danvm

gatorguy said:

danvm said:

blastdoor said:

anantksundaram said:

blastdoor said:

anantksundaram said:

Apple’s so embarrassingly far behind in the AI game. Despite being among the earliest. 

They should outsource this or partner for it, and move along. 

Catching up in AI is mostly a matter of spending money, with most of that money being spent on computer hardware.

Apple has a lot of money, so if apple wants to catch up, they will. 

So why didn’t Apple? 

Unless you’re (untenably) suggesting the company has had no interest in AI… 

I suspect that apple might not have prioritized LLMs, instead focusing on AI/ML for other purposes. Could be that their main AI focus has been in their alleged secret autonomous vehicle project. Also, the LLMs potentially have legal, ethical, and reputational risk that made apple execs leery of going first in this space. That’s my guess. 

Another guess is that they were caught off guard by MS / ChatGPT and Google, right?

I'm pretty sure Apple is aware of Google's ongoing projects in that field, and also aware of Google being exceptionally cautious in making them available to the public. All reports point to them being very capable, "near-sentient" according to some engineer reports which Google is distancing themselves from.  

Yes, I suppose that Google is very capable in their AI efforts, and have a large infrastructure in GCP.  Still, it look like MS / ChatGPT make something good enough to make them activate a "code red".  
Google at 'code red' over ChatGPT, plans competing AI products (9to5google.com)

Microsoft on the other hand is operating more from desperation. Despite efforts to use the Windows 11 processes to either fool or pressure users into opting for the Bing search engine along with other MS first-party services like Photos, and Cloud, they had been largely unsuccessful. Rolling out a less-considered and careful ChatGPT integration was a result of that, hoping that it might give them an "EDGE" (!) and garner positive public impressions. Some early media tests caused that to explode in their face and a fast backtrack.

Maybe it was a desperation move from MS, but it looks like it worked.  Now Google is the one who looks desperate.  Yes, MS took advantage of that with Windows 11 and Bing.  And, again, it looks like it worked, considering Bing traffic is increasing.  
Since Adding ChatGPT, Bing’s App Grew Almost As Much As All Last Year (forbes.com)
And the recent announcements of AI in MS Office were well received.  At the moment, MS execution around AI have been very good.

BTW, you claim it was a desperation move from MS by pressuring users to use Bing.  How is Apple different when they pressure users to have a Mac / iOS device if they want to use iMessage?  Would you say that Apple is desperate too?

They did succeed tho in forcing Google's hand into making market decisions they would have preferred to put off until all the safety mechanisms were in place to their satisfaction. Still Google is being very cautious, only integrating some sub-set of what they are actually capable of. That's good IMO. There are a lot of possible missteps and unanticipated negatives. Moving slowly is the right way to go. Microsoft was throwing caution to the wind in striving for market share.

It cloud be as you said, or Google was slow to protect their search business,
ChatGPT and Other Chat Bots Are a ‘Code Red’ for Google Search - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
ChatGPT May Hurt Google's Ad Business Model, Former Exec Says: Report (businessinsider.com)

So knowing that, Apple is not behind IMO. It will be a few years before they need to have a complementary feature in order to remain competitive.  

We don't know for sure if Apple is behind.  We'll have to wait at the announcements in WWDC.  But if you ask me today, I would say that they area behind Google and MS in AI.  And it looks like I'm not the only one who think that,
AI is changing technology and Apple is lagging behind with Siri (9to5mac.com)

blastdoor said:

anantksundaram said:

blastdoor said:

anantksundaram said:

Apple’s so embarrassingly far behind in the AI game. Despite being among the earliest. 

They should outsource this or partner for it, and move along. 

Catching up in AI is mostly a matter of spending money, with most of that money being spent on computer hardware.

Apple has a lot of money, so if apple wants to catch up, they will. 

So why didn’t Apple? 

Unless you’re (untenably) suggesting the company has had no interest in AI… 

I suspect that apple might not have prioritized LLMs, instead focusing on AI/ML for other purposes. Could be that their main AI focus has been in their alleged secret autonomous vehicle project. Also, the LLMs potentially have legal, ethical, and reputational risk that made apple execs leery of going first in this space. That’s my guess. 

Another guess is that they were caught off guard by MS / ChatGPT and Google, right?

entropys said:

Qualcomm chip doesn’t need to be an Mx killer though. It just has to be good enough. It dominates the android market as it is, and no one claims they match Ax chips.

I agree with you.  I think Qualcomm will start focused with devices where performance is not an issue, for example, notebooks and PC's personal or business use.  Those users work most of the time in the browser and MS Office, and they are fine today with the performance level they have.  If they release a chip that perform at the level of the M1, I think they'll be very good.  IMO, they don't need to release a M3 killer to impact the market, at least for the light tasks I mentioned before. I'm looking forward to a ThinkPad with a Qualcomm CPU with performance + efficiency similar to an Apple M1.  

jdw said:

AppleInsider said:

... you should think of it as an Apple compete for the Microsoft ecosystem."

I suppose some people actually care about Windoze.  I for one do not.  I've been an exclusively Mac user since the 128K in 1984. Hence, it doesn't matter that some chips in the Windoze world beat the M1 or M2.  Even Intel's latest and greatest beat the M2 in certain areas, but aside from the fact those new chips apply exclusively to Windoze (and therefore not to me), those fast chips also draw a huge amount of power compared to Apple Silicon, which makes them rather silly, especially with most people buying notebooks these days.  You see, when you pull the power cord on most any Windoze notebook, you suddenly get about half the performance, which is crazy.  MacBooks don't suffer a performance penalty for using battery power alone.  When pondering Apple Silicon, it's not only about performance (which is great, mind you).  Power draw matters!

If it wasn't for gamers and engineers and people too old to change their ways, would anyone really need or want a Windoze machine anymore?

Considering the market share, there is a lot of people interested in Windows.  At least for me, Windows 11 have been as stable as my macOS devices.  In some tasks Windows is better, in others macOS does better.  

And you should add to the groups you listed, business and enterprises, that has the best ecosystem in MS services.  Also the group of users the prefer Windows over macOS (yes, they exist).  Maybe you should try Windows in a high quality PC.  It has improved a lot since 1984.  

amar99 said:

This sounds so typically Microsoft, what should be a simple feature followed by a long list of caveats or things that don't work like you'd expect.

Do you really think MS could do more with the restrictions have in place with iMesssage?