If macOS 27, iOS 27, etc. turn out to be vibe coded, that should lead to some really interesting bugs
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.
New Siri: Apple Almost Chose a Different Partner Before Google Gemini
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple has not been using the “one, singular model to rule them all approach at all “ .
Goes back to before WWDC 2025, but more flushed out in accessible documentation then .
“
Introducing Apple’s On-Device and Server Foundation Models “
Introducing Apple’s On-Device and Server Foundation Models
At the 2024 Worldwide Developers Conference, we introduced Apple Intelligence, a personal intelligence system integrated deeply into iOS 18…
The Apple Fouundationals models is a plural word. From the joint statement Google and Apple released
“Apple and Google have entered into a multi-year collaboration under which the next generation of Apple Foundation Models will be based on Google's Gemini models and cloud technology. These models will help power future Apple Intelligence features, including a more personalized Siri coming this year. ..
…
Apple Intelligence will continue to run on Apple devices and Private Cloud Compute, while maintaining Apple's industry-leading privacy standards.…”
Joint statement from Google and Apple
Apple and Google have entered into a multi-year collaboration under which the next generation of Apple Foundation Models will be based on Google's Gemini models and clou…
Again, the use of plural from of ‘model’ .
The API to the models is all wrapped up in an Apple Libaray API. Where your inputs / outputs go is controller by Apple. Whether dispatched local or clould is controlled by Apple. ( similar how call an Apple library for ProRes RAW process and Apple decides if goes to a hardware accelerator or to a 100% software implementation)
If anything Apple has been doing more to construct the smallest possible models, before it got more trendy . Concentrating on smallest is one reason they have tracked the ‘piled higher and deeper’ options that are so big they are mainly mega server only .
( even Private Cloud Compute is not trying to the a “drain the local power grid completely” solution. )
May not be all that temporary . Some of the more specialized mini-models for task specialized to Apple. But basic speech in/out in a high number of human languages Apple may not touch that over very long term .
Shades of the 5 nodes in 4 years talk coming form Intel several years ago. For Apple “just as good as” is still a large win for Apple for next 3-4 years.
There is a ton of training data Apple would have to grapple past their privacy and copyright protocols to surpass what the mainstream.
I doubt Apple wants to spend max money on cost sink trying to surpass everyone’s investment there. They would rather have deeper leverage on revenue possible inference .
Not. Apple does not build industrial tools for other peoples factories . It isn’t there core competency . There is a broad set of stuff tha5 will be enabled .
The “Tesla is dumping cars to do robots” is kool-aid that Apple should stay far away from .
Last edited:
It was already much to expensive for what you are getting. For now, they are leasing rather than buying. This gives them flexibility to switch engines later should the tech landscape change.
Do some reading on Apple’s Private Cloud Compute and how it protects user privacy. Apple is supposed to give more details about the AI integration with Google at the end of February. Right now, we are just getting some high level confirmation. Also, Google is rumored to be working on a similar tech for their consumer facing AIs. Believe it or not, Google has a better history with privacy than ChatGPT.
The details I’ve heard are that Apple will have an on-device AI to intercept the user request and then route that to another on-device AI for some requests and to the Private Cloud Computer AI for bigger tasks.
During this week’s earnings call, Apple said “We'll continue to run (AI) on the device and run in Private Cloud Compute and maintain our industry-leading privacy standards in doing so. ”. This is how they will prevent sharing data with Google.
Apple Explains How Gemini-Powered Siri Will Work
Apple CEO Tim Cook yesterday reiterated the structure of its partnership with Google to use Gemini AI models for the next generation version of Siri. During the company's Q1 2026 earnings call yesterday, Apple CEO Tim Cook and CFO Kevan Parekh were asked several questions about Apple...
www.macrumors.com
The announcement for a week ago was that Apple would be running a custom version of Google’s AI with Apple able to make adjustments to how it operates.
What Apple product development does internally is not sit around most of the day tip-tapping on their iPhones .
( maybe Apple Store personnel , but that isn’t the critical core of Apple ) .
Last I heard Apple used SAP software for enterprise resource management … end users large are not . Doesn’t keep their corporate finances in a Numbers/Excel spreadsheet.
If internal development is using Xcode than this isn’t necessarily a Siri integration model . ( nor does have to tap same Private Clould Compute hardware foundation. Maybe expand Xcode cloud paid for service )
It likely is money ( and taxes ) more than politics. Google pays Apple about $20B per year ( Apple herds users into Google and take a piece the action while claim privacy purity )
If Apple licenses Gemini and same base clould compute at $2-3B a year they can just take that from Google as a barter trade. The check ( cash income) shrinks by that amount so pay a lower bill . If licensing/server barter gets classified as Cost of Goods for their server business then that is tax free ( business expense ) .
P.S. And if Apple rolls out a for Apple intelligence add-on service if they can spill over to Google servers in encrypted virtual machines and just pay more.
P.S. Apple is like paying for Claude code. Are vast majority of Apple users goin to pay for Apple Intelligence after Apple has highly pitched it as completely free ?
Last edited:
Would you rather that they partner with ChatGPT? Is that the privacy protecting solution?
Apple is licensing Google AI tech to run in protected Apple servers using Apples Private Cloud Compute OS. That OS has protections built in that prevent data logging and data sharing with Google or anyone. Don’t assume that this is a wide open, Google take all sharing arrangement.
Claude Opus is not free ( no cost). So far Apple hasn’t tried to put any revenue model around Apple Intelligence. As long as it is an almost entirely free/ ‘ no cost’ service that metics fdoesny make much finance sense .
Apple should jump eyeball deep into the for pay Ai service business with their current reputation ? Really think that will work ? Probably not.
Why are they using AI for product development and internal tools? Does that explain why their software has gotten so bad? Are they just vibe coding everything?
Good points.
The only thing it’s doing is making our lives worse. The only ones who truly benefit are the elite and ultra wealthy who want to replace all workers. That doesn’t end well if we let it happen
Is this really that weird? This is a seller’s market. Apple screwed up and couldn’t get it done themselves, so of course they had to become the buyer. And when you’re the buyer, everyone’s going to try to squeeze as much money out of you as possible. That’s not “extortion.” In Apple’s case, it should just be called: Apple failing to get its **** together.
As for choosing Google over Anthropic, I don’t think that’s strange either. Putting money aside, Apple actually has the ability to hurt Google if things go south. And honestly, when it comes to his “news,” I’m skeptical most of the time—but this particular case is interesting enough to think through.
If Apple decided not to go with Anthropic, we have to be clear about one thing: in this situation, Apple is effectively outsourcing Siri’s brain, whether it’s to Anthropic or to Google. Both can charge Apple a massive amount of money. Apple is loaded—if they didn’t buy, it wasn’t because of the price.
The real issue is this: if Apple gets cornered, do they have any way to push back?
With Anthropic, Apple would be almost entirely passive. Anthropic doesn’t necessarily need Apple, but once Siri is live and deeply integrated year after year, Apple would once again end up stuck in a position where it can’t really do anything about it. Sound familiar? Like the old Intel CPU situation?
Google is different. With Google, the relationship is horizontal. It’s not just money—there are ads, traffic, distribution, and other forms of mutual exchange. So if Apple works with Google, at least it’s not walking into the deal with zero bargaining power.
That said, I still don’t agree with calling this “Anthropic extorting Apple.” Because in the end, there’s only one real conclusion: Apple screwed this up. This is the tuition for a remedial, make-up exam they now have to take—and they have to pay it.
As for choosing Google over Anthropic, I don’t think that’s strange either. Putting money aside, Apple actually has the ability to hurt Google if things go south. And honestly, when it comes to his “news,” I’m skeptical most of the time—but this particular case is interesting enough to think through.
If Apple decided not to go with Anthropic, we have to be clear about one thing: in this situation, Apple is effectively outsourcing Siri’s brain, whether it’s to Anthropic or to Google. Both can charge Apple a massive amount of money. Apple is loaded—if they didn’t buy, it wasn’t because of the price.
The real issue is this: if Apple gets cornered, do they have any way to push back?
With Anthropic, Apple would be almost entirely passive. Anthropic doesn’t necessarily need Apple, but once Siri is live and deeply integrated year after year, Apple would once again end up stuck in a position where it can’t really do anything about it. Sound familiar? Like the old Intel CPU situation?
Google is different. With Google, the relationship is horizontal. It’s not just money—there are ads, traffic, distribution, and other forms of mutual exchange. So if Apple works with Google, at least it’s not walking into the deal with zero bargaining power.
That said, I still don’t agree with calling this “Anthropic extorting Apple.” Because in the end, there’s only one real conclusion: Apple screwed this up. This is the tuition for a remedial, make-up exam they now have to take—and they have to pay it.
Last edited:
I don't care, as long as it's better than alphaSiri.
I just can't get over how BAD Siri is, and it is ridiculous how Apple has struggled and struggled and not even come remotely as close as any other AI-based personal assistant out there. Use ChatGPT or Claude or Gemini or Grok in a Tesla and they're light-years ahead.
I just asked my HomePod to record a voice memo. Nope, can't do that. Instead, it said I had no timers. I tried again, and it asked me which Apple TV. I don't even think the Apple TV comes with a microphone. Shouldn't the smart-speaker with an entire array of microphones be able to record a voice memo?
Don't get me started. If you don't know exactly what to say in the car when you see an obstruction in the mode, faghettaboutit. You'll be three miles away before Siri figures out what you're asking.
Ask Siri for the altitude or elevation as you're driving up a mountain road with your ears popping... nope, has no blooming idea what you're talking about.
I remember once getting frustrated in the car with the girlfriend and kids because Siri just wasn't understanding what I was asking directions for. We were stopped, so no road noise. I ended up using Google Maps, and it worked on the first try. When we got to the destination, I checked Apple Maps and... you got it... it was right there. Siri just couldn't figure out what I wanted, despite repeatedly speaking clearly 3-4 times.
It's definitely ... not smart. It's decidedly un-smart and incapable.
I just can't get over how BAD Siri is, and it is ridiculous how Apple has struggled and struggled and not even come remotely as close as any other AI-based personal assistant out there. Use ChatGPT or Claude or Gemini or Grok in a Tesla and they're light-years ahead.
I just asked my HomePod to record a voice memo. Nope, can't do that. Instead, it said I had no timers. I tried again, and it asked me which Apple TV. I don't even think the Apple TV comes with a microphone. Shouldn't the smart-speaker with an entire array of microphones be able to record a voice memo?
Don't get me started. If you don't know exactly what to say in the car when you see an obstruction in the mode, faghettaboutit. You'll be three miles away before Siri figures out what you're asking.
Ask Siri for the altitude or elevation as you're driving up a mountain road with your ears popping... nope, has no blooming idea what you're talking about.
I remember once getting frustrated in the car with the girlfriend and kids because Siri just wasn't understanding what I was asking directions for. We were stopped, so no road noise. I ended up using Google Maps, and it worked on the first try. When we got to the destination, I checked Apple Maps and... you got it... it was right there. Siri just couldn't figure out what I wanted, despite repeatedly speaking clearly 3-4 times.
It's definitely ... not smart. It's decidedly un-smart and incapable.
For sure. I've exclusively used Gemini for about a year now and it has been super. I recently tried Claude for the first time this week and was floored at of the things it was able to do that Gemini simply couldn't. Great tools.