I'm imagining that one year from now the voice will change to that of the Daleks in the British TV series "Doctor Who"... made famous by the phrase, "The plan has failed... the plan has failed!"
Apple has had voice recognition for as long or longer. It sucked just as bad as googles
The voice calling Apple had previously was somewhat akin to the voice dialing that has been available on bargain basement phones for years. Android's voice actions raised the bar considerably, turning voice recognition into a genuinely useful function.
Google's voice recognition hardly sucks. In fact, it's remarkably good. I use it daily, particularly for navigating, but also for sending email, text messages, or controlling the music player.
I've not yet had the pleasure of trying Siri, but my friends tell me it's another evolutionary step from Google Voice Actions, and I have no problem believing it.
The point remains; Apple did not invent voice recognition on phones. Siri is apparently awesome for 2012, just as Google Voice Actions was awesome for 2010 and 2011.
The point remains; Apple did not invent voice recognition on phones.
I find it odd that with so much information on Siri that people are still calling voice recognition without acknowledging all the parts that make Siri so much better than anything else on the market. Either this is a purposeful attempt to belittle Apple's effort and/or superiority in this field or some people really don't know the difference between Siri and other voice activated systems.
Google Voice Actions came out in Froyo, in August 2010. Apple added Siri in August 2011, buying a voice recognition app from a smaller developer in order to quickly catch up. Android's voice recognition feature was a full year earlier. All this article is about is Google renaming GVA to something more catchy in order to better compete with Apple's marketing machine. Apple certainly didn't invent the idea, and they weren't first to introduce it in a smartphone OS either.
Hmm....
iPhone 3GS introduced "Voice Control" in June 2010
I love how obvious the rotten Apples are in threads about Siri. They can't differentiate between natural language processing with semantic analysis and contextual awareness with deep operating system integration versus speech recognition. Until Apple's competition understands the fundamentally differences between Siri and existing speech recognition solutions; i.e. release their own version, they won't acknowledge the difference.
Siri manifestly demonstrates that there exists a direct relationship between disruptiveness of a new technology and the incoherence of responses by competitors.
I find it odd that with so much information on Siri that people are still calling voice recognition without acknowledging all the parts that make Siri so much better than anything else on the market. Either this is a purposeful attempt to belittle Apple's effort and/or superiority in this field or some people really don't know the difference between Siri and other voice activated systems.
I directly attribute this to the fact that the rotten Apples haven't received new talking points. They won't understand natural language processing with semantic analysis and contextual awareness with deep operating system integration until the competition releases a reasonable rival and updates their talking points.
On both sides of this argument bot Siri and Android are much changed from the respective companies that purchase them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sessamoid
Hmm....
iPhone 3GS introduced "Voice Control" in June 2010
Android "Voice Actions" intros in Aug 2010
iPhone 4S introduced "Siri" in Aug 2011
Android "Majel" intros.... ?
To be clear, because I know others will try to argue against your point by excluding relative details, Android OS has had Google search through voice control since it's initial release in September 2008, but it wasn't until May 2010 that calling, texting, and navigation were added. In June 2009 Apple added Voice Control which could do calling of contracts, a feature I'd say is one of the most important uses of basic voice control.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
I love how obvious the rotten Apples are in threads about Siri. They can't differentiate between natural language processing with semantic analysis and contextual awareness with deep operating system integration versus speech recognition. Until Apple's competition understands the fundamentally differences between Siri and existing speech recognition solutions; i.e. release their own version, they won't acknowledge the difference.
Siri manifestly demonstrates that there exists a direct relationship between disruptiveness of a new technology and the incoherence of responses by competitors.
I played with Nuance's Dragon Dictation. It worked well, but I had no need for an app that can dictate my words accurately.
I played with the Siri app. It worked well, but I had no need to use a separate app to do contextual searches.
I played with Siri for the iPhone 4S. That changed everything. It was finally a useful way of talking to your phone.
I played with Nuance's Dragon Dictation. It worked well, but I had no need for an app that can dictate my words accurately.
I played with the Siri app. It worked well, but I had no need to use a separate app to do contextual searches.
I played with Siri for the iPhone 4S. That changed everything. It was finally a useful way of talking to your phone.
Hence the importance of all elements of Siri:
Speech recognition (almost certainly provided by Nuance)
Natural language processing
Semantic analysis
Contextual awareness
"Personality"
Siri is an order of magnitude greater than the sum of the parts. Without any of those aspects Siri would be far more lackluster including the quirky, sometimes humorous responses. Those occasionally unpredictable responses convey the sense that you aren't interacting with technology which is absolutely critical for complex technologies to become ubiquitous.
Speech recognition (almost certainly provided by Nuance)
Natural language processing
Semantic analysis
Contextual awareness
"Personality"
Siri is an order of magnitude greater than the sum of the parts. Without any of those aspects Siri would be far more lackluster including the quirky, sometimes humorous responses. Those occasionally unpredictable responses convey the sense that you aren't interacting with technology.
Don't forget the OS tie ins that truly make it a personal assistance.
I was using iOS 5.0 betas for months and found no need to use Reminders. Too many steps to creat a reminder, but with Siri it was easy to say remind me at x-time or remind me when I arrive/leave x-location.
Don't forget the OS tie ins that truly make it a personal assistance.
I was using iOS 5.0 betas for months and found no need to use Reminders. Too many steps to creat a reminder, but with Siri it was easy to say remind me at x-time or remind me when I arrive/leave x-location.
I couldn't even fathom Reminders in iOS 5 beta frankly. The Reminders app is far too unwieldy and almost demands Siri.
You are correct, of course. The deep operating system integration is critical as well. The original incarnation of Siri for the iPhone was more like a concierge who would discover local events, purchase tickets and reserve a table at a restaurant before the show. Apple's genius was knowing that while a concierge is convenient a personal assistant is indispensable.
I must admit that I miss some of the functionality Siri had prior to iPhone 4S. Specifically, MovieTickets.com although I have high hopes that Apple will integrate iTunes Movie Trailers with Siri.
I liked Eventful integration as well.
I miss the previous implementation of Yelp integration that allowed viewing of reviews and other information. Currently, if I tap the Yelp review on a business Siri fails to handoff properly to Yelp (I have assumed this is by design).
I am ecstatic to see Siri integrated with the Maps application we all know is likely to be delivered next year. I hope that Apple provides navigation similar to Waze as well. In fact, I almost hope that Apple just purchases Yahoo as well and integrates Yahoo services with iOS:
OH F*** OFF Verizon/Asus/Google/Moto/Android/Whatever... Droid, Transformer, now Majel... Even your code names and technology names aren't original!!! Get stuffed. Spend your time making a non-ripooff mobile and tablet operating system that gets easily rolled out to many Android hardware platforms at once. What's that? Too hard?
Will the next big-hyped-up Android tablet be called Galactica?
OH F*** OFF Google... Droid, now Majel... Even your code names and technology names aren't original!!! Get stuffed. Spend your time making a non-ripooff mobile and tablet operating system that gets easily rolled out to many Android handsets at once. What's that? Too hard?
To be fair, Droid is licensed to Verizon from Lucas Arts, not to Google.
HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
So? You do realize that Siri, by virtue of being purchased by Apple, is now Apple, right?
Oh, btw, Android was purchased by Google. As was the only money making operation in their entire company, Adsense. So basically, by your definition, Google does not have its own Mobile OS, and does not even make any money.
Google Voice Actions came out in Froyo, in August 2010. Apple added Siri in August 2011, buying a voice recognition app from a smaller developer in order to quickly catch up. Android's voice recognition feature was a full year earlier. All this article is about is Google renaming GVA to something more catchy in order to better compete with Apple's marketing machine. Apple certainly didn't invent the idea, and they weren't first to introduce it in a smartphone OS either.
And Apple has had voice commands for a while, too. Do you even know what Siri is? The "voice actions" / "speech recognition" is the trivial part, as clearly stated when it came out. What's different about it is that it can process natural language (no need to speak in a stilted way using certain key words, phrases or syntax).
Yes, Apple brought the team and technology on board from elsewhere. It is far more than "buying a small app". The Siri team had access to and experience with all the military sponsored research in this area. It was a very strategic move. Why shouldn't Apple hire developers that have shown some real promise?
What Apple has done is take it beyond an app so that it is beginning to get integrated into the OS. Secondly, Apple is producing APIs for it so that thirdparty developers can begin to use their creativity with it in all sorts of new ways in powerful native apps. This is where Google is a little weak.
BTW, the difference between Google buying Android, or MS buying Danger and DOS, and Apple buying NeXT is that Steve Jobs envisioned and headed NeXT, and its development over the past 12 years has been done in-house at Apple including migrating it to several processor families, and scaling it from the desktop to mobile devices. People act as though Apple is all about buying up stuff and marketing it, but, really, the evidence is quite the opposite. Apple actually has far more software chops than anyone else. Considering all the beta crap that Google foists on the public, and all the deadends and do-overs that MS eventually gets around to producing, this should be obvious.
Comments
No, that's not the case, you trash anything that isn't Apple.
Actually, that's not the case at all.
Apple has had voice recognition for as long or longer. It sucked just as bad as googles
The voice calling Apple had previously was somewhat akin to the voice dialing that has been available on bargain basement phones for years. Android's voice actions raised the bar considerably, turning voice recognition into a genuinely useful function.
Google's voice recognition hardly sucks. In fact, it's remarkably good. I use it daily, particularly for navigating, but also for sending email, text messages, or controlling the music player.
I've not yet had the pleasure of trying Siri, but my friends tell me it's another evolutionary step from Google Voice Actions, and I have no problem believing it.
The point remains; Apple did not invent voice recognition on phones. Siri is apparently awesome for 2012, just as Google Voice Actions was awesome for 2010 and 2011.
The point remains; Apple did not invent voice recognition on phones.
I find it odd that with so much information on Siri that people are still calling voice recognition without acknowledging all the parts that make Siri so much better than anything else on the market. Either this is a purposeful attempt to belittle Apple's effort and/or superiority in this field or some people really don't know the difference between Siri and other voice activated systems.
Google Voice Actions came out in Froyo, in August 2010. Apple added Siri in August 2011, buying a voice recognition app from a smaller developer in order to quickly catch up. Android's voice recognition feature was a full year earlier. All this article is about is Google renaming GVA to something more catchy in order to better compete with Apple's marketing machine. Apple certainly didn't invent the idea, and they weren't first to introduce it in a smartphone OS either.
Hmm....
iPhone 3GS introduced "Voice Control" in June 2010
Android "Voice Actions" intros in Aug 2010
iPhone 4S introduced "Siri" in Aug 2011
Android "Majel" intros.... ?
Siri manifestly demonstrates that there exists a direct relationship between disruptiveness of a new technology and the incoherence of responses by competitors.
I find it odd that with so much information on Siri that people are still calling voice recognition without acknowledging all the parts that make Siri so much better than anything else on the market. Either this is a purposeful attempt to belittle Apple's effort and/or superiority in this field or some people really don't know the difference between Siri and other voice activated systems.
I directly attribute this to the fact that the rotten Apples haven't received new talking points. They won't understand natural language processing with semantic analysis and contextual awareness with deep operating system integration until the competition releases a reasonable rival and updates their talking points.
Hmm....
iPhone 3GS introduced "Voice Control" in June 2010
Android "Voice Actions" intros in Aug 2010
iPhone 4S introduced "Siri" in Aug 2011
Android "Majel" intros.... ?
To be clear, because I know others will try to argue against your point by excluding relative details, Android OS has had Google search through voice control since it's initial release in September 2008, but it wasn't until May 2010 that calling, texting, and navigation were added. In June 2009 Apple added Voice Control which could do calling of contracts, a feature I'd say is one of the most important uses of basic voice control.
I love how obvious the rotten Apples are in threads about Siri. They can't differentiate between natural language processing with semantic analysis and contextual awareness with deep operating system integration versus speech recognition. Until Apple's competition understands the fundamentally differences between Siri and existing speech recognition solutions; i.e. release their own version, they won't acknowledge the difference.
Siri manifestly demonstrates that there exists a direct relationship between disruptiveness of a new technology and the incoherence of responses by competitors.
I played with Nuance's Dragon Dictation. It worked well, but I had no need for an app that can dictate my words accurately.
I played with the Siri app. It worked well, but I had no need to use a separate app to do contextual searches.
I played with Siri for the iPhone 4S. That changed everything. It was finally a useful way of talking to your phone.
Google purchased the company that created Android.
Indeed they did.
You know what would be pretty original is an Emily Litella voice assistant.
"Now, what's this I hear about endangered feces?"
Apple's patent applications protecting Siri technology should be available from the PTO in about a year.
I played with Nuance's Dragon Dictation. It worked well, but I had no need for an app that can dictate my words accurately.
I played with the Siri app. It worked well, but I had no need to use a separate app to do contextual searches.
I played with Siri for the iPhone 4S. That changed everything. It was finally a useful way of talking to your phone.
Hence the importance of all elements of Siri:
Speech recognition (almost certainly provided by Nuance)
Natural language processing
Semantic analysis
Contextual awareness
"Personality"
Siri is an order of magnitude greater than the sum of the parts. Without any of those aspects Siri would be far more lackluster including the quirky, sometimes humorous responses. Those occasionally unpredictable responses convey the sense that you aren't interacting with technology which is absolutely critical for complex technologies to become ubiquitous.
Hence the importance of all elements of Siri:
Speech recognition (almost certainly provided by Nuance)
Natural language processing
Semantic analysis
Contextual awareness
"Personality"
Siri is an order of magnitude greater than the sum of the parts. Without any of those aspects Siri would be far more lackluster including the quirky, sometimes humorous responses. Those occasionally unpredictable responses convey the sense that you aren't interacting with technology.
Don't forget the OS tie ins that truly make it a personal assistance.
I was using iOS 5.0 betas for months and found no need to use Reminders. Too many steps to creat a reminder, but with Siri it was easy to say remind me at x-time or remind me when I arrive/leave x-location.
Don't forget the OS tie ins that truly make it a personal assistance.
I was using iOS 5.0 betas for months and found no need to use Reminders. Too many steps to creat a reminder, but with Siri it was easy to say remind me at x-time or remind me when I arrive/leave x-location.
I couldn't even fathom Reminders in iOS 5 beta frankly. The Reminders app is far too unwieldy and almost demands Siri.
You are correct, of course. The deep operating system integration is critical as well. The original incarnation of Siri for the iPhone was more like a concierge who would discover local events, purchase tickets and reserve a table at a restaurant before the show. Apple's genius was knowing that while a concierge is convenient a personal assistant is indispensable.
I must admit that I miss some of the functionality Siri had prior to iPhone 4S. Specifically, MovieTickets.com although I have high hopes that Apple will integrate iTunes Movie Trailers with Siri.
I liked Eventful integration as well.
I miss the previous implementation of Yelp integration that allowed viewing of reviews and other information. Currently, if I tap the Yelp review on a business Siri fails to handoff properly to Yelp (I have assumed this is by design).
I am ecstatic to see Siri integrated with the Maps application we all know is likely to be delivered next year. I hope that Apple provides navigation similar to Waze as well. In fact, I almost hope that Apple just purchases Yahoo as well and integrates Yahoo services with iOS:
Will the next big-hyped-up Android tablet be called Galactica?
OH F*** OFF Google... Droid, now Majel... Even your code names and technology names aren't original!!! Get stuffed. Spend your time making a non-ripooff mobile and tablet operating system that gets easily rolled out to many Android handsets at once. What's that? Too hard?
To be fair, Droid is licensed to Verizon from Lucas Arts, not to Google.
HAHAHA. Apple purchased the company that created Siri. Siri isn't even Apple's idea to being with. Try having some knowledge about the subject before posting. And speech recognition is a VERY old idea. Yes there have been some advancements, but Apple has nothing to do with them.
So? You do realize that Siri, by virtue of being purchased by Apple, is now Apple, right?
Oh, btw, Android was purchased by Google. As was the only money making operation in their entire company, Adsense. So basically, by your definition, Google does not have its own Mobile OS, and does not even make any money.
Brilliant.
Google Voice Actions came out in Froyo, in August 2010. Apple added Siri in August 2011, buying a voice recognition app from a smaller developer in order to quickly catch up. Android's voice recognition feature was a full year earlier. All this article is about is Google renaming GVA to something more catchy in order to better compete with Apple's marketing machine. Apple certainly didn't invent the idea, and they weren't first to introduce it in a smartphone OS either.
And Apple has had voice commands for a while, too. Do you even know what Siri is? The "voice actions" / "speech recognition" is the trivial part, as clearly stated when it came out. What's different about it is that it can process natural language (no need to speak in a stilted way using certain key words, phrases or syntax).
Yes, Apple brought the team and technology on board from elsewhere. It is far more than "buying a small app". The Siri team had access to and experience with all the military sponsored research in this area. It was a very strategic move. Why shouldn't Apple hire developers that have shown some real promise?
What Apple has done is take it beyond an app so that it is beginning to get integrated into the OS. Secondly, Apple is producing APIs for it so that thirdparty developers can begin to use their creativity with it in all sorts of new ways in powerful native apps. This is where Google is a little weak.
BTW, the difference between Google buying Android, or MS buying Danger and DOS, and Apple buying NeXT is that Steve Jobs envisioned and headed NeXT, and its development over the past 12 years has been done in-house at Apple including migrating it to several processor families, and scaling it from the desktop to mobile devices. People act as though Apple is all about buying up stuff and marketing it, but, really, the evidence is quite the opposite. Apple actually has far more software chops than anyone else. Considering all the beta crap that Google foists on the public, and all the deadends and do-overs that MS eventually gets around to producing, this should be obvious.