Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

adlrocha.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 402 posts

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#361

Post by Traster »

toyetic wrote: post #295
Traster wrote: post #287

People can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the core logic behind OpenAI's valuation was essentially that AI would work like search. Google had the best search engine, it became a centre of gravity that sucked everything in and suddenly network effects meant it was the centre of the universe. There seem to be 2 big problems with that though. The first is that for search, queries are both demand for the product an…

I think a large part of its valuation was it's ability to compete with search but thats understating it a bit. Unlike search it could/can be the platform users primarily interact with (ala a social media replacement) while having huge impacts on enterprise work and automation. I think its the combination of the ability for effectively one company to compete on every front in the modern web ecosystem thats contributed…

Yeah to zoom out, I think it was less specifically search and more generally: There was the PC, the winner became a behemoth. Then was Search, the winner became a behemoth. Then smartphones, the winner became a behemoth, Then there was social media and the winner became a behemoth.

The logic was basically "AI is going to be the next thing. The winner is going to be massive, let's back the person who looks best placed to do that". To be fair, it's probably correct. The people betting on OpenAI probably have plenty of money in Google shares and almost certainly have a share of Anthropic, grok, you name it. Most of them will go to 0, but the 1 winner could pay off. I'm not sure even 1 will pay off.

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#362

Post by wj »

Philip-J-Fry wrote: post #186
swazzy wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

similar vibes as "640k ought to be enough for anybody"

I think the difference is that with LLMs, in a lot of cases you do see some diminishing returns. I won't deny that the latest Claude models are fantastic at just one shotting loads of problems. But we have an internal proxy to a load of models running on Vertex AI and I accidentally started using Opus/Sonnet 4 instead of 4.6. I genuinely didn't know until I checked my configuration. AI models will get to this point w…

I'm not sure I understand your last paragraph? The two sentences seem to contradict?

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#363

Post by bigyabai »

ebbi wrote: post #358

I think introducing the MacBook Neo now, at that price point, was a genius move. While they're playing the waiting game on AI, they're cementing the next generation into the Apple ecosystem and getting them to not sway towards whatever device(s) OpenAI is cooking up. The MacBook Neo feels like the iPod of this generation.

> getting them to not sway towards whatever device(s) OpenAI is cooking up.

Why is this even relevant? The Macbook Neo's biggest competitor is not an imaginary future product, it's the Chromebooks and Windows devices that constitute the majority of laptops sold.

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#364

Post by bigyabai »

a13o wrote: post #286
pjmlp wrote: post #108

What I don't get about Apple is when everyone else was giving up on yet another VR attempt, moving into AI, they decide AI isn't worth it, and it was the right time for a me too VR headset. So no VR, given the price and lack of developer support, and late arrival into AI.

I think of it like a technology checkpoint. Make sure you got as far as everyone else when they gave up, so when the next innovation in that space comes along you can start back up on even footing. You want to have your own pathway to production that dodges competitors’ patents, is somewhat defensible itself, maybe a brand, etc.

From the outside looking in, it's an incredible waste of resources on Apple's behalf to use Vision Pro as a design exercise.

Apple would have had a much stronger position (for much cheaper) if they supported OpenXR and obsoleted the Windows Mixed Reality/Quest/Hololens brand for good. As a "15 competing standards" platform, visionOS is a net negative project when it could have been a direct shot at Microsoft and Valve.

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#365

Post by ebbi »

bigyabai wrote: post #363
ebbi wrote: post #358

I think introducing the MacBook Neo now, at that price point, was a genius move. While they're playing the waiting game on AI, they're cementing the next generation into the Apple ecosystem and getting them to not sway towards whatever device(s) OpenAI is cooking up. The MacBook Neo feels like the iPod of this generation.

> getting them to not sway towards whatever device(s) OpenAI is cooking up. Why is this even relevant? The Macbook Neo's biggest competitor is not an imaginary future product, it's the Chromebooks and Windows devices that constitute the majority of laptops sold.

It's relevant because it hooks people into an ecosystem. It builds brand loyalty when they have a good experience with the product...and the services that come with it (Music, Apple TV, iCloud, etc.).

I'm not suggesting MacBook Neo is a competitor to what OpenAI will release. I'm suggesting Apple will be a brand competitor, and getting people familiar with the Apple ecosystem from now will potentially lead to higher loyalty when it comes time to decide between OpenAI product vs Apple AI product.

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#366

Post by maplethorpe »

dwaite wrote: post #343
maplethorpe wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't they rush to integrate ChatGPT into their OS back in 2024? Reality doesn't seem to align with your description.

I wouldn't describe it as 'rushed'. Its integrated pretty much exactly the way they said it would be, as a fall-back from Siri when you ask world knowledge questions. The part that doesn't work is having Siri locally smart enough to use it as a tool.

I used "rushed" because they decided to add it while everyone was still figuring out what it was for. That behaviour goes against the OP's claim that Apple "waits to understand what the thing is capable of doing" before acting.

It feels like we're rewriting history. There was a lot of blowback at the time.

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#367

Post by nunez »

pram wrote: post #12

I've had it turned off since Sequoia, and this I truly appreciate. It hasn't nagged me once to turn it or Siri on, and it isn't mandatory. When I open up JIRA or Slack I am always greeted with multiple new dialogues pointing at some new AI bullshit, in comparison. We hates it precious

This right here is why I uninstalled Google Maps from my phone. Them pushing the AI-generated Know Before You Go that you can't turn off and blocks you from getting to reviews written _by humans who went to that restaurant_ is absurd. And this is getting normalized everywhere. Amazon with Rufus. Uber with their AI-first support. Google Workspace with Gemini EVERYWHERE (that requires hoops to properly turn off). Lots of sites with their "Ask $HUMAN_NAME" features.

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#368

Post by BoorishBears »

wj wrote: post #362
Philip-J-Fry wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that with LLMs, in a lot of cases you do see some diminishing returns. I won't deny that the latest Claude models are fantastic at just one shotting loads of problems. But we have an internal proxy to a load of models running on Vertex AI and I accidentally started using Opus/Sonnet 4 instead of 4.6. I genuinely didn't know until I checked my configuration. AI models will get to this point w…

I'm not sure I understand your last paragraph? The two sentences seem to contradict?

GPT 3.5 was intelligent enough to understand that command and turn it into a correct shaped JSON object: the platforms don't have tight enough integration to take advantage of the intelligence

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#369

Post by rekabis »

It really comes down to the old saying,

“The early bird might get the worm, but it’s the second mouse that gets the cheese.”

Apple is hanging back, waiting for mousetraps to be triggered as AI companies make mistakes that could not have been reliably foreseen. Then it’ll swoop in, adopt the best bits, and put out a product that is immensely polished and easy to use.

That has been, after all, one of its most important strategies over the years. They realized that early adopters only became industry leaders if their error rate remained low enough to keep ahead of those who let others make mistakes for them.

Re: Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up winning

#370

Post by foobar1962 »

46493168 wrote: post #38
foobar1962 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the people that bought iPhones are now buying Macs as well.

Indeed, a lot of the people that bought iPhones are now buying Macs with a binned version of the chip they already bought. So much so that Apple is in danger of running out of them.

Indeed. I just watched a "leak" video that claimed Apple is already releasing the MacBook Neo 2 with A19 chip because they are running out of A18 chips.
Post reply on HN