131–140 of 609 posts
Gemini models clearly gaslight the user and hallucinate, they're also SUPER verbose, as shown in the demos from the keynote.
Plus, if they're not charging a subscription for this, you know we're getting the dumbest models...
It's strange to me that Apple would choose to disadvantage themselves by selecting Google as their provider as opposed to, say, Anthropic or even OpenAI. Doesn't this mean they'll struggle more to differentiate themselves from the assistant on Android phones? Thinking more cynically, couldn't Google, if they wanted, feed Apple an inferior version of Gemini, ensuring they stay ahead? As the consumer, this just sucks b…
Apple was not going to hand over the keys to AI to just anyone.
Apple is a Fortune 5 company with a brand value alone worth more than any of these AI labs besides Google.
There's too much at stake for them to not play it safe. There's almost nothing to gain taking a risk
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the time Apple made this decision there wasn’t as strong of a difference in model quality between Google, anthropic, and OpenAI as there is now. Also Apple definitely burnt some bridges with OpenAI on the agreement they made together a year earlier.
> wasn’t as strong of a difference in model quality between Google, anthropic, and OpenAI as there is now What's the difference now? I would guess 9/10 people here would have a very hard time telling the models apart in a blind taste test.
Not launching in EU feels like a smell. It does look interesting enough for me to try it out before disabling Apple Intelligence again.
It's strange to me that Apple would choose to disadvantage themselves by selecting Google as their provider as opposed to, say, Anthropic or even OpenAI. Doesn't this mean they'll struggle more to differentiate themselves from the assistant on Android phones? Thinking more cynically, couldn't Google, if they wanted, feed Apple an inferior version of Gemini, ensuring they stay ahead? As the consumer, this just sucks b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google pays to be the default search because they make more from selling ads on those searches than they are paying for the search. I don't see the same thing here. Google isn't making any money from being the assistant in Apple, so why would they pay to be it?
It doesn't matter if it's classic search or LLM. They can monetize tracking information as easily as they can sell ads. They'll have fast cheap custom-built assistant models that run on device by default, keeping things profitable. In time they'll likely double-dip again by injecting product placement in results.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s the DMA regulation that forces Apple to give the same access as they have to other AI chat apps. Once it leaves the device Apple does not know what those other ai chat apps will do with the gathered data. > Siri AI is private by design and deeply integrated across Apple’s platforms using on-device processing and Private Cloud Compute, which extends the privacy and security of iPhone into the cloud. However, unde…
Translation: Since it's the user 's device, not Apple's, EU correctly "interprets" this as the user has the right to do whatever they please, including installing third-party chat apps. Apple are just bulshitters when it comes to actual users, and not their corporate definition of a user. BTW, did you know that in Japan, and in Japan only, you can change the Siri shortcut button to start other voice assistants? https…
It’s paternalistic, but I agree with Apple that free for all access to this kind of data is not a great idea. Ironically, before this could work we’d actually need much more EU style data regulation, and more consistently enforced.
It's strange to me that Apple would choose to disadvantage themselves by selecting Google as their provider as opposed to, say, Anthropic or even OpenAI. Doesn't this mean they'll struggle more to differentiate themselves from the assistant on Android phones? Thinking more cynically, couldn't Google, if they wanted, feed Apple an inferior version of Gemini, ensuring they stay ahead? As the consumer, this just sucks b…
I see it differently… Apple has chosen to treat the model as a commodity. By making Gemini an implementation detail, they leave the door open to swap it out for Anthropic or OpenAI without end-users even knowing or caring. So I think they're creating leverage in any future negotiation.
Very Apple-ish approach to AI catch up: wrap an external tool in a privacy architecture, embed into the OS and productize the orchestration layer. It will be interesting to see if the Private Cloud Compute + on-device routing can make third-party model capabilities feel like a first-party system without leaking user context to the model provider. If Apple handles the Google-Apple boundary right, this will be an elega…