Google doesn't lose money on Android; it's actually making money on Android. Perhaps you should Google this.
Yes, Google makes money on advertising--and Apple doesn't provide any sort of search functionality at all. It wouldn't surprise me if Siri does use Google services, paying Google on the side for said results.
Even if Siri isn't using Google technology, then Apple is paying another (Bing?) for said services.
Not sure I'm following, are you saying that Google's backend won't be able to handle the increased search volume if android users started using voice actions as much as Siri? Perhaps, and Siri's somewhat shaky launch don't bode well in that regards. But that should be a simple problem to fix (throw more hardware at it).
Yes, I'm saying that Google's backend has a very difficult growth problem to match Siri. It will need:
More intelligent system that will require more processing of requests.
It will need to be more throughout and complete in the services in offers
It will need to be much faster than Google' voice control is currently (I haven't personally used it but I've heard that it's not fun to use because of the delay).
Once all those are dealt with Google will get a lot more users using it a lot more, which means even more HW to keep it comparable. Now factor in how many more Android-based devices there are in use compared to iPhone 4Ses and you see a dilemma that is much easier for Apple to deal with, hence my suggestion of how Google could introduce a similar service.
Quote:
Are you saying that Google won't be able to expand voice actions to match Siri in features?
Not with the same ease or with seeing a direct return on the investment.
Quote:
On that point, about intelligence, granted I have not had a chance to play with a 4S in person yet, but everything that I have read about siri indicates that it is not intelligent at all. It still seems to rely on certain keywords, although its library is vast enough that to most people, its indistinguishable to AI;
Of course it responds to keywords. That's how language works. Siri is more versatile and can parse your natural language better than any other competing service. Language and intelligence between human's isn't perfect either, nor ever will be.
Quote:
but the fact that it still has issues with some basic questions, and that simply rewording some questions can trip it up indicates that it doesn't have a firm grasp on the actual language itself.
Human's get tripped up with language and ideas, too. I'm not sure why that would suggest it's any less useful or difficult for Google to implement when its worlds above what anyone else has and what iOS 4.0 had with local Voice Control.
edit: Does Google's data mining from their GOOG-411 service help them with this or will they need to buy a company the way Apple did? (still surprised Apple kept the Siri name). There are a couple options that are already on the Android Market (Speaktoit and Vlingo), but none seem to be very good right now, though how good was Siri in 2009 before Apple bought it compared to today?
Uh.... Google decides whether or not Siri gets its search results. If they want to force Siri to read ads for each search, they can, and all Apple will be able to do is switch to Bing...
Don't forget that google already has a framework for something like this in place. They have voice search, a huge database of voice samples from google 411 and some IP regarding voice recognition.
They already have voice actions on android; though no where as polished, integrated (could say that about quite a few google products ), or interactive as siri. Will google expand on voice actions to match siri? I don't know for sure, but with all the hype around siri right now, i wouldn't be surprised if they do.
The questions are:
1) Will Android Assistant AndyAny work like Siri and only use [Google] web searches as a fail-through of last resort?
2) If AndyAndy only delivers web searches -- how does it compete with Siri who delivers cruft free answers and accomplishes tasks?
3) If AndyAndy delivers results -- how does Google monetize their web search service?
4) Same questions for Chrome on the desktop!
5) If Android [or Chrome] can't exploit Google web searches -- How does Google justify their existence?
6) What about the threat to [Google] web searches from Amazon Silk?
Yes, I'm saying that Google's backend has a very difficult growth problem to match Siri. It will need:
More intelligent system that will require more processing of requests.
It will need to be more throughout and complete in the services in offers
It will need to be much faster than Google' voice control is currently (I haven't personally used it but I've heard that it's not fun to use because of the delay).
Once all those are dealt with Google will get a lot more users using it a lot more, which means even more HW to keep it comparable. Now factor in how many more Android-based devices there are in use compared to iPhone 4Ses and you see a dilemma that is much easier for Apple to deal with, hence my suggestion of how Google could introduce a similar service.
From my experiences, the delay is really network dependent more than anything. I've had times where it responded instantly, and times when it went processing for minutes. On WiFi, it always responds instantly, at least in its current form, so I don't think theres much room for improvement there.
On the processing power, you have a point. but considering the potential for how easy this makes google searches, I think google will find it worthwhile.
Quote:
Of course it responds to keywords. That's how language works. Siri is more versatile and can parse your natural language better than any other competing service. Language and intelligence between human's isn't perfect either, nor ever will be.
Human's get tripped up with language and ideas, too. I'm not sure why that would suggest it's any less useful or difficult for Google to implement when its worlds above what anyone else has and what iOS 4.0 had with local Voice Control.
Guess my point got lost in my words. My point was that because siri is not truly 'AI' in the strictest sense, its foundation is not that far removed from voice actions; meaning google, in theory, should be able to match capability through expanding their library of recognized keywords.
Quote:
The questions are:
1) Will Android Assistant AndyAny work like Siri and only use [Google] web searches as a fail-through of last resort?
2) If they only deliver web searches -- how do they compete with Siri who delivers cruft free answers and accomplish tasks?
Nah, google web searches will probably be the predominate response. I dont' see this as a bad thing tho; google web searches are pretty damn good (they wouldn't be where they are if it wasn't), and includes numerous features that can deliver 'cruft free answers'
Oh, and android already has a little green robotic mascot that I'm sure they will leverage as the face of their 'siri' ... or they can go with the DROID HAL9000-esq red eye (the geek in me really wishes that would happen)
Uh.... Google decides whether or not Siri gets its search results. If they want to force Siri to read ads for each search, they can, and all Apple will be able to do is switch to Bing...
Apple's servers do the web searches and the results are returned to them.
I don't know if Apple would repurpose Googles results (remove ads, re-sort results)...
Google certainly seems to think that repurposing the results of others for Google's needs is OK.
Somehow, I think DED articles and the the subsequent torrent of furious forum visits that follow will more than make up for Siri's drop in Google ad views.
Which is why I marvel that Google makes any money at all. Who the heck clicks on that BS?
Exactly. That's why Siri isn't going to hurt Google and why the article is fud. There's no data here to support anything, it's purely opinion. Which is fine, everyone is entitled to theirs. I just wish people would use fact to support their position on these things instead of making a claim with no evidence to support it.
For all we know the use of Siri will drop once the novelty wears off. It could also be huge for the iOS platform. No one knows yet because it's so new. That's why making bold claims about how Siri is going to kill Google is silly.
For all we know the use of Siri will drop once the novelty wears off. It could also be huge for the iOS platform. No one knows yet because it's so new.
No, we know Siri is a big deal, just as we knew colour television and the original iPhone were a big deal. I'm sure you can find some evidence to suggest colour television and the original iPhone were unimportant to their industries just as you can find people pooh-poohing Siri, but it obvious its more than a novelty.
No, we know Siri is a big deal, just as we knew colour television and the original iPhone were a big deal. I'm sure you can find some evidence to suggest colour television and the original iPhone were unimportant to their industries just as you can find people pooh-poohing Siri, but it obvious its more than a novelty.
That's your opinion, but you have no facts to back it up. Look at magnetic trains, which should have been evolutionary for transportation. They never became popular outside Japan and China. How about OS/2? It was a huge leap in operating systems, but died off pretty quick.
Products fail. It's possible Siri will fade away only to be found on a top 10 list somewhere 10 years of now. As I said earlier, it's also possible it will be huge, a giant leap forward in how we communicate with machines. It's too early to tell which way it will go.
Uh.... Google decides whether or not Siri gets its search results. If they want to force Siri to read ads for each search, they can, and all Apple will be able to do is switch to Bing...
There are limits. Since Google has a predominant position in search and web advertising, they have to be careful. They can't simply single Apple out and treat them differently than everyone else.
Interesting. I'd like to see which engine most iOS users search with.
It doesn't matter, iOS apps and Siri both bypass the use of the web and use the internet directly therefore bypassing Googles income model. This simple fact is not understood by many who fail to grasp the web isn't the internet. Google depends on the web for eyes on ads.
That's your opinion, but you have no facts to back it up. Look at magnetic trains, which should have been evolutionary for transportation. They never became popular outside Japan and China. How about OS/2? It was a huge leap in operating systems, but died off pretty quick.
Products fail. It's possible Siri will fade away only to be found on a top 10 list somewhere 10 years of now. As I said earlier, it's also possible it will be huge, a giant leap forward in how we communicate with machines. It's too early to tell which way it will go.
Siri might fade away ... or be the biggest shift in computing since the Macintosh brought a GUI to the masses.
Comments
Yes, Google makes money on advertising--and Apple doesn't provide any sort of search functionality at all. It wouldn't surprise me if Siri does use Google services, paying Google on the side for said results.
Even if Siri isn't using Google technology, then Apple is paying another (Bing?) for said services.
Not sure I'm following, are you saying that Google's backend won't be able to handle the increased search volume if android users started using voice actions as much as Siri? Perhaps, and Siri's somewhat shaky launch don't bode well in that regards. But that should be a simple problem to fix (throw more hardware at it).
Yes, I'm saying that Google's backend has a very difficult growth problem to match Siri. It will need:
- More intelligent system that will require more processing of requests.
- It will need to be more throughout and complete in the services in offers
- It will need to be much faster than Google' voice control is currently (I haven't personally used it but I've heard that it's not fun to use because of the delay).
Once all those are dealt with Google will get a lot more users using it a lot more, which means even more HW to keep it comparable. Now factor in how many more Android-based devices there are in use compared to iPhone 4Ses and you see a dilemma that is much easier for Apple to deal with, hence my suggestion of how Google could introduce a similar service.Are you saying that Google won't be able to expand voice actions to match Siri in features?
Not with the same ease or with seeing a direct return on the investment.
On that point, about intelligence, granted I have not had a chance to play with a 4S in person yet, but everything that I have read about siri indicates that it is not intelligent at all. It still seems to rely on certain keywords, although its library is vast enough that to most people, its indistinguishable to AI;
Of course it responds to keywords. That's how language works. Siri is more versatile and can parse your natural language better than any other competing service. Language and intelligence between human's isn't perfect either, nor ever will be.
but the fact that it still has issues with some basic questions, and that simply rewording some questions can trip it up indicates that it doesn't have a firm grasp on the actual language itself.
Human's get tripped up with language and ideas, too. I'm not sure why that would suggest it's any less useful or difficult for Google to implement when its worlds above what anyone else has and what iOS 4.0 had with local Voice Control.
edit: Does Google's data mining from their GOOG-411 service help them with this or will they need to buy a company the way Apple did? (still surprised Apple kept the Siri name). There are a couple options that are already on the Android Market (Speaktoit and Vlingo), but none seem to be very good right now, though how good was Siri in 2009 before Apple bought it compared to today?
Don't forget that google already has a framework for something like this in place. They have voice search, a huge database of voice samples from google 411 and some IP regarding voice recognition.
They already have voice actions on android; though no where as polished, integrated (could say that about quite a few google products
The questions are:
1) Will Android Assistant AndyAny work like Siri and only use [Google] web searches as a fail-through of last resort?
2) If AndyAndy only delivers web searches -- how does it compete with Siri who delivers cruft free answers and accomplishes tasks?
3) If AndyAndy delivers results -- how does Google monetize their web search service?
4) Same questions for Chrome on the desktop!
5) If Android [or Chrome] can't exploit Google web searches -- How does Google justify their existence?
6) What about the threat to [Google] web searches from Amazon Silk?
Yes, I'm saying that Google's backend has a very difficult growth problem to match Siri. It will need:
- More intelligent system that will require more processing of requests.
- It will need to be more throughout and complete in the services in offers
- It will need to be much faster than Google' voice control is currently (I haven't personally used it but I've heard that it's not fun to use because of the delay).
Once all those are dealt with Google will get a lot more users using it a lot more, which means even more HW to keep it comparable. Now factor in how many more Android-based devices there are in use compared to iPhone 4Ses and you see a dilemma that is much easier for Apple to deal with, hence my suggestion of how Google could introduce a similar service.From my experiences, the delay is really network dependent more than anything. I've had times where it responded instantly, and times when it went processing for minutes. On WiFi, it always responds instantly, at least in its current form, so I don't think theres much room for improvement there.
On the processing power, you have a point. but considering the potential for how easy this makes google searches, I think google will find it worthwhile.
Of course it responds to keywords. That's how language works. Siri is more versatile and can parse your natural language better than any other competing service. Language and intelligence between human's isn't perfect either, nor ever will be.
Human's get tripped up with language and ideas, too. I'm not sure why that would suggest it's any less useful or difficult for Google to implement when its worlds above what anyone else has and what iOS 4.0 had with local Voice Control.
Guess my point got lost in my words. My point was that because siri is not truly 'AI' in the strictest sense, its foundation is not that far removed from voice actions; meaning google, in theory, should be able to match capability through expanding their library of recognized keywords.
The questions are:
1) Will Android Assistant AndyAny work like Siri and only use [Google] web searches as a fail-through of last resort?
2) If they only deliver web searches -- how do they compete with Siri who delivers cruft free answers and accomplish tasks?
Nah, google web searches will probably be the predominate response. I dont' see this as a bad thing tho; google web searches are pretty damn good (they wouldn't be where they are if it wasn't), and includes numerous features that can deliver 'cruft free answers'
Oh, and android already has a little green robotic mascot that I'm sure they will leverage as the face of their 'siri'
Uh.... Google decides whether or not Siri gets its search results. If they want to force Siri to read ads for each search, they can, and all Apple will be able to do is switch to Bing...
Apple's servers do the web searches and the results are returned to them.
I don't know if Apple would repurpose Googles results (remove ads, re-sort results)...
Google certainly seems to think that repurposing the results of others for Google's needs is OK.
Who uses Google Search anyway?
Based on their last quarterly earning numbers, a lot of people do.
There you go again.... it is either:
eighty-one percent from two companies
or
ninety percent from three companies
I do hope your 4S arrives soon -- Siri can help you with your math [homework]
Doh! Last time I started missing simple stuff like this repetitively I was coming down with a cold. I have an unpleasant weekend ahead of me.
Which is why I marvel that Google makes any money at all. Who the heck clicks on that BS?
Exactly. That's why Siri isn't going to hurt Google and why the article is fud. There's no data here to support anything, it's purely opinion. Which is fine, everyone is entitled to theirs. I just wish people would use fact to support their position on these things instead of making a claim with no evidence to support it.
For all we know the use of Siri will drop once the novelty wears off. It could also be huge for the iOS platform. No one knows yet because it's so new. That's why making bold claims about how Siri is going to kill Google is silly.
For all we know the use of Siri will drop once the novelty wears off. It could also be huge for the iOS platform. No one knows yet because it's so new.
No, we know Siri is a big deal, just as we knew colour television and the original iPhone were a big deal. I'm sure you can find some evidence to suggest colour television and the original iPhone were unimportant to their industries just as you can find people pooh-poohing Siri, but it obvious its more than a novelty.
No, we know Siri is a big deal, just as we knew colour television and the original iPhone were a big deal. I'm sure you can find some evidence to suggest colour television and the original iPhone were unimportant to their industries just as you can find people pooh-poohing Siri, but it obvious its more than a novelty.
That's your opinion, but you have no facts to back it up. Look at magnetic trains, which should have been evolutionary for transportation. They never became popular outside Japan and China. How about OS/2? It was a huge leap in operating systems, but died off pretty quick.
Products fail. It's possible Siri will fade away only to be found on a top 10 list somewhere 10 years of now. As I said earlier, it's also possible it will be huge, a giant leap forward in how we communicate with machines. It's too early to tell which way it will go.
Uh.... Google decides whether or not Siri gets its search results. If they want to force Siri to read ads for each search, they can, and all Apple will be able to do is switch to Bing...
There are limits. Since Google has a predominant position in search and web advertising, they have to be careful. They can't simply single Apple out and treat them differently than everyone else.
The hatred...
What "hatred" exactly?
Interesting. I'd like to see which engine most iOS users search with.
It doesn't matter, iOS apps and Siri both bypass the use of the web and use the internet directly therefore bypassing Googles income model. This simple fact is not understood by many who fail to grasp the web isn't the internet. Google depends on the web for eyes on ads.
That's your opinion, but you have no facts to back it up. Look at magnetic trains, which should have been evolutionary for transportation. They never became popular outside Japan and China. How about OS/2? It was a huge leap in operating systems, but died off pretty quick.
Products fail. It's possible Siri will fade away only to be found on a top 10 list somewhere 10 years of now. As I said earlier, it's also possible it will be huge, a giant leap forward in how we communicate with machines. It's too early to tell which way it will go.
Siri might fade away ... or be the biggest shift in computing since the Macintosh brought a GUI to the masses.
Apple has a nice bargaining chip with Google by not opening up Siri for use in the large installed base of other iOS devices.
So you missed [BETA], then.