That is how it is for search (Google pays Apple to be default search on Safari) but do we know for sure it will also be true for AI? For example, does Google pay Samsung to put Gemini features on Galaxy S24 phones or is it the other way around, or neither (Samsung gets it for free - doesn't pay but isn't paid either)? What will it be in the future?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple in Talks With Google to Bring Gemini AI Features to iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is how it is for search (Google pays Apple to be default search on Safari) but do we know for sure it will also be true for AI? For example, does Google pay Samsung to put Gemini features on Galaxy S24 phones or is it the other way around, or neither (Samsung gets it for free - doesn't pay but isn't paid either)? What will it be in the future?
Which is the whole point of applying more modern AI to Siri to bring more intelligence to it. Sir was originally built in a way that made subsequent changes very difficult and Apple stopped trying. Now they are talking about something that amounts to a brain transplant.
That take is a bit wide of the mark.
Due to how prominent white men are in published photos used as source materials, there has been a lot of criticism of AI generated images as being inherently racists and sexist in defaulting to white male images. As a result, those building the models have added in defaults to try to include more diversity by default. The result was a group of people (with a default racial variety) depicted wearing "nazi" outfits.
There was a similar incident where someone sent a prompt asking for an image of "the founding fathers" and it was also racially diverse. In digging further in that case, it was found and an earlier part of the prompt (that was not originally published) included instructions for racially diverse images. So the result was exactly what was requests, but it became a meme about how inaccurate AI images are.
Yep. And to what purpose? they don't even know.
it's all pointless ways to generate funding. it's not going to help you colonize Mars, or improve human lives in any way.
And you'd have to have pretty loose and forgiving definition of "intelligence" to believe that actual "AI" exits.
Good question. Apple sees itself as the prize with a couple of billion users. You want access you pay up.
However Apple needs this service to compete. Who needs who more. And also can this new ai that Apple integrates be used on existing devices. If not then they don’t have a couple of billion devices to leverage in their negotiations.
It’s a good quandary because apple obviously wants people to upgrade devices to use this. And this is what excites analysts. Something that spawns a supercycle of iPhone upgrades.
But what a pickle. Apple has to sell Google ai at its event. It begs the question if it’s a must have then why not get a Google device that probably has better integration.
Could this Google Gemini deal be about the money Apple will receive from Google??
Tim Cook said something to the affect that Apple has been working on AI for years spending billions of dollars……So why do they need Google
If this materializes then everyone’s privacy and info will be at risk
Tim Cook said something to the affect that Apple has been working on AI for years spending billions of dollars……So why do they need Google
If this materializes then everyone’s privacy and info will be at risk
True, although it wouldn’t be the first time Apple had to "sell" use of a competitor's product/service. Jobs had to sell making IE the default browser on Macintosh in 1997 as Apple didn't even get into the browser game until 2003. Apple had to sell making Google the default search on Safari, and Apple still isn't in the web search market at this point.
How good or bad this potentially is (still only in talks or a rumor at this point) will depend on the financial arrangement between Apple and Google, how integrated Gemini is into the phone, what Apple does on its own going forward, etc.
If you develop a truly great search product it:
1) costs money you have to recover, and
2) you eventually wind up with a boatload of user data.
The natural temptation is to monetize the data to pay for the search, after all, nobody is making money selling search (at least not on a mega-corp scale).
By pointing their users to Google search and collecting a portion of the earnings those searches make for Google, Apple gets the benefit of (arguably historically anyway) the best search for their users without having to do the nasty things with user data that pay for the cost of that capability.
Could Apple have a great search option? Without doubt they could. But I think they have looked at what they would need to do to pay for it and have balked.
I think the same thing is true of AI. They can't figure out how to monetize it without doing things they said they would not do. They want steak but do not want to run a slaughter house.
1) costs money you have to recover, and
2) you eventually wind up with a boatload of user data.
The natural temptation is to monetize the data to pay for the search, after all, nobody is making money selling search (at least not on a mega-corp scale).
By pointing their users to Google search and collecting a portion of the earnings those searches make for Google, Apple gets the benefit of (arguably historically anyway) the best search for their users without having to do the nasty things with user data that pay for the cost of that capability.
Could Apple have a great search option? Without doubt they could. But I think they have looked at what they would need to do to pay for it and have balked.
I think the same thing is true of AI. They can't figure out how to monetize it without doing things they said they would not do. They want steak but do not want to run a slaughter house.
Last edited:
Let me be clear.. search engines are going to be depreciated and replaced with AI queries, and probably not that far in the future. Google knows this, Microsoft knows this, and so do most of the people that are paying attention.
The issue then becomes, choosing an AI that hasn't been hamstrung with biased injections. Google has clearly proven that it's the MOST biased of all AI thus far.
The issue then becomes, choosing an AI that hasn't been hamstrung with biased injections. Google has clearly proven that it's the MOST biased of all AI thus far.
Tim Cook busy operating in damage control mode right now regarding A.I.
(side note: …and a couple other acronyms: EU, ECJ, DMA, DOJ, CAR…)
The state and capabilities of their current natural language processing A.I. assistant - after having invested years and probably billions in it - suggests they may need Google to provide a competitive product rather soon.
Last edited:
The question is, will specific AI features potentially being considered for the iPhone be monetized by Google (or anyone else) in the same way or level that search has been? Will it actually be like search where Google pays Apple or will Apple have to pay? What’s the longer term expectation? All of this will help determine whether or not Apple having its own AI for its devices is better or worse than using Google or another company for AI.
Nooooo.
I‘m with Apples ecosystem to avoid Google and its data tracking. I hope this is not true
I‘m with Apples ecosystem to avoid Google and its data tracking. I hope this is not true
Some of that AI manipulation will have been done before, (and after), it reaches you........