Will Apple Lose Siri's Core Tech To Samsung?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Will Apple Lose Siri's Core Tech To Samsung?

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday October 2, 2014 @09:27PM from the mine-now-I-take-it dept.

An anonymous reader writes Apple bought Siri in 2010, but its core technology is owned by Nuance, maker of Dragon NaturallySpeaking. Now Samsung is looking to buy Nuance. From the article: "This past June, Nuance and Samsung began merger talks, but nothing came of it. At the time, the two companies said talks had 'slowed' due to 'complexities.' But they didn't say it was dead. Guess what? The talks are back on. The first hint came in June, after the company missed the quarterly projections. The Wall Street Journal then brought up the talks with Samsung and also noted the company had taken financial steps that could indicate a buyout was imminent. The company’s earnings report for June stated that Nuance was redeeming $250 million in 2027 convertible notes. By calling back the debt, that would save the future acquirer around $50 million from a debt-to-share conversion."

161 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Siri says by twixer · 2014-10-02 21:28 · Score: 5, Funny

User: Will Apple Lose Siri's Core Tech To Samsung? Siri: Sod off, you insensitive clod!
Maker? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 21:29 · Score: 1

Don't you mean "acquirer"?
"talks" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 21:34 · Score: 0

Why bother with talks, just follow the example of the Dear Leader and send in the corporate troops to invade and conquer. Boots in the boardroom, death to the competition. It's the American Imperial way.
1. Re:"talks" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 22:39 · Score: 0
  
  Crimson Permanent Assurance Company style!
That Will Make The On-Going Patent Wars Uglier by Greyfox · 2014-10-02 21:35 · Score: 2

I wonder how that meeting at Samsung went. I'm guessing it opened with someone saying "Ok guys! We need to come up with some ways we can fuck Apple!"

--
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
1. Re:That Will Make The On-Going Patent Wars Uglier by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:16 · Score: 2
  
  Even if thats what happened I can say it couldn't happen to a more deserving company.
2. Re:That Will Make The On-Going Patent Wars Uglier by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 03:48 · Score: 0
  
  And you say that because you somehow derive a part of your identity based on the products you buy. Please be assured in the real world no one gives a fuck about what phone you bought, what operating system you use, or how vocally you hate on other tech companies that I assure are not even aware of you existence.
3. Re:That Will Make The On-Going Patent Wars Uglier by Imazalil · 2014-10-03 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  While yes, Samsung sure is trying hard to beat Apple, I think this is more about them being worried about their future with Android.
  Google has been reigning things in and requiring their services (play, search, etc) to be on Android phones. Samsung doesn't like this because they have their own version of just about everything. They are also big enough that they could just off the Android bandwagon and take a good number of customers with them (mostly the ones that walk into stores and 'need one of em' galaxies'). They have their own app store, own versions of just about all 'default' apps (browser, email, etc), recently partnered with Nokia for Here maps (or whatever it's called nowdays) and now they're looking to not need Google for voice commands.
  It could also be an easy way to get Tizen up to speed, matching Android on features. Because if there's one thing that Samsung is known for its their software talents.
  If nothing else, this is a pretty cheap way to keep bulling Google into keeping Android to Samsung's liking.
4. Re:That Will Make The On-Going Patent Wars Uglier by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 05:36 · Score: 0
  
  So you're perfectly fine with Giant Company A fucking over Giant Company B (and millions of customers, including people completely unrelated to Giant Company B) just because you don't like giant company B?
  What an objective view of the world you have.
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2014-10-02 21:56 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion
great.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 22:08 · Score: 0

Seems like a good way to fuck up the speech recognition market for a while.
Let Samsung take over the company that has spent years taking over all it's competitors.
1. Re:great.. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 23:06 · Score: 1
  
  it's means it is
  I'd be grateful if someone could come up with Dragon Natural Apostrophe.
Re:Irrevocable License by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 22:09 · Score: 3, Funny

You don't get it. Samsung would never revoke Apple's license. Think about it...
Apple technology... brought to you by Samsung!
Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Taco+Cowboy · 2014-10-02 22:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

I have been in the tech scene for decades, and having have my "tech baptism" we always have that "community" feel to what we do
That was decades ago
Now, everything changed. Tech companies today are like warring fiefdoms. Instead of focus on innovation they wasted all their resources on making their competitors suffer
Take this SIRI/Nuance -- Apple/Samsung saga for example ---
Instead of innovate - Innovate - INNOVATE what we have here are "strategizing - scheming - blocking"
Instead of innovation the tech companies are more interested in dog fights, and the one thing that I need to know is this ---
Why are they doing all these?
Is it because they no longer have the urge to innovate?
Or is it because the corporate culture (the ROI mentality) that has taken over (in almost all the big tech companies that I know) and it is killing the tech field as we know it?
This is a very unhealthy trend, very very unhealthy, and if we let them corporate guys taking over our tech industry sooner or later we will be facing the sad cold reality that one day, somebody else, maybe India or China or Russia, will become much more technologically advance than the West
Please pay a visit to India or Russia or China, if you have the chance. Over there they still have a lot of people devoting their lives on innovation, because to them, it is the right thing to do

--
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
1. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Savage-Rabbit · 2014-10-02 22:38 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Please pay a visit to India or Russia or China, if you have the chance. Over there they still have a lot of people devoting their lives on innovation, because to them, it is the right thing to do
  That will change...
  
  --
  Only to idiots, are orders laws.
  -- Henning von Tresckow
2. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 22:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Instead of innovation the tech companies are more interested in dog fights, and the one thing that I need to know is this ---
  Why are they doing all these?
  Is it because they no longer have the urge to innovate?
  Why are they doing this? It's because the low hanging fruit is gone. When every company makes general purpose processors in every device (cell phone, laptop, netbook, desktop, tablet), there is nothing to differentiate one device from any other device, at a fundamental level.
  So, instead of having device differentiation, manufacturers need to fight it out over the underlying technologies that support the software running on those devices. The new ideas, or leadership in the old ideas (i.e., Nuance and voice recognition), are where the fight is now because that's the only way to beat a competitor with truly differentiating features in your own products.
  - DB (posting as an anonymous coward).
3. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by SimonInOz · 2014-10-02 23:01 · Score: 1
  
  >> Or is it because the corporate culture (the ROI mentality) that has taken over (in almost all the big tech companies that I know) and it is killing the tech field as we know it?
  Yes.
  
  --
  "Cats like plain crisps"
4. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by towermac · 2014-10-02 23:26 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Can't innovate man. The tech is covered by patents.
  You're not allowed to build your own Siri from scratch.
  Give me a break, "they do what they do in India Russia and China because it's the right thing to do."
  They follow the law over there while trying to make a buck, same as we do here.
  Don't blame our people for obeying the law.
5. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by rodrigoandrade · 2014-10-02 23:39 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  There was never a "community feel." You were too young to understand how businesses work.
6. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by BasilBrush · 2014-10-02 23:55 · Score: 2
  
  It's no different in tech now than ever it was.
  
  Please pay a visit to India or Russia or China, if you have the chance. Over there they still have a lot of people devoting their lives on innovation, because to them, it is the right thing to do
  They are certainly the innovators when it comes to malware. So please save the nonsense that they are doing it "because it's the right thing to do." They do what they can to make money, same as any other country.
7. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by ihtoit · 2014-10-03 00:00 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, because IP is something to protect even if it has no intrinsic value in concealment - it has strategic value in making your competitors lag. This is abuse of the patent system. China's (to pick a random example from your shortlist) knowledge base depends on the free sharing of ideas, of designs and of the technology to make whatever. Take their auto industry: Chinese manufacturers are building what are basically clones of the most solid cars on the planet built by the likes of BMW, Porsche, Volvo, and even AMG. Do they give a shit for patents? Hell no, otherwise these frames wouldn't outsell their Western counterparts by a factor of almost three.
  
  --
  Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
8. Re: Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:09 · Score: 1
  
  Microsoft versus Netscape
  Microsoft versus DR DOS
  Microsoft versus IBM OS II
  Mike was a versus all the other office apps
  Apple versus Microsoft look and feel
  It was a Garden back the
9. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by koan · 2014-10-03 00:11 · Score: 1
  
  "Why are they doing all these?"
  Because there is so little competition.
  
  --
  "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
10. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:38 · Score: 1
  
  They follow the law over there while trying to make a buck, same as we do here.
  Do they have lobby groups creating the laws even if they are AGAINST the vast majority of what the people want?
11. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 00:50 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Yep, you can't innovate. Which is why the phone in your pocket is exactly the same as, does the same thing as, and performs the same as the phone that was there 10 years ago.
12. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  They follow the law over there while trying to make a buck, same as we do here.
  Do they have lobby groups creating the laws even if they are AGAINST the vast majority of what the people want?
  What makes you think they don't?
  The more powerful the government, the more likely that is to happen.
  See regulatory capture.
  Translation: big government is NOT your friend, because government regulation of an industry actually leads to that industry controlling that aspect of the government. Hence we see Obamacare forcing people to buy health insurance from private companies.
13. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 00:57 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Exactly. This is nothing more than a case of nostalgia for 'the good old days' that never actually existed.
  Watt and his competitors were having patent fights hundreds of years ago. Bell and his competitors. Edison. The list goes on.
14. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:05 · Score: 0
  
  "They are certainly the innovators when it comes to malware."
  Citation?
  People frequently say the same thing about "spam" but factually this is untrue:
  http://www.statista.com/statistics/263086/countries-of-origin-of-spam/
  China is number one at 21%
  United States is number two at 18.81%
15. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by torkus · 2014-10-03 01:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The short answer? The stock market. No really, no tin-foil hats here.
  It's become a race to the bottom in order to push the stock prices up. It's not even ROI anymore. The balance sheet for a corporation has more in common with the matrix computers than your checkbook...but if the symbols line up just right you win (and your stock price goes up). Cut 10% of your workforce (even if they're actively earning money) and your numbers look immediately better. Stock price typically goes up.
  Why?
  Companies are run by their senior staff and board members; All of whom receive large stock-based compensation and/or typically have large holdings in the company. So laying off a bunch of hard working people or doing other shitty things even if your company is doing just fine...suddenly starts to make sense. If you own 12 million shares and cutting a department or two pushes up the stock price a buck you just make $12 million. The board is probably thrilled with you and increase your bonus this year by another 100k shares or something on top of it.
  So the same game applies to stuff like patents and apps and whatnot. It's all about swinging the bigger dick and look like you're running your competition out of business. Doesn't matter if you do or not. Doesn't matter if you put a bunch of people out of work. Doesn't matter if you have a stupid. Stock price goes up? Execs win.
  Granted most other people lose in the process. Buy hey, we don't count.
  
  --
  You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
16. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by The+Grim+Reefer · 2014-10-03 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  Part of it is, as someone else already stated, all of the easier things are done. The market has also shifted significantly. Back when I got into tech, and presumably you too, only a small part of the population cared.
  You had large corporations who wanted mainframes, and only so many companies built them. The admins that maintained those systems back then were viewed as about half a step down from Merlin. Then there were the hobbyists, who were mainly geeks and a very small portion of the population. So the low end computer market was very small.
  Now the average person walks around with more computing power in their pocket than an entire computer lab in the 1970's had. And the user doesn't need to know how to program in Assembly, or create stacks of punch cards just to play tic-tac-toe. They need about as much intelligence as your average cat to do things that weren't even possible 30 years ago.
  That being said, it's now a huge multibillion dollar market and is very competitive. When you're dealing with the average person, marketing is every bit, if not more important than substance. At this point the MBA's are in full swing and if it's going to cost X number of dollars to design a feature or X number minus a little bit to deny a competitor of something; well the number at the bottom of the spreadsheet is all that matters.
17. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by vakuona · 2014-10-03 02:13 · Score: 1
  
  They are not building clones. That would imply they are building cars that would pass for BMWs and Volvos. (Incidentally, Volvo is now Chinese owned, so that would be a interesting fight).
  Their cars only look like BMWs and Volvos, but are nowhere near the quality.
18. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 02:53 · Score: 0
  
  Are you sure? From India, I mostly see tech clickbait blogs.
19. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by hairyfeet · 2014-10-03 03:01 · Score: 1
  
  That is because the tech has matured to the point there really isn't anywhere to go, short of sticking the chips in your brain.
  Look at the PC, we have gotten to the point that the cheapest Worst Buy special has more cycles and storage than the average u user will ever touch. Its like using a dragster to pick up milk so all they can do now is die shrinks and soon that angle will be gone. The same is true of tablets and phones, which are getting multicores and piles of RAM, soon it'll hit the battery wall (some would argue we already have) and with the same result, more cycles than Joe Normal can ever use.
  It was easy to innovate when a HDD can't be lifted without a fricking crane, nowadays there just isn't anything not already being done.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
20. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by james_shoemaker · 2014-10-03 03:09 · Score: 1
  
  I was carrying a smartphone 10 years ago, my new one is faster, prettier and better integrated, but does it do anything the other one couldn't... nope. Just polishing there, no innovation that I can see. In fact the battery life is significantly worse.
21. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 03:12 · Score: 0
  
  Another piece of old IBM.(90s)
22. Re: Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 03:21 · Score: 0
  
  You forgot Emacs versus vi, you insensitive clod!
23. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by lister+king+of+smeg · 2014-10-03 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  I was carrying a smartphone 10 years ago, my new one is faster, prettier and better integrated, but does it do anything the other one couldn't... nope. Just polishing there, no innovation that I can see. In fact the battery life is significantly worse.
  Yeah only back then we called them PDA's
  
  --
  ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
24. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 03:39 · Score: 1
  
  Really? 10 years ago you had a phone with 32GB of memory, that could connect to an LTE4 network, stream usable HD video (and display it on it's own HD screen), do voice recognition, weighed less the 150 grams, had a 16MP camera, etc? Exactly which phone was that?
  Now, maybe YOU do not want or appreciate those features, and that is fine, but don't pretend they don't exist.
  Most innovation (not just now, but always) does NOT show up suddenly as some earth-shattering new thing. Most innovation is incremental improvements to existing stuff.
25. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · 2014-10-03 03:44 · Score: 1
  
  Of course they don't have lobbyists. They have near totalitarian governments.
  
  --
  Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
26. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by ihtoit · 2014-10-03 03:57 · Score: 1
  
  until you go round the back you would swear that their BMW X5 clone was actually a BMW X5. In 2008, BMW actually lost a court case against the company that built the clone (believe it or not, that is the CLONE on the left, built by Shuanghuan and dubbed the "CEO", revealed in a side by side comparison against the BMW stand at the 2007 Frankfurt Motor Show!) simply on the grounds that the company used a Mazda chassis and sidestep! Their "Genesis" model (from 2006?) uses their own chassis with coachwork reminiscent of the S Class (right down to the grille).
  
  --
  Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
27. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by ihtoit · 2014-10-03 04:10 · Score: 1
  
  Addendum: a few more differences between the CEO and the X5 (from what I remember):
  - wheelbase on the CEO is slightly longer (a matter of a couple inches)
  - Track width on the CEO is also wider by about an inch
  - Engine in the CEO is slightly smaller, offering more room in the cab
  - Floor in the CEO is closer to the ground
  - - Altogether offering better stability in the CEO, offset by it being about 400lb lighter on basic model compared with basic X5.
  - CEO offers 123BHP, X5 offers 231BHP (base models), up to 198 and 381BHP respectively (depending on engine/transmission configuration).
  - CEO back seats do not fold down, however they do have more longitudinal travel, hence more legroom available to rear seat passengers
  - No airbags in the CEO, period (I think the X5 has front and side front airbags, side bags in the rear doors). Five point restraints for front seat passengers an option, however.
  - Welded roll cage in the CEO: the BMW uses a monocoque.
  Sources: as stated, otherwise BBC Top Gear Magazine
  
  --
  Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
28. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by BlackSnake112 · 2014-10-03 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  Please pay a visit to India or Russia or China, if you have the chance. Over there they still have a lot of people devoting their lives on innovation, because to them, it is the right thing to do
  Since when is stealing and coping been called innovation?
29. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by towermac · 2014-10-03 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sure they have lobbyists of some sort. You writing a letter to your congressman is lobbying him. But it would be better to get face time, right? Can you take that much time off work? Do others feel as you do? Could you all get together and hire somebody to go down there and talk to him for you? Maybe someone who is an expert in the field, and could answer any questions the congressman might have...
  I never bought into the 'it's the lobbyists fault' thing. Lobbyists don't pass legislation. Elected representatives do.
30. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by towermac · 2014-10-03 04:55 · Score: 1
  
  Okay, Okay. (actually I miss my Star-Tac, but that's another thing..)
  Not everything under the sun has yet been patented. Point taken.
  Was I wrong about Dragon owning the patents to speech recognition on a computer?
  Was I wrong in implying that no one can feasibly publish speech recognition, designed from scratch or not; without paying Dragon on Dragon's terms?
  I would like to be wrong about that. Somebody tell me I'm wrong about that.
31. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by mlts · 2014-10-03 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  Part of it is that the soul of innovation has been beaten out of people here in the US in the past decade or so. The seeds of this were sewn back in the 1990s with Operation Sun Devil which drove the hacking community underground, and long term, caused it to move to Europe and Russia. Even now, if a kid shows hacking experience, in other countries, it would be encouraged. In the US, they would be tossed in jail until age 21 because most public schools are more interested in "teaching" the three "C"s here (conform, comply, consume) than trying to bring out talents in their students that would be useful later on.
32. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by nephilimsd · 2014-10-03 05:26 · Score: 1
  
  "Really? 10 years ago you had a phone with 32GB of memory, that could connect to an LTE4 network, stream usable HD video (and display it on it's own HD screen), do voice recognition, weighed less the 150 grams, had a 16MP camera, etc? Exactly which phone was that?"
  
  In all fairness, the only thing you've done is add bigger numbers or better adjectives to existing functions. If you replaced that with, "[Y]ou had a phone with memory, that could connect to a network, stream video (and display it on it's own screen)..." The answer is likely yes. I can see how that isn't really considered innovation, and just incremental improvement (albeit a lot in a fairly short time).
33. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  What is your point? Yes, I am sure Dragon has patents on certain ways of doing speech recognition, and if you want to use those methods you must pay Dragon. So what?
  The purpose of patents is to spur innovation. Doing what someone else is already doing, the same way they are doing it, is not innovation.
  If you are unable to copy (whether or not you 'designed it from scratch') what Dragon is doing, maybe you should do something ELSE. Maybe there is a better way to do speech recognition. Maybe you should focus your attention on something other than speech recognition. Those efforts could lead to real innovation, efforts that would otherwise be wasted doing what already has been done.
  Read up on something like the history of the steam engine. Watt was motivated by financial gain. He patented his engine and rigorously defended it. Other people saw a lucrative market for steam powered engines, and set about making their own engines that were different than what Watt did. That drove innovation. And the same pattern is repeated throughout history.
34. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 05:32 · Score: 0
  
  9 Years ago I had this.. in 2005.
  http://www.cnet.com/products/audiovox-ppc-6700-sprint/
  The Sprint PPC-6700 features a spacious QWERTY keyboard, three forms of wireless (EV-DO, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth), and the latest OS, Windows Mobile 5.
35. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  How is that 'not really innovation'? What enabled all those improvements, magic? Or maybe you think Moore's law is an actual law of physics, and things are just going to keep getting denser with no innovation from dedicated human beings?
  If 'incremental improvements' are not innovation, then there has been no innovation between ENIAC and today's smartphones. Every one of the steps between there and here has been 'just an incremental improvement'.
36. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by jafac · 2014-10-03 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  If the low hanging fruit is gone, then you plant more trees (invest in R&D), and grow more fruit.
  It's nothing more than the business culture, and "ROI mentality" that Taco Cowboy mentions.
  They're interested in THIS quarter's numbers. Who gives a shit about next quarter. Cash-in, pump-n-dump, grab the money and run.
  
  --
  
  These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
37. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by jafac · 2014-10-03 06:13 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Well, this article is incredibly misleading.
  Nuance is NOT the core-technology behind SIRI.
  SIRI's search AI was the core technology.
  Nuance was just the convenient front-end (speech recognition) - and that technology is actually very "old" (in internet terms): Mid-1990's.
  What Nuance has that its competitors don't have, is a method of using pronunciation guides, which were captured using very painstaking intensive studies of speakers. Variations in individual speech patterns (mannerisms, dialects, accents) have been boiled down to statistical models. These models inform the recognizer, so that "training" isn't necessary, and speech recognition can be more of a plug-n-play thing. It's a huge boost in usability over other speech recognition software. And it required a huge up-front investment. There are few cases where intellectual property is a legitimate idea to protect in software - and this is one of them. Otherwise, there would have been no incentive for the geniuses at Nuance to have come up with this scheme, and invest in the research required to create the statistical models.
  If other companies want to build a competing solution for speech recognition, I'm not aware of any encumbrance on the method (software patents are a thing, but this method is not patented afaik) - but they still have to come up with their own statistical models, because Nuance's are protected.
  
  --
  
  These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
38. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Your.Master · 2014-10-03 06:18 · Score: 1
  
  No it isn't. Do you remember 2004?
  In 2004, most people did not have phones that could stream video. In the US, about 1/3 of adults didn't even have any cellphone (cite: http://www.pewinternet.org/200...). Most people age 15 and younger did not, and now they are 25 and younger and thus probably make up a nontrivial portion of the slashdot userbase.
  I got my first cellphone in mid-2004 (note: I am not from the US). It certainly could not stream video. I don't remember when I first saw a cellphone streaming video, but I think it was years later (I think it was post-iPhone). I had barely seen it on a desktop computer. Remember, youtube didn't exist yet. Mostly it was one-off shockwave flash cartoons of the type you'd find at albinoblacksheep.com, and a few embedded quicktime or windows media player clips. And oh how people hated quicktime.
  Besides which, it might not be innovation *in a phone* to just increase/decrease the number sizes or improve the adjectives, but those improvements aren't possible without real innovation. 32GB was literally impossible without innovations to storage technology that allowed us to pack more memory units per unit area and manufacture them at scale. HD video playback on the phone required big advances in screen technology, network infrastructure technology, battery technology, and hardware video processing technology.
  At some point everything, everything is incremental, but that point is beyond the point of absurdity. An incremental change is swapping out an off-the-shelf 16GB chip with an off-the-shelf 32GB chip of the same size. But it took a lot of innovation to make that first 32GB chip in the first place.
39. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by jafac · 2014-10-03 06:20 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's also true, largely, with outsourcing.
  If a company cuts high-paid domestic workers, and contracts out to an overseas consulting firm (or call center, or whatever) - whether or not this actually saves money overall (in most cases, it actually does NOT) - is irrelevant.
  The only relevant factor, is it makes the CEO seem "ruthless in the pursuit of profit" - and this boosts the stock price, much in the same way as "brawndo's got what plants crave". It's also the same with high CEO compensation. If a company pays a well-known rockstar CEO 300x what their average worker earns, it's seen as a "smart move" - even if it starves the operating budget of revenue for workers to produce actual products or innovate. (this is the same reason that sales-guys tend to buy overpriced luxury cars: for the appearance of wealth and therefore "success" as an effective salesperson).
  Institutional investors are pretty smart people, but there are a LOT of idiots out there, and even institutional investors will follow a trend if they think it will make them money. Fundamentals be damned. Hence, the invisible hand shoves itself further up the bunghole of our economy : lube-free.
  
  --
  
  These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
40. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by jedidiah · 2014-10-03 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  It's not really innovation because it's just taking advantage of Moore's Law and it's friends to pack more dense components made by OTHER people into the same old packaging.
  Dell is no more an innovator for doing the same thing.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
41. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 09:22 · Score: 0
  
  No, I don't think that you understand my point... Yes, more R&D will always yield results, and those results may be profitable, but there's a difference between QUALITATIVE and QUANTITATIVE result effects here that I was referring to.
  Quantitative results - more memory, faster processor, etc..
  Qualitative results - fundamental capacities:
  wireless [WiFi, Blutooth] (hookup to peripherals, access cloud storage, browse the web, etc..),
  add a camera [still photography, movies],
  onboard storage [SSD vs. HDD] (keep your stuff with you, rather than on the cloud, run Apps on your phone rather than downloading and running them in a browser all the time),
  functional touch screen - now gestures can interact with a device (arguably the most important HW innovation in the last 8 years, after SSDs) and
  SOFTWARE (apps, really).
  Arguably, the most recent widely successful commercial applications of qualitative results are the result of form factor and device design developments: the iPhone and the iPad (and I'll argue that the iPad is only an extension of the iPhone: bigger screen, less HW (no cell calling)).
  The iPhone squeezed a capacitive touch screen in with onboard storage and a mobile phone (HW innovation + design), becoming a commercial success.
  The iPad stretched the screen out, but lost the mobile phone, Instant success (HW innovation + design).
  What's the next HW innovation? Implantation? (right). If you look at what people do to interact with their devices, there isn't much left but voice and "wearable" (whatever that means).
  It really makes me bonkers to hear "R&D" used as a cure-all for business-hating rhetoric. Think! Something NEW is awfully hard to come by, which is why Nuance is so valuable: it's the next developmental step (not a fundamental new invention, but maturation of the next step's technology allowing us to communicate more easily with our devices).
  - DB (posting as an anonymous coward)
42. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  Wow. You do know that Moore's law is not a real thing, right? You can't 'take advantage of it'.
  And you may want to look at what one of those 'other companies' that are making these ever smaller components is called. Hint, it begins with an S and ends with a G.
43. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by towermac · 2014-10-03 13:34 · Score: 1
  
  My point is that there is no 'other way' to do speech recognition on a computer. The method, is *ALL* speech recognition, using a computer.
  So Apple paid Dragon. The so what is, if Samsung buys Dragon, and then decides not to sell speech recognition to Apple anymore. Or to keep the DOJ off of them, maybe just triple the price. And they don't have to license the new version to Apple, which makes their phones better for the next 20 or 50 years, however long the patent lasts.
  Patents only spur innovation when they protect inventions. The steam engine being a perfect example. Speech recognition is not an invention, it's just one of many applications one can use the computer for, itself a physical invention.
  Even if you could make the case that speech recognition on a computer was an invention, how long ago was that? They had it in the early days of the PC, certainly over 20 years ago. Given the rate of cellphone hardware innovation, how is that not holding things back?
44. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by towermac · 2014-10-03 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you.
  So I was somewhat wrong. Samsung shouldn't be able to kill Apple's Siri with this move, even if they could use it to be a pain in Apple's ass for a while.
  And that's just fine. Apple is a big boy these days; they can take it.
45. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 13:52 · Score: 0
  
  I see where you're coming from and completely agree. We aren't saying that the incremental improvements aren't often better / more important, but they aren't _innovative_.
  Think back to before camera phones, how commonly you'd say "ahh, I wish I had my camera". The first phone you got with a camera changed everything, suddenly everyone started having multiple cameras on a night out, etc... (good or bad, not the point. it definitely changed things)
  Most of those 1 megapixel photos were horrible, it definitely took a while to get to 'acceptable' standards. There's been so many bigger, more important advancements in the tech, but nothing really changed things IRL as dramatically.
46. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 14:00 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly what patent is it that covers ALL speech recognition on a computer? Or has there been some mathematical proof done that shows there is no other way to do it?
  You can't get a patent on a 'new version'. You can get a patent on improvements, but ANYONE can do that.
  What do you mean speech recognition isn't an invention? Did it just fall out of the sky or something?
  If this technology existed 20 years ago, then the patent is expired anyway.
  You're not making any sense.
47. Re: Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 14:14 · Score: 0
  
  What do Moroccans have to do with this and why can't you spell?
48. Re: Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by johnamadsen · 2014-10-03 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  Don't bother to explain it. This guy is a dumbass.
49. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by bws111 · 2014-10-03 14:20 · Score: 1
  
  Wait, you're claiming that sticking something that already exists (a digital camera) in the same case as something else that already existed is MORE innovative than the camera sensors, memory, and all that other stuff you can't see is? That has got to be one of the STUPIDEST things I have ever heard.
50. Re: Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 14:21 · Score: 0
  
  You are probably arguing with some loose that still lives with his mom at 30 years old and plays video games.
51. Re: Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 14:25 · Score: 0
  
  They won't kill Siri, they will just license it. Research the relationship between different apple and samsung divisions. Apple using Samsung SSDs and other tech. Business is about making money. If apple has to replace a core feature, they will. It would be a PR nightmare that samsung renders all I phone users voice recognition useless. Think about it, it will not happen like that.
52. Re: Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-04 04:47 · Score: 0
  
  No, they don't have a patent on all voice recognition in perpetuity. That would be ridiculous. Google Now doesn't use Nuance, neither does Microsoft Cortana.
53. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-04 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  suspect its related to wanting the so called American Dream ie self made man who builds a company from the ground up while getting rich in the process and the path to that is to innovate. In those countries you can still build a company from scratch without needing corporate America or VCs to fund you.
54. Re:Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by Plumpaquatsch · 2014-10-07 07:28 · Score: 1
  
  Can't innovate man. The tech is covered by patents.
  You're not allowed to build your own Siri from scratch.
  Give me a break, "they do what they do in India Russia and China because it's the right thing to do."
  They follow the law over there while trying to make a buck, same as we do here.
  Don't blame our people for obeying the law.
  So your only examples of "can't innovate" you could think off was doing something already existing "from scratch"? Something that others have done, supposedly better, as we are constantly told here?
  
  --
  Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Good comparison for personal data collection by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 22:29 · Score: 0

You may well have a safe-and-sound, water-tight agreement with Company X while they are free, but when bought out by Company Y that could all change. They still have your data, and now so does Company Y, who could be someone much more nefarious.
Which company? by wonkey_monkey · 2014-10-02 22:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

The first hint came in June, after the company missed the quarterly projections.
In an article about two companies possibly merging (and the possible ramifications of said merger for a third company), "the company" ends up being just a bit ambiguous.

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
1. Re:Which company? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 22:56 · Score: 0
  
  Context. Something, Pelosi has zero of. See you're ahead of the game. On the other hand the congress critters already have their bets called in to the bookies, because tech is about getting a piece of the 50 million you just saved on that debt conversion deal. Whether you make transistors or clothespins is immaterial
2. Re:Which company? by sproketboy · 2014-10-02 23:54 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks. I was going to post the same comment. Still don't know which company they're talking about.
3. Re:Which company? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:42 · Score: 0
  
  Gramatically speaking you're right, there is ambiguity. But practically speaking it should be quite clear they're talking about Nuance.
  In a finance article about a (relatively speaking) smaller company potentially being bought out by a much larger conglomerate, "the company" will 99% of the times refer to the smaller entity. Nuance missing quarterly projections means their valuation decreases so they become a more attractive target for Samsung. If Samsung would have missed projections, they have no reason to start up talks to spend money on Nuance, on the contrary.
4. Re:Which company? by Anubis+IV · 2014-10-03 06:02 · Score: 1
  
  Gramatically speaking you're right, there is ambiguity. But practically speaking it should be quite clear they're talking about Nuance.
  Except that Samsung substantially missed their predicted quarterly earnings for the quarter, whereas Nuance hit the midpoint of their projections.
Whew! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 22:54 · Score: 0

Glad I have Microsoft's Cortana in my Windows Phone!
1. Re:Whew! by quetwo · 2014-10-03 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  Powered by Nuance... Sorry, try again.
Re:Irrevocable License by Noughmad · 2014-10-02 23:06 · Score: 1, Informative

Just like Samsung would never stop selling chips and screens to Apple. Oh wait.

--
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
license cortana by jbolden · 2014-10-02 23:09 · Score: 3

Right now Cortana (Windows Phone) is the digital assistant that is furthest ahead. Microsoft / Apple's relationship is good for example the Bing integrations. So potentially they could license Cortana (likely calling it Siri and using the Siri voice) and get an upgrade. I don't see this as devastating, just annoying. Or of course it isn't like Apple couldn't afford to move anything in house.
1. Re:license cortana by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 23:28 · Score: 1
  
  Have you actually used Cortana, or just have you just watched too many of the Apple vs Windows phone commercials?
2. Re:license cortana by OzPeter · 2014-10-02 23:47 · Score: 1
  
  Right now Cortana (Windows Phone) is the digital assistant that is furthest ahead.
  And I laugh out loud whenever I see the add for Cortana on TV that gives the user the reminder that he has to leave now in order to get to his date on time.
  The map shown on screen is of Richmond, VA, .. a city of 210,000 people
  The route shows going from somewhere in Church Hill to the Fan .. about 3 miles
  The time of day is around 8PM at night
  And Cortana suggests that this will take 20+ minutes.
  Sure, the map and the reminder are nice, but factually the trip duration is out the window unless you are considering driving during one of the 3 days in the year where there might be enough snow to impede you - in which case why aren't you at the supermarket, buying everything in sight like everyone else??
  
  --
  I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
3. Re:license cortana by koan · 2014-10-03 00:10 · Score: 1
  
  You mentioned Bing so I now know it's safe to ignore you.
  
  --
  "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
4. Re:license cortana by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:22 · Score: 0
  
  You are judging a technology from a fucking mock up on a tv commercial. You sound like me when I watch a war movie. I always yell at the TV when the patches are wrong/wrong location. I've got to say the fact that you spent the time to figure out where the map was, how far it was, and the average time it takes to travel that route shows you have nothing better to complain about, but does little to convince anyone that Cortana sucks.
5. Re:license cortana by jbolden · 2014-10-03 00:25 · Score: 1
  
  Good point didn't catch that. It does get good reviews.
6. Re:license cortana by OzPeter · 2014-10-03 00:55 · Score: 1
  
  You are judging a technology from a fucking mock up on a tv commercial.
  What sort of company allows their marketing department to show their product in a bad light? Especially when they are in full control of showing things that are easily verifiable.
  And I didn't "spend time to figure out where the map was". I am simply very familiar with the city and the route that was shown. Funnily enough if you show something from an identifiable, real world location in your advertisement, there exists people who know that location.
  
  --
  I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
7. Re:license cortana by CastrTroy · 2014-10-03 01:11 · Score: 1
  
  First it's an example. screen shots are simulated, it's not completely accurate to what you'd see on an actual phone. All commercials do that.
  
  Secondly, it's a date. You do not want to be late for the date. I think it's actually instilling good habits on people to arrive 10 minutes early. Sure the 3 mile drive may only take 5 minutes. Some people will think it only takes 5 minutes to get there, and start leaving 5 minutes before the date. But that's not how to estimate time to get somewhere. He should start getting ready to go 25 minutes before he has to be there. First he has to put his shoes on, find his keys, wallet, because most people don't walk around the house with this stuff on their person all the time. He has to go out to his car, start it, futz with his phone for a couple minutes so that he doesn't have to listen to the god awful radio. Now he can do his 5 minute drive. Then he has to find parking, and walk from the parking to the actual location. That could add on another 5 minutes. All included, it would probably take 15 minutes to get from, "ok I'm leaving now" to "actually at the restaurant". And he's 10 minutes early. Which is OK. Had there been some hold up in one of the previous steps, he still shows up on time or early. People who plan to get somewhere based on the exact minimal time to actually drive somewhere are the people who are always 15 minutes late for everything.
  
  --
  
  Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
8. Re:license cortana by swb · 2014-10-03 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  Secondly, it's a date. You do not want to be late for the date.
  Unless you're seriously late, she'll make you wait. Every. Single. Time. Even after 14 years of marriage.
  I think it's actually instilling good habits on people to arrive 10 minutes early.
  Nobody wants their date to show up 10 minutes early. Since she'll make you wait anyway, she will REALLY be unprepared when you show up early. Plus it makes you look desperate and over-eager.
  If you have to be early because of some compulsion, park a block away and then arrive at her door about 3 minutes late. A little anticipation on her part will go a long way.
Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by KingOfBLASH · 2014-10-02 23:10 · Score: 3, Insightful

I find it funny how this article implies that because Samsung might now own the technology behind Siri, Siri is in trouble.
Samsung is a REALLY big company with lots of different divisions. One of those, the phone division, is in stiff competition with apple. Another one of those, the chip division, has apple as their best customer.
Apple will continue licensing siri technology. Yes, they'll probably look for alternatives (the same way they are looking for an alternative to the Samsung chip fabrication).
But whether or not they're successful, all that will happen is two really big companies will continue having divisions that work together, and divisions that are in competition.
It's a non story.
1. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by Bogtha · 2014-10-03 00:11 · Score: 2
  
  Apple will continue licensing siri technology. Yes, they'll probably look for alternatives (the same way they are looking for an alternative to the Samsung chip fabrication).
  
  I would be amazed if they weren't already working on this. You mention chip fabrication, but bringing software development in house compared with bringing manufacturing in house is a hell of a lot easier.
  This is more akin to Google Maps vs Apple Maps. They are reliant upon licensing software from a competitor for a major feature. While they've almost certainly got a long-term contract in place that lets them use the technology on their own terms, at some point that contract will expire, and they'll be beholden to whatever new contract terms are offered. With Maps, the new terms were unacceptable, the timing was awful and they were underprepared to switch. You'd better believe bringing voice recognition in house in plenty of time for switching over is a priority.
  
  --
  Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
2. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by KingOfBLASH · 2014-10-03 00:15 · Score: 1
  
  Except voice recognition is difficult. Really, really, really difficult.
  I have no doubt they would like to bring such technology in house. But after the Apple Maps fiasco, I'm not sure they'd risk a switch.
  Then again, Siri already sucks. It can't get much worse.
3. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by jellomizer · 2014-10-03 01:14 · Score: 2
  
  Apple seems to have a good track record of working well with its most bitter competitors.
  Apple and Microsoft, Apple and IBM, Apple and Samsung, Apple and Google...
  Apple seems to compete against individual products not against the companies on the whole.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
4. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:32 · Score: 0
  
  The chip division? .....no.
5. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by AmiMoJo · 2014-10-03 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  I'm surprised they have not ditched Nuance already. Siri hasn't been getting the development it needs to keep up with the competition like Cortana and Google Now.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
6. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by unimacs · 2014-10-03 02:39 · Score: 2
  
  I'm not sure it's wise bring Siri development in house but FWIW Apple's Maps has worked really well for a couple of years now.
7. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by technomom · 2014-10-03 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  Apple really only ever competed against IBM's PC division, which was never terribly profitable to IBM anyway. They cooperated quite a bit with technology (PowerPC) and of course today with software and services.
8. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by Uberbah · 2014-10-03 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  But after the Apple Maps fiasco
  You mean the greatest Hatorade orgy until Bendghazi? All navigation services have errors, but you didn't see people crying at Google.
9. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by Reverberant · 2014-10-03 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  True, but Apple has also been working on voice recognition for a long time. Remember "My voice is my password" from Mac OS 8?
10. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by UnknowingFool · 2014-10-03 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, they'll probably look for alternatives (the same way they are looking for an alternative to the Samsung chip fabrication).
  I thought they already signed on with TSMC for this. Yes some could look at it as Apple looking to smite Samsung but also remember that TSMC currently is ahead of Samsung when it comes to feature size. TSMC will be producing 16nm chips in 2015 and 10mn after that while Samsung has only recently made 20nm ones. Only Intel is ahead of them but Intel is not yet producing ARM chips in this size. They seem to be reserving these fabs for their own x86 chips.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
11. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by tlhIngan · 2014-10-03 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  Apple seems to have a good track record of working well with its most bitter competitors.
  Apple and Microsoft, Apple and IBM, Apple and Samsung, Apple and Google...
  Apple seems to compete against individual products not against the companies on the whole.
  Or more correctly, big companies form very complex relationships with other companies.
  Apple. Google. Samsung. Microsoft. They all have relationships with each other, very complex ones. One is a customer of another. Or vice-versa. One competes against another. One supports another. And so on.
  Take Apple and Google. You'd think they're competing in the smartphone arena? Yes and no. Yes, Google produces Android which competes with iOS. But Google also pays Apple a significant chunk of money to make sure it's the default on iOS. (And probably partially to ensure "competition" - I mean, why does Apple bother with iAds given you're better off using AdMob for advertising? Google must be supporting iAds in some form given how Google's AdMob purchase was allowed purely because of iAds (which happened to only have been launched a few months before)).
  Or Apple and Samsung. If Apple cut off all component buys from Samsung, it'll have ripple effects through the entire industry. Samsung has fabs built just to handle Apple's demand for flash memory and CPUs - which if they go idle means billions of dollars. (Remember, TSMC? Apple's basically monopolizing their new fabs).
  Samsung's purchase of Nuance just adds more complexity to the Apple-Samsung relationship. And no doubt both will figure out a way to sail through it.
12. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by hondo77 · 2014-10-03 05:13 · Score: 1
  
  Siri is "competing" with Cortana the same way the steering wheel in a Porsche is competing with the steering wheel in a Kia.
  
  --
  I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
13. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by Anubis+IV · 2014-10-03 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  Apple will continue licensing siri technology. Yes, they'll probably look for alternatives (the same way they are looking for an alternative to the Samsung chip fabrication).
  
  I would be amazed if they weren't already working on this.
  They are. Rumors have been circulating for months that Apple has been busy poaching the top talent from Nuance (everyone from VPs to postdoc researchers) to form their own in-house voice recognition group. The efforts apparently started way back last year, in fact.
14. Re:Samsung Already works with Apple, what changes? by gmhowell · 2014-10-03 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  Welcome to slashclickbaitdot, courtesy of Dice.
  
  --
  Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Do people actually use Siri? by Rik+Sweeney · 2014-10-02 23:14 · Score: 1

I'm genuinely curious here, do any Slashdotters use Siri on a regular (let's say daily) basis? What do you use it for?
I've always thought this kind of tech to be more of a gimmick, something to show your mates every now and again.

--
Summation 2
1. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by dave1791 · 2014-10-02 23:26 · Score: 2
  
  Setting egg timers and alarms. For that use case, I can skip over a lot of menu taps. For just about anything else, its useless.
2. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by mlk · 2014-10-02 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  I use Google Now fairly regularly. Mostly to ask my phone to set an alarm.
  
  --
  Wow, I should not post when knackered.
3. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:08 · Score: 0
  
  I've been hoping every Fall that they would announce a Siri API so that developers could integrate their apps into Siri. Unfortunately, the best they could do was add sports trivia.
4. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by koan · 2014-10-03 00:09 · Score: 1
  
  I switched to Google Now.
  
  --
  "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
5. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Dr.+Evil · 2014-10-03 00:24 · Score: 1
  
  I can take notes with it, read (and carefully send) texts and call people while stuck in bumper to bumper traffic.
  It's not perfect, but better than nothing.
6. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by holmstar · 2014-10-03 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  Now that it has "Hey Siri", I use it pretty much whenever I need directions somewhere in my car. Works pretty awesome for that.
7. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Dr.+Evil · 2014-10-03 00:34 · Score: 1
  
  Oh and it's actually amazing at adding columns of numbers. No need to take your eyes off the paper. E.g., "What's 34+52+1324+53+6+23+11+43..."?
  For smaller calculations, it's ridiculous.
8. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:59 · Score: 0
  
  Car taxes? The fuck dystopian country do you live in?
9. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:33 · Score: 0
  
  Or did you somehow not pay them upfront when you bought the car?
10. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:40 · Score: 0
  
  Probably a state like CT, which considers them "property" for tax purposes.
  http://www.ct.gov/dmv/cwp/view.asp?a=814&q=245268
  Motor Vehicles are subject to a local property tax under Connecticut state law. This applies whether or not the vehicle is registered. The local property tax is computed and issued by your local tax collector.
11. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by schlachter · 2014-10-03 02:39 · Score: 2
  
  I use it recursively.
  "Remind me to set a reminder in an hour"
  It's never ending fun.
  
  --
  My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
12. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Lord_Jeremy · 2014-10-03 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  I use it frequently when I'm driving. My car has built-in Bluetooth handsfree phone support so I can get my messages read, make calls, check my schedule or get directions while driving. Since I usually have my phone plugged into power in the car I can use "Hey Siri" to activate it.
13. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by technomom · 2014-10-03 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  Love Google Now on my Android devices and laptop, especially the Google Everywhere thing where I don't even have to touch the device. With my husband's MotoX, it can even be unplugged with screen off. The utility is quite amazing. But using Google Now on iOS kinda sucks because you have to get to the app to begin with, which kind of defeats the purpose. I wish Apple would let you change the voice rec engine from Siri to Google Now. I would probably consider replacing my Android stuff with iOS devices if I could do that.
14. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 03:07 · Score: 0
  
  Apple made certain it would be reduced in functionality.
15. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 03:12 · Score: 0
  
  Try Google Now on the Nexus 7, if you own one you can also check a box that allows them to store your voice request and it gets better and better.
  I can have a mouth full of food in a noisy restaurant and it still works.
  You can leave it on, lay it on the table and just say "ok Google" to use it.
  Great full when I was studying, use a bluetooth headset if you don't want to bother anyone (not to mention it works even better than)
  You can also enable it in the chrome browser, works quite well.
16. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by mythosaz · 2014-10-03 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  I use Google Now for the same sort of things.
  "OK Google - Remind me to pick up light bulbs when I get to Home Depot." "OK Google - Wake me up in an hour."
  Wake me up in an hour is probably a bit lazy (for a couple of reasons), but the reminder to get light bulbs at Home Depot is pretty awesome. More than once I've gone "oh yeah, that!" when I've wandered into a store.
  When I'm in a quiet environment, I also do a lot of "OK Google - Wikipedia $semi_famous_actress" to figure out who some guest star on a TV show is. It's shockingly good at getting the sort of things you'd see in a Google search right - more so than conversational speech.
17. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by mythosaz · 2014-10-03 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  I hadn't realized this was an option in Now. Thanks for the tip.
  http://www.cnet.com/how-to/qui...
18. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by gpalyu · 2014-10-03 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  -Setting calendar appointments and reminders. -Calling people "hey siri call Rachel" -Setting alarms -Checking the weather "hey siri what's the weather today?" -Sports scores -Hands free responding to texts She works awesome for all of that.
19. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by ToasterMonkey · 2014-10-04 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  Car taxes? The fuck dystopian country do you live in?
  I know counties in Virginia do it
  http://www.pwcgov.org/governme...
  http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/d...
  Apparently the state started doing it recently
  https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/v...
  Maine has done it as long as I remember, and your town gets the money.
  http://www.maine.gov/revenue/p...
  I felt these were nice places to live...
20. Re:Do people actually use Siri? by ToasterMonkey · 2014-10-04 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  I mainly use it for reminders...
  "Remind me to clean my AC filter in 2 weeks"
  "Remind me to pay my car taxes on October 25th"
  "Remind me to do the laundry when I get home"
  Stuff like that and it works great. I don't really use it for texting or notes since it makes too many mistakes but I think that's more of my problem. I feel weird talking to a computer so I talk weird and not loud enough.
  Directions while driving, or just for an ETA, you can say "ETA to work" if it has your work address.
  Sending a quick text while driving "Be there 20 minutes late" "send it" is better than actually texting, or calling - if you don't have hands free.
  I've used it to do some quick math while I was driving, milage maybe? It's all stuff you can do with a little tapping, you just need to get over the notion that you're asking someone to do these dumb/lazy things for you. Even for stuff you would be ok asking someone in the passenger seat to do like directions, Siri is still faster...
Tech Companies have become warring fiefdoms by cardpuncher · 2014-10-02 23:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

Actually, nothing has changed.
The BUNCH vs IBM, Amdahl vs IBM, LANManager vs Netware, Word vs WordPerfect, Excel vs Lotus 1-2-3... The first big anti-trust case in IT was against IBM in 1969.
It may be seem different to anyone who arrived on the scene at a point in time when tech took its first Internet turn and there was enough virtual turf in cyberspace for everyone to have a piece of the action. However, most of those claims are now staked, so this is merely a return to business as usual.
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2014-10-02 23:25 · Score: 3, Informative

Comment removed based on user account deletion
There may be other complexities... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 23:34 · Score: 0

Nuance probably has US military / intelligence contracts that could complicate their acquisition by a foreign-owned corporation like Samsung. All those phone calls that are intercepted don't just transcribe themselves. How do you think they are screened and searched?
1. Re:There may be other complexities... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:10 · Score: 0
  
  oompa loompas
Can we please lose the term 'merger'? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-02 23:36 · Score: 0

There are no mergers, only acquisitions. The term 'merger' is only used to somehow soften the usual picture of decimation of the acquired company. Let's toss it. Please.
Siri! What does Betteridge say about this? by OzPeter · 2014-10-02 23:51 · Score: 1

Seriously, do you really think that Apple would allow one of its flagship technologies to be compromised by another company?

--
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
1. Re:Siri! What does Betteridge say about this? by koan · 2014-10-03 00:08 · Score: 1
  
  LOL, are you serious?
  
  --
  "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
2. Re:Siri! What does Betteridge say about this? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:42 · Score: 0
  
  So like much of Apple, their "flagship technology" was purchased?
3. Re:Siri! What does Betteridge say about this? by pauljlucas · 2014-10-03 02:15 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Seriously, do you really think that Apple would allow one of its flagship technologies to be compromised by another company?
  
  Like Google did with Maps? Like Motorola did with the PowerPC? Like Microsoft did with Internet Explorer? Nah, Apple would never let things like that happen.
  
  --
  If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
Re:Irrevocable License by BasilBrush · 2014-10-03 00:04 · Score: 1

It'll be a license for a limited number of years. In this hypothetical situation of Samsung buying Nuance, they would simply put impossible terms upon Apple renewing the contract. At which point Apple would withdraw and get another solution, with perhaps a year available to do so. Nuance isn't the only speech recognition company in the world. This is what happened with Google Maps.
Of course it could leave Apple with a temporarily worse solution, just as happened with maps.
Stupid headline. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:05 · Score: 1

Apple doesn't OWN this tech. There's nothing to "lose." They've NEVER owned it.
They have a license to this tech. Almost certainly a perpetual license that can't be cancelled without cause (and "we don't like you" does not constitute cause). That's all they need. They don't NEED to own the patents or the IP to the code if they have a sufficient license to USE them. If they did, they would have BOUGHT NUANCE THEMSELVES. It's not like they couldn't afford it.
There is approximately ZERO percent chance that this would affect Apple in the slightest. At very worst, they might not get a license to any NEW tech built on top of the tech they already own.
This is why Apple buys courts by gelfling · 2014-10-03 00:07 · Score: 1

So they can send a squadron of attorneys to sue Samsung.
Litigation over Innovation
Say what? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:07 · Score: 1

Siri was bought from SRI international and prior to purchase was a standalone application. I've met some of the folks that worked on it and this is the first I've heard of Dragon being involved at all...
1. Re:Say what? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's the difference between siri itself (as in the tech that works out what you mean, searches for it/does it, and presents the results), and the technology siri uses to know what you're saying (i.e. voice recognition).
2. Re:Say what? by SilenceBE · 2014-10-03 01:36 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  They only use the RealSpeak TTS (text to speech) engine... . This is really a non story because they can easily switch to another TTS vendor. The only possible impact is that siri would sound different... .
  
  Disclaimer: I'm a developer that worked for Lernout and Hauspie that originally developed the ASR/TTS engine that have been sold to Scansoft/Nuance.
  
  PS: Good luck for Samsung because when we bought certain American companies that also did Pentagon contract work, some Americans weren't that happy about it. I'm even personally convinced that they had some hands in the rapid downfall of Lernout and Hauspie.
Google Now just works... by koan · 2014-10-03 00:07 · Score: 1, Interesting

SIRI does not work well, on the other Google Now works every time even in a noisy coffee shop.

--
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
1. Re:Google Now just works... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:26 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't know they served Kool Aid in the coffee shop.
2. Re:Google Now just works... by PRMan · 2014-10-03 00:47 · Score: 2
  
  This is nonsense. Google Now is so useless that it never understands me unless I am in absolute silence. It's much quicker to just hit Chrome and type what I want with Swype.
  
  --
  Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
3. Re:Google Now just works... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:43 · Score: 0
  
  Take the cock out of your mouth, works flawlessly for me.
4. Re:Google Now just works... by koan · 2014-10-03 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  Unlike the Flavor Aid served at the Apple store?
  
  --
  "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
5. Re:Google Now just works... by koan · 2014-10-03 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  You may want to consider which device you use it on, on my Nexus 7 2nd gen tablet it is phenomenal, on my GF's piece of shit iPhone it is "so so" due to the crap microphone I'm sure or some Apple shenanigans to thwart Google.
  
  --
  "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Screaming "innovate more" is not a solution by sjbe · 2014-10-03 00:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

Instead of innovation the tech companies are more interested in dog fights, and the one thing that I need to know is this --- Why are they doing all these?
Because they have to. It has nothing to do with their desire (or lack thereof) to innovate. Once you are an established player part of remaining a successful company is competitive strategy. Some products simply cannot be rapidly innovated. Coca-Cola isn't going to come up with some new miracle drink. Apple is not likely to reinvent the personal computer. Those are mature businesses and they have to be tended to and protected. The notion that every problem can be solved and every business can be run if we are just more innovative is incredibly naive. Even if you do have some incredibly innovative new product it is going to be copied within days and you will be out of business if you cannot protect that new product. To do otherwise is irresponsible and a one way ticket to bankruptcy.
For Apple or Samsung or Microsoft to grow at even a modest 5-8% rate they would have to create as much new business as the entire revenue of EBay *every year*. You think it is easy to create a new company the size of eBay each any every year? When you become big enough there simply are not that many new lines of business that are big enough to really move the needle. It is unbelievably difficult

Please pay a visit to India or Russia or China, if you have the chance. Over there they still have a lot of people devoting their lives on innovation, because to them, it is the right thing to do
I have been to China and India. There is no religion of innovation over there any more than there is lack of it here in the US. There are a bunch of people who are working hard to find economic opportunities, just like here. A lot of the effort over there is largely aimed at copying industry from other parts of the world with the advantage of cheaper Chinese labor rates. Sure there are a few companies doing some pretty nifty new stuff, but their economy is in no way centered around innovation. Most of it is engaged in contract manufacturing for export. They don't design the products, the just make or copy them. Nothing (generally) wrong with that but China is not driving product innovation in any big way yet. One day maybe but not today.
samsung stocks by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:31 · Score: 0

truth of the matter is that we're never going to ever let samsung die because it's too tied into everything in south korea. It's also relatively competent as far as supercompanies go. Apple should face the reality that they can't own the world because it would be too destructive for all. Make your own Nuance Apple, you can afford it.
Dictation takes practice by sjbe · 2014-10-03 00:39 · Score: 1

I don't really use it for texting or notes since it makes too many mistakes but I think that's more of my problem. I feel weird talking to a computer so I talk weird and not loud enough.
Not unusual. Dictating is a learned skill and not that many people are used to doing it. I'm not particularly good at it either.
Samsung has worked with Nuance forever by RubberDogBone · 2014-10-03 00:41 · Score: 3, Informative

An ancient Samsung flip-phone I had, gosh, 10 years ago maybe, had a sort of rudimentary voice command operation powered by Nuance. Between that and other similar things Samsung has done, they were working with Nuance long before SRI and Siri came along.
Rather than being something to damage Apple, I would say the current idea of buying them probably has more to do with "OK Google" now being mandated on devices, which in turn cuts Samsung and Nuance out of the game. I am not sure what buying Nuance is supposed to do but it has to be a defense of some sort.

--
Sig for hire.
1. Re:Samsung has worked with Nuance forever by StormReaver · 2014-10-03 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  I am not sure what buying Nuance is supposed to do but it has to be a defense of some sort.
  Buy Nuance, raise licensing fees charge to Apple for Siri, make iCrap more expensive, make back money lost in court, make Apple pay for its own court victories.
  It's poetry.
meh by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 00:57 · Score: 0

Let's hope so. Regardless, Samsung - while better than Apple - won't fare any better with it.
Apple hates being dependent on other companies.... by Karlt1 · 2014-10-03 01:07 · Score: 1

History shows that Apple likes to own any tech they depend on....
http://9to5mac.com/2014/06/30/...
Re:Irrevocable License by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 01:08 · Score: 0

If it's only the voice recognition tech that nuance owns I reckon apple will be fine. The important bit of siri is the back end stuff that it actually uses to look up/generate/present results.
Meh. Patents. by DarthVain · 2014-10-03 02:11 · Score: 1

This is not a big deal. Even if it does happen, there is likely a preexisting licence, or they will just licence the tech from Samsung. Both devices licence each other Apple/Samsung, along with a host of other companies that have various patents on technology. Or what will happen is the Apple will just continue to use it, refuse to pay the licencing fees as Samsung has set them too high per device, then they will eventually go to court over the whole thing 5 years later, and a army of lawyers will get rich trying to figure it out. The later has already happened on one occasion.
Re:Irrevocable License by quetwo · 2014-10-03 02:33 · Score: 1

You would be surprised at how few speech recognition companies are left in the industry. Nuance was on a buying spree a few years ago and there really are almost no mature companies left. There are a few smaller ones, but their software really isn't any good. Plus, they own almost all the patents, so others are quickly purchased or squashed...
I can see it by roc97007 · 2014-10-03 05:03 · Score: 1

"Siri, direct me to the nearest Apple store."
"Oh, you don't want to go there. Let me direct you to a place where you can buy a nice Samsung Galaxy Note Edge."

--
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I'm worried about their other stuff by Voyager529 · 2014-10-03 06:27 · Score: 1

Nuance ate Scansoft and several other companies. Nuance now owns Paperport, Dragon NaturallySpeaking, and Swype. Will Samsung ditch the desktop products if this goes through?
1. Re:I'm worried about their other stuff by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-03 07:49 · Score: 0
  
  Nuance ate Scansoft and several other companies.
  Other way around. Scansoft ate Nuance and several other companies. They decided to wear Nuance's skin as a coat.
This will fail by jafac · 2014-10-03 06:27 · Score: 1

Even if they get Nuance, and put it on their devices to replace S-Voice; I predict it will be completely useless, because they're still going to wrap it with their craptacular TouchWiz interface.
They will attempt to force-tie it in to other craptacular Samsung apps, and it will die because NOBODY LIKES VENDOR LOCK-IN, STUPID MOTHERFUCKERS!

--

These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Samsung still copying apple? by thetoadwarrior · 2014-10-03 07:01 · Score: 1

Try doing something original samdung
DARPA role by Anonymous Coward · 2014-10-04 04:58 · Score: 0

Siri was brought to Apple by Tom Gruber as a previously DARPA-funded project. DARPA may have been a beneficiary of the sale but I'm surprised they allowed such resale possibility in the deal.
Hopefully there will be improvement by PJ6 · 2014-10-04 11:11 · Score: 1

because I have nothing good to say about s-voice.