- For mac computer google doppelgänger android#
- For mac computer google doppelgänger software#
- For mac computer google doppelgänger Pc#
- For mac computer google doppelgänger crack#
Their demo asked Google Now “What’s his real name?” while a Skrillex song was playing. Last week was Google I/O, where Google announced Now on Tap, featuring an ability for voice interaction to work while another app is running. Stefan Constantine once remarked there are only two important events in the annual technology calendar: Google’s I/O and Apple WWDC. And we can expect this exponential improvement in NLP to continue apace.
For mac computer google doppelgänger crack#
And this relentless exponential sustaining innovation is starting to crack thresholds of usability which make voice far more powerful and potentially disruptive than when it first shipped. But for voice I think the answer lies in understanding that Siri, or more broadly the technology of Natural Language Processing (NLP), has been making steady Moore’s law exponential progress for years. Why is this threat happening now? It’s not just the Watch form factor, though of course the watch itself is a new and more personal platform and interface as well (glances, taps, crown, force touch, complications). Recall Apple acquired Siri way back in 2010 and released it in 2011. The historical red warning flag indicating a platform shake up is possible is the rise of another new and far more personal input method for computers: voice. Rather we should ask if Apple can overcome their general strategy tax on services to make an exception for voice interaction, making it competitively first class. We should never expect Apple to be best in services across the board. Voice interaction as the “God Particle” of mobile is explicitly clear to anyone who talks to Google about it.
For mac computer google doppelgänger android#
If Google maintains their lead in voice, and voice interaction becomes as common as I expect, then Nexus Android becomes the de facto premium phone. It was of course written before Apple Watch came out, and before we learned voice is a far more natural and compelling interaction for watches than phones: In fact let me quote from my original “God Particle” post from 2013. That was acceptable on the phone, but is a much more problematic issue when the cloud is so central to the most important means of interacting with the Watch. Rather, it depends on the cloud, and as much as Apple has improved, an examination of their core competencies and incentives argues that the company will never be as good as Google.
For mac computer google doppelgänger software#
The concern for Apple is that, unlike the others, the success or failure of Siri doesn’t come down to hardware or low-level software optimizations, which Apple excels at, and which ensures that Apple products have the best user interfaces. More broadly, it’s clear that what the mouse was to the Mac and multi-touch was to the iPhone, Siri is to the Watch. Nor, I think, is the long term threat to Apple’s position being fully appreciated.” He then describes that threat as below, kindly linking to one of my posts in his original of this paragraph: In Apple Watch and Continuous Computing Ben Thompson says “I can’t quite shake the feeling that the Apple Watch is being serially underestimated. image source (Stratechery)Įnter Apple Watch. And since native ads are a natural fit to the far larger brand advertising market, it’s possible Google may be eclipsed in the next era. These ads aren’t on the web, so Google web search doesn’t play in this space. For native ads think Facebook ads that show up in natively in your timeline just like regular posts. Using his eclipse framework, Ben Thompson then asks whether Google’s dominance in web search advertising leaves it with no room to grow, with web search becoming eclipsed by native ads. Instead what happens is new entrants have a window of opportunity to eclipse old platform owners when new and more personal input methods become technically feasible. History seems to show that computer platforms have such strong lock-in the original owners never lose control. For smartphones of course the input shift was moving to touchscreen interfaces, where Apple iOS and Google Android now dominate.
For mac computer google doppelgänger Pc#
But once PCs shifted to mouse/keyboard and graphical interfaces, IBM dropped out and PC use exploded. Yes, it’s true PCs continued using command line input at first. I want to pause here to note that both of his eclipse examples are driven by the invention of new and more personal input methods. His examples are IBM mainframes being eclipsed by PCs, and PCs being eclipsed by smartphones.
It’s just that new companies create new platforms that are so much bigger they eclipse the old ones. They continue to dominate their old platforms. Ben Thompson starts off his Peak Google post saying “Despite the hype about disruption, the truth is most tech giants, particularly platform providers, are not so much displaced as they are eclipsed.” By this he means old platforms and companies don’t fail or go away.
0 kommentar(er)
