Apple Developing 'Apple Neural Engine' Chip to Power AI in iOS Devices

[kdarling]

And other voice assistent apps like that of Microsoft and Goole also gathering your information for commercial exploitation.

Sure, and that pays for often better services. Billions of people think it's a fair trade.

For instance, I use VPN for various reasons, as an example,when I search for a specific camera equipment I get harassed with banners about camera's for the next few weeks.

Yes, it's mildly annoying to still see camera ads even after we're no longer interested. But "harassed"? No.

Targeted ads have always been part of modern life. Heck, almost every TV show pays for itself by displaying commercials targeted at its audience.

Services and shows are not free.

With VPN together with add blockers I have none of that.

Do you also contribute to forums like MacRumors like many of us do, partly in order to not see ads? Or do you just block all ads and use places like this for free?

(It's also ironic that companies like Samsung help support forums like this with ads, whereas Apple does not.)

In regards to Apple's Siri, that company doesn't sell user data to commercial parties, Apple is not in that market.

Neither Google nor Microsoft sell user data. Just like Apple, they sell anonymised data or ad slots.

Well, and of course Apple also makes billions a year by selling Google access to iOS users in the form of the default search engine spot. That way, Apple can claim to be clean about selling data themselves, while making tons of money in data related kickbacks.

Which reminds me of something else hypocritical that Cook said in an interview last month. He was asked if Apple used our personal App Store and iTunes purchase info to target iAds and services. Of course we do, he replied; Apple has implicit permission to do so because you are using our stores.

And yet Apple touts hiding customer info from merchants who take Apple Pay at their checkout. Seems to me that what's good for the goose, should be also good for the gander.

 

[usamaah]

Out of curiosity I just (verbally) asked my Apple Watch the travel time to San Francisco. Within a second it gave me the correct answer. While that's nice, and might wow some people at a party or bar, it's not particularly impressive from an AI perspective. As I said, Siri handles simple commands like that just fine - as others do as well.

"I hate to think this is true, but might be... that if Siri was doing all this and Google was behind, that some people here would be singing its praises and saying "baby steps, at least Apple is this far ahead," but because it's competitors that are ahead people are prone to downplaying the advances made thus far."

I've never found it necessary/useful to thump my chest saying one product is doing better in a particular area than another. I'm guessing that's more the domain of people still in high school, needing to validate their favorite technology, and, being competitive.

To your second paragraph, that's great that you don't feel it necessary to thump your chest about one product over another, I feel the same way.

To your first paragraph, I am afraid I didn't explain my point well. You put my statement in bold when you were quoting me, but the thing is I never queried Google how long it would take to get to my parents home. So the example you gave of asking your Watch isn't the same thing. That is definitely NOT the point I was making with Google Now giving me information about my travel time to my parents. My point was that I never had to ask Google Now, it recognized on its own that on Fridays I typically go from work to my place of worship, and then to my parents home and started giving me travel information on Fridays to my mosque and then travel information to my parents' home.

This is akin to an assistant learning your schedule and letting you know "Hey I know you have this meeting up north after work, this is how long it will take to get there." It presented information by learning my habits.

The assistant similarly will present information to me based on my purchasing (package shipped, arrived? movie theater tickets I bought, when I should leave my home to make the movie on time). I know Siri has started doing some of this too, I think. But Google Now is particularly impressive with this sort of stuff and it's I think a step towards artificial intelligence.
[doublepost=1495901832][/doublepost]

I don't have knowledge of Motorola's industry with coprocessors, But nor are they really relevant in the smart phone market anymore either. I think my point is Apple is tuning their devices more specific to various products. Hence S1/S2 Chip, W1 Chip, M9/M10, A Series, to each device to Create a sense of exclusivity if you will that simulates different functions. Apple may not be the first to implement the coprocessor, but they can better the process and user experience. Also, Apple's coprocessors are not taxing on the battery as well, which helps with managing the efficiency from the processor itself.

I don't mean disrespect but I feel you ignored my post's main point.

It's fine if you don't have knowledge of Motorola's coprocessors, but they did exactly what you're getting at, they provided functionality without degrading battery life. (And I'd argue them using it first would make their efforts pretty relevant to the smart phone market, at the time). That's the whole point of creating coprocessors, so you do not "wake" the main CPU as much which is more power hungry.

M chips
These are true coprocessors. They handle sensory information without taxing the CPU.

W1 chip
W1 is an apple-specific implementation of [now] current BT specs, and they added the ability to pair to specific devices better/easier/faster (which gets at your point about creating a better process and user experience).

S2 chip
The S2 chip is again something that every chip manufacture does because it helps to make production more standardized, cheaper, and allows devices to be lower power. It just put the CPU, GPS and other relevant chips (GPU, RAM) into one package. This is not a coprocessor by itself.

A series
Also the A series is not a coprocessor, it is the system on a chip which houses the main CPU. The design of the A-series is nothing short of brilliant, but the coprocessors are just the M and W chips.


The M series is something other companies had already started doing, so Apple was catching up, and was better at branding it. The W1 chip was Apple taking an early jump at Bluetooth 5 but adding Apple magic to make it work quickly with their other hardware (Earpods, and probably Beats stuff).

 

[MH01]

Chips are great and all....but maybe invest in the software.....cough "Siri" .... it's not hardware holding it back, it's lack of investment

 

[44267547]

I don't mean disrespect but I feel you ignored my post's main point.

It's fine if you don't have knowledge of Motorola's coprocessors, but they did exactly what you're getting at, they provided functionality without degrading battery life. (And I'd argue them using it first would make their efforts pretty relevant to the smart phone market, at the time). That's the whole point of creating coprocessors, so you do not "wake" the main CPU as much which is more power hungry.

M chips
These are true coprocessors. They handle sensory information without taxing the CPU.

W1 chip
W1 is an apple-specific implementation of [now] current BT specs, and they added the ability to pair to specific devices better/easier/faster (which gets at your point about creating a better process and user experience).

S2 chip
The S2 chip is again something that every chip manufacture does because it helps to make production more standardized, cheaper, and allows devices to be lower power. It just put the CPU, GPS and other relevant chips (GPU, RAM) into one package. This is not a coprocessor by itself.

A series
Also the A series is not a coprocessor, it is the system on a chip which houses the main CPU. The design of the A-series is nothing short of brilliant, but the coprocessors are just the M and W chips.


The M series is something other companies had already started doing, so Apple was catching up, and was better at branding it. The W1 chip was Apple taking an early jump at Bluetooth 5 but adding Apple magic to make it work quickly with their other hardware (Earpods, and probably Beats stuff).

No disrespect taken at all. This is the internet, if one takes something offensively from a digital stranger, then one shouldn't be on discussion forums.

That said:

Since We are talking about the same thing in some respects, I'm not indicating Apple was the first to do anything with coprocessors/custom chips. (To clear confusion, I never assumed the other chips you listed were coprocessors and I understand the differences). However , I will say it again, which was Indicated in my previous post, Apple isn't the first to necessarily implement the coprocessor, but they can better the process and make it More user efficient, which they are indefinitely doing across their product line.

If you take the time to reread my first post on the first page, I think that clears everything where we first started. Apples not necessarily making something over somebody else that hasn't already manufactured already, they're just doing it to better their devices and then make them more exclusive For the specific product. The Apple Watch with the first S1 chip (Which was custom), the W1 ship for the AirPods (Cross-platforming) as aforementioned and the M9 coprocessor in the 6S (Which granted Hands free Siri to in this specific model). The reason I list the functions for these chips, is they all do different things, which makes that product that much more of its own entity Or entitlement.

As far as Motorola being relevant with the coprocessor, sure, I'll give you the fact that they were already doing this before Apple had. But why does it have any relevance to what Apple is doing currently? It doesn't. Nor would it be pertinent for Apple not taking advantage of this sooner.

Also, just to clear up any confusion and to be succinct, Apple uses their own custom chips for their devices, I wasn't just referring to coprocessors by themselves.

For the record, I did every state In my previous post that the coprocessor has a function where it's less taxing on the battery and from the processor itself.

 

[chucker23n1]

As far as Motorola being relevant with the coprocessor, sure, I'll give you the fact that they were already doing this before Apple had. But why does it have any relevance to what Apple is doing currently? It doesn't. Nor would it be pertinent for Apple not taking advantage of this sooner.

It's relevant because you said:

The M9 Coprocessor incorporated into the 6s was what allowed Siri to be hands free, which was a nice advantage. It's the little things that make the device better as a whole.

[..]

To me this, this is what separates Apple from others. They make their devices almost custom using their own flow into future devices and compatibility.

Apple does put a lot of effort into advantages from custom chips, owning as much as the entire stack as possible, etc.

But the M9 / Hey Siri is a poor example, because Motorola shipped it more than two years earlier in the Moto X.

 

[44267547]

Apple does put a lot of effort into advantages from custom chips, owning as much as the entire stack as possible, etc.

But the M9 / Hey Siri is a poor example, because Motorola shipped it more than two years earlier in the Moto X.

I disagree, the M9 is a great example of how it manages less draw from the main A9 Processor, which grants Siri to be hands free inconjuction. And it's entirely true, it makes the device and user experience better from being over first.

Also, you didn't read my previous post or part of it, because I already admitted Motorola was prior to Apple with the coprocessor. My whole point was, is Apple is making their products different across the product line with more custom chips to enhance the product differently for the user experience. I.e.- The W1 chip with Cross platforming and I will use this example again, the M9 Coprocessor, which granted Siri as hands free and provides less draw from the main processor, ultimately conserving the battery.

 

[usamaah]

I disagree, the M9 is a great example of how it manages less draw from the main A9 Processor, which grants Siri to be hands free innconjuction. And it's entirely true, it makes the device and user experience better from being over first.

Also, you didn't read my previous post or part of it, because I already admitted Motorola was prior to Apple with the coprocessor. My whole point was, is Apple is making their products different across the product line with more custom chips to enhance the product differently for the user experience. I.e.- The W1 chip with Cross platforming and I will use this example again, the M9 Coprocessor, which granted Siri as hands free and provides less draw from the main processor.

Thanks for the clarification in your earliest post.

I think chucker23n1 meant it was a poor example because the M9 did the exact same thing the Motorola X8 system did. It granted the phone the ability to respond to voice commands without drawing from the main CPU, and without having to wake the phone. No doubt the M9 granted Siri as hands free, and this is exactly what the X8 did for the Moto X, and no doubt it [M9] lets the phone draw less from the main processor, and again this is what the X8 did for the Moto X.

The M-line didn't do anything better than the competition, nor did it do anything gave it a special advantage to the iPhone. It just did what someone else was doing. And it should be noted, Qualcomm did it too.

I think our concern isn't that you didn't acknowledge Motorola was first, it's that you're saying Apple is doing something better or unique, or more valuable, than what others have done or are doing:

The M9 Coprocessor incorporated into the 6s was what allowed Siri to be hands free, which was a nice advantage. It's the little things that make the device better as a whole.

The W1 chip from the Airpods has huge potential to cross platform.

To me this, this is what separates Apple from others. They make their devices almost custom using their own flow into future devices and compatibility.

And

making their products different across the product line with more custom chips to enhance the product differently for the user experience

Emphasis was added by me in the first quote. We're just saying the examples you give with M9 is not a good example of what separates Apple from others, because others had been doing this and continue to do it.

 

[44267547]

Thanks for the clarification in your earliest post.

I think our concern isn't that you didn't acknowledge Motorola was first, it's that you're saying Apple is doing something better or unique, or more valuable, than what others have done or are doing: .

Actually, In post 49 and 79, I Stated Apple was NOT the first to manufacture the coprocessor, I just never admitted directly Motorola On its own, which I also indicated to you previously on how I was not aware of Motorola's back history. That was acknowledged on more than one occasion and there shouldn't be any confusion.

And yes, I stand by that I believe Apple is doing something to Make their products more
Efficient and they're doing it more so across their productline then they are just one specific product. It's not just about the coprocessor or iPhone. It expands beyond that and clearly is continually to grow. It May not be "Different" from what was already released, but it's not about being the first, it's about making it the process better.

 

[Bacillus]

I believe Apple intends to offload all Siri functionality onto this new chip. That way, it frees up the upcoming A11 SoC to do more computation-intensive tasks.

Ehhh? How much computational advantage would that offer (if so limited for A11) ?
And what Siri processing related to AI would have to become local for that matter ?
Actually, you're suggesting a complete conceptual Siri redesign that I cannot follow

 

[usamaah]

Actually, In post 49 and 79, I Stated Apple was NOT the first to manufacture the coprocessor, I just never admitted directly Motorola On its own, which I also indicated to you previously on how I was not aware of Motorola's back history. That was acknowledged on more than one occasion and there shouldn't be any confusion.

And yes, I stand by that I believe Apple is doing something to Make their products more
Efficient and they're doing it more so across their productline then they are just one specific product. It's not just about the coprocessor or iPhone. It expands beyond that and clearly is continually to grow. It May not be "Different" from what was already released, but it's not about being the first, it's about making it the process better.

Ok, gotcha, I understand what you mean. The network of co-processors in the different devices Apple is building and will build in the future is what will help it stand apart from the plethora of other products since these devices will be bale to better connect to each other and offer more to the end user.

 

[44267547]

Ok, gotcha, I understand what you mean. The network of co-processors in the different devices Apple is building and will build in the future is what will help it stand apart from the plethora of other products since these devices will be bale to better connect to each other and offer more to the end user.

That's exactly what I mean. It appears there was confusion here. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[chucker23n1]

Ehhh? How much computational advantage would that offer (if so limited for A11) ?
And what Siri processing related to AI would have to become local for that matter ?
Actually, you're suggesting a complete conceptual Siri redesign that I cannot follow

I suppose some tasks that are fairly frequent and don't rely on the network might benefit from this. Tasks that set up alarms and reminders, read e-mails and messages, stuff like that.

 

[Bacillus]

I suppose some tasks that are fairly frequent and don't rely on the network might benefit from this. Tasks that set up alarms and reminders, read e-mails and messages, stuff like that.

Could be but even those for local tasks voice processing is done in the cloud - implying that a Siri co-processor would offer little benefit.
Unless a complete overhaul takes place and Siri would be redesignex to work without a network - which I personally would appreciate

 

[chucker23n1]

Could be but even those for local tasks voice processing is done in the cloud - implying that a Siri co-processor would offer little benefit.
Unless a complete overhaul takes place

macOS's implementation of Dictation has an 'Enhanced Dictation' option that works offline. This is currently missing in iOS, presumably mainly due to lack of processing power. It's conceivable that A11 will be fast enough.

 

[Keirasplace]

You can literally say that about any product man has ever made in existence today, right now.

But in reality, it's just called deflection ... .to go away from the fact that Siri really is *THAT* bad

No bud, it's called an argument. If the difference is immaterial as a god damn sales argument except to nerds, it doesn't exist. That's all that actually matters.

In fact, the availability of Siri in so many languages (a massive distribution advantage) IS a material difference that actually matters to selling the product. Cause availability to the client is actually more important to the client that super duper minute differences that nerds get high on.

As for other important selling advantages, Google's link to search and your search history does provide them a distinct advantages in certain type of queries; no surprise there...
[doublepost=1495944958][/doublepost]

Nope.

For example, the smartphone is a mature product, silicium based chips are a mature technology, and so on...

Siri is completely comparable to the other products you mention, sometimes superior, other times inferior, but all of them just suck donkey balls. They're not AIs by any stretch of imagination yet.

I do agree, they all suck balls as a general AI (they're all very bad), but they don't when using them within their specific field of expertise.
Right now, you pick and choose whatever you want to do and get the correct tool that serves your needs.

Those voice assistant are still in their infancy and there is much to do still before they're more than nice products.

One thing that I wish they could do and I'm not holding my breath for, is be able to understand what your saying in mixed language settings. I live in Quebec and our place names, names, songs etc are French, so its easy to introduce those things mid sentence and just confuse those voice systems completely if your voice settings are english. If you set your system to french, then all tech terms and other searches I initiate in English are not understood; or if I look for an English song it will simply not know I switched language (how could it know). Doing a dual parallel 2 language voice recognition is probably the solution here (then it returns the most probable response between french and english). For that, you'd almost certainly require local processing.

 

[potatis]

Is this superior to the Emotion engine from the Sony PS2?

 

[Geurt]

Wow, imagine this neural chip for artificial intelligence would be ready to be implanted in my wife creating a humanoid... we could actually have a good conversation instead of with some backend servers of Apple they call Siri!

 

[drewyboy]

Wow, imagine this neural chip for artificial intelligence would be ready to be implanted in my wife creating a humanoid... we could actually have a good conversation instead of with some backend servers of Apple they call Siri!

Nope. 90% of the time you ask a question, she'll just meander off to your laptop and ask google.

 

[buckwheet]

Let's be honest — Apple is WAY behind the game with voice recognition. Siri is flat out useless compared to both Alex and Google Voice. If I could replace Siri with Google Voice (including Lens) without having to have another app open, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

I'd just rather avoid the rest of Android.

Being "behind" really means very little. With sufficient resources, a company could enter the market today and gain the potential to be a competitor. This is a "new" field based (largely) on old theory and long-standing models, grounded in widely available knowledge. So, what Apple—or any company for that matter—may or may not have in a product today means very little for what they could release in only a few months, given sufficient resources. And Apple, of course, has enormous resources.

Also, in my experience, Siri has trouble with British accents (my partner is British and has a terrible time getting it to work properly... not sure if you're from the UK or not). However, it works *very* well for me, with my fairly generic, urban Canadian accent; probably because it favours North American English... Perhaps it has trouble with Brits because there are such a huge number of different accents in the UK (and the extremes are *very* different)...?? I wonder if it has trouble with US from the deep South (or thick, rural Canadian)?

 

[nfable]

50% of the time....
Me: "Siri, remind me when I get home"

Siri: 'Okay, what do you want to be reminded about?'

50% of the time....
Me: "Siri, remind me when I get home"

Siri: 'Okay, in what amount of time?'


So who is going to be producing these Dialog Semiconductor?

 

[drewyboy]

Being "behind" really means very little. With sufficient resources, a company could enter the market today and gain the potential to be a competitor. This is a "new" field based (largely) on old theory and long-standing models, grounded in widely available knowledge. So, what Apple—or any company for that matter—may or may not have in a product today means very little for what they could release in only a few months, given sufficient resources. And Apple, of course, has enormous resources.

It's all about data sets and Google has by far the most.

 

[buckwheet]

It's all about data sets and Google has by far the most.

True. But there are techniques designed specifically for smaller datasets, and I'm sure these will improve...

 

[oplix]

Apple begins AI marketing campaigns while their competitors are developing actual products...

I think that's what the article means.

 

[Bacillus]

Apple begins AI marketing campaigns while their competitors are developing actual products...

I think that's what the article means.

More specifically:
Apple uses AI-marketing and a co-processor announcement to effectuate its necessary transition to local-Siri

 

[sudo1996]

Exciting times for hardware people. CPUs suck for anything really performance-critical, and people are going back to specialized chips.
[doublepost=1496032036][/doublepost]

Let's be honest — Apple is WAY behind the game with voice recognition. Siri is flat out useless compared to both Alex and Google Voice. If I could replace Siri with Google Voice (including Lens) without having to have another app open, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

I'd just rather avoid the rest of Android.

Am I not creative enough? I've found that Siri can do everything I need her to do, which is usually just asking for directions or changing the music while driving. I don't need to have a conversation with a robot.
[doublepost=1496032146][/doublepost]

For instance, I use VPN for various reasons, as an example,when I search for a specific camera equipment I get harassed with banners about camera's for the next few weeks.

Would you rather see ads about something else? How are you seeing them in the first place if you have an ad blocker? I just have an ad blocker or two set to the maximum "I don't want f***ing ads" settings.