Apple choosing gemini as the model for Siri
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Apple has entered a multi-year, non-exclusive agreement to use Google’s Gemini models and cloud technology as the foundation for its next-generation Siri and other Apple Intelligence features, a move Apple says followed “careful evaluation” and aims to accelerate delivery of a more capable, personalized assistant [1] [2]. The deal shifts third‑party model dynamics — keeping OpenAI’s ChatGPT in a continued, more supporting or opt‑in role — while Apple insists user-facing experiences will remain Apple-controlled and private protections will be maintained [3] [4].
1. Why Apple picked Gemini: capability and speed to market
Apple’s public justification frames Gemini as “the most capable foundation” after evaluation, letting the company accelerate a long‑promised Siri overhaul that had been delayed because prior approaches were unreliable [2] [5]. Independent reporting and industry sources note Gemini’s leaderboard wins and the release of Gemini 3 as factors that pressured competitors and made Gemini an attractive partner for rapid improvement in generative capabilities [6] [5] [7].
2. What “powering” Siri actually means — not a visible Gemini on the iPhone
Multiple outlets and Apple statements clarify that Gemini will serve as a training and backend foundation for Apple Foundation Models and Apple Intelligence features rather than appearing as a Google-branded engine on users’ devices; Apple says the end experience will run on Apple hardware, Apple servers (including Private Cloud Compute), or on‑device systems, preserving Apple’s interface and control [4] [8] [5]. Reporting indicates Gemini-derived models may be customized and hosted on Apple’s Private Cloud Compute for task components like planning and summarization [8] [9].
3. Privacy, control, and the tightrope Apple must walk
Apple has publicly emphasized that privacy safeguards will persist even as it leans on Google tech, asserting that user data won’t be exposed to Google’s infrastructure and that core Apple Intelligence will run on Apple-controlled servers or on-device [2] [4] [9]. Journalists and analysts, however, note tradeoffs: outsourcing foundational training or model primitives to an external giant like Google affords speed but raises questions about concentration of AI capabilities and long-term dependence, a concern voiced in discussion of market power and by public figures [3] [10].
4. The competitive and strategic implications — winners, losers, and shifting partnerships
The Gemini tie-up is a substantial win for Google, strengthening its position against OpenAI and embedding Gemini deeper in the mobile ecosystem, while reporters cite estimates (unconfirmed by Apple publicly) that Apple might pay around $1 billion per year for access — figures Bloomberg and others reported but Apple did not disclose in full [11] [7]. For OpenAI, the deal appears to relegate ChatGPT to an “opt‑in” specialty role inside iOS rather than the default intelligence layer, reshaping how AI vendors integrate with platform owners [3] [1].
5. Limits of the reporting and plausible alternative readings
Coverage converges on the same core facts — a multi‑year Gemini arrangement, non‑exclusive terms, on‑device and private cloud caveats — yet differs on emphasis: some outlets portray Apple as pragmatic and accelerating product timelines [12], others frame the choice as a strategic retreat from building everything internally [6]. Public statements and reporting stop short of revealing full commercial terms, the precise technical split between Gemini components and Apple’s proprietary models, and how long Apple will remain dependent on Gemini versus its roadmap for in‑house trillion‑parameter models, which Apple reportedly plans for the future [4] [8]. These gaps mean plausible debates about vendor lock‑in, pricing leverage, and long‑term privacy tradeoffs remain open in reporting.