The MacRumors Show: John Gruber Talks Apple Intelligence and the Future of the Company

[citysnaps]

I love Apple. I hate the direction they have gone in for years. Tim Cook has ruined a great company by overvaluing it now and destroying its long term goodwill with customers. There are 2B devices not users. I have 14 devices in total but that’s not 14 unique users. That’s for business and personal. Have a new $14k Mac Studio. Also have millions in Nvidia GPUs and PC/Linux servers. Personally a Pixel phone, ThinkPad and Razer laptop. I love some things about all of it.

I don’t like how anticompetitive AAPL acts. I don’t like the greed from the top down. And the growing sentiment with everyone except young users is disappointment or frustration.

And this is all with labor that’s badly underpaid and treated without dignity in other countries. Labor underpaid in America. Only the executives win this game because yes the shareholders are winning under Cook. But this is the problem with greed making a company valuable now but burning bridges with customers by taking advantage and acting anticompetitively. The long run doesn’t look good. Apple has maybe ten years before it sees serious decline. The best case scenario is to hire an innovator at the top to restore the future of Apple. Yes shareholders will suffer short term but that’s how all stakeholders will win.

My mistake... 1+ Billion active customers. Still a remarkable number that speaks to Apple's success.

People have been predicting Apple's doom for the last 10-20 years. Yes... Apple has had its share of flops. Apple III, Lisa, PowerMac G4 Cube, Macintosh TV, Apple iPod Sox, Apple Pippin, Newton, Apple iPod HiFI, quickly come to mind. But those were developed and released under the previous CEO, not Cook.

Cook is doing an excellent job leading Apple. The good news is that people who don't like Cook and where Apple is today, have many other choices to purchase tech products. It's bewildering some people choose to stay unhappy rather than purchase superior tech offered by other companies.

 

[UpsetTheAppleCart]

Is it just me or did he talk a lot without saying much?

 

[TechnoTiger3000]

Is it just me or did he talk a lot without saying much?

All signal, no meaning. Apple Ai vibes.

 

[bluecoast]

I can't take that seriously.

Gruber does not know the intricacies of what brought AVP into existence, or why Apple Intelligence turns out to be more marketing fluff than substance.

Trying to draw parallels between two different products, different kind of products at that, is going to lead to misunderstanding what is going on.

I also doubt that Gruber knows much about artificial intelligence, or why what Apple claimed what Siri will do is so damn hard.

I think he has a pretty good idea. And most people who know about such things felt that Apple’s claims last June of a personalised Siri who knows about your stuff were a tall order for any company to implement, let alone a company whose personal assistant has been a dumpster fire for over a decade.

 

[bluecoast]

Is it just me or did he talk a lot without saying much?

Gruber is the Melville of tech pundits. A 2 hour podcast for him is short.

 

[bluecoast]

I agree that Siri/AI operating app functionality system-wide would be really useful. However, leading AI companies haven't been very successful yet in letting AI operate browsers, desktops, or apps in general. It's difficult and unreliable with the current state of the art. Given how much Apple is already lagging behind with the AI functionality that does work, plus their on-device/privacy focus imposing a substantial extra handicap, I have little hope that they'll accomplish that to a significantly useful degree anytime soon. If anything, there will be a gap like between original (2011) Siri marketing and Siri reality.

Apple’s marketing has always shown people being surprised and delighted with how useful Siri is.

When the reality for most people is like the Larry David scene in the last series of curb where he’s using Siri in his car.

 

[AndiG]

It was difficult to listen to Gruber as he carefully searched for words to critique Apple without sounding too harsh.

There’s clearly something off at Apple right now—and it’s becoming increasingly obvious. The company seems to be moving in the wrong direction, starting with the release of more marketing buzz than substance. Branding their efforts as “Apple Intelligence” felt like an attempt to rebrand AI under their own umbrella, but the result has backfired. At this point, "Apple Intelligence" is starting to feel like a euphemism for "doesn’t work".

Rather than focusing on grand, headline-grabbing concepts, Apple should have started by addressing fundamental needs. One of the most obvious first steps would have been transitioning Siri to a generative AI foundation. That would’ve provided a valuable learning path and room for iterative improvement. In parallel, Apple could have begun developing Siri into a more agentic AI—one capable of controlling apps and accessing cross-app data meaningfully.

As things stand today, I’m increasingly skeptical that we’ll see truly useful AI from Apple anytime soon. Unless there’s a significant shift in approach, we’re likely to continue seeing more underwhelming features wrapped in glossy branding.

 

[Expos of 1969]

It was difficult to listen to Gruber as he carefully searched for words to critique Apple without sounding too harsh.

There’s clearly something off at Apple right now—and it’s becoming increasingly obvious. The company seems to be moving in the wrong direction, starting with the release of more marketing buzz than substance. Branding their efforts as “Apple Intelligence” felt like an attempt to rebrand AI under their own umbrella, but the result has backfired. At this point, "Apple Intelligence" is starting to feel like a euphemism for "doesn’t work."

Rather than focusing on grand, headline-grabbing concepts, Apple should have started by addressing fundamental needs. One of the most obvious first steps would have been transitioning Siri to a generative AI foundation. That would’ve provided a valuable learning path and room for iterative improvement. In parallel, Apple could have begun developing Siri into a more agentic AI—one capable of controlling apps and accessing cross-app data meaningfully.

As things stand today, I’m increasingly skeptical that we’ll see truly useful AI from Apple anytime soon. Unless there’s a significant shift in approach, we’re likely to continue seeing more underwhelming features wrapped in glossy branding.

Yes, they made a big foolish mistake in calling it Apple Intelligence. It tarnishes the whole company with what has happened. If it had been simply AI that went wrong it would be a little easier to shrug it off and then maybe down the road change the name to Apple Intelligence if things were working very well. That is still a big if though. But as it stands, AI under the Apple brand name is a big pile of invisible garbage which will stay in peoples minds for quite a while.

 

[ThailandToo]

My mistake... 1+ Billion active customers. Still a remarkable number that speaks to Apple's success.

People have been predicting Apple's doom for the last 10-20 years. Yes... Apple has had its share of flops. Apple III, Lisa, PowerMac G4 Cube, Macintosh TV, Apple iPod Sox, Apple Pippin, Newton, Apple iPod HiFI, quickly come to mind. But those were developed and released under the previous CEO, not Cook.

Cook is doing an excellent job leading Apple. The good news is that people who don't like Cook and where Apple is today, have many other choices to purchase tech products. It's bewildering some people choose to stay unhappy rather than purchase superior tech offered by other companies.

Actually, as an Apple fan I am destroyed by the loss of the Apple that innovates and creates things nobody could think of. There’s no innovator at the top. Nobody who understands it’s not what the customers think they want it’s what they will want in the future with innovation.

I feel like everything from the quality of software to the lack of innovation in products has led Apple down a path. Its only real advantage is an ecosystem that is run so anticompetitively it should be regulated.

As an AAPL shareholder over the years, I loved AAPL. But as a fan of Apple, I hated what Tim has done. The firing of Forstall and loss of top talent has shown the greed of the CEO. It’s unfortunate for all customers and stakeholders other than the current executive team and those who made their billions by throwing the other stakeholders under the bus so they could make more money. I am a part of it, and I hate the system so I quit with AAPL stock.

Just as a customer, I want a real innovative leader who cares about all the stakeholders not just the shareholders who give this CEO $100m annually in stock grants to destroy goodwill and the future by locking in people today and taking advantage of the whole pipeline of stakeholders other than the top 1% of shareholders who truly made all the profits possible by buying AAPL stock. Greed is not good at this level.

 

[Will Co]

Innovation is really difficult, really time consuming and really expensive. Mostly because it's usually very iterative with a lot of trial and error before things work, if they ever do. Working in software and electronics gives me a huge amount of respect for what Apple and other tech companies have achieved. Because we've had super thin gadgets for a while now, we take it all for granted. But adding further extra features into an ever decreasing space and power budget is just not that easy. Add to that brand new product development with technology that really is truly impressive, such as AVP, even if it may not have been a huge commercial success, and I just don't see how people believe that "Apple never does anything impressive". They're far from perfect. Software bugs, the recently quite stupid embarrassment over AI and the awful Siri.

On balance, I'd still take Apple over any of the other hardware and software providers, and by a long way. Warts and all. I suspect a rather large customer base agrees with me. I don't think they're going away any time soon.

 

[Piggie]

Just to repeat something I said a while ago.

We can't compare Apple being late with maps to Apple being late with AI.

With Google Maps that were pretty much set in stone (maps don't exactly change much) Apple had years and years to gradually catch up to be a nice alternative to Google Maps.

But with AI this isn't the case. If Apple takes 3 years to build their own system to be where Open AI is today, then by that time Open AI will be 3 years in front of Apple.

I suspect Apple will just buy their way into someone else's AI system or bolt a part of theirs's onto someone else's AI.
Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see Apple make it's own AI, build it own data centres, but that's not what Apple normally does, as it almost always uses someone else's tech to create their products, and packs them in a pretty easy to use way.

 

[aknabi]

Apple and Apple Intelligence are going to be just fine.

I remember this exact same blind handwaving all through the Sculley, Spindler, Gil Amelio years...

 

[racerhomie]

It’s nice to see John Gruber on video. The last time I saw him was on the WWDC interview, last year I think. Your hair looks different John!

 

[Rogifan]

You never read LoopInsight then I take it. The "Trio of Fanboys" consisted of Gruber, Rene Richie & Dalrymple. Jim never had a negative word to say about Apple no matter how bad a product was. His white knight-ing of the Apple iPhone Battery Case is a particular favorite of mine.

Up until he retired he was VERY slavishly pro-Apple

Well he’s certainly not now.

 

[dominiongamma]

Actually, as an Apple fan I am destroyed by the loss of the Apple that innovates and creates things nobody could think of. There’s no innovator at the top. Nobody who understands it’s not what the customers think they want it’s what they will want in the future with innovation.

I feel like everything from the quality of software to the lack of innovation in products has led Apple down a path. Its only real advantage is an ecosystem that is run so anticompetitively it should be regulated.

As an AAPL shareholder over the years, I loved AAPL. But as a fan of Apple, I hated what Tim has done. The firing of Forstall and loss of top talent has shown the greed of the CEO. It’s unfortunate for all customers and stakeholders other than the current executive team and those who made their billions by throwing the other stakeholders under the bus so they could make more money. I am a part of it, and I hate the system so I quit with AAPL stock.

Just as a customer, I want a real innovative leader who cares about all the stakeholders not just the shareholders who give this CEO $100m annually in stock grants to destroy goodwill and the future by locking in people today and taking advantage of the whole pipeline of stakeholders other than the top 1% of shareholders who truly made all the profits possible by buying AAPL stock. Greed is not good at this level.

my question to you is what are your next steps? Are you planning to stay with Apple or are you planning to go to switch to a different system? Not a criticism just curious because I’m just thinking about Apple a lot lately and they have been making a lot of wrong decisions.

 

[Chungry]

People have been saying that for many years. Yet Apple appears to limp along with its 2+ Billion active and repeat customers who love to purchase and use Apple products.

This right here. Did I recently go down to just one iPhone 16 PM and, do I daily drive an S25U? Yes. But Apple is by no means down and out. They are behind to be sure. But I will keep buying their flagship phone every year and I'll switch to it as my daily when they get their act together. It's just not this year. They aren't going to crumble because of the botched AI rollout

 

[Chungry]

Gruber is the Melville of tech pundits. A 2 hour podcast for him is short.

He is a blowhard, but unlike Melville or even Dickinson, it's sound and fury signifying nothing.

 

[Ghengis LeMond]

The bigger problem is that innovation will surpass the anticompetitive ecosystem of Apple and when it does, Apple’s days are numbered.

Nailed it. Excellent post.

 

[blairh]

He targets Gurman because he isn’t transparent when he makes a mistake. Gurman, along with the Bloomberg tech writers, lack accountability. It’s perfectly acceptable to call that out.

Yeah, no. That's not what he is doing. He is purposely trying to hurt Gurman. You don't write that he is an 'ace' reporter unless you are trying to hurt someone's feelings.

It's fine if you want to call someone out for their professional work. It's not fine to make it hurtful and vindictive.

 

[philfloyduk]

Thank god someone publicly mentioned the displays. All I read is about how they’re THE best displays. They’re good, but they aren’t great.

For me, I’d sacrifice a reduction in weight for twice the resolution and increased brightness.

 

[bluecoast]

He is a blowhard, but unlike Melville or even Dickinson, it's sound and fury signifying nothing.

I haven’t listened to the podcast yet. I prefer his written stuff on daring fireball because his spoken stuff generally goes on so long. I guess apple podcast transcriptions are my friend.

 

[MonkeyT]

Releasing the headset when Apple did achieved many small goals, including the first-to-market, but the main thing it did was send every viable competitor back to the drawing boards to compare what they originally had planned versus what they now knew they HAD to include. It set their competitors back at least a year on software, if not on hardware too. Apple DEFINED the market that will come. If Meta's first release had been the world's first glimpse of AR/VR headsets, the market itself would never have become more ambitious than cheap children's toys. Apple's reputation in the field benefitted greatly from Zuckerberg's panicked press conferences full of pre-release concepts that ridiculously oversold the capabilities his first (and current) releases.

 

[neotint]

But they did jump on it. Too quickly in fact and why they mentioned features which weren’t ready. Hopefully they have learnt from this

Their product focus has lagged behind Android, M$, and others. Which again is a positive. Their skepticism is 100% well placed, and this gives them a leap frog possibility which they are bungling and risk caving into generative "AI" hype which is inherently a loosing proposition given how unfit for purpose stochastic LLMs are for any serious work.

 

[neotint]

How are they not jumping on that bandwagon with Genmoji, Smart Reply, Image Wand, notification/email/transcript summaries, memory movies, Writing Tools, and ChatGPT integration?

They resisted generative "AI" due to correct skepticism of stochastic alpha/beta-level "AI" products with mature level PR/Marketing spend, and have lagged far behind Google and M$ due to this. They've only done these due to pressure from basic uncritical consumer pressure for really bad tech snake oil.

These appeasements are driven by pressure from misplaced consumerism and equally non-savvy investors who don't understand/don't care about all the near term and long term problems with stochastic LLMs being crammed into everything. Apple still has the chance to leapfrog the field with focus on non-stochastic ML tools but there's clearly a battle inside Apple between the product quality longer term visions and the short-term myopia for pushing more stochastic parrots.

 

[ThailandToo]

He targets Gurman because he isn’t transparent when he makes a mistake. Gurman, along with the Bloomberg tech writers, lack accountability. It’s perfectly acceptable to call that out.

Says who? Gruber attacks Bloomberg because it reported that Chinese secretly had put chips on Apple servers and could monitor that activity. Nobody knows where Bloomberg reported factually or not other than the Chinese and Apple if they bothered to find the chips on their servers anyways. I wouldn’t put it past Tim to allow the Chinese to monitor it all.