Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#151

Post by mtrovo » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:30 PM UTC

hi_hi wrote: post #110

Does Google have an LLM based AI experience for Android? What are they doing differently to avoid the problems plaguing Apple. The core technology in both can't be that different. Or is it an expectation thing? I feel like they may be experiencing that issue where the product is quite good within some core set of features, but the edge cases are where all the paper cuts happen. And when its a singular product on a si…

The Android assistant with Gemini is quite good nowadays, very close to parity of features with the previous one. It's not there yet but Google decided to develop it in the open, similar to the old "beta" products. Hard to see Apple doing the same.

The main issue to Apple is the different mindset that takes to deliver hardware vs. services. Delivering hardware you have one shot to "wow" your customers, and Apple keep nailing this process in a way that the whole industry can't keep up with anymore. On software, that doesn't work that well. You can totally be disrupted by a startup that delivers an MVP faster with 30% of your perfect product that would take 3 years to deliver. In this way, Google's assistant strategy in the short term was spot-on compared to Apple's. You take the hits of bad feedback in the short term in the hope that being in the game can create enough momentum to get you to a solid position of features and know-how in a couple of years.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#152

Post by epohs » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:35 PM UTC

ejoso wrote: post #134

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I suspect the most significant thing holding Apple back in the realm of AI is the fact that Apple prides itself as a company that delivers revolutionary products with ‘wow factor’ that is leagues above the competition. I don't remember them ever doing that. Usually they start with something lacklustre then incrementally improve it until it is strong. Maps is a great example, it was poor on launch compared to Google…

Google Maps largely exists because of Apple. Do you remember when the iPhone was released? AirPods? The iMac? The Mac? The Apple II? Broaden scope a bit to understand what this comment meant. You’re right that Apple botches things in the small scale and especially in software, but they’ve been a great aggregator of amazing tech in the total lifespan.

Google Maps had already launched and had really surprised everyone at how much better it was than any other mapping tool a few years before iPhone launched. and just the interactivity of it in general independent of it being a “map” was a paradigm shifter.

Yes, the iPhone put it in everyone’s pocket, but if Apple had built a handheld device that was powerful enough to run any interactive mapping tool Google Maps was already the obvious choice.

It’s a minor quibble, but to say Apple played a majority role in Google Map’s success doesn’t ring true to me. In 2007 Google Maps was easily overtaking all other mapping tools with or without the iPhone.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#153

Post by heresie-dabord » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:35 PM UTC

mtrovo wrote: post #146

heresie-dabord wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Siri has been close to useless for a decade and a half. The concrete value-measure for me is whether I would feel any loss as a user if Siri simply disappeared. The answer is no, I would feel no loss. But this is also true for me if the subject is Gemini, CoPilot, Alexa, &c. For all the money and energy burned, for all the advertising babble and grotesque valuation, I would not as a user be one jot less productive…

As an Android user I have to disagree, at least if we're comparing apples to apples (could not resist the pun). Google Assistant with Gemini (or whatever its name is this month) is really remarkable at helping with mundane tasks, and I would really miss it if it were gone. Circle to search, asking questions about my agenda, and setting up new events on my calendar based simply on taking photos of documents or posters…

It's not so much a question of disagreement. The fact that you have found value as a user is fine by me, of course! Maybe your use-cases should be captured by the Siri development team.

If Siri has been useless for more than a decade, that also means that many users are barely using it, if at all. I'm not the only user of a system containing such applications that has found zero concrete value in them.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#154

Post by pzo » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:36 PM UTC

It's interesting that Whisper from OpenAI that has been released so long time ago is much better than Siri and also support like ~50 languages and an be run actually realtime on iPhones. They could even take it probably for free since its MIT license but most likely they have not invented syndrome at Apple.

Actually ex-Apple devs are running company that optimised whisper for apple devices and even provide it on HF open source: https://www.argmaxinc.com/team

Just very good multilingual STT would improve Siri experience a lot. I'm wondering if apple privacy policy backfired and they don't have much data they can use for training.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#155

Post by kittikitti » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:38 PM UTC

I have an iPhone 16 Pro Max and had to turn off all Apple Intelligence. It bricked my phone multiple times and made things significantly worse all around.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#156

Post by breckenedge » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:39 PM UTC

rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #35

svnt wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parent is saying there are too many middle managers/execs and not enough engineers with agency.

I don't know why anyone believes that the push for Apple Intelligence was driven by middle management. Sure, engineers could have pushed back because they knew more about the limitations of the tech, but engineers aren't one to understand the macroeconomics driving industry-wide demand and long-term growth.

> engineers aren't one to understand the macroeconomics driving industry-wide demand and long-term growth

It’s a two way street. Managers can only see the forest, but engineers are capable of seeing both the forest and the trees.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#157

Post by mrtksn » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:47 PM UTC

AnonC wrote: post #55

IMO, Craig Federighi is quite good at presentations and his own style of humor, but he doesn’t seem to have a good grip on the quality of software across all of Apple’s (buggy) platforms and apps. I don’t believe that moving Siri under him (i.e., his reporting structure) is a good idea. Only time will tell. There are far more bugs and issues that are to be fixed (but don’t get attention) than Siri. Anyway Siri has be…

Don't you think that maybe the issues are rooted in the Apple's attempt to do everything by itself?

All things considered Apple actually delivers some great software, Apple is one of the few companies that built their own operating systems, their software UX is considered to be the gold standard. They pulled architecture transition processes that required great software engineering alongside with the hardware engineering and they did it amazingly well.

Apple's success in some areas suggests that the failure in other areas doesn't have to be about software development culture but simply wrong bets or policies.

Apple tomorrow can become the best platform for anything AI, they just have to open up their platform and let people on the cutting edge of AI to take over some functions.

IMHO Apple's greed is failing them. That revenue growth in the "Services" category on their quarterly reports is their Achilles heel. Locking down users on their platforms allows them access to a "market without competition" but there's actually a competition happening outside of this walled garden and that competition is fierce. People in the garden start thinking that maybe the grass is greener beyond the fence.

Ironically, there's a possibility EU saving them from themselves if they stop being just compliant enough to hold up in court and embrace the spirit of what DMA is trying to do. Throw a tantrum on EU and say that the lost revenue was because of the evil EU thingy and save this great brands and great company.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#158

Post by mulletbum » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:51 PM UTC

JimDabell wrote: post #99

AnonC wrote: post #55

IMO, Craig Federighi is quite good at presentations and his own style of humor, but he doesn’t seem to have a good grip on the quality of software across all of Apple’s (buggy) platforms and apps. I don’t believe that moving Siri under him (i.e., his reporting structure) is a good idea. Only time will tell. There are far more bugs and issues that are to be fixed (but don’t get attention) than Siri. Anyway Siri has be…

Apple have never learnt how to build software sustainably. They let the bugs, misfeatures, and tech debt pile up over time. They addressed this once with a huge “0 new features” iteration with Snow Leopard to catch up on the worst of it, but never resolved the root of the problem, so it started to build up again. Now it seems like they don’t care enough about software quality to even do that. They need somebody else…

They aren't even doing hardware well in some cases, their bread and butter.

Bluetooth has been broken on both editions of their Pro Max Phone (15 & 16). It cuts out and has all kinds of weird issues, but no fix has come for years now. This was why I always paid a premium for their phones, they did hardware and software well. Not anymore, their so focus has been on their processors.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#159

Post by plaidfuji » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:51 PM UTC

Is part of the problem not that people don’t actually want to use voice commands on their phone for most things? Using my phone is a private activity. I don’t want to yell at my phone in public about doctors appointments, work emails, setting up dinner reservations, calendar events etc. And god forbid I have to repeat myself. There are certain situations, like driving, where it’s necessary. I just don’t think voice commands are a significant step up from typing.

Re: Apple shuffles AI executive ranks in bid to turn around Siri

#160

Post by pzo » Fri, Mar 21, 2025, 12:58 PM UTC

varunnrao wrote: post #88

chippiewill wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their vertical integration gives them an edge not many can match, when it comes to running ML models. They have an advantage when it comes to running them locally, but it feels like they're trying to push it onto consumer hardware before consumer hardware is at the point of actually being able to run useful LLMs.

You're right. The hardware right now can't run useful models. But that's why I think they have a couple of years to sort out their software issues. When useful models can be run on their devices they have to be ready. The hardware advantage can only be an advantage when they have the software to run useful applications. Hopefully they don't get stuck in the typical big company bureaucracy and ego matches and instead…

They made it less useful because they were greedy. Before M1 we used to have laptops that had 16GB RAM as a base. With M1 the made base back to 8GB. In PC world before M1 and even before apple started soldering everything you could have easily laptop extended up to 64GB RAM for a cheap price. Those ram sticks are not expensive in retail price and should be even less expensive if wholesale and not full sticks as bill of material but just memory modules.

If last year they would make each macbook air as a standard have 32GB RAM and iPhone 16GB RAM + 250GB SSD as a base they would have the most capable hardware with big user base.

Sure they loose some money of people having upgrade models but they would sell much more Macs. As a reference they sell each year only ~20M Macs comparing to 60M ipads and 240M iphones. Macs are having only like what ~10% market share worldwide? They could easily double it but they protect their profit margin like virginity.