As most posts have correctly pointed out here, Siri is currently a mediocre service. It is quite useless except for simple tasks like setting the alarm and the timer.
Why isn't Apple spearheading taking Siri to the next level via collaborating with Watson, given their relationship with IBM? As with ApplePay, Apple Music, CarPlay, HomeKit and HealthKit, the ambition and hype seem to have got ahead of actual performance.
The reason Apple isn't working with IBM and Watson is because Watson requires a tremendous amount of data. And Apple isn't willing to give customer data to ANYONE. The same thing with AI. Many AI specialist won't work with Apple because of Tim Cooks ridiculous privacy stance.
Sure they will. They do when they receive a lawful order to turn over customer data and or/files they have access to as has been reported many times, especially recently. They'll also share your data under certain other conditions, for instance for 3rd parties fulfilling orders, market research by outside contractors, and certain promotional (advertising) efforts done on Apple's behalf. What Apple won't do is allow your data to be use for profit-making by outside parties which at the moment would generally be understood to be targeted advertising. FWIW I personally think Apple is correct in their stance.
The reason Apple isn't working with IBM and Watson is because Watson requires a tremendous amount of data. And Apple isn't willing to give customer data to ANYONE. The same thing with AI. Many AI specialist won't work with Apple because of Tim Cooks ridiculous privacy stance.
Sure they will. They do when they receive a lawful order to turn over customer data and or/files they have access to as has been reported many times, especially recently. They'll also share your data under certain other conditions, for instance for 3rd parties fulfilling orders, market research by outside contractors, and certain promotional (advertising) efforts done on Apple's behalf. What Apple won't do is allow your data to be use for profit-making by outside parties which at the moment would generally be understood to be targeted advertising. FWIW I personally think Apple is correct in their stance.
I think you're taking his point too literally. He meant it in exactly the same way you think he should have (at least, that's how I understood it).
Apple might be just to big to bring true cutting edge tech to the market. They have fingers in everything, streaming, cloud, AI, health & fitness, etc... but none surpass what smaller more focuses companies are doing.
As most posts have correctly pointed out here, Siri is currently a mediocre service. It is quite useless except for simple tasks like setting the alarm and the timer.
Why isn't Apple spearheading taking Siri to the next level via collaborating with Watson, given their relationship with IBM? As with ApplePay, Apple Music, CarPlay, HomeKit and HealthKit, the ambition and hype seem to have got ahead of actual performance.
The reason Apple isn't working with IBM and Watson is because Watson requires a tremendous amount of data. And Apple isn't willing to give customer data to ANYONE. The same thing with AI. Many AI specialist won't work with Apple because of Tim Cooks ridiculous privacy stance.
This has to stop. Tim Cooks pious, ridiculous, and extreme stance on privacy is keeping Apple in the stone ages while other companies are advancing. Tim cooks dumb privacy stance is hurting Apple:
1. Cloud is falling behind 2. AI research is falling behind 3. Siri is falling behind 4. Advertising platform is falling behind 5. Social platforms are falling behind 6. Apple Pay is not being accepted by most merchants (Apple does not want to give customer data)
This needs to stop.
The dumbest part is most iOS users don't give a crap about what Tim Cook spews. 95% of iOS users either use Facebook and/or Google services. So they actually don't give a crap about Tim Cooks extreme stance of privacy.
These are EXACTLY the knee-jerk shareholder views that pressure major companies to cave-in and fail instead of focusing on their strengths and the future. How many shares of Apple did you own BEFORE '97?
Always the same story, big company buys startup, bla bla about the super tech and people acquired, followed by exit of the people that did the actual work and petering out of all that was acquired in a short period of time. This is a nice example, funny people defending Apples Siri, it was clearly an inferior product without improvement and depending on central servers while not nessesary. So, Apple should not buy Siri2, instead they should invest in it (if it is any good) and acknowledge that Apple doesn't understand AI.
You know why Siri sucks? Because of Tim Cooks ridiculous stance on privacy. Without being able to data mine you, Siri is clueless and dumb.
Cook needs to stop his pious and extreme stance on privacy. Its hurting Apples cloud advancement, Siri, advertising platform, and Apple pay (wont share data with merchants)
ah, i see we're on another delusional anti-Cook week for you. it would be great if you could find something more...stabilizing.
As most posts have correctly pointed out here, Siri is currently a mediocre service. It is quite useless except for simple tasks like setting the alarm and the timer.
Why isn't Apple spearheading taking Siri to the next level via collaborating with Watson, given their relationship with IBM? As with ApplePay, Apple Music, CarPlay, HomeKit and HealthKit, the ambition and hype seem to have got ahead of actual performance.
... 95% of iOS users either use Facebook and/or Google services. So they actually don't give a crap about Tim Cooks extreme stance of privacy.
Apple might be just to big to bring true cutting edge tech to the market. They have fingers in everything, streaming, cloud, AI, health & fitness, etc... but none surpass what smaller more focuses companies are doing.
To big?
Google is just as big as Apple and its kicking ass on services. There's no excuse for Apple to be so behind on cloud, streaming, AI, data mining, and advertising.
The only reason Apple is behind is not lack of talent or focus. Its because the CEO has an EXTREME PERSONAL POLICY on privacy.
Without data Artificial intellegence and big data is impossible. And because of Tim Cooks privacy policy Apple has 1000000000x less data then its competition (Google/facebook/Amazon). No wonder they are getting their asses kicked.
IMO Apple is better when it plays to it's strengths, hardware. Google is better when they stay with their core software, services, and advertising. They both stumble a bit when they try to do what made the other one successful.
Besides, how many $billions does one company actually need to be considered successful? At what point does the drive for yet more $10's of billions more become a danger to inventiveness, competition and the general welfare? TBH some of these companies are becoming just a bit too rich, powerful, and demanding. This might not end in a good place for we as common citizen's as it's not unlike nation-building.
The need for countries to control more territory, more assets, more of everything, often leads to outcomes that benefit only a few, just as it sometimes does in business as the two are intricately entwined.
These are EXACTLY the knee-jerk shareholder views that pressure major companies to cave-in and fail instead of focusing on their strengths and the future. How many shares of Apple did you own BEFORE '97?
I'm sick of Tim Cooks personal AGENDA's running the company. Sick of it. Go do your job you idiot. If you want to fight for privacy rights go step down as CEO and run a non for profit.
i can't think of another CEO who has hurt his company so badly because of his PERSONAL VIEW of social issues. Go leave those ISSUES at HOME. Go run the business and STFU about your social agenda you piece
Sog, I don't think this is a Cook policy but rather an Apple policy. Remember Apple has a university of sorts, which is what codifies the corporate viewpoint and all senior level employees must go to it. This is to get everyone on the same page and avoid dilution of their culture.
should they disband the intensive level of privacy policies? I don't know. I do know that Apple tends to think further ahead than most organizations especially in terms of core beliefs about what constitutes ethical business practices.
your point is valid, that Apple is being left out of some avenues of technological research and it does have a lot to do with privacy policies. I'd sure like it if they could find a way to be a little more transparent about why they think this way.
They will eventually encrypt the cloud contents because of this privacy concern, so again, I don't think this is on Tim, it's a corporate legacy.
You know why Siri sucks? Because of Tim Cooks ridiculous stance on privacy. Without being able to data mine you, Siri is clueless and dumb.
Cook needs to stop his pious and extreme stance on privacy. Its hurting Apples cloud advancement, Siri, advertising platform, and Apple pay (wont share data with merchants)
IMO Apple is better when it plays to it's strengths, hardware. Google is better when they stay with their core software, services, and advertising. They both stumble a bit when they try to do what made the other one successful. How many $billions does one company actually need to be considered successful? At what point does the drive for yet more $10's of billions more become a danger to inventiveness, competition and the general welfare? TBH some of these companies are becoming just a bit too rich, powerful, and demanding. This might not end in a good place for we as common citizen's.
Apple has never been just about hardware. Without strong software and services the iPhone is nothing. You can buy Android phones with similiar hardware as the iPhone for half the price. Just as good screen, build quality, CPU, camera. What sets the iPhone apart (for now) is iOS and integrated software and services. But if their services keeps falling behind (Siri, AppleMusic, ApplePay, ect) iPhone is doomed.
Just selling hardware is a losers game. Eventually the competition will catch up and copy. And then sell it for cheaper. What is extremely hard to copy is world class services and software.
The next stage in computing is data mining and artificial intellegence. And Apple is YEARS behind Google, Facebook, and Amazon. Hell even Microsoft is probably ahead of them. Really pathetic. If this trend keeps up for the next 5 years Apple will be a has been.
In 5-10 years data-mining and AI will be so much more advanced. You could ask your phone "any suggestions on where to eat"? The AI and data mining will calculate all this in a mere split second:
1. Where your location is 2. What time is it. 3. Where have you eaten the last 90 days 4. What resturants are open now 5. Whats the traffic like to those resturants 6. Any specials? 7. What did you eat this morning 8. What are your buying patterns? Price range? 9. Your favorites based on posts in social platforms, based on search activity, ect
Your phone will tell you an excellent suggestion for a place to eat.
That is just one example of the power of AI/data mining. In contrast an iPhone will look like a stone age phone because it has no way to get such data with strict privacy rules.
I guess my question would be how would you balance the commitment to privacy that Apple is known for without giving away the farm (perceived or otherwise) that Google does? Apple has been touting privacy for years now, so how would you propose changing this without making the company look like hypocrites or turncoats?
I happen to think a lot of people care about their privacy which is on of the reasons they choose Apple. Service is suffering no doubt (although Apple has never been able to get services right imo) but privacy is one of their tentpoles, so what would be the ideal balance between the two?
You know why Siri sucks? Because of Tim Cooks ridiculous stance on privacy. Without being able to data mine you, Siri is clueless and dumb.
Cook needs to stop his pious and extreme stance on privacy. Its hurting Apples cloud advancement, Siri, advertising platform, and Apple pay (wont share data with merchants)
Or maybe you need to move over to Android. I like their privacy policies just fine. I don't need anyone sifting through my data unless it's specifically data I've given to a specific app, and have granted it specific and limited access.
This has to stop. Tim Cooks pious, ridiculous, and extreme stance on privacy is keeping Apple in the stone ages while other companies are advancing. Tim cooks dumb privacy stance is hurting Apple:
1. Cloud is falling behind 2. AI research is falling behind 3. Siri is falling behind 4. Advertising platform is falling behind 5. Social platforms are falling behind 6. Apple Pay is not being accepted by most merchants (Apple does not want to give customer data)
This needs to stop.
The dumbest part is most iOS users don't give a crap about what Tim Cook spews. 95% of iOS users either use Facebook and/or Google services. So they actually don't give a crap about Tim Cooks extreme stance of privacy.
1. I care. 2. I care. 3. I care. 4. I don't care. 5. I don't care. 6. I care, and I don't want Apple to change on this. Adoption is happening, and it's happening faster than Apple is aware, mostly because it's difficult to track with all the small integrators reselling POS systems.
Insisting that Apple stop guarding its customers privacy is a non-starter.
Apple might be just to big to bring true cutting edge tech to the market. They have fingers in everything, streaming, cloud, AI, health & fitness, etc... but none surpass what smaller more focuses companies are doing.
And that is why they make acquisitions! One thing we have all learned who have followed Apple for a long tome is, don't try to second guess them, or try to predict their next move.
You know why Siri sucks? Because of Tim Cooks ridiculous stance on privacy. Without being able to data mine you, Siri is clueless and dumb.
Cook needs to stop his pious and extreme stance on privacy. Its hurting Apples cloud advancement, Siri, advertising platform, and Apple pay (wont share data with merchants)
Here's ApplePay working in conjunction with a merchant's rewards program, so they get the data they're looking for, and the security of the ApplePay transaction. Next problem that cannot be solved?
Sog, I don't think this is a Cook policy but rather an Apple policy. Remember Apple has a university of sorts, which is what codifies the corporate viewpoint and all senior level employees must go to it. This is to get everyone on the same page and avoid dilution of their culture.
should they disband the intensive level of privacy policies? I don't know. I do know that Apple tends to think further ahead than most organizations especially in terms of core beliefs about what constitutes ethical business practices.
your point is valid, that Apple is being left out of some avenues of technological research and it does have a lot to do with privacy policies. I'd sure like it if they could find a way to be a little more transparent about why they think this way.
They will eventually encrypt the cloud contents because of this privacy concern, so again, I don't think this is on Tim, it's a corporate legacy.
Good explanation.
But it begs this question:
IF APPLE IS SO CONCERNED ABOUT PRIVACY WHY IS GOOGLE STILL THE DEFAULT SEARCH ON SAFARI?
Seriously? With all your posts, do you really need to ask that question? It has been reported that Google paid Apple something like a $Billion a year to do it. Secondly, Google happens to be the leading search engine by far. And lastly, it is a matter of consumer choice whether or not they want to use it. It has nothing to do with data held by Apple.
I guess my question would be how would you balance the commitment to privacy that Apple is known for without giving away the farm (perceived or otherwise) that Google does? Apple has been touting privacy for years now, so how would you propose changing this without making the company look like hypocrites or turncoats?
I happen to think a lot of people care about their privacy which is on of the reasons they choose Apple. Service is suffering no doubt (although Apple has never been able to get services right imo) but privacy is one of their tentpoles, so what would be the ideal balance between the two?
I agree it would be very hard transition. That's why Tim Cook should have kept his mouth shut before spewing and bragging about how awesome Apple was for upholding customer privacy. Apple no doubt painted themself in a corner.
But its for the customers benefit. Apple should put the customer first. Less privacy equals better services. PERIOD. They can always offer a setting that turns off data mining.
IMO, that is one reason Tim Cook needs to step down. He will look like an absolute idiot if he changes his policy about privacy 180 degrees. A new CEO will have the freedom to take a different path and start over.
You say Apple customers care about privacy. But why then is Google still the default search on iOS? Why then is does 90% of iOS users use Facebook or Google services? Actually I don't think iOS users care about privacy at all. Or they don't share the same extreme view as Cook. I don't mind some of my privacy being violated to get a better service. That's why I use Gmail and Google search. I know the trade offs. Apple should allow its customers to choose also.
Apple does not have to be so extreme. Privacy does not have to be black or white. Share what I bought? fine. Share my bank account number ,SSN, or CC numbers? Hell no. Give customers a choice
I like the idea of customer choice. Maybe Apple could give a choice in setup, explaining the trade offs in a series of dialog boxes. (Ugh) but maybe they could make privacy the default and the setup something customer could delay until they care about using x services. ("Use Apple SuperSearch? Here are some considerations...").
What you say is true, the average iPhone user is googling stuff all the time and it is Google that benefits. Most customers aren't even thinking about privacy when they Google, that elevated doesn't go to the top floor.
However, I don't think Apple wants to get into quite the same ad structure though, they don't need to.
You know, I wonder if Apple is secretly struggling with this issue right now? It's a fork in the road I would think. Like you say, I don't see HOW they are gonna make a go of AI without data!! The examples you give are good. What kind of AI is Apple developing without data??
so, I would like them to describe their privacy policies better, especially about technology like AI.
Comments
It it is a tough balance for Apple.
This is a nice example, funny people defending Apples Siri, it was clearly an inferior product without improvement and depending on central servers while not nessesary.
So, Apple should not buy Siri2, instead they should invest in it (if it is any good) and acknowledge that Apple doesn't understand AI.
Besides, how many $billions does one company actually need to be considered successful? At what point does the drive for yet more $10's of billions more become a danger to inventiveness, competition and the general welfare? TBH some of these companies are becoming just a bit too rich, powerful, and demanding. This might not end in a good place for we as common citizen's as it's not unlike nation-building.
The need for countries to control more territory, more assets, more of everything, often leads to outcomes that benefit only a few, just as it sometimes does in business as the two are intricately entwined.
should they disband the intensive level of privacy policies? I don't know. I do know that Apple tends to think further ahead than most organizations especially in terms of core beliefs about what constitutes ethical business practices.
your point is valid, that Apple is being left out of some avenues of technological research and it does have a lot to do with privacy policies. I'd sure like it if they could find a way to be a little more transparent about why they think this way.
They will eventually encrypt the cloud contents because of this privacy concern, so again, I don't think this is on Tim, it's a corporate legacy.
I happen to think a lot of people care about their privacy which is on of the reasons they choose Apple. Service is suffering no doubt (although Apple has never been able to get services right imo) but privacy is one of their tentpoles, so what would be the ideal balance between the two?
2. I care.
3. I care.
4. I don't care.
5. I don't care.
6. I care, and I don't want Apple to change on this. Adoption is happening, and it's happening faster than Apple is aware, mostly because it's difficult to track with all the small integrators reselling POS systems.
Insisting that Apple stop guarding its customers privacy is a non-starter.
Here's ApplePay working in conjunction with a merchant's rewards program, so they get the data they're looking for, and the security of the ApplePay transaction. Next problem that cannot be solved?
Seriously? With all your posts, do you really need to ask that question? It has been reported that Google paid Apple something like a $Billion a year to do it. Secondly, Google happens to be the leading search engine by far. And lastly, it is a matter of consumer choice whether or not they want to use it. It has nothing to do with data held by Apple.
What you say is true, the average iPhone user is googling stuff all the time and it is Google that benefits. Most customers aren't even thinking about privacy when they Google, that elevated doesn't go to the top floor.
However, I don't think Apple wants to get into quite the same ad structure though, they don't need to.
You know, I wonder if Apple is secretly struggling with this issue right now? It's a fork in the road I would think. Like you say, I don't see HOW they are gonna make a go of AI without data!! The examples you give are good. What kind of AI is Apple developing without data??
so, I would like them to describe their privacy policies better, especially about technology like AI.
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/155059/20160501/google-strikes-deal-with-nhs-that-gives-ai-unit-access-to-1-6-million-patient-records.htm
That is the scariest I've read this week.