Nuance Bringing Voice Recognition to Televisions and Intel Ultrabooks

[QuiteSure]

Okay, I'm over this voice recognition stuff. I get it, it's cool, a neat feature, but nonetheless a gimmick. Unless this all entails some TRULY REVOLUTIONARY capabilities, that are far beyond our collective imaginations, I can't see what's so freaking amazing about speaking to my computer or television set. I certainly have no problem tapping a few keys or buttons.

Having an iPhone 4S, I can say that my personal use (not saying this is the same for everyone - just me) of Siri has been minimal. Once in a while I might use it to send a brief text while driving, or if I'm feeling extra lazy and using my finger to swipe and touch my screen a couple times seems like a burden too great to handle at that moment, I might instruct her to place a call for me, but that's about it. I'm sure I'm not alone in this way of thinking.

I guess something has to replace the recent "3D" obsession.

For me, as an attorney, Siri has revolutionized the way I work. Used to be I would contact a court/client, leave a message, wait for them to call back, maybe write a note on my calendar. Now, I immediately dictate a reminder to Siri, who will remind me at the appointed time to follow up. It is this feature in Siri – dictatable reminders – that has greatly enhanced my workflow.

Adding reminders to my iCal through iCloud is the icing on the cake. My to do list has never been more useful and alive.

 

[AppleScruff1]

100% correct.

Had Apple not done what they did with Siri, we wouldn't be reading this news.

So you think that they just started development on this since Siri was released?

 

[trunten]

I'm tellin' you all... this is how "skynet" started.

Run.

2011 has gone. Skynet missed the boat.

 

[SandynJosh]

I have used Dragon to compose documents and I would say it is more than 75-80% accurate. Its very useful. But you are right, siri isn't merely voice recognition, it is intelligent language recognition. I am shocked that even with its limited functionality that it works so well on an iPhone, considering that the supercharged version (IBM's Watson) took 90 servers. I think Apple rolled Siri out too early. Its impressive but it has a way to go. It will get there.

If the competition takes until late 2012 to come out with products that can do what the iPhone is doing today, Apple has the opportunity to grab mindshare and further improve their adaption of the Siri experience. Remember: Apple still calls it a "beta" version.

What we don't know is what kind of contract Apple and Nuance have between them, and what Easter Eggs Apple has written in there for themselves.

Finally, Apple has a long term game plan and that serves as a disrupter to most of Apple's competitors, keeping them in a reactive (follower) mode.

 

[SandynJosh]

100% correct.

Had Apple not done what they did with Siri, we wouldn't be reading this news.

I know what meant by your last statement, but it seems to gone right over the heads of several people who can't understand simple cause and effect.

If a person should read the book, "On a Clear Day You can See GM." they would understand how the world''s largest car company waited until they knew what Ford was going to do before solidifying their own plans (at the time preceding the book's publication).

Most companies are too timid or lack the vision to go first, but will go second with gusto!

 

[Renzatic]

Nuance is just a tool Apple uses as an interface to Siri. Siri has as much to do with voice recognition as IBM's Watson does.

So, in other words..."Siri is the innovative product. I talk to it, and it tells me the information I want to hear. That is where the magic lies. Nuance just provided the tools that interprets my voice into something the computer can understand. There's nothing special about that"

To abuse YET ANOTHER car analogy, that's like saying "the engine isn't anything spectacular. It makes the wheels roll. Big whoop. Now the bucket seats and the steering wheel? That's where the innovation lies. You could even say they're the "heart" of the car. See, you directly interact with the steering wheel every day. And the seats? They make it comfortable to drive the car. Without the steering wheel or the seats, you don't really have a car."

...yeah.

 

[Analog Kid]

Sorry to call out you specifically - but this is a pet peeve of mine on here. This seems to be the "go to answer" for posters. Really? Any time Apple runs into a company that competes or has something Apple might want/need/is developing they should just buy the company. I'm glad you're not running Apple.

And on the flip side - not every company is for sale. Some companies actually enjoy being - you know - their own company.

I dunno, I'm wondering if this one makes sense. Apple seems to have done a lot with Siri, and there's clearly a lot of room for it to grow. Apple could develop the recognition technology internally, continue buying it in from a single source vendor, or buy the vendor.

As a shareholder, I wouldn't be too disappointed to see Apple acquire Nuance as a technology play. Makes more sense than the rumors of acquiring ARM, for example. I don't know the full story on Nuance, but my understanding is that they have deep penetration into niche application areas-- which fits Apple's model well (or at least their old model of targeting specific professions).

The potential problem may be that a lot of Nuance's value is wrapped up in Windows based products. I don't know if Apple wants to invest $8b in Windows software, and killing the Window's line would destroy the value of the company. There may be a slow path towards coercing existing customers to migrate to Mac, but that's not something I would bank on. Spinning off the application division is another possibility, but I don't think I've seen Apple spin anything off before...

As far as wanting to be their own company, you give up that prerogative when you go public. You can resist takeover, but a public company by definition is not "their own" company.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

So, in other words..."Siri is the innovative product. I talk to it, and it tells me the information I want to hear. That is where the magic lies. Nuance just provided the tools that interprets my voice into something the computer can understand. There's nothing special about that"

To abuse YET ANOTHER car analogy, that's like saying "the engine isn't anything spectacular. It makes the wheels roll. Big whoop. Now the bucket seats and the steering wheel? That's where the innovation lies. You could even say they're the "heart" of the car. See, you directly interact with the steering wheel every day. And the seats? They make it comfortable to drive the car. Without the steering wheel or the seats, you don't really have a car."

...yeah.

Nobody dismisses new car technologies by comparing them to the engine. You seriously might as well just take it all the way back to electricity and diminish the importance of anything that was invented because of electricity.

 

[inlovewithi]

My head hurts, so I stopped reading after the 2nd paragraph, and it was like wow how hard macrumor was trying to set it up, and shove in really hard that it's all because of Apple. Weren't voice recognition television shown at last year's CES?

 

[thenerdal]

Weren't voice recognition television shown at last year's CES?

I don't know, but Samsung already announced a TV that has voice control and face recognition today.

 

[Renzatic]

Yeah, they kinda were. And it feeds into the biggest problem of the Apple fanbase. Take people like LTD. You could say he lives in an Apple Bubble. He's not really a technology fan, and doesn't read about any other technologies other than what Apple provides to Apple-centric sites. So whenever something like Siri pops up, it seems like a completely innovative, brand new invention. He's never heard of voice recognition being used elsewhere, so it must be a initative spearheaded by Apple.

It's a brand new thing.

And once Apple does something, the Apple tech sites then begin reporting on what the other guys are doing with similar technology. Doesn't matter than it was being used beforehand. That wasn't important. It's only important now that it's in direct competition with Apple.

So to people like LTD, it looks like they're copying Apple. And thus, he'll go on and on about how Apple did X first, and now it's safe for the rest to follow, post up consumer satisfaction reports, and...well...you know the spiel.

Thing is, that's the way LTD and the rest seem to prefer things to be. It doesn't matter than their opinion is borne of ignorance. It only matters that they have something good to say about their favorite company.

It's....kinda weird. But it gets the internet juices flowing, so on it goes.

 

[Renzatic]

Nobody dismisses new car technologies by comparing them to the engine. You seriously might as well just take it all the way back to electricity and diminish the importance of anything that was invented because of electricity.

Yeah, reductio ad absurdum done to an absurd degree.

I don't know exactly what you're arguing here, but it seems that you're completely dismissing Nuance because it's already been done before, and Siri is supposedly some new thing. Nuance doesn't factor into the equation at all.

But here's the thing, Siri is built on top of Nuance. It uses Nuance technology. Siri is just a refinement of said technology. You can't have one without the other. Now that's all well and good. It's how technology rolls, after all. BUT, you can't dismiss the core technology and claim Apple has created something entirely new simply because they gave it a spit shine and polish.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

I don't know exactly what you're arguing here, but it seems that you're completely dismissing Nuance because it's already been done before, and Siri is supposedly some new thing. Nuance doesn't factor into the equation at all.

But here's the thing, Siri is built on top of Nuance. It uses Nuance technology. Siri is just a refinement of said technology. You can't have one without the other. Now that's all well and good. It's how technology rolls, after all. BUT, you can't dismiss the core technology and claim Apple has created something entirely new simply because they gave it a spit shine and polish.

No, I'm not dismissing Nuance. I'm giving it all the credit it is due, but that credit was fully paid out 10 years ago. There's nothing new or interesting about Nuance.

You don't understand what Siri is at all. Siri would still be useful even if you spoke to it via text input (a feature they should implement, btw). It's an AI that uses voice recognition, not a means of voice recognition. Voice recognition is only as interesting as what it is being used in.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Nuance was in the news long before Apple acquired or even thought of acquiring Siri. Nice try though.

Its funny, but why didn't Nuance implement voice recognition into TV & laptops years ago? Why now? More then likely its because Apple implemented this with Siris last year. And with hints of marketing a Television with voice control by Apple they wanted to get it to the market before them.

Should be no surprise people would be doing this. Along with coming out with ultrabooks to compete with MacBook Airs.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

"Speaking channel numbers".

This is a great example of how technology companies fail to "get it". Does anyone really imagine Apple's TV/Siri integration will in any way involve "speaking channel numbers"?

The continued existence of concepts like channel numbers are what's wrong with TV, not the fact that you have to use your fingers to input them.

Hence, ``I've cracked it,'' for just one area of focus. Smartlists for the Apple HDTV, speak a command that brings up a collection you've organized, say, ``Give me my sci-fi list. Or, ``Watch Community now and Siri brings up the list of episodes you have and asks you which one from the list and you tell them.''

``Find me the latest episode of blah, blah, blah''.

Telling something to turn to channel 4 reminds me of the Clapper.

 

[Renzatic]

You don't understand what Siri is at all. Siri would still be useful even if you spoke to it via text input (a feature they should implement, btw). It's an AI that uses voice recognition, not a means of voice recognition. Voice recognition is only as interesting as what it is being used in.

Siri in and of itself is Google voice command that's smart enough to interpret looser phrasing. I won't deny that it isn't an incredibly well put together piece of software, but I also can't claim it as an entirely new thing that changed life for everyone.

That's the problem I see with alot of people around here. It doesn't matter that it's good. That's not enough. It has to be construed to look like it's something Apple thought up of on their very own, and now everyone else is copying it. But since they obviously don't "get it", it'll never be quite as good.

 

[twoodcc]

competition is a good thing. i hope the voice recognition continues to get better

 

[squirrellydw]

Apple leads, others follow!

Lets see, up until a few months ago who heard of controlling a TV by your voice? I would say the only thing that was close was MS Kinect. I know for sure I didn't hear of any major TV companies having this idea. So a few rumors of Apple doing this and now everyone is getting in on it.

So yes Apple started this, they may not be the first out the door with a working product but you can bet that it will probably be the best implementation of it.

Why can't others come up with ideas instead of copying? I am all for competition but give credit to Apple, they take ideas and make them work.

They didn't invent the smartphone, the tablet, the mp3 player but they made them all popular.

 

[lilo777]

competition is a good thing. i hope the voice recognition continues to get better

Don't get your hopes too high. VR and AI (artificial intelligence) have been in development for many decades and they are still in beta.

 

[thenerdal]

Apple leads, others follow!

Lets see, up until a few months ago who heard of controlling a TV by your voice? I would say the only thing that was close was MS Kinect. I know for sure I didn't hear of any major TV companies having this idea. So a few rumors of Apple doing this and now everyone is getting in on it.

So yes Apple started this, they may not be the first out the door with a working product but you can bet that it will probably be the best implementation of it.

Why can't others come up with ideas instead of copying? I am all for competition but give credit to Apple, they take ideas and make them work.

They didn't invent the smartphone, the tablet, the mp3 player but they made them all popular.

There are only rumors that Siri will be on a TV. Nothing official. Today Samsung announced a TV that can be controlled by your voice and has facial recognition.

So no, Apple did not start this. They haven't even officially announced it yet.

And no, companies aren't copying Apple, they're following a trend. Like when Motorolla pioneered the flip phone, everyone followed that trend.

 

[samcraig]

Its funny, but why didn't Nuance implement voice recognition into TV & laptops years ago? Why now? More then likely its because Apple implemented this with Siris last year. And with hints of marketing a Television with voice control by Apple they wanted to get it to the market before them.

Should be no surprise people would be doing this. Along with coming out with ultrabooks to compete with MacBook Airs.

It's naive to think that this product evolution simply happened in the last few months and is already demo-ing at CES. Extremely naive. Sorry.

Having worked for one of the largest cell manufacturing company for even a short time I can tell you that there are innovations and features that are thought up - even demoed YEARS ahead they are actually adopted because they have a roadmap. And that roadmap includes incrementally increasing people's UI and usage to a point that they adopt the technology when it is actually release.

10 years ago - no one would touch a voice activated television. But with Google Voice, Siri, video conferencing, skype, and so on - people are more "comfortable" with such features.

Again - they didn't just "whip" up this idea since the book came out.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Hence, ``I've cracked it,'' for just one area of focus. Smartlists for the Apple HDTV, speak a command that brings up a collection you've organized, say, ``Give me my sci-fi list. Or, ``Watch Community now and Siri brings up the list of episodes you have and asks you which one from the list and you tell them.''

``Find me the latest episode of blah, blah, blah''.

Telling something to turn to channel 4 reminds me of the Clapper.

Or even, "Are there any old Steven J. Cannell shows I haven't seen?" or "I'm really in the mood for something starring Patrick Duffy."

The Clapper analogy is perfect. That's exactly what companies like Nuance think is clever.

 

[twoodcc]

Don't get your hopes too high. VR and AI (artificial intelligence) have been in development for many decades and they are still in beta.

oh i understand. but every little bit of progress helps. i think apple is just the start of the progress, as you see others working on it more now

 

[WestonHarvey1]

It's naive to think that this product evolution simply happened in the last few months and is already demo-ing at CES. Extremely naive. Sorry.

Having worked for one of the largest cell manufacturing company for even a short time I can tell you that there are innovations and features that are thought up - even demoed YEARS ahead they are actually adopted because they have a roadmap. And that roadmap includes incrementally increasing people's UI and usage to a point that they adopt the technology when it is actually release.

10 years ago - no one would touch a voice activated television. But with Google Voice, Siri, video conferencing, skype, and so on - people are more "comfortable" with such features.

Again - they didn't just "whip" up this idea since the book came out.

The public is never "ready" for products that suck. Samsung could have made a voice recognition TV set years ago. I'm sure it was somewhere on their roadmap. If they had, it would have flopped because it would have awesome features like "Change to channel Three-Eight-Two".

Remember Yahoo widgets for TV sets? Remember how life changed after that? I don't either. I do remember them being on my new TV a couple years ago. I tried them once, instantly realized they were terrible and utterly useless, and that was that. It wasn't because I wasn't ready to have internet services integrated with my TV.

 

[samcraig]

The public is never "ready" for products that suck. Samsung could have made a voice recognition TV set years ago. I'm sure it was somewhere on their roadmap. If they had, it would have flopped because it would have awesome features like "Change to channel Three-Eight-Two".

Remember Yahoo widgets for TV sets? Remember how life changed after that? I don't either. I do remember them being on my new TV a couple years ago. I tried them once, instantly realized they were terrible and utterly useless, and that was that. It wasn't because I wasn't ready to have internet services integrated with my TV.

I missed the part where you = the entire general public. But thanks for stating your opinion. Sincerely...