I've had a love-hate relationship with Apple since Jobs died. I hated the transition that Apple made from an experience company trying to be a technology company. When a brand strays from delivering good experiences, I don't cling to what was, but rather look for what's next. Yet, Apple was such a love story for me.
There was always something magical about using an Apple product during the Jobs era. That ineffable quality where hardware and software danced together in perfect harmony. Where opening a box felt like unwrapping a gift rather than unpacking a gadget. Where features weren't just functional but delightful. It was technology that understood humanity, rather than forcing humanity to understand technology.
But over time, something changed. The obsessive focus on experience gave way to incremental technical improvements. The poetry of product design slowly surrendered to the prose of product margins. Apple became extraordinarily profitable but increasingly ordinary. The company that once told us to “Think Different” began thinking predictably.
Nevertheless, I've remained bizarrely hopeful. Like an ex who can't quite delete your number, I keep expecting Apple to rediscover its soul. And now, with AI poised to reshape how we interact with technology, I find myself wondering: could this be the catalyst that brings back the Apple I fell in love with? Could artificial intelligence help restore the authentic human experience that once defined Apple?
The Ghost in the Machine: Reviving Jobs' Reality Distortion Field
I couldn't stop imagining what might happen if the rumours are true. Eddie Cue, Apple's Senior VP, testified that the company is considering replacing Google as Safari's default search engine – switching to an AI-based alternative. He revealed that Apple is already exploring partnerships with specialist companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Perplexity. Following these statements, Alphabet's stock plunged 7.3% at market close.
AI-driven experience is exactly what Apple needs to bring back Jobs' reality distortion field to centre stage. That remarkable ability to bend reality wasn't just charisma – it was Jobs' unwavering commitment to experiences that transcended technical specifications. Apple's still-superb hardware coupled with AI-enhanced software could recreate that non-linear, contextual experience that once made Apple revolutionary rather than merely innovative.
One can hope that the most profound impact AI could have on Apple is the ability to use all of Steve Jobs' recorded data to create a digital shadow that whispers through the corridors of the Donut HQ. Not literally, of course, but as a philosophical framework – a distillation of the principles and approaches that made Jobs' Apple exceptional.
Imagine this digital Jobs presence not as some weird sci-fi clone, but as a sophisticated pattern recognition system trained on his decision-making approach. The way he ruthlessly prioritised meaningful experiences over technical specifications. The way he distinguished between genuine innovation and mere feature creep. The way he intuitively understood what users wanted before they knew themselves.
Jobs famously said no to a thousand things for every yes. This disciplined approach to product development is precisely what's been missing from Apple in recent years. An AI system trained on Jobs' decision patterns could ask the essential questions that current leadership might overlook: “Does this create a meaningful experience?” rather than “Is this technically impressive?” “Will this delight users?” rather than “Will this increase our margins?”
The technology to do this exists today. Beyond simple chatbots, modern AI can analyse vast archives of text, video, and audio to identify patterns in decision-making, communication styles, and value systems. Apple possesses the richest archive of Jobs-related material in existence – decades of keynotes, internal meetings, email exchanges, and product reviews.
What might this look like in practice? Imagine an AI system that evaluates potential product decisions using Jobs' experiential framework. When considering whether to remove a headphone jack, add another camera, or redesign an interface, this system could analyse how Jobs approached similar decisions. Not to slavishly imitate past choices, but to apply his principles to contemporary challenges. It could identify when Apple is prioritising technical specifications over user experience, or when feature additions are creating complexity rather than simplicity.
Sleeping with the Frenemy: Apple's Costly Love Affair with Google
Don't get me wrong, I understand Apple and Google's business relationship. After all, we're a lazy bunch who don't bother to change any default settings, so it's a perfect relationship. Google pays Apple about £20 billion annually to be Safari's default search engine. This ensures Google stays as the default option across all iPhones and Macs.
But neither Google nor OpenAI, and definitely not Microsoft, have the legacy of creating meaningful experiences like Apple does. Their relationship has worked well for both companies – Google maintains search dominance while Apple collects billions for doing essentially nothing. It's comfortable but lacks innovation.
When Cue testified that “Safari search is down for the first time in Apple's history,” he wasn't just sharing a business metric. He was signalling a fundamental shift in how people discover information online. People are increasingly turning to AI assistants rather than traditional search engines – a behavioural change that threatens the very foundation of Apple and Google's lucrative arrangement.
The possibility of Apple moving to an AI search alternative isn't just about changing partners – it's about reimagining how people interact with information entirely and, perhaps more importantly, how information interacts with us as humans. This could be as revolutionary as when Apple transformed mobile phones with the iPhone.
This revelation raises fascinating questions about the future of search itself. The traditional keyword-based search paradigm that Google perfected might be approaching its expiration date. We're shifting from a world where we adapt our queries to match search engine algorithms to one where AI understands our natural language questions and intentions.
For Apple, this shift creates both risk and opportunity. The risk is obvious – potentially sacrificing billions in guaranteed revenue from Google. As Cue admitted, he “doesn't sleep at night” thinking about losing that money. But the opportunity is even more significant – a chance to redefine information access in ways that align with Apple's historical strengths in user experience.
What might this look like for users? Imagine asking your iPhone a complex question and receiving not a list of links, but a thoughtfully curated response that draws from multiple sources, presented in a visually elegant way that respects your preferences and context. Imagine search that understands the difference between research, shopping, troubleshooting, and curiosity – and adapts its responses accordingly. Search that remembers what you know and what you don't, building a relationship rather than treating each query as an isolated event.
AI as Apple's New Turning Point: Transforming Data into Experience
What made Apple special under Jobs wasn't just good technology – it was how that technology made you feel. Jobs had an almost magical ability to transform technical specifications into emotional experiences. The iPod wasn't marketed as “5GB of storage” but as “1,000 songs in your pocket.” The iPhone wasn't just a phone with a touchscreen; it was a revolutionary device that changed how we interact with technology.
Apple's genius was turning cold technology into warm experiences – like ancient alchemists trying to turn lead into gold. While other companies focused on specs and features, Apple focused on how people felt using their products.
AI offers Apple a chance to revive this approach in a profoundly new context. While Google and Microsoft race to build bigger models with more parameters, Apple could focus on using AI to create more human, more intuitive experiences. The technology isn't the point – it's what the technology enables that matters.
Apple's closed ecosystem, often criticised as restrictive, could be its greatest strength in the AI era. Unlike companies that must build AI for every device and operating system, Apple can create AI experiences specifically designed for their own hardware and software. This tight integration could produce AI interactions that feel fundamentally different from the generic experiences offered by competitors.
This approach to AI would represent a return to Apple's philosophical roots rather than a departure from them. Jobs was never interested in technology for technology's sake. He was interested in how technology could simplify and enhance human experience. He didn't want users to think about processors or memory or file systems – he wanted these technical elements to disappear into the background, leaving only the experience.
AI represents an extraordinary opportunity to advance this vision. Today's AI systems often force users to think about tokens, parameters, and prompt engineering – technical details that create friction between the user and their goals. Apple could pioneer a fundamentally different approach where the complexity of AI vanishes behind intuitive interfaces and anticipatory assistance.
What might this look like in practice? Imagine Photos that doesn't just organise images but understands the emotional significance of moments in your life, creating collections and memories with genuine emotional resonance. Imagine Siri that understands not just what you're asking, but why you're asking it – detecting frustration, confusion, or delight in your voice and responding appropriately. Imagine devices that learn your preferences so thoroughly that they anticipate your needs without requiring explicit instruction, but do so in ways that feel helpful rather than creepy.
Apple's integrated hardware and software ecosystem makes this vision uniquely achievable. The tight coupling between Apple's devices, operating systems, and services creates a rich contextual environment that could inform AI interactions in ways impossible for more fragmented systems. Your iPhone could understand that you're running late for a meeting based on your location and calendar, prompting your Mac to prepare relevant files and summaries without explicit instruction. Your AirPods could detect that you're in a noisy environment and automatically enhance voice clarity during calls. Your Apple Watch could sense stress patterns and suggest moments of mindfulness throughout your day.
Humans, AI, and the Impossible Loop of “Support”: A Personal Story
I recently installed a new computer and mobile device (yes, Apple). I downloaded ChatGPT on my phone and logged in… so far, so good. Then came the Mac's turn to log into ChatGPT… no good. Suddenly, out of the blue, OpenAI decided it didn't recognise my email or password – impossible given I was using Bitwarden for password management!
For 24 hours, I fought with the system. It was no surprise that when I sought support, I fell into, yes, a fucking AI that tried to twist me around its finger. No matter what I did, I simply couldn't escape a useless support loop. And try to ask to speak to a human? Nope.
The experience was maddening in its circularity. The support chatbot kept offering solutions that I had already tried, unable to understand the specificity of my situation. Each interaction followed the same frustrating pattern: I would explain the issue, the bot would suggest basic troubleshooting, I would explain that I'd already tried those steps, and the bot would cheerfully suggest them again, as if our previous exchange had never happened. There was no memory, no learning, no adaptation to my increasingly desperate attempts to break out of this algorithmic purgatory.
So I asked the chat (as gently as I could – not!) what the heck I needed to do… “Email OpenAI,” it said. OK… we're 5 days later and I still haven't gotten any answer. I eventually solved the problem by jumping on Reddit and talking to other humans!
OpenAI, Google, Microsoft – they're great technology companies, but they're not human companies, far from it. And X.AI is no better. It's also a dichotomy for a guy who wants to save humanity while building an ecosystem that will make humanity redundant to machines… but this is a topic for another article.
This frustrating experience perfectly shows what's wrong with AI today. The technology is impressive, but the experience is terrible. AI should make our lives easier, not trap us in endless support loops. It's especially ironic coming from companies that claim to be revolutionising human interaction while creating systems that feel profoundly inhuman.
My ChatGPT login fiasco represents a broader problem with current AI implementations. Companies building these systems prioritise scale and automation over genuine human needs. They're so focused on creating AI that can replace humans that they've forgotten how to design systems that actually help humans.
The circular loop of AI-powered support systems reveals a profound failure of imagination. Rather than using AI to enhance human support capabilities – making human agents more efficient and effective – companies like OpenAI have attempted to replace human support entirely. The result is systems that can handle simple, common queries but collapse entirely when faced with edge cases or complex problems.
This approach fundamentally misunderstands what makes support experiences satisfying. When we have problems, we don't just want solutions – we want understanding. We want acknowledgment of our frustration. We want the assurance that comes from knowing a human being is working to resolve our issue. AI support systems that can't provide these emotional elements will always feel hollow and unsatisfying, regardless of their technical capabilities.
Apple has historically understood this better than most technology companies. Their Genius Bar concept recognised that technical support isn't just about fixing devices – it's about supporting humans who happen to be experiencing technical problems. The face-to-face interaction, the empathy, the personalised attention – these elements transformed what could have been transactional interactions into relationship-building opportunities.
What if Apple applied this understanding to AI-powered support? Not by replacing humans entirely, but by creating systems that combine the scale of automation with the empathy of human interaction. AI that triages problems effectively, provides immediate solutions for simple issues, and seamlessly escalates to human specialists for complex cases. Support systems that remember your history, understand your level of technical sophistication, and adapt accordingly. A support experience that feels like talking to a knowledgeable friend rather than wrestling with an algorithm.
AI Handshake: Apple's Closed Garden is the Ultimate Fertile Ground
Apple's ecosystem has always been carefully controlled. Critics call it restrictive; fans say it's perfect. The truth is somewhere in between. But this “walled garden” approach could be exactly what makes Apple the ideal company to create truly human-centred AI experiences.
Unlike other tech giants that must build AI systems that work across countless different devices and operating systems, Apple can focus on creating AI experiences specifically optimised for their own hardware and software. This gives them a unique advantage in creating AI that feels natural and integrated rather than bolted-on.
Consider the contrasting approaches of Apple and its competitors. Google's AI must work on thousands of different Android devices, from budget phones to premium tablets, each with different capabilities and interface customisations. Microsoft's AI must function across decades of Windows versions and countless hardware configurations. This fragmentation forces them to create lowest-common-denominator experiences that can't take full advantage of specific hardware capabilities.
Apple, by contrast, can design AI experiences knowing exactly what sensors, processors, and capabilities are available on each device. They can optimise for the specific camera systems in their iPhones, the precise motion sensors in their Apple Watches, the acoustic properties of their AirPods. This tight hardware-software integration has always been Apple's strength, and it becomes even more valuable in the context of AI, where small differences in sensor data or processing capabilities can dramatically affect the user experience.
The walled garden metaphor is particularly apt when considering what makes effective AI experiences. Just as gardens balance natural growth with careful cultivation, the best AI experiences balance algorithmic freedom with thoughtful constraints. An AI allowed to operate without appropriate boundaries quickly becomes unpredictable and potentially harmful. But an AI constrained by too many rigid rules loses its ability to provide genuinely helpful assistance.
Apple's approach to ecosystem development has always involved finding this balance – enabling third-party creativity within frameworks designed to ensure quality and consistency. This philosophy translates perfectly to AI development. While other companies encourage open experimentation with minimal guardrails, Apple could pioneer AI systems that are simultaneously powerful and responsible, flexible and reliable.
This controlled approach also addresses one of the most significant challenges in current AI development: privacy. Most AI systems rely on massive data collection, often with limited transparency about how that data is used. Apple's privacy-focused business model offers a compelling alternative – AI that learns from on-device data without shipping it to central servers, personalisation that doesn't require surveillance, assistance that doesn't compromise security.
The integration possibilities within Apple's ecosystem are particularly exciting. Imagine Siri evolved into a genuinely intelligent assistant that understands not just your words but your context – knowing when you're working, exercising, relaxing, or socialising based on signals from your various Apple devices. An assistant that can access your documents, photos, messages, and calendar to provide truly relevant assistance without requiring you to explicitly grant permissions for each request.
This level of integration is simply impossible for companies that don't control both hardware and software. Google's AI might be powerful, but it can't deeply integrate with iPhones. Microsoft's AI might be sophisticated, but it can't seamlessly extend across Apple Watches, HomePods, and MacBooks. Only Apple can create AI experiences that span their entire ecosystem without friction or compatibility issues.
The Morning Ritual: Why Technology Should Never Lead the Day
Our journey each morning has changed dramatically. We used to pee first thing in the morning; today, we first check our phones. Our daily journey should not start from a technology point of view but from a human experience one. And Apple, with all its flaws, is the only company built exactly on that principle.
This shift in morning rituals reveals something important about our relationship with technology. We've allowed devices to take priority over basic human needs. Technology doesn't complement our lives – it dominates them.
The transformation of our morning routine from human-centred to device-centred represents one of the most profound yet underexamined shifts in contemporary life. This isn't merely a change in habit – it's a fundamental reordering of priorities that places digital consumption above physical existence. Before attending to our bodies, we now attend to our notifications. Before orienting ourselves in physical space, we orient ourselves in digital space.
This inversion has significant psychological consequences. Morning rituals have traditionally served as transitions from rest to activity, providing structure and intention for the day ahead. By surrendering this transition to technology, we begin each day in a reactive rather than proactive state – responding to external stimuli rather than following internal priorities.
Consider how different our relationship with technology might be if our devices respected these human rhythms. Imagine waking to an environment intelligently prepared for your day – lighting that gradually adjusts to support natural waking, music that aligns with your mood and schedule, information presented when and how you want it rather than in an endless stream of notifications. This vision requires AI that understands human contexts and needs at a deep level – not just responding to explicit commands but anticipating unstated preferences.
What if Apple could use AI to restore a healthier relationship with technology? Instead of designing systems that demand our constant attention, they could create AI that respects human rhythms and needs. AI that knows when to be present and when to fade into the background. Technology that serves human experience rather than the other way around.
Apple was once the company that understood these human factors better than any other technology firm. Jobs famously obsessed over how technology felt to use, not just what it could do. He recognised that the most meaningful technological innovations weren't just technically impressive but psychologically satisfying. The iPhone wasn't revolutionary because it had a touchscreen; it was revolutionary because it transformed our relationship with digital devices, making interaction more intuitive and direct.
In practice, this could mean an iPhone that understands when you've just woken up and presents a gentler, more mindful interface – perhaps showing a calming visualisation, a meaningful quote, or a brief summary of the day ahead before bombarding you with notifications. It could mean an Apple Watch that detects your sleep-wake transitions and coordinates with your HomeKit devices to create an environment conducive to a healthy morning routine. It could mean AirPods that understand when you're meditating or exercising and adjust their notifications accordingly.
The Road Ahead: Making Apple Great Again
Yes, they've lost their way, but here lies the opportunity to make Apple great again. Let's use AI to create the human-AI handshake that people actually need!
Apple's potential shift away from Google isn't just about changing search engines – it's about reclaiming the spirit that once made Apple special. It's about reviving Jobs' legendary reality distortion field through advanced artificial intelligence that understands human needs at a profound level.
The challenges facing Apple are substantial. The company has grown enormous, with institutional inertia that makes radical change difficult. Its extraordinary profitability creates natural resistance to risky innovation – why endanger reliable cash flows for uncertain future benefits? And the leadership team, while extraordinarily competent, was selected for operational excellence rather than visionary creativity.
Yet throughout history, great companies have periodically reinvented themselves in response to technological and cultural shifts. IBM transformed from a hardware company to a services company. Microsoft evolved from a desktop software provider to a cloud computing leader. Netflix abandoned DVD rentals to pioneer streaming entertainment. These transformations weren't incremental adaptations but fundamental reimagining of corporate identity and purpose.
Apple stands at a similar inflection point. The smartphone era that Jobs inaugurated and that Cook perfected is maturing. Growth is slowing, innovation is incremental, and differentiation is diminishing. The next great computing paradigm – whether it's called artificial intelligence, ambient computing, or something else entirely – is emerging. And Apple must decide whether to lead this transition or merely adapt to it.
The financial calculus is daunting. Sacrificing the Google search deal means potentially foregoing £20 billion in essentially free annual revenue. Building sophisticated AI capabilities requires enormous investment with uncertain returns. And pioneering new interaction models risks alienating users comfortable with current paradigms.
But Apple's greatest successes have always come from precisely this kind of calculated risk. The transition from iPod to iPhone cannibalised their most successful product line. The App Store opened their carefully controlled ecosystem to outside developers. Both decisions prioritised long-term vision over short-term comfort.
What makes me cautiously optimistic is that beneath Apple's corporate exterior, traces of Jobs' experience-obsessed DNA remain. The company still produces moments of genuine delight that reveal an underlying commitment to human experience. The seamless pairing of AirPods. The thoughtful integration of health features in the Apple Watch. The privacy protections built into iOS. These elements suggest that Apple hasn't completely forgotten what once made it special.
AI offers Apple not just a new technological frontier, but a chance to rediscover its soul. To remember that its greatest contribution wasn't technological dominance but humanising technology – making complex capabilities accessible, intuitive, and joyful. In a world increasingly dominated by algorithmic systems optimised for engagement rather than enrichment, Apple could offer a compelling alternative – AI designed to enhance human agency rather than replace it, to support human creativity rather than supplant it.
Can AI make Apple great again? Perhaps. But more importantly, perhaps Apple can make AI human – transforming a technology often perceived as alien and threatening into something that genuinely enhances our lives. For the sake of our technological future, and for the sake of meaningful human experiences in an increasingly digital world, I sincerely hope so.