Xed

danvm said:

danox said:

track_trk said:

danox said:

Mr_mime3000 said:

Xed said:

jacob_rad said:

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.

gatorguy said:

Yup.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/12/21/apple-google-close-to-rolling-out-final-bluetooth-tracker-misuse-standard

Thanks.

Stabitha_Christie said:

avon b7 said:

StrangeDays wasn't on point.

He missed the point entirely and your point boils down to your definition of 'true' which completely ignores what the OP might have meant and, IMO at least, seems very clear. 

Apple's bread and butter remains hardware. 

Google's bread and butter remains software. 

Even though both of them produce hardware and software. 

That is incredibly myopic. What do you think people buy that Apple hardware for? The software is what absolutely defines Apple products. You can’t delineate the two it’s a whole widget. Without the software Apple products are literally useless beyond being paper weights and doorstops. Nobody buys Apple hardware for the sake of the hardware. They buy them because id what the software can do with the hardware. 

Strangedays is 100% correct. Apple is first and foremost as software company. 

Some people can't seem to leave the beige box mentality so the concept of pairing HW and SW to create a groundbreaking UX is lost on them. They are a two-dimensional entity unable to perceive the world in three dimensions. 

Here's Steve Jobs quoting Alan Kay. This is what Apple, a company that focuses on SW — not  counting the Elio for ad revenue — for the user experience, which we've seen countless times and are seeing again with Apple Vision instead of a bond mediocre, Google Glass- or Meta Quest-level experience.

https://youtu.be/XAfTXYa36f4

track_trk said:

danox said:

Mr_mime3000 said:

Xed said:

jacob_rad said:

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.

Google didn’t create YouTube. They bought  the dominate web-based video service at the time. Nothing wrong with that as it was a way compete while killing competition since Google Video(?) was a market flop, but you can’t say they “created” it. 

ursues_1 said:

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

StrangeDays said:

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

jacob_rad said:

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?

I think he means that, as a company, Apple stills derives a huge amount of revenues from hardware. That is true.

While services may be growing, the iPhone and hardware is, and will remain, the cash cow for the foreseeable future.

Conversely, Google is financially dependant on software services products, and not so much, hardware. 

Those services are not limited to the CE realm as they reach into science and industry too. 

Apple's scope hasn't reached those areas. 

What a non sequitur. Making lots of money from hardware has no bearing on whether a shop also produces software. 

That’s like me saying Google isn’t a true software company because their business is advertising. 

Producing hardware and software per se wasn't at issue.

It was the balance between the two in terms of revenue. 

No it wasn't. His comment stated that Google was a "true" software company which implies that Apple doesn't "truly" create any software which is fucking stupid to say and for anyone to defend. Even your "revenue" comment is silly because Apple doesn't sell their SW without the HW and their HW without the revenue. They are a paired product so you can't exclude the SW and claim Apple hasn't a leg to stand on simply because you see no SW when the display is off.

Also, StrangeDays is on point by calling Google just an ad placement company if we go by your facile definition. Personally, I see Apple as being a very deep in SW and HW development, just as I see this with Google, MS, FB, and many others.

You are thinking too much into it, to the everyday Joe, Apple is a hardware company whereas companies such as Google are thought of as software companies, thanks in part due to the media.

I think the "Average Joe" knows that Apple makes SW. I bet if I talked to 10 iPhone or iPad owners nearly all would know what iOS is, iTunes, and many other Apple apps by name. If one doesn't know this or consider this — especially on a tech forum — then one may want to consider themselves a "Below Average Joe."