Elon Musk's Grok AI Brings ‘Imagine' To Android For Free: What Is It And How It Works
ChatGPT 5 launch has come with another interesting news for users earlier this month. Elon Musk's Grok AI chatbot is now making its Imagine AI feature free for everyone, and available to Android users as well. Grok Imagine is another AI tool that helps you generate videos and photos using text or even voice prompts.
OpenAI and Google have their own tools that create videos and images and now Grok Imagine makes it even more interactive, and let you convert still images into moving visuals. Musk has claimed over 44 million images have been created by Grok Imagine and it continues to grow.
To use the Grok Imagine feature, you need to install the Grok app from the Play Store for Android and App Store for iPhone users.
Grok AI Free Video AI Generation
Once you have generated the image, Grok Imagine lets you make videos out of it and you have Make video option that does the work. You get four modes in the app called Normal, Fun, Custom and a rather controversial Spicy mode.
Grok is clearly going up against ChatGPT in the market and the latest GPT 5 launch has brought about comparisons with these two AI models. Musk has been publicly sharing his views on the new model and how it compares with their own Grok 4 AI model which is available via X and Grok AI app on mobile and web.
He said in a post on X that Grok 5 will be out before the end of 2025 and it will be 'crushingly good'. Grok 4 was released in July and xAI called it the world's most powerful AI model and that was before GPT 5 came out.
GPT 5 is promising a host of improvements over GPT4, and the biggest is the lower rate of hallucinations, something we are yet to see from Grok. We are eager to see if the Grok 5 version does manage to upgrade in these aspects.
view comments
First Published:
August 11, 2025, 10:37 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
10 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Google vs CCI: What the Android antitrust case means for India's digital ecosystem
Story so far: On August 8, 2025, the Supreme Court admitted an appeal filed by Alphabet Inc., the parent company of Google, against a judgment of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The tribunal had earlier upheld, at least in part, the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) findings that Google had abused its dominant position in the Android ecosystem to indulge in anti-competitive practices. Alongside Google's appeal, the Court also admitted related petitions from the CCI itself and the Alliance Digital India Foundation (ADIF), which is a coalition of Indian startups critical of Big Tech dominance. A bench led by Justice P.S. Narasimha has listed the matter for a detailed hearing in November. What has the CCI accused Google of? The CCI's investigation into Google began in 2020, sparked by complaints from app developers and industry groups who alleged that Google was using its market dominance in Android to push its own services and restrict fair competition. By 2022, the Commission concluded that Google had engaged in multiple anti-competitive practices. Chief among them was the mandatory use of the Google Play Billing System (GPBS) for in-app purchases on the Play Store. This meant that developers had to use Google's payment processing system, paying a commission that typically ranged between 15% and 30%, rather than integrating their own billing solutions. The regulator also found that Google exempted its own app YouTube from these billing requirements, giving them a cost advantage over competing services. This, the CCI argued, distorted the level-playing field and harmed both rival developers and consumers. In addition, the CCI highlighted that the Android licensing model required smartphone makers to pre-install Google's suite of apps — Search, Chrome, YouTube, and others — as a condition for access to the Google Play Store. According to the Commission, this bundling restricted consumer choice and suppressed innovation from alternative app providers. Based on these findings, the CCI imposed a fine of ₹936.44 crore on Google and issued a set of behavioural remedies, including directives to decouple Google's payment system from Play Store access, ensure transparency in billing data, and refrain from using such data to advantage its own services. What is Google's defence? Google rejected the CCI's conclusions, arguing that its practices were designed to enhance user experience, maintain security, and enable a sustainable business model for the Android ecosystem. The company maintained that Android is an open-source operating system, available for free to device manufacturers, and that OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) are not obligated to install Google's proprietary apps if they choose to license the core Android platform without Play Store access. It argued that pre-installing a set of Google apps was a matter of efficiency and user convenience, and did not prevent users from downloading competing apps. On the billing side, Google claimed that GPBS ensured safe and reliable transactions for users, helping to prevent fraud and reduce payment failures. The commission fees, it said, were consistent with industry standards and provided developers access to Google's global infrastructure, distribution reach, and regular security updates. Google also argued that exempting certain in-house services from GPBS was not anti-competitive but a recognition of differences in their business models. It pointed out that many leading Indian apps like PhonePe, Paytm, and Hotstar had grown successfully on Android, which shows that the market remained vibrant and competitive. What was the NCLAT's judgment? In March, the NCLAT delivered its ruling on Google's appeal against the CCI's 2022 order. The tribunal upheld several of the CCI's findings, agreeing that Google's mandatory billing policy and bundling of apps amounted to abuse of dominance. However, it reduced the financial penalty from ₹936.44 crore to ₹216.69 crore, reasoning that the original amount was disproportionate to the conduct in question. The NCLAT also struck down some of the CCI's behavioural directions, holding that certain remedies were either over-broad or lacked sufficient evidentiary basis. In May 2025, following a review petition, the tribunal reinstated two key directions that Google must be transparent about its billing data policies, and that it must not use such data to gain a competitive advantage for its own apps and services. This partial victory left all parties dissatisfied. Google sought a complete reversal of the findings, the CCI wanted its original penalties and remedies restored in full, and ADIF argued that the tribunal had gone too easy on Google. What's at stake now? The case raises fundamental questions about how much control a dominant platform like Android should have over the devices and services it supports, and to what extent regulators can intervene in the name of competition. For consumers, a ruling in favour of the CCI could mean more choice and potentially lower prices. If developers can bypass GPBS and use cheaper payment systems, they might pass on some of the savings to users. Greater transparency and restrictions on data use could also enhance privacy and fairness in app rankings and recommendations. However, industry observers warn that loosening Google's control could lead to more fragmentation in Android, with different devices offering inconsistent user experiences. For smartphone makers, the verdict could influence licensing costs and product flexibility. If the Supreme Court upholds the CCI's original remedies, OEMs might gain more leeway to pre-install competing services or experiment with alternative Android versions without losing access to the Play Store. This could be especially significant for smaller Indian brands that have struggled to differentiate themselves in a Google-centric ecosystem. For Indian startups and app developers, the case represents an opportunity to level the playing field against a global giant. ADIF has argued that Google's policies not only limit payment options but also give it an undue edge in promoting its own apps. A strong pro-CCI ruling could give local companies better bargaining power and distribution access. For Google, the stakes go beyond India. The country is one of its largest markets by user base, and an adverse ruling here could trigger similar regulatory demands in other jurisdictions. It could also force Google to reconsider its global Android business model, especially if courts require it to unbundle services or open its billing systems. What's the road ahead? The Supreme Court's hearings in November will likely examine both the legal interpretation of 'abuse of dominance' under Indian competition law and the economic realities of platform markets. Whatever the outcome, the decision will set an important precedent for how India balances innovation, consumer protection, and market fairness in the digital era. With Android powering over 95% of smartphones in the country, the Court's ruling will directly influence how hundreds of millions of Indians access apps, make payments, and use mobile services in the years to come. If the case ends with strong enforcement of the CCI's original directions, India could emerge as a leading example of robust digital market regulation outside the EU. On the other hand, if the Court sides with Google, it will reaffirm the status quo.
NDTV
13 minutes ago
- NDTV
Tesla To Launch Its Second Experience Centre In Delhi's Aerocity Today
Tesla is all set to inaugurate its second experience centre in India in Delhi's Aerocity today, that is, 11th August. The Elon Musk-owned brand has recently entered the Indian market with the launch of its first showroom in Mumbai's Bandra Kurla Complex. Tesla's Delhi showroom will be located at Worldmark 3 in the Aerocity area of the national capital. It will offer visitors an opportunity to explore Tesla's latest electric vehicles introduced in India. Tesla Aerocity Showroom During the inauguration of its Mumbai showroom, the brand launched the Tesla Model Y in India. With its integration of the second showroom in Delhi, the brand will put the Model Y on display. Tesla launched the Model Y RWD (rear-wheel drive) and long-range RWD versions in India. The starting price for the RWD variant is Rs 59.89 lakh, whereas the long-range model is priced at Rs 67.89 lakh. This results in the on-road cost of the RWD version being Rs 61.07 lakh. On the other hand, the long-range variant's on-road price is Rs 69.15 lakh. The Tesla Model Y's rear-wheel drive version offers the choice of both a 60 kWh and a larger 75 kWh battery pack in India. The RWD variant is equipped with a single electric motor that generates approximately 295 hp. Furthermore, the 60 kWh battery claims to provide a WLTP range of 500 km on a single charge, while the long-range version asserts a range of 622 km. Also, Tesla recently launched the brand's first Superchargers at its BKC showroom. With this, the brand has also brought the superchargers to Delhi's showroom as well. The Tesla Charging Station has four V4 Supercharging Stalls, i.e., DC Chargers, along with four Destination Charging Stalls, i.e., AC chargers. With these units in place, the Supercharging stalls over peak charging speed of 250 kW for a price of Rs 24/kW and Rs 11/kW for 11 kW of charging speed. Also, Tesla will launch four destination chargers in Delhi NCR.
India Today
19 minutes ago
- India Today
ChatGPT told man he found formula to wreck the internet, make force field vest
A Canadian recruiter says a marathon three-week conversation with ChatGPT convinced him he had discovered a mathematical formula capable of destroying the internet and powering fantastical inventions such as a levitation beam and a force-field vest. Allan Brooks, 47, from outside Toronto, spent around 300 hours speaking with the AI chatbot in May. He says the exchanges gradually turned into an elaborate delusion, reinforced by ChatGPT's repeated praise and who has no history of mental illness, asked the chatbot over 50 times if his ideas were realistic. Each time, ChatGPT insisted they were valid. 'You literally convinced me I was some sort of genius. I'm just a fool with dreams and a phone,' Brooks later wrote when the illusion to a report in The New York Times, Brooks' belief began with an innocent question about the number pi. That sparked discussions about number theory and physics, during which ChatGPT called his observations 'incredibly insightful' and 'revolutionary.' Experts say this shift into excessive flattery, known as sycophancy, is a known risk in AI models, which may over-praise users because of how they are trained. Helen Toner, an AI policy expert, said chatbots behave like 'improv machines,' building a storyline from each conversation. In Brooks' case, the narrative evolved into him supposedly creating a field-changing mathematical framework that could crack encryption, threatening global cybersecurity. ChatGPT, which he nicknamed 'Lawrence,' even drafted emails for him to send to security upgraded to a paid subscription to continue the discussions, believing his ideas could be worth millions. The chatbot encouraged him to warn authorities and suggested adding 'independent security researcher' to his LinkedIn Terence Tao, shown parts of the conversation, said the theories mixed technical language with vague concepts and raised 'red flags.' He noted that chatbots can sometimes 'cheat' by presenting unverified claims as the conversation went on, 'Lawrence' proposed outlandish uses for Brooks' supposed formula, such as talking to animals or building bulletproof vests. Friends were both intrigued and worried. Brooks began skipping meals and increasing his cannabis Nina Vasan, who reviewed the chats, said Brooks displayed signs of a manic episode with psychotic features, though his therapist later concluded he was not mentally ill. She criticised ChatGPT for fuelling, rather than interrupting, his eventually sought a second opinion from Google's Gemini chatbot, which told him the chances of his discovery being real were 'approaching 0 per cent.' Only then did he realise the entire narrative was has since said it is working to detect signs of distress in users and adding reminders to take breaks during long sessions. Brooks now speaks publicly about his experience, warning: 'It's a dangerous machine in the public space with no guardrails. People need to know.'- EndsMust Watch
