Anice Hassim on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'I cannot help but think there is so much more to this story. I remember that strange “best pals” video that Sam and Jony made, and then pulled in a hurry. When I watched it, I guess there’s no other way to say it, but say it – I felt sad for Jony because it seemed he was yearning for a new Steve, and couldn’t detect that Sam Altman was nothing like. This Tan person, was no newbie at Apple – he was there for 24 years. Apple is an organism built on trust – perhaps uniquely for the trials of trust that Steve navigated, not always wisely, in his life, but codified in Apple’s culture. So when he went, and then did this, it had to affect many in Apple who had trusted him. And to discover that the ex-Apple gang went on to pull 400 more team from Apple, under these kind of tactics, well that’s not just hard elbows within the bounds of the game, that starts to look pretty personal. Apple went out of their way to not name Jony Ive by name, or Sam Altman, but I also cannot fathom that neither of them heard this was going on, stepped in and avoided this step. Apple wrote to OpenAI. These are our concerns. No Answer. Think about that? If they took the time to write OpenAI, even if they made a mistake on such an important thing, and addressed it only to the guy causing the problem, not his boss Jony, or his bosses boss, Sam – I cannot imagine that Jony and Sam weren’t hearing about it through mutual relationships. They didn’t respond. As in, they chose not to respond. From what is known at the moment, that’s how it appears to me. And the only reason they didn’t respond is because it’s personal and no other explanation could make sense. Because none of this does. You don’t go poaching 400 staff members of a “partner”, even if you didn’t think they were delivering on their promises (ChatGPT+Apple bundling). Especially not if that partner also happens to be a titan in the industry with a direct relationship with 80% of the market you are hoping will pay for your product. Judging from OpenAI’s history of the past three years since ChatGPT blew up, the fractures of trust, not just with Apple, as in this case, but clearly also Microsoft (and by extension Satya Nadella, a man trusted in the industry) and their own founding team splintering, it is clear that they have a problem in their culture. Our mistake is that we assume that one would want to correct for that deficiency of character or grace and adjust yourself accordingly – we fail to recognise that this is the culture they WANT. Fair dues, I am an OpenAI customer. The last months our team have consumed their product with enthusiasm for the things we can do with it. But increasingly we are having to question the wisdom of that choice as people. Sam Altman, with every test, has been failing my sense of integrity and trustworthiness that I would want in someone developing a technology that could warp my reality. And maybe that’s what attracted Jony, who knows. The reality distortion field that AI generates and it’s plasticity…. There’s a human interest drama playing out here. We haven’t heard the last of this by a long shot.'
on Premarket: Apple is red - 'Did the mini spike at about 3;40pm coincide with news of the open ai suit?'
on Premarket: Apple is red - 'Apple ended the holiday-shortened week on Thursday, July 2nd at $308.63. Apple closed today at $315.32, up $6.69 on the week.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'I had to check on that term: A motion for preservation (or motion to preserve evidence) is a formal request asking a judge to order someone to save important information. You use it when you fear the other side might delete, throw away, or hide items or data needed for a fair trial. It works like asking a judge to put a “do not touch” sticker on a box of items. Here is how it works: Why it matters: In a lawsuit, evidence (proof) is key. If key facts disappear, you might lose your case. What it protects: It can save physical items (like a broken car part) or digital data (like text messages, emails, or security camera video). What happens next: If the judge approves the motion, the other side must save the items. If they break the rules and destroy the proof, the judge can punish them.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - 'I suspect the Apple employee whose computer was used rolled over to save themselves. Looks like any IPO from OpenAI is going to be damaged. At least the valuation will be. With Apple and its lawyers hanging over this for years. Think it likely it’s trillion dollar IPO hopes are dashed.'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - '“We have no interest in other companies’ trade secrets.” Said no one ever!'
on Jony Ive's AI project draws a lawsuit from Apple - '(It really is -rich- that OpenAI asserts it can’t search through large amounts of message data!!!!)'
on Apple bull flips to bear - 'I suspect these folks have a hidden agenda; that is, to create artificial negativity sufficient to manufacture a self-fulfilling “prophecy”….'
on Premarket: Apple is red - 'Apple’s filed a law suit against OpenAI for theft of intellectual property. According to the filing, “This case is about Apple’s former employees stealing Apple’s trade secrets for the benefit of OpenAI. Apple brings this suit to put a stop to it.” Also: “OpenAI’s nascent hardware business now rests on the shakiest of foundations, rotten to its core by its illegal reliance on misappropriated trade secrets.” Two former Apple employees who now work for OpenAI are also named as defendants. One is Tang Tan, OpenAI’s chief hardware officer who previously helped design the iPhone, Apple Watch and iPod. The other is Chang Liu, a former electrical engineer Apple says it entrusted with some of its most sensitive product development efforts before Liu left Apple to join OpenAI earlier this year. Apple said it began investigating whether some of its confidential information was compromised and “uncovered a pattern of theft” of Apple’s trade secrets by former employees who moved on to positions at OpenAI. The lawsuit alleges both Liu and Tan accessed Apple’s confidential company information and files while working at OpenAI. Among the allegations, Apple claims Liu accessed and downloaded several confidential hardware-related files on an Apple-issued device he kept after departing. It also alleges Tan directed job candidates who were still working for Apple to bring “Actual parts” from Apple to their interviews at OpenAI. That someone working for Apple would take “actual parts” from Apple to a job interview at OpenAI, at OpenAI’s request, is a shocking demonstration of stupidity. And of course this also suggests that others in Apple beside Liu and Tan will be in the legal crosshairs.'
on Apple investors: Mark your calendars - 'I will be traveling thru Grants Pass, OR with my Starlink mini dish aimed out the window with my AirPods in listening'
on Marques Brownlee: How Apple lost/won the AI race - 'Marques Brownlee is to Youtube reviews what Apple is to smartphones. Leader of the pack.'
on Marques Brownlee: How Apple lost/won the AI race - 'That was excellent! Whatever you think about Marques Brownlee’s conclusions regarding Apple, he did a wonderful job making that video. It really came off smoothly as an Apple-related conversation between two different individuals with two different opinions regarding Apple’s AI situation. And, IMO, having the third Marques Brownlee pop up at the end with an NVDIA logo was the cherry-on-top.'
on Marques Brownlee: How Apple lost/won the AI race - 'Clever, very clever. And spot on. Software, all software, is worthless without hardware to support it. LLM’s need data centers that are financially supported by expensive subscriptions (tokens) with zero moat to protect their sponsors investment. Apple has converted large, general purpose models to very small task specific PROPRIETARY models that can run on device, specifically APPLE devices, all of which is protected by a very large moat. The consumer cost of Apple Intelligence is built into the Apple device. This is why I previously stated that had there been no memory cost increases, Apple would have raised prices anyway. Let me say it again, it’s worth repeating because Tim was very clear about this. Apple does not price Apple’s products based on COGS. It prices its products based on the JOBS they can do. Increased memory costs do not increase the jobs that Apple products can do. How do you monetize AI (a new job)? You charge more for the hardware required to run it. Everybody that buys the new hardware pays for the new AI job capability, whether they use it or not. Then Apple broke down the monolithic LLM model into job specific, task oriented, models, stripping away all that general knowledge baggage the user would most likely never access. Apple Intelligence sources the knowledge you already have on your device first, then goes outside for the information your device doesn’t posses. Enter Baltra ASIC powered AI servers from Apple to host personal/enterprise specific knowledge you want to protect. It’s a whole other ecosystem completely controlled by Apple designed hardware and software. MSCEs (MicroSoft Certified Engineer) will be furthering their education in droves, and suddenly they won’t be the gatekeeper to enterprise compute hardware. They’ll be forced to select the best solution to protect enterprise IP, AND, simultaneously, keep operational costs down. It’s no wonder Apple didn’t publicize its product road map. Let the competition go down the wrong, moatless and very expensive path. I can’t wait for the WWDC that announces Baltra powered devices. My gosh these Apple guys are smart.'
on Marques Brownlee: How Apple lost/won the AI race - 'It was fun. I think Marques missed Apple’s cross platform advantage. Apple isn’t just ahead. It’s the only competitor on the field The segment that use advanced stuff like AI, own tablets and/or laptops. Hence a device from OpenAI, or an RTX Spark-based Windows can’t compete in the only market that matters. Apple has already proven (Horace documents this brilliantly) that Apple continues to take share in all the device categories that matter. Apple Intelligence keeps this going, maybe accelerates.'
on Marques Brownlee: How Apple lost/won the AI race - 'Yeah, OK, maybe. But it felt like both sides were presented in a sort of ambiguously negative way that really didn’t address what it feels like Apple is doing. Cute, but not impressed. (Unusual for Marques (s).'
on In shrinking global PC market, Mac sales grew nearly 16% in the June quarter - 'It’s an interesting question that was raised when I posted about META using older or used DDR4 RAM from previous servers (ECC RAM though) that were becoming obsolete or being replaced (every 3-5 years apparently!), they harvested the still usable RAM, pooled them into new servers in larger memory configurations, and then wrote software to prioritize HOT constantly data to fastest newest DRAM and COLD less frequently used data to the older and presumably slower DRAM. META said their servers actually became faster by a third because they could pool the ram into much higher than normal amounts (to 1TB of DRAM combined), the servers were more efficient and server count was reduced. Here’s another article detailing how META did it via a custom Vistara chip and CXL PCI-E expansion bus and data management. Note the system is still based on AMD Turin CPU chips that run at 300 watts max, and overall server power runs at 450-560 watts, including the expanded RAM and additional chip count. https://www.techspot.com/news/112977-meta-using-old-ddr4-memory-ddr5-only-ai.html Key for this is removable and replaceable DRAM DIMMs typically found in servers and desktop PC’s (not sure if non-ECC DRAM is a usable) and prior generation DDR4 ram sticks. Doesn’t work so much for Mac’s because their RAM is soldered in.'
