upvote

points

by QuadmasterXLII8 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby threetonesun8 hours ago|
next
[-]
I say this every time: the average person never wants to hear the letters A and I. Not because it has a negative connotation, but because they don’t care how their phone gets them an answer to “when is my dentist appointment” they just want it to do it.
reply
upvoteby simonh7 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Yep, by using the terms intelligence, and occasionally Apple Intelligence and not AI[1], they get to talk about these features in a way that don't trigger an automatic mental gag reflex. The fact they cottoned on to this 2 years ago is actually pretty impressive.

[1] https://x.com/ArtemR/status/2056961743142957143

reply
upvoteby Gigachad8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
At least for consumer software, AI is synonymous with annoying nagware forcing itself in your way.
reply
upvoteby jorisw8 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I think you're trying to say, the term 'AI' is _associated_ with chatbots being added in places (websites mostly) where they are more of a nuisance than added value.

OpenAI's ChatGPT is AI consumer software and is a hit, albeit mostly free tier users.

reply
upvoteby acdha2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Don’t forget Google search and Copilot giving you wrong answers. The first time someone gets graded poorly or called out at work for obviously not checking what they sent tends to reframe their perspective.
reply
upvoteby whizzter6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
And that's the thing, 90% of people's interactions with "AI" is negatives in places it didn't belong, Klarna had to roll back "AI" customer service, useless chatbots everywhere "because AI", copilot this and that and so on.

And yes, ChatGPT is a hit but who will subsidize the hardware for freeloaders, Google's (cheap to run) AI is good enough now that I don't need to move over to ChatGPT for simple answers, thus the Google moat will probably remain intact denying OpenAI the search revenue stream all whilst OpenAI proposals/trials to add ADs were met with annoyance.

AI where useful is becoming a commodity, Apple did the correct thing in waiting and using the commodity parts and we're otherwise also quickly heading to the bubble's pop, HN even censoring articles on the topic sure seems to be an indicator that those in power are afraid.

reply
upvoteby mvdtnz55 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I think this is the jaded HN way of seeing AI in products. It's not reality.

I work on a popular consumer product (from well before AI existed) which is incorporating more and more AI features. When we release AI features they receive far more attention and usage than traditional features.

Users who interact with AI features are much "stickier" (more likely to still be users months from now). Free users who interact with AI features are much more likely to convert to paid users. AI features get more press, more online comments, more usage, more conversions. If this wasn't true we wouldn't be spending so much money on it.

reply
upvoteby recursive2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
But also because it has a negative connotation. Not with everyone, but with a lot of people. If someone says "That looks like AI", do you think they are intending to make a compliment?
reply
upvoteby frizlab8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Exactly. Even though Siri is completely lost today, my friend asks it a number of random things, all she wants is an answer. Currently it redirects to the web, it’s enough for her. I told her “next year it’ll work!” And boom. We’re in the EU. Sad.
reply
upvoteby marricks3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Their most recent iPhone which had no major AI advertisements associated with it GAINED market share over competition[1]

They have no ground to make up on AI, and changing their operating system to center on AI would piss off every iPhone user I know outside of tech, and probably half of them within tech.

[1] https://www.macrumors.com/2026/05/13/apple-q1-market-share-g...

reply
upvoteby nl6 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Whether or not consumers wanted it, Apple failed to deliver. And that wasn't because they were listening or anything - they just couldn't deliver.

Apple doesn't leak much but there has been coverage of this:

https://spyglass.org/apple-ai-fail/ (April 2025)

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/apple-fumbled-siris-... (paywalled)

https://appleinsider.com/articles/26/06/07/one-fateful-meeti... (2 days ago)

reply
upvoteby zarzavat5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
They couldn't deliver because they are not a startup and thus have something to lose in a way that OpenAI/Anthropic don't. If Siri starts telling people to self-destruct themselves it would be a major PR disaster, whereas Apple Intelligence being late is not. Arguably the technology they needed (strong guardrails) didn't really exist at the time and the extra couple of years is what made the difference.
reply
upvoteby simonh5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
I think you're quite right in a sense, but let's say it had been Samsung making these promises. Do you think the system not working properly or producing weird and unacceptable results would have prevented them releasing it anyway?

Well, the results[1] are[2] actually[3] in. Samsung of course did do that and the results are what you'd expect.

So in a sense Apple 'could' have released what they had, after all Samsung and others have, but almost certainly not at the level of quality Apple expects. In which case arguably not releasing until it is capable of reaching that quality bar is the right call. The wrong call was announcing it in the first place when it wasn't ready.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/samsung/comments/1b4zc1j/new_ai_tex... [2] https://tech.yahoo.com/ai/articles/awful-galaxy-s24-feature-... [3] https://www.androidauthority.com/im-tired-pretending-galaxy-...

reply
upvoteby 1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby kylehotchkiss53 minutes ago|
prev|
[-]
> copilot button in ms paint

things there don't seem to be going well

reply