The Samsung Galaxy S26 could feature a completely different AI assistant — here's what we know
The next generation of Samsung devices could drop Google Gemini as the default AI assistant, as Samsung reportedly comes close to finalizing a deal with Perplexity to include its app on the Galaxy S26.
Originally, we had heard that Samsung and the AI startup Perplexity were in talks back in April. However, as revealed in a recent report from Bloomberg, the two companies are apparently close to finalizing a deal with an announcement possibly coming this year.
As a result of the deal, the Perplexity app will reportedly come preinstalled on the Galaxy S26, while also integrating the startup's search features into Samsung's default web browser. Bloomberg's sources also claim that the two companies have discussed integrating Perplexity's tech into the Bixby digital assistant.
This would be a massive step forward for Perplexity, primarily because shipping as the default AI will massively boost the visibility of the company's assistant. However, this isn't the only work that the company is doing with Samsung.
According to the report, both companies were discussing building an AI-based operating system that can tap into functionality from Perplexity and other AI assistants. On top of that, Samsung is reportedly on track to be one of the company's biggest investors, further deepening their relationship beyond the S26's AI features.
Both Google and Samsung have worked together to develop some fantastic features over the years. For instance, we saw the release of the fantastic Circle to Search on the Galaxy S24. Google also showed off the improved power of its Gemini AI during the announcement of the Galaxy S25.
However, it would seem that Samsung is looking to reduce its reliance on Google and instead follow Apple's lead by working with a mix of different AI developers. This could be an issue for Google as it relies on having its programs pre-installed on devices to extend its reach and secure revenue. Considering Samsung is one of Google's biggest partners, this could be a pretty major disruption, although we imagine Gemini will still be available to those who want it, and that Samsung won't be jumping from the Android operating system any time soon.
Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.
For the time being, we'll need to wait and see what Samsung officially announces. However, the specific details have yet to be finalized, meaning that certain parts could be subject to change before then. We will aim to keep our eyes open for any more information and update you when we know more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tom's Guide
2 hours ago
- Tom's Guide
I swapped my Apple Watch for the Galaxy Watch 7 — here's what I liked and disliked
Smartwatches have become an essential bit of kit for many, with features like fitness tracking, notifications, sleep monitoring, and heart-rate checking that were once novel and impressive. Now? They're expected. For years, I've been mostly in the Apple Watch camp. As my usual go-to everyday smartwatch, it's proven to be sleek, responsive, and — since it's tightly-knit with my iPhone and other Apple gear — it just works. Until now, I hadn't found a good enough reason to switch. But with Samsung's latest wearable, the Galaxy Watch 7, launching alongside the feature-rich Galaxy Watch Ultra and the much-hyped Galaxy Ring, I was curious. Was it time to try the other side? Could Samsung's circular contender pull me away from the Apple Watch Series 10? As someone who tests gadgets for a living, I decided it was time to find out. I've been wearing the Galaxy Watch 7 day in, day out — at the gym, pottering around the yard, walking around the block, shopping trips, in bed, and everywhere in between — to see how it stacks up against Apple's polished powerhouse. Here's everything I liked, and what I felt didn't quite hit the mark. Let's start with looks because, in my opinion, that's still what matters most on your wrist. Swapping from Apple's distinct rectangular slab to Samsung's traditional round face was — I have to say — a bit of a relief. I've never really been a fan of the Apple Watch's angular design, so it didn't take long to get used to, and prefer, the Watch's 7's more traditional circular face design. Samsung's latest wearable comes in 40mm and 44mm sizes, and the version I wore (the former) struck a great balance — not too chunky, not too delicate. The aluminium case keeps things lightweight, and I really liked the muted khaki finish of my review unit — it's subtle, modern, and goes with anything. The sapphire crystal glass is also a win, sporting a premium feel and a level of scratch resistance the aluminium Apple Watch 10 can't quite match without going up to the stainless steel model. Samsung's bezel is minimal and sleek, and the buttons are well integrated — I never once missed Apple's Digital Crown. If you're into traditional watch styling, Samsung's rounded aesthetic will feel more at home. The Apple Watch Series 10 features a bright and responsive touch screen, a comfortable and lightweight case and more smart functions than you'll know what to do with. Some of my favorites include on-wrist translations and global tide tracking. You also get useful safety tools and lots of holistic-tracking tech. The Samsung Galaxy Watch 7 provides in-depth, AI-backed, holistic insights into everything from sleep quality to fitness training and recovery. A handsome and easy-wearing watch, the touchscreen is bright and responsive, smart features and third-party apps are plentiful, and battery life is good for a full day. While the Galaxy Watch 7 does a decent job on the design front, its display doesn't quite dazzle in the same way the Apple Watch Series 10 does. Don't get me wrong, it's bright, colourful and sharp, and outdoors in the sun it's still clear and visible. But Apple's display just has the edge here — it feels more vibrant, especially when it comes to viewing angles and responsiveness. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. And then there's haptics. The Apple Watch is the gold standard here with crisp, tight vibrations that never miss a tap. The Galaxy Watch 7, in contrast, just isn't quite as responsive. It's by no means an issue, but it's just not as refined or as satisfying as on Apple's wearable. One of my unexpected highlights was the sheer joy of swapping bands on the Galaxy Watch 7. Sure, Apple's proprietary band system is clever, but it's also rather limiting — and not to mention expensive. Samsung's choice to use a quick-release system compatible with standard 20mm or 22mm bands means I could use all sorts of third-party straps without it putting a big dent in my wallet. From sporty silicone to classic leather, you could quite quickly build up a new mini collection of different styled straps for the Watch 7. And while Samsung's own bands are decent, it's the freedom to personalize without Apple's markup that does it for me. Lovely stuff! If only I had a dollar for every time a smartwatch brand promised 'all-day battery' and failed to deliver. Unfortunately, despite its promises, Samsung's Galaxy Watch 7 also falls into that camp. It claims 'up to 40 hours of battery life' — and yes, in some cases it'll stretch a full second day — but in reality, with notifications on, GPS use, and a bit of music control, I was plugging it in nightly. Sigh. Still, it's still a little better than my Apple Watch 9, which Apple claims lasts 18 hours (and, in my experience, often hits that mark). Nevertheless, the Galaxy Watch 7's charging speed doesn't match up. It'll give you about 40% in 30 minutes, which is fine, but Apple's fast charge still has the edge, especially when you're in a rush to leave the house. This was the big one. Apple Watch is only focused on iPhone users. If you live in the Apple ecosystem, it's seamless. But it's also a walled garden with zero Android support, no Google Maps native app, and limited options for third-party customisation. The Galaxy Watch 7, on the other hand, is a Wear OS 5 device, and it plays nicely with a huge array of Android phones and also can be used by iPhone users (although more limited than on Android). The Google Play Store access on your wrist also works super well — I could download Spotify, Google Maps, WhatsApp, and even control my smart home with the Google Home app. The interface feels smoother than on past Galaxy Watches, and while Samsung's own One UI Watch skin adds a few quirks, it's generally very intuitive and responsive. The new Exynos W1000 chip seems to help, too, with everything from app launches to swiping around feeling faster and slicker than on older models. Okay, so it's time to talk money. The Samsung Galaxy Watch 7's prices start at $299 for the 40mm Bluetooth model and $329 for the 44mm version. If you want LTE connectivity, it's an extra $50 on top for either size, so you're looking at $349 and $379, respectively. Compare that to the Apple Watch Series 10, which starts at $399 for the 42mm GPS version and jumps to $499 if you want the same size with cellular. Opt for the larger 46mm model and you're looking at $429, or $529 if you want it fully connected. So, if we're comparing like for like, Samsung's pricing undercuts Apple at almost every level, and you're still getting very similar top-notch features. Add in the fact that Samsung often offers deals and trade-in offers, too, makes it even more tempting if you're already in the Android ecosystem. Annoyingly, you can't pair a Galaxy Watch with an iPhone in a way that gives you the full experience. While the Galaxy Watch 7 technically can work with iOS, some features and health metrics — like ECG, blood pressure monitoring, and Samsung Health's more advanced tools — are either stripped back or unavailable entirely. The same goes for certain third-party apps and watch face options, which are much more robust when used within Samsung's own ecosystem. To get the most out of the Galaxy Watch 7, you really need to pair it with a compatible Android phone, ideally, a Samsung one. I tested mine with the Samsung Galaxy S25 Plus, and it was a seamless, enjoyable experience. It boasted fast pairing, full feature access, and top-notch integration with Samsung Health, SmartThings, and the new Galaxy Ring ecosystem. On top of that, the Galaxy S25 Plus' big, bright AMOLED screen made it a joy to manage watch settings, workouts, notifications, etc and it felt like both devices were built to work with one another — probably because they are. Of course, it's not easy to move away from iMessage, but if you're fully onboard the Samsung train, the S25+ and Galaxy Watch 7 combo is as slick and functional as it gets on Android. After two weeks of using the Galaxy Watch 7, I can honestly say it's a strong rival to Apple's popular wearable. The design is smarter than I expected, the software is powerful and flexible, and the price is right. It's a great option for Android users — and for once, Apple fans may have something to be envious of. Still, it's not perfect. Battery life is still just okay, the screen's responsiveness isn't perfect, and the tighter integration of the Apple Watch with iPhone still can't be beaten if you're fully invested in that ecosystem. So, did I switch for good? Not yet, but I'm seriously considering it. I've gone back to my Apple Watch for now, mainly because I'm a creature of comfort (and you gotta love the seamless iOS experience), but the Galaxy Watch 7 did make a huge impression on me. If I were to move to a Samsung phone full-time (and after using the Galaxy S25+, I'm genuinely tempted) the Galaxy Watch 7 would be my go-to wrist wearable.
Tom's Guide
2 hours ago
- Tom's Guide
I tested 5 apps that detect AI writing — here's the one that beat them all, and the one that missed the mark
On the one hand, AI tools like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and DeepSeek are incredibly useful when it comes to writing emails, summarizing content, and detecting tone in our writing. It's hard to imagine life before late 2022, when most of us discovered that ChatGPT can do some of the legwork when it comes to writing content. Need a cover letter? You can write one in five seconds, complete with a greeting and a summary of your work the other hand, AI slop is all around us. Prose written by a chatbot has a few telltale signs, such as a lack of originality and vague details. In this war of words, though, the AI bots are improving. You can ask ChatGPT to rewrite content so that it sounds more original and can avoid detection by apps like GPTZero. The war rages on, a true cat and mouse don't really know who is winning the war. If you're a student, writing content for your job, or even composing an email for a family reunion this summer, detecting AI writing is far easier than you might think — which might give you pause. For example, most professors in college now know how to run an AI detection service on your assignments. One popular tool — called GPTZero — uses a probability index to detect whether AI was involved in a piece of all of the AI detection apps work the same, though. I found there was one superior tool and one that missed the mark. For my tests, I used a sample chapter from a book I'm writing — I loaded an entire chapter into the five AI detection apps below. I also had ChatGPT write a cover letter for a fictitious job. I asked the bot to use some flair and originality, and to try to avoid AI detection. Lastly, I asked ChatGPT to finish this article for me — essentially, a 50-50 split between me and AI (e.g., something I'd never actually do).Here's how each AI detection tool fared on the three tests, including the big winner. I've used GPTZero many times, in part because the free version lets you detect a small amount of text without signing up for a subscription. For this review, I used the full Premium version that costs $23.99 per month and can do basic and advanced scans. With the advanced scan, GPTZero splits a long section of text into pages and rates the AI probability for each section. GPTZero did flag quite a few paragraphs with a 1% AI probability and a few sentences with a 5% AI probability rating. Yet, overall, the service worked remarkably I tested the cover letter written by ChatGPT, GPTZero really shone the brightest of all the apps. The service reported that it was likely 100% AI-written. The only issue is that there were some false flags, even with that overall rating. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. GPTZero labeled a few sentences as human-generated. When I had GPTZero scan my article that was 50% human and 50% AI, the service flagged it as 58% human — the most accurate of the AI detection apps. is a comprehensive tool that provides detailed detection results. The service costs $12.95 per month for the Pro plan with 2,000 credits. In the sample text from my book, Originality. AI quickly labeled my text with 100% confidence that it was all human-written — the only app that returned that correct result. That is reassuring, although the service did question a few sentences as AI-written even if it gave me an overall 100% confidence the ChatGPT cover letter test, reported that it was 91% human. That's because I asked ChatGPT to try and avoid the AI detection apps and write with flair, but a little troubling. In my test where I asked ChatGPT to finish this article, I was quite shocked. flagged the entire article as original with 100% confidence, even though only the first half was human. (When I asked ChatGPT to finish the article, it churned out some generic content even though I asked the bot to match the article style.) It seems was fooled by that trick even though it's likely a common practice, especially with students. Grammarly is designed primarily to help you write without errors and to avoid plagiarism, but it also includes a robust AI detector. I would say it is too robust. The interface for Grammarly is confusing since it flags plagiarism and AI writing at the same time. The app flagged the chapter of my book, saying '7% of your text matches external sources' which felt like a slap in the face. Come on! First, it isn't true, and second, that's discouraging. The app also said it did not detect common AI patterns in the writing, so that was a relief. Still, I didn't like the false flags. Grammarly is also expensive, costing $30 per month if you pay trick, asking ChatGPT to write a cover letter to avoid detection, proved quite effective — Grammarly said: 'Your document doesn't match anything in our references or contain common AI text patterns.' That was entirely incorrect, since the text was 100% AI-generated. The same result occurred when I fed the article that was 50% me and 50% AI — it said it was all human. Winston AI is another powerful and full-featured app, similar to in many respects. Scanning the sample chapter of my book, Winston AI gave me a 96% human score, which is fair. Unfortunately, like Grammarly, the service flagged some sections with only a 50% probability of human writing. In the middle section, Winston AI labeled two entire paragraphs as 100% AI written, even though they weren't. I tested the Winston AI Essential plan, which costs $18 per month but does not detect plagiarism; it's $12 per month if you pay annually. As for the cover letter, Winston AI was all over it. The service flagged the text as 100% AI written, although it suggested the second half of the letter might have been human-generated (suggesting a 48% probability as human). Fortunately, Winston AI also flagged my article correctly, saying there was a 46% chance of it being human-generated. The app flagged a middle section that was all AI-written, but missed the closing section (which was AI). Monica was my least favorite AI detection tool, but that's mostly because the service has multiple purposes — AI detection is just one feature. The app actually outsourced detection to Copyleaks. GPTZero, and ZeroGPT. For the book chapter, Monica flagged my test as 99% human but didn't provide any other guidance as far as feedback on specific detected the cover letter as 100% AI-written. That's not a surprise since GPTZero reported the same result, and Monica uses that same app. Monica had some serious problems detecting my article which was 50% human and 50% AI-generated. The service decided it was 100% human-generated and didn't flag the second half, which was AI-written.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Analysts unveil bold forecast for Alphabet stock despite ChatGPT threat
Analysts unveil bold forecast for Alphabet stock despite ChatGPT threat originally appeared on TheStreet. You typed in a question and clicked a few links, and Google could get paid if you landed on an ad. For years, that simple cycle helped turn Google into a trillion-dollar titan. But now, that model is under threat. 💵💰💰💵 AI-powered chatbots like OpenAI's ChatGPT are rapidly changing how people find answers. Instead of browsing through links, users are getting direct summaries on AI. These 'zero-click' searches quietly erode the economics that built the modern internet. The number of users is growing fast. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said in April that ChatGPT already has 'something like 10% of the world" in terms of users, pegging the number closer to 800 million, Forbes reported. Even Google seems to know it. It's giving AI answers, called AI Overviews, right at the top of the page. "What's changing is not that fewer people are searching the that more and more the answers to Google are being answered right on Google's page. That AI box at the top of Google is now absorbing that content that would have gone to the original content creators," Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince said in a CNBC interview. Alphabet () , Google's parent company, isn't showing any cracks just yet. In April, the company posted first-quarter revenue of $90.23 billion, topping Wall Street expectations. Earnings per share came in at $2.81, far above the forecasted $ the backbone of Google's business, brought in $66.89 billion, accounting for nearly three-quarters of total revenue. Its 'Search and other' segment rose almost 10% year over year, hitting $50.7 billion. Meanwhile, Google's own AI tools are starting to show traction. AI Overviews now has 1.5 billion users per month, up from 1 billion in October, the company said. So far, the numbers suggest that AI isn't cannibalizing Google's business yet. Bank of America remains bullish on Alphabet stock. The firm reiterated a buy rating and a price target of $200, which implies a potential 15% upside from current levels, according to a recent research report. The firm said in May, Google's global average daily web visits held steady at 2.7 billion, unchanged from the previous month and down 2% from a year earlier. ChatGPT, meanwhile, saw a 3% month-over-month increase to 182 million, marking a 105% jump the U.S., Google traffic slipped 2% year-over-year to 524 million daily visits, while ChatGPT surged 112% over the same period to 26 million. Although Google has highlighted the growing reach of its AI Overviews, analysts are uncertain whether it's translating into more traffic. 'So far, we are not seeing a lift in Google traffic from AI Overviews expansion, though we think the search experience is much improved,' the analysts wrote. The competition is real. Google's global search share also edged down in May, falling 8 basis points month-over-month and 123 basis points year-over-year to 89.6%, according to Statcounter. Still, Bank of America analysts remain optimistic on Alphabet stock. "While ChatGPT's traffic continues to grow rapidly, we think Google remains well-positioned given its scale, multi-product reach, data assets, and robust monetization infrastructure," the analysts said. "AI can expand overall search monetization by better understanding the intent behind complex and long-tail queries that were previously hard to monetize," they added. Morningstar's Malik Ahmed Khan echoed that sentiment, saying Alphabet's diverse revenue streams and global exposure should cushion any hits, even as regulatory and AI risks mount, according to a May research report. Alphabet stock closed at $174.92 on June 6. The stock is down 8% unveil bold forecast for Alphabet stock despite ChatGPT threat first appeared on TheStreet on Jun 6, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jun 6, 2025, where it first appeared. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
