"Apple's attempts to keep up with the rest of the AI field has seen some surprising success. It has already implemented a lot of machine learning elements in iOS and other platforms, and on December 19, it published a paper on rapidly creating 3D avatars of humans from brief video clips."
Creating 3D avatars probably isn't significant in terms of 'keeping up' and its ML efforts have consistently seemed to get marketing attention after industry has already moved ahead from them.
It was only really this year that ML got any major attention (WWDC2023) . It's been around on its phones since 2017 but until this year not much was really pushed and that's because up to recently perhaps it just wasn't being used as much as it was on competing phones.
You and I have been watching very different keynotes. Apple has been mentioning ML(Ai) in every keynote since they added the neural engine to their SOC. ML has been a staple of iOS and Watch updates for some time.
Let me repeat something you may have missed:
"It was only really this year that ML got any major attention (WWDC2023) . It's been around on its phones since2017 but until this year notmuch was really pushed and that's because up to recently perhaps it just wasn't being used as much as it was on competing phones. "
NPUs first appeared on phones in 2017. It was only this year that Apple made it a major focus.
That’s some bullshit. One’s inability to notice something doesn’t mean it hasn’t existed. I recall Eddy Cue and others talking about Apple’s ML efforts since at least 2017. Personally, when you make ML tools for developers and you design into your chips and build apps around iit you are giving it major attention
What you and others always fail to understand is that Apple tends to focus on marketing the user experience, not simply trying to make you focus on what a great potential widget something could be without a real follow through on utility that serves a need.
Has Google been focused on it since then or earlier? I don’t know, but you won’t hear me claiming they weren't because I don’t know.
Re-read what I said.
No. It doesn't mean it didn't exist.
I specifically said it did exist. I specifically gave the year it launched on phones due to the presence an NPU.
The post you are quoting me on even reiterated those points with the relevant points bolded!
The existence of ML on iPhones isn't at issue here.
As for major attention, that has nothing to do with it simply being present.
Major attention is what happened this year during WWDC. Prior to that Apple really hadn't pushed ML even though it was present (notably in imaging and voice).
This year was Apple's biggest push on ML since 2017.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Google has more money than Apple?
Apple isn't a "true" software company is what respect? Because they also design HW?
Both of them don't have a big difference in revenue generated, I don't think money is a problem to either of them.
Isn't Apple more akin to Samsung which sells hardware, and makes software to go along with that? Whereas, Google focuses on software and also has divisions such as Google Deepmind which is the leader of AI research, also possessing the world's fastest quantum computer.
Apple executes on a far different level than Google, Apple in the last 25 years has been far more effective building profitable new ecosystems, however the huge loads of money spent by the Googles (me too) follies is far beyond Apple. Most of it was spent on bribes, kickbacks and short-term tech flops.
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Aside from search everything Google does is me too and unusually they do it badly with short term focus.....The same applies to Microsoft and Samsung since 2007.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but Apple also have a list of "me too" products and services. Some of them are Pages / Numbers / Keynote, iCloud, HomePod, Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade / Apple TV as a gaming console. Is should include Siri on the list. At the end, no company is perfect, including Apple.
1) What OS came with a full fledged digital personal assistant before Apple integrated Siri.
2) What digital media streaming appliance did Apple ape back in 2006? I remember Apple doing a demo with the then named iTV (which they knew wouldn’t fly because of the BBC’s copyright). Before iOS it was based macOS Leopard(?) and Intel and only having Disney-owned content as a promised partner for its 2007 launch for rent or purchase. This was an obvious ploy to get other content owners to team up with Apple so that TV Shows and Movies could be had without a disc or tape. It was very slow going as they feared about pirating but the Apple TV was by far the most secure appliance. Apple won in the end but the appliance struggled because of this security reluctance. This was long before steaming services took root as a replacement to cable and satellite.
3) what would become Apple’s “iWork” app start back in 1982. A year before MS introduced what would become Word and had a spreadsheet app in the Apple ][ by1984, 3 years before Excel launched. Obviously long before Google existed. Spreadsheets apps existed before that. Even mainframes and mini computers had them decades before, as ai recall.
4) iCloud came from the failed MobileMe (which I fully blame Jobs’ for a litany of reasons that all come down to hubris), which came from .Mac, which was a branding of the amazing iTools which started in 2000. So tell me, what did Google have on the market that competed with iCloud when Google was a mere 15 months old.
1. From that POV, agree. 2. My post mentioned Apple TV and Apple Arcade as a gaming console. 3. As you said, there were word processors and spreadsheets before AppleWorks / iWork. 4. Google didn't had them, but MS and other companies did.
Again, my point still that Apple has some me too products and services, same as Microsoft, Google, Samsung and other companies.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Google has more money than Apple?
Apple isn't a "true" software company is what respect? Because they also design HW?
Both of them don't have a big difference in revenue generated, I don't think money is a problem to either of them.
Isn't Apple more akin to Samsung which sells hardware, and makes software to go along with that? Whereas, Google focuses on software and also has divisions such as Google Deepmind which is the leader of AI research, also possessing the world's fastest quantum computer.
Apple executes on a far different level than Google, Apple in the last 25 years has been far more effective building profitable new ecosystems, however the huge loads of money spent by the Googles (me too) follies is far beyond Apple. Most of it was spent on bribes, kickbacks and short-term tech flops.
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Aside from search everything Google does is me too and unusually they do it badly with short term focus.....The same applies to Microsoft and Samsung since 2007.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but Apple also have a list of "me too" products and services. Some of them are Pages / Numbers / Keynote, iCloud, HomePod, Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade / Apple TV as a gaming console. Is should include Siri on the list. At the end, no company is perfect, including Apple.
What Apple has to do to sell hardware is roll up their sleeves and design software in order to sell hardware no one over years is going to support your product better the you be it, iMac, OSX, Safari. iPod, Apple Retail Stores, iPhone, iPad, iMessage, Maps, Apple Watch, Apple Silicon, Apple Vision Pro, or AI, or AAA games in the end Apple has to roll up their sleeves.....
After the Apple Vision Pro comes out (which will be a Master class on how it's done) Google, Samsung, and Meta will revise whatever crap they have released or have on the drawing board. But not being very good at hardware or software they will fail, and then cry foul to the government (Korean, EU, and the Justice Dept). About the unfairness of it all Spacial Video, LiDAR, Appstore, the R1 chip?
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Google has more money than Apple?
Apple isn't a "true" software company is what respect? Because they also design HW?
Both of them don't have a big difference in revenue generated, I don't think money is a problem to either of them.
Isn't Apple more akin to Samsung which sells hardware, and makes software to go along with that? Whereas, Google focuses on software and also has divisions such as Google Deepmind which is the leader of AI research, also possessing the world's fastest quantum computer.
Apple executes on a far different level than Google, Apple in the last 25 years has been far more effective building profitable new ecosystems, however the huge loads of money spent by the Googles (me too) follies is far beyond Apple. Most of it was spent on bribes, kickbacks and short-term tech flops.
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Aside from search everything Google does is me too and unusually they do it badly with short term focus.....The same applies to Microsoft and Samsung since 2007.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but Apple also have a list of "me too" products and services. Some of them are Pages / Numbers / Keynote, iCloud, HomePod, Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade / Apple TV as a gaming console. Is should include Siri on the list. At the end, no company is perfect, including Apple.
1) What OS came with a full fledged digital personal assistant before Apple integrated Siri.
2) What digital media streaming appliance did Apple ape back in 2006? I remember Apple doing a demo with the then named iTV (which they knew wouldn’t fly because of the BBC’s copyright). Before iOS it was based macOS Leopard(?) and Intel and only having Disney-owned content as a promised partner for its 2007 launch for rent or purchase. This was an obvious ploy to get other content owners to team up with Apple so that TV Shows and Movies could be had without a disc or tape. It was very slow going as they feared about pirating but the Apple TV was by far the most secure appliance. Apple won in the end but the appliance struggled because of this security reluctance. This was long before steaming services took root as a replacement to cable and satellite.
3) what would become Apple’s “iWork” app start back in 1982. A year before MS introduced what would become Word and had a spreadsheet app in the Apple ][ by1984, 3 years before Excel launched. Obviously long before Google existed. Spreadsheets apps existed before that. Even mainframes and mini computers had them decades before, as ai recall.
4) iCloud came from the failed MobileMe (which I fully blame Jobs’ for a litany of reasons that all come down to hubris), which came from .Mac, which was a branding of the amazing iTools which started in 2000. So tell me, what did Google have on the market that competed with iCloud when Google was a mere 15 months old.
1. From that POV, agree. 2. My post mentioned Apple TV and Apple Arcade as a gaming console. 3. As you said, there were word processors and spreadsheets before AppleWorks / iWork. 4. Google didn't had them, but MS and other companies did.
Again, my point still that Apple has some me too products and services, same as Microsoft, Google, Samsung and other companies.
The Microsoft Surface computers, Google Tensor, and Samsung Exynos are poster children of unprofitable MeTooism all conceived to follow Apples rear end.......
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Google DID NOT create YouTube. They bought it after it was already commercialized by three ex-PayPal guys.
Also, Apple was never near bankruptcy, as it never had less than $100 million in the bank even back then.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Google has more money than Apple?
Apple isn't a "true" software company is what respect? Because they also design HW?
Both of them don't have a big difference in revenue generated, I don't think money is a problem to either of them.
Isn't Apple more akin to Samsung which sells hardware, and makes software to go along with that? Whereas, Google focuses on software and also has divisions such as Google Deepmind which is the leader of AI research, also possessing the world's fastest quantum computer.
Apple executes on a far different level than Google, Apple in the last 25 years has been far more effective building profitable new ecosystems, however the huge loads of money spent by the Googles (me too) follies is far beyond Apple. Most of it was spent on bribes, kickbacks and short-term tech flops.
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Aside from search everything Google does is me too and unusually they do it badly with short term focus.....The same applies to Microsoft and Samsung since 2007.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but Apple also have a list of "me too" products and services. Some of them are Pages / Numbers / Keynote, iCloud, HomePod, Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade / Apple TV as a gaming console. Is should include Siri on the list. At the end, no company is perfect, including Apple.
1) What OS came with a full fledged digital personal assistant before Apple integrated Siri.
2) What digital media streaming appliance did Apple ape back in 2006? I remember Apple doing a demo with the then named iTV (which they knew wouldn’t fly because of the BBC’s copyright). Before iOS it was based macOS Leopard(?) and Intel and only having Disney-owned content as a promised partner for its 2007 launch for rent or purchase. This was an obvious ploy to get other content owners to team up with Apple so that TV Shows and Movies could be had without a disc or tape. It was very slow going as they feared about pirating but the Apple TV was by far the most secure appliance. Apple won in the end but the appliance struggled because of this security reluctance. This was long before steaming services took root as a replacement to cable and satellite.
3) what would become Apple’s “iWork” app start back in 1982. A year before MS introduced what would become Word and had a spreadsheet app in the Apple ][ by1984, 3 years before Excel launched. Obviously long before Google existed. Spreadsheets apps existed before that. Even mainframes and mini computers had them decades before, as ai recall.
4) iCloud came from the failed MobileMe (which I fully blame Jobs’ for a litany of reasons that all come down to hubris), which came from .Mac, which was a branding of the amazing iTools which started in 2000. So tell me, what did Google have on the market that competed with iCloud when Google was a mere 15 months old.
1. From that POV, agree. 2. My post mentioned Apple TV and Apple Arcade as a gaming console. 3. As you said, there were word processors and spreadsheets before AppleWorks / iWork. 4. Google didn't had them, but MS and other companies did.
Again, my point still that Apple has some me too products and services, same as Microsoft, Google, Samsung and other companies.
Based on your comments you see the first A19/E26 LED smart bulb and claim it's a "me too" product because A19/E26 LED light bulb had existed for years, and that those are also "me too" products because A19/E26 incandescent light bulbs existed for a 100 years, and that those are also "me too" products because the light bulb had already existed years before that. Probably not, but only because Apple doesn't make light bulbs.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Google has more money than Apple?
Apple isn't a "true" software company is what respect? Because they also design HW?
Both of them don't have a big difference in revenue generated, I don't think money is a problem to either of them.
Isn't Apple more akin to Samsung which sells hardware, and makes software to go along with that? Whereas, Google focuses on software and also has divisions such as Google Deepmind which is the leader of AI research, also possessing the world's fastest quantum computer.
Apple executes on a far different level than Google, Apple in the last 25 years has been far more effective building profitable new ecosystems, however the huge loads of money spent by the Googles (me too) follies is far beyond Apple. Most of it was spent on bribes, kickbacks and short-term tech flops.
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Aside from search everything Google does is me too and unusually they do it badly with short term focus.....The same applies to Microsoft and Samsung since 2007.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but Apple also have a list of "me too" products and services. Some of them are Pages / Numbers / Keynote, iCloud, HomePod, Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade / Apple TV as a gaming console. Is should include Siri on the list. At the end, no company is perfect, including Apple.
What Apple has to do to sell hardware is roll up their sleeves and design software in order to sell hardware no one over years is going to support your product better the you be it, iMac, OSX, Safari. iPod, Apple Retail Stores, iPhone, iPad, iMessage, Maps, Apple Watch, Apple Silicon, Apple Vision Pro, or AI, or AAA games in the end Apple has to roll up their sleeves.....
After the Apple Vision Pro comes out (which will be a Master class on how it's done) Google, Samsung, and Meta will revise whatever crap they have released or have on the drawing board. But not being very good at hardware or software they will fail, and then cry foul to the government (Korean, EU, and the Justice Dept). About the unfairness of it all Spacial Video, LiDAR, Appstore, the R1 chip?
I agree with your comment on what Apple has to do, but that doesn't change that they have some "me too" product and services.
I have no comments on the AVP, , considering is not in the market. It could be as successful as the iPhone or not that good as the HomePod. We'll have to wait and see what happens.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Google has more money than Apple?
Apple isn't a "true" software company is what respect? Because they also design HW?
Both of them don't have a big difference in revenue generated, I don't think money is a problem to either of them.
Isn't Apple more akin to Samsung which sells hardware, and makes software to go along with that? Whereas, Google focuses on software and also has divisions such as Google Deepmind which is the leader of AI research, also possessing the world's fastest quantum computer.
Apple executes on a far different level than Google, Apple in the last 25 years has been far more effective building profitable new ecosystems, however the huge loads of money spent by the Googles (me too) follies is far beyond Apple. Most of it was spent on bribes, kickbacks and short-term tech flops.
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Aside from search everything Google does is me too and unusually they do it badly with short term focus.....The same applies to Microsoft and Samsung since 2007.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but Apple also have a list of "me too" products and services. Some of them are Pages / Numbers / Keynote, iCloud, HomePod, Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade / Apple TV as a gaming console. Is should include Siri on the list. At the end, no company is perfect, including Apple.
1) What OS came with a full fledged digital personal assistant before Apple integrated Siri.
2) What digital media streaming appliance did Apple ape back in 2006? I remember Apple doing a demo with the then named iTV (which they knew wouldn’t fly because of the BBC’s copyright). Before iOS it was based macOS Leopard(?) and Intel and only having Disney-owned content as a promised partner for its 2007 launch for rent or purchase. This was an obvious ploy to get other content owners to team up with Apple so that TV Shows and Movies could be had without a disc or tape. It was very slow going as they feared about pirating but the Apple TV was by far the most secure appliance. Apple won in the end but the appliance struggled because of this security reluctance. This was long before steaming services took root as a replacement to cable and satellite.
3) what would become Apple’s “iWork” app start back in 1982. A year before MS introduced what would become Word and had a spreadsheet app in the Apple ][ by1984, 3 years before Excel launched. Obviously long before Google existed. Spreadsheets apps existed before that. Even mainframes and mini computers had them decades before, as ai recall.
4) iCloud came from the failed MobileMe (which I fully blame Jobs’ for a litany of reasons that all come down to hubris), which came from .Mac, which was a branding of the amazing iTools which started in 2000. So tell me, what did Google have on the market that competed with iCloud when Google was a mere 15 months old.
1. From that POV, agree. 2. My post mentioned Apple TV and Apple Arcade as a gaming console. 3. As you said, there were word processors and spreadsheets before AppleWorks / iWork. 4. Google didn't had them, but MS and other companies did.
Again, my point still that Apple has some me too products and services, same as Microsoft, Google, Samsung and other companies.
The Microsoft Surface computers, Google Tensor, and Samsung Exynos are poster children of unprofitable MeTooism all conceived to follow Apples rear end.......
Looks like you agree with me, every company has a "me too" product.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Google has more money than Apple?
Apple isn't a "true" software company is what respect? Because they also design HW?
Both of them don't have a big difference in revenue generated, I don't think money is a problem to either of them.
Isn't Apple more akin to Samsung which sells hardware, and makes software to go along with that? Whereas, Google focuses on software and also has divisions such as Google Deepmind which is the leader of AI research, also possessing the world's fastest quantum computer.
Apple executes on a far different level than Google, Apple in the last 25 years has been far more effective building profitable new ecosystems, however the huge loads of money spent by the Googles (me too) follies is far beyond Apple. Most of it was spent on bribes, kickbacks and short-term tech flops.
Well, Apple is twice as old as Google as a starting point. Also, don't forget the bad phase Apple had to go through when it was almost going bankrupt.
I understand the love for Apple on an Apple site, but the creator of YouTube, Google maps, Google search, Gmail, Chrome, Google photos is more than the creator of a me too product.
Also, dare I say Google has played such a significant part in the creation/implementation of most modern web protocols to the point they are the reason the web exists in its current form. Their work in AI is also highly appreciated by the industry, most of which they have open-sourced.
I would personally not insult Apple because I respect them, but they aren't exactly the shining bastion of morality, as we have been finding out in recent times.
Aside from search everything Google does is me too and unusually they do it badly with short term focus.....The same applies to Microsoft and Samsung since 2007.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but Apple also have a list of "me too" products and services. Some of them are Pages / Numbers / Keynote, iCloud, HomePod, Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade / Apple TV as a gaming console. Is should include Siri on the list. At the end, no company is perfect, including Apple.
1) What OS came with a full fledged digital personal assistant before Apple integrated Siri.
2) What digital media streaming appliance did Apple ape back in 2006? I remember Apple doing a demo with the then named iTV (which they knew wouldn’t fly because of the BBC’s copyright). Before iOS it was based macOS Leopard(?) and Intel and only having Disney-owned content as a promised partner for its 2007 launch for rent or purchase. This was an obvious ploy to get other content owners to team up with Apple so that TV Shows and Movies could be had without a disc or tape. It was very slow going as they feared about pirating but the Apple TV was by far the most secure appliance. Apple won in the end but the appliance struggled because of this security reluctance. This was long before steaming services took root as a replacement to cable and satellite.
3) what would become Apple’s “iWork” app start back in 1982. A year before MS introduced what would become Word and had a spreadsheet app in the Apple ][ by1984, 3 years before Excel launched. Obviously long before Google existed. Spreadsheets apps existed before that. Even mainframes and mini computers had them decades before, as ai recall.
4) iCloud came from the failed MobileMe (which I fully blame Jobs’ for a litany of reasons that all come down to hubris), which came from .Mac, which was a branding of the amazing iTools which started in 2000. So tell me, what did Google have on the market that competed with iCloud when Google was a mere 15 months old.
1. From that POV, agree. 2. My post mentioned Apple TV and Apple Arcade as a gaming console. 3. As you said, there were word processors and spreadsheets before AppleWorks / iWork. 4. Google didn't had them, but MS and other companies did.
Again, my point still that Apple has some me too products and services, same as Microsoft, Google, Samsung and other companies.
Based on your comments you see the first A19/E26 LED smart bulb and claim it's a "me too" product because A19/E26 LED light bulb had existed for years, and that those are also "me too" products because A19/E26 incandescent light bulbs existed for a 100 years, and that those are also "me too" products because the light bulb had already existed years before that. Probably not, but only because Apple doesn't make light bulbs.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
The Tensor just sucks in comparison to Apple and Qualcomm SOC'S and has to phone home because it is incapable of performing on device, which means Google may make a switch to the Qualcomm line of SOC's, like Samsung had to switch some of their flagship phones over to a better SOC because the Samsung Exynos is also far behind.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
Nothing is stopping Apple from scraping the web, like the others do. They probably have been doing that already for years with their search engine. This deal would expose fresh content that is usually behind paywalls, and Apple would potentially get that first. Also, if Apple makes a deal with the publishers, those publishers might want to see money from competitors like Google and OpenAI to let them keep access.
Scraping data isn't enough as LLMs have to be trained with it for efficiency ana and accuracy, AI is something where Apple has historically lagged behind, they aren't doing themselves favours by going this route.
Also, if content creators start charging money then only Apple, Google and Microsoft will be able to pay which will automatically kill all other competition.I don't really want that to happen.
Why not? if they can get access to content with good journalistic standards then they can flag to the trainer this content is good then scraping the web for the same stories as hot takes gives them the low value examples.
They get better training by buying access to the human interaction and refinement with the content over decades.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
The Tensor just sucks in comparison to Apple and Qualcomm SOC'S
Two companies with long histories of chip development, one far longer than the other of course, are better at it than a company who first released their own design Tensor chip barely more than two years ago? What a shock, right? So, of course, it "sucks in comparison".
Going back to Qualcomm would be a huge mistake since it would put them back at Qualcomm's mercy for supporting firmware updates longer than three years.
Apple had to start someplace with their own chip designs, Samsung I believe, and it wasn't the top performer. Give 'em time to walk first.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
The Tensor just sucks in comparison to Apple and Qualcomm SOC'S
Two companies with long histories of chip development, one far longer than the other of course, are better at it than a company who first released their own design Tensor chip less than three years ago? What a shock, right? Well of course it "sucks in comparison".
Going back to Qualcomm would be a huge mistake since it would put them back at Qualcomm's mercy for supporting firmware updates longer than three years.
Apple had to start someplace with their own chip designs, and it wasn't at the top. Give 'em time to walk first.
My opinion is that Google has handicapped itself in the last 3 years with the Tensor SoCs in their Pixel 6/7/8 lineups. Tensor SoCs made the Pixel phones significantly worser compared to the other phones in their price range. And the issue is NOT with the design of the SoC per se. Because the Tensor's CPU utilizes ARM's generic cores - X1/X2/X3 for high performance, A78/A710/A715 for mid level performance and A55/A510 for low performance, with very little tweaking done for the additional features that Google wanted to include in the SoC.
The actual issue is with the foundry (Samsung's foundry) where the SoCs are manufactured. Qualcomm had the exact same issue for SD 888/888+ SoCs in 2021 and SD Gen 1 in first half of 2022. But then they ditched Samsung's foundry and switched to TSMC's foundry for fabbing their recent flagship SoCs SD 8+ Gen 1, SD 8 Gen 2 and SD 8 Gen 3. Why Google didn't switch the fab to TSMC at least this year (after 2 years of missteps with Samsung's foundry) is a million dollar question that only Google's management can answer. But, it is hindering them big-time in terms of peak performance, efficiency AND most importantly reputation. With Samsung struggling with their foundry, switching to TSMC made SoC (their own design or Qualcomm SD 8 Gen 3 or Mediatek's Dimensity 9300) is the only viable option left over for Google to salvage the reputation of Pixel phones worldwide next year.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
The Tensor just sucks in comparison to Apple and Qualcomm SOC'S
Two companies with long histories of chip development, one far longer than the other of course, are better at it than a company who first released their own design Tensor chip less than three years ago? What a shock, right? Well of course it "sucks in comparison".
Going back to Qualcomm would be a huge mistake since it would put them back at Qualcomm's mercy for supporting firmware updates longer than three years.
Apple had to start someplace with their own chip designs, and it wasn't at the top. Give 'em time to walk first.
The actual issue is with the foundry (Samsung's foundry) where the SoCs are manufactured. Qualcomm had the exact same issue for SD 888/888+ SoCs in 2021 and SD Gen 1 in first half of 2022. But then they ditched Samsung's foundry and switched to TSMC's foundry for fabbing their recent flagship SoCs SD 8+ Gen 1, SD 8 Gen 2 and SD 8 Gen 3. Why Google didn't switch the fab to TSMC at least this year (after 2 years of missteps with Samsung's foundry) is a million dollar question that only Google's management can answer.
Google is switching over to TSMC for future Tensor processors in Pixel handsets. As I recall it was originally planned for next year, but will probably be 2025 instead to allow for more tweaking.
EDIT: What is meant by "salvage the reputation of Pixel phones"? It looks to me as if they are getting more respect each year. The latest Pixel 8 Pro has even been crowned Phone of the Year by the same high-profile reviewer who tagged the iPhone Pro 15 as having Camera of the Year. They're also the only phone brand building US market share in a declining market, doubling it in 12 months, so isn't that evidence of being on the right track?
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
The Tensor just sucks in comparison to Apple and Qualcomm SOC'S
Two companies with long histories of chip development, one far longer than the other of course, are better at it than a company who first released their own design Tensor chip less than three years ago? What a shock, right? Well of course it "sucks in comparison".
Going back to Qualcomm would be a huge mistake since it would put them back at Qualcomm's mercy for supporting firmware updates longer than three years.
Apple had to start someplace with their own chip designs, and it wasn't at the top. Give 'em time to walk first.
The actual issue is with the foundry (Samsung's foundry) where the SoCs are manufactured. Qualcomm had the exact same issue for SD 888/888+ SoCs in 2021 and SD Gen 1 in first half of 2022. But then they ditched Samsung's foundry and switched to TSMC's foundry for fabbing their recent flagship SoCs SD 8+ Gen 1, SD 8 Gen 2 and SD 8 Gen 3. Why Google didn't switch the fab to TSMC at least this year (after 2 years of missteps with Samsung's foundry) is a million dollar question that only Google's management can answer.
Google is switching over to TSMC for future Tensor processors in Pixel handsets. As I recall it was originally planned for next year, but will probably be 2025 instead to allow for more tweaking.
EDIT: What is meant by "salvage the reputation of Pixel phones"? It looks to me as if they are getting more respect each year. The latest Pixel 8 Pro has even been crowned Phone of the Year by the same high-profile reviewer who tagged the iPhone Pro 15 as having Camera of the Year. They're also the only phone brand building US market share in a declining market, doubling it in 12 months, so isn't that evidence of being on the right track?
If Google is switching to TSMC only in 2025, I think it will be too late. Many of the Pixel phone users will start moving to other OEMs in the next 2 years. By the time Google get back to TSMC fab, Pixel phones would have started losing marketshare which is already very small. And Pixel phones would become unsustainable for Google to continue further. The sooner they ditch Samsung fab and start using TSMC for Tensor SoCs (or switch to Qualcomm/Mediatek SoCs), the better the chances of survival for Pixel lineup. Else, they would join the likes of LG, HTC, Sony pretty soon.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
The Tensor just sucks in comparison to Apple and Qualcomm SOC'S
Two companies with long histories of chip development, one far longer than the other of course, are better at it than a company who first released their own design Tensor chip less than three years ago? What a shock, right? Well of course it "sucks in comparison".
Going back to Qualcomm would be a huge mistake since it would put them back at Qualcomm's mercy for supporting firmware updates longer than three years.
Apple had to start someplace with their own chip designs, and it wasn't at the top. Give 'em time to walk first.
The actual issue is with the foundry (Samsung's foundry) where the SoCs are manufactured. Qualcomm had the exact same issue for SD 888/888+ SoCs in 2021 and SD Gen 1 in first half of 2022. But then they ditched Samsung's foundry and switched to TSMC's foundry for fabbing their recent flagship SoCs SD 8+ Gen 1, SD 8 Gen 2 and SD 8 Gen 3. Why Google didn't switch the fab to TSMC at least this year (after 2 years of missteps with Samsung's foundry) is a million dollar question that only Google's management can answer.
Google is switching over to TSMC for future Tensor processors in Pixel handsets. As I recall it was originally planned for next year, but will probably be 2025 instead to allow for more tweaking.
EDIT: What is meant by "salvage the reputation of Pixel phones"? It looks to me as if they are getting more respect each year. The latest Pixel 8 Pro has even been crowned Phone of the Year by the same high-profile reviewer who tagged the iPhone Pro 15 as having Camera of the Year. They're also the only phone brand building US market share in a declining market, doubling it in 12 months, so isn't that evidence of being on the right track?
If Google is switching to TSMC only in 2025, I think it will be too late. Many of the Pixel phone users will start moving to other OEMs in the next 2 years. By the time Google get back to TSMC fab, Pixel phones would have started losing marketshare which is already very small. And Pixel phones would become unsustainable for Google to continue further. The sooner they ditch Samsung fab and start using TSMC for Tensor SoCs (or switch to Qualcomm/Mediatek SoCs), the better the chances of survival for Pixel lineup. Else, they would join the likes of LG, HTC, Sony pretty soon.
I don't think you've been keeping up with news, reviews and market reports, which would go towards explaining why your outlook is so very... umm... different. I'd suggest getting out and reading more on sites besides Apple-centric ones. Pixel phones aren't going away.
Though I praise the ethical stand point that Apple has taken, doing so will ensure their loss. The data that these companies will provide will be infinitely smaller than the huge mountains of data that companies such as OpenAI and Google have.
Also, having to rely on third parties will only slow them down. There are claims that regulations will be passed which may hinder companies such as Google which is scraping the internet for data, I assure you nothing like that will happen in the states. Currently, the world is in a race and no country can afford to be behind, no government (barring EU, duh) is foolish enough to hinder this fledgling field.
Also, Apple is a hardware company unlike Google which is a true software company, they have more areas to integrate and monetise AI.
So in short Apple should steal it? Apple can't win either way they go? By the way the quality of the data is more important than the quantity of data. Building anything in AI is going to require brains, focus, iteration and discipline.
What good is artificially handicapping yourself, when at this point we can't even say if it's legal or not. Apple is only hurting itself.
Google has decades worth of data and their deepmind division is the leader in AI research. The only reason they were behind OpenAI is because they were caught by surprise and are quickly catching up.
Is that why everything on the Pixel 8 Pro has to phone home to elicit a response because of the deep mind? Phoning home to a tensor (me too) processor that is weaker than the 11 Pro iPhone with a bad modem to boot isn't progress...
Some things do, most things don't. Smartphones aren't yet prepared to host the most resource-hogging features fully, and even then many of the Pixel 8 Pro features can't be done by Apple's iPhone at all, cloud servers or not.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
The Tensor just sucks in comparison to Apple and Qualcomm SOC'S
Two companies with long histories of chip development, one far longer than the other of course, are better at it than a company who first released their own design Tensor chip less than three years ago? What a shock, right? Well of course it "sucks in comparison".
Going back to Qualcomm would be a huge mistake since it would put them back at Qualcomm's mercy for supporting firmware updates longer than three years.
Apple had to start someplace with their own chip designs, and it wasn't at the top. Give 'em time to walk first.
The actual issue is with the foundry (Samsung's foundry) where the SoCs are manufactured. Qualcomm had the exact same issue for SD 888/888+ SoCs in 2021 and SD Gen 1 in first half of 2022. But then they ditched Samsung's foundry and switched to TSMC's foundry for fabbing their recent flagship SoCs SD 8+ Gen 1, SD 8 Gen 2 and SD 8 Gen 3. Why Google didn't switch the fab to TSMC at least this year (after 2 years of missteps with Samsung's foundry) is a million dollar question that only Google's management can answer.
Google is switching over to TSMC for future Tensor processors in Pixel handsets. As I recall it was originally planned for next year, but will probably be 2025 instead to allow for more tweaking.
EDIT: What is meant by "salvage the reputation of Pixel phones"? It looks to me as if they are getting more respect each year. The latest Pixel 8 Pro has even been crowned Phone of the Year by the same high-profile reviewer who tagged the iPhone Pro 15 as having Camera of the Year. They're also the only phone brand building US market share in a declining market, doubling it in 12 months, so isn't that evidence of being on the right track?
If Google is switching to TSMC only in 2025, I think it will be too late. Many of the Pixel phone users will start moving to other OEMs in the next 2 years. By the time Google get back to TSMC fab, Pixel phones would have started losing marketshare which is already very small. And Pixel phones would become unsustainable for Google to continue further. The sooner they ditch Samsung fab and start using TSMC for Tensor SoCs (or switch to Qualcomm/Mediatek SoCs), the better the chances of survival for Pixel lineup. Else, they would join the likes of LG, HTC, Sony pretty soon.
I don't think you've been keeping up with news, reviews and market reports, which would go towards explaining why your outlook is so very... umm... different. I'd suggest getting out and reading more on sites besides Apple-centric ones. Pixel phones aren't going away.
You are right the Google Pixel Pro's like the Microsoft Surface isn't going anywhere fast, the current Tensor SOC is barely ahead of Apple iPhone 10 Pro in performance and 2025 is too late.
I would also would suggest they (Google) add LiDAR (as implemented) by Apple to their smartphones too, that is if the Tensor SOC can handle it on the device. In addition Google will to need to build a R1 type co-processor chip too by 2025 and the same applies to Samsung, Meta and Qualcomm.....Oh that's right they're going to need wait until Apple releases the Apple Vision Pro before they can copy it.
Comments
No. It doesn't mean it didn't exist.
I specifically said it did exist. I specifically gave the year it launched on phones due to the presence an NPU.
The post you are quoting me on even reiterated those points with the relevant points bolded!
The existence of ML on iPhones isn't at issue here.
As for major attention, that has nothing to do with it simply being present.
Major attention is what happened this year during WWDC. Prior to that Apple really hadn't pushed ML even though it was present (notably in imaging and voice).
This year was Apple's biggest push on ML since 2017.
2. My post mentioned Apple TV and Apple Arcade as a gaming console.
3. As you said, there were word processors and spreadsheets before AppleWorks / iWork.
4. Google didn't had them, but MS and other companies did.
Again, my point still that Apple has some me too products and services, same as Microsoft, Google, Samsung and other companies.
What Apple has to do to sell hardware is roll up their sleeves and design software in order to sell hardware no one over years is going to support your product better the you be it, iMac, OSX, Safari. iPod, Apple Retail Stores, iPhone, iPad, iMessage, Maps, Apple Watch, Apple Silicon, Apple Vision Pro, or AI, or AAA games in the end Apple has to roll up their sleeves.....
After the Apple Vision Pro comes out (which will be a Master class on how it's done) Google, Samsung, and Meta will revise whatever crap they have released or have on the drawing board. But not being very good at hardware or software they will fail, and then cry foul to the government (Korean, EU, and the Justice Dept). About the unfairness of it all Spacial Video, LiDAR, Appstore, the R1 chip?
Also, Apple was never near bankruptcy, as it never had less than $100 million in the bank even back then.
I have no comments on the AVP, , considering is not in the market. It could be as successful as the iPhone or not that good as the HomePod. We'll have to wait and see what happens.
Magic Eraser is done right on the Pixel handset. Best Take works on device, no internet connection is required. Audio Magic Eraser is handled on the device too. Gboard Smart Replies happen directly on the Pixel 8, as will AI summaries in the Google Recorder app, and Zoom Enhance (better than expected!). Call screening is also on-device. The latest Google Nano Generative AI also runs on-device.
Three features require the cloud: AI Wallpaper, Magic Editor, and Video Boost.
if they can get access to content with good journalistic standards then they can flag to the trainer this content is good then scraping the web for the same stories as hot takes gives them the low value examples.
They get better training by buying access to the human interaction and refinement with the content over decades.
Two companies with long histories of chip development, one far longer than the other of course, are better at it than a company who first released their own design Tensor chip barely more than two years ago? What a shock, right? So, of course, it "sucks in comparison".
Going back to Qualcomm would be a huge mistake since it would put them back at Qualcomm's mercy for supporting firmware updates longer than three years.
Apple had to start someplace with their own chip designs, Samsung I believe, and it wasn't the top performer.
The actual issue is with the foundry (Samsung's foundry) where the SoCs are manufactured. Qualcomm had the exact same issue for SD 888/888+ SoCs in 2021 and SD Gen 1 in first half of 2022. But then they ditched Samsung's foundry and switched to TSMC's foundry for fabbing their recent flagship SoCs SD 8+ Gen 1, SD 8 Gen 2 and SD 8 Gen 3. Why Google didn't switch the fab to TSMC at least this year (after 2 years of missteps with Samsung's foundry) is a million dollar question that only Google's management can answer. But, it is hindering them big-time in terms of peak performance, efficiency AND most importantly reputation. With Samsung struggling with their foundry, switching to TSMC made SoC (their own design or Qualcomm SD 8 Gen 3 or Mediatek's Dimensity 9300) is the only viable option left over for Google to salvage the reputation of Pixel phones worldwide next year.
EDIT: What is meant by "salvage the reputation of Pixel phones"? It looks to me as if they are getting more respect each year. The latest Pixel 8 Pro has even been crowned Phone of the Year by the same high-profile reviewer who tagged the iPhone Pro 15 as having Camera of the Year. They're also the only phone brand building US market share in a declining market, doubling it in 12 months, so isn't that evidence of being on the right track?
I would also would suggest they (Google) add LiDAR (as implemented) by Apple to their smartphones too, that is if the Tensor SOC can handle it on the device. In addition Google will to need to build a R1 type co-processor chip too by 2025 and the same applies to Samsung, Meta and Qualcomm.....Oh that's right they're going to need wait until Apple releases the Apple Vision Pro before they can copy it.