it really does seem like they’re just buying stuff up in the hopes that something accidentally turns into a profit to cover their previous investments/promises. Kind of a ponzi of acquisitions
I'm just discovering Glass Imaging (a bit difficult as their website seems overloaded), but it seems they are in software solutions, not a hardware manufacturer or designer.
Both Apple and Google have dropped the ball enough with the state of recent releases that some iPhone-equivalent-disruption product from the AI industry is becoming conceivable, though I would be surprised if it turns out not to be running Android in some form.
Putting a lot of effort into pushing complexity into software to reduce manufacturing complexity is precisely the sort of thing you worry about when you're getting serious about building consumer products.
> AI cameras won’t be accepted with open arms like the iPhone was 20 years ago. Might as well buy an Android if it’s an Android.
> For the mass market, the AI industry has a trust problem.
Oh how far we've fallen! Everyone should invite an OpenAI into their homes to watch and hear their most intimate moments. Just think of the value! Next time someone fights with their spouse, the machine can email a summary with advice the next day! Mass bliss will surely follow!
> though I would be surprised if it turns out not to be running Android in some form.
Just yesterday I saw a post I cant recall if on here or reddit, someone coded an entire OS with Claude Code, I would not be surprised if they invest AI compute at building an OS themselves, though I'd never buy a phone from these companies.
Android has a huge amount of battle tested stuff for running things like media codecs and GPUs connected to devices that are not rebooted for months on end by normal people. (The iPhone wasn't an entirely new OS either for a good reason).
The whole vibe coding an OS might become a thing in the next few years, but you still have to QA and test it, and there simply hasn't actually been enough time for that.
Hardware is hardware. At some point you have to run and test it on the real thing, and it always misbehaves in some previously undiscovered way.
A lot of software people live under the illusion that hardware bugs don't happen, but they're ubiquitous and it's the job of firmware and OS people to reduce their impact.
The issue is getting developers to create apps for a new OS nobody uses (yet). And nobody will use it if they can't have their banking app and uber on it
This becomes even tougher if they go the Apple route and don't allow other phone manufacturers to use their OS. Alternatively, if they go down the Windows Phone route, we saw how that played out considering that Google _pays_ manufacturers to use Android
Making OS is very hard, but getting necessary adoption is likely even harder
I would be surprised if any AI forward OS is based around applications developed by other people. I imagine the OS will create the software you need. Thing's like banking apps are more difficult, but I imagine OpenAI could sort that out behind the scenes.
The idea of managing a consumer app API for which every client is auto-vibecoded to the user's preference sounds...fun.
User: Hello Uber support? Yes, the app shows my driver is in the ocean off the west coast of Africa? And his ETA is -2147483648 minutes?
Uber: Your app, your problem.
User: Hello phonebrain, can you fix my Uber app?
Phonebrain: You're absolutely right, I must have misunderstood the API docs. Squiggling... ... Shuffling ...
Phonebrain: Error, you've hit your usage limit. Please wait 12 hours, or switch to pay-as-you-go app development mode. I cannot estimate how much it will cost to fix your Uber app.
And if it came to that, and that's how this OS worked, we'd see open APIs disappear real quick from all the popular services because of the support nightmare, and, services like Uber and others are going to want to maintain exclusivity with their first party app the moment vibe coding becomes that viable. APIs will get locked down, and we'll all be worse off for it.
If an "AI Phone" looks to be an existential threat to third party app devs and services, except everyone to do everything they can kill said AI Phone to protect their own products.
Honestly this might be less of a problem these days. If the model is that you build a good dev API and everyone points their agent at the software they need, then you don’t need the huge corporate investment in a full ecosystem.
To be clear I don’t think we are fully ready for this to work. But directionally the trend looks significant.
On the other hand, I'm perfectly fine with a high quality phone OS that has only stock apps out of the box and high quality hardware, good camera, good battery life, reasonable camera app, drastically more curated app store for professional apps, I'd be okay with such a competitor, no more ad spam apps.
I don't think I've seen a phone take over enterprise the way that the Blackberry once dominated, now its either iPhone or Android. You could argue that your executives are safer on a more locked down system. You'd 100% want to get everyone who makes an MFA app or service on your device on the other hand.
It's a bit of a different world today then when BlackBerry dominated.
RIM essentially invented MDM which is what allowed it to take off in the enterprise, via BlackBerry Enterprise Server. Android and iOS didn't fully unseat them in the enterprise until third party MDMs were up to par and lock down the consumer devices just as effectively.
So whatever new phone/OS that wants to take a stab at the enterprise, out of the gate, must support MDM profiles from all the major ones at least (InTune, ManageEngine, MaaS360, etc.). Then, as you said, all the MFA apps, at least should have Slack/Teams, office apps, etc.
Not that it can't be done, but the cost of entry is much higher today if anyone wants to overcome the switching costs.
The cost of entry is higher, but everyone has more money though, in this analogy. AI can vibe code all that out if someone seriously wanted to compete.
Not only that, people have seriously memory holed the state the original iPhone launched in.
No App Store, only web apps, not even 3G, only Yahoo push mail, and tied to AT&T - who were loathed, because in many places they just sucked. And it succeeded anyway.
It was when Exchange push support came in the first major OS upgrade that corporate adoption exploded.
Except that emulation/VM and the web makes it viable. What do you want to do with the thing? Banking and Uber are two specific, mass-market adoption criteria, but there's a reason Windows is still around and it's not because of those two things. The issue is business and money and who's paying for things in the age of AI? I'll use a new OS for fun, for free, in my spare time, but if I have to pay money instead of time, then I'm going to have to think about it. Either way though, the AI lab's gonna get my money in order to do stuff with it.
I, as someone who would rather leave the industry than become a manager of either people or autonomous agents, or worse just a meat-based relay, am truly obsolete.
porting an OS to a known platform which has been done a tonne of times before is very different to trying to create a power efficient, secure and fast OS on hardware that is not yet locked down, let alone released.
Moreover the interaction between firmware and the OS is a massive headache to overcome, especially if you are dealing with battery powered devices.
I wonder if it might be some totally clean sheet of paper OS design but also capable of running Android applications in an emulation/virtualization layer. I think they know that any mass market handheld smartphone consumer device isn't going to succeed (windows phone) unless people can easily install all available apps from either the google play store or apple app store.
But honestly, why do that when there's already a good, open-source(ish), well-designed, highly secure operating system platform that already runs Android apps? Any new clean sheet OS is either going to be worse than Android on one or more of these dimensions, or it will be absurdly expensive to vibe code.
The problem is that although what most people use on a daily basis is small nearly everyone uses something unusual app for _something_. I think it would be quite hard to find a market large enough that didn’t include such people.
There is a solution sitting there, which is running Android and having the AI run it behind the scenes I guess, but is suspect that would end up looking a lot like we have now.
This is the fundamental problem with all of these hypothetical new devices. If you assume you can come up with some new UI or innovative interaction model, maybe it’s purely voice or whatever else, then you have to ask if this could just run on a phone.
Modern smartphones won’t be supplanted by tech that could just run on a phone. That doesn’t make any sense. For any new tech to take off and replace phones, it has to provide something that isn’t simply additive to the phone. Otherwise, it just makes more sense to build it into the existing phone.
“A phone, but it has AI and no apps” isn’t even additive. It’s purely a loss of functionality.
You want a phone that "does a few things very well" and then you list "personal agent" and "your interface with the world". This would encompass everything anyone does with a phone, except maybe interacting with creative media (video games, ebooks). That's the exact opposite of "a few things". I think you're confusing actual functionality with AI marketing phrases.
OpenAI want to make smart glasses, but can't do that yet because its not possible.
So they are almost certianly making an alexa type thing with cameras. So they can build a device capable of recording the entire context of a household.
So they want to put their spying AI directly into the camera workflow, where you can't see it and can't turn it off. They will have infinite training data and also sell access to the alphabet agencies. The next level of total surveillance.
they had a really cool optical approach that I kind of felt immediately was doomed in the consumer market but would likely find a cool, valuable niche. The unique distortion patterns and front element I felt probably ruled out cinema but beyond that I had no idea. looks like they pivoted at some point but their expertise in lens accommodation does seem like it could be helpful.
67 comments
[ 0.22 ms ] story [ 21.3 ms ] threadI'm sick of the Android/iOS duopoly. Let them cook. The market is so ripe for disruption.
OpenAI is as bad as the rest. Anthropic likely is too but they seem a hair better. Still bad though.
Probably they are buying the staff, not the technology.
Hardware is the next thing which is far more valuable IP and with its staff.
Putting a lot of effort into pushing complexity into software to reduce manufacturing complexity is precisely the sort of thing you worry about when you're getting serious about building consumer products.
For the mass market, the AI industry has a trust problem.
> For the mass market, the AI industry has a trust problem.
Oh how far we've fallen! Everyone should invite an OpenAI into their homes to watch and hear their most intimate moments. Just think of the value! Next time someone fights with their spouse, the machine can email a summary with advice the next day! Mass bliss will surely follow!
Just yesterday I saw a post I cant recall if on here or reddit, someone coded an entire OS with Claude Code, I would not be surprised if they invest AI compute at building an OS themselves, though I'd never buy a phone from these companies.
The person got it running on bare hardware.
Found it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1wfpydl/i_asked_c...
The whole vibe coding an OS might become a thing in the next few years, but you still have to QA and test it, and there simply hasn't actually been enough time for that.
A lot of software people live under the illusion that hardware bugs don't happen, but they're ubiquitous and it's the job of firmware and OS people to reduce their impact.
This becomes even tougher if they go the Apple route and don't allow other phone manufacturers to use their OS. Alternatively, if they go down the Windows Phone route, we saw how that played out considering that Google _pays_ manufacturers to use Android
Making OS is very hard, but getting necessary adoption is likely even harder
User: Hello Uber support? Yes, the app shows my driver is in the ocean off the west coast of Africa? And his ETA is -2147483648 minutes?
Uber: Your app, your problem.
User: Hello phonebrain, can you fix my Uber app?
Phonebrain: You're absolutely right, I must have misunderstood the API docs. Squiggling... ... Shuffling ...
Phonebrain: Error, you've hit your usage limit. Please wait 12 hours, or switch to pay-as-you-go app development mode. I cannot estimate how much it will cost to fix your Uber app.
If an "AI Phone" looks to be an existential threat to third party app devs and services, except everyone to do everything they can kill said AI Phone to protect their own products.
To be clear I don’t think we are fully ready for this to work. But directionally the trend looks significant.
I don't think I've seen a phone take over enterprise the way that the Blackberry once dominated, now its either iPhone or Android. You could argue that your executives are safer on a more locked down system. You'd 100% want to get everyone who makes an MFA app or service on your device on the other hand.
RIM essentially invented MDM which is what allowed it to take off in the enterprise, via BlackBerry Enterprise Server. Android and iOS didn't fully unseat them in the enterprise until third party MDMs were up to par and lock down the consumer devices just as effectively.
So whatever new phone/OS that wants to take a stab at the enterprise, out of the gate, must support MDM profiles from all the major ones at least (InTune, ManageEngine, MaaS360, etc.). Then, as you said, all the MFA apps, at least should have Slack/Teams, office apps, etc.
Not that it can't be done, but the cost of entry is much higher today if anyone wants to overcome the switching costs.
No App Store, only web apps, not even 3G, only Yahoo push mail, and tied to AT&T - who were loathed, because in many places they just sucked. And it succeeded anyway.
It was when Exchange push support came in the first major OS upgrade that corporate adoption exploded.
I, as someone who would rather leave the industry than become a manager of either people or autonomous agents, or worse just a meat-based relay, am truly obsolete.
Do you want fries with that?
Bread baking factories could clearly destroy civilization as we know it, create incredible economic inequality, make a permanent underclass, etc etc.
Moreover the interaction between firmware and the OS is a massive headache to overcome, especially if you are dealing with battery powered devices.
I totally get why they wanted a custom userland, built it myself for embedded devices. But IME Linux kernel is not terribly bad these days.
There is a solution sitting there, which is running Android and having the AI run it behind the scenes I guess, but is suspect that would end up looking a lot like we have now.
Modern smartphones won’t be supplanted by tech that could just run on a phone. That doesn’t make any sense. For any new tech to take off and replace phones, it has to provide something that isn’t simply additive to the phone. Otherwise, it just makes more sense to build it into the existing phone.
“A phone, but it has AI and no apps” isn’t even additive. It’s purely a loss of functionality.
So they are almost certianly making an alexa type thing with cameras. So they can build a device capable of recording the entire context of a household.
Huh? Why not?
But if the LLM isn't local, I'm not buying.
I think it's more likely it would be a radical departure from existing mobile OS.
More like an entirely generative experience. No discrete apps. The phone screen just morphs into whatever purpose you need at the time.
Will be interesting to see how the legal battle plays out as well.
they had a really cool optical approach that I kind of felt immediately was doomed in the consumer market but would likely find a cool, valuable niche. The unique distortion patterns and front element I felt probably ruled out cinema but beyond that I had no idea. looks like they pivoted at some point but their expertise in lens accommodation does seem like it could be helpful.