It reads like he needed to do this to maintain credibility. He’s often criticized for believing Apple can do no (meaningful) wrong; he can always defend even Apple’s tactical mistakes with an explanation of the rational business decision.
The “Siri is delayed” statement they gave him, and he put out on (their) schedule without any accompanying commentary, made him look like a lap dog. His explanation is that he thought lots of media were given that statement and it wasn’t an exclusive or a big deal. Instead, it was Apple using him to push out embarrassing news through a favorable outlet with optimal timing (if there is such a thing).
He’s highlighting that he/we were “bamboozled” last WWDC, but to me it reads like he’s actually mad about what they did to him last week.
Update: I just noticed also that he updated his Apple PR post to include his commentary. That is, rather than have his commentary as a separate post (it came later) he’s combined them into one, giving the more recent reader the impression that they were always posted together. That’s not my memory of the timeline at all and I think he said as much on Upgrade. First he posted their statement (only) and then hours later he added some commentary. Not a big deal to me, but it further cements my impression that he’s mad because he’s embarrassed (and not about last June as much as about last Friday).
Wow. I’m going out on a limb saying this, but I think John is mildly irritated at Apple. He not only called BS on this situation, he did it four times. Until I read this I thought Gruber would find an excuse if Apple executives were filmed clubbing baby seals.
How did this happen? My guess is the same as many others, Apple was caught off guard when artificial intelligence hit the headlines. Yes they had been using “machine learning” in their hardware and software for years. But their major projects included a self driving car and an “only Apple can”, state of the art, face computer. Could AI have been on the back burner?
iPhone sales have been relatively flat for the past four years or so, and its services revenue has been enough to keep the stock market happy. But they need something to spur upgrades and new sales?
All I know for sure is today’s Siri is worse with Apple Intelligence turned on. One of the few things I trust Siri to do is adjust volume and play/pause/stop audio. And when AI is turned on it doesn’t seem to listen to my commands. So I don’t plan to turn AI back on until Apple, or someone, solves the prompt injection problem and they ship the “more personalized” Siri.
I upgraded both my iPhone and iPad today because of the critical Security update, and bizarrely, iPad turned Apple Intelligence back on, but iPhone didn’t.
Very naughty though Apple.
I really wonder what determines that. I have Apple Intelligence off on both my phone and my MacBook. After the critical update on both, my phone turned it on but my laptop didn’t.
I got bored and gave up on the article. Seems to me he regrets being associated with what he calls a “fiasco”
The fiasco is that Apple pitched a story that wasn’t true, one that some people within the company surely understood wasn’t true, and they set a course based on that.
You could say the course they set centered around—depending on how charitable you want to be—either deceiving their customers or breaking a promise to them in service of profit and maintaining market share.
Interesting, after the upgrade I discovered that even though I have Apple Intelligence disabled across devices it was re-enabled on my Mac, but not on my iPad. Rather annoying behaviour that.
Good idea. Here’s Grok’s.
Summary
John Gruber’s article “Something Is Rotten in the State of Cupertino” (March 12, 2025) slams Apple for delaying its “personalized Siri” features, promised at WWDC 2024 as part of Apple Intelligence. Hyped for on-device AI capabilities, these are now pushed to 2025 or later, denting Apple’s credibility. He cites internal doubts and questions the premature hype, calling it a major misstep in AI.
What Prompted the Author’s Perspective
Gruber’s critique stems from his long history covering Apple and its reputation for reliability. The gap between heavy promotion and delayed delivery, plus reports of internal skepticism (e.g., Federighi’s doubts), likely triggered his view of this as a systemic failure in a key area.
Speculation on How He’s Feeling
Gruber seems frustrated and disappointed, with sharp words like “fiasco” showing anger. As an Apple advocate, he’s likely alarmed that this could signal deeper issues, feeling both let down and worried about the company’s future.
I think they crossed a line when they started showing ads in the Fall showing these vapor features as a selling point for the new iPhone 16. Has Apple ever done that before? The concept videos Gruber mentions were not ads for an existing product. Those Apple Intelligence ads were deceptive and really makes me question the leadership at Apple. Forsaking credibility for short term profit. Lots of companies do that of course, I expect more from Apple.
Exactly. I don’t remember the timeline exactly, but I felt like introducing “Apple Intelligence” was a clear play to not get passed up any further. Great. But then they headlined those features to sell hardware and they never delivered. If they knew it, that’s deception. If they blew it, that’s incompetence. Either way, I join you in questioning their leadership.
The irony, as I think the ATP folks pointed out, Apple doesn’t need AI.
It is not an existential challenge like when Microsoft initially missed the evolution to the Internet.
Apple devices do just fine, thank you, running AI apps from others.
A survey of my regular friends and family, not MPU types, shows almost ignorance of the whole AI industry-wide thing and no FOMO or even concern about whether Apple has anything, special or not, for AI.
For the time being, yes. Apple doesn’t play the platform game, they are in the product game. They can wait it out until Apple Silicon delivers 2025 workstation-class power across the whole hardware line. They waited it out with iCloud, with Apple Maps, even the Apple Vision, but eventually they’ll figure this out probably sherlocking some successful competitor.
On the other hand, isn’t Gruber more grumpy than usual lately? I’ve seen him throw some punches against Gurman too.
I agree. But does Apple’s stock price need AI? The President’s tariffs has the stock market In turmoil, but Apple had a market cap of $3.7T on Feb 25 and as of close yesterday it was $3.15T.
Warren Buffett cut his stake in Apple from 49% to 23% of Berkshire’s portfolio last year. And now Wall Street analysts are cutting their forecasts for Apple iPhone sales this year as the consumer electronics giant delays adding artificial intelligence features.
I’m not worried that, at least in the near term, Apple will feel compelled to give President Trump $100M to hold a product showcase of Apple products on the White House lawn to try and goose up their share price.
The whole instability in the stock market is industry-wide and worldwide based on macro-economic turmoil - not a specific company’s strategy or failure - at least for most tech companies.
I purposely don’t pay too much attention to my portfolio during times like this. I told my financial advisor to continue buying based on dollar-cost-averaging (DCA). I’m buying cheaper stock right now. 