Google and Apple announced this week that Gemini will be the brains behind Apple’s long-awaited and stalled-out Apple Intelligence. Among other things, it will elevate Siri to the latest standards of the AI age, with the goal of rivaling conversational intelligence from the likes of ChatGPT and Gemini itself.
So what will this look like in UX terms? Not a lot was disclosed by the two companies, but Siri will keep its branding and likely get played up for its new and improved capabilities. In Apple’s (erstwhile unfulfilled) hype around its long-awaited AI features, the company has used the term “more personalized Siri.”
Gemini’s branding will correspondingly get pushed to the background, if used at all. But in fairness, Google is getting paid for that white labelling (more on that in a bit). Another deal point is non-exclusivity, so Google is free to double-dip and license Gemini elsewhere, along with its own first-party positioning.
Altogether, this should be a much-needed boost for Apple’s competitive position in AI. The company has received well-deserved flak for its stumbles and delays in this area. It should now be able to put that behind it, for the most part, and move forward with conversational intelligence across its products.
How Did We Get Here?
Backing up for context, how did we get here? It’s no secret that Apple has stumbled in AI, as noted. This started with a splashy AI-centric WWDC in 2024, including the launch of Apple Intelligence and several promises. But the months that followed included delays and excuses that Apple Intelligence isn’t ready.
As this process played out, Apple realized that its positioning as a hardware company doesn’t engender the rich data banks needed for AI training. And Apple’s explicit positioning as a privacy-centric player – though smart in many ways – is counterproductive to its ability to gain an edge in today’s AI battlefield.
All of this comes as Apple was already behind in the race. Even before the past few years of heightened AI investment, capability, and demand, Apple faced performance issues for its primary AI play, Siri. In fact, as AI was ramping up over this period, we were forced to ask if Siri would be Apple’s Achilles heel.
More importantly, one of the questions we posed at the time was whether or not Siri would be “taken to the woodshed” or endure a brain transplant. The latter was the more likely scenario, given how embedded Siri is throughout the Apple ecosystem, as well as some degree of brand equity it carries.
So here we are, with Google officially named as Apple’s brain transplant donor. Why was it chosen? As stated in a joint press release from Apple and Google, one big reason for selecting Gemini over competing AI engines is that it has the best capability and compatibility with Apple’s Foundation Models.
Enemy of My Enemy
That brings us to another key question: what’s in it for all parties? Apple gets bailed out of its AI stumbles, which have dragged down its competitiveness (and stock price). Though it has to abandon its vertically-integrated DNA, it has come to terms with the fact that this is an unrealistic luxury in AI.
Google, meanwhile, gets more surface area for Gemini, which vaults it further past AI-first challengers like OpenAI and Perplexity. Though it’s competitive with Apple – and this move helps Apple, per the above – It sees greater existential threats from new challengers. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
And there’s some precedent for this move, at least on broad levels. Don’t forget Google Maps’ and Search’s default positioning on iPhones – a move similarly made to gain positioning and surface area for Google’s software. But in that case, Google pays for the privilege, which is flipped in the latest deal.
Specifically, Apple will pay ~$1 billion annually for Gemini’s brainpower. The difference between these two deals, and which direction the money flows, is a matter of leverage. With Google Search and Maps’ default spot on iPhones – a ~$20 billion annual proposition – Google was the one primarily benefiting.
But in the latest deal, Apple is the one that needs a bailout, and Google is in a position of leverage. There are other differences, such as hard costs to do AI right (data centers, etc.). But in the end, Apple gets what it needs to compete on the AI battlefield, while Google gets the power balance shifted in its favor.
Header image credit: Markus Winkler on Unsplash
