I suppose imitation is the greatest form of flattery?
Now fandroids will go crazy calling this the best thing since sliced bread
I'm sure the developers of Microsoft's Tellme will be flatered
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.
Google to Launch Siri Rival Soon?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm sure the developers of Microsoft's Tellme will be flatered
I really hope Google doesn't try to emulate Siri. Saying a command to have your phone preform an action is one thing. Talking to your phone like you are talking to a person is a little creepy.
I bet you get a straight answer from him. You wait for a one liner which is basically meaningless, unreasoned and absolutely inconclusive.
I'm been reading the flames going back and forth between Apple and Google partisans and I'm amazed that people can't even agree on historical facts. You can debate the impact of certain developments and product launches, but when certain products were launched, developed or acquired are pretty set in stone facts.
Let's clear up something right now. Both Apple and Google are great companies that make great products and services and the world would be a lot poorer without them. The Apple vs. Google thing goes back to a basic tribalism that we all seem to have. Our team vs. their team....zero sum game. It's fun because it fires all kinds of parts of our brain that likes this sort of thing but in the end, it doesn't signify much.
I'm old enough to have been following Apple since 1978 when I was in 8th grade. I got my first Apple ][ in 10th grade. Even then, Apple products and their customers flamed all kinds of passions from all sorts. The TRS-80 and Commodore PET debates are much like the debates of today. It got completely silly during the IBM era in 1981 and went into overdrive when the Mac debuted in 1984. A lot of the passion did center around Steve Jobs and his ability as a showman, even back then. But I'm still amazed at the absolutely irrational emotions that Steve Jobs brings out in people, even after his death, whether you like Apple products or not.
Google is a much younger company but has been a smashing success by any measure for it's short life. Fans of Google point to their dominance of the search engine market and their willingness to bring services to millions of people, often without fees. What isn't discussed is that many of the same fans have to get over the fact that they really aren't customers of Google but are instead their product to sell advertising. It's an important distinction and as long as you are down with that, then it's generally ok. But I've never been entirely comfortable with Google's business model being the selling of my personal demographics to the highest bidder.
Apple has been accused for years of selling overpriced, underperforming products to legions of people who would buy a rock from Steve Jobs. And for some products in Apple's history, that would be a valid criticism. But in the last 15 years, Apple pulled off the biggest business renaissance in history because they figured out how to provide value through simplification. It's much harder to do that it looks. And every now and then, they rock the world with something truly extraordinary, disrupting entire businesses. It's hard to do once. It's almost impossible to do twice. Apple is at the point where people just expect them to do this every few years, which is unbelieveable.
Which brings us back to the current Apple vs. Google debate. Can we agree on a few facts about the mobile space in general? Overall my opinion is that while Apple disrupted the smartphone business from the staid market leaders (RIM, Microsoft, Nokia), it was Google who came along next and shot the reeling leaders dead.
1. Google acquired Android in the fall of 2003 with the idea of a Google produced phone. But Andoid still needed years of development to bring it to market.
2. Apple began development of the products that would be the iPhone/iPad in early 2004. The iPad was technically first but a large screen was impractical to build, hence pivoting to a phone.
3. iPhone launched in January 2007 and shipped in June of that year. The world gasped and competitors wrote it off as too expensive, impractical, what-have-you.
4. Google begins to show prototypes of Android on pre-production hardware. The hardware/software solution looked very much like a Blackberry, which makes perfect sense because Blackberry was the dominant phone for most of the decade, along with Windows CE.
5. The G1 ships in 2008. Instead of a Blackberry interface, Android comes to market with an iPhone like touch interface, although single-finger touch initially. Android would quickly develop with the help of many partners. Features like multi-touch and a slew of performance features would quickly see implementation in the next 24 months.
6. Android overtakes iOS as the dominate phone platform in terms of sheer numbers. Apple continues to lead in profits per device. Some Android makers make money (HTC, Samsung)...others not (Motorola, LG, Sony-Ericson)
7. From 2007 to 2011, Windows and Blackberry would go from market leaders to also-rans. Windows Phone is rebooted to a new OS in 2010/2011, years late from the iOS/Android threat.
8. Voice features would be featured on both iOS and Android, which Android coming first and dominating the flexibility and utility of the implementation until Apple unveiled Siri, an acquired natural language technology in 2011.
Did I forget anything? I mean, can we just have a civil discussion without the freaking flame war?
Let's clear up something right now. Both Apple and Google are great companies that make great products and services and the world would be a lot poorer without them. The Apple vs. Google thing goes back to a basic tribalism that we all seem to have. Our team vs. their team....zero sum game. It's fun because it fires all kinds of parts of our brain that likes this sort of thing but in the end, it doesn't signify much.
I'm old enough to have been following Apple since 1978 when I was in 8th grade. I got my first Apple ][ in 10th grade. Even then, Apple products and their customers flamed all kinds of passions from all sorts. The TRS-80 and Commodore PET debates are much like the debates of today. It got completely silly during the IBM era in 1981 and went into overdrive when the Mac debuted in 1984. A lot of the passion did center around Steve Jobs and his ability as a showman, even back then. But I'm still amazed at the absolutely irrational emotions that Steve Jobs brings out in people, even after his death, whether you like Apple products or not.
Google is a much younger company but has been a smashing success by any measure for it's short life. Fans of Google point to their dominance of the search engine market and their willingness to bring services to millions of people, often without fees. What isn't discussed is that many of the same fans have to get over the fact that they really aren't customers of Google but are instead their product to sell advertising. It's an important distinction and as long as you are down with that, then it's generally ok. But I've never been entirely comfortable with Google's business model being the selling of my personal demographics to the highest bidder.
Apple has been accused for years of selling overpriced, underperforming products to legions of people who would buy a rock from Steve Jobs. And for some products in Apple's history, that would be a valid criticism. But in the last 15 years, Apple pulled off the biggest business renaissance in history because they figured out how to provide value through simplification. It's much harder to do that it looks. And every now and then, they rock the world with something truly extraordinary, disrupting entire businesses. It's hard to do once. It's almost impossible to do twice. Apple is at the point where people just expect them to do this every few years, which is unbelieveable.
Which brings us back to the current Apple vs. Google debate. Can we agree on a few facts about the mobile space in general? Overall my opinion is that while Apple disrupted the smartphone business from the staid market leaders (RIM, Microsoft, Nokia), it was Google who came along next and shot the reeling leaders dead.
1. Google acquired Android in the fall of 2003 with the idea of a Google produced phone. But Andoid still needed years of development to bring it to market.
2. Apple began development of the products that would be the iPhone/iPad in early 2004. The iPad was technically first but a large screen was impractical to build, hence pivoting to a phone.
3. iPhone launched in January 2007 and shipped in June of that year. The world gasped and competitors wrote it off as too expensive, impractical, what-have-you.
4. Google begins to show prototypes of Android on pre-production hardware. The hardware/software solution looked very much like a Blackberry, which makes perfect sense because Blackberry was the dominant phone for most of the decade, along with Windows CE.
5. The G1 ships in 2008. Instead of a Blackberry interface, Android comes to market with an iPhone like touch interface, although single-finger touch initially. Android would quickly develop with the help of many partners. Features like multi-touch and a slew of performance features would quickly see implementation in the next 24 months.
6. Android overtakes iOS as the dominate phone platform in terms of sheer numbers. Apple continues to lead in profits per device. Some Android makers make money (HTC, Samsung)...others not (Motorola, LG, Sony-Ericson)
7. From 2007 to 2011, Windows and Blackberry would go from market leaders to also-rans. Windows Phone is rebooted to a new OS in 2010/2011, years late from the iOS/Android threat.
8. Voice features would be featured on both iOS and Android, which Android coming first and dominating the flexibility and utility of the implementation until Apple unveiled Siri, an acquired natural language technology in 2011.
Did I forget anything? I mean, can we just have a civil discussion without the freaking flame war?
Last edited:
It seems a lot of ideas never get fully developed and get implemented to its full potential. Apple recognized this and put this technology into their phones after buying the company.
But they do improve on existing technology and bring it in the forefront to be easily accessible to everyone. It still has bugs to be worked out, but still quite usable.
My Android phone (Galaxy SII) DOES have something. And it works pretty well, though perhaps not quite as well as Siri. While it doesn't have Siri's personality, Android's can dictate in more languages than Siri (take Korean for example).
The claims about Android being the first or Apple copying or what not... it doesn't really matter to me because depending how you look at it, both sides are right! Android had voice req software first chronologically on their phones. Apple was the first to make it popular. Both sides have legit views. So can we stop arguing about it now?
That being said, I don't think the presence of a Siri or a Siri-like feature will make or break (or even influence) my decision for a phone. Oh and the Star Wars and Star Trek comparison by Google makes me laugh. I think that Star Wars approach is exactly why Siri was so popular... I think there may have been a good chance Siri could have been a failure had Siri not have its humor and sass.
And while I understand Google is doing this to stay competitive with Apple, a part of me wishes they spent that time and energy into making Android a little more cleaner and smoother instead (though admittedly, I haven't yet played with Ice Cream Sandwich).
My God, because the pull down notification center was in the SDK virtual devices in december 2.007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy-YcGNyJds
February 2008
So in what way is the statement that such a notification feature pre-dated Cydia implementation in iOS false? I'm trying my best to understand where some of you guys are coming from, but I'm getting the growing sense that some of you are just in it to defend Apple's claim to being there first at all costs.
----------
At least, my one liners are right, not like almost the wrong things tou normally say
Bad ASS Comment!
The best comment ever! Google is never out of beta and their finished products still look beta!
The best comment ever! Google is never out of beta and their finished products still look beta!
Siri is a load of crap.
She doesn't work, and Siri is a significant downgrade from the voice recognition bundled with IOS 4.X.
a) I live in canada.
Phrases like "are the flames playing tonight" Where's the nearest macdonalds? all result in "I can't do that".
Any question about where you are returns an error. It's crap.
b) *all* voice recognition now requires an internet connection.
In IOS4 I could say "dial SoandSo mobile" and it'd work without checking the internet.
I could also say "next song" without it having to check the internet.
c) If you go without Cell reception it stops working.
I hike a lot in places with no cell reception. Now rather than having crappy VR, I get no VR. It's worse than it was before. $%#%$%ing turn it off.
I can no longer control my iPhone from the headset while hiking.
d) It's ****ing slow.
Siri is seriously demented. You can't talk to it while it's talking to you. You have to wait for it to pedantically finish it's phrase to reply.
It's much faster to type than it is to speak. This is a significant failure.
e) If Steve was alive he'd fire the team responsible. It does have promise, but it's a serious downgrade from the voice stuff in prior IOS.
I can only hope Siri isn't viewed as a successful model.
It's crap.
She doesn't work, and Siri is a significant downgrade from the voice recognition bundled with IOS 4.X.
a) I live in canada.
Phrases like "are the flames playing tonight" Where's the nearest macdonalds? all result in "I can't do that".
Any question about where you are returns an error. It's crap.
b) *all* voice recognition now requires an internet connection.
In IOS4 I could say "dial SoandSo mobile" and it'd work without checking the internet.
I could also say "next song" without it having to check the internet.
c) If you go without Cell reception it stops working.
I hike a lot in places with no cell reception. Now rather than having crappy VR, I get no VR. It's worse than it was before. $%#%$%ing turn it off.
I can no longer control my iPhone from the headset while hiking.
d) It's ****ing slow.
Siri is seriously demented. You can't talk to it while it's talking to you. You have to wait for it to pedantically finish it's phrase to reply.
It's much faster to type than it is to speak. This is a significant failure.
e) If Steve was alive he'd fire the team responsible. It does have promise, but it's a serious downgrade from the voice stuff in prior IOS.
I can only hope Siri isn't viewed as a successful model.
It's crap.
Google full of it
Googles comment is a joke to their selves.
Apple is the company that's making a Star Trek life a reality. They've been doing it for years and will continue to put the future of technology in the palm of our hands.
Goolge will try to copy them...
Apple = Transformers and Google = GoBots
One does it first and better the other... is just a cheap imitation.
----------
Siri as an AI concept is great. That is if she interprets what you actually said. There are to many mistakes in the words you say and her dictation.
I also agree if I am asking Siri to do some thing on my phone it should NOT require the internet. Google will have to do the same thing too, because the AI is too powerful for the handset it's self.
But, they should figure out how to split up the commands so that only AI required questions go online, things like, "Play Smashing Pumpkins" or "call Billy Corgan" stay local on the device.
I agree 100%, it's BS that those commands go online racking up data charges for those of you who are not on unlimited. Thank God I got unlimited.
Googles comment is a joke to their selves.
Apple is the company that's making a Star Trek life a reality. They've been doing it for years and will continue to put the future of technology in the palm of our hands.
Goolge will try to copy them...
Apple = Transformers and Google = GoBots
One does it first and better the other... is just a cheap imitation.
----------
Siri as an AI concept is great. That is if she interprets what you actually said. There are to many mistakes in the words you say and her dictation.
I also agree if I am asking Siri to do some thing on my phone it should NOT require the internet. Google will have to do the same thing too, because the AI is too powerful for the handset it's self.
But, they should figure out how to split up the commands so that only AI required questions go online, things like, "Play Smashing Pumpkins" or "call Billy Corgan" stay local on the device.
I agree 100%, it's BS that those commands go online racking up data charges for those of you who are not on unlimited. Thank God I got unlimited.
I can't believe this got 79+ up votes.
I use an Android. I found all voice recognition a gimmick before. I find voice recognition a gimmick now. And I will find it a gimmick tomorrow.
I don't care WHAT device features it, be it iPhone, Android, Blackberry or a Windows Phone, I will *NOT* use it.
The view must be nice from your high horse?
That looks like a third-party app, so you're just arguing my point for me. The concept existed before Google jumped on it. I still don't see any proof that the notification drop-down list was Google's creation.
Here's a video from Nov. 2007 discussing Android development that touches on the notification system (see 2:40 onward).
http://youtu.be/MPukbH6D-lY
You'll note that there is no swipe-down list of notifications in the API despite your claim that it existed in the API around that time. What they demonstrate are the notification icons that show up in the status bar with a hovering pop-up balloon. This is a totally different implementation than what we're discussing.
Wrong, is the NATIVE notification system. Have you used the SDK?
I give up.
Android saw a Cydia app in May 2008 and they copied it in February 2008, then the Delorean broke.
Happy?
Have you actually used that intelliscreen app? All it does is aggregate notifications on the lockscreen. That's it.
Last edited:
Yap, the funny thing is that the linked blog has used a program that doesn't do pull down notifications but only lock screen information only because they look more less like the iOS 5 notifications. They could have used SBSetting that did status bar pull down technique. And existed another Cydia App that did real pull down notifications, I don't remember the name but I used it with my 3G
I think you'll find that the homescreen notifications on the iPhone pictured there was a modification made (not just unlocked) by a jailbreaker. IIRC the ability to inject code into the homescreen was there, but there was no content for it. It was used eventually to display push notifications and missed call history. Apple most certainly didnt get there first. You have to remember that when the iPhone came out, that was going to be it. No extra apps were ever on the table. Steve actually hated the idea of an AppStore, but caved when others started doing it.
----------
I'm guessing you're in fanboy defence mode right now. Grow up.
Pulldown predated Android's existence with SBSettings release just after the first jailbreak.
Would love you to refute this one liner with your routinely nonsensical babble.
It is was one of many prototypes, touchscreen phones were already popular then. You claim to be unbiased but your post says otherwise.
----------
Does not change the fact that Apple did not invent it. And the SDK also had it way before the G1 came out...
You spill out nonsensical babble worse than Oletros ever will.
----------
What are you doing? You're only allowed to criticize Android here Would love to point that out. I'll always take back any nonsensical drivel that I'm responsible for.
I've never said Apple invented it. Don't put words in my mouth.
BigBoss, the developer of SBSettings has just answer a mail where I asked him when he released SBSettings, his response:
Well, I'm sorry, not a one liner and no a nonsensical babble.
Ah, yes, Android pull down was first, I suppose that BigBoss is not a rabir fandroid and he is not lying
Last edited:
About as original as SBSettings before Android existed in public.
The preview for SBSettings was released October 2008 and I remember this quite well, I was following this very closely.
http://www.ifans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104790
The first Android SDK was released September 2008, with the notifications. You can find the change logs to see that the notifications were there already.
http://gizmodo.com/5054472/download-android-10-sdknow
As far as I know, the notification was built in before version 0.9 but I cannot remember for sure and I do not have a link to prove it.
If you still insist that SBSettings had it first because Google had not released Android to the public yet then I give up, it's pointless.
----------
They probably had the idea in July 2008, the first release was much later. And nothing was announced to the public until October.
Oh, to the first person on this thread to call me a fandroid (Like in every other thread), grow up. You don't need to own/love/worship Android to point out the lies and useless criticisms.