spring if they had not.