Comment by the_mitsuhiko

Agreed. I often have to verbally battle with Siri to do the most basic interaction. Siri recognizes all my words but misinterprets my intent and does something I didn’t want.

My understanding is they are just stubborn. They once did it this way and now it is "the Apple way".

Recent example: Apple used to hide "search in page" in the share menu in mobile safari. Far from obvious, but at some point one discovers it because there is no other place to look for it.

Now they have finally decided to make a standard fly dropping overflow menu and hide the share button there. But interestingly you still need to open the share menu from there to find the search button.

Meanwhile other buttons that weren't as obviously misplaced in "share" like "Add to Bookmarks" are now on the top level together with the share button.

Same goes for the arguments against things like cut and paste in finder: they didn't create it back in the day and now there is a complete mythology about why cut and paste in Finder would actually be stupid and almost evil.

It was driven by privacy and on device compute.

Anything you ask an Android device to do, or an Alexa device goes to their clouds to be 100% processed there.

Apple tried to make a small and focused interface that could do a limited set of things on device without going to the cloud to do it.

This was built around the idea of "Intents" and it only did the standard intents... and app developers were supposed to register and link into them.

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/intents

Some of the things didn't really get fleshed out, some are "oh, that's something in there?" (Restaurant reservations? Ride Booking?) and feels more like the half baked mysql interfaces in php.

However, as part of privacy - you can create a note (and dictate it) without a data connection with Siri. Your "start workout" command doesn't leave your device.

Part of that is privacy. Part of that is that Apple was trying to minimize its cloud spend (on GCP or AWS) by keeping as much of that activity on device. It wasn't entirely on device, but a lot more of it is than what Android is... and Alexa is a speaker and microphone hooked up to AWS.

This was ok, kind of meh, but ok pre-ChatGPT. With ChatGPT the expectations changed and the architecture that Apple had was not something that could pivot to meeting those expectations.

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

> Apple first implemented artificial intelligence features in its products with the release of Siri in the iPhone 4S in 2011.

> ...

> The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence and the release of ChatGPT in late 2022 reportedly blindsided Apple executives and forced the company to refocus its efforts on AI.

ChatGPT was as much a blindside to Apple as the iPhone was to Blackberry.

Yeah, I'm not buying that either/or framing too

Siri could've done better but Apple is definitely taking big risks with their privacy play. They might just corner themselves.

They are solving for privacy before solving for the UX.

They should actually make something useful first, and then work backwards to making it private before releasing it.

Don't invert the argument, something can be enormously useful while also having an equally big effect on one's privacy.

You'd have to expand on that because I don't see why one is related to the other. People get value out of giving their data to OpenAI. They don't care. So what?

China does not care about personal privacy, they only care about privacy beyond their political boundaries.

If you've never been to China, you need to look no further than the streets to understand this (cameras everywhere, social credit system, etc.)

That's a great point and an easy way to visualize it as an outsider, but it's not necessarily that simple.

For one thing, the iPad (market-leading tablet) and the iPhone (market-leading pocket touchscreen device) were not their first attempt at doing that. That would be the Newton, which was an actual launched product and a commercial failure.

For another thing, even Apple can't just become the market leader by doing nothing. They need to enter late with a good product, and having a good product takes R&D, which takes time. With MP3 players, smartphones, and tablets, they didn't exactly wait until the industry was burnt through before they came in with their offering; they were just later (with the successful product) than some other people who did it worse. They were still doing R&D during those years when they were "waiting."

Apple could still "show up late" to AI in a few more years or a decade, using their current toe-dipping to inform something better, and it would still fit into the picture you have of how they "should've done it." Not to mention, Apple's also lost its way before with things like convoluted product lines (a dozen models of everything) and experimental products (the Newton then, Apple Vision now); messing up for a while also isn't exactly bucking history.

Because today they're racing against regulators for the privilege of setting their own service as the preinstalled, exclusive, default with APIs only they are allowed to use.

They already lost this superpower in the EU and I think Japan, India, Brazil too. Early next year they've got their US antitrust trial, and later in the year are some class actions challenging their control over app distribution, and at least two pieces of draft legislation are circulating that would require allowing competing apps to be defaults.

If they need another two years they might face an entrenched and perhaps even better competitor, while their own app needs to be downloaded from the App Store.

I agree that not falling for the hype and rushing in may have just saved them. Apple is typically not a first mover. They often hang back, rethink the problem, and deliver something really nice. But not in this case. They had Siri first and then squandered their lead, but may have avoided a huge write-down as a result.

> Apple also doesn't have actual privacy since their focus was using the word strategically against their competitors, not actually protecting user data.

big company bad, or do you have examples?