Discussion on:
View:
Show:
I do not know what it means, but SIRI backwards spells IRIS. I wonder if eye-scan technology will find its way into phones for one purpose or another. Shades of "Minority Report."
I didn't realize the long term implications of Siri, but of course, I think your assertion is correct.
I just bought a 4S, and by far the most amazing thing is Siri. Its ability to actually interpret English is remarkable, and scary (in a good way.) In addition, I'm tickled by the way that it makes "assumptions" based on my previous behavior (like Google search results.) When I ask Siri to call "Joe," even though there are four "Joes" in my phone, it calls the one I talked to most recently. It is certainly my first experience with a technology that smacks convincingly of artificial technology.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Apple didn't develop Siri, right? Didn't they purchase it?
http://www.johnclassick.com
I just bought a 4S, and by far the most amazing thing is Siri. Its ability to actually interpret English is remarkable, and scary (in a good way.) In addition, I'm tickled by the way that it makes "assumptions" based on my previous behavior (like Google search results.) When I ask Siri to call "Joe," even though there are four "Joes" in my phone, it calls the one I talked to most recently. It is certainly my first experience with a technology that smacks convincingly of artificial technology.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Apple didn't develop Siri, right? Didn't they purchase it?
http://www.johnclassick.com
Siri was bought a few years back. I guess Apple toiok the lazy approach and just bought a product. I guess they don't really invent anything in Cupertino.
As does Mircrosoft, as does Nuance, as does almost every hardware, software, manufacturing, retail, service, and every other type of company in the world. If someone has a product, process, or service that a company finds of value, they acquire it (and the ancillary patents and copyrights) if they can. It's usually more cost-effective than starting from scratch.
And it has a lot to do with not re-inventing the wheel.
And it has a lot to do with not re-inventing the wheel.
Judging from their sales, it appears to be just the "stuff" that consumers seem to want and purchase, eh?
Apple has spent the last 18 months extending and further developing Siri since it purchased the company that originally created it. So, the answer is that Apple purchased Siri AND continued to develop it.
Another great article Jason! The fact that Siri disintermediates every app on the iPhone is a powerful, maybe risky, business action by Apple - not just cool technology.
Now we just have to wait for some malware to hook into the system, triggered by specific search queries, and start up some malicious code...
I am truly sorry to say that Siri has been a big disappointment to me. On numerous occasions I've had to stop and pull over while driving to turn Siri off so that I could switch to "Voice Control" to make my phone calls.
Voice Control works without hesitation every single time. Siri doesn't.
8 out of ten times I'll get a response indicating it cannot perform that function. Or when I ask it to call a number of a business in my address book it instead searches the Internet and gives me the address.
Apple needs to do a better job insuring connectivity to it's servers so that Siri might at least connect half the time.
Voice Control works without hesitation every single time. Siri doesn't.
8 out of ten times I'll get a response indicating it cannot perform that function. Or when I ask it to call a number of a business in my address book it instead searches the Internet and gives me the address.
Apple needs to do a better job insuring connectivity to it's servers so that Siri might at least connect half the time.
Like don't drive and yack on the phone at the same time
Microsoft has had voice commands on the phone and PC for years now. So, are you saying you are excited that Apple is finally catching up in this area?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_synthesis#Apple
"The first speech system integrated into an operating system that shipped in quantity was Apple Computer's MacInTalk in 1984. The software was licensed from 3rd party developers Joseph Katz and Mark Barton (later, SoftVoice, Inc.) and was featured during the 1984 introduction of the Macintosh computer. Since the 1980s Macintosh Computers offered text to speech capabilities through The MacinTalk software. In the early 1990s Apple expanded its capabilities offering system wide text-to-speech support. With the introduction of faster PowerPC-based computers they included higher quality voice sampling. Apple also introduced speech recognition into its systems which provided a fluid command set."
"The first speech system integrated into an operating system that shipped in quantity was Apple Computer's MacInTalk in 1984. The software was licensed from 3rd party developers Joseph Katz and Mark Barton (later, SoftVoice, Inc.) and was featured during the 1984 introduction of the Macintosh computer. Since the 1980s Macintosh Computers offered text to speech capabilities through The MacinTalk software. In the early 1990s Apple expanded its capabilities offering system wide text-to-speech support. With the introduction of faster PowerPC-based computers they included higher quality voice sampling. Apple also introduced speech recognition into its systems which provided a fluid command set."
In 1992, I began to use voice control to open application on my Mac. In 1994, I wrote a program that used voice recognition to take orders over the telephone for my plants. It worked pretty well, but when it didn't understand a series of words, it always opened Quark Express. So I had to abandon it. Still, many orders were taken and filed in my database correctly.
In 1982 the TI 99 Business computer has speech.
How does Apple get credit for SIRI since it was it's own entity? Siri is the pioneer right?
How does Apple get credit for SIRI since it was it's own entity? Siri is the pioneer right?
If I can't understand him the how many times did he have to retrain the phone (SIRI) to get it right.
GET REAL! It just doesn't work the first time. You need to train the service.
GET REAL! It just doesn't work the first time. You need to train the service.
Siri is not "voice commands." Siri is a voice interface based on AI-backed speech recognition. Apple is not "catching up;" it has leapfrogged past voice functions on all other platforms.
(By the way, you should be aware that Apple had "voice commands" built-in to ALL its computers since the introduction of PlainTalk in 1993.)
(By the way, you should be aware that Apple had "voice commands" built-in to ALL its computers since the introduction of PlainTalk in 1993.)
I seem to recall a quote from a whimsical Steve Jobs telling people they'd be amazed at how they interact with the then unannounced and unseen iPad. About 4 trillian keyboard designs (including keyboards on the back) made the headlines. But I think Siri was what he had in mind all along.
The reason we use Google and the like is that they are web crawlers finding anything remotely relevant, however the data is dirty and unverified and is thus of little use. Also of no use is the boast that it found 8,247, 856 (ir)relevant entries in 0.2 of a second.
Siri goes straight to the heart of the problem, it KNOWS it is a request for a restaurant and automatically goes to dedicated sites that can answer the question SUCCESSFULLY, without giving you the other 8,247,843 irrelevant results. This in time, coupled with dabbling in non-core specialities that they know nothing about (phone software and hardware) will ultimately prove the undoing of Google. A search request, such as Google knows not who you are, where you are, what age and sex you are and more importantly why you are (re)asking this question.
Siri is just going to build up a lot of relevant content providers that CAN ANSWER the question and go straight there. We don't go to a butchers and ask for a recommendation on central heating, why should we ask an unqualified person for an expert opinion on something he knows nothing of? Web search has not changed a jot since the dawn of the web (excepting the delivery of quicker irrelevant results) - just the same crummy list. The opportunities lie with the content providers to do more than just feed Googles invoicing machine. Top Table and Wolfram Alpha are but the start of this trend. This is going to be the content equivalent of iTunes and the music/movies providers and everybody by the search engines will become a winner.
Siri goes straight to the heart of the problem, it KNOWS it is a request for a restaurant and automatically goes to dedicated sites that can answer the question SUCCESSFULLY, without giving you the other 8,247,843 irrelevant results. This in time, coupled with dabbling in non-core specialities that they know nothing about (phone software and hardware) will ultimately prove the undoing of Google. A search request, such as Google knows not who you are, where you are, what age and sex you are and more importantly why you are (re)asking this question.
Siri is just going to build up a lot of relevant content providers that CAN ANSWER the question and go straight there. We don't go to a butchers and ask for a recommendation on central heating, why should we ask an unqualified person for an expert opinion on something he knows nothing of? Web search has not changed a jot since the dawn of the web (excepting the delivery of quicker irrelevant results) - just the same crummy list. The opportunities lie with the content providers to do more than just feed Googles invoicing machine. Top Table and Wolfram Alpha are but the start of this trend. This is going to be the content equivalent of iTunes and the music/movies providers and everybody by the search engines will become a winner.
They had invented a brain scanner that operates via a browser.
Otherwise how would they determine "why you are (re)asking this question"? Half the time I don't know the real reason I'm asking a question. There's a lot of sub-concious stuff going on as well as conscious thought.
Otherwise how would they determine "why you are (re)asking this question"? Half the time I don't know the real reason I'm asking a question. There's a lot of sub-concious stuff going on as well as conscious thought.
"Apple???s iPhone 4S was a disappointment to all of those who were expecting a redesigned iPhone 5"
Correction: The iPhone 4S was a disappointment to the few dopes who happen to both believe every rumor they read and who chose to ignore Apple's recent history of reusing the same form factor for more than one generation of devices. The rest of us were actually quite impressed with the 4s from the beginning.
Correction: The iPhone 4S was a disappointment to the few dopes who happen to both believe every rumor they read and who chose to ignore Apple's recent history of reusing the same form factor for more than one generation of devices. The rest of us were actually quite impressed with the 4s from the beginning.
I think you took that sentence out of context, you cannot argue that is was a disappointment for a lot of users when viewed from what they were expecting but they were happy with the phone.
I believe the 4s main purpose is for the future, a phone for BETA Siri, imagine what they could do with the iphone5 when siri has advanced a year or so.
I believe the 4s main purpose is for the future, a phone for BETA Siri, imagine what they could do with the iphone5 when siri has advanced a year or so.
I'll bet a kiwi has more calories than that! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi I think you mean a kiwiFRUIT! 
While voice recognition technology will be (has been?) quickly adopted in the mobile space, I can't see this being as heavily used at the desktop, especially in open office environments.
I can see some possible humorous unintended search results, though. It takes me back to when I first got my hands on a Newton. Until it was trained, it came up with some bizarre interpretations. A colleague of mine tried writing his name (Peter Moodie) and it responded with "Peter Must die".
I fully agree with CaptainWhizz. Ignoring the voice recognition aspect for now, the best thing about the underlying technology is its use of divergent and specialised sources of information, that can provide much richer and more relevant results. This is the future of search technology and Google needs to understand this if it wishes to maintain it's position.
While voice recognition technology will be (has been?) quickly adopted in the mobile space, I can't see this being as heavily used at the desktop, especially in open office environments.
I can see some possible humorous unintended search results, though. It takes me back to when I first got my hands on a Newton. Until it was trained, it came up with some bizarre interpretations. A colleague of mine tried writing his name (Peter Moodie) and it responded with "Peter Must die".
I fully agree with CaptainWhizz. Ignoring the voice recognition aspect for now, the best thing about the underlying technology is its use of divergent and specialised sources of information, that can provide much richer and more relevant results. This is the future of search technology and Google needs to understand this if it wishes to maintain it's position.
I agree with you Jason, and your article is spot on. I look forward to Microsoft innovating a whole new paradigm of interaction with Kinect for Windows. It will not only have Siri-like voice commands but possibly make the mouse irrelevant with gesture control for desktops.
Search engines need to think about the future and prepare for voice input, regardless of what apple does with its own service. The future is almost here and I look forward to seeing how Microsoft's implementation stacks up against Apple's.
Search engines need to think about the future and prepare for voice input, regardless of what apple does with its own service. The future is almost here and I look forward to seeing how Microsoft's implementation stacks up against Apple's.
Jason,
Isn't Safari (Apple product) a search engine?
Isn't Safari (Apple product) a search engine?
If Apple actually came out with a search engine it could be a risky move especially if they locked users into using their search engine. The vast majority of internet users like googles search engine, and phones that have locked people out of google have lost sales as well as encouraged people to hack their phones. Apple doesn't like people jailbreaking their devices.
This type of move could actually backfire on them.
This type of move could actually backfire on them.
Maybe I should trademark these names so Apple doesn't grab them [unless they are already taken], iSearch, iFind, IBiased, iCostMoney, iProprietary
Apple will then force all Apple products to use their search engine even if you choose another one [say in your browser]. [Then, of course, Apple rushing to get it live, will allow so many security loopholes that the scammers and virus makers will think it's Christmas for a month].
Apple will then force all Apple products to use their search engine even if you choose another one [say in your browser]. [Then, of course, Apple rushing to get it live, will allow so many security loopholes that the scammers and virus makers will think it's Christmas for a month].
VUI will never replace touch related interfaces because there is a special pleasure in touching (except is a specialized specific situations). It is just like choosing either to "talk" with or to touch the thing that u like.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
