I mean, they tried. They just tried and failed. It may work out for them, though — two years ago it looked like lift-off was likely, or at least possible, so having a frontier model was existential. Today it looks like you might be able to save many billions by being a fast follower. I wouldn’t be surprised if the lift-off narrative comes back around though; we still have maybe a decade until we really understand the best business model for LLMs and their siblings.
I think you are right. Their generative AI was clearly underwhelming. They have been losing many staff from their AI team.
I’m not sure it matters though. They just had a stonking quarter. iPhone sales are surging ahead. Their customers clearly don’t care about AI or Siri’s lacklustre performance.
> Their customers clearly don’t care about AI or Siri’s lacklustre performance.
I would rather say their products didn’t just loose in value for not getting an improvement there. Everyone agrees that Siri sucks, but I’m pretty sure they tried to replace it with a natural language version built from the ground up, and realised it just didn’t work out yet: yes, they have a bad, but at least kinda-working voice assistant with lots of integrations into other apps. But replacing that with something that promises to do stuff and then does nothing, takes long to respond, and has less integrations due to the lack of keywords would have been a bad idea if the technology wasn’t there yet.
We do know that they made a number of promises on AI[1] and then had to roll them back because the results were so poor[2]. They then went on to fire the person responsible for this division[3].
That doesn't sound like a financial decision to me.
[1] https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2024/06/wwdc24-highlights/
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-05-18/how-apple...
[3] https://nypost.com/2025/12/02/business/apple-shakes-up-ai-te...
> I mean, they tried. They just tried and failed.
They tried to do something that probably would have looked like Copilot integration into Windows, and they chose not to do that, because they discovered that it sucked.
So, they failed in an internal sense, which is better than the externalized kind of failure that Microsoft experienced.
I think that the nut that hasn't been cracked is: how do you get LLMs to replace the OS shell and core set of apps that folks use. I think Microsoft is trying by shipping stuff that sucks and pissing off customers, while Apple tried internally declined to ship it. OpenClaw might be the most interesting stab in that direction, but even that doesn't feel like the last word on the subject.