This Week's Sponsor:

Washing Machine X9

Spring Clean Your Mac Effortlessly

Posts in Linked

How Could Apple Use Open-Source AI Models?→

Yesterday, Wayne Ma, reporting for The Information, published an outstanding story detailing the internal turmoil at Apple that led to the delay of the highly anticipated Siri AI features last month. From the article:

In November 2022, OpenAI released ChatGPT to a thunderous response from the tech industry and public. Within Giannandrea’s AI team, however, senior leaders didn’t respond with a sense of urgency, according to former engineers who were on the team at the time.

The reaction was different inside Federighi’s software engineering group. Senior leaders of the Intelligent Systems team immediately began sharing papers about LLMs and openly talking about how they could be used to improve the iPhone, said multiple former Apple employees.

Excitement began to build within the software engineering group after members of the Intelligent Systems team presented demos to Federighi showcasing what could be achieved on iPhones with AI. Using OpenAI’s models, the demos showed how AI could understand content on a user’s phone screen and enable more conversational speech for navigating apps and performing other tasks.

Assuming the details in this report are correct, I truly can’t imagine how one could possibly see the debut of ChatGPT two years ago and not feel a sense of urgency. Fortunately, other teams at Apple did, and it sounds like they’re the folks who have now been put in charge of the next generation of Siri and AI.

There are plenty of other details worth reading in the full story (especially the parts about what Rockwell’s team wanted to accomplish with Siri and AI on the Vision Pro), but one tidbit in particular stood out to me: Federighi has now given the green light to rely on third-party, open-source LLMs to build the next wave of AI features.

Federighi has already shaken things up. In a departure from previous policy, he has instructed Siri’s machine-learning engineers to do whatever it takes to build the best AI features, even if it means using open-source models from other companies in its software products as opposed to Apple’s own models, according to a person familiar with the matter.

“Using” open-source models from other companies doesn’t necessarily mean shipping consumer features in iOS powered by external LLMs. I’ve seen some people interpret this paragraph as Apple preparing to release a local Siri powered by Llama 4 or DeepSeek, and I think we should pay more attention to that “build the best AI features” (emphasis mine) line.

My read of this part is that Federighi might have instructed his team to use distillation to better train Apple’s in-house models as a way to accelerate the development of the delayed Siri features and put them back on the company’s roadmap. Given Tim Cook’s public appreciation for DeepSeek and this morning’s New York Times report that the delayed features may come this fall, I wouldn’t be shocked to learn that Federighi told Siri’s ML team to distill DeepSeek R1’s reasoning knowledge into a new variant of their ∼3 billion parameter foundation model that runs on-device. Doing that wouldn’t mean that iOS 19’s Apple Intelligence would be “powered by DeepSeek”; it would just be a faster way for Apple to catch up without throwing away the foundational model they unveiled last year (which, supposedly, had a ~30% error rate).

In thinking about this possibility, I got curious and decided to check out the original paper that Apple published last year with details on how they trained the two versions of AFM (Apple Foundation Model): AFM-server and AFM-on-device. The latter would be the smaller, ~3 billion model that gets downloaded on-device with Apple Intelligence. I’ll let you guess what Apple did to improve the performance of the smaller model:

For the on-device model, we found that knowledge distillation (Hinton et al., 2015) and structural pruning are effective ways to improve model performance and training efficiency. These two methods are complementary to each other and work in different ways. More specifically, before training AFM-on-device, we initialize it from a pruned 6.4B model (trained from scratch using the same recipe as AFM-server), using pruning masks that are learned through a method similar to what is described in (Wang et al., 2020; Xia et al., 2023).

Or, more simply:

AFM-server core training is conducted from scratch, while AFM-on-device is distilled and pruned from a larger model.

If the distilled version of AFM-on-device that was tested until a few weeks ago produced a wrong output one third of the time, perhaps it would be a good idea to perform distillation again based on knowledge from other smarter and larger models? Say, using 250 Nvidia GB300 NVL72 servers?

(One last fun fact: per their paper, Apple trained AFM-server on 8192 TPUv4 chips for 6.3 trillion tokens; that setup still wouldn’t be as powerful as “only” 250 modern Nvidia servers today.)

Permalink

A Peek Into LookUp’s Word of the Day Art and Why It Could Never Be AI-Generated

Yesterday, Vidit Bhargava, developer of the award-winning dictionary app LookUp, wrote on his blog about the way he hand-makes each piece of artwork that accompanies the app’s Word of the Day. While revealing that he has employed this practice every day for an astonishing 10 years, Vidit talked about how each image is made from scratch as an illustration or using photography that he shoots specifically for the design:

Each Word of the Day has been illustrated with care, crafting digital illustrations, picking the right typography that conveys the right emotion.

Some words contain images, these images are painstakingly shot, edited and crafted into a Word of the Day graphic by me.

I’ve noticed before that each Word of the Day image in LookUp seemed unique, but I assumed Vidit was using stock imagery and illustrations as a starting point. The revelation that he is creating these from scratch every single day was incredible and gave me a whole new level of respect for the developer.

The idea of AI-generated art (specifically art that is wholly generated from scratch by LLMs) is something that really sticks in my throat – never more so than with the recent rip-off of the beautiful, hand-drawn Studio Ghibli films by OpenAI. Conversely, Vidit’s work shows passion and originality.

To quote Vidit, “Real art takes time, effort and perseverance. The process is what makes it valuable.”

You can read the full blog post here.

Is Electron Really That Bad?→

I’ve been thinking about this video by Theo Browne for the past few days, especially in the aftermath of my story about working on the iPad and realizing its best apps are actually web apps.

I think Theo did a great job contextualizing the history of Electron and how we got to this point where the majority of desktop apps are built with it. There are two sections of the video that stood out to me and I want to highlight here. First, this observation – which I strongly agree with – regarding the desktop apps we ended up having thanks to Electron and why we often consider them “buggy”:

There wouldn’t be a ChatGPT desktop app if we didn’t have something like Electron. There wouldn’t be a good Spotify player if we didn’t have something like Electron. There wouldn’t be all of these awesome things we use every day. All these apps… Notion could never have existed without Electron. VS Code and now Cursor could never have existed without Electron. Discord absolutely could never have existed without Electron.

All of these apps are able to exist and be multi-platform and ship and theoretically build greater and greater software as a result of using this technology. That has resulted in some painful side effects, like the companies growing way faster than expected because they can be adopted so easily. So they hire a bunch of engineers who don’t know what they’re doing, and the software falls apart. But if they had somehow magically found a way to do that natively, it would have happened the same exact way.

This has nothing to do with Electron causing the software to be bad and everything to do with the software being so successful that the companies hire too aggressively and then kill their own software in the process.

The second section of the video I want to call out is the part where Theo links to an old thread from the developer of BoltAI, a native SwiftUI app for Mac that went through multiple updates – and a lot of work on the developer’s part – to ensure the app wouldn’t hit 100% CPU usage when simply loading a conversation with ChatGPT. As documented in the thread from late 2023, this is a common issue for the majority of AI clients built with SwiftUI, which is often less efficient than Electron when it comes to rendering real-time chat messages. Ironic.

Theo argues:

You guys need to understand something. You are not better at rendering text than the Chromium team is. These people have spent decades making the world’s fastest method for rendering documents across platforms because the goal was to make Chrome as fast as possible regardless of what machine you’re using it on. Electron is cool because we can build on top of all of the efforts that they put in to make Electron and specifically to make Chromium as effective as it is. The results are effective.

The fact that you can swap out the native layer with SwiftUI with even just a web view, which is like Electron but worse, and the performance is this much better, is hilarious. Also notice there’s a couple more Electron apps he has open here, including Spotify, which is only using less than 3% of his CPU. Electron apps don’t have to be slow. In fact, a lot of the time, a well-written Electron app is actually going to perform better than an equivalently well-written native app because you don’t get to build rendering as effectively as Google does.

Even if you think you made up your mind about Electron years ago, I suggest watching the entire video and considering whether this crusade against more accessible, more frequently updated (and often more performant) desktop software still makes sense in 2025.

Permalink

Recording Video and Gaming: A Setup Update→

It’s been a couple of months since I updated my desk setup. In that time, I’ve concentrated on two areas: video recording and handheld gaming.

I wasn’t happy with the Elgato Facecam Pro 4K camera, so I switched to the iPhone 16e. The Facecam Pro is a great webcam, but the footage it shot for our podcasts was mediocre. In the few weeks that I’ve moved to the 16e, I’ve been very happy with it. My office is well lit, and the video I’ve shot with the 16e is clear, detailed, and vibrant.

The iPhone 16e sits behind an Elgato Prompter, a desktop teleprompter that can act as a second Mac display. That display can be used to read scripts, which I haven’t done much of yet, or for apps. I typically put my Zoom window on the Prompter’s display, so when I look at my co-hosts on Zoom, I am also looking into the camera.

The final piece of my video setup that I added since the beginning of the year is the Tourbox Elite Plus. It’s a funny looking contraption with lots of buttons and dials that fits comfortably in your hand. It’s a lot like a Stream Deck or Logitech MX Creative Console, but the many shapes and sizes of its buttons, dials, and knobs set it apart and make it easier to associate each with a certain action. Like similar devices, everything can be tied to keyboard shortcuts, macros, and automations, making it an excellent companion for audio and video editing.

On the gaming side of things, my biggest investment has been in a TP-Link Wi-Fi 7 Mesh System. Living in a three-story condo makes setting up good Wi-Fi coverage hard. With my previous system I decided to skip putting a router on the third floor, which was fine unless I wanted to play games in bed in the evening. With a new three-router system that supports Wi-Fi 7 I have better coverage and speed, which has already made game streaming noticeably better.

Ayn Odin 2 Portal Pro. Source: Ayn.

Ayn Odin 2 Portal Pro. Source: Ayn.

The other changes are the addition of the Ayn Odin 2 Portal Pro, which we’ve covered on NPC: Next Portable Console. I love its OLED screen and the fact that it runs Android, which makes streaming games and setting up emulators a breeze. It supports Wi-Fi 7, too, so it pairs nicely with my new Wi-Fi setup.

A few weeks ago, I realized that I often sit on my couch with a pillow in my lap to prop up my laptop or iPad Pro. That convinced me to add Mechanism’s Gaming Pillow to my setup, which I use in the evening from my couch or later in bed. Mechanism makes a bunch of brackets and other accessories to connect various devices to the pillow’s arm, which I plan to explore more in the coming weeks.

The 8BitDo Ultimate 2 Controller. Source: 8BitDo.

The 8BitDo Ultimate 2 Controller. Source: 8BitDo.

There are a handful of other changes that I’ve made to my setup that you can find along with everything else I’m currently using on our Setups page, but there are two other items I wanted to shout out here. The first is the JSAUX 16” FlipGo Pro Dual Monitor, which I recently reviewed. It’s two 16” stacked matte screens joined by a hinge. It’s a wonderfully weird and incredibly useful way to get a lot of screen real estate in a relatively small package. The second item is 8BitDo’s new Ultimate 2 Wireless Controller that works with Windows and Android. I was a fan of the original version of this controller, but this update preserves the original’s build quality and adds new features like L4 and R4 buttons, TMR joysticks that use less energy than Hall Effect joysticks, and 2.4G via a USB-C dongle and Bluetooth connection options.

That’s it for now. In the coming months, I hope to redo parts of my smart home setup, so stay tuned for another update later this summer or in the fall.

Permalink

Opening iOS Is Good News for Smartwatches→

Speaking of opening up iOS to more types of applications, I enjoyed this story by Victoria Song, writing at The Verge about the new EU-mandated interoperability requirements that include, among other things, smartwatches:

This is a big reason why it’s a good thing that the European Commission recently gave Apple marching orders to open up iOS interoperability to other gadget makers. You can read our explainer on the nitty gritty of what this means, but the gist is that it’s going to be harder for Apple to gatekeep iOS features to its own products. Specific to smartwatches, Apple will have to allow third-party smartwatch makers to display and interact with iOS notifications. I’m certain Garmin fans worldwide, who have long complained about the inability to send quick replies on iOS, erupted in cheers.

And this line, which is so true in its simplicity:

Some people just want the ability to choose how they use the products they buy.

Can you imagine if your expensive Mac desktop had, say, some latency if you decided to enter text with a non-Apple keyboard? Or if the USB-C port only worked with proprietary Apple accessories? Clearly, those restrictions would be absurd on computers that cost thousands of dollars. And yet, similar restrictions have long existed on iPhones and the iOS ecosystem, and it’s time to put an end to them.

Permalink

On Apple Allowing Third-Party Assistants on iOS→

This is an interesting idea by Parker Ortolani: what if Apple allowed users to change their default assistant from Siri to something else?

I do not want to harp on the Siri situation, but I do have one suggestion that I think Apple should listen to. Because I suspect it is going to take quite some time for the company to get the new Siri out the door properly, they should do what was previously unthinkable. That is, open up iOS to third-party assistants. I do not say this lightly. I am one of those folks who does not want iOS to be torn open like Android, but I am willing to sign on when it makes good common sense. Right now it does.

And:

I do not use Gemini as my primary LLM generally, I prefer to use ChatGPT and Claude most of the time for research, coding, and writing. But Gemini has proved to be the best assistant out of them all. So while we wait for Siri to get good, give us the ability to use custom assistants at the system level. It does not have to be available to everyone, heck create a special intent that Google and these companies need to apply for if you want. But these apps with proper system level overlays would be a massive improvement over the existing version of Siri. I do not want to have to launch the app every single time.

As a fan of the progressive opening up of iOS that’s been happening in Europe thanks to our laws, I can only welcome such a proposal – especially when I consider the fact that long-pressing the side button on my expensive phone defaults to an assistant that can’t even tell which month it is. If Apple truly thinks that Siri helps users “find what they need and get things done quickly”, they should create an Assistant API and allow other companies to compete with them. Let iPhone users decide which assistant they prefer in 2025.

Some people may argue that other assistants, unlike Siri, won’t be able to access key features such as sending messages or integrating with core iOS system frameworks. My reply would be: perhaps having a more prominent placement on iOS would actually push third-party companies to integrate with the iOS APIs that do exist. For instance, there is nothing stopping OpenAI from integrating ChatGPT with the Reminders app; they have done exactly that with MapKit, and if they wanted, they could plug into HomeKit, HealthKit, and the dozens of other frameworks available to developers. And for those iOS features that don’t have an API for other companies to support…well, that’s for Apple to fix.

From my perspective, it always goes back to the same idea: I should be able to freely swap out software on my Apple pocket computer just like I can thanks to a safe, established system on my Apple desktop computer. (Arguably, that is also the perspective of, you know, the law in Europe.) Even Google – a company that would have all the reasons not to let people swap the Gemini assistant for anything else – lets folks decide which assistant they want to use on Android. And, as you can imagine, competition there is producing some really interesting results.

I’m convinced that, at this point, a lot of people despise Siri and would simply prefer pressing their assistant button to talk to ChatGPT or Claude – even if that meant losing access to reminders, timers, and whatever it is that Siri can reliably accomplish these days. (I certainly wouldn’t mind putting Claude on my iPhone and leaving Siri on the Watch for timers and HomeKit.) Whether it’s because of superior world knowledge, proper multilingual abilities (something that Siri still doesn’t support!), or longer contextual conversations, hundreds of millions of people have clearly expressed their preference for new types of digital assistance and conversations that go beyond the antiquated skillset of Siri.

If a new version of Siri isn’t going to be ready for some time, and if Apple does indeed want to make the best computers for AI, maybe it’s time to open up that part of iOS in a way that goes beyond the (buggy) ChatGPT integration with Siri.

Permalink

App Store Vibes→

Bryan Irace has an interesting take on the new generation of developer tools that have lowered the barrier to entry for new developers (and sometimes not even developers) when it comes to creating apps:

Recent criticism of Apple’s AI efforts has been juicy to say the least, but this shouldn’t distract us from continuing to criticize one of Apple’s most deserving targets: App Review. Especially now that there’s a perfectly good AI lens through which to do so.

It’s one thing for Apple’s AI product offerings to be non-competitive. Perhaps even worse is that as Apple stands still, software development is moving forward faster than ever before. Like it or not, LLMs—both through general chat interfaces and purpose-built developer tools—have meaningfully increased the rate at which new software can be produced. And they’ve done so both by making skilled developers more productive while also lowering the bar for less-experienced participants.

And:

I recently built a small iOS app for myself. I can install it on my phone directly from Xcode but it expires after seven days because I’m using a free Apple Developer account. I’m not trying to avoid paying Apple, but there’s enough friction involved in switching to a paid account that I simply haven’t been bothered. And I used to wrangle provisioning profiles for a living! I can’t imagine that I’m alone here, or that others with less tribal iOS development knowledge are going to have a higher tolerance for this. A friend asked me to send the app to them but that’d involve creating a TestFlight group, submitting a build to Apple, waiting for them to approve it, etc. Compare this to simply pushing to Cloudflare or Netlify and automatically having a URL you can send to a friend or share via Twitter. Or using tools like v0 or Replit, where hosting/distribution are already baked in.

Again, this isn’t new—but being able to build this much software this fast is new. App distribution friction has stayed constant while friction in all other stages of software development has largely evaporated. It’s the difference between inconvenient and untenable.

Perhaps “vibe coding” is the extreme version of this concept, but I think there’s something here. Creating small, low-stakes apps for personal projects or that you want to share with a small group of people is, objectively, getting easier. After reading Bryan’s post – which rightfully focuses on the distribution side of apps – I’m also wondering: what happens when the first big service comes along and figures out a way to bypass the App Store altogether (perhaps via the web?) to allow “anyone” to create apps, completely cutting out Apple and its App Review from the process?

In a way, this reminds me of blogging. Those who wanted to have an online writing space 30 years ago had to know some of the basics of hosting and HTML if they wanted to publish something for other people to read. Then Blogger came along and allowed anyone – regardless of their skill level – to be read. What if the same happened to mobile software? Should Apple and Google be ready for this possibility within the next few years?

I could see Google spin up a “Build with Gemini” initiative to let anyone create Android apps without any coding knowledge. I’m also reminded of this old Vision Pro rumor that claimed Apple’s Vision team was exploring the idea of letting people create “apps” with Siri.

If only the person in charge of that team went anywhere, right?

Permalink

Bloomberg Reports that Apple Is Shaking up Siri Leadership→

Less than two weeks ago, Apple announced that it was delaying the launch of a more personalized Siri. Today, Mark Gurman, reporting for Bloomberg, says the company is shuffling leadership of the project, too. According to Gurman:

Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook has lost confidence in the ability of AI head John Giannandrea to execute on product development, so he’s moving over another top executive to help: Vision Pro creator Mike Rockwell. In a new role, Rockwell will be in charge of the Siri virtual assistant, according to the people, who asked not to be identified because the moves haven’t been announced.

Giannandrea isn’t leaving Apple. Instead, Gurman says Giannandrea will continue to oversee “research, testing and technologies related to AI” including a team investigating robotics. Rockwell, who led the development of the Vision Pro, will report to Craig Federighi, Apple’s senior vice president of software.

Rockwell has had a long and successful track record at Apple, so hopefully Siri is in good hands going forward. It’s clear that there’s a lot of work to be done, but the promise of a more personalized Siri and a system for apps to communicate with each other via Apple Intelligence is something I’m glad the company isn’t giving up on. Hopefully, we’ll see some progress from Rockwell’s team soon.

Permalink

Pebble’s Inherent Disadvantages on the iPhone→

It’s been just shy of one year since the U.S. Department of Justice and 15 states sued Apple for antitrust violations. It’s not clear what will become of that lawsuit given the change of administrations, but as it stands today, it’s still an active case.

One of the things that is hard about a case like the one filed against Apple is cutting through the legal arguments and economic jargon to understand the real-world issues underlying it. Earlier this week Eric Migicovsky one of the Pebble smartwatch founders who resuscitated the device this week, wrote an excellent post on his blog that explains the real world issues facing third-party smartwatch makers like Pebble.

Among other things:

It’s impossible for a 3rd party smartwatch to send text messages, or perform actions on notifications (like dismissing, muting, replying)….

It’s worth reading the post in its entirety for the other things third-party smartwatch makers can’t do on iOS, and as Migicovsky explains, things have gotten worse with time, not better. Since the Pebble’s time, the complaint against Apple adds that:

  • You must set notifications to display full content previews on your lockscreen for them to also be sent to a 3rd party watch (new restriction added in iOS 13).
  • Apple closed off the ability of smartwatches after Pebble to negotiate with carriers to provide messaging services, and now requires users to turn off iMessage (disabling iOS’s core messaging platform) if they want to take advantage of such contracts between a third-party smartwatch maker and cellular carriers.

The Apple Watch is great. There isn’t another smartwatch that I’ve even been tempted to try in recent years, but is that because no one has been able to make a good alternative or hasn’t because the disadvantages third-party wearables face are too great?

I’d like to see Apple focus on finding ways to better integrate other devices with the iPhone. There are undoubtedly security and privacy issues that need to be carefully considered, but figuring those things out should be a priority because choice and competition are better for Apple’s customers in the long run.

Permalink