There's nothing interesting going on here, and I don't mean that as a criticism. There's a clear schema, no particularly clever UX needed, you can build almost all of this out of standard UI components, and the problem is well defined.
The only challenge is the actual time input for coding, and that's mostly gone today.
Steve Jobs would have said that you're just ... "holding it wrong".
'ba-dum tss'
Nevertheless, this is stuff even LLMs know how to do correctly, so there's no excuse for Apple here.
The last thing they need is more things to get distracted with. They don’t need LLMs, they need to care and focus on making good products.
Help us, John Ternus.
Apple could alternate annual releases with performance/security focus and features. Need to figure a cadence of changing the UI that fits in with that cycle.
The biggest indictment, however, is that the Siri they bought was itself more powerful before they bought it.
Update: "I'd like a romantic place for Italian food near my apartment" just showed places near me instead.
Apparently the restaurant reservation thing was supported, although OpenTable might’ve broken it at some point https://reddit.com/r/Siri/comments/mhc8cx/restaurant_reserva...
Right now shareholders expect a visible AI play. Apple doesn't have much in terms of visible AI, there's plenty of AI features in e.g. the Photo app and Mail, but investors want a chatbot. That's what the market thinks AI looks like and Siri is what Apple has that fits the bill.
Its kinda silly that investors think this incredible technology (AI) is just chat... when its real utility is really doing invisible things (for better or for worse)
Even this is half baked; just try to use Siri to sleep/stop that alarm once it’s underway.
“No regressions“ did not make their priority list. No more searching Spotify with Siri.
The fact it won’t Google something and open the SERP seems a little willful. Had to tell it I was doing programming homework and needed to know how to build the URL. (Saying “Search Kagi“ to run my shortcut is the superior workflow, but I was curious.)
Google is going to win the consumer AI battle and Microsoft the B2B battle.
This is purely because model cost will trend to zero whilst capability will reach an equilibrium, meaning the only moat is user lock-in.
Android owns something like 60-80% of the global market, and most people using an iPhone actually use the Gsuite (Gmail, YouTube, Google Maps, etc) from day to day. The EU (and after that probably India and Japan) are going to force Apple to open up iOS to accept other assistants.
Now most of that either is "i cant do that" or "sure, playing Ellie Gouldings Lights at 200%" (which admittedly was funny in hindsight, had it not woken my infant daughter up and caused a sleepless night)
But it's not about that. They'll all improve, but since for the majority of people their entire life is in the Googlesphere, they will want to run Gemini. And the DMA will even let them on iPhones and iPads.
Bro dropping truth nukes.
Under Tim Cook regime, it has authorized $877B in stock buybacks, and is very likely to continue under this new leadership.
The decline in quality aligns with how much capital is returned to shareholders.
I do, nostalgically, miss HyperCard once in a while, but just the idea of it. I am salty about how they dismissed Sal Soghoian and Keith Stattenfield though, those decisions baffle me. They could pay them for life to stay fellows at a cost of 100th of a mosquito bite.
I'm not saying that these tools didn't exist (there are better examples than this one), but hobbyist, or open-source tools are examples of the prioritisation not mattering. Most of the little projects I've built outside of work have been objectively terrible uses of time for the result.