Hacker News Reader

Comment by VonLipwig | Hacker News Reader

> Apple: Takes risk, makes iPhone > Google: I want some of that. Android Go! > Apple: Takes risk, launches iPad > Google: I want some of that. Android is tablet optimised > Apple: Lets innovate here and add Siri > Google: Voice? To control a phone? Lets do that!

It probably isn't like this at all but this is how it comes across. It seems that when Apple innovates, Google copies.

Bringing out your own version of insert item here is fine but it would be nice if Google didn't come across as plainly copying someone else. Apple has Siri, 3 month's later: "Introducing Siri for Android! I mean Majel!"

Would be nice if the next version of Android has its own killer feature people could shout about instead of waiting for someone else to invent it first.

View on HN

  > Apple: Lets innovate here and add Siri > Google: Voice? 
  > To control a phone? Lets do that!

No, Apple acquired a company that was using DARPA-funded research from the SRI. Their software was in the iOS app store and on its way to Android/Blackberry when Apple bought them.

  > It seems that when Apple innovates, Google copies.

From the other point of view, Android is way ahead and iPhone is catching up slowly. A tray for multitasking? Notification pulldown from the top statusbar? Microphone-on-keyboard for dictation? All Android features, some from day one.

Face it: everyone takes good ideas from wherever they're found and builds on them. Treating Apple as if it's some divine font of innovation that everyone else can only copy is absurd.

If the media sends that message across they are being disingenuous. It's not that different from saying Google introduces voice control -> Apple introduces the same "but better". Why can't Google's 1-2 step be seen the same now, as introducing something like Siri "but better" ?

Apple usually gets away with waiting 2 years before they release an alternative to something Android has, but they get a pass because "they waited to make it better". While Android doesn't get the same defense even if they waited a few months. Do you really think they've started working on this just 2 months ago? A Google X employee said on Reddit that they've been working on AI that can beat the Turist test for a long time - and it already beats 93% of the Turing tests.

http://androidandme.com/2011/12/news/more-info-on-googles-ma...

> It's not that different from saying Google introduces voice control -> Apple introduces the same "but better".

iOS has had voice control since iOS3. The point of Siri is that it's not voice control, it's that it's 1. better at recognizing speech and 2. stateful/context-based, in that it can take "followup actions" within the context of the previous command

And Mac OS has had voice commands for several years before that.

I'm getting sick of this fight of always trying to find who “invented” something. Innovation is not just inventing new concepts, that just doesn't happen that much, it's also using old stuff in new ways or applying it somewhere it hadn't been used before, or twisting it in some other way.

What's conceptually different between Siri and Eliza or the Emacs Doctor? Nothing, but nobody else put it in a phone as a way to control it when everybody was using just voice commands. That's innovation – which Google dismissed, by the way http://gigaom.com/apple/googles-andy-rubin-doesnt-think-siri....

As is pointed out in another comment here, Google has been working on Voice recognition for a long time now and had voice commands prior to Siri. It was not conversational like Siri, that was mentioned int the article as well - but to have a conversational AI is not something new either (there are probably hundreds of these).

Secondly, voice recognition and conversational AI is not a new product that was invented by Apple. You seem to overestimate the importance of Siri in terms of the originality it brings. It indeed seems awesome to have and interact with, I have not done that yet. I have an Android, and I am not even waiting for something similar because I find it unnecessary to have one and it might be intrusive to use in presence of others. So probably for the few who are like me, it is not a killer feature - not even close.

I was aware that Apple didn't invent Siri. They brought the company which made it then tidied it up. The point still is that Apple recognised its use in one of their products, they took the punt and made it happen.

I am also an Android user. This feature isn't something I need.

Like I said in my original post, it probably isn't how it seems. The fact remains though that Apple saw an opportunity with voice commands on its mobile platform. Google may have been working on voice technology before hand but was it for Android?

Google is doing great on other things. Chrome, Chromebooks (maybe released a few years too early but they took a risk on it) and driverless cars.

With Android, I have yet to see it really innovate by itself. I should say that I do not follow Android development. I am just an Android user who casually looks at an iPhone from time to time to compare the two.

They didn't merely tidy it up, they added hardware support and needlessly broke the version people already had that worked without it.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3215420

it might be intrusive to use in presence of others

In my experience, it essentially looks the same as voice actions, except with a much higher success rate. The least socially intrusive action is whatever lets me transition back to the conversation the soonest, and voice actions win in terms of speed for a lot of use cases. Also, if you absolutely have to turn to your phone with someone else around, it's kind of courteous to telegraph exactly what you're doing.

You're ignoring pretty much all the situations that would stop me from wanting to use it: The vast majority of the time I use my phone for something other than conversations is spent in the presence of colleagues, family or commuting in situations where I would not be interacting with them, but where talking to my phone would potentially disturb them. Voice actions is not an alternative - I never use them for exactly this reason. The alternative is my phones touch interface.

If I "had to" interact with my phone in the middle of a conversation, it might be different, but that's a fringe case I very rarely encounter.

I can't get my friends to shut the hell up when I'm using voice search or music match software. I say "hang on a second" /beep/ "search for polar be" "dude we should get Taco Bell" "ars in Michigan".

"Now searching for taco bears in Bell, Michigan"

yeah definitely -- Google Voice Search and all the work they put into building up the database/quality of voice recognition has been in place for years. I've tested voice search with many of the Siri-like statements and commands and they all work. The only thing is the device doesnt' talk back, seems like that means they're way past 50% complete on this 'feature'.

Yeah they held back their perfect Siri-beating tech because they were sure nobody wanted to talk to their phone.

Sigh. My Nokia had voice commands before the iPhone existed...

Example: Nokia 5500, launched in May, 2006: http://europe.nokia.com/support/product-support/nokia-5500-s...

As does my 2004 Acura TL. However, Siri <> "voice commands".

Sure, but for someone who follows what universities and groups like SRI have been doing in the past ten years, it doesn't take a genius to see the connection.

Apple got there first. Good for them, and they fully deserve the advantage on having a functional version while others are still working on the beta. But let's not now extrapolate that and claim nobody would have got there if it wasn't for Apple.

Even the legendary 3310 (2000) had voice dailing.

Google has innovated plenty. To name a few things that Apple copied: notifications, cloud sync, OTA updates, and voice actions (as a part of Siri). Also, simply buying up an existing company is a pretty weak form of "innovation."

You might not be aware but you've been able to control an Android phone by voice for quite a long time, it's just not very good at it..

There was also GOOG-411, where you dialled a phone number then interacted with google search by voice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOOG-411

Siri isn't innovative in the sense of being a new concept, it's just much better than what came before.

Android was a Danger rival, not an iPhone rival (the they responded to iPhone)

So Apple invented voice search? No they didn't. Google had that telephone thing ages before.

> Apple has Siri, 3 month's later: "Introducing Siri for Android! I mean Majel!"

I think it's more like: Google has been researching conversational voice control for several years; Apple releases Siri; Google says "Oh dear they've beaten us to it, we'd better rush a release now even though we have only implemented 30% of what we planned."

> when Apple innovates

When was that?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com