[barumrho]

This looks pretty promising to me. It will likely replace the need to set up OpenClaw for average personal users. The work of getting email, messages, and all the personal data on the phone as context seamlessly is not as straightforward as one might think.

I'm curious how the pricing will work. Would it be free up to some limit and then some subscription pricing? I can't imagine it can be free unlimited usage given the price of serving these models.

[pheewma]

Craig mentioned near the end of the keynote that compute intensive things (like image generation) will have rate limits that can be increased bundled with their iCloud + plans. I imagine any request that gets routed to their cloud compute will be subject to limits as well. He positioned it as a value-add to their existing subscription but I suppose that can change.

[emodendroket]

I doubt the average personal user knows what OpenClaw even is though Google is also producing competitive stuff.

[aurareturn]

This is why OpenAI thinks it needs to build its own physical devices. If Apple is only allowing its own AI to operate at the OS level, then that leaves OpenAI with no choice but to build their own.

Meta also realized this and attempted multiple times to build their own hardware but they've given up each time. They started as early as a partnering with HTC in 2011 to make a Facebook phone.

Quite frankly, I'm kind of excited to see what OpenAI can build. I think an AI-first phone could challenge iOS and Android. It's a new paradigm and if OpenAI gets it right, it'll be very hard for Apple and Google to pivot.

I personally think chat + code is the future of apps. For example, I find myself wanting to do many things inside ChatGPT instead of traditional app because I can tell it to do things that are simply impossible on a static app UI. For example, I have some data I want to send to an app but before I do, I want ChatGPT to clean the data in some way first. And then after the data is uploaded, I want ChatGPT to pull some data off the API and make charts that I want to see.

I imagine a world where very intelligent models run at 10k tokens/s, app building is extremely standardized, and it simply builds any app you want inside the OS. IE, if you want a dashboard of your health data, you ask it to build it almost instantly exactly how you want it. I'm already doing something similar today but it's slow and not easy to do for non-engineers.

[layer8]

> If Apple is only allowing its own AI to operate at the OS level

Incidentally, that’s what’s preventing Apple from rolling out their OS-privileged AI in the EU, as the EU mandates equal access for competing AI products. It will be interesting how this plays out.

[smartbit]

Indeed according to Apple https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de... when allowing equal access for competing AI products

> Apple would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to users’ private data — and the ability to directly control other installed applications — as soon as Siri AI is made available in the EU

[aurareturn]

I don't personally agree with EU's mandates. I think it's ok if Apple only allows their own models to run on iOS at the OS level.

If OpenAI makes their own AI-phone, do they have to let Anthropic and Deepseek run their models on it too?

[merlindru]

> do they have to let Anthropic and Deepseek run their models on it too?

provided it gets big enough, yes. the EU's position roughly is "if this hurts an entire market just to benefit you, and lots of people use / rely on it, then you gotta allow it"

[Danox]

Then the EU’s not gonna get anywhere the US and China will just sail along. The lawyers in the EU are essentially cutting their throats building hardware and operating systems cost real money and time which is one of the reasons Apple is using Google’s model for $1 billion a year. (when Apple finishes their models in house, Google probably will be dropped). Like dropping Broadcom, Intel, or Qualcomm in 2027-28).

It takes real time to drag along five ecosystems. That is the main reason it’s taking Apple longer than they’re so-called competition? Noticed that Google and Microsoft only do bits and pieces. Microsoft has no mobile and Google at its heart is an ad company the processor is six years behind.

[merlindru]

that's the most common criticism. can't say i disagree.

though monopolistic practices are unequivocally bad and used to get struck down. one may argue this is just another instance of disallowing monopolistic behavior.

the DOJ used to have sharper fangs than what the EU is doing now

[aurareturn]

Why can't Anthropic or Deepseek take the big risk to develop their own phone? It doesn't seem right that they can simply use EU laws to hop on the ride for free without taking the same risks.

[KawaiiCyborg]

As a consumer it also doesn't seem right that Apple can just use all their private APIs that no other company is allowed to use to tell me what I can and can't use on my phone. If I want Anthropic to have the same level of access that Apple grants itself on _my_ phone, I should be able to do so.

[merlindru]

the EU feels like this falls under monopolistic practices, which it has deemed illegal. the buck stops with the politicians - there's no reason other than "the EU thinks it's bad for the economy and should thus not be allowed"

[Danox]

OpenAI is not a hardware company or an OS company and they hardly have the money to pay the real cost in the long-term, if Amazon, Meta, Google and the Linux crowd are having trouble, OpenAI is not gonna get the job done.

[le-mark]

They have thier very own ai to help; isn’t that supposed to disrupt everything?

[umpalumpaaa]

They would start on a green field though… which makes it pretty efficient initially

[le-mark]

> Quite frankly, I'm kind of excited to see what OpenAI can build.

I’d go further and claim if controlling the hardware is a existential threat for these companies, their ability to deliver or not should be seen as an indictment of the entire “llm formulation of ai” era we’re currently in. If llms have the potential they claim, then empowering them to design a best of breed phone should be table stakes.

[officeplant]

>Meta also realized this and attempted multiple times to build their own hardware but they've given up each time. They started as early as a partnering with HTC in 2011 to make a Facebook phone.

I was working in cellphone sales at the time and I can tell you no one wanted that phone back then even when Facebook was massive. An easy to hit facebook button was not a value add anyone was begging to exist.

Although with how many phones now have stock forced installs of Meta apps perhaps they won their con in the long game.

Similarly no one really wants a physical AI device, and attempts at such are pure techbro hubris on the companies part.

[yakshaving_jgt]

I think I want a physical AI device.

I want an AI assistant that I can use truly hands free. I keep my phone in my jacket when I'm riding my motorcycle. I want to be able to start, stop, adjust, and check details in route guidance. I want to be able to ask what the weather is like ahead on my route. I want to be able to ask it to start looking for a sensible place for me to stop for fuel and/or food without making me do a big detour.

Actually I would also quite like better driving directions, since I can't look at the directions on a screen.

[officeplant]

None of these demands need an AI in a box.

They need software companies to give a damn and improve apple maps/gmaps/etc.

Or perhaps pull over and adjust your routing like most of us do, or maybe bolt a sacrificial phone with maps on it to a holder. If you don't want to risk your main phone.

[yakshaving_jgt]

> Or perhaps pull over and adjust your routing like most of us do

The entire point is I don't want to have to stop in order to receive new information.

I don't know how to make that clearer, sorry.

[officeplant]

Todays pulling over to adjust planning is yesterdays pulling over to make a call, and yesteryears pulling over to throw a map on the hood.

Riding on a motorcycle is already dangerous enough with the average land tank driver on their phone. Talking to your AI assistant while riding at speed sounds like pending split focus disasters waiting to happen.

[haritha-j]

Earbuds exist.

[yakshaving_jgt]

I use Shure se215 IEMs inside my helmet together with a Cardo Packtalk (which includes a microphone mounted inside my helmet).

The audio setup is not the problem.

The problem is when I say "Hey Siri, cancel route guidance," it will say something like "…You must unlock your iPhone to do that."

The entire point is that I can't take my gloves off, get out my phone, and unlock it, at speed, on a motorcycle.

[aurareturn]

  Similarly no one really wants a physical AI device, and attempts at such are pure techbro hubris on the companies part.

No one serious has made one.

[archagon]

Average personal users don't need OpenClaw at all...