The Real Reason the OpenAI-Jony Ive Partnership Is So Strange

by

For more than three decades, Jony Ive has honed his design skills in Silicon Valley, crafting the exterior of the iMac, conceptualizing the aesthetic of the iPod, and devising the physical structure for the iPhone. In essence, he’s had a hand in shaping almost every significant Apple technology we interact with, from the early days of Alta Vista to the present.

There’s no question that the legacy attracted Sam Altman to hire Ive. This week, the founder of OpenAI purchased Ive’s startup io for a whopping $6.5 billion (which is roughly equivalent to 130 million classic iPod shuffles). In a somewhat awkward video by Davis Guggenheim, they revealed that these two would be collaborating to develop an unspecified series of devices intended to run apps based on OpenAI’s models. In essence, Ive and his startup are now heading in the direction of OpenAI.

Altman has been striving to persuade investors and the public since the launch of ChatGPT thirty months ago, and even before that, he’s been aiming to alter the trajectory of civilization in a Jobs-like manner by introducing technology widely adopted. If you aspire to introduce a technology that everyone will use, who better to hire than the man whose technology is already widely used?

In addition to that, another task you can perform is designing irresistible programs. When it comes to this aspect, Altman has had some ups and downs. ChatGPT quickly amassed 100 million users during its first two months, but the growth has since tapered off; currently, approximately 5% of the world’s population actively uses it. New reasoning versions like 4o have yet to gain traction, while o1, geared towards programmers, has faced numerous issues. The pursuit of AGI continues, with no solid scientific proof that we are on the verge of developing machine intelligence equal to a human’s full reasoning capacity anytime soon.

The primary reason these systems haven’t fully integrated into our daily routines appears less connected to their specific shapes, and more to the functionalities they offer. While it’s unavoidable that any new consumer technology will be accompanied by a surge of device-related content, what truly matters, most psychologists argue, is what these tools allow us to accomplish. Despite the playful applications based on OpenAI models (which the company primarily leaves for others to develop), we haven’t seen much revolutionary change in our lives yet. There are only so many tasks like writing thank-you notes or generating quirky images that an AI program can assist with.

The proof that the problem lies with the app rather than the machine comes from previous failed attempts at AI-focused devices, such as the R1 Rabbit and Humane AI Pin. Additionally, I find it particularly challenging to follow Altman’s recent philosophical shift in his argument. He is correct in stating that AI differs from past technological advancements because it doesn’t just alter our capabilities but rather affects how and what we think, or more accurately, eliminates the need for us to think.

The personal computer revolutionized daily life by making digital technology accessible, and the internet expanded our connections to communities and information beyond what we could previously access. However, if AI fulfills its potential (which is still uncertain), it will bring about a change more profound than that – a change akin to an intelligent alien arriving on Earth rather than just a new product or scientific discovery.

In simpler terms, Altman had previously expressed this year that when it comes to AGI (Artificial General Intelligence), it’s hard not to think, “This time it’s different.” The potential economic growth ahead appears extraordinary, and we can envision a world where all diseases are cured, we have more quality time with our loved ones, and we can fully express our creative abilities. However, something as profoundly existential as this isn’t swayed by how trendy your gadget is. Spending $6.5 billion on making the packaging impressive leaves one questioning whether there’s substance behind that profound existentialism.

In a sense, it seemed like Altman and Ive were wrestling with this paradox in their blog post announcing the partnership. They wrote, “This is an extraordinary moment. Computers are now capable of seeing, thinking, and understanding. Yet, our experiences are still constrained by traditional products and interfaces.” As a fan, it’s fascinating to see them grapple with the juxtaposition between the advanced capabilities of computers and the limitations imposed by conventional designs.

Additionally, it’s somewhat surprising that Microsoft wasn’t mentioned throughout this discussion. After all, OpenAI is mainly supported by a company that produces tablets and other gadgets. You might expect that Sam Altman could have reached out to Satya Nadella to see if there was anyone within the company they could lend before writing a $6.5 billion check to the Apple executive.

AI Agents, as envisioned by Altman, could be a blend of Siri and a Celebrity Assistance Agency assistant, always ready to assist us in our daily tasks. A key point he made in his Guggenheim video was that an indispensable application like an AI Agent needs to be more user-friendly than a laptop, although he seemed to overlook the possibility of a smartphone. Google appears to have taken note, and its ChatGPT competitor, Gemini, designed for both Android and iOS devices, is making significant progress by seamlessly integrating with existing technology instead of requiring new hardware that we might not necessarily desire. (It’s almost as if Google’s ability to easily integrate with its own phones might be a factor in Altman’s thoughts.)

Let’s avoid being blind to potential advancements while also avoiding an overly narrow focus on immediate concerns. After all, who could have foreseen the smartphone revolution back in 2007 when Steve Jobs unveiled the iPhone? Yet, the convenience of having so many essential activities at our fingertips was undeniably appealing. As for artificial intelligence, we’re still uncertain about its practicality and safety, not to mention what form it might take if we decide to embrace it.

It’s not to imply that novel interfaces won’t play a role in our digital future. The concept that a phone, a rather bulky rectangular device we read and interact with, is the primary means through which we manage our digital lives, is more of a byproduct of technology or at least one specific moment in its history. As the world becomes increasingly multimodal, meaning the ability to communicate via speech, visual cues, or gestures instead of typing, the notion of touch screens and fingers will likely become outdated.

Altman shares a similar viewpoint. Recently, Meta has reintroduced their Ray-Ban smartglasses as an effort to combine the cloud-powered AI chatbot capabilities with the tangible charm of a fashion accessory. Similarly, Apple Vision Pro aims to provide immersion by fitting around our faces instead of being held in our hands. Among these innovations, Samsung’s “Ballie” stands out as both unusual and potentially promising. This long-awaited robotic sphere, scheduled for release this summer, serves as a personalized assistant that straddles the line between a pet and a butler – acting as your helper in tasks like feeding the dog, guiding your yoga sessions, and translating video calls, much like a custom BB-8.

Although various non-phone products designed to aid us don’t necessitate a fundamental shift in human thinking, they do leverage AI in some way. It’s important to recognize that these two aspects, though possibly related, operate independently. The future may or may not bring more profound and unique interactions with technology, which could necessitate innovative designs akin to those of Jony Ive. Similarly, AI might soon assist us in ways we’ve never experienced before. Even if both predictions come true, it seems unlikely that a single company would spearhead both revolutions, given the evolution of technology over the past three tech-filled decades. Companies like IBM developed computers, Microsoft supplied desktop software for them, Apple revolutionized portable devices, and Google dominates internet search – each with its unique focus.

It’s plausible that one company, like OpenAI, could excel in both areas, but it seems unusual given their primary focus on artificial intelligence and machine learning. For instance, imagining me becoming an award-winning chef is possible, but it’s not my core expertise. Similarly, while OpenAI specializes in creating models for how computers can think and needs developers to build applications using these models, it may not be ideally positioned to tackle the challenges of a post-smartphone future, as this area requires different skill sets that have yet to be mastered by anyone thus far.

It’s understandable if you question Altman’s reasons for making so many announcements, as it might appear that he runs a tech company primarily to maintain his active blog. Just like Terrell Owens, who seemed to use football as a means to attend more press conferences, Altman may come across as having a strong inclination towards creating content for his blog rather than focusing solely on the business at hand. However, it’s important to remember that reality may not always align with appearances.

The proposed Ive announcement aligns with current trends. A futuristic AI device as appealing and desirable in 2030 as the iPhone was in 2010 is an intriguing notion, on par with remarkable economic expansion and endless leisure time. However, existing machine models lack the ability to deliver such benefits, and there’s little proof that Sam Altman or anyone else has found a way to construct them for this purpose yet.

Read More

2025-05-25 03:55