5 ms·

This makes no sense to me. Apple's plan works because... their lock-in is better? I can "control most of the lights in my house, stream Apple music and set kitc

This makes no sense to me. Apple's plan works because... their lock-in is better? I can "control most of the lights in my house, stream Apple music and set kitchen timers" with Alexa, Google Assistant, Cortana and even Bixby. What is Apple's actual advantage here? How is Apple making money from this when Amazon does not?

Tagbert 4y ago
Apple makes money from the devices it sells. Siri makes those devices more convenient to use. Amazon is selling the devices at or below cost and hoping that Alexa will make the money (which it doesn’t)
- smoldesu 4y ago
  That only tells me which one will exist longer, not that "Apple's plan works". I've genuinely seen zero people deliberately use Siri (on iPhone or Mac) over the past 5 years. Apple is certainly losing money on Siri too.
  - jm4 4y ago
    If you look at Siri in a vacuum, you're almost certainly correct that it isn't a moneymaker. But Siri isn't in a vacuum. It comes with a device with an average cost of like $1000. It may not necessarily be widely used, but the ones who do use it are highly likely to remain in the Apple ecosystem and use other products and services that are highly profitable. Look at all those Korean novelas and shovelware on Netflix. There are cohorts of subscribers who remain highly loyal because they're into it. Netflix isn't necessarily swinging for the fences with high brow, popular content that competes with the best studios in the world. Instead, they pump out a wide variety of content that keeps the maximum number of people subscribed. Apple is similar. They promote features - whether it's Siri, health, privacy, family sharing/controls, etc. - that will strongly appeal to some cohort and keep them on the platform. Then, they incrementally hook you into services until you're buying $1000 devices for the whole family and paying $30/mo for the services bundle. And once you're there, they have you because the switching cost involves turning your digital life upside down.
  - nottorp 4y ago
    I was one of those zero people until i realized i can tell Siri "add an appointment with Blahblah next tuesday at 11", it will actually understand that and it takes less time than using the calendar interface. I'm sure enough people find some small use for the voice commands that it's a good feature to have on the phones.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Siri really shines with the HomePod or the watch I’ve found.
      - Tagbert 4y ago
        It works well on phones for things like setting calendar events, timers, reminders, playing music.
shagie 4y ago
Apples devices are smarter. This makes them cost more for the "same" hardware, but costs less for the computation. Apple isn't trying to make money with Siri. It's using Siri to make its ecosystem of Apple Music and similar more valuable to its customers. The limits that Apple puts on what it can do makes that cloud side computation less expensive. --- Consider that bit - less expensive. Apple doesn't run its own cloud in the way that Google, Amazon, or Microsoft do. So what does Alexa cost? It costs for AWS cloud time. That's the expense that it's running. Those skills that people use run on AWS compute time rather than a phone's local cpu and battery. A google search "costs" about 1 KJ of energy. Alexa has similar costs somewhere just for energy and other costs for the maintenance of the additional software and content. It costs something to maintain that joke database.
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  I don't think Apple is smarter. Siri is really basic. I can't even say "Turn on the lights and the fan". I have to present it all in bite-sized chunks. Come on how hard is that. I have a feeling there is no AI in these supposedly intelligent assistants. Only scripted stuff.
  - dljsjr 4y ago
    I don't know if it's device specific but I use "Hey Siri, turn on the overhead lights and the floor lamp" for example all the time. I have a HomePod though.
    - GekkePrutser 4y ago
      Weird, I have a homepod (mini) also. In fact I hardly have any Apple stuff anymore, I only got homepods because it was the most privacy-friendly option out of the big three. I just have an iPad from work which I used to set them up. And most of my automation goes through Home Assistant anyway. When I give a double command Siri literally tells me she can't do two things at the same time and I have to present them as two separate commands. Perhaps it's because I have it set to UK English? Perhaps it's smarter in US English. I'll have to try that.
twobitshifter 4y ago
I think the point is that apple produces software that doesn't directly make them money as part of their business model. Pages, Numbers, iMovie, Maps are all given away for “free” with devices. Siri is just another example of that. As you say, being able to talk to your phone is table stakes, not an advantage. But having that offering keeps sales of Apple hardware moving.

Tagbert 4y ago

Apple makes money from the devices it sells. Siri makes those devices more convenient to use. Amazon is selling the devices at or below cost and hoping that Alexa will make the money (which it doesn’t)

smoldesu 4y ago
That only tells me which one will exist longer, not that "Apple's plan works". I've genuinely seen zero people deliberately use Siri (on iPhone or Mac) over the past 5 years. Apple is certainly losing money on Siri too.
- jm4 4y ago
  If you look at Siri in a vacuum, you're almost certainly correct that it isn't a moneymaker. But Siri isn't in a vacuum. It comes with a device with an average cost of like $1000. It may not necessarily be widely used, but the ones who do use it are highly likely to remain in the Apple ecosystem and use other products and services that are highly profitable. Look at all those Korean novelas and shovelware on Netflix. There are cohorts of subscribers who remain highly loyal because they're into it. Netflix isn't necessarily swinging for the fences with high brow, popular content that competes with the best studios in the world. Instead, they pump out a wide variety of content that keeps the maximum number of people subscribed. Apple is similar. They promote features - whether it's Siri, health, privacy, family sharing/controls, etc. - that will strongly appeal to some cohort and keep them on the platform. Then, they incrementally hook you into services until you're buying $1000 devices for the whole family and paying $30/mo for the services bundle. And once you're there, they have you because the switching cost involves turning your digital life upside down.
- nottorp 4y ago
  I was one of those zero people until i realized i can tell Siri "add an appointment with Blahblah next tuesday at 11", it will actually understand that and it takes less time than using the calendar interface. I'm sure enough people find some small use for the voice commands that it's a good feature to have on the phones.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Siri really shines with the HomePod or the watch I’ve found.
    - Tagbert 4y ago
      It works well on phones for things like setting calendar events, timers, reminders, playing music.

shagie 4y ago

Apples devices are smarter. This makes them cost more for the "same" hardware, but costs less for the computation. Apple isn't trying to make money with Siri. It's using Siri to make its ecosystem of Apple Music and similar more valuable to its customers. The limits that Apple puts on what it can do makes that cloud side computation less expensive. --- Consider that bit - less expensive. Apple doesn't run its own cloud in the way that Google, Amazon, or Microsoft do. So what does Alexa cost? It costs for AWS cloud time. That's the expense that it's running. Those skills that people use run on AWS compute time rather than a phone's local cpu and battery. A google search "costs" about 1 KJ of energy. Alexa has similar costs somewhere just for energy and other costs for the maintenance of the additional software and content. It costs something to maintain that joke database.

GekkePrutser 4y ago
I don't think Apple is smarter. Siri is really basic. I can't even say "Turn on the lights and the fan". I have to present it all in bite-sized chunks. Come on how hard is that. I have a feeling there is no AI in these supposedly intelligent assistants. Only scripted stuff.
- dljsjr 4y ago
  I don't know if it's device specific but I use "Hey Siri, turn on the overhead lights and the floor lamp" for example all the time. I have a HomePod though.
  - GekkePrutser 4y ago
    Weird, I have a homepod (mini) also. In fact I hardly have any Apple stuff anymore, I only got homepods because it was the most privacy-friendly option out of the big three. I just have an iPad from work which I used to set them up. And most of my automation goes through Home Assistant anyway. When I give a double command Siri literally tells me she can't do two things at the same time and I have to present them as two separate commands. Perhaps it's because I have it set to UK English? Perhaps it's smarter in US English. I'll have to try that.

twobitshifter 4y ago

I think the point is that apple produces software that doesn't directly make them money as part of their business model. Pages, Numbers, iMovie, Maps are all given away for “free” with devices. Siri is just another example of that. As you say, being able to talk to your phone is table stakes, not an advantage. But having that offering keeps sales of Apple hardware moving.