Jony Ive's Futuristic OpenAI Device Like a Neck-Worn iPod Shuffle 34
OpenAI on Wednesday announced that it was paying $6.5 billion to buy io, a one-year-old start-up created by Jony Ive. While the company remains tightlipped about the futuristic AI device(s) it has in the works, Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo shared some alleged details about its design. MacRumors reports: In a social media post today, Kuo said the device will be "slightly larger" than Humane's discontinued AI Pin. He said the device will look "as compact and elegant as an iPod Shuffle," which was Apple's lowest-priced, screen-less iPod. The design of the iPod shuffle varied over the years, going from a compact rectangle to a square. Like the iPod shuffle, Kuo said OpenAI's device will not have a screen, but it would connect to smartphones and computers. The device will be equipped with microphones for voice control, and it will have cameras that can analyze the user's surroundings.
He said that users will be able to wear the device around their necks, like a necklace, whereas the AI Pin can be attached to clothing with a clip. Kuo expects OpenAI's device to enter mass production in 2027, and the final design and specifications might change before then. Kuo expects OpenAI's device to enter mass production in 2027, and the final design and specifications might change before then.
He said that users will be able to wear the device around their necks, like a necklace, whereas the AI Pin can be attached to clothing with a clip. Kuo expects OpenAI's device to enter mass production in 2027, and the final design and specifications might change before then. Kuo expects OpenAI's device to enter mass production in 2027, and the final design and specifications might change before then.
Oblig. (Score:2)
"Can't innovate anymore, my ass."
(I don't care that he's not with Apple anymore, it sounds like the same level of effort. Might as well be a Humane Pin on a string.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I could fail to innovate my way to a $6.5bn valuation in just one year, I'd sure as shit be doing it. That's got to be one of the steepest valuation rises in history, doesn't it?
Categorically, without fail, under no measure at all is the company worth the money. There is simply no way there's 6.5 *billion* dollars of *value* created by that company - even if you look forward by 3-5 years.
> Kuo expects OpenAI's device to enter mass production in 2027
When you say "mass" production, just what sort of run
Re: (Score:2)
Looks at my groty 512MB Shuffle.
"Ew, I'm not wearing that where people can see!"
Re: (Score:2)
Jony is not Steve say what you want about People like Steve Jobs or Elon Musk but they see where the future is before most do Jobs saw the potential at each stage of each product and saw what was needed to make something work and had enough technical knowledge to know who he needed to make it happen Jony Ive is brilliant from what I have seen so far he has built what others (mainly Jobs) told him to build from the big picture they could see. Musk similar to Jobs looks at the bi
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.geekwire.com/geekw... [geekwire.com]
https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobi... [cnet.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The guy's an industrial designer. He just made a box that's so pretty someone paid him $6.5 billion dollars for it. Clearly he's done his job exceptionally well.
OpenAI Looking increasingly desperate (Score:2)
... poorly solving a problem that didn't exist in the first place. But it made a few people stupidly rich so i guess it doesn't matter chumps. The Emperor's new clothes.
Re: OpenAI Looking increasingly desperate (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, right? Iâ(TM)m a nerd, I get star struck over cool new tech, and have since I took apart the family tv in the 4th grade. But pointless tech is never cool. ChatGPT is cool. Eliza was cool too. Claude is actually pretty useful. But this? I want *less* tech to be attached to, not more. I want a much smaller phone that will project a 3d image like in Star Wars. Now that would be cool tech. Even the watch is pretty cool. Cool enough for me to buy and play with, not useful enough for me to still b
Re: (Score:2)
I'm afraid all the money in the world won't solve either of those problems. There are deep rooted societal problems at play here that ensure both of those things will continue going and they won't get fixed by money. In fact, throwing money at those particular problems has just made it worse over the years.
Re: (Score:3)
It's only a problem when the wrong "people are starving and their homes are being bombed"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Give me two (Score:1)
One to shit on and the other to cover it up with.
So essentially a dog-collar? (Score:2)
Yep, fits. Also immediately marks the "AI"-dependent morons...
So, wut it do? (Score:4, Insightful)
AI what? Haven't they invented the problem it solves yet?
Re: (Score:1)
You can pretty much tell something isn't worth a damn when the best thing they say about it is that it's reminiscent of some obsolete Apple product.
AI what? Haven't they invented the problem it solves yet?
Funny how every time someone invokes the iPod Shuffle as a bad sign, I wonder if they actually remember the product—or just resented how many people loved it.
The Shuffle and Nano were insanely successful, and that is not debatable. Not because they had screens. Not because they were open platforms. But because they nailed two things: style and function. Turns out people like elegant, wearable tech that Just Works—especially when it lets them interact with media or information without fiddling w
Re: (Score:3)
You can pretty much tell something isn't worth a damn when the best thing they say about it is that it's reminiscent of some obsolete Apple product.
AI what? Haven't they invented the problem it solves yet?
Funny how every time someone invokes the iPod Shuffle as a bad sign, I wonder if they actually remember the product—or just resented how many people loved it.
The Shuffle and Nano were insanely successful, and that is not debatable.
You are making an argument that I am not making.
Can you tell me where I posted that the iPod shuffle was a bad product? I posted that it is an obsolete product. It was successful. It had its run. It was discontinued in 2017 - not because it was "bad", because it was obsolete. I even had one, and liked it.
My point stands. I went to the page, and there's nothing about what the thing actually does. Pictures of iPods. It will look like an iPod of sorts. Okay. That's nice. I have pieces of wood out in my s
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, a society encumbered by literal AI listening devices that fools will wear around their necks sounds so much better. Plus, you'll still need earbuds/earphones to not annoy the fuck out of everyone around you; so you're still disconnected from your immediate surroundings; and believe it or not most people like having visual interfaces coz they're faster and more efficient than voice for almost all tasks.
But yeah, enjoy paying OpenAI to provide them with training data every minute of every day, not to me
Re: (Score:2)
It's a bad sign because it's the only substantive marketing point being brought up. We have pretty much the *exact* concept that was attempted in the AI pin with zero interest, and no indication of why they think this could possibly find a target market when the pin pretty much demonstrated there isn't.
The shuffle went away because in time it was a redundant product, even if it had relevance in the beginning, when you got to a market full of smartphones and wireless earphones/buds with touch controls, ther
Differentiate (Score:2)
Yeah, because THAT was the problem with the Humane pin, how you wore it, not the 'nobody wants or needs this' part.
Re: (Score:2)
And don't forget this part:
"Kuo expects OpenAI's device to enter mass production in 2027, and the final design and specifications might change before then."
Some shocking news about the brilliant plans of the smartest people on the planet: "maybe gonna be made" and "might not be this". Fantastic.
At least people have caught on that Ive is a total fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
Innovation requires discipline (Score:1)
Sam Altman lacks the stones to tell Ive 'no'- and the product will suffer because of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Strong Ego-on-Ego energy there.
Re: (Score:2)
The also design worked because it covered a specific need, for example in case of the iPhone, it was "an iPod, a phone, an internet mobile communicator" -- people wanted to have that in their pocket.
What do people want to hang on their neck? What's the use case for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Welll....2027? That sounds like a nod to AI2027 ( https://ai-2027.com/ [ai-2027.com] ) though I'm not sure why that's a good thing.
Financial Play, Not A Company (or Product) (Score:2)
The stunning $6.5 billion dollar payout for a year-old company looked like a sweetheart gift (or grift), the essentials of which are secret, not public. There seemed no possible way that anything could have been brought into existence into that time, with remotely that kind of value, no matter how long the time horizon for eventual profit is.
And this reveal confirms it. This is a failed product out the door -- something that is so obviously a lame idea that it is simply stunning. It isn't really a device, o
Re: (Score:2)
So, how will jony kick some back to Sam?
So a limitless.ai like pendant ? (Score:1)
Flavor Flav (Score:3)
Once again, Flavor Flav was ahead of his time.
I know they'll sell it on a Platinum chain and I can get a Grill to match.