Latest news with #AlexPIGMAN
Japan Today
8 hours ago
- Business
- Japan Today
Apple plays it safe on AI despite Wall Street pressure
By Glenn CHAPMAN and Alex PIGMAN Apple on Monday remained on its cautious path to embracing generative 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 last year's disappointment, Apple insisted on Monday 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 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." 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 U.S. App Store. Adding to doubts about Apple's direction is the fact that the legendary designer behind the iPhone, 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 President Donald Trump in his trade war with China, a key market for sales growth and the place where most iPhones are manufactured. 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 $600 billion from its market value and far outshone by its Big Tech rivals. While some analysts remain optimistic about Apple's long-term AI monetization 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 last year," said 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. © 2025 AFP
Japan Today
15-05-2025
- Business
- Japan Today
U.S. rests case in landmark Meta antitrust trial
In a landmark anti-trust trial in Washington, Facebook-owner Meta could be forced to divest itself of Instagram and Whatsapp By Alex PIGMAN The U.S. government rested its case against Facebook-owner Meta on Thursday, as it tries to persuade a U.S. judge that the tech giant bought Instagram and WhatsApp to neutralize them as rivals. The landmark case, brought by the Federal Trade Commission, could see Meta forced to divest itself of the two apps, which have grown into global powerhouses since their buyouts. The trial, held in a federal court in Washington, is presided over by Judge James Boasberg who will decide the outcome of the case. At the heart of the antitrust battle is the question of whether the crucial ingredient that undergirds Meta's success is its ability to make connections between friends or family across its apps. The argument -- that real-life connections are the glue that make Facebook's apps successful -- is the foundation of the government's argument that describes a world where only youth-targeted Snap is a credible, if very distant, rival. Meta counters that its rivals are YouTube and TikTok and that it competes furiously in a much wider and ever-changing market to capture the eyeballs and attention of the world's users. The trial, expected to continue for several more weeks, has seen top Meta executives take the stand, including founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former Meta chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg. Much of the testimony has been devoted to government lawyers building their case that Facebook and its family of apps constitute a market that is distinct from TikTok and YouTube, apps where personal connections have very little impact on usage. The U.S. government argues that Meta's hold on friends and family offers a unique ability to build out its products and rake in billions of dollars in profits every quarter. As a sign of the monopoly, the government also points to widespread reports of customer dissatisfaction with Meta products but continued success and growth of its apps. Meta executives argue that its apps are facing major headwinds and that calling them a monopoly is wrong. On the government's last day of calling its witnesses, the head of Facebook, Tom Alison told the court the company is in an "upheaval," facing generational changes in online habits as young users prefer TikTok-style short video content over sharing pictures and text. "The reality is that Facebook was built 21 years ago and Gen Z users have different expectations," Alison said. But the government believes that Facebook's hold on friends and family shields its business from swings in the market and that it bought Instagram and WhatsApp, in 2012 and 2014 respectively, to remove potential threats to its dominance. Testimony in the past weeks has included revelations by Kevin Systrom, the founder of Instagram, that he felt that Zuckerberg had undermined the success of his photo-sharing app in favor of Facebook once he was bought out. This seemed to back the government's argument that the purchase of Instagram was originally intended as an effort to remove a potential rival, before it became successful in its own right. Meta on Thursday began calling its own list of witnesses, beginning with executives from Snap. "After five weeks of trial, it is clear that the FTC has failed to meet the legal standard required under antitrust law," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement. "Regardless, we will present our case to show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram competes with TikTok (and YouTube and X and many other apps)," Meta added. © 2025 AFP
Japan Today
02-05-2025
- Business
- Japan Today
U.S. asks judge to break up Google's ad tech business
Google is facing a demand by the US government to break up its hugely profitable ad technology business after a judge found the tech giant was commanding an illegal monopoly By Alex PIGMAN Google on Friday faced a demand by the U.S. government to break up its hugely profitable ad technology business after a judge found the tech giant was commanding an illegal monopoly. "We have a defendant who has found ways to defy" the law, U.S. government lawyer Julia Tarver Wood told a federal court in Virginia, as she urged the judge to dismiss Google's assurance that it would change its behavior. "Leaving a recidivist monopolist" intact is not appropriate to solve the issue, she added. The demand is the second such request by the U.S. government, which is also calling for the divestment of the company's Chrome browser in a separate case over Google's world-leading search engine business. The U.S. government specifically alleged that Google controls the market for publishing banner ads on websites, including those of many creators and small news providers. The hearing in a Virginia courtroom was set to plan out the second phase of the trial, set for September 22, in which the parties will argue over how to fix the ad market to satisfy the judge's ruling. The plaintiffs argued in the first phase of the trial last year that the vast majority of websites use Google ad software products which, combined, leave no way for publishers to escape Google's advertising technology and pricing. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with most of that reasoning, ruling last month that Google built an illegal monopoly over ad software and tools used by publishers, but partially dismissed the argument related to tools used by advertisers. The U.S. government said it would use the trial to recommend that Google should spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations, as Google could not be trusted to change its ways. "Behavioral remedies are not sufficient because you can't prevent Google from finding a new way to dominate," Tarver Wood said. Google countered that it would recommend that it agree to a binding commitment that it would share information with advertisers and publishers on its ad tech platforms. Google lawyer Karen Dunn did acknowledge the "trust issues" raised in the case and said the company would accept monitoring to guarantee any pledges made to satisfy the judge. Google is also arguing that calls for divestment are not appropriate in this case, which Brinkema swiftly refused as an argument. The company also said breaking up Google's control of the ad platforms would pose a data security risk for publishers and advertisers. The judge urged both sides to mediate, stressing that coming to a compromise solution would be cost-effective and more efficient than running a weeks-long trial. The business in question at the trial is just a portion of Google's colossal online advertising revenue, which is the driving engine of its fortune and pays for its free-to-use online services such as Maps, Gmail, and search. Money pouring into Google's coffers also allows the Silicon Valley company to spend billions of dollars on its artificial intelligence efforts. © 2025 AFP
