Apple picks Gemini to power Siri
(cnbc.com)965 points by stygiansonic a day ago
965 points by stygiansonic a day ago
> Gemini is objectively a good model (whether it's #1 or #5 in ranking aside) so Apple can confidently deliver a good (enough) product
Definitely. At at this point, Apple just needs to get anything out the door. It was nearly two years ago they sold a phone with features that still haven't shipped and the promise that Apple Intelligence would come in two months.
Yes but they also haven’t generated spicy deep fakes and talked kids into suicide with their products.
It’s just how Apple does things: They still have no folding phone, under-screen finger print scanner, under-screen front-cam, etc.
Apple is always behind on industry trends, but when they adopt them eventually, they become mainstream and cool. This is what will happen with the folding phones this year, if rumors are true.
> At at this point, Apple just needs to get anything out the door
To the extent Cupertino fucked up, it's in having had this attitude when they rolled out Apple Intelligence.
There isn't currently a forcing function. Apple owns the iPhone, and that makes it an emperor among kings. Its wealth is also built on starting with user problems and then working backwards to the technology, versus embracing whatever's hot and trying to shove it down our throats.
Lately, they've arguably been starting from their own priorities (i.e. pushing and protecting their "services" revenue at all cost) and working backwards to an acceptable user experience from there.
> Its wealth is also built on starting with user problems and then working backwards to the technology, versus embracing whatever's hot and trying to shove it down our throats.
Then again, remember millimeterwave? But yes, as a general rule I think your point still stands.
> Its wealth is also built on starting with user problems and then working backwards to the technology
Since when?
> versus embracing whatever's hot and trying to shove it down our throats
I agree here, to a degree. It's just that Apple tells its customers what's hot and then shoves it down their throats.
> Definitely. At at this point, Apple just needs to get anything out the door
They don't though, Android is clearly ahead in AI integration (even Samsung are running TV ads mocking iPhones AI capability) yet still iPhones sales are breaking records - the majority of their phone buyers still prefer an iPhone over an AI capable other phone.
They can take their time to develop AI integration that others can't deploy - 'secure/private', deep integration with iCloud, location services, processing on device etc. that will provide the product moat to increase sales.
i dont NEED it, but if Siri could actually do anything you could do on your phone it would be very nice.
I still think Apple should, at least to Apple One customers, offer small, private models, trained on your personal imessage, image and video archives in icloud. With easy-to-use, granular controls for content inclusion/exclusion.
Will make it much easier to find those missing pictures from a few years ago...
I consider Apple to be practical, Also Apple will be running Gemini on its own hardware. This is better than Buying perplexity and running chinese model on which Perplexity runs. Training Models is a money on game, Its better to rent models than training your own. If everyone is training models they are going to be come commodity, also this is not the final architecture.
I'll bite
1. Have a user interface. Sometimes I'll ask a question and Siri actually provides a good enough answer, and while I'm reading it, the Siri response window just disappears. Siri is this modal popup with no history, no App, and no UI at all really. Siri doesn't have a user interface, and it should have one so that I can go back to sessions and resume them or reference them later and interact with Siri in more meaningful ways.
2. Answer questions like a modern LLM does. Siri often responds with very terse web links. I find this useful when I'm sitting with friends and we don't remember if Lliam Neeson is alive or not - for basic fact-checking. This is the only use case where it's useful I've found, when I want to peel my attention away for the shortest period of time. If ChatGPT could be bound to a power button long-press, then I'd cease to use Siri for this use case. Otherwise Siri isn't good for long questions because it doesn't have the intelligence, and as mentioned before, has no user interface.
3. Be able to do things conversationally, based on my context. Today, when I "Add to my calendar Games at Dave's house" it creates a calendar entry called "Games" and sets the location to a restaurant called "Dave's House" in a different country. My baseline expectation is that I should be able to work with Siri, build its memory and my context, and over time it becomes smarter about the things I like to do. The day Siri responds with "Do you mean Dave's House the restaurant in another country, or Dave, from your contacts?" I'll be happy.
I'm sorry, I can't answer that right now.
Would you like to click this button which takes what you said and executes it as a Google search in Safari?
Siri to function above the level of Dragon NaturallySpeaking '95
I should be able to completely control my phone with voice and ask it to do anything it is capable of and it should just work:
"Hi Siri, can you message Katrina on WhatsApp that Judy is staying 11-15th Feb and add it to the shared Calendar, confirm with me the message to Kat and the Calendar start and end times and message."
ANY ability to answer simple questions without telling me to open Safari and read a webpage for myself...?
The iPhone 16 was released 16 months ago, not “nearly” 24 months.
Counterpoint: iOS’s biggest competitor is Android. They are now effectively funding their competition on a core product interface. I see this as strategically devastating.
Counterpoint: Google is paying Apple $20b/year to keep themselves as the default search engine in iOS. Android's biggest competitor is iOS. They are now effectively funding their competition on a core product interface. I see this as strategically devastating.
It's strategically devastating because no small number of users choose Apple because they do not trust Google and now they have no choice but to have Google AI on-board their machines.
I respect Google's engineering, and I'm aware that fundamental technologies such as Protocol Buffers and FlatBuffers are unavoidably integrated into the software fabric, but this is is avoidable.
I'm surprised Google aren't paying Apple for this.
> no small number of users choose Apple because they do not trust Google
Unfortunately, it probably actually is a small number comparatively. Or at least I would need to see some sort of real data to say anything different.
I feel like people who distrust Google probably wouldn't trust Apple enough to give them their data either? Why would you distrust one but not the other?
Is android really iOSs competition ? I feel like the competition is less android more vendors who use android. Every android phone feels different. Android doesn’t even compete on performance anymore the chips are quite behind. The target audience of the two feels different lately.
>Is android really iOSs competition ?
It ISN'T in this day and age. People don't switch back and forth between iOS and Android like it's still 2010. They use whatever they got locken in initially since their first smartphone or where Apple's green/blue-bubble issue pushed them to or what their family handed them down or what their close friend groups used to have.
People who've been using iOS for 6+ years will 98% stick to iOS for their next purchase and won't even bother look at Android no matter what features Android were to add.
The Android vs iOS war is as dead as the console war. There's no competition anymore, it's just picking one from a duopoly of vendor lock-ins.
Even if EU were to break some of the lockins, people have familiarity bias and will stick with inertia of what they're used to, so it will not move the market share needle one bit.
Of course android is iOSs competition. android is also 75% of the market that apple surely wants bigger piece of.
Performance? We are many years past the point somebody cared about performance. I am writing this on iphone 11 pro and the experience is almost exactly the same as current iOS.
You know what's not the same? Android became pretty great OS. I recently got older Pixel to see how GrapheneOS works and was surprised about Android (which i havent seen for a decade). iOS on the other hand has recently gone trough with very bad ui redesign for no reason.
Imho the main thing Apple has going for it is that Google is spyware company and Apple is still mainly hardware company. But if Apple decides to pull their users data to gemini… well good luck.
Nothing about OpenAI is clean. Their complete org is controlled by Altmann, who was able to rehire himself after he was fired.
Anthropic doesn't have a single data centre, they rent from AWS/Microsoft/Google.
It was 20 billion dollars years ago, 2022. There's little doubt it's closer to $25B now, perhaps more.
With Anthropic or OpenAI they would have had to pay for it, but Google already pay them $20bn+ per year to be the default search engine - so they just knock $1bn off Google's bill for Gemini
True. Also Gemini is the boring model, heavily sanitised for corporate applications. At least it admits this if you press it. It fits Apple here very well.
Personally I wouldn't use it, it still belongs to an advertiser specialised on extracting user information. Not that I expect that other AI companies value privacy much higher. But clean smell also means bland smell.
I suspect you're exactly right about it being the most sanitized model.
I don't however like the idea of having Google deeply embedded in my machine and Siri will definitely be turned off when this happens. I only use Siri as an egg timer anyway.
This seems like a odd move for a company that sells privacy.
Google, as the designer of the original transformer, is designer of the original "mechanism" for inserting ads into a prompt answer in realtime to the highest bidder, so it makes sense from that part too.
Given my stance about AI, I'll definitely not use it, but I understand Apple's choice. Also this choice will give them enough time to develop their infrastructure and replace parts of it with their own, if they are planning to do it.
> Not that I expect that other AI companies value privacy much higher.
Breaching privacy and using it for its own benefit is AIs business model. There are no ethical players here. Neither from training nor from respecting their users' privacy perspective. Just next iteration of what social media companies do.
>If nothing else, this was likely driven by Google being the most stable of the AI labs.
I dont think the model is that much different if they thought Siri was half decent enough for so long.
Judging from the past 10 years, I would say this is more likely driven by part of a bigger package deal with Google Search Placement and Google Cloud Services. When everything else being roughly equal.
Instead of raising price again Paying Apple even more per user, How about we pay the less but throw in Gemini with it?
Apple has been very good, if not the best at picking one side and allowing the others to fight for its contract. They dont want Microsoft to win the AI race, at the same time Apple is increasing the use of Azure just in case. Basically playing the game of leverage at its best. In hindsight probably too well into it they forgot what the real purpose of all these leverage are for, not cost savings but ultimately better quality product.
> I would say this is more likely driven by part of a bigger package deal with Google Search Placement and Google Cloud Services.
Can the DOJ and FTC look into this?
Google shouldn't be able to charge a fee on accessing every registered trademark in the world. They use Apple get get the last 30% of "URL Bars", I mean Google Search middlemen.
Searching Anthropic gets me a bidding war, which I'm sure is bleeding Google's competition dry.
We need a "no bare trademark (plus edit distance) ads or auto suggest" law. It's made Google an unkillable OP monster. Any search monopoly or marketplace monopoly should be subject to not allowing ads to be sold against a registered trademark database.
>Can the DOJ and FTC look into this?
I guess this venture into politics more than anything else. And I am opinionated on the subject.
But other than that, the point worth centred on is Apple no longer care as much as being the best. They care much more about extracting best business deals and money out of their current position. Which is very different to Steve Jobs era, No money can put crap on his plate.
I agree with your point about Google being more stable company then the rest so the decision probably makes sense. But there was a study done by multiple news companies in Czechia by asking about news topics and Gemini was consistently the worst in citations and straight up being incorrect (76% of its answers had "issues", I don't have exact issues specification).
OpenAI aren’t using their cloud directly, but have signed data center partnerships with them that are effectively huge amounts of debt not backed up with revenue. That’s all liability that Google doesn’t really have because they have revenue from other areas.
If nothing else, this was likely driven by Google being the most stable of the AI labs. Gemini is objectively a good model (whether it's #1 or #5 in ranking aside) so Apple can confidently deliver a good (enough) product. Also for Apple, they know their provider has ridiculously deep pockets, a good understanding and infrastructure in place for large enterprises, and a fairly diversified revenue stream.
Going with Anthropic or OpenAI, despite on the surface having that clean Apple smell and feel, carries a lot of risk Apple's part. Both companies are far underwater, liable to take risks, and liable to drown if they even fall a bit behind.