sunwukong

SpamSandwich said:

sunwukong said:

SpamSandwich said:

Google's access to sensitive private information really is making their assistant more capable for users. It's still up to the individual if this gain in function is a fair tradeoff.

People keep saying or inferring that Siri is behind behind because Apple doesn't datamine.  This is false.  They do collect data on you.  They just don't sell it, at least at present, not to imply they will, just that they don't.  This is a ridiculous excuse, though, for a functionally lacking pseudo AI assistant. The internet is as available to Apple as to Google or others.  Apple doesn't have data from Google search input, of course, but the vast reference of online data sources is certainly available.  The crux of the biscuit is that Apple is not doing the hard work, apparently, on making the software smarts behind Siri much better.  It is not just data - it is how it is used in an AI/assistant, and you don't need to sell someone else's data to make a good assistant.

Things that cannot be performed on the device put Apple at a disadvantage.

This doesn't speak to the advanced level of functionality and interaction that is available with the Echo/Alexa devices, compared to Siri on iPhone, etc.  They just sit there on the table, listening for a wake word in a sound stream.  There's no other interaction in the manner of what Google gets websites, or photos, or what have you.  All referenceable data on the internet is available to Apple/Siri.  How do they get sports scores, restaurants, historical tidbits, weather, movie times, everything else that Siri can provide at present?  Those things are not Apple proprietary.  Saying that because Apple does not have a vast cache of  my personal data and that of millions therefore they are hobbled in developing a better AI/assistant is not logical.  I guarantee Apple has information about their customers.  I mean, take the Genius feature in iTunes, that has to be kept somewhere.  How can they make recommendations? I don't buy the notion that Apple has to give up our privacy, (i.e. sell it, or make it available outside Apple), in order to have a better functioning Siri.  Amazon is not Google, either, and they seem to be doing rather well in this area, comparitively.

jbdragon said:

Go Google doing a number of commands is what Alexa started doing not to long ago. It is a nice feature. Not a HUGE deal. You know what is a big deal? Have you seen Alexa and it's Blueprint? Being able to easily create your own skills?

https://blueprints.amazon.com/

Siri is following more and more behind. I have a Alexa Dot and a Google Mini which I got during the Christmas shopping season when these things were selling for $40. That way I can personally play with Alexa, Google and Siri and do my own comparisons to my own needs. Siri works well most of the time, but it also lacks in area's and again falling behind. Also not having a cheap $50, or even $100 option is hurting Apple in this area. While I personally think the Apple Watch is a better overall device as it works in every room I'm in and outside and away from my house. But a Smart Speaker would work better in a family environment for a number of people, not just 1 person.

Something I read not long ago made a good observation, I thought.  It compared what Amazon is doing with these $50 and sometimes $40 hockey puck Echo Dots, versus a $350+ HomePod.  You can say that they are aiming at different targets, and that would be easy to see.  But the result is that you can easily have 5-10 of the little Dots all over the house, every room, compared to one, maybe two HomePods.  

Personally, I bought an Echo because it was on sale last summer, and I wanted to try it out.  Not long after that, I had bought 3 Dots, multiple smart switches, outlets, bulbs, thermostats, etc., and for me, I have found it really convenient to just sort of "talk to your house".  I am fully invested in this Echo/Alexa 'ecosystem' now, not just in money, but in our home life.  We use them for so much, it is like imagining going back to corded rotary phones, (I was there...), compared to cordless and cellular.  I can't go back to not having them around, unless say camping or something.  We went on vacations and have brought at least one Dot with us to have in the room for things like weather, time, music, and so forth.  Ok, so HomePod is maybe shooting at a different target, I don't know, but it damn sure is not going to ever replace this consetllation of Echo/Alexa devices in our home, and maybe even the car.  I do believe that there is a market for home automation and 'voice butler' that Apple is simply ignoring.  I do not want to have to hold something in my hand and push a button, or say 'hey siri'.  I do have to say wake word 'alexa', but it does now have a follow up mode where you don't have to do that every time, if sequential requests.

gutengel said:

Google's presentation was rather impressive and creepy. Apple really needs step up their game, I haven't seen a presentation from them that gets me excited in a long time. Privacy and security are great, but there should be some compromises.

They can maintain privacy and security and still come up with improvements. What about what Google presented today, for example, requires Apple to sell your data? Apple does have data on its customers and users, can't say how deep, but is a fantasy to consider them virginally pure and saintly as to sacrifice themselves and not collect anything on you.  Everything on the internet is available to Apple other than another company's proprietary IP.  Not having access to that and not selling customers' data, is no excuse for the software behind Siri falling behind.  It is not a trade-off between privacy/security versus decent AI assistant.

BTW, there was article recently about how to get a copy of the data that Apple has on you:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/apple-took-8-days-to-give-me-the-data-it-had-collected-on-me-it-was-eye-opening/ar-AAwJ5Ej

On mine, I've received a response, and things are in process.  I just am curious as to what there is, not pulling at my pearl necklace over it, though.  I would if they were doing dastardly evil things, which I do not trust Google or FAcebook, et al., not to do, for reasons made recently obvious.

SpamSandwich said:

Google's access to sensitive private information really is making their assistant more capable for users. It's still up to the individual if this gain in function is a fair tradeoff.

People keep saying or inferring that Siri is behind behind because Apple doesn't datamine.  This is false.  They do collect data on you.  They just don't sell it, at least at present, not to imply they will, just that they don't.  This is a ridiculous excuse, though, for a functionally lacking pseudo AI assistant. The internet is as available to Apple as to Google or others.  Apple doesn't have data from Google search input, of course, but the vast reference of online data sources is certainly available.  The crux of the biscuit is that Apple is not doing the hard work, apparently, on making the software smarts behind Siri much better.  It is not just data - it is how it is used in an AI/assistant, and you don't need to sell someone else's data to make a good assistant.

levansic said:

He also served on the Apple board of directors between Aug. 28 2006 and Aug.3, 2009, and stepped down to avoid any conflicts of interest  after Android had copied enough from the iPhone to really piss off Steve Jobs.

.

There.  Fixed it.

Maybe is just me but Eric Schmidt always struck me as a creepy, untrustworthy, corporate so-and-so.