Apple is considering adding AI search engines to Safari
AI services like Perplexity or OpenAI's SearchGPT could be search engine options in a future version of Safari, Bloomberg reports. The tentative plans were shared by Eddy Cue, Apple's senior vice president of services, while on the stand for Google's ongoing search antitrust case. Cue was called to testify because of the deal Google and Apple have to keep Google Search as the default search engine on the iPhone.
Cue claims Apple has discussed a possible Safari-integration with Perplexity, but didn't share any definitive plans during his testimony. It's clear that he believes AI assistants will inevitably supplant traditional search engines, though. "Prior to AI, my feeling around this was, none of the others were valid choices," Cue said. "I think today there is much greater potential because there are new entrants attacking the problem in a different way."
Whatever AI search Apple ultimately adds likely won't be the default at first, according to Cue, but "there's enough money now, enough large players, that I don't see how it doesn't happen." There's some evidence to back up the idea that things are changing, too. According to The Verge, Cue shared that the number of Google searches in Safari fell for the first time last month, something "that has never happened in 22 years." It's entirely possible those missing searches went to ChatGPT or Gemini.
Google pays Apple $18 billion or more a year to keep Google Search as the default, possibly on top of other financial incentives. Cue's threading a very fine needle acknowledging the popularity of AI without suggesting that Google's deals have gotten in the way of other search options growing. Clearly, both companies would like their mutually beneficial relationship to stay the same.
Of course, Apple's also had its own public issues with AI in the last few months. After presenting big plans for how Apple Intelligence would work in 2024, Apple had to delay its updated Siri, the centerpiece of its pitch, until later this year. The company ultimately made the decision to work with third-party AI models because its systems weren't up to snuff. That change could be how conversations about adding AI search engines to Safari came about in the first place.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
11 minutes ago
- Forbes
Japan's Largest Companies 2025: Rare Interest Rate Hikes Lead To A Volatile Year
Toyota and other Japanese automakers have been hampered by Trump's tariffs. Getty Images Japan's stock market has been on a roller-coaster ride over the past 12 months. Its benchmark Nikkei index reached an all-time high in July 2024, driven by corporate governance reforms and robust company earnings, then crashed more than 25% in less than four weeks on a surprise interest rate hike by the Bank of Japan. Though the index rebounded shortly after, its gains were trimmed in early 2025 as U.S. President Donald Trump ignited his trade war. Japan has 180 companies on this year's Forbes Global 2000 ranking of the world's largest public corporations, down slightly from 182 in 2024, making it the third most-represented country after the U.S. and China. The list weighs market value, revenue, profit and assets equally, using the latest 12 months of data as of April 25. Toyota Motor, the highest-ranking Japanese company, is in a sector particularly hard hit by Trump's sweeping tariffs. The U.S. in early April imposed a 25% tax on foreign-made cars, followed in early May by the same levy on auto parts, a blow to Japan's mainstay industry and its export-led economy. The world's top-selling carmaker slipped three places to No. 14 after its stock tumbled 22% over the year. Though its revenues and profits in the year through December were roughly flat at $309 billion and $34 billion, respectively, Toyota warned that the tariffs would result in a $1.3 billion hit to operating profit in April and May. Some of Toyota Motor's peers suffered even steeper declines. Nissan Motor, long plagued by deteriorating financials, sank 366 spots to No. 707 after its profit in the 12 months through December plunged 76% to $702.6 million. After the cut-off date for the list, the automaker posted a $4.7 billion loss for the three months ended March. Nissan is struggling to restructure after merger talks with larger rival Honda Motor collapsed in February. The failed tie-up, together with the tariffs, relegated Honda to No. 117 from No. 91 as its stock fell 17% over the year. Mitsubishi Motors, whose biggest shareholder is Nissan, tumbled 379 places to No. 1,562 as its shares skidded almost 10%. Companies in the AI space were a bright spot. Billionaire Masayoshi Son's SoftBank investment powerhouse climbed 331 spots to No. 130 on a 425% surge in 12-month profit through December to $5.6 billion, driven partly by increases in the value of portfolio companies such as ByteDance, the Chinese parent of TikTok. SoftBank is ramping up its AI bet, with plans to invest up to $30 billion in U.S.-based ChatGPT maker OpenAI while also investing $100 billion to build AI infrastructure stateside as part of its Stargate Project joint venture with OpenAI and Oracle. The AI boom also lifted Advantest, the world's largest semiconductor testing equipment maker by market share and a supplier to AI-chip giant Nvidia. It scaled 509 places to No. 1,231 as its profit in the year through March more than doubled to $1.1 billion on a 52% surge in sales to $5.1 billion. Other notable climbers included companies in the defense industry. IHI Corp, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) and Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI) were among the best performers on the Nikkei over the year as Japan ramped up military spending. IHI, an engineering company that makes everything from turbines for power plants to rocket systems for space travel, debuted on the Global 2000 at No. 1,349 after its stock skyrocketed 176%. A more than doubling in MHI stock elevated the company 75 spots to No. 372 while KHI vaulted 513 places to No. 1,331 on a 52% share increase.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Contributor: In precarious times, an old restaurant idea makes new sense
Back in the 1980s, the norm-busting adman Jay Chiat liked to pose the question, "How big can we get before we get bad?" as his Los Angeles-based boutique agency attracted clients like Apple and Nike. It is all too easy, he figured, to do more and accomplish less. He might as well have been talking about restaurants. For a long time, the industry has embraced replication as the holy grail: If we build it, and then we build a lot more of it, they will come, and we will make lots of money. But big is no guarantee. Sometimes it fails for reasons that have less to do with the food than with exponential reality — impatient investors, ego battles between the money people and the chef, and the challenge of managing employees owners have never met in cities they rarely visit. Or if all that works just fine, maybe the chef gets cautious about the menu to protect success, and jaded restaurant-chasers move on. Read more: Just don't call it a bagel. It's fluffy, domed and dimpled Restaurants are not financial institutions. There's no such thing as too big to fail. Lately, a new generation of restaurateurs has embraced a more modest model, one that harks back to the era before social media and competitive food TV: the old-school one and done; maybe two, but not 10, and not a nationwide restaurant empire. These independent owner-operators want a career defined by a ZIP Code rather than by cloned outlets and corporate memos, one where they're on a first-name basis with their customers, their employees and their suppliers. Their notion of success sounds suspiciously, and delightfully, like what it was before a marquee sensibility inflated everyone's dreams. Owners get real-time gratification. We get just what we need right now — good food with side orders of comfort and connection. L.A.'s Café Telegrama and Ètra were early arrivals in what's about to become a colony of little independent restaurants near the intersection of Melrose and Western avenues. Jyan Isaac Bread and its sibling, Ghisallo, have helped turn a block in Santa Monica's Ocean Park neighborhood into what one regular happily calls "carb alley." And De La Nonna combines a pizza joint, take-out slice window and a disco bar called the Let's Go! at the intersection of Little Tokyo, Skid Row and the Arts District. Look around your neighborhood and I expect you'll find examples of your own. Read more: The restaurant lover's guide to picking a president To improve their odds, these restaurateurs avoid spaces with destination-dining rents, run multiple operations out of a shared space to decrease downtime and work the room in person. "We gravitated toward small," said Andrew Lawson, an owner of Café Telegramma and Ètra. "The chef and the partners are on the floor five nights a week, we touch the tables, we know what the regulars like." These doubled-up operations improve the odds of what Lawson calls the "crossover customers" who show up for morning coffee, check out the more expensive dinner menu and are inclined to give it a try because they already like the cafe. Jyan Isaac Bread spreads the word with a wholesale operation, generating profits from outlets someone else operates, and De La Nonna has opened an outpost in Big Bear. That's as big as small gets. Let's not kid ourselves; there's no magic survival formula. The National Restaurant Assn. reports "pent-up demand" across all dining sectors but notes that millennials and Gen Xers prefer to get their food to-go, which puts a crimp in profitable alcohol sales and tips. Here in L.A., restaurants barely caught their breath post-pandemic before fires and the entertainment industry exodus wiped them out, along with their customer base; now the threat of tariffs and higher food costs looms. Business is off from 30% to "empty" in many parts of the city, depending on whom you ask. Read more: Contributor: What's the worth of a Michelin star? And that sorry appraisal predates the arrival this week of ICE and federal troops, which means employees and customers may not be showing up at restaurants at all. If it seems frivolous to worry about the restaurant business amid everything else that's going on, think again, because their reach extends far beyond their front doors: Fewer customers means fewer employee shifts, fewer orders for farmers and suppliers, fewer places for you to unwind at the end of a tough day. That kind of reality check rarely stops someone who's passionate about feeding people, though. Instead, owners downsize, partner up, work the room, sell their wares wholesale. Small may be the only dream that makes any kind of sense right now. As for the flip side, I recently conducted an utterly limited and personal investigation on a trip to New York, where the excellent cappuccino at my first stop had morphed into watery coffee topped by something like Styrofoam, and the lunchtime salmon bowl at the second location involved a tired slab of fish retrieved from a warming drawer. And yet both places are so popular they're opening outlets nationwide — which might be where the focus has shifted to, rather than the food. Give me little and local anytime. Read more: Contributor: My lonely boycott hasn't hurt In-N-Out Burger, but our small decisions do add up My first morning back in Santa Monica, I went straight to Jyan Isaac Bread, although I could've made coffee at home. Yes, I missed the food; there's a reason the owner is referred to as the Dough Whisperer. But I also missed the experience: employees who are not cogs in a wheel but individuals with personalities, interests, questions about where I'd been — and answers about what they'd been up to during our communications gap. When the equivalent experience comes to a vacant storefront near you, count yourself lucky. The big thing now is small: upstart indies that are strategizing to reclaim what a restaurant is supposed to be. Karen Stabiner's most recent book is "Generation Chef: Risking It All for a New American Dream." If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
One ChatGPT query uses same energy as a second of baking, OpenAI says
A single query to the AI software ChatGPT consumes as much electricity as roughly one second of baking something in an oven, according to the developer OpenAI. Meanwhile the water consumption from each query - owing to data centres needing to be cooled - comes down to about one-fifteenth of a teaspoon, OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman wrote in a blog post. Experts have for years been warnings about the massively escalating energy demands from the widespread use of AI services. While individual queries may require less energy due to efficiency gains in chip and server technology, the sheer volume of usage continues to drive a sharp increase in energy demand for AI data centres. Companies such as Microsoft, Google and Amazon are planning to rely on nuclear energy in the US to help meet this demand without proportionally increasing emissions of climate-damaging carbon dioxide. The need to cool data centres has also raised concerns about water consumption. In recent years, several studies have attempted to calculate the environmental impact of increased AI usage, but researchers must rely on numerous assumptions. Altman shared OpenAI's energy and water figures in a blog post in which he painted a generally positive picture of the future of AI. He acknowledged that there would be significant disruptions, such as the elimination of entire job categories. "But on the other hand the world will be getting so much richer so quickly that we'll be able to seriously entertain new policy ideas we never could before." In recent years, the idea of a universal basic income, funded by productivity gains, has been discussed in connection with AI. According to the OpenAI chief executive, an average ChatGPT query consumes approximately 0.34 watt-hours of electricity ("about what an oven would use in a little over one second, or a high-efficiency lightbulb would use in a couple of minutes"). He quantified the water consumption at 0.000085 gallons (0.00032176 litres). Altman did not provide further details about the basis for these calculations.
