thadgarrison

Regardless of how the technologies affect the bottom lines of each company, Apple does have catching up to do with the quality of the Siri experience compared to both Google and Amazon. Siri feels very restrictive compared to competitors, requiring more precise phrasing to get an adequate answer. The other two feel more freeform and conversational, particularly Google Now.

One reason behind this is that Google/Amazon are not afraid to use customer data to bolster AI learning, which will potentially allow them to stay ahead of Apple. Apple has painted themselves into a corner a bit by being so loud and proud about customer privacy. While their stance on privacy is obviously highly respectable, the reality is that AI software needs real world input to improve and Google/Amazon (particularly Google) are in a position that may offer exponential rather than incremental improvements.

I'd also like to point out this bad assumption in your article:
"In contrast, moving from iOS devices and the rest of Apple's platform to new hardware running a different ecosystem, just to access another voice assistant, is a much more difficult transition for users to make."

At least in the case of Alexa, nothing is further from the truth. I was given an Echo Dot as an unexpected Xmas present and found it delightfully easy to use. It has quickly replaced "Hey Siri" as my go-to for voice control of lights and common questions like weather. The fight here might not be about which technology makes the most money, but which voice service gets the most mind share first, becoming the "Google" or "Kleenex" of voice assistance.

I'm starting to wonder if Apple is paralyzed by their obsession with perfection. With all of their money and staff and the opportunities in connected home, wearables, VR, auto and beyond—how is it possible that all we've gotten is an OK watch? I'm not saying I want them to release any old junk, but there is a threshold after which perfection in detail simply doesn't matter as much as having a real product in hand. A lot of artists and creator-driven companies get caught in an echo chamber of high expectations and lose site of just how good what they've already created is. Release, iterate, perfect over time so I can have more Apple, sooner!

lkrupp said:

You start out by saying you’ll miss “mac os,” something that doesn’t even exist (it’s OS X). 

Actually, it is branded macOS now, not OS X.

I just spent all of yesterday troubleshooting a Windows 10 machine and was reminded that the true beauty of Apple products is the investment they've made in top-to-bottom simplicity. While the Apple lineup is far from perfect, I've simply never spent hours upon hours in front of a Mac or iOS product trying to untangle draconian complexity just to solve basic problems like I did yesterday. The fact that the rest of the technology world is so brutal will continue to act in Apple's favor -- I think the user-friendliness that (most of) their ecosystem offers is unparalleled and will trump any weak hardware cycle sales in the long run. Unfortunately, that is not easily quantified by Wall Street or bloggers, and gets lost on many when trying to pinpoint value. It doesn't help that some of Apple's recent software sloppiness proves that even they can take their eye off the ball if they're focused to much on launching and not enough on experience (I'm looking at you Music, tvOS and iCloud).

That being said, hardware updates *are* fun and compelling and I am absolutely devastated that they are only bringing their dual-lens option to the giant phone. This seems like an odd approach in terms of giving the iPhone 7 generation a clear, cohesive reason for upgrade. "Amazing new camera...er...but only if you like giant phones."