With due respect, that comment represents lazy analysis. It is important to note that Apple has utilized advanced AI technology to power its personal voice accessibility features and Vision Pro persona. While there may be areas where Apple can improve, it is not accurate to say that the company has failed to embrace generative AI technology.
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
They haven't bought ANYTHING.
There is a rumor about Apple being in talks, but we don't know why, for what, or the scale of it.
But you have your narrative all set.
I suggest with your confidence you go short Apple stock and make some money instead of arguing with an idiot like me
Why would privacy be a concern.
I'd have to suggest that;
Apple know better than we and have done the due diligence and trust it will be fine or.....
Google isn't quite the boogie monster people think it is, or.......
Google isn't quite the boogie monster people want it to be, or.......
Apple and Google really aren't that different?
An option five is fine if you want to suggest one.
Assuming AI isn’t another fad like NFTs.
@wanha
Totally different thing. I am not believing APple sucks or is going to get broke because they stopped developing their car or they presented the vision pro which is not a good product in my point of view. Its just an objective statement, that Apple seems to not be on par with its competitors. If Apple could provide a solution by themselfs they wouldnt rely on their competitors.
Totally different thing. I am not believing APple sucks or is going to get broke because they stopped developing their car or they presented the vision pro which is not a good product in my point of view. Its just an objective statement, that Apple seems to not be on par with its competitors. If Apple could provide a solution by themselfs they wouldnt rely on their competitors.
and that is the day I buy my first Samsung phone.
Apple is all in the AI basket now as they ditched/canned there Big Car project and 5G modem project, which cost them billions by buying Intel and Self driving technology.
AI is obviously the future and will tie in big to the Vision Pro and iPhone
AI is obviously the future and will tie in big to the Vision Pro and iPhone
Lol. It's the reality distortion field at work. Apple does not pay suppliers, Suppliers pay Apple for the privilege of being named as Apple suppliers, even if the supplied product costs billions and generates no revenue yet like Generative AI on ios. (Sarcasm)
I cannot understand the kind of logic that leads people to come to such conclusions.
Too much of a price to pay for something of so limited use. If I wanted to sell my soul to Google I would have bought an Android
I'm a heavy ChatGPT user. I've tried to use Google's LLM offerings multiple times and I've always found them to be completely useless. Not really sure why Apple would choose to partner with Google over OpenAI (unless it's due to licensing agreements with Microsoft).
Not having to deal with the evil that is google is 95% of the reason I use the apple eco system. So no thanks. I’m sure those tens/hundreds of billions of dollars can whip up a proper non shittified gen AI for iOS.
Having extensively tried Gemini, Copilot pro, Perplexity, and many more, I really wonder why would Apple chose to become totally reliant on Google for that. What's the benefit?
If it's about the scale and the capacity, then Microsoft should be well placed as well. And they're willing to invest into any market they can. That would at least be a decent alternative on the mobile sector. That being said, any provider would do as long as Apple is willing to pay for the cloud computing (and here again Google or Microsoft would gladly take the check so they wouldn't mind)
If it's about the innovation, then why don't they buy Claude, Humane, Perplexity AI or any of the "small" contenders who are making waves right now.
...
I'm really lost when it comes to understating the direction Apple is going right now.
It was easy when all there was to manage was the next iPhone or Macbook iteration. Engineers did optimized performances, Tim optimized costs and margins.
Now that it's about making decisions on what the next product(s) should be, Apple gives the vibes of a company not knowing at all where it goes. It's been a few years already, and you can really start to see a trend of failed attempts.
The Car ->axed after 10 years
The Apple TV's interface and goal (is it just a roku? a console? a home hub without a proper home app ?)
The Homepod -> is it a smartspeaker ? Then why make it so difficult to use anything else with it ?
The Airpods Max -> All that money for just a pair of headphones you can't use properly for anything else? Sony's XM4 and 5 can do so much more for less. If you pay the Apple tax, you should at least get something the others dont do, or at least not as well (the 5k screens of the imacs or macbook pro for instance with their best of class calibration)
And of course the jury is still out (and I'm being kind here) about what the usage of the Vision Pro should be, in a context where people are short of money and watching even more than before what they'll get for their money.
Don't be fooled by the "high" sales of some products. Products that sell well are those where we already know what the usage is, and why it's worth paying the premium. Anything new is pretty anecdotic or simply a failure, only bought by the hardcore fans (which are still many) who don't look at the expense.
This is very concerning as an Apple user, and I didn't even talk about the software (hey Apple, I'm using Java - yes it's still a (big) thing in research - stop messing with your OS).
Of course, YMMV. If you're one of the few "pros" who are the still in Apple's target, you may as well find that everything is perfect. For the rest of us, not so much.
If it's about the scale and the capacity, then Microsoft should be well placed as well. And they're willing to invest into any market they can. That would at least be a decent alternative on the mobile sector. That being said, any provider would do as long as Apple is willing to pay for the cloud computing (and here again Google or Microsoft would gladly take the check so they wouldn't mind)
If it's about the innovation, then why don't they buy Claude, Humane, Perplexity AI or any of the "small" contenders who are making waves right now.
...
I'm really lost when it comes to understating the direction Apple is going right now.
It was easy when all there was to manage was the next iPhone or Macbook iteration. Engineers did optimized performances, Tim optimized costs and margins.
Now that it's about making decisions on what the next product(s) should be, Apple gives the vibes of a company not knowing at all where it goes. It's been a few years already, and you can really start to see a trend of failed attempts.
The Car ->axed after 10 years
The Apple TV's interface and goal (is it just a roku? a console? a home hub without a proper home app ?)
The Homepod -> is it a smartspeaker ? Then why make it so difficult to use anything else with it ?
The Airpods Max -> All that money for just a pair of headphones you can't use properly for anything else? Sony's XM4 and 5 can do so much more for less. If you pay the Apple tax, you should at least get something the others dont do, or at least not as well (the 5k screens of the imacs or macbook pro for instance with their best of class calibration)
And of course the jury is still out (and I'm being kind here) about what the usage of the Vision Pro should be, in a context where people are short of money and watching even more than before what they'll get for their money.
Don't be fooled by the "high" sales of some products. Products that sell well are those where we already know what the usage is, and why it's worth paying the premium. Anything new is pretty anecdotic or simply a failure, only bought by the hardcore fans (which are still many) who don't look at the expense.
This is very concerning as an Apple user, and I didn't even talk about the software (hey Apple, I'm using Java - yes it's still a (big) thing in research - stop messing with your OS).
Of course, YMMV. If you're one of the few "pros" who are the still in Apple's target, you may as well find that everything is perfect. For the rest of us, not so much.
ChatGPT is superior to Gemini, at least as it stands today (and based on my experience).
Apple is so proud of making their products in-house as much as possible. Seems almost inconceivable they would license technology that is so fundamental to their software.
There are many "Search" competitors that Apple could go to if Google was not paying up though while there aren't that many AI "makers" to choose from if I am not mistaken and ChatGPT / OpenAI is already working with MS, so Apple does not really have too many options
That’s a stretch to try to argue. Anybody will say Google Search is “the one” yet they have to pay Apple lum sum for a privilege on iPhone while on AI people actually know more about ChatGPT than “Gemini”.
And why Apple can’t work with Microsoft? Of course they can & Microsoft would love it.
Google is the second tier here while they are the first tier in search. I’d imagine they have to pay much more.
So Apples idea of AI is to use their main competitors solutions? A 3 trillion dollar company.. and even then it is STILL only going to run locally in your decide, or in other words be EXTREMELY limited in capability.
If true it shows how massively and indeed embarrassingly behind the AI curve Apple truly is. Desperately attempting to buy its way into catching up. Perhaps if they didn't waste so much time and money on a frankly STUPID idea of building a car! They would have noticed the traction AI was getting......
If true it shows how massively and indeed embarrassingly behind the AI curve Apple truly is. Desperately attempting to buy its way into catching up. Perhaps if they didn't waste so much time and money on a frankly STUPID idea of building a car! They would have noticed the traction AI was getting......
Very good points. Sort of just left Apple for a variety of reasons but what you said resonated!
Please don’t do this Apple. I don’t want anything from Google on my devices.
I doubt it. It's going to hurt everyone else in the long term. They are hedging their bets by buying in stuff which could end up the target of legislative control.
If only all the money invested in Apple Vision Pro had been invested in AI... or in other words to something that all Apple users would have benefited from vs a shiny gadget that only very few will ever use.
Apple making big business deals with Google sounds a little desperate, Google knows how to make money only one way: collecting user data and part of Apple's marketing plan is to tell the world how pro-privacy they are.
Apple making big business deals with Google sounds a little desperate, Google knows how to make money only one way: collecting user data and part of Apple's marketing plan is to tell the world how pro-privacy they are.