It’d be short sighted to not have a wrapper around which AI to use, even without implementation for them. Like, having an abstract parent class with a Siri implementation of it would be baseline good software engineering.
That’s actually a good solution. Create a platform where app actions can be invoked with a permission model by any AI model.
Maybe apple can even have something similar to MCPs for tool invocations of apps and publish it so all models can actually be trained to use that framework
I actually think this is what they ended up doing - just regular conversations with tool calling into your various apps, behind a Siri AI API. not HTTP based mcps (for now) but rather local ones.
This is a very clever platform play. If you make Siri / your mac the central access point for all AI related workflows and make models interchangeable, then Apple has a huge weapon in the AI race.
I don't disagree, but I do feel the need to point out this was not Apple's plan A. Luckily for them they have so many tools and options at their disposal, that they are able to massively fail at developing their own models and still end up in a good position.
Apple genius has been to accept their plan A failed (the original Apple Intelligence), and instead of doubling down, let the others explore the space, then offer a good interface (I say that, I haven’t seen if it’s actually good).
So many other actors in the industry would have just doubled down and follow the race to the bottom
Just playing the devil advocate: what happens when the answers from a not-Apple LLM are garbage? Who the users are going to blame, Apple or OpenAI, Anthropic, etc..?
I'm not 100% on Apple side on this, I would love to chose whatever I want, even local models, but I get why trey trying to control 100% of the user experience. If they could trust any provider with customers data, they would let them in, since they're not competitors. They would even let Apple not spend a ton of money on developing LLMs....
Are people blaming Apple when Google search in Safari gives garbage results? Some probably are, but that really shouldn’t be a relevant discussion, in particular when the user explicitly chose which AI backend to use.
I think that's the end goal, at least looking at where their hardware is going. Or flexible routing with easy tasks running locally and only the more complex ones hitting the cloud
This appears to be the current feature prototype intended for the EU and potentially China. Apple has chosen not to release the new Siri AI in the EU because our Digital Markets Act requires them to allow interoperability. I.e. that users be allowed to choose another AI provider.
Ostensibly they'll activate this in the EU when it's ready. Given the current functionality, it looks ready (or close to being ready). My guess is it is ready and Apple is doing their usual negotiation tactics with the EU to see who blinks first.
It’d be short sighted to not have a wrapper around which AI to use, even without implementation for them. Like, having an abstract parent class with a Siri implementation of it would be baseline good software engineering.
That’s actually a good solution. Create a platform where app actions can be invoked with a permission model by any AI model.
Maybe apple can even have something similar to MCPs for tool invocations of apps and publish it so all models can actually be trained to use that framework
I actually think this is what they ended up doing - just regular conversations with tool calling into your various apps, behind a Siri AI API. not HTTP based mcps (for now) but rather local ones.
This is a very clever platform play. If you make Siri / your mac the central access point for all AI related workflows and make models interchangeable, then Apple has a huge weapon in the AI race.
I don't disagree, but I do feel the need to point out this was not Apple's plan A. Luckily for them they have so many tools and options at their disposal, that they are able to massively fail at developing their own models and still end up in a good position.
Apple genius has been to accept their plan A failed (the original Apple Intelligence), and instead of doubling down, let the others explore the space, then offer a good interface (I say that, I haven’t seen if it’s actually good).
So many other actors in the industry would have just doubled down and follow the race to the bottom
I would pay a good chunk of money if Apple released a local AI hub to coordinate all AI usage locally (including photo indexing).
Just playing the devil advocate: what happens when the answers from a not-Apple LLM are garbage? Who the users are going to blame, Apple or OpenAI, Anthropic, etc..? I'm not 100% on Apple side on this, I would love to chose whatever I want, even local models, but I get why trey trying to control 100% of the user experience. If they could trust any provider with customers data, they would let them in, since they're not competitors. They would even let Apple not spend a ton of money on developing LLMs....
If you are smart enough to change the default, you would know which LLM you picked and could point the finger at it.
Apple is in the game of providing an application platform. Maybe in the future they will provide their own LLM.
Are people blaming Apple when Google search in Safari gives garbage results? Some probably are, but that really shouldn’t be a relevant discussion, in particular when the user explicitly chose which AI backend to use.
Don't they need that for China for compliance with their law?
Possibly, but certainly the EU.
Is there any hint that Siri can be connected to arbitrary MCP providers?
So will they have access to the AOP?
You can’t even search this because Google thinks you mean “app” even when you use quotes around “aop”.
It’s the thing that runs PhraseSpotter 24/7
That would be really cool, if you can route your local model for it.
I think that's the end goal, at least looking at where their hardware is going. Or flexible routing with easy tasks running locally and only the more complex ones hitting the cloud
Hmmm then why is it not available in EU?
This appears to be the current feature prototype intended for the EU and potentially China. Apple has chosen not to release the new Siri AI in the EU because our Digital Markets Act requires them to allow interoperability. I.e. that users be allowed to choose another AI provider.
Ostensibly they'll activate this in the EU when it's ready. Given the current functionality, it looks ready (or close to being ready). My guess is it is ready and Apple is doing their usual negotiation tactics with the EU to see who blinks first.
I think it is because the EU is requiring broader access to the deeper layers that Apple doesn’t want to give.
EDIT: by broader I mean all apps the user installs on their phone.
There’s a difference between Apple being able to swap out the model in code and Apple letting end users choose which model to use.
Siri, and Alexa, would be significantly more useful if it could be connected to ChatGPT etc.
It happens now – when I ask certain questions Siri asks if I want ChatGPT to answer it.
Good news, Alexa+ (included with Prime) is already an Anthropic model, probably Sonnet.
News at 11: Developers write decoupled code.
Neat. Now let me point it to an OpenAI-compatible API endpoint of my choosing, like a Mac Mini running Hermes on my LAN.
I do not want my personal data or the queries against it to leave my network boundaries if at all possible. This should be a default option.