zlacker

I think this might be part of the reason Apple is “behind” on generative AI … LLMs have not really proven to be useful outside of relatively niche areas such as coding assistants, legal boiler plate and research, and maybe some data science/analysis which I’m less familiar with

Other “end user” facing use cases have so far been comically bad or possibly harmful, and they just don’t meet the quality bar for inclusion in Apple products, which as much as some people like to doo doo on them and say they have gotten worse, still have a very high expectations of quality and UX from customers.

>>jmogly+(OP)
You are being too charitable to Apple. They are just being the fox from the Sour Grapes fable.

>>jmogly+(OP)
Apple prides itself on building high quality user experiences. One can argue over whether that’s true anymore or ever was but it’s very clear they pride themselves on that. This is why Apple tends to “be late” on many features. I think like you’re saying it’s becoming even more clear they aren’t seeing a UX they are willing to ship to customers. We’ll see with WWDC if they found something in the last year to make it better but this paper seems to indicate they haven’t.

>>jmogly+(OP)
I have friends that do pretty disparate things (e.g. education consulting, grant writing, solar project planning, etc). They all use LLMs in aspects of their jobs; tasks like rewording emails for tone, extracting themes from brainstorming sessions, rough drafting project plans, etc.

None of them are doing the equivalent of “vibe-coding”, but they use LLMs to get 20-50% done, then take over from there.

Apple likes to deliver products that are polished. Right now the user needs to do the polishing with LLM output. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t useful today