Intel, Microsoft discuss plans to run Copilot locally on PCs(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
Intel, Microsoft discuss plans to run Copilot locally on PCs
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/03/intel-microsoft-discuss-plans-to-run-copilot-locally-on-pcs-instead-of-in-the-cloud/
24 comments
For a long time, before Apple announced that they'd integrate Gemini into their devices, people posted fan fiction on HN about how Apple was going to bring local AI to the masses. Now Microsoft is actually doing it, and ...
Gemini is a poor choice, rather useless. They recently bought some AI company, so scratch that.
lol. Yeah it’s amazing the hold Apple has on people.
Look at the last ten years. Microsoft has gone from a closed off backwater to a forward thinking and multi-OS integrated, cloud powerhouse and made some incredibly savvy investments. Crickets.
Meanwhile Apple has made their MacBook Pro into an RSI inducing monster that has no ports and a touchbar that was both useless and caused extra battery drain and heat. The watch is fine, nothing special. And the VR headset is going to be a disaster. They are just making bad decision after bad decision. Trillion dollar valuation.
How both those companies are at the same order of magnitude of valuation looking at things now is boggling to me. One makes sense, one seems like a dinosaur.
Look at the last ten years. Microsoft has gone from a closed off backwater to a forward thinking and multi-OS integrated, cloud powerhouse and made some incredibly savvy investments. Crickets.
Meanwhile Apple has made their MacBook Pro into an RSI inducing monster that has no ports and a touchbar that was both useless and caused extra battery drain and heat. The watch is fine, nothing special. And the VR headset is going to be a disaster. They are just making bad decision after bad decision. Trillion dollar valuation.
How both those companies are at the same order of magnitude of valuation looking at things now is boggling to me. One makes sense, one seems like a dinosaur.
Microsoft hasn't been cool in decades. They might have had a week back when Windows 7 came out, and another when Win10 arrived, but that's about it. Apple gets a lot more leeway because they've been effective at presenting themselves as the cool choice for years. It's a pretty impressive feat, since I'd expect an entire generation would associate them with "the crappy computer lab your school district couldn't afford to upgrade, but could lock down to make it even less fun."
As you said, they can do some incredible stuff. I can't debate that VSCode is a spectacular product, and it's winning because it's being politely presented as an option. But when they start every interaction with 'we're going to cram this down your throat until you stop clicking "maybe later"' -- people are not going to be too eager for your products.
As you said, they can do some incredible stuff. I can't debate that VSCode is a spectacular product, and it's winning because it's being politely presented as an option. But when they start every interaction with 'we're going to cram this down your throat until you stop clicking "maybe later"' -- people are not going to be too eager for your products.
What‘s more amazing is the chronic anti-Apple stance of many Android/Windows fanboys and fangirls. It‘s like the Steve Ballmer iPhone-release-interview all over again.
Apple and Microsoft are just two very different companies as they always have been. One is a software company that regularly fails with its hardware products and has now turned towards using its users to harvest data at a nightmarish privacy scale, massively investing in a „fuck copyrights“-AI company.
The other is a company that has perfected a hardware-software ecosystem and is more and more creating huge turnovers with services that complement said ecosystem. What you‘ve missed to mention is Apple‘s SoC that still leave the competition in panic mode because of power and power efficiency. MS has tried to establish ARM as a hardware basis more than once and is failing miserably again and again, while Apple has eased everyone into a promising ARM future. This is also the reason for the MS-Intel-Copilot partnership. Two failing companies (in certain areas, for MS) don‘t make a success.
Why can‘t both companies be successful in very different ways?
Apple and Microsoft are just two very different companies as they always have been. One is a software company that regularly fails with its hardware products and has now turned towards using its users to harvest data at a nightmarish privacy scale, massively investing in a „fuck copyrights“-AI company.
The other is a company that has perfected a hardware-software ecosystem and is more and more creating huge turnovers with services that complement said ecosystem. What you‘ve missed to mention is Apple‘s SoC that still leave the competition in panic mode because of power and power efficiency. MS has tried to establish ARM as a hardware basis more than once and is failing miserably again and again, while Apple has eased everyone into a promising ARM future. This is also the reason for the MS-Intel-Copilot partnership. Two failing companies (in certain areas, for MS) don‘t make a success.
Why can‘t both companies be successful in very different ways?
I would expect them to rebound by building incredibly efficient ai optimized chips and embedding those into their future devices.
On a macro level apple has disappointed recently. I think the apple car was my biggest disappointment.
On a macro level apple has disappointed recently. I think the apple car was my biggest disappointment.
[deleted]
[dupe]
More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39840294
More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39840294
why would it be better to host an AI on your PC, rather than in its own local box, with ability to access permitted aspects of your PC ?
i can tell you why a discreet box is better, you can firewall it, or physically unplug it when its not functioning in a desireable manner.
i can tell you why a discreet box is better, you can firewall it, or physically unplug it when its not functioning in a desireable manner.
Same reason people virtualize dozens to hundreds of machines in one box, hardware efficiency.
I don't understand this sentiment.
I don't understand this sentiment.
AI integrated into your PC, means cooperating with an AI to use your PC.
this also restricts your[sic] AI.
your AI should go with you and saddle into task specific hardware, be that a home automation bus, LAN dock, automobile, or roomba-iod R2 like unit.
your AI should be your wingman and have your back. but being an agent capable of deciding without your input, there should be a way of training acceptable bounds into your AI. [yes that is looking like a mobile]
likewise there should be physical restraint when it gets a "bad idea"
your AI should go with you and saddle into task specific hardware, be that a home automation bus, LAN dock, automobile, or roomba-iod R2 like unit.
your AI should be your wingman and have your back. but being an agent capable of deciding without your input, there should be a way of training acceptable bounds into your AI. [yes that is looking like a mobile]
likewise there should be physical restraint when it gets a "bad idea"
You're talking like we already have artificial general intelligence that can autonomously initiate actions, when at best what can run on a single consumer device is a very small, dumb LLM. So none of what you're trying to worry about makes any sense for this discussion.
Every AI inference costs money. It would be better for them to have these ongoing expenses on the user side vs them having to pay for the expense.
Why would anyone strap a couch to the top of their car, when it would be better to buy a new pickup truck and transport it in the back of that?
Because we don't need 12 boxes when 1 box is enough.
Well... I hope this open to other parties or an antitrust may be on their way. Can you image getting the ai subscriptions money and just let the user paid for the operation cost? Google, OpenAI and endless others wont be able to compete.
Access to the NPU is done through DirectML which is open to anyone to use. The hard part is making useful AI people will pay for that runs on consumer devices themselves without a race to the bottom on the same few use cases (e.g. local translation). There may eventually be some bundling type concerns with the service being pushed by the OS over time though.
Forget about "useful AI people will pay for"; the limitations of these NPUs and the immaturity of the software stacks necessary to target them means it's hard to get anything running well enough to be a cool tech demo. Good enough that people would use it for free is still a ways off, and good enough to be worth paying extra for may not even be possible on the NPU hardware Intel and AMD are currently shipping.
hulitu(2)