We are so used to being able to do almost anything in software. For example, today I was looking at how long it takes to load the list of your blog posts in Micro.blog. It’s a couple seconds, but I’d like it to be half a second. I know from many years of web experience that there is no technical reason why it can’t be faster. Just a little more caching and database optimizations.
With the Apple Intelligence and Siri delays, people have speculated on why it’s late. Maybe it’s about getting the security right. Maybe it’s just buggy and taking longer than expected.
But what if Apple has discovered that it’s not actually possible? AI is entirely new, with new requirements that stress the limits of hardware. Apple is attempting to cram a clever intermingling of data and Siri features into 8 GB of RAM. As a comparison, the largest version of DeepSeek R1 can only be run on a brand new Mac Studio with the M3 Ultra and 512 GB of RAM.
Apple does have an out if on-device models fall over: private cloud compute. But scaling that out to hundreds of millions of iPhone users goes well beyond what Apple had presumed was needed when they talked last year about ramping up production of M2-based servers for AI.
If Apple needs to lean on the cloud to really make Siri work, I think it will be the largest server undertaking that Apple has ever attempted. And they need to balance this with their commitments to energy use and the environment. This is not something you just spin up out of nothing.
Another path would be to simplify their approach, starting with a more manageable set of tasks that the new Siri could do. Something that fits within the limits of iPhone hardware and a realistic deployment of new servers. Apple could focus on making Siri a little more capable and more reliable, saving some of the harder challenges for later. Most people have no idea what Apple promised last year, despite the TV ads, so a reset of expectations could get Apple back on track.
We don’t know what’s going on inside Apple. Apple Intelligence might need a little more time or much more time. The only truly worrying scenario would be if the sunk cost fallacy is blinding them to how badly they are stuck.
Fred McCann @manton I'm not sure it's even possible on massive cloud infrastructure much less on a phone.
Numeric Citizen someone at some point told to higher-level execs that X amount of RAM would be enough in the iPhone 15 Pro or 16 Pro and beyond... if that's no longer the case... some heads might be rolling soon... and Apple might face a massive court battle (because: built for Apple Intelligence).
Tom Loughlin The better question to ask is "Is Apple Intelligence Necessary?" I would argue that, for a vast majority of everyday users, it's not, in which case, Apple's best move is to abandon it. I am willing to reconsider my position if someone can point to me some data showing that AI is a feature that a substantial majority of Apple iDevice users are requesting.
Scott Walters @apoorplayer "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” -- Henry Ford
Manton Reece @apoorplayer Users want a better Siri, and I don't think Siri can be substantially better without using some form of LLM. But there is a range of possibilities between "Siri understands me now" and "Siri has AI superpowers".
Tom Loughlin @drwalt And what, exactly, would have been wrong with that response? Why are we not allowed to say "no" to Henry Ford? Or Sam Altman? Clearly the intent behind Ford's snide answer is that the people were wrong, and he was right. And now we have clogged cities, polluted air, and highway deaths all for the sake of faster transportation. The trouble is we never know what the consequences are of any of these types of decisions until it's far too late and too costly to mediate them. And even today, when we can easily transition to electric/solar power, every oil corporation and every car manufacturer is pushing against that option. No one in positions of wealth or power is saying, "Oops. Guess we should fix that." Bill Gates is done with climate change as the political wind has shifted. I guess I am not as altruistic about the nature of humanity as you are. I agree we need a balance between innovation, creativity, and potential harm and danger; but I focus on the danger because I believe it is not focused on enough when massive corporate profit is part of the equation.
Scott Walters 
rom @apoorplayer I agree.
Apple got bit by the GenAI hype. Apple did something that was outside of their playbook - pre-announced something that isn't even close to ready.
They have seen what the initial results of their Apple Intelligence beta has done - following the footsteps of every LLM out there, i.e., bullshitting. The Apple Intelligence news summary was so bad that it is just like "putting glue on pizza". Now imagine this with YOUR PERSONAL DATA -- picking Mom at the airport but gives you the wrong date and time, flight no. and airport BECAUSE that is what LLMs do, bullshit. Apple will NEVER recover from that.
I agree with that there are constraints on device (need more resources, but granting that Apple has researched on how to minimize the models, I guess the models are still too resource intensive) and also on their private cloud compute (they couldn't churn chips fast enough). BOTH are necessary if privacy is to be preserved (something all other GenAI companies are violating).
A slow and careful rollout of features is what Apple do best, and that includes AI-enhanced features. Integrating ChatGPT with Siri could have been the best initial play, and work on the other, more useful features until "it works". Apple users are patient.
Tom Loughlin Tom Loughlin "Users want a better Siri." Again I ask (with respect), which users? Techno-enthusiasts, or everyday, non-techie people? Is there any data indicating this? I fear one of the problems with issues like this is the techno-enthusiasts live in a techno-bubble, transferring what THEY want to "what users want."
Scott Walters @apoorplayer LOL. Ooh, a link war! Um- um- shoot- ummmmmm
Manton Reece @apoorplayer Everyday people. I'm thinking of anyone who has been frustrated with Siri not working quite right.
Jonathan Hays @apoorplayer interacting with something by talking to it is an inherently easier paradigm than typing a message to it. I don't think that's anything unique to tech vs non-tech people.
Scott Walters @drwalt
AI for Good: a.co/d/01aSWQbAI for Social Good: a.co/d/cl8vkQu
(I know what you're going to say: Google and Microsoft. Still.)
Scott Walters @apoorplayer People didn't know they wanted "a thousand songs in your pocket" until Jobs showed them. Everyone thinks they just want more of the same, just better. Was there a "substantial majority " of theatergoers wandering around going, "Damn it, when are we gonna get a rap musical about Alexander Hamilton starring a cast of POCs"?
Rene van Belzen Apple was never about what people want, but what people need, what adds value to their lives. Therein lies a problem, because it is still unsure what AI is good for. Yes it is capable, but is it any good at it? Only time will tell. Also, if nature has come up with a low-cost, energy-low solution (brains), there surely is room for huge improvements in AI technology, even if it remains at the intelligence level of a simple animal.
