Apple plays it safe on AI despite Wall Street pressure
Apple insisted on June 9 that it was still very much in the AI race, announcing incremental updates to its Apple Intelligence software. PHOTO: REUTERS
CUPERTINO, United States - Apple on June 9 remained on its cautious path to embracing generative artificial intelligence (AI) even as rivals race ahead with the technology and Wall Street expresses doubts over its strategy.
The pressure was on Apple not to disappoint at its annual Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) a year after the iPhone juggernaut made a promise it failed to keep – to improve its Siri voice assistant with generative AI.
The annual WWDC is addressed to developers who build apps and tools to run on the company's products.
Despite 2024's disappointment, Apple insisted on June 9 that it was still very much in the AI race, announcing incremental updates to its Apple Intelligence software, including the ability for app makers to directly access a device's AI capabilities.
This would allow users to engage with apps using generative AI while offline, letting them interact ChatGPT-style with a hiking app, for example, while in remote areas without a connection.
Apple CEO Tim Cook briefly mentioned that Siri's AI makeover was still under development and 'needed more time to meet our high quality bar,' which includes Apple's standards on privacy and data security.
'We are making progress, and we look forward to getting these features into customers' hands,' he added.
For Mr Gadjo Sevilla, senior analyst for Emarketer, 'the delays to Apple's in-house AI efforts will continue to draw scrutiny'.
'Especially since rivals like Google and Samsung are moving ahead by introducing new on-device AI capabilities, or partnering with AI startups like Perplexity, (in Samsung's case) to provide users with AI features,' he added.
The biggest announcement at the event was the renaming of Apple's operating systems so that releases better match their release year.
The next operating system will be iOS 26 and will be available across all of Apple's devices – including the Mac, Watch and Vision Pro headset – in the fall, in time for the likely release of the next iPhone 17.
Today, Apple's operating systems have vastly different nomenclatures across devices, including the current iOS 18 for the iPhone or macOS 15 for Mac computers.
Apple also announced that the new operating system will be the first major iOS redesign since 2013, calling the new look 'liquid glass'.
Wall Street divided
The relationship between Apple and app-making developers has been strained in recent years, with developers chafing at the iPhone maker's high fees for getting access to the App Store.
A marathon lawsuit by Fortnite maker Epic Games ended with Apple being ordered to allow outside payment systems to be used in the US App Store.
Adding to doubts about Apple's direction is the fact that the legendary designer behind the iPhone, Mr Jony Ive, has joined with ChatGPT maker OpenAI to create a potential rival device for engaging with AI.
Apple also has to deal with tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump in his trade war with China, a key market for sales growth and the place where most iPhones are manufactured.
Mr Trump has also threatened to hit Apple with tariffs if iPhone production wasn't moved to the US, a change which analysts say would be impossible given the costs and capabilities required.
Wall Street analysts remain divided on Apple's prospects, with the stock down about 17 percent since the start of the year, wiping over US$600 billion (S$771 billion) from its market value and far outshone by its Big Tech rivals.
While some analysts remain optimistic about Apple's long-term AI monetisation potential, others worry the company's cautious approach may prove costly in the longer term.
WWDC 'was void of any major Apple Intelligence progress as Cupertino is playing it safe and close to the vest after the missteps in 2024,' said Mr Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities.
'We have a high level of confidence Apple can get this right, but they have a tight window to figure this out,' he added. AFP
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AsiaOne
an hour ago
- AsiaOne
Musk's father says Trump dispute triggered by intense stress, has to end, World News
MOSCOW — The dispute between Donald Trump and Elon Musk was triggered by months of intense stress on both sides, and the public battle between the US president and the billionaire donor needs to stop, Musk's father told Reuters on Monday (June 9). Trump and Musk began exchanging insults last week on social media, with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO describing the president's sweeping tax and spending bill as a "disgusting abomination". Asked whether he thought his son had made a mistake by engaging in a public clash with the president, Errol Musk said people were sometimes unable to think as clearly as they should "in the heat of the moment". "They've had five months of intense stress," Musk told Reuters at a conference in Moscow organised by conservative Russian tycoons. "With all the opposition cleared and two people left in the arena, all they have ever done is get rid of everything and now they are trying to get rid of each other — well that has to stop." Asked how it would end, he said: "Oh, it will end on a good note — very soon." Neither the White House nor Musk could be reached for comment outside normal US business hours. Trump said on Saturday his relationship with Musk was over and that there would be "serious consequences" if the world's richest man decided to fund US Democrats running against Republicans who vote for the tax and spending bill. Musk bankrolled a large part of Trump's 2024 presidential campaign. Trump named Musk to head an effort to downsize the federal workforce and slash spending. Musk's father told reporters he was standing by his son. "Elon is sticking to his principles but you cannot always stick to your principles in the real world," Musk's father said. "Sometimes you have to give and take." Speaking beside sanctioned Russian businessman Konstantin Malofeyev, Musk's father praised President Vladimir Putin as a "very stable and pleasant man". He accused "fake media" in the West of projecting "complete nonsense" about Russia and for casting it as an enemy. [[nid:718829]]
Straits Times
4 hours ago
- Straits Times
The White House wants 90 trade deals in 90 days, may have 1 so far
US President Donald Trump has so far announced only one deal: a pack with Britain, which is not one of America's biggest trading partners. PHOTO: REUTERS The White House wants 90 trade deals in 90 days, may have 1 so far WASHINGTON - President Donald Trump has announced wave after wave of tariffs since taking office in January, part of a sweeping effort that he has argued would secure better trade terms with other countries. 'It's called negotiation,' he recently said. In April, administration officials vowed to sign trade deals with as many as 90 countries in 90 days. The ambitious target came after Mr Trump announced, and then rolled back a portion of, steep tariffs that in some cases meant import taxes cost more than the wholesale price of a good itself. The 90-day goal, however, is one-tenth of the time it usually takes to reach a trade deal, according to a New York Times analysis of major agreements with the United States currently in effect, raising questions about how realistic the administration's target may be. It typically takes 917 days, or roughly two and a half years, for a trade deal to go from initial talks to the president's desk for signature, the analysis shows. Roughly 60 days into the current process, Mr Trump has so far announced only one deal: a pact with Britain, which is not one of America's biggest trading partners. He has also suggested that negotiations with China have been rocky. 'I like President XI of China, always have, and always will, but he is VERY TOUGH, AND EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A DEAL WITH!!!' Mr Trump wrote on Truth Social on June 4. China and the United States agreed last month to temporarily slash tariffs on each other's imports in a gesture of goodwill to continue talks. Part of what the president can accomplish boils down to what you can call a deal. The pact with Britain is less of a deal than it is a framework for talking about a deal, said Ms Wendy Cutler, the vice-president of the Asia Society Policy Institute and a former US trade negotiator. What was officially released by the two nations more closely resembled talking points for 'what you were going to negotiate versus the actual commitment', she said. During his first term, Mr Trump secured two major trade agreements, both signed in January 2020. One was the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) which was a reworking of the North American free trade treaty from the 1990s that had helped transform the economies of the three nations. USMCA is an all-encompassing, legally binding agreement that resulted from a lengthy and formal process, according to trade analysts. Such deals are supposed to cover all aspects of trade between the respective nations and are negotiated under specific guidelines for congressional consultation. Closing the deal involves both negotiation and ratification – modifying or making laws in each partner country. The deals are signed by trade negotiators before the president signs the legislation that puts the deals into effect for the United States. Mr Trump's other major agreement in his first term was with China, in an echo of the current trade war. The pact, unlike previous deals, came about after Mr Trump threatened tariffs on certain Chinese imports. This 'tariff first, talk later' approach, said Ms Inu Manak, a trade policy fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, is part of the same playbook the administration is currently using. The result was a nonbinding agreement between the two countries, known as 'Phase One,' that did not require approval from Congress and that could be ended by either party at any time. Still, it took almost one year and nine months to complete. China ultimately fell far short of the commitments it made to purchase American goods under the agreement. A comparison of the two first-term Trump deals shows the drawn-out and sometimes winding path each took to completion. Fragile truces (including ones made for 90 days) were formed, only for talks to break down later, all while rounds of tariffs injected uncertainty into the diplomatic relations between countries. The Times analysis used the date from the start of negotiations to the date when the president signed to determine the length of deal making for each major agreement dating back to 1985 that's currently in effect. The median time it took to get to the president's signature was just over 900 days. A separate analysis published in 2016 by the Peterson Institute for International Economics used the date of signature by country representatives as the completion moment and found that the median deal took more than 570 days. With roughly one month before the administration's self-imposed deadline, Mr Trump's ability to forge deals has been thrust into sudden doubt. Last week, a US trade court ruled he had overstepped his authority in imposing the April tariffs. For now, the tariffs remain in place, following a temporary stay from a federal appeals court. But in arguing its case, the federal government initially said that the ruling could upset negotiations with other nations and undercut the president's leverage. 'I think when the administration first started, they thought they could actually do these binding and enforceable deals within 90 days and then quickly realised that they bit off more than they could chew,' Ms Cutler said. The administration told its negotiating partners to submit offers of trade concessions they were willing to make by June 4, in an effort to strike trade deals in the coming weeks. The deadline was earlier reported by Reuters. The current approach to deal making may be strategic, Ms Manak said. One of the benefits of not doing a comprehensive deal like USMCA is that the administration can declare small 'victories' on a much faster timeline, she said. 'It means that trade agreements simply are just not what they used to be,' she added. 'And you can't really guarantee that whatever the US promises is actually going to be upheld in the long run.' NYTIMES Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
4 hours ago
- Straits Times
Barclays to cut more than 200 investment bank jobs to reduce costs: Sources
Staffers in investment banking, global markets and research will likely be affected, sources said. PHOTO: REUTERS LONDON – Barclays is preparing to cut more than 200 jobs in its investment bank in the coming days as part of chief executive officer C.S. Venkatakrishnan's plan to boost the profitability of the division. Staffers in investment banking, global markets and research will likely be affected, according to people familiar with the matter. Managing directors will be the most senior roles affected, they added. The reduction represents about 3 per cent of the investment bank's headcount. The cuts are meant to give the bank more capacity to invest in priority areas, one of the people said. In markets, the bank has been focused on boosting its market share in European rates, equity derivatives and securitized product trading. In investment banking, the firm has been looking bolster the revenue it generates from equity capital markets and mergers and acquisitions, in particular across the health care, industrial, tech and energy transition industry groups. The move is not a sign that the bank is retrenching away from any products or asset classes, the person added. Although it's prioritising growth elsewhere, Barclays has committed to its costly transatlantic investment banking model in the face of pressure from investors over the years. 'Like other banks, we regularly review our talent pool as part of our ongoing business operations to ensure continued investment in priority areas,' a Barclays spokesperson said in a statement. The lender made similar reductions just over a year ago. Mr Venkatakrishnan has been under pressure to boost returns across the investment bank, which consumes large amounts of capital compared with other, higher-returning parts of the business. He has said the division won't be allocated any additional risk-weighted assets from the parent company in the coming years, even as it navigates higher capital requirements from global regulators. The CEO set out a new strategy in 2024 that anticipated about £2 billion (S$3.5 billion) of efficiency savings across the bank by 2026, helping to boost earnings and return £10 billion to investors. Barclays' investment bank is by far its largest division, generating £11.8 billion in revenue in 2024, up 7 per cent from a year earlier. The bank is known as a powerhouse in fixed-income markets – though it's been investing heavily in its prime and equity divisions in recent years to catch up to rivals. The bank has seen its market share in investment banking inching upward after it had roles on deals including Alphabet.'s US$32 billion (S$41 billion) purchase of Wiz Inc. and Sunoco's acquisition of Parkland Corp. for about US$9.1 billion including debt. Within markets, revenue for the first three months of the year jumped 16 per cent as the firm's stock traders posted their best quarterly haul in almost three years. Investors seem to be happy with the bank's progress so far, with shares up about 24 per cent this year. That's better than the 8 per cent advance of the FTSE 100 index. BLOOMBERG Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
