Especially if that intent is used to sell as much "relevant advertising" as possible.
Well, would you prefer your intelligent agent to return the correct answer along with some relevant advertising or return the wrong answer or no answer whatsoever?
You mean "correct" answer like the crap Google has been feeding me for the last 2 years. have to put it on verbatim manually on almost all my requests. Google's AI is good at go and bad at everything else.
Considering they're useless, it's better that they go.
How do you know they are useless? Perhaps they were working with one hand tied behind their back. After all, they were able to develop a competing product, Viv, in a short period of time, which is being billed as more advanced than Siri.
Especially if that intent is used to sell as much "relevant advertising" as possible.
Well, would you prefer your intelligent agent to return the correct answer along with some relevant advertising or return the wrong answer or no answer whatsoever?
If wrong answer or no answer at all, you get the correct answer or some answer when you try a second time. You don't have such a chance when some relevant advertising makes you believe that you got the correct answer.
You mean "correct" answer like the crap Google has been feeding me for the last 2 years. have to put it on verbatim manually on almost all my requests. Google's AI is good at go and bad at everything else.
I have no idea what you are searching for, but I get stellar results, especially for finding coding examples and user tips and tricks to obscure programming challenges.
You mean "correct" answer like the crap Google has been feeding me for the last 2 years. have to put it on verbatim manually on almost all my requests. Google's AI is good at go and bad at everything else.
I have no idea what you are searching for, but I get stellar results, especially for finding coding examples and user tips and tricks to obscure programming challenges.
Search that demand intelligence and I get garbage; ALL THE TIME. Replacing my search words for the ones it thinks I mean. .. If I put all those words in... I WANT MY WORDS TO BE USED.
But, glad you like Google so much.
For me It's 10 times as bad as in 2004. I'm a user since the very first month they came in so I've seen every iteration of their engine. Youtube is beyond bad these days so glad (sic) they "fixed" that too since they have bought it.
It's clear their goal has been monetization, not the best service, for quite some time.
If wrong answer or no answer at all, you get the correct answer or some answer when you try a second time. You don't have such a chance when some relevant advertising makes you believe that you got the correct answer.
I rarely see any advertising because I'm often searching for programming examples, scientific data, historical records or application how-tis which have no relevant advertising. I find their search algorithms to be superb for my needs.
Considering they're useless, it's better that they go.
How do you know they are useless? Perhaps they were working with one hand tied behind their back. After all, they were able to develop a competing product, Viv, in a short period of time, which is being billed as more advanced than Siri.
Yes, vaporware running for a demo is absolutely better than a service running for 1 Billion, no question. Do you actually read what you write? My opinion that they're useless, at least useless to Apple, is as valid as your own biased view.
Building something in your garage is quite different than when it has to scale to 1B people; I think that's were their skills became useless. That's what Apple needed and they seemingly didn't deliver.
Whoever did that capture of the Siri conversion needs to learn how to speak proper English. No wonder Siri can't understand people! High-school dropouts are influencing her with their poor education!
Ooh sh*t, that's f*cked up man! LOL
Viv is really not that big a deal.
Novauris Technologies, which Apple bought in 2013, already gave SIRI the core of what Viv offers. Vocal IQ which Apple purchased last year will put SIRI over the top by allowing SIRI to intelligently query users about context of requests and learning about the user overtime.
I don't think Apple will be interested in Viv because they don't need it. Viv may find a buyer if FaceBook or Google since they already made offers. Viv apparently allowing any developer to integrate their service is a bad idea. The best services should be selected to improve quality and reliability.
I would have been impressed if Viv could have answered "What is the integral from 0 to 10 of X squared + 5" like Siri can. :-)
Don't get me wrong, I think Apple is a fine company, but Steve Jobs unwittingly created another IBM. The very company he despised. Apple is just like IBM from a corporate standpoint. Albeit, their product base is vastly different as is their core target audiences. Apple and IBM have more in common than differences these days. They both have so many layers that the creative and entrepreneurs sometimes get lost in the shuffle. This is a cycle in large conglomerates as someone else pointed out (wash, since, repeat). It's been going on for decades and will continue. Hopefully Apple gets the message that its innovative cycles need to be cared for and not rely on past achievements. I expect great things from Apple in the future, including a better Siri.
Steve knew the slip from fleet-footed content innovation to process driven obsolescence was very easy. I can't imagine that any other company was more purpose built to resist this slip than Apple. However, there are indications everywhere that cracks are forming. R&D investment is way up, but we're not seeing bang for the buck. I want to believe it's not true, but if they don't execute some Earth shattering new stuff, completely outside their present offerings in the next 18 months, we better get ready for another Scully period.
If wrong answer or no answer at all, you get the correct answer or some answer when you try a second time. You don't have such a chance when some relevant advertising makes you believe that you got the correct answer.
I rarely see any advertising because I'm often searching for programming examples, scientific data, historical records or application how-tis which have no relevant advertising. I find their search algorithms to be superb for my needs.
Great. I do the same. I still do it the old way by typing. Congrats if you perform these by voice interaction.
Whoever did that capture of the Siri conversion needs to learn how to speak proper English. No wonder Siri can't understand people! High-school dropouts are influencing her with their poor education!
I can assure you I spoke to Siri in complete sentences, and I am a college graduate who speaks proper English. It just doesn't hear/interpret as well as it should, frankly.
Be Aware. Is this site called "Appleinsider" turning against Apple ? All the articles I see is deliberately pointing issues which may not even exists ?
We don't work for Apple. We cover the company -- good and bad news, and everything in between. The original Siri team is almost all gone. Just the facts.
macplusplus said: Great. I do the same. I still do it the old way by typing. Congrats if you perform these by voice interaction.
Perhaps that is where there was a misunderstanding. I search by typing as well. My comment that Google is way ahead in understanding the intent of a question is based on their long history of understanding search queries. The comment was in the context of and with the premise that the voice request had already been converted from speech to text, which I think Siri does a decent job with. It is what comes afterwards that is important. Google just has a lot more experience in that area than Apple has.
macplusplus said: Great. I do the same. I still do it the old way by typing. Congrats if you perform these by voice interaction.
Perhaps that is where there was a misunderstanding. I search by typing as well. My comment that Google is way ahead in understanding the intent of a question is based on their long history of understanding search queries. The comment was in the context and with the premise that the a voice request had already been converted from speech to text, which I think Siri does a decent job with. It is what comes afterwards that is important. Google just has a lot more experience in that area than Apple.
Siri is not a search engine. It is just an interaction method, that is its place in the overall Apple user experience. You can instruct Siri to search Google as well. So, that query will fail when searched by Siri and not when typed into Google's search box... Is that what you mean?
Siri is not a search engine. It is just an interaction method. You can instruct Siri to search Google as well. So, that query will fail when searched by Siri and not when typed into Google's search box... Is that what you mean?
Not sure but to clarify, if Siri is left to her own methodology and not instructed to search using Google there appears to be a hodgepodge of inconsistency resulting from the first interaction with the Siri back end. It decides whether it will use some special dedicated action or search Bing, Yelp, Wikipedia, Wolfram or whatever. These are all disparate resources belonging to other third party entities resulting in varying levels of success and often completely different presentations. On the other hand Google's results are more integrated into their own database, although they also have special relationships with third parties. It just seems that queries are returned with better interpretation from Google, at least that is my impression and experience.
Furthermore when Google is really felling lucky about a successful hit, they will vocally read back the entire best answer with lots of detail, whereas Siri will often just say "this is what I found on the web".
So they leave Apple to create their own startups, hoping their reputations will get someone big to buy them. You know, like that bag of hurt called Nest.
Comments
Replacing my search words for the ones it thinks I mean. .. If I put all those words in... I WANT MY WORDS TO BE USED.
But, glad you like Google so much.
For me It's 10 times as bad as in 2004. I'm a user since the very first month they came in so I've seen every iteration of their engine.
Youtube is beyond bad these days so glad (sic) they "fixed" that too since they have bought it.
It's clear their goal has been monetization, not the best service, for quite some time.
My opinion that they're useless, at least useless to Apple, is as valid as your own biased view.
Building something in your garage is quite different than when it has to scale to 1B people; I think that's were their skills became useless.
That's what Apple needed and they seemingly didn't deliver.
Viv is really not that big a deal.
Novauris Technologies, which Apple bought in 2013, already gave SIRI the core of what Viv offers.
Vocal IQ which Apple purchased last year will put SIRI over the top by allowing SIRI to intelligently query users about context of requests and learning about the user overtime.
I don't think Apple will be interested in Viv because they don't need it. Viv may find a buyer if FaceBook or Google since they already made offers. Viv apparently allowing any developer to integrate their service is a bad idea. The best services should be selected to improve quality and reliability.
I would have been impressed if Viv could have answered "What is the integral from 0 to 10 of X squared + 5" like Siri can. :-)
Furthermore when Google is really felling lucky about a successful hit, they will vocally read back the entire best answer with lots of detail, whereas Siri will often just say "this is what I found on the web".