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?
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.
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.
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.
That Google may have built theirs in house, while Apple bought theirs via another company is irrelevant, surely, to any current ownership question. Those are both legitimate paths to IP ownership. In any case, what has whether either company first used voice recognition have to do with whether Apple would be copying if they released their version in Spanish? I'm afraid you lost me with that response.
Because....Apple bought Siri and then neutered it to only work on the iPhone 4S. So perhaaaaaps....someone who is using a 3GS or iPhone 4 might have use of the program....Hardly a waste of time.
Well, this is great for 3GS & 4 users then (as well as original iPads and iPod Touch), but once they upgrade to the new iPhone when their contract is up (or the then budget 4S), is the idea that they will be hooked on Google's app and will eschew the iOS integrated Siri?
At most it will give Google a small window of opportunity to keep those ad dollars rolling in for a small user base of iPhones, and then what?
And if Apple sees that Google's app is indeed siphoning off user share, don't you think that they will suddenly decide to enable it for at least some of those devices considering it has already been hacked to work on them anyway? I mean, Apple is only doing it to help differentiate the 4S from the 4 since the 4S offered so little else. iOS 6 could offer the opportunity to do a lot.
Sorry I lost you. Google invented their tech, Apple bought theirs. Google was first in mobile voice recognition Apple was not. They copy some, invent some, same as Apple, hence gray area, which is what my original premise was.
Sorry I lost you. Google invented their tech, Apple bought theirs. Google was first in mobile voice recognition Apple was not. They copy some, invent some, same as Apple, hence gray area, which is what my original premise was.
OK - but as I said earlier, this discussion appeared to be about implementation and user interface, not about just the use of voice recognition.
Aaaargh, that annoying American accent, as an Australian it is as grating as fingernails on a blackboard, that's the voice of the navigation on my Galaxy Nexus.
Speaking of Australia I wonder why there has been nothing on this:-
OK - but as I said earlier, this discussion appeared to be about implementation and user interface, not about just the use of voice recognition.
Google search was providing context appropriate search results from voice input for a long time on iOS. The fact that they are now adding spoken responses is a natural evolution in my opinion. After all, the understanding of the voice request is the most important part of returning accurate and useable results. Verbalizing them is secondary. Clearly Apple was first to successfully implement that on a mobile device but it is also an obvious extension of Voice XML which has been used in countless corporate phone systems for many years.
OK - but as I said earlier, this discussion appeared to be about implementation and user interface, not about just the use of voice recognition.
Google search was providing context appropriate search results from voice input for a long time on iOS. The fact that they are now adding spoken responses is a natural evolution in my opinion. After all, the understanding of the voice request is the most important part of returning accurate and useable results. Verbalizing them is secondary. Clearly Apple was first to successfully implement that on a mobile device but it is also an obvious extension of Voice XML which has been used in countless corporate phone systems for many years.
I don't disagree with any of that, and especially that it is a natural evolution for Google to add spoken responses. In fact I'd be disappointed if they did not move in that direction.
And why on earth would someone using an iPhone opt for a third party app that offers nothing new over the integrated iOS functionality? Talk about a waste of time ...
Out of curiosity I picked up my iPhone 4S and asked Siri some of the same questions used in the video and Siri didn't know how to respond to any of the queries. So at least at the moment, it does things BETTER than the integrated iOS functionality (much like there are better calendar, mail, weather, stocks and notes apps to name just a few).
For a moderator, you certainly have a talent of setting a negative tone to almost every discussion. It's like your trolling in safer waters rather than going over to a non-Apple centric site to make biased arguments.
And as usual, your comment is sidetracking the topic and doesn't contribute constructive discussion. Who's moderating you?
Perhaps that is why he ended up leaving Mac Rumors after three years.
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.
Sorry, total BS. People are not buying Samsung products and thinking that they are Apple products. It seems that the big SAMSUNG on the box would be a dead give-away. If someone was told that the "Samsung tablet is as good as an iPad" and then they went the cheap route only to return the item and instead getting a "real" iPad..that isn't the same thing as BELIEVING that they actually bought the iPad. That is buyer's remorse and the inability to admit they screwed up...so instead they lie and state they were tricked. Human nature to avoid responsibility.
Now if someone buys a tablet branded with the Apple logo which turned out to be a total counterfeit, that is a different story, but not at all what Samsung was accused of.
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.
If you were referring to "voice recognition" technology, it has been around longer than Watson and Siri. The thing that is making voice recognition more useful is superior methods of achieving said recognition. I don't know if they are using some form of mathematical probability to improve results or if it's a form of artificial intelligence, but it's gotten much better recently.
That's a hilarious image. It's astounding the lengths to which the Androiders will go to justify Google's gang-raping of phones.
How is the truth hilarious? How is Apple copying ideas from Android okay, but others cannot copy from Apple? And what is up with the gang-rape obsession?
Well, this is great for 3GS & 4 users then (as well as original iPads and iPod Touch), but once they upgrade to the new iPhone when their contract is up (or the then budget 4S), is the idea that they will be hooked on Google's app and will eschew the iOS integrated Siri?
At most it will give Google a small window of opportunity to keep those ad dollars rolling in for a small user base of iPhones, and then what?
And if Apple sees that Google's app is indeed siphoning off user share, don't you think that they will suddenly decide to enable it for at least some of those devices considering it has already been hacked to work on them anyway? I mean, Apple is only doing it to help differentiate the 4S from the 4 since the 4S offered so little else. iOS 6 could offer the opportunity to do a lot.
Of course if these people were to see this same software running on Android and compared it to Siri they would be surprised to see that the Google software isn't reliant on external servers for its dictation capabilities. So, maybe they would choose to avoid using Siri.
(For the record...not a Android Fan. I've used an iPhone since 2009 when the 3GS became my first smartphone. Having said that, I am actually looking forward to Windows Phone 8. You know...I think it is time to just going back to reading the articles; if there are any that are actually related to OS X anymore. There really is no point in posting here since it just turns into a bitch-fest)
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.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
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.
Originally Posted by muppetry
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
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.
That Google may have built theirs in house, while Apple bought theirs via another company is irrelevant, surely, to any current ownership question. Those are both legitimate paths to IP ownership. In any case, what has whether either company first used voice recognition have to do with whether Apple would be copying if they released their version in Spanish? I'm afraid you lost me with that response.
At most it will give Google a small window of opportunity to keep those ad dollars rolling in for a small user base of iPhones, and then what?
And if Apple sees that Google's app is indeed siphoning off user share, don't you think that they will suddenly decide to enable it for at least some of those devices considering it has already been hacked to work on them anyway? I mean, Apple is only doing it to help differentiate the 4S from the 4 since the 4S offered so little else. iOS 6 could offer the opportunity to do a lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
I'm afraid you lost me with that response.
Sorry I lost you. Google invented their tech, Apple bought theirs. Google was first in mobile voice recognition Apple was not. They copy some, invent some, same as Apple, hence gray area, which is what my original premise was.
OK - but as I said earlier, this discussion appeared to be about implementation and user interface, not about just the use of voice recognition.
Aaaargh, that annoying American accent, as an Australian it is as grating as fingernails on a blackboard, that's the voice of the navigation on my Galaxy Nexus.
Speaking of Australia I wonder why there has been nothing on this:-
Google failed to delete Australians' private info
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
OK - but as I said earlier, this discussion appeared to be about implementation and user interface, not about just the use of voice recognition.
Google search was providing context appropriate search results from voice input for a long time on iOS. The fact that they are now adding spoken responses is a natural evolution in my opinion. After all, the understanding of the voice request is the most important part of returning accurate and useable results. Verbalizing them is secondary. Clearly Apple was first to successfully implement that on a mobile device but it is also an obvious extension of Voice XML which has been used in countless corporate phone systems for many years.
I don't disagree with any of that, and especially that it is a natural evolution for Google to add spoken responses. In fact I'd be disappointed if they did not move in that direction.
If Google has some innovation to deliver here, I’m in favor. But why make YET ANOTHER separate Google app? Just roll it into the main Google app!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128
And why on earth would someone using an iPhone opt for a third party app that offers nothing new over the integrated iOS functionality? Talk about a waste of time ...
Out of curiosity I picked up my iPhone 4S and asked Siri some of the same questions used in the video and Siri didn't know how to respond to any of the queries. So at least at the moment, it does things BETTER than the integrated iOS functionality (much like there are better calendar, mail, weather, stocks and notes apps to name just a few).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asim Soofi
For a moderator, you certainly have a talent of setting a negative tone to almost every discussion. It's like your trolling in safer waters rather than going over to a non-Apple centric site to make biased arguments.
And as usual, your comment is sidetracking the topic and doesn't contribute constructive discussion. Who's moderating you?
Perhaps that is why he ended up leaving Mac Rumors after three years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
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.
Sorry, total BS. People are not buying Samsung products and thinking that they are Apple products. It seems that the big SAMSUNG on the box would be a dead give-away. If someone was told that the "Samsung tablet is as good as an iPad" and then they went the cheap route only to return the item and instead getting a "real" iPad..that isn't the same thing as BELIEVING that they actually bought the iPad. That is buyer's remorse and the inability to admit they screwed up...so instead they lie and state they were tricked. Human nature to avoid responsibility.
Now if someone buys a tablet branded with the Apple logo which turned out to be a total counterfeit, that is a different story, but not at all what Samsung was accused of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival
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.
If you were referring to "voice recognition" technology, it has been around longer than Watson and Siri. The thing that is making voice recognition more useful is superior methods of achieving said recognition. I don't know if they are using some form of mathematical probability to improve results or if it's a form of artificial intelligence, but it's gotten much better recently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's a hilarious image. It's astounding the lengths to which the Androiders will go to justify Google's gang-raping of phones.
How is the truth hilarious? How is Apple copying ideas from Android okay, but others cannot copy from Apple? And what is up with the gang-rape obsession?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128
Well, this is great for 3GS & 4 users then (as well as original iPads and iPod Touch), but once they upgrade to the new iPhone when their contract is up (or the then budget 4S), is the idea that they will be hooked on Google's app and will eschew the iOS integrated Siri?
At most it will give Google a small window of opportunity to keep those ad dollars rolling in for a small user base of iPhones, and then what?
And if Apple sees that Google's app is indeed siphoning off user share, don't you think that they will suddenly decide to enable it for at least some of those devices considering it has already been hacked to work on them anyway? I mean, Apple is only doing it to help differentiate the 4S from the 4 since the 4S offered so little else. iOS 6 could offer the opportunity to do a lot.
Of course if these people were to see this same software running on Android and compared it to Siri they would be surprised to see that the Google software isn't reliant on external servers for its dictation capabilities. So, maybe they would choose to avoid using Siri.
(For the record...not a Android Fan. I've used an iPhone since 2009 when the 3GS became my first smartphone. Having said that, I am actually looking forward to Windows Phone 8. You know...I think it is time to just going back to reading the articles; if there are any that are actually related to OS X anymore. There really is no point in posting here since it just turns into a bitch-fest)
Deleted by poster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival
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.
What would Apple know about computers and voice:-