My understanding is that this works on-device (via the iPhone), so I wonder what the regulatory issue is.
Perhaps the regulations treat is as if you’re “recording” the person you’re speaking with, without their consent?
Perhaps the regulations treat is as if you’re “recording” the person you’re speaking with, without their consent?
For example, maybe Apple purposefully trained the model to not only optimizing working with AirPods, but to optimize not working with any other input devices? If Apple could be in trouble if it became known they did such specific training, could it also mean there is the potential for them to have legal issues due the potential for them to have done such?
(I think we can also make a similar argument when it comes to the hardware being made to optimally run one specific model and possible allegations it doesn't run other models as well.)
If the government doesn't crack down on this sort of behavior, a company could use it to try to meet the legal requirements technically while also still hurting competitors. But if the government does crack down on it, then a company could be caught up under an accusation of doing this even if they didn't (they just didn't care to optimize for competitors at all, but never negatively optimized for them either).
If I were Apple, I'd say you got what you want EU, it works on ALL earphones in EU. But it will be absolutely terribly shitty because we will use the same model trained for our AirPods on your random headphones.
You're using a third party BLE airtag and clicking on UWB? Enjoy tracking this approximate noisy location that we're basing off of some noise pattern we didn't lock on.
Feature provided, just not well. Goes against Apple's ethos of trying to make things polished but don't let some bureaucrats weaponize that against you.
The issue arises when Apple leverages their position as gatekeeper to anticompetitively preference their own headphones in the iPhone/iOS ecosystem. Can't do that.
> If I were Apple, I'd say you got what you want EU, it works on ALL earphones in EU. But it will be absolutely terribly shitty because we will use the same model trained for our AirPods on your random headphones.
The problem for Apple is that they have no secret sauce here: absent any ratfuckery, it would probably work just as well with competing headsets, if not better (particularly since many of Apple's competitors' headsets have better sound quality, better microphone quality, and better noise cancellation). That's probably why they aren't taking your suggestion and are instead choosing anticompetitive behavior.
Yeah, I'd believe it. There is a good chance that is very much the case here.
For reference, we are seeing it more and more - sensor design changes to improve loss curve performance - there’s even a term being bandied about : “AI-friendly sensor design”. This does have a nasty side effect of basically breaking abstraction - but that’s the price you pay for using the bitter lesson and letting the model come up with features instead of doing it yourself. (Basically - the sensor->computer abstraction eats details the RL could use to infer stuff)
audio goes into mic => STT engine => translation model => TTS engine => audio comes out of speaker
a change in hardware would be a change in the "audio goes into mic" component of the model, which is not the critical part of the model.
All the parts of the above architecture already exist: we already have mics, STT, translation models, TTS, and speakers, and they all worked on other systems before apple even announced this, much less came up with a redesign. Most likely the redesign is aesthetic or just has slightly better sound transmission or reception – none of those were necessary for the functioning of the above architecture in other, non-apple systems.
I am, of course, assuming apple's architecture is a rough approximation of above. An alternative theoretical architecture might resemble the one below, but I have seen no evidence apple is doing this.
audio goes into mic => direct audio-to-audio translation model => audio comes out of speaker
If we were using Whisper in that pipeline, we could for example generate speaker embeddings for each segment whisper generates, then group by matching the speaker embeddings - and in reality, this doesn't really work all that well.
But we are still left with the question of _WHO_ to feed to the translation model - so, ideally, the person facing us or talking at us - so we'd have to classify the 3 people all talking to each other given their angle in relation to the listener's head, etc.. This is what the diarization model would have to do - and the more sophisticated diarization models certainly could use the precise angle input can only be computed if you have super-close timings.
So Apple is throwing a huge tantrum and withholding features from the EU to act like this is a much bigger deal than it is. This gives Apple a lot more bargaining room after the EU bitch slapped them.
Apple likely already has an API they could enable and be done with this. They won't do that. Apple needs exclusivity with new feature releases because they don't do things all that well anymore(Siri, maps, etc, nobody uses those because there are better alts available on ios).
But yeah Apple is just starting way to the extreme so they have more room to bargain. Hopefully the EU sees through this, again, and doesn't budge.
>Apple needs exclusivity with new feature releases because they don't do things all that well anymore(Siri, maps, etc, nobody uses those because there are better alts available on ios).
Siri was okay for a very brief window after release and then dreadful ever since and Apple Maps was never good, but has gotten better. Etc maybe more valid idk
I dislike Apple's malicious compliance with the EU too, but it seems unrelated here, at least without any proof.
As this is HackerNews, you should expect to see at least a couple commenters who believe they should have control over devices they own, including interoperability without artificial, anticompetitive limitations.
Not really. They are complying by not offering features that would be considered anti-competitive. It’s not untoward, it’s just following their interpretation of the law. We obviously don’t know the discussions between Apple and the EC, but in public it’s American nerds who are complaining that the EU is bad.
It is my understanding that this is what apple has chosen to do in areas where this iOS feature is available. Is that not the case?
This isn’t the first time that Apple has been withholding features from the EU without ever providing a clear and understandable explanation, so there isn’t much basis for giving them the benefit of the doubt.
The audio is captured by the outward facing microphones used for active noise cancellations. That’s why it only works for AirPods Pro 2, 3 and AirPods 4 with ANC. That wouldn’t just work with any headphones.
Even the AirPods Pro 2 will need a firmware update. They won’t work with just any old headphones and seeing that even the AirPods Pro 2 need a firmware update tells me that it is something they are doing with their H2 chip in their headphones in concert with the iPhone.
That it only works with AirPods is just Apple discriminating in favour of their own product which is exactly what the EU was going after.
But their $60 ANC headphones with cheap audio processing hardware in the headphones aren’t going to be sufficient.
They may even be able to use the exposed models on the phone.
The equivalent feature on Android tells me it would. I mean it already does technically.
Are we supposed to treat Apple being late to the party as usual as some kind of exceptional thing only them could do?
https://support.google.com/googlepixelbuds/answer/7573100?hl...
Which are the same price as Apple’s AirPods with ANC.
So Google also didn’t try to support the feature with generic earbuds.
But I mean, you are free to buy overpriced Apple headphones which sounds worse than Sony, only properly works paired with an Apple phone or laptop and whose killer feature was available on their competitors buds years ago if that rocks your boat.
The noise cancellation are neck and neck but the AirPods had much less of that “pressure” sensation when using it. AirPods transparency is just plain better. Comfort for long use sessions is better on the Sony’s. Mic is better on the AirPods.
And those Sony ones aren’t cheap.
The first review I found comparing them..
https://wasteofserver.com/sony-wf-1000xm4-vs-apple/
Why would I want to by a none Apple laptop with horrible battery life, loud, and that produces enough heat to ensure that I don’t have offspring if I actually put it on my lap?
This is no different than Google not supporting just any old headphones.
Then the argument came that Apple’s AirPods are “overpriced” even though the cheapest AirPods that support it - AirPods 4 with ANC are in the same price range as Google’s and cheaper than the worse sounding and more expensive Sony Earbuds.
The whole argument seems kind of silly. Just buy the platform you want that has the features you want. If the European thinks Apple is overpriced then it's no harm that they aren't bringing features to Europe. He wasn't going to buy them and now is going to not buy them even harder.
The rest, which is to say that everything Apple sells beside laptops is subpar, their strategy regarding European regulations deprive them of any credibility when they pretend to care about consumers and their prices conversion in Europe is daylight robbery, is just my opinion and accessory to the discussion. I just couldn’t help myself.
You aren’t going to save any money by getting a pair of $50 ANC headphones and hoping they work with the system - the Android variant doesn’t.
Absolutely not. It assumed the AirPods Pro 2 unique processing was required which it clearly isn’t.
Nobody ever talked about saving money.
The whole discussion is about the EU mandating Apple play fair which would mean letting competitors access their phone processing exactly like Google is already doing.
You didn’t say this?
> But I mean, you are free to buy overpriced Apple headphones
> which sounds worse than Sony,
And the Sony headphones sound worse and are more expensive.
> only properly works paired with an Apple phone or laptop
Which also isn’t true.
Sony headphones sounds noticeably better than AirPods Pro 2 by the way and their EQ is better. AirPods have great noise cancellation but their sound quality is not that great.
> > only properly works paired with an Apple phone or laptop
> Which also isn’t true.
Care to explain to me how I set what presses do on AirPods without an Apple product. How do I disable noise cancellation and pass through? Where do I setup the level of noise cancellation?
Yes, exactly.
And the headphones are “overpriced” even though they are the same price as comparable devices that have worse ANC?
And a simple Google search tells you how to pair AirPods to none Apple devices
https://support.apple.com/en-sg/guide/airpods/dev499c9718b/w...
Maybe, maybe not. Assuming Apple's motivation isn't pure self-dealing, it's very consistent with Apple's behavior to forbid or impede doing things that are absolutely possible but sometimes result in a sub-par experience.
I mean they absolutely are especially as EU regulators categorically refuse to review anything in advance just in-case their get a budget shortfalls and need to go looking for fines.