Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Kuo: Expectation That Apple Intelligence Will Drive iPhone 16 Sales 'May Be Too Optimistic'

google last yr went on and released an AI phone but Google doesn't sell too many phones so what it did is it recruited Samsung with the AI. and Samsung has a huge budget so Samsung AI was being advertised everywhere u could see. and in the last 2yrs Google and Samsung have gotten very close

so what ended up happening is that a lot of geeks went out and bought pixel phones and I have seen tons of ppl who now have pixel phones. I think now the apple saw this as a challenge and saw as an opportunity to grow sales but the fact is maybe it is good selling point for ppl in tech not to everyone

and u can already do the gen AI with the chatgpt app without needing a new phone but of course there is privacy with that now apple wants to give u privacy

this yr Google is again going all in with AI so it decided its going to release pixel phones 2 month earlier then normal even b4 the release of iphone and with a lot more AI which will give ppl access to premium gen AI too included in the price.

in the meantime Google also wanted to release a watch with ******** of AI and they promised but still haven't delivered anything till now.
 
CorvusFox said:
Generative "AI" is completely worthless. It can't do anything reliably, repeatably or in a trustworthy manner. It's just the latest techbro grift like the blockchain and NFTs before it. Even the name is a lie, there's zero intelligence involved. No-one is buying a phone just for this.
Click to expand...
"worthless" is a bit of an overstatement, I find it handy for a number of things... But if all that iPhone 16 has to offer over the current gen is integration of chatGPT, a.k.a. Siri 2.0, then I don't a whole lot of reasons to go for it.

Besides, what's up with everybody going "oh, it won't do AI, that's lame" when addressing literally not even 2 year old iPhones? My mom's iPhone 8 runs chatgpt just fine. All that stuff is processed on remote servers, so where's the demand for on-device computing power coming from anyway? Noob question, seriously asking.
 
Mr. Nice said:
In Europe a lot of people can switch directly to the iPhone 17. apple intelligence will take to long to arrive in German etc. at the iPhone 16. I will switch because I have an iPhone 13 mini, and the battery life annoys me.
Click to expand...
That's just the thing.

Apple can claim its not bringing AI to EU consumers for reasons x, y, and z.

But, if we are to judge past iOS releases, it's only ever the U.S. that gets every single iOS feature. Then secondly, larger countries like Germany, France, China, will get a good portion of these upgrades at a later point, then followed by smaller countries, usually, years and years down the line.

But some features Apple never ports to iOS users outside the U.S. And it's not because any EU regulations are in the way.

It just costs too much to do while keeping profit margins as mountainous as they are.

Apple only spends what's necessary and it will never begin porting major iOS features before it's absolutely sure it's satisfied with the English version. But also that the features in question are ones that are actually necessary to keep sales figures high enough outside the U.S.

Apple Intelligence will get tested and optimized over several many years before Apple is even sure of the English version.

I'm fairly optimistic. But I don't see how what we saw at WWDC 24' will be good and reliable any earlier than at iPhones 17 launch in 2025.

But then I still don't see when Apple starts porting it to non-English languages. There's yet to be a single one announced.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: dk001 and Digital Dude
carestudio said:
I actually do and love it. I bought 15 only because it has USB-C port, now I can get rid of all the slow lightning phone...and cables.
Click to expand...
Having my iPad, Mac, AirPods, and all other non-Apple products in my home and at work be USB-C, but then having iPhone still be Lightning really is a pain.

Like, you always have to have that extra cable or adapter with you.

And you could leave the cable sitting in your wall-charger without ever pulling it out.. if it weren't for your iPhone needing that USB-C to Lightning.

And then also putting Lightning into its keyboards and trackpads, mice, etc. Ugh!

Apple's decision to hold onto Lightning until forced to upgrade by the EU was such a terrible move for consumers.

We should have gotten it with iPhone X at the very least.

Big tech's decisions can be so arbitrary and greedy just to increase profits by a few cents or dollars per product sold. They should not be able to make such decisions. There should be many more regulations keeping them from forcing proprietary tech like Lightning upon us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
lenningj said:
Breaking News, businesses take huge u-turn on AI investments as markets plummet due to lack consumer interest 🤞

(i wish)
Click to expand...
It will. Just not soon. Bitcoin is still hovering around all time high. Sometimes bubbles just like to stay bubbly for a while.
 
Apple doesn’t need people to keep buying iPhones. T they just need people to keep using them. And for all the talk of iPhones no longer being innovative, nobody is switching to android. Heck, we are seeing a net influx of switchers even.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley and tenthousandthings
senttoschool said:
ChatGPT has 200 million+ users.
Click to expand...
You can use chat GPT with any phone, it does not sell any iPhone, new or old. Apple won’t convince anyone they need to buy a new iPhone if they want to use AI features widely available for free elsewhere, and generally better too
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
VisceralRealist said:
Makes me wonder what the next fad is going to be. Apple seems to think it's "spatial computing". 🤔
Click to expand...
we dont need fads.
we've had enough of those.
and people do keep trying them... Rabbit Phone anyone? :)

Curved TVs?

Things only take off when they are priced right and offer something people really want to integrate into their daily routines. Spatial computing may well be niche now but if they get it right for even business use, there's a market. Is it a consumer product? Maybe not even though watching media on it seems to be great, we usually consume visual media together for social entertainment. Audio not so much. But you dont need a vision device to do that...

More helpful pocketable devices are probably still the thing most people will buy and use.
Making them faster and able to do more on device is probably clever.
Siri has been useful but dumb for a long time.
A smarter Siri that you can interact with more naturally has to be a good step.
 
scorpio vega said:
Ai is something I genuinely don’t care about and honestly most day to day people see Ai as weird. So I never expected it To be a driving force.
Click to expand...
Different folks for different strokes.

Those who have to answer 60 emails everyday would love to be able to ask a built in AI to write a professionally written email reply without taking 10 minutes to reply to each one individually.

Also, Siri is dumber than a box of sand. It needs something on the back-end to improve how well the feature works.

AI doesn’t need to be over the top, but it’s useful in some circumstances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
Dark_Omen said:
Different folks for different strokes.

Those who have to answer 60 emails everyday would love to be able to ask a built in AI to write a professionally written email reply without taking 10 minutes to reply to each one individually.

Also, Siri is dumber than a box of sand. It needs something on the back-end to improve how well the feature works.

AI doesn’t need to be over the top, but it’s useful in some circumstances.
Click to expand...
so long as the AI auto email response still involves some level of checking or clearly signposts that it is AI answered... and provides a way to ensure any response back can get to the intended recipient and brought to their attention without letting AI keep handling it...

Look at Facebook and when you report an issue.
It just keeps towing the line that content doesnt breach Community Standards. When often any real person would see it does. The algorithm is bad to start with. The lack of human involvement and adjudication is plain bad. They put so many hurdles in the way to get to a human group for review. They want to say they offer the service but dont want you to use it.
 
Dark_Omen said:
Those who have to answer 60 emails everyday would love to be able to ask a built in AI to write a professionally written email reply without taking 10 minutes to reply to each one individually.
Click to expand...
Unless we are talking about canned replies (like those you see with automated customer service emails), I am not sure what the recipient would feel about receiving an AI-generated response.

Like, if you can't be bothered to take the time to write something, then why should I be bothered to take the time to read it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309
wbeasley said:
so long as the AI auto email response still involves some level of checking or clearly signposts that it is AI answered... and provides a way to ensure any response back can get to the intended recipient and brought to their attention without letting AI keep handling it...

Look at Facebook and when you report an issue.
It just keeps towing the line that content doesnt breach Community Standards. When often any real person would see it does. The algorithm is bad to start with. The lack of human involvement and adjudication is plain bad. They put so many hurdles in the way to get to a human group for review. They want to say they offer the service but dont want you to use it.
Click to expand...
A simple yet effective solution would be to incorporate a “Reply with AI” button at the bottom of email replies. This feature would allow users to review and edit AI-generated drafts before sending them.


It is plausible that complete AI automation without user oversight could be deemed illegal. While not yet codified in statutory law, common law principles could apply until specific legislation is enacted.


Consider a scenario where AI autonomously drafts and sends replies. This could lead to significant issues, such as the AI being manipulated to generate and dispatch incriminating or defamatory statements without the user’s awareness. Such communications could be sent to colleagues or other individuals, potentially leading to serious consequences. Additionally, AI might inadvertently disclose proprietary information or trade secrets, causing further complications.


//Sent with ChatGPT//
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
Abazigal said:
Unless we are talking about canned replies (like those you see with automated customer service emails), I am not sure what the recipient would feel about receiving an AI-generated response.

Like, if you can't be bothered to take the time to write something, then why should I be bothered to take the time to read it?
Click to expand...
I understand your concern about AI-generated responses. It’s true that personal effort in communication is important and often appreciated. However, there are situations where using AI can help organize thoughts, save time, or even ensure clarity and professionalism. The key is to use such tools responsibly and not as a substitute for genuine human interaction, but rather as an aid to it. Balancing efficiency with a personal touch is crucial to maintaining meaningful connections.
 
Dark_Omen said:
I understand your concern about AI-generated responses. It’s true that personal effort in communication is important and often appreciated. However, there are situations where using AI can help organize thoughts, save time, or even ensure clarity and professionalism. The key is to use such tools responsibly and not as a substitute for genuine human interaction, but rather as an aid to it. Balancing efficiency with a personal touch is crucial to maintaining meaningful connections.
Click to expand...

Why does it feel like this reply was generated using chatGPT?

And yes, I still read it.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Dark_Omen and wbeasley
Dark_Omen said:
A simple yet effective solution would be to incorporate a “Reply with AI” button at the bottom of email replies. This feature would allow users to review and edit AI-generated drafts before sending them.


It is plausible that complete AI automation without user oversight could be deemed illegal. While not yet codified in statutory law, common law principles could apply until specific legislation is enacted.


Consider a scenario where AI autonomously drafts and sends replies. This could lead to significant issues, such as the AI being manipulated to generate and dispatch incriminating or defamatory statements without the user’s awareness. Such communications could be sent to colleagues or other individuals, potentially leading to serious consequences. Additionally, AI might inadvertently disclose proprietary information or trade secrets, causing further complications.


//Sent with ChatGPT//
Click to expand...
An AI no oversight/interaction at all system could be deemed spam.
 
Dark_Omen said:
I understand your concern about AI-generated responses. It’s true that personal effort in communication is important and often appreciated. However, there are situations where using AI can help organize thoughts, save time, or even ensure clarity and professionalism. The key is to use such tools responsibly and not as a substitute for genuine human interaction, but rather as an aid to it. Balancing efficiency with a personal touch is crucial to maintaining meaningful connections.
Click to expand...
I dont think we are disagreeing on AI writing content for replies.
It could help with clearer wording or better grammar or sticking to facts.

The danger is no oversight or flagging response as AI generated, I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back