MassiveAttack

About

Banned
Username
MassiveAttack
Joined
Visits
48
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
-264
Badges
0
Posts
115

Reactions

88Like357Dislike1Informative

  • Apple may need to acquire AI firms to boost Apple Intelligence

    MassiveAttackMassiveAttack
    danox said:
    danvm said:
    danox said:
    Laughable this is the typical Wall Street MBA solution. Go try and buy your way in (movie studio, gaming company) there are no shortcuts in chip hardware or software development, even if you found the right AI company (there isn’t one) today and if you could buy them next month. It will take years of work to even get to first base at this moment, who has a AI solution that the public is willing to use that actually makes a actual profit upfront right now in this new world of AI? Answer no one.

    Apple was right in not giving OpenAI or anyone else billions of dollars for AI software, which is currently a work in progress …..
    Apple didn't gave OpenAI billons of dollars but gave access to billions of customers.  In this agreement, I think OpenAI won.  

    They didn’t win anything you seemed to forget that Apple in the Apple Intelligence presentation at last year‘s WWDC said very clearly other so called AI companies would be also added over time which means they’re gonna have to fight it out with other companies it is ultimately a loss for OpenAI not to get any money from Apple and not to have an exclusive agreement with Apple particularly when Sam hasn’t had that initial public offering for OpenAI yet… For there is no moat around AI it is open season.
    True.. OpenAI, Gemini, Anthropic, Claude etc. are just cloud-based commodities which will run at marginal cost at the end. There is no moat.
    Additionally, it is also a lesson learned move from Apple that an exclusive agreement could get eyed by the court sooner or later (Google Search as an example).
    williamlondon

  • Apple may need to acquire AI firms to boost Apple Intelligence

    MassiveAttackMassiveAttack
    danox said:
    blastdoor said:
    Typically the point of an acquisition is to gain technology, productive assets (like factories), employees, or customers. But I don't see Apple as falling short in any of those areas. 

    Apple's problem really is with their senior management's failure of vision and strategy. Either senior management needs to self-correct or the board will have to get involved. 
    Apple is not a technology company. The technology plays in the background. Apple is a design company. If you compare executives from other corporates with Apple, you will notice that literally all of Apple‘s executives are older than any other pe. 

    John Ternus is the youngest and maybe the only one who is young on comparison to other companies.

    Apple is basically the last vertical computer company left from the 1980s, Apple, not being a tech company would be news to some of their competitors particularly Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and Qualcomm.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_silicon

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacOS


    According to K-10 filing, Apple describes themselves as a design company. Apple designs, manufactures, and markets etc. 

    So. I have always considered Apple Silicon as their own design IP. Somehow, you are also right, that is is a vertical company. 

    williamlondon

  • Apple may need to acquire AI firms to boost Apple Intelligence

    MassiveAttackMassiveAttack
    blastdoor said:
    Typically the point of an acquisition is to gain technology, productive assets (like factories), employees, or customers. But I don't see Apple as falling short in any of those areas. 

    Apple's problem really is with their senior management's failure of vision and strategy. Either senior management needs to self-correct or the board will have to get involved. 
    Apple is not a technology company. The technology plays in the background. Apple is a design company. If you compare executives from other corporates with Apple, you will notice that literally all of Apple‘s executives are older than any other pe. 

    John Ternus is the youngest and maybe the only one who is young on comparison to other companies.
    williamlondonStrangeDaysblastdoor

  • Apple may need to acquire AI firms to boost Apple Intelligence

    MassiveAttackMassiveAttack
    There were a lot of news that Apple bought AI startups more than any others. Where are they? What are they? Are they already integrated? 

    Embarrassing moment for Apple so far. They need to work on Siri and perfect it. But the time is ticking. Even if it is hard to master until 2026, the world expects to have it in 2026 as they literally confirmed 2026 as their target. 

    Rotten Apple.
    danoxwilliamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam

  • Apple's continued lack of native apps on Vision Pro isn't a good sign for the platform

    MassiveAttackMassiveAttack
    humbug1873 said:
    You forgot, that Apple 'only' released a developer build of VisionOS 26, so devs can make use of the new API's etc. It's not a release for an end customer, so no need to add more apps.

    This is going to be a valid point should things not change for the customer release though I admit. Then again they might well plan for some HW upgrade in fall, to finally kick off the 'real' release cycle (from my point of view the current Vision Pro is more an extended Developer Hardware Kit than a real consumer product).
    As long as something is available and can be purchased at Apple Store, it is meant to be for end customers. 
    If the scale of availability of apps from developers is not fast enough (rather sloppy), developers struggle to make something which suits for end customers.

    But I admit that Vision Pro is a technical masterpiece (maybe, way ahead of our times). But it is strongly limited to certain use cases.

    Nevertheless, I liked the spartial view. I could imagine to have it when having meetings. It makes Microsoft Teams look like stone-aged application. And it could reduce my business trip activities. 
    williamlondon