I can't choose between Google and Apple, and it just got much harder
As I watched the Google I/O 2025 keynote, there were several product demonstrations which really stood out to me, not just because they were technically impressive and exciting, but also because none were ones I could ever imagine Apple showing off during a public presentation in the same way.
It reignited an age-old battle within me. Which approach do I prefer? Google and its incredible 'moonshots' which may or may not actually be useful, or even become products I can buy, or Apple and its carefully considered demos firmly rooted in the real-world, benefits and all?
Recommended Videos
Beam me up, Sundar
The demonstration which sparked my internal struggle most was Google Beam. In case you missed it, Beam is an 'AI-first video communication platform,' which has evolved from Google's Project Starline. At I/O, Google showed the hardware it has developed for Beam, which consists of cameras and sensors attached to a giant television, and together with cloud-based AI algorithms it creates a 3D version of the person on the other end of your call.
It's made for businesses, and it's likely quite hard to see the full 3D effect on video, but that didn't matter. It's so futuristic, slightly crazy, and absolutely compelling. It really made me want to try it out. Video calls have been a fixture for me for years, and while they're perfectly fine as they are, they can't replicate the feeling of being in the same room with the other person. Google Beam is a product from the future. It's a step closer to Star Wars-like holograms and Star Trek-like Holo Decks, and it's why I love the concept. Google proudly showed it off, but because I can't buy it or even use it yet, it's a 'look what we can do' tech showcase and little more.
I can't see Apple ever showing a product as visually jarring as Google Beam, with its thick bezels to hide cameras, sensor arrays, and massive room-dominating screen. Google has shown Beam off as Project Starline before, something Apple would never do with a new product. However, Apple's Beam competitor (should such a thing ever exist) would almost certainly be for consumers, and when it showed if off, it would probably have a release date and a price attached. Assuming I don't start working for one of the companies Google and Beam partner HP are working with, I may never even see it in real life. What's more, knowing how Google can abandon projects, it wouldn't surprise me if it never expanded beyond the initial few companies onboard, and certainly not to consumers. The thing is, I don't care. I'm happy to know it exists at all.
Welcome to the future
The concept of Google Beam seems ripe for Apple to adapt using the iPhone's cameras and LIDAR, Apple TV, and FaceTime though. Perhaps Apple is working on such a thing? I'll never know for sure until the company decides to show it off, and if it is working on something similar which doesn't make it past the prototype stage, I'll almost certainly never know about it. Apple's mystery is part of its appeal, but so is Google's willingness to show us its ideas.
When Apple shows me a new product, I can be pretty certain that at some point in the not too distant future, I'll be able to buy it. AirPower is always brought up as an example of Apple's failure to deliver, but its the outlier. A better example of the way Apple handles its forward-thinking hardware is Apple Vision Pro, which was teased and subsequently released, and not once did I think it wouldn't come out, only that I knew I wouldn't be able to afford it when it did.
For Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference (WWDC) keynote this year, it's possible we'll learn about Apple Vision Pro 2, and even if it is another teaser, there's no question a full launch will happen later on. I can be fairly certain if it's on stage at WWDC 2025, it'll be a real product at the end of its development, and not a 'moonshot.' After the chaos of I/O 2025 it'll be refreshing, as while Google wrapped Android XR, its smart glasses, and Project Moohan headset into one, exciting segment at the end of its 2025 keynote presentation, it still felt distant and experimental.
The Android XR experiment
I don't mean experimental in a bad way, but in a 'we're still working all this out, but look at what we've already done,' way. It smart glasses were prototypes, at least one of the live demos didn't work as intended, and there's no final release date for any of it at all. It doesn't look like Google itself will release a pair of Pixel Glasses, leaving partners Warby Parker, Gentle Monster, and Kering Eyewear to work all that out.
Project Moohan, an Android XR headset made with Samsung, is still really only a rendered photo on a screen aside from a few limited demos. But Android XR was demonstrated in various different ways, given us an early look at what the team is working on behind the scenes. It felt experimental because I got the impression the demos shown are the exact ones engineers are playing with in the office. This isn't a criticism, it's what I want to see.
When, or if, Apple shows us a pair of smart glasses, it won't be a 'look at me' demo. It'll be because they're almost ready for sale. There are rumors about such a product, but that's all. We absolutely know Google will be behind a new wave of smart glasses coming, well, some time in the future. We've known it for a while, because it takes such pleasure in showing us what the future holds. Apple will let us know when the future has arrived, and not a moment before.
Two different approaches
While I don't think Apple cares about Google Beam-like devices at this stage, it really should be watching what Google is doing with Android XR, because I came away from the keynote wanting both a Project Moohan headset and a pair of Android XR smart glasses. I've never had the same feeling about the Apple Vision Pro, and it's all down to Apple's failure to build a compelling, accessible, and enticing XR platform and range of products like Google has teased.
This is where Google's approach works better than Apple's. I can see what Google has planned, and while I don't really know if it will fully execute its plans (or even stick with it, long-term), I'm anticipating the future and excited to see how the early-stage products develop into devices I can buy. Google looks lithe and active, daring and ready to take risks, hang the consequences. I'm aware a chunk of what I see (and imagine) may not ever reach me, or that exciting projects may just fall away or be canceled. Project Jacquard comes to mind, as I never did get to try one of the Levi's jackets before the project ended.
Less chaos, more predictable order
Does Google's openness about its experiments sometimes lead to disappointment? Yes. Is that worse than being entirely unaware of what Apple's working on for the future, outside of some rumors? Yes, and no. Apple's product finality is preferable in many ways. I don't enjoy being be teased with no pay-off. I want to see something new and cool, then provided the knowledge of when I can buy it and how much I'll pay. But at the same time, I'd love to know what's going on deep inside Apple's headquarters, even if some of what I'm shown turns out to be a tech showcase and nothing more.
Google I/O 2025's keynote was far more compelling than recent years, and it left me more conflicted than ever about whether I prefer its openness, with the caveat some of what I saw will never be seen again, or if Apple's no-nonsense, carefully curated previews are preferable because my expectations don't have to be kept in check. Less chaos, more predictable order. I simply can't choose between them, and ultimately, I expect I quite like both.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
33 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
IPO Market Shows Signs of Renewed Vigor
The market for initial public offerings seems to be improving after the stock selloff linked to tariff concerns in early April. Shares in Voyager Technologies rose sharply in their debut on the New York Stock Exchange on Tuesday. Other recent signs of success include a blockbuster debut for crypto from Circle Internet Group and upsized IPOs from Aspen Insurance and trading platform eToro Group. Read more:
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Goldman Sachs wants students to stop using ChatGPT in job interviews with the bank
Goldman Sachs is cautioning its young job-seekers against using AI during the interview process. Instead, the $176 billion bank is encouraging applicants to study up on the firm in preparation. Other businesses like Anthropic and Amazon have also warned candidates against deploying AI—and if they're caught, they could be disqualified. While many companies are boasting about all the efficiencies that will come with AI, some are dissuading potential hires from using it to get a leg up in interviews with recruiters and hiring managers. Goldman Sachs' campus recruitment team for the bank's private investing academy in EMEA recently sent out an email to students reminding them of its expectations for interviews, as reported by eFinancialCareers. Goldman uses video interviewing platform HireVue to pre-assess candidates and maintains a set of best practices for job-seekers. Based on the best practices guidelines, the young applicants are encouraged to prepare for interviews by studying the $176 billion firm's financial results, business principles, and core values. But they can't bank on AI to help them out. 'As a reminder, Goldman Sachs prohibits the use of any external sources, including ChatGPT or Google search engine, during the interview process,' the email noted, according to someone who saw the message. HireVue is an AI-powered talent evaluation platform, known for asking behavioral questions that reveal applicants' skills. Gen Z job-seekers might be tempted to use ChatGPT or other chatbots to game the recruitment process—but it's discouraged, and isn't the most viable option. The typical Goldman Sachs virtual interview allows for 30 seconds of prep after the question, followed by a two-minute response time, according to research from eFinancialCareers. That makes it hard for job-seekers to quickly type a prompt into the chatbot, churn out an answer, and decide what the line of attack is. Plus, the responses aren't tailored and unique to the individual, potentially hurting the interviewee more than helping. Goldman's job-seeker AI policy could seem ironic, as half of the firm's 46,000 employees have access to the technology. But other companies are navigating that same paradox as they try to fully flesh out their AI strategies in an ever-changing technological environment. Goldman Sachs isn't the only major company warning its applicants not to use AI during recruitment. The $61.5 billion AI giant Anthropic went on a hiring spree last month, but told job-seekers that they can't use the advanced technology to fill out their applications. The company argued that it wants to test the communication skills of potential hires, and AI use clouds that assessment. 'Please do not use AI assistants during the application process,' Anthropic wrote in the description for its hundreds of job postings. 'We want to understand your personal interest in Anthropic without mediation through an AI system, and we also want to evaluate your non-AI-assisted communication skills.' Retail giant Amazon also doesn't like it when potential talent uses AI tools during the recruitment process. Earlier this year, the $2 trillion behemoth shared guidelines with internal recruiters, stressing that candidates who are caught using AI during job interviews should be disqualified. According to Amazon, the tools give an 'unfair advantage' that masks analysis of someone's 'authentic' capabilities. 'To ensure a fair and transparent recruitment process, please do not use gen Al tools during your interview unless explicitly permitted,' the guidelines, as reported by Business Insider, noted. 'Failure to adhere to these guidelines may result in disqualification from the recruitment process.' This story was originally featured on
San Francisco Chronicle
34 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Nvidia chief calls AI ‘the greatest equalizer' — but warns Europe risks falling behind
PARIS (AP) — Will artificial intelligence save humanity — or destroy it? Lift up the world's poorest — or tighten the grip of a tech elite? Jensen Huang — the global chip tycoon widely predicted to become one of the world's first trillionaires — offered his answer on Wednesday: neither dystopia nor domination. AI, he said, is a tool for liberation. Wearing his signature biker jacket and mobbed by fans for selfies, the Nvidia CEO cut the figure of a tech rockstar as he took the stage at VivaTech in Paris. 'AI is the greatest equalizer of people the world has ever created,' Huang said, kicking off one of Europe's biggest technology industry fairs. Huang's core argument: AI can level the playing field, not tilt it. Critics argue Nvidia's dominance risks concentrating power in the hands of a few. But Huang insists the opposite — that by slashing computing costs and expanding access, 'we're democratizing intelligence' for startups and nations alike. But beyond the sheeny optics, Nvidia used the Paris summit to unveil a wave of infrastructure announcements across Europe, signaling a dramatic expansion of the AI chipmaker's physical and strategic footprint on the continent. In France, the company is deploying 18,000 of its new Blackwell chips with startup Mistral AI. In Germany, it's building an industrial AI cloud to support manufacturers. Similar rollouts are underway in Italy, Spain, Finland and the U.K., including a new AI lab in Britain. Other announcements include a partnership with AI startup Perplexity to bring sovereign AI models to European publishers and telecoms, a new cloud platform with Mistral AI, and work with BMW and Mercedes-Benz to train AI-powered robots for use in auto plants. The announcements underscore how central AI infrastructure has become to global strategy — and how Nvidia, now the world's most valuable chipmaker, is positioning itself as the engine behind it. As the company rolls out ever more powerful systems, critics warn the model risks creating a new kind of 'technological priesthood' — one in which only the wealthiest companies or governments can afford the compute power, energy, and elite engineering talent required to participate. That, they argue, could choke the bottom-up innovation that built the tech industry in the first place. Huang pushed back. 'Through the velocity of our innovation, we democratize,' he said, responding to a question by The Associated Press. 'We lower the cost of access to technology.' As Huang put it, these factories 'reason,' 'plan,' and 'spend a lot of time talking to' themselves, powering everything from ChatGPT to autonomous vehicles and diagnostics. But some critics warn that without guardrails, such all-seeing, self-reinforcing systems could go the way of Skynet in ' The Terminator ' movie — vast intelligence engines that outpace human control. To that, Huang offers a counter-model: layered AI governance by design. 'In the future,' he said, 'the AI that is doing the task is going to be surrounded by 70 or 80 other AIs that are supervising it, observing it, guarding it, ensuring that it doesn't go off the rails.' He likened the moment to a new industrial revolution. Just as electricity transformed the last one, Huang said, AI will power the next — and that means every country needs a national intelligence infrastructure. That's why, he explained, he's been crisscrossing the globe meeting heads of state. 'They all want AI to be part of their infrastructure,' he said. 'They want AI to be a growth manufacturing industry for them.' Europe, long praised for its leadership on digital rights, now finds itself at a crossroads. As Brussels pushes forward with world-first AI regulations, some warn that over-caution could cost the bloc its place in the global race. With the U.S. and China surging ahead and most major AI firms based elsewhere, the risk isn't just falling behind — it's becoming irrelevant. Huang has a different vision: sovereign AI. Not isolation, but autonomy — building national AI systems aligned with local values, independent of foreign tech giants. 'The data belongs to you,' Huang said. 'It belongs to your people, your country... your culture, your history, your common sense.' But fears over AI misuse remain potent — from surveillance and deepfake propaganda to job losses and algorithmic discrimination. Huang doesn't deny the risks. But he insists the technology can be kept in check — by itself. The VivaTech event was part of Huang's broader European tour. He had already appeared at London Tech Week and is scheduled to visit Germany. In Paris, he joined French President Emmanuel Macron and Mistral AI CEO Arthur Mensch to reinforce his message that AI is now a national priority.
