People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
I wouldn’t say Cortana is dead, since it was replaced with CoPilot. One advantage companies like Google and MS over Apple is that they manage their own data centers. Also MS has a huge advantage in business and enterprises with their ecosystem. They already have CoPilot in MS Office, Dynamics and GitHub. And based from what I saw, Microsoft did an excellent job with CoPilot in their business applications, and better than what Apple has done with AI. We’ll see if Apple improve their implementation of AI in their software and services.
I'm a big Apple fan - have all their devices - and was very enthusiastic when Siri first came out. But over the years, Siri has moved inches, while competitors have moved miles - I can't believe a company that spends $22b on R&D can't make its voice assistant more useful in people's day-to-day lives. So disappointing.
Siri will NEVER EVER be as “smart” as other voice assistants, so you’d better get over this right now. The reason? Because Siri doesn’t heavily rely on the collected data about you that encompasses more than even your parents know about you.
Siri continues to work very well for me, because I know what it can do and I don’t have much need outside of it helping me organise my day/life. I am fully aware that if you ask it some random question, probably phrased poorly, it will punt to web results. This is because it doesn’t have access to everything you have ever searched for or asked about ever in your life to help piece together what you actually want.
Maybe my needs are unusually simple, but I appreciate that Siri isn’t spying on me to get “smarter,” because it currently does 95+ percent of what I want it to do. I think the main area where Siri actually needs work is on accent recognition, and I could certainly see where Siri may in the future ask you to train it to your voice with more phrases than it does now.
It is much harder to develop a system that uses “AI” (in quotes on purpose) without scraping and selling all your personal data, which is why progress on Siri has been very slow (though it has in fact improved a great deal in recent years, at least in my use of it) compared to the companies that raid your brain for your every thought. But this is like praising the child who answers the algebra question by looking over another student’s shoulder, and failing the child who did all the work themselves because it took too long IMO.
Did you forget the AI in Photos? Assuming Apple collects no personal data for this, there is no reason Siri could not use a similar training methodology. ChatGPT blows it out of the water, and it is also not based on personalised data, only data publicly available.
But either way Siri and AI is irrelevant because the reason Siri is so crap is its interpretation engine is not AI. It is programmed with a set of predefined phrases (amongst which are variants of that phrasing and wording) that it "understands", anything outside of that and it's clueless. That is why it's crap, and Apple very rarely adds to the list of understood phrases, it's only ever added to facilitate using Siri with a new product or service.
I don't believe you get a 95% success rate, I get at least 10% of queries answered with Homepods or AW complaining that it's not connected to the internet or "hmm, that's taking a little too long, can you try again?". Add to that the number of times it completely mishears or misunderstands and it's success rate is probably more like 50%. It's terrible and has never improved. There is zero excuse, stop trying to invent one.
Randomly emboldening sentences doesn't make them right by the way, Apple in fact does use your own personal data, but it's anonymised with "differential privacy".
I'm sorry - but the excuses about Siri being crap because of privacy concerns just doesn't hold water.
"Hey Siri - play Scarborough Fair". Now I have "Scarborough Fair" by Simon & Garfunkel in my library, and I'd guess this is the version that 99.9% of people would want 99.9% of the time and it's a track I've also asked Siri to play literally hundreds of times because it helps my toddler get to sleep.
And yet, every time it is a gamble if she will play this, or some other rando version, or some other rando song completely. Siri learns NOTHING and doesn't even use the contextual knowledge available to make a reasonable guess of what you want.
Or what about a simple query while I'm driving and I idly ask what year some actor died. "I can't answer that while you're driving". Is that to preserve my privacy or is it just because they haven't put in the work to make Siri be able to answer simple queries in natural language?
Okay, let’s go over this:
As I mentioned, if you issue requests poorly, you can get bad results. Your S&G request is a good example of this. If you want a specific artist’s version of a song, you need to include the artists’ name in the request. A thousand acts (at least) have covered this song, so saying “Hey Siri, play Scarborough Fair by Simon and Garfunkel” will probably get you the right version, though I admit there’s a possibility you might get a live version by them — but if you add the phrase “from my library” I think you’d hit 100 percent accuracy.
As for your driving and asking questions query, I’ll remind you that Siri is not a chat bot. It is MUCH more restricted by Apple while you’re driving so that you don’t get distracted, and this is by design. Apple does not want you asking Siri random questions while you are driving, because that indicates that you are distracted or want to be distracted.
You may find that too restrictive, and I think you have something of a case, but when it comes to driver distraction I’d rather Apple err on the side of being over cautious and thus more limited. When I’m NOT in motion, suddenly Siri can answer a question like that handily. I just asked it “what year did actor John Wayne die,” when I was at home, and it gave me a very full answer, including his age and location when he died as well as the date.
I am certainly NOT saying there isn’t any room for improvement in Siri; quite the opposite! I’m just explaining why it behaves in some of the ways it behaves.
More excuses. That request was perfectly reasonable. Siri should lean toward using the songs in your library, and especially songs that you have played recently, or multiple times. All of that can be on-device, none of it needs to be privacy violating. We all like Apple, but it's quite sad that you feel the need to defend something that essentially everyone finds to be junk. Push Apple to be the best, don't try and fail to persuade 4 people on an Apple forum that they're apparently wrong, because for those 4 there's another 250 million each that experience Siri being crap. You've a very long way to go.
My primary problem with Siri is it doesn't remember context. So if I ask about where someone lives or the address of a company and it gives me the answer, I can't request, "Take me there" because it doesn't know what "there" means. I'm afraid I've gotten spoiled by GPTchat engines with which I can make backward references.
I believe the next version of Siri — coming with iOS 17 — can chain queries together. Combined with saying just "Siri", instead of "Hey Siri", the experience of interacting with the assistant should be much more natural and enjoyable.
Has this improved Siri been available in the iOS 17 betas, or do the betas still use the same Siri as the rest of us?
It does but it's still really basic. Siri stays active after a query in iOS17, and that is the only time you can expect it to remember context. If Siri stops listening, and you re-initiate it with "Siri" or whatever, it has no clue about the last thing you asked.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
I think Siri, ironically, was one of the very few things where Apple actually *was* "first to market" in the last twenty-five years.
And it was pretty mind-blowing when it came out alongside the iPhone 4S — it just didn't really go terribly far from there, while other digital assistants that came after really moved forward.
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
FWIW, Apple Maps got better faster than Google Maps did when that first launched, and is pretty much on par these days, depending upon the region and the day and, whatever random weirdness crops up on either service.
We regularly compare services when on tour, and Google has its share of "head off the autobahn here to shave off 20 minutes of traff…— no wait, best U-turn now and head back onto the Autobahn", where Apple Maps showed faster solutions that Google eventually agreed with.
A few weeks ago, Google also routed us off the autobahn straight into a cul-de-sac from construction that had been there for weeks, that Apple Maps knew about. One of the villagers was standing by his garden fence, drinking beer in the sun and merrily gesturing for drivers led by Google Maps to turn around and go the other way. He looked like he'd been there all afternoon. 😃
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
'Damage control' in terms of mindset is what is probably going on here. It's what Google did with Bard. That's OK.
In the bigger scheme of things, Huawei has said their LLM GPT technologies only represent about 2% of their intentions. The other 98% is geared towards backend technologies and industry. Where do you think Pangu came from? It's been cooking for years now.
Ascend, Mindspore, CANN, Pangu...
All out in the open.
Both Apple and Google are on numerous hooks around the world (including the US) for abusing their gatekeeper status, among other things. Most of those investigations directly name consumer harm as part of the problem.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
'Damage control' in terms of mindset is what is probably going on here. It's what Google did with Bard. That's OK.
In the bigger scheme of things, Huawei has said their LLM GPT technologies only represent about 2% of their intentions. The other 98% is geared towards backend technologies and industry. Where do you think Pangu came from? It's been cooking for years now.
Ascend, Mindspore, CANN, Pangu...
All out in the open.
Both Apple and Google are on numerous hooks around the world (including the US) for abusing their gatekeeper status, among other things. Most of those investigations directly name consumer harm as part of the problem.
You entertain me no end.
You had an opportunity to chime in about how great the EU is in AI, if it is at all, but instead, you double down on more Huawei "love", as if any of us aren't aware of the extremely close relationship that the CCP and the PLA have with Huawei.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
'Damage control' in terms of mindset is what is probably going on here. It's what Google did with Bard. That's OK.
In the bigger scheme of things, Huawei has said their LLM GPT technologies only represent about 2% of their intentions. The other 98% is geared towards backend technologies and industry. Where do you think Pangu came from? It's been cooking for years now.
Ascend, Mindspore, CANN, Pangu...
All out in the open.
Both Apple and Google are on numerous hooks around the world (including the US) for abusing their gatekeeper status, among other things. Most of those investigations directly name consumer harm as part of the problem.
You entertain me no end.
You had an opportunity to chime in about how great the EU is in AI, if it is at all, but instead, you double down on more Huawei "love", as if any of us aren't aware of the extremely close relationship that the CCP and the PLA have with Huawei.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
The converse applies: it’s not legitimate to claim that they are “behind” simply because others have released non-viable products.
Your example of foldable phones is interesting, because it implies a) that the currently available phones are actually products people aspire to, and b) that Apple has the slightest interest in competing in that space at all. a) is debatable. They’re not selling terribly well, from what I’ve read, and they don’t seem to be all that thoroughly engineered at this point. b), we really don’t know.
I’d throw Vision Pro in the argument. Is it legitimate to say that Apple was “behind” in VR tech, as everyone was claiming — even though it is now clear that they were at least at level, if not way ahead of the incomplete products that others were throwing at a market that didn’t want them?
Comments
But either way Siri and AI is irrelevant because the reason Siri is so crap is its interpretation engine is not AI. It is programmed with a set of predefined phrases (amongst which are variants of that phrasing and wording) that it "understands", anything outside of that and it's clueless. That is why it's crap, and Apple very rarely adds to the list of understood phrases, it's only ever added to facilitate using Siri with a new product or service.
I don't believe you get a 95% success rate, I get at least 10% of queries answered with Homepods or AW complaining that it's not connected to the internet or "hmm, that's taking a little too long, can you try again?". Add to that the number of times it completely mishears or misunderstands and it's success rate is probably more like 50%. It's terrible and has never improved. There is zero excuse, stop trying to invent one.
Randomly emboldening sentences doesn't make them right by the way, Apple in fact does use your own personal data, but it's anonymised with "differential privacy".
Tim Cook confirms that Apple has been working.
They should of just left the it at that since most of Apple PR says a lot of nothing.
And it was pretty mind-blowing when it came out alongside the iPhone 4S — it just didn't really go terribly far from there, while other digital assistants that came after really moved forward.
”here’s some links in safari, go find it yourself”
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/23/china-dilemma-europe-wants-a-new-relationship-but-is-wary-of-retaliation.html
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
'Damage control' in terms of mindset is what is probably going on here. It's what Google did with Bard. That's OK.
In the bigger scheme of things, Huawei has said their LLM GPT technologies only represent about 2% of their intentions. The other 98% is geared towards backend technologies and industry. Where do you think Pangu came from? It's been cooking for years now.
Ascend, Mindspore, CANN, Pangu...
All out in the open.
Both Apple and Google are on numerous hooks around the world (including the US) for abusing their gatekeeper status, among other things. Most of those investigations directly name consumer harm as part of the problem.
You had an opportunity to chime in about how great the EU is in AI, if it is at all, but instead, you double down on more Huawei "love", as if any of us aren't aware of the extremely close relationship that the CCP and the PLA have with Huawei.
You just can't help yourself.
You had no counterpoint to my argument.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence?
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/dec/15/documents-link-huawei-uyghur-surveillance-projects-report-claims
China is a Totalitarian autocracy, and Huawei is "on the hook" for that association, as it should be.