Will AI be the iPhone killer?

[teh_hunterer]

Apple owns the stack but not the AI

Rivals own the AI but not the stack

Both are rushing to play catch-up in each other's area

Given Apple's historical advantage has been its WIMP design and hardware-software integration, can it maintain its dominance in a post-smartphone world?

The AI is only going to get easier to run and the models are only going to get cheaper to run on your own hardware.

Apple sells the device that you actually want to use the AI on.

I think the money is in the device you run the AI on and not in the AI itself.

I'm also going to bet that it's harder to make Apple's devices and ecosystem than it is to make AI models. Meaning it's far more difficult for the AI companies to catch up to Apple.

 

[BenGoren]

How, pray tell, is one to take photos with AI rather than a camera? And then look at them after they’ve been taken? Is AI going to read your ebooks and newspapers for you, save you the burden of watching videos or scrolling social media? Will AI take you by the hand as you try to figure out which train to catch as you navigate a major non-US city’s public transit system? Do you expect AI to tune your musical instrument for you, or whisper in your ear in a non-annoying way to tell you if you’re sharp or flat? What’s the best way for AI to help you level a picture on the wall? And can it shine a light for you in a strange hotel room at night as you stumble your way to the bathroom?

There are an awful lot of things AI will do to make the world a better place. But it’s not replacing anybody’s smartphone. Not even hypothetically.

b&

 

[PsykX]

It will grow for sure. I've started using the dev tools for AI and they are a savior as opposed to just using the original OpenAI APIs for example.

The magic recipe :
1. No secret keys to hide on a server
2. The API is easy as saying 1-2-3
3. They cost nothing to the dev, Apple assumes all risk
4. Apple's not the evil ones taking paywalled or private or copyrighted data to grow their LLM. Thanks to their "Private Cloud Compute" API. Google takes the evil position for Apple.

With this in hand, users will want an iPhone for AI, and 3rd party apps AI will grow like nothing you've seen on Android and Apple will win the AI race by not even having an LLM themselves.

How will they grow revenue ? As apps become more powerful, they will also cost more and Apple makes either 15% or 30% of every sale on the App Store 😉

 

[rosie.macEvans]

don't think so. If anything, it'll probably help Apple maintain or even grow its dominance. Most people don't want a completely new device category, they want better experiences on the devices they already use. AI is much more likely to become another layer built into smartphones rather than replace them. Apple has an enormous installed base, strong ecosystem lock-in, and the resources to integrate AI across hardware, software, and services.

 

[Le_Chiffre]

Anybody remember the Facebook cha cha phone or the Amazon phone.

Yeah those went nowhere fast.

 

[Sosab123]

Anybody remember the Facebook cha cha phone or the Amazon phone.

Yeah those went nowhere fast.

Monkey see, monkey do. Many more brands will discover that assembling a chassis and dropping silicon into it isn't the same as building something great.

 

[WebHead]

How, pray tell, is one to take photos with AI rather than a camera? And then look at them after they’ve been taken? Is AI going to read your ebooks and newspapers for you, save you the burden of watching videos or scrolling social media? Will AI take you by the hand as you try to figure out which train to catch as you navigate a major non-US city’s public transit system? Do you expect AI to tune your musical instrument for you, or whisper in your ear in a non-annoying way to tell you if you’re sharp or flat? What’s the best way for AI to help you level a picture on the wall? And can it shine a light for you in a strange hotel room at night as you stumble your way to the bathroom?

There are an awful lot of things AI will do to make the world a better place. But it’s not replacing anybody’s smartphone. Not even hypothetically.

b&

Funnily enough, I can conceive of AI doing a lot of that stuff (in conjunction with smartglasses and other wearables)

I'd like to see OpenAI and X's devices gain some traction, if only to restore some competition and innovation.

 

[sigamy]

The only thing AI is going to kill is brain cells.

You sound like the neck beards in the 70s who said, "PCs are underpowered game machines" and then in the 80s, "GUIs are toys and will never be used for real computing".

 

[sigamy]

Tbh, its too early to tell how this will all shake out, and it will impact mobile phones.

I chafe under the terms iphone killer, because there is no single product that will kill an established popular product. Lots of little mistakes, and lack of innovation will do that. Apple's current AI implementation has been fraught with mistakes and missteps, and that has hurt them, whether they can make up ground is anyone's guess.

I'm just not sure how AI will transform mobile phones to a degree that apple will be left behind. Personally I'd rather not see AI baked into an operating system, be it ios, or macos.

Today:

1. user takes iPhone out of pocket
2. opens Facebook app, likes a post, reads a few things.
3. user opens banking app, checks their balance, transfers money to savings account.
4. searches for their flight information; sends it to spouse via text message.

Future?

1. User walks into their living room...voice agent says "hello, do you want updates?" user says Yes.
2. Agent summarizes FB posts. User says, "like"
3. User says, "I need to transfer $400 to my Bank of America savings account from the Citibank Checking"
   1. Agent says, "I have found that SoFi is offering 4.5% on high yield savings. This is 1.4% higher than Citibank. Considering your current balance, over 12 months, that equates to an additional $822 in interest earned. Would you like to transfer to SoFi?"
   2. user says, "yes".
4. User says, "send Mary our flight information"
   1. Agent says, "I found a cheaper flight that leaves 1 hour earlier. do you want to change your reservation?"
   2. user says, "yes, great".

 

[Mousse]

You sound like the neck beards in the 70s who said, "PCs are underpowered game machines"

Wut?! Who bought PC's in the 70's for gaming? No one in their right mind would spend several thousand on a toy. PC's were mostly bought by businesses to improve workflow.
If you wanted games in the '70s, your parents drop $200 for an Atari 2600.

and then in the 80s, "GUIs are toys and will never be used for real computing".

Who said that? If they thought that in the '80s, Apple would have died out and MS wouldn't have developed Windows. Because of its GUI, Mac were touted back then as an in house publishing system when coupled with the LaserWriter and later, LaserWriter II. WYSIWYG.

 

[sigamy]

Wut?! Who bought PC's in the 70's for gaming? No one in their right mind would spend several thousand on a toy. PC's were mostly bought by businesses to improve workflow.
If you wanted games in the '70s, your parents drop $200 for an Atari 2600.

Who said that? If they thought that in the '80s, Apple would have died out and MS wouldn't have developed Windows. Because of its GUI, Mac were touted back then as an in house publishing system when coupled with the LaserWriter and later, LaserWriter II. WYSIWYG.

You need to read some history...

1. By "PC" I don't mean IBM PC and clones. I mean "personal computers". I probably should have said "home computers". All the early 8-bit machines (Apple II, TRS-80, VIC20, C64, Atari 400/800/ST) were primarily used to play games. Even the Amiga was a heavy games focused machine.

2. All the mainframe, mini computer people, and DOS people said this. It was widely debated if a character based UI or GUI was the right approach. These people thought the original Mac was a toy computer. It was similar to the debate around microcomputers. IBM laughed at the first micros (Apple II, etc). There was a huge library of DOS applications (WordPerfect, WordStar, Lotus 1-2-3, dBase, AutoCAD) that were cash cows and people did not want to move off of.

 

[throAU]

AI needs a platform and apple has the only OS with the plumbing to enable easily plugging in AI.

 

[sigamy]

AI needs a platform and apple has the only OS with the plumbing to enable easily plugging in AI.

the Android people are going to love this...

 

[Mousse]

You need to read some history...

Read some history?

1. By "PC" I don't mean IBM PC and clones. I mean "personal computers". I probably should have said "home computers". All the early 8-bit machines (Apple II, TRS-80, VIC20, C64, Atari 400/800/ST) were primarily used to play games. Even the Amiga was a heavy games focused machine.

Right, common household items those. You were lucky to know someone who owned one.

2. All the mainframe, mini computer people, and DOS people said this.

I was one of the early DOS people. I connected to the Uni's VAX-VMS machines for programming classes. The first time I used a Mac, I was blown away at how easy it was to manipulate files and move through directories. CLI was a pain in the (_!_) at mundane tasks like that. CLI is great for batch work.

It was widely debated if a character based UI or GUI was the right approach.

Not as one-sided as you inferred. I still prefer CLI to GUI for batch/script manipulation. Everything else, GUI wins.

These people thought the original Mac was a toy computer.

And designers thought the Mac was the Holy Grail. No more having to imagine what the final print would look like based on LaTex script. What you see is what you get (WYSWIG). I can cherry pick too.

It was similar to the debate around microcomputers. IBM laughed at the first micros (Apple II, etc).

Well, that explains why they made the first DOS based PC and marketed them to businesses.

There was a huge library of DOS applications (WordPerfect, WordStar, Lotus 1-2-3, dBase, AutoCAD) that were cash cows and people did not want to move off of.

DOS applications. Apps that runs on IBM's microcomputers. The type of machines IBM scoffed at. Makes sense.

 

[sigamy]

Read some history?

Right, common household items those. You were lucky to know someone who owned one.

I was one of the early DOS people. I connected to the Uni's VAX-VMS machines for programming classes. The first time I used a Mac, I was blown away at how easy it was to manipulate files and move through directories. CLI was a pain in the (_!_) at mundane tasks like that. CLI is great for batch work.

Not as one-sided as you inferred. I still prefer CLI to GUI for batch/script manipulation. Everything else, GUI wins.

And designers thought the Mac was the Holy Grail. No more having to imagine what the final print would look like based on LaTex script. What you see is what you get (WYSWIG). I can cherry pick too.

Well, that explains why they made the first DOS based PC and marketed them to businesses.

DOS applications. Apps that runs on IBM's microcomputers. The type of machines IBM scoffed at. Makes sense.

I was there too...funny how we have different realities.

I don't believe anything I said is controversial or inaccurate, yet here we are.

Many, many sources have said that IBM laughed at microcomputers. You've never heard this?

Next, as for your "gotcha" on IBM machines...geez...can you grasp that I was writing about a series of events that happened over a few years?

Is it possible that from 1977-1979 (heck from the dawn of man to 1979) IBM thought that microcomputers were not useful, not a threat and not a concern???? Then, after VisiCalc and a few other killer apps caused corporations to buy micros, IBM saw the light...and started "Project Chess" in July 1980. That is 3-4 years after the Apple II was released.

Yes it is possible because that is exactly what happened.

 

[zenmacx]

AI needs a platform and apple has the only OS with the plumbing to enable easily plugging in AI.

Don’t look now, but Google Pixel has already done it.

Apple has a lot of catching up to do. Once “magical & revolutionary” they’ve fallen far behind.

 

[Howard2k]

AI is a tool with no built in safety features. Making in available to the general public is down right irresponsible.

AI advice gave someone a 19th century illness.😬
AI advice contributed to a teen suicide.
AI + mental illness = murder/suicide.
Another reason not to trust AI.
Y'all heard about xAI's MechaHitler.🫣
AI telling landlords to break the law.😄

AI ain't ready for public consumption. It's a tool that should only be in the hands of those train using in safely, even then it's dangerous. AI is no threat to the iPhone. It's a threat to the general public.

Let's take Google away from people too. No information should be given to anyone at all unless it's thoroughly validated.

 

[zenmacx]

Tbh, its too early to tell how this will all shake out, and it will impact mobile phones.

Yes, far too early.

I chafe under the terms iphone killer, because there is no single product that will kill an established popular product.

True, especially the well established iPhone.

Personally I'd rather not see AI baked into an operating system, be it ios, or macos.

Indeed. Keeping AI separate if possible is the best of both worlds.

 

[mjs916]

It’s not AI. Many smartphone companies market their newest features as “AI,” but in many cases they are better described as advanced software with machine learning components. These systems do not think, make independent decisions, or act on their own goals. They only perform specific tasks they have been designed and authorized to do. If they were truly autonomous AI, they would be able to decide what to do without relying entirely on predefined rules, user input, and strict limitations.

So the right question is:

Will AI advanced software with machine learning components be the iPhone killer?​

It's PI: Pretend Intelligence.

 

[Mousse]

Let's take Google away from people too. No information should be given to anyone at all unless it's thoroughly validated.

Sounds like something a politician would say. You gotta keep the population ignorant and easy to manipulate.

How is making information available to the general public dangerous to anyone but the corrupt?

 

[Howard2k]

Sounds like something a politician would say. You gotta keep the population ignorant and easy to manipulate.

How is making information available to the general public dangerous to anyone but the corrupt?

Exactly (my reply was facetious 😀 ). Information is out there on the Internet, and a lot of it is garbage. Just like with AI. You cannot protect everyone from themselves.

Make information (and AI) available. We cannot gate-keep everyone against their own issues.

 

[throAU]

the Android people are going to love this...

Google are first to do a lot of things, Apple is rarely first, but more often in a manner that actually works seamlessly.

Don’t look now, but Google Pixel has already done it.

Apple has a lot of catching up to do. Once “magical & revolutionary” they’ve fallen far behind.

Google have a problem with abandoning projects making things work seamlessly with any even half-serious consideration of user privacy across their ecosystem.

 

[zenmacx]

Google have a problem with abandoning projects making things work seamlessly with any even half-serious consideration of user privacy across their ecosystem.

Kudos to Google for the courage to try new things and put them out in the public arena for further testing and development.

Apple is also forward thinking but does it behind closed doors. The Apple Car project is but one example of many things they have been involved in, but then scrapped. It’s nothing more than a difference in philosophies.

In the case of Google it gives the haters and those more narrow minded about anything that isn't Apple, ammunition to criticize. Hating is their pastime.

 

[throAU]

In the case of Google it gives the haters and those more narrow minded about anything that isn't Apple, ammunition to criticize. Hating is their pastime.

No, real people have adopted real google products only to have them abandoned.

 

[Ctrlos]

The only thing AI is going to kill is brain cells.

Amen, Reverend.

The 'Ask Gemini' feature in Google Photos winds me up because the edits it frequently gets wrong I ca do a lot faster manually in iOS27.

For Apple AI is just another handy iPhone feature whereas for Google its another thing to become reliant on.