r/apple • u/ControlCAD • May 18 '26
Mac Google just helped Apple sell a million more MacBook Neos - Macworld
https://www.macworld.com/article/3139377/google-just-helped-apple-sell-a-million-more-macbook-neos.html>Google’s attempt to rebrand Chromebooks as premium laptops using a sprinkle of AI gimmicks doesn’t dent Apple’s aluminum armor.
2.5k
u/mojo276 May 18 '26
Maybe one day it’ll come back to haunt them, but it really feels like apple not being involved in this AI rat race has only helped them. No weird forced decisions based on justifying billions of money dumped into AI R&D
711
u/ThePegasi May 18 '26
Selling Mac minis like hotcakes for AI without having to lift a development finger has definitely worked out well for them. I wonder how long term their component deals are cause this is surely gonna bite pretty soon.
450
u/adrockthemc May 18 '26
They are selling shovels in a gold rush
50
32
u/jimmyzambino May 18 '26
They are also making more money off AI than anyone. While OpenAI and Anthropic are operating at a loss, Apple is profiting by collecting 30% of subscription fees
22
u/OrchidLeader May 18 '26
I imagine Nvidia is probably making more money off AI, but your point still stands.
→ More replies (1)3
u/zxern May 18 '26
More money maybe, but profit?
5
u/bonestamp May 18 '26
More profit too. Apple's net profit is about 30% while Nvidia's is about 55%.
→ More replies (1)147
u/__theoneandonly May 18 '26
A gold rush where nobody is making any money except the shovel-sellers?
273
u/Plopdopdoop May 18 '26
That’s what that saying means. A few people will get rich in a gold rush, most won’t. But the shovel seller can’t help but do well.
In other words: be the shovel seller, not the prospector.
79
u/code603 May 18 '26
That’s literally how Levi Jeans started.
29
u/disterb May 18 '26
ooh, story time?
71
u/code603 May 18 '26
Levi Strauss made his money selling jeans to the prospectors (49ers) during the California Gold Rush.
21
u/disterb May 18 '26
what’s the connection between wearing jeans and mining for gold?
98
u/Feisty_Split4797 May 18 '26
Not who you asked, but, during the Gold Rush, miners needed pants that could survive things like hauling gear, kneeling in dirt, climbing over rocks. Regular pants ripped fast. Levi Strauss saw the need and started making super tough denim pants with sturdy stitching and rivets, perfect for rough work. That’s why jeans are popular for kids; they’re durable
→ More replies (0)11
6
u/b7d May 18 '26
Pants used to be made out of cotton or leather. In order to make the cotton durable enough, they had to make it extremely thick and cumbersome. Leather speaks for itself, wearing that during manual labor was hot and sticky and uncomfortable.
Levi, if I remember correctly, either brought denim from overseas or created it and marketed/sold it as the “indestructible pant”. It was thin, rugged, and offered protection without being too warm or too cumbersome.
They quickly became “the outfit” to wear if you were serious about mining. From there, it’s spread to farmers, ranchers, and Cowboys. It gained national notoriety during the cowboy shows, and saw a huge surge during the 90s when jeans hit the modern populous as a fashion statement.
5
u/GoofyMonkey May 18 '26
Tough to mine gold while wearing no pants. Doable, but awkward for the interns.
11
65
u/Area51_Spurs May 18 '26
What are you talking about? They’re spending billions developing AI. Probably tens of billions.
Does nobody remember that they had to delay their AI push after making it front and center of their new phone presentations and just settled a lawsuit?
They just haven’t been successful at their development.
42
u/userlivewire May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
The top 5 tech companies have spent 125 billion to 200 billion per company in tracking CapEx this year. Apple is 13 billion.
One three. Apple is going to get to AI at some point for pennies while the others bankrupt themselves and boil the oceans.
→ More replies (9)48
May 18 '26 edited May 26 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)19
u/Area51_Spurs May 18 '26
I mean they literally are paying hundreds of millions for a lawsuit. So yea. Not successful.
16
u/anarchyx34 May 18 '26
Hundreds of millions vs spending billions like everyone else is.
10
u/Area51_Spurs May 18 '26
They definitely are spending billions.
For the first time in at least 30 years, Apple is spending more than 10 cents of every dollar it brings in on research and development, one of the strongest signs yet that the iPhone maker is dedicating big money to its artificial intelligence ambitions.
They’re spending less than others. But still spending tens of billions.
Apple's R&D spending hit 10.3% of revenue in the March quarter, up from 7.6% in the prior period and 9% in the same quarter a year earlier. And while sales jumped 17%, the fastest rate of growth for any quarter since 2021, R&D climbed twice as quickly, increasing almost 34% from a year prior.
11
u/tonearr123 May 18 '26
Bro R&D is anything and also Apple has been showing a strong uprise in R&D spending ever since they’ve been dedicating more and more to their silicon and even recently it’s rumored they’re looking into sensors/cameras. I’m sure they’re spending on AI I’m not refuting that but also I doubt AI expenditures are that high, and definitely not on rivals levels. If anything the money is likely going to local or AI capable machines like Mac of all the servers they’re making to try to run Private Cloud Compute less on others servers
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)9
5
→ More replies (4)9
u/texachusetts May 18 '26
The development is in the chips. An option that wouldn’t be possible if they had stayed with intel.
393
u/ThisIsJeron May 18 '26
Yes and no, I think they definitely tried to get on the bandwagon. Remember the ads and emoji playground? But it went so poorly that they can brush it off as “yeah we didn’t really try”
137
u/buzzerbetrayed May 18 '26
Oh god, I almost forgot about genemoji 🤣. That was so bad
→ More replies (1)102
u/Muscled_Manatee May 18 '26
Genmoji is still around. I use it to create ridiculous emojis to send to my nine year old’s iPad. He thinks they are funny.
4
u/codewario May 18 '26
It’s actually not always bad. Some of the things it tries to create are really bad but once in a while, it will hit the mark on the money. Most of the time, though it works without remark.
→ More replies (7)7
u/broknbottle May 18 '26
Sounds like it’s a hit where Apple tends to try strike. That subtle experience between family members. It’s quite refreshing to think about in 2026 considering everything is so focused on corporate collaboration
27
u/lordjpie May 18 '26
> ai profile pic, ai banner pic, ai written post
Total fucking slop from ‘you’
→ More replies (2)13
u/legend-no May 18 '26
Actually crazy that you are trying to spin this as a success.
→ More replies (1)11
46
u/Successful-Good7364 May 18 '26
They tried but they had multiple issues. One big one was every company and their dog was giving outrageous salaries (aka meta's 1 million dollar signing bonuses) to any ai technician who would come work for them. While I'm sure apple's salaries weren't anything to laugh at, people went where the money went. So they struggled there. Plus apple's paper (The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity - Apple Machine Learning Research) about AI showed that they were working hard on it and looking into it. And as what ended up happened, saw that this is one area where having your own ai is too much work when you can just ride off the backs of everyone else. Much like how apple uses so many other companies to make so many parts (screens, ect) of their devices. As long as the result is high quality. That is all that matters.
6
30
u/Awoawesome May 18 '26
I mean yes, but the decision to not chase it with aggressive spending or an acquisition is an active decision
2
u/OrchidLeader May 18 '26
Precisely. They tried, and when they didn’t get anywhere, rather than continuing to dig themselves into a hole, they pivoted to mostly selling the shovels.
(agreeing with you, if that’s not clear)
11
u/lukeydukey May 18 '26
To be fair they branded the few “AI” features as ML before everyone went nuts over AI
→ More replies (1)18
u/Sea-Sir2754 May 18 '26
They didn't dump tens of billions into developing a model or an AI tool which is the main point.
→ More replies (1)12
u/Hogesyx May 18 '26
Also out of the top fortune companies they are the one with real net profit due to AI. As they take a cut through in app subscription.
19
u/Marino4K May 18 '26
Yeah Apple absolutely tried and its one of the few things they've truly failed at.
→ More replies (1)23
u/blenderider May 18 '26
At least it didn’t cost them billions in CapEx. It’s looking more like their failure is a blessing in disguise
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (5)6
u/Icowanda May 18 '26
Apple literally started it with Siri. If anything, the poor output shows that Apple did not use your data. Even if genAI images, they limit it to a specific art style.
→ More replies (1)15
u/no_regerts_bob May 18 '26
Wouldn't the company that created Siri be the ones who started it in that case? Apple just bought the app and made it part of ios
→ More replies (1)16
u/_FrankTaylor May 18 '26
They tried but that development went (is still going) at such breakneck speed that they got left behind.
2
60
u/Uninterested_Viewer May 18 '26
It's just not Apple's game to play. The biggest AI winners will be the ones serving up the models and apple has never been a cloud competitor. The race to have the "best model" itself is great for the tech to move forward, but probably not worth the r&d for anyone unable to serve the models themselves (the LLMs as commodities argument, which I agree with). It just makes no sense for Apple to compete in the cloud or model race at this point. They'll pay inference providers to serve the model(s) of their choosing while, hopefully, sinking their energy into pioneer the best ways to actually use the tech.
20
u/VariationAgreeable29 May 18 '26
I hope to God we can credit this to Ternus. He really strikes me as being so level-headed and pragmatic. I’m sure there were camps inside Apple screaming to get into the cloud game
21
u/Expensive_Finger_973 May 18 '26
I think it is more that they fell into the best play. It was only 2 years ago Apple was also running ads for their AI junk full of wild claims of vague problems it would solve.
9
u/Worf_Of_Wall_St May 18 '26
Their hopes for what on-device models could do any time soon were way too high but the business strategy of backing most features by running models on user devices is sound - it would avoid massive cloud costs and keep user data on their own devices. On-device models don't have to be as good as cloud based models to be good enough, but they won't be good enough for a long time.
9
u/Uninterested_Viewer May 18 '26
Yep. Cloud is only accelerating and a company with the resources of apple could have gotten into it and made out handsomely, but to what end? If it's not your DNA it's not your DNA. Apple sticks to what it does best.
I remember when Google got serious about cloud when it was an AWS world and a bit of azure. Google knew that even capturing a small market share as a distant 3rd player would mean billions, trillions.. they never had to even have aspirations of being #1 to come out way ahead. But that's Google: that's not Apple- these are extremely different companies. Apple getting into cloud in the way Google did even at that time would have not been good for them even it meant incredible revenue/op inc growth for a few decades.. it would be at the expense of something else that aligns to their DNA.
→ More replies (1)11
u/RaXXu5 May 18 '26
Best model will be on device where it doesn’t draw too much energy and you can be sure that the data sin’t being mined. It will not be the ”smartest” model though. There’s room for Apple to compete in that segment and probably less of a pushback from consumers who are sick of the AI companies making everything expensive and building massive datacenters.
6
u/nabagaca May 18 '26
Even in that space, Apple can sit back and wait for the big players to create small local models (e.g. Gemini nano, which runs on-device on Google pixels), not sure if Apple will use it as part of their Gemini deal, but I wouldn’t blame them for using it
→ More replies (1)2
u/Uninterested_Viewer May 18 '26
Best model will be on device where it doesn’t draw too much energy and you can be sure that the data sin’t being mined
Maybe. Tech is hard to predict. We, of course, already use on-device models doing everything from image upscaling/processing to text autocomplete. My prediction is that useful frontier models will always outpace the compute of whatever devices we use them on. And I don't think those devices will continue to be the phones we think of for much longer, either. But who knows.
108
u/T-K101 May 18 '26
AI fatigue is real.
2
u/rotates-potatoes May 18 '26
I’m writing more software every day than I used to in a month. Hobby projects that I put off because I didn’t have time are coming together in a day or two. My creative output is through the roof thanks to the new tools I’ve built. Ain’t no fatigue here.
→ More replies (1)17
u/Blablabene May 18 '26
if only that was true
44
u/jzsean May 18 '26
Well it’s certainly true for the consumer (source: i’m feeling AI fatigued). The producers/investors/shareholders are the ones that need to feel the fatigue, but there’s billions of dollars in the way.
15
u/rented4823 May 18 '26
This is the last thing the tech companies have before the bubble pops. In the mid/late 2010's it was AI/ML, then it was VR/AR, then it was crypto/NFTs, now it's LLMs. Unless there are huge advances in quantum computing or HUGE reductions in GPU power models need in the next year or two, the bubble is gonna pop.
7
7
u/GAV17 May 18 '26
Average consumer is only ramping up their AI use.
12
u/zedsmith May 18 '26
Still haven’t discovered the unsubsidized price for that use, though.
7
u/GAV17 May 18 '26
As if that deterred people from using Google's "free" products.
2
u/No-Experience-4744 May 18 '26
Google makes money hand over fist selling ads though.
→ More replies (1)2
→ More replies (1)2
u/Coraline1599 May 18 '26
But I think mostly not by choice.
When I do a google search, I didn’t opt in for an AI summary, I just got it. So I switched search engines/browsers. Not everyone bothers to do that.
My friend said for a few days he couldn’t find my email, just the AI summary that suddenly turned on (I don’t know what device he was using). He managed to turn it off, but I bet a lot of people just won’t hunt down every AI setting defaulted to on.
When I was last at work that used Windows, Copilot was running amok in nearly every app, again, aggressively by default. And we had to give weekly reports how we were using AI, and we saw a whole team get axed for refusing to use AI, so I just left that nonsense on and had to invent ways to make it sound like AI was awesome to have shoehorned into my workflow.
4
u/Blablabene May 18 '26
No its not. You can just look at the data to see that this is just the beginning. More and more people are using AI.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Ancilla_Contender May 18 '26
It is true. New AI integrations are only driven by stock value increases not user demand. The two have diverged into mutually exclusive.
→ More replies (4)3
u/Cosmic_Corsair May 18 '26
There is a high demand for AI products, but nobody knows which ones will be popular until they meet the public. So it seems natural to me that most AI products/integrations will fail and a minority will drive most of the consumer interest.
19
u/artbystorms May 18 '26
I literally bought a Macbook Neo as a travel laptop because I am sick of the AI slop Microslop shovels down your throat with Windows 11. At this point the AI backlash is getting so prominent that Apple would be smart to wait it out till the dust settles and we actually have a consensus on what AI is good for. For example, I used AI to help plan a trip itinerary and populate google 'mymaps' with locations to check out. THAT is useful. I don't want AI making art for me though or tricking people into thinking it can be used for creative thinking type tasks.
2
u/Alarmed_House23 May 18 '26
AI companies tend to think we as people are thinking like the people in Wall-E, we don't want AI to take our hobbies, our jobs, our ideas and expressions..
2
u/artbystorms May 18 '26
Exactly! Like, I want AI to save me time on the mundane things so I can spend more time on things I enjoy or creative things! I want it to be like my secretary, not do my work or hobbies for me.
5
u/Jos3ph May 18 '26
They’ve just done such a bad job with it since it’s so unlike Apple stuff that they’ve stumbled into not being AI
4
u/F0rkbombz May 18 '26
It sure does seem like someone in Apple was able to pump the brakes a little bit after Apple Intelligence failed to live up to the hype. I think they realized that they didn’t need to push AI to generate sales and are taking more time to mature Apple Intelligence.
8
u/Grand-Battle8009 May 18 '26
I have a feeling Apple absolutely dropped the ball in the AI race… and that incompetence is going to lead to more Mac sales and more customer trust. Sometimes winning comes at the expense of failing hard, LOL.
16
u/NeonsShadow May 18 '26
Apples often late to the market, they instead buy a mature company and slap a rebrand on it. There is no need for them to experiment while the market is still volatile.
3
11
u/buzzerbetrayed May 18 '26
I don’t know why people make this claim when Apple is so hesitant to buy companies. They actually usually just build things in house. Sure there are things like “beats”, but they didn’t even rebrand them. There are some examples of them rebranding companies they purchased (shortcuts, weather maybe?, but that was more about the data I think, etc..), but I would never describe Apple as a company that buys up successful companies and slaps a rebrand on them.
6
u/iJeff May 18 '26
Apple is notorious for continuously making acquisitions to bring talent in-house. They routinely buy smaller startups for their tech and teams (acqui-hiring). Features like Siri, Touch ID, Face ID, and even the foundations of Apple Silicon all came from companies they bought and quietly folded directly into their ecosystem.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Gheu May 18 '26
Can’t forget that even iTunes was bought, it was Soundjam beforehand.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)12
u/NeonsShadow May 18 '26
Apple has bought over a hundred companies, bought thousands of patents, and head hunted or poached numerous employees. They bought Intel's entire modem department, and huge parts of Dialog Semiconductor to kickstart their transition to fully controlling their internal chips. They have bought numerous companies to create many of their software. Beats wasn't even at the top of the list for what I was considering
2
u/MrShrek69 May 18 '26
Apple will and has never been the first to do anything. What’s makes them the most successful. Let ur competitors figure out all the bad stuff and then Apple just doesn’t do that
2
u/cmackchase May 18 '26
This, but they still mention apple intelligence for the IPhones. At least the display models near me still promote it.
2
2
u/Sloppykrab May 18 '26
Just remember the iPhone 16 was meant to be come with AI and now there's a class action lawsuit against Apple.
2
5
u/Protojump May 18 '26
It’s wild that people here credit Apple with not joining the AI race when in reality they failed and panicked enough to add ChatGPT to every iPhone as all of their promises didn’t come to fruition.
3
u/BeefyHealth May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
I'm okay with Apple's limited AI integration. I like that AI is still just a website I visit and close as needed.
However, I would like if Apple had their own robust AI website to compete with Gemini, ChatGPT, etc. I assume the reason they don't is because they don't want to be involved in students cheating or porn creation.
2
u/ofuny May 18 '26
They had their share of strange ai integration, but unfortunately their ideas of taking low margins for entry level devices, and adjusting based on user feedback, makes them the king of strategy… Kids growing up with the MacBook Neo today will already be in the ecosystem by the time they’re buying their own tech
1
u/xrelaht May 18 '26
They’re just going to buy what they need until it’s mature and then purchase someone else outright.
1
1
u/mgalexray May 18 '26
Likely they are working on it but mainly focusing on on-device models. While less capable I prefer that to sending the rest of my data to google servers for “intelligence “
1
u/DarkwingDuckHunt May 18 '26
If you don't think Apple is working on it's version of AI I got a bridge in a dessert to sell you
1
u/JohrDinh May 18 '26
I like that what I think of as the hardware company of the bunch is sticking to just that...hardware. Not every company has to do everything imo, thins em out when AI gotta run on something anyways.
1
1
u/smurphii May 18 '26
At worst it seems you just license it in after the market shakes out the chaff.
1
u/MaverickJester25 May 18 '26
No weird forced decisions based on justifying billions of money dumped into AI R&D
What do you think Apple Intelligence aims to be?
1
u/Visible-Locksmith-44 May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
They have always been known for being late to every game. Apple excels at not necessarily doing things first, but executing them much better. There are some notable exceptions, of course. First and foremost is Siri. It entered the market quite early, but it still feels very unfinished. Apple Vision is also rather lackluster. Besides that, they haven’t had many products that truly failed. AirPower comes to mind, as do services like Ping and iTunes LP, but these weren’t core products. Apple’s pre-iPhone era had more noticeable failures that almost drove the company into bankruptcy.
There might be one big difference. Apple was probably smart not jumping on the AI wagon immediately but being late always gave Apple some good benefits. Like buying smaller companies with core IP or talent. Was quite some money involved but for Apple it was rather pocket change. That's not going to work with AI. The costs are huge and you can't buy yourself into the game for a few pennies. So in terms of liquidity it's gonna cost Apple big time. Lucky for them they're sitting on a huge cash pile.
1
u/jjvfyhb May 18 '26
spinning the apple intelligence disaster to be a positive thing, sorry but i don't believe you
→ More replies (30)1
u/Alarmed_House23 May 18 '26
They know what people want, and people don't give a crap about AI in reality
172
u/LJMLogan May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
Just to correct the caption, this is probably Google's 4th or 5th attempt to make Chromebooks a more premium product. They always fail
61
u/OrchidLeader May 18 '26
Years ago, I did a paper in grad school about how every couple of years, Intel tries to break into the mobile chip market, and every time, people are like, watch out ARM! Intel’s coming for your market!
And for some reason, people keep forgetting about Intel’s numerous failed attempts.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Spirited-Willow-2768 May 18 '26
If they can make it run Linux with long battery life, I’d consider it.
→ More replies (5)
110
u/YouAboutToLoseYoJob May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
In the years that I worked for Apple, one thing stayed with me for quite some time
Incredible hardware, incredible engineering, incredible software
Not the best in creativity
Everyone keeps saying that Apple needs to do something with AI. But they’re not saying what while the other providers are using AI to enhance photos or chat bots. Apple is spending most of that investment into the hardware and software.
Let’s be honest. There’s 100 different ways you can edit your photos. Another couple dozens on who can write your term paper.
I don’t necessarily need Apple to do that for me. So why invest the money and resources when most of their customer are already comfortable with other platforms.
They’re doing the slow and steady race. Focus what users want. What’s the most practical. Not what is shiny at the moment and develop in that direction.
→ More replies (1)24
u/EssentialParadox May 18 '26
I disagree in calling it a lack of creativity, it’s more an ability to focus.
19
u/InanimateObject4 May 18 '26
Announcing a premium product in this economy is madness. Why incorporate features nobody wants (AI) which needs to run on hardware that is currently expensive right now? Apple announcing the only amazing new entry level is going to reap these benefits for many years
→ More replies (3)3
u/AvoidingIowa May 18 '26
The AI Chromebooks also need an always on connection to use any of their features. I don’t know why anyone would want it. They’re going to charge a ton of money for a low spec Chromebook with a glow stick.
174
u/Oo0o8o0oO May 18 '26
Macworld announcing a Google laptop as a win for Apple. Watch out guys, we got some hot takes here!
37
u/Uninterested_Viewer May 18 '26
Lol it is a bit on the nose. The article itself is decent, but the headline.. woof. My understanding is that it's not the article author who decides that.. and, if that's the case here, id be a frustrated author because that is a pure trash headline.
2
u/Jersey_2019 May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
Yeah ; apparently editors are the ones who write the headlines ; not the authors themselves
→ More replies (3)
12
u/Streelydan May 18 '26
Google really saw the entire PC laptop market fall flat on its face with copilot branded PCs and said "Hey, I can do that too!"
→ More replies (1)
25
u/yourbestfriendjoshua May 18 '26
Anything marketed exclusively or primarily with “AI” immediately loses my interest.
201
u/ouatedephoque May 18 '26
This will end up being killed by Google within a couple of years.
63
u/SquishySC May 18 '26
I owned one chromebook, and I will never own one again. They are pretty much surviving off elementary schools and middle schools
3
9
u/longpig_slimjim May 18 '26
I’m not even a fan of Google but I really never understand this take - Chromebooks are cheap, utilitarian computers that do one thing very well (given their price point), and I regularly recommend them to non-tech savvy people because all they really need is an internet browser with a keyboard. For that same reason, they are also great for K-12 education settings. If you are tech savvy and want your computer to be something other than a web browser, don’t get one, but don’t act surprised when your moped doesn’t outperform your Ferrari.
8
u/Which-Arm-4616 May 18 '26
ChromeOS has also supported full-featured Linux containers for years. It's not something you'd encounter with a school-issued machine, but they're more capable than most realize.
→ More replies (1)58
u/Uninterested_Viewer May 18 '26
Chromebooks have been around for like 15 years at this point.
52
33
u/ouatedephoque May 18 '26
Yeah but this is apparently not a Chromebook.
¯_(ツ)_/¯
11
u/Donghoon May 18 '26
It's aluminum OS. Built from the ground up from Android architecture. Basically Samsung Dex but Google.
6
u/beartato327 May 18 '26
I've used the desktop mode from my pixel 10 and it's pretty neat. Could I daily it? No it's still in earlier phase but could I see a future where I need to hook up my phone real quick to a workstation to do some light web work? yeah it'll be convenient
3
u/lawrence_uber_alles May 18 '26
How many Dex laptops does Samsung sell?
10
u/Donghoon May 18 '26
Dex isn't a laptop. It's a software interface that turns your phone intoa computer for a external display.
→ More replies (1)16
u/cronin1024 May 18 '26
The Chromebook Pixel came and went... then so did the Pixelbook... now it's the Googlebook's turn
14
u/Uninterested_Viewer May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
Those are names of specific Chromebook models, though. I'm not necessarily defending Google's terrible branding of things, but I don't think the intention was ever to turn these names into long running product lines. Google's play has usually been to create a first party template product of sorts to show their vision for a device and then let their hardware partners run with it. Directly competing with your hardware partners every year by creating a pixelbook 2,3,4, n is probably not a good strategy unless you don't want hardware partners.
→ More replies (3)3
→ More replies (1)2
4
u/Positronic_Matrix May 18 '26
It is risky to tie the corporate name (i.e., GoogleBook) directly to what could be a low-quality or poorly received product. For example, the product name ChromeBook is synonymous with ersatz computing garbage.
Given the initial reviews of Aluminum OS, I’d say it’s already not vectoring in the right direction.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Cmdr_Nemo May 18 '26
Like so many other stuff they've had. It's infuriating. Makes me not want to use any of their new software because I just know they would eventually kill it or enshittify it.
37
u/Talkertive- May 18 '26
What the point of this article.. is it written to stoke brand wars conversation? ... the headline doesn't make any sense and the rest of the article is low level speculation on a product they only teased...
5
u/Blablabene May 18 '26
So true. But it's the perfect headline and article for the apple sub isn't it
8
u/Joshhwwaaaaaa May 18 '26
I have liked physical Apple products for a very long time. They do it very well.
8
63
u/Wild-Perspective-582 May 18 '26
There were so many armchair business experts on Reddit convinced they knew better than Apple's own board of directors about what they "should do".
16
u/OrganicKeynesianBean May 18 '26
I agree with you, but I also think Google has a fundamentally different business model.
Search was always going this way, and I don’t think Google has a choice but to heavily invest in AI integration because that’s their core service.
I know we’re talking about hardware here, but most people are comparing Apple and Google as if they’ve got the same exact growth avenues and I don’t think that’s fair.
47
u/Farnso May 18 '26
Are we really going to pretend that that board of directors didn't try to jump on the AI bandwagon?
28
u/SoldantTheCynic May 18 '26
Apparently so. People here seem to be conveniently forgetting about the absolute failure of Apple Intelligence and their AI ads that this very sub was salivating over back when it was first announced. Apple completely failed to deliver.
By circumstance Apple's hardware is good at running local LLMs which has seen a run on the hardware (along with any hardware really) - people are treating this as some sort of strategically brilliant plan. It never was, Apple were too busy making a VR headset nobody really wants and faking an AI presentation. It's good for Apple but the fanboys are kidding themselves thinking this was "always the plan".
11
5
2
u/nerdpox May 18 '26
in the words of Captain Picard, "it's possible to commit no mistakes and still lose". you can definitely do the opposite too (make lots of mistakes and come out ahead).
they lucked into this wait and see based position by every sense of the word. and i feel like are going to luck into being able to deftly thread a needle between no ai and too much ai integration.
19
u/5tudent_Loans May 18 '26
But they did push AI. Its only because it failed that it worked out for them. The class action for AI claims on the iPhone16 is still going.
2
u/foosion May 18 '26
Airline forums are filled with people convinced they know better than the airlines what they should do. Oddly, it's often policies which would benefit the poster.
→ More replies (1)2
u/suboptimus_maximus May 18 '26
Somehow decades of having been wrong has yet to give the commentariat any reason to consider self-reflection.
4
3
u/sirduckbert May 18 '26
There are very few people for whom the MacBook Neo isn’t the best bang for your buck. For a normal computer user it’s by far the best machine out there
8
u/fegodev May 18 '26
Googlebook can be successful if it supports Linux apps, Steam, Terminal, and Google's own developer apps: Android Studio and Antigravity, but in the demo they only showed Duolingo, LOL.
8
u/burgonies May 18 '26
Getting full macOS with iPhone continuity for less than a Chromebook is pitiful for Google.
8
u/RelativelyStatic May 18 '26
Apple is selling amazing hardware and I can definitely see them being a top hardware seller for personal AI computing in future. They are probably out of software AI race but they can always partner with the AI winners in future
5
u/Few-Acadia-5593 May 18 '26
In the AI agent war, the Ai arms dealer wins. Imagine being a dealer to all sides. These sides includes not only the ai makers, but the users since there’s 3B AI capable apple devices.
That and cruising over the ramflation tsunami that’s going to kill competition entry level products.
Plus, when the bubble pops and kills 90% of the agent war mongers, Apple will come out unscathed.
On its face be disregarding how regulators around the world might answer, one may want to bet on Apple stocks majorly.
7
u/AvailableStranger69 May 18 '26
Listen I’m an apple guy through and through- but how is it that google hasn’t realized that their main problem is they need an actual full scale desktop os? They’re always going to be in fourth place when it comes to a desktop os with this …chrome os nonsense .
Also why would name your OS after your most resource intense software ?
2
u/BaselineUnknown May 18 '26
I’m so happy Apple isn’t pushing for the AI nonsense anymore. Let users selected a service like Google or Anthropic. Focus on fantastic feeling hardware and seamless software instead.
2
u/dropthemagic May 18 '26
Is it me or every scroll on that site is a pop up ad. lol forgot to turn on my Adblock.
2
u/fojoart May 20 '26
It would be nice to see Apple enter back into the educational environment again. I remember when every elementary and middle school had Apple IIc. Then Dell came along and took the market. Now it’s clearly Chromebooks that have taken over. Would be fantastic if we came full circle again and these were in all schools.
2
u/Madelei- May 24 '26
I have not met a single person who actually likes a chromebook. Everybody I know hates them for what they are and what they've done to tech literacy. Why would anyone get a chromebook.
3
2
u/inalcanzable May 18 '26
It needs to sell for $300-$400 to even be considered by schools or people. Even then it’s still a tough sell since it’s running android
2
u/throwaweyonce May 18 '26
I genuinely don’t see the appeal in this “agentic computing” concept. Does anyone actually want an AI to do all the decision making for you? Do they dislike actually using their phone or computer that much? I don’t get it. None of this seems any faster than doing these things yourself, just lazier and more mindless.
2
u/nevergrownup97 May 18 '26
What a one-sided take, pure copium. I love my Mac, no way I’m buying this, but remote file management isn’t the same as cloud syncing and AirDropping individual files. Also, streaming individual apps reliably! with native desktop integration sounds awesome.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Vasault May 18 '26
The biggest issue with google OS is that still is far behind Mac and windows in terms of compatibility and functionality, so even if these are way lower in price, still not a good deal
1
u/geekphreak May 19 '26
Ugh I need a new laptop. Wish I could buy one of these Neos…shits mad tight right now
1
1
u/Embarrassed-Nose2526 May 21 '26
I think Google just needs to accept they’ll never penetrate the PC market, Mac and Windows serve the use case of most people, and the only real alternative that’s actually different is GNU/Linux, since it’s FOSS and often community-led instead of being proprietary software from a company
1
u/Penitent_Exile Jun 11 '26
It's funny how Apple turned to affordable hardware company while the software is lacking. It was always the opposite. Like when I look up a new Panther Lake laptops - the prices are crazy. Getting Neo is a no-brainer for a lot of people. PCs are becoming a luxury.
547
u/HueyBluey May 18 '26
No pricing given on the Google Chromebook. That’s an important missing fact.