[menacingly]

Apple isn't behind on AI any more than they were behind on cloud storage. It doesn't matter when, it doesn't matter if it isn't SOTA, I don't know how many different ways I can word that they have your data. Google has your data.

model-as-service companies can have all the features they want, their models can't do anything meaningful without the data Apple, MS, Google have.

Apple is at zero risk that someone else will have your notes, entire app library with data, mail, calendar, messages. They hold so much leverage. Even if you use some other (so far nonexistent) secret all-model, what are you going to access it with?

[rainsford]

I don't even think it's about data. Since when has Apple's strategy been about being "first" to anything? I'm probably showing my age, but I remember the iPod being ridiculed as both late to the MP3 player game, especially if you were a PC user, and lacking "key" features the competitors had like FM receivers.

Literally none of that ended up mattering to the actual success of the product, a pattern that has been repeated with a lot of Apple products. My first MP3 player, smartphone, tablet, laptop, etc, were not Apple products but that's what I own now (well except for the MP3 player which is essentially a dead product category).

[menacingly]

that's a good point. it could also be the same reason everyone else is struggling: it's very hard to find compelling utility for LLMs. We absolutely will, but it's difficult.

Right now everyone is setting incomprehensibly expensive amounts of compute on fire, for basically free, in the hopes utility emerges

[candiddevmike]

Apple doesn't have an answer for creating GenAI content, yet makes most of their money selling products for creatives. You could argue they're "doing it for the little guy" by not adding it, but their creative software needs GenAI features to stay competitive.

[romwell]

What "their creative software" and you talking about?

Microsoft Office? That's not Apple (and it's got AI a-plenty).

Adobe Photoshop? That's not Apple (and it's got AI a-plenty).

Autodesk Maya? That's not Apple (and it's got AI a-plenty).

Logic Pro? It's... Oh, that one is, in fact, Apple — and it's got AI features unrivaled in other DAWs, as of last month's release [1].

Final Cut Pro? Got me there, I don't know much about it, but at least we can be specific.

In any case: most "creatives" are using software that's not made by Apple to create.

And the creative software Apple does make is not their top priority.

So, to my knowledge, presence or lack of AI in Apple software is not affecting most people using Apple hardware as creative professionals.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/05/whats-coming-in-majo...

[rglover]

> their creative software needs GenAI features to stay competitive.

They're not interested in staying competitive. It's not in their blood. They define markets and dominate them. If there's even a whiff of Jobs-era thinking left at the company, they're working on something that will make all of the "competition" irrelevant. Even if it takes them a few years. Do I expect it? No, but the last thing they'll do is chase the crowd/tulip mania.

[menacingly]

That's certainly one of the available takes. Mine is that I'd need something other than some exuberant posts to think that's market essential at this point.

Either it becomes an essential part of workflows, in which case it becomes commoditized and we're worried about whether or not they'll someday support the mouse, or it's hype and it doesn't matter if/when they implement it

[thfuran]

>yet makes most of their money selling products for creatives

Do they actually?

[menacingly]

if you frame "a creative" as people who select an emoji

[dylan604]

Just because you make the hardware doesn't mean you have to build the software. Not really sure why you'd expect Apple to feel like that's something they should be involved with at all.

[menacingly]

it's because there is some sense among the physics-challenged that apple has to support it in hardware, as if we're a generation away from placing the burn-inducing, fusion-reactor-draining h100s in people's pocket it would take to run a model that impresses them as much as the tech demos of today

[threeseed]

> but their creative software needs GenAI features to stay competitive

The only truly creative software they sell is Final Cut and Logic.

And both target professionals who aren't interested in generating low quality GenAI content.

It's Adobe and Canva who care more about those features.