{"id":43435,"date":"2024-05-29T13:59:13","date_gmt":"2024-05-29T17:59:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=43435"},"modified":"2024-10-01T14:27:31","modified_gmt":"2024-10-01T18:27:31","slug":"can-anyone-but-a-tech-giant-build-the-next-big-thing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2024\/05\/29\/can-anyone-but-a-tech-giant-build-the-next-big-thing\/","title":{"rendered":"Can Anyone But a Tech Giant Build the Next Big Thing?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jason Snell<\/a> (Mastodon<\/a>):<\/p>\n

\n

I’m sad about the Ai Pin because it—and a similar AI hardware product, the Rabbit R1—shows just how much potential innovation is strangled by the presence of enormously powerful tech companies, most notably the Android-iPhone duopoly.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

The problem is that I’m dismissing the Ai Pin and looking forward to the Apple Watch specifically because of the control Apple has over its platforms. Yes, the company’s entire business model is based on tightly integrating its hardware and software, and it allows devices like the Apple Watch to exist. But that focus on tight integration comes at a cost (to everyone but Apple, anyway): Nobody else can have the access Apple has.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

It seems like we’re at the point where even the most groundbreaking hardware device simply can’t succeed in a world where it’s unable to deeply integrate with either the iPhone or Android. (And really, in the U.S. especially, it would need to integrate with both.) This is why the Ai Pin and the Rabbit and similar products are not going to succeed. Instead, Apple and Google will integrate everything that the Ai Pin does into iOS and Android, and those will be the best-in-class implementations, and that’ll be it for Humane and anyone else who wants to create an AI-powered hardware dingus.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

I’m not making a legal argument here. (Which is good, because I am not a lawyer.) I’m just observing that the smartphone has become so central to life that if your product can’t offer deep connections to the smartphone, you’re stuck.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This is what I said<\/a> at the Ai Pin’s unveiling. It should have been an app, but what it wants to do is not allowed for third-party apps. Apple and Google will integrate best-in-class implementations, but they’ll be best in the sense that no one can<\/em> do better, not that no one could<\/em> do better.<\/p>\n\n

Jeff Johnson<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Three companies control all of the consumer OS market share on both mobile and desktop. Microsoft was founded in 1975, Apple in 1976, Google in 1998. We’re in a period of terrible tech stagnation.<\/p>

Also, Apple acquired NeXT and Google acquired Android. Those weren’t home-grown technologies.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Steve Troughton-Smith<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Some simple categories of apps that can’t realistically exist on the iOS\/iPadOS\/visionOS App Store off the top of my head[…]<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

Many of Apple’s apps, like Playgrounds, simply could not be built by any<\/em> third party developer.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

John Gruber<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

I would argue, strenuously, that the phone is the natural AI device. It already has: always-on networking, cameras, a screen, microphones, and speakers. Everyone owns one and almost everyone takes theirs with them almost everywhere they go.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Sören<\/a>:<\/p>\n

I’ve been saying for a while that instead of “all phones should use USB-C” and “users should pick a web browser when setting up their phones”, “the Apple-Google duopoly must provide APIs that allow third parties to thrive” is the real thing the EU should’ve focused on.<\/p>

For example, third-party headphones can’t integrate as well as AirPods, no matter how hard the vendor tries.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

I’m still unconvinced it would be a good product. But I think Snell is right: Apple makes it so that Humane cannot<\/em> make a good product.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n