Founder, Stratechery
Apple Finally Gets Intelligence (And It Works This Time) | Sharp Tech with Ben Thompson
Link to Episode: https://sharptech.fm/member/episode/f...
Links:
Stratechery Youtube: / @stratechery
Sharp Tech website: https://sharptech.fm
Stratechery: https://stratechery.com
Sign up for Stratechery Plus: https://stratechery.com/stratechery-plus
Submit reader questions at [email protected]
About Ben Thompson
Ben Thompson, founder of the tech analysis site Stratechery, has been publishing articles and appearing on podcasts in recent months, offering commentary on major technology companies and industry trends. In a July 2026 Stratechery article, Thompson wrote a hypothetical earnings call script for Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, arguing that Meta should focus on its core advertising business and entertainment rather than competing directly with AI companies like OpenAI and Anthropic. On the Sharp Tech podcast, Thompson criticized Meta's messaging around AI, stating that the company should lean into connecting and entertaining people rather than positioning itself as a productivity or coding company. Thompson has also written about Apple, Google, and Anthropic. In a June 2026 article, he described Apple's delayed AI features as "vaporware" and argued that the company's approach to AI, centered on the iPhone's personal context, could be a long-term advantage if executed properly. In another piece, he analyzed Google's business model, describing its advertising business as highly profitable while noting that its cloud division is growing faster. Regarding Anthropic, Thompson wrote that the company's safety-focused messaging aligns with its business interests, and he expressed concern about the influence of companies building advanced AI systems. He has also discussed topics including the Xbox business, memory chip shortages, and SpaceX's potential IPO and plans for data centers in space.
Transcript (62 segments)
A
Andrew0:00
Top of the show here. We got a lot of emails on the heels of WWDC, but I'll begin with Gabriel who wrote on the way into WWDC, sent this email last week. Ben and Andrew, is there any way for Apple to come out of WWDC leaving a good impression? If they play it safe and only deliver on features that were promised back in 2024, people will think it's just warmed over news. On the other hand, if they show off new capabilities for Apple Intelligence, people will be wary of trusting them. Which of these approaches should Apple focus on? Is there any third option where they can leave the public excited about what they presented without the bitter aftertaste of the whole something is rotten in the state of Cupertino debacle. So, there was no third option. A lot of people were pretty underwhelmed. What did you think? You were in Cupertino.
B
Ben Thompson0:55
Yeah, I think Apple foreclosed the opportunity. What Gabriel's putting his finger on is they foreclosed the opportunity for people to leave this keynote excited for the exact reasons he said. They could show exciting things and no one would believe them or they could show like we're actually like doing basic stuff, but it works this time and then everyone's underwhelmed. So, that's Apple's own fault. This is the cost of 2024 is that no one is going to leave 2026 genuinely excited and feeling like Apple is changing the world.
A
Andrew1:25
Mhm.
B
Ben Thompson1:26
Given that constraint, I thought they did a great job. And the most important aspect of doing a great job was the extent to which this was a fairly painful keynote.
A
Andrew1:41
Yeah.
B
Ben Thompson1:42
On one hand, it was shockingly short. And it was shockingly short despite the fact it felt like approximately 23% of the keynote was watching loading indicators. Like this was the demo. This was the keynote of all keynotes that could have benefited from being live. Because what they needed to do was rebuild their credibility. And you rebuild your credibility by stuff actually working. Now, I guess they're never going to do that again.
A
Andrew2:15
To that at this point, but I was texting Jamin during the presentation and all the AI demos were pretty tedious. However, if you were doing them in front of a live audience and then watching it work in real time
B
Ben Thompson2:31
What if it fails? Right?
A
Andrew2:32
Yeah, then it becomes kind of thrilling and they could have done that but didn't.
B
Ben Thompson2:36
This actually is a testament to a weakness of the Tim Cook era. To go out there and do it live and say we're going to roll the dice, we think we actually got it, and we're going to go out there and risk total embarrassment is itself an acknowledgement of the embarrassment they should already feel
A
Andrew3:02
Yeah.
B
Ben Thompson3:02
Given what happened in 2024. And number two, that is the third way. That's the way where you come out of it and you're like
A
Andrew3:11
The balls are out there, guys.
B
Ben Thompson3:13
Yeah, they went out there and I use that term carefully, but that would have been the response. They went out there, they threw away their pre-recorded keynotes, they said we are doubling down, we're putting our chips on the table, and we're going to do live demos, screw it. And it actually works this time. And in that case, given what they shipped, it's totally what they said in 2024. There was almost nothing new. And you know what? That's fine. What they showed in 2024 was pretty compelling. That's why we were excited in 2024. And it's compelling, crucially
A
Andrew3:53
It's compelling for like 90% of Apple customers for whom high-end expensive AI is not really what they want.
B
Ben Thompson4:02
It's compelling for high-end AI customers. Who hasn't wanted to surface something that's in your data somewhere? And they can do it because they're the operating system. It's because of their position with the iPhone that they are uniquely positioned to do something with AI that no one else can do. Even though it's not technically impressive, it's still differentiated, highly differentiated. And that was why I was so enthusiastic about 2024, because aha, they have an angle here. They don't need to do a bunch of capex spending. They can actually deliver something meaningful given their pre-existing position. They're leveraging their position as
A
Andrew4:48
The data that matters. Yeah.
B
Ben Thompson4:49
They own the data that matters and they have a position to corral developers to use this app intent system and their index system to give them their data, even though the developers don't like Apple and all these bits and pieces. But it was a very smart strategic play and I was very enthusiastic about it in 2024. And if I step out of it's 2026 and look, mythos or fable
A
Andrew5:17
They're so ashamed. Yeah.
B
Ben Thompson5:20
It remains impressive and compelling. And now I think where they fell short is they didn't go all the way. I think a live demo would have transformed this. It would have been a smash hit. Especially because almost universally the reports are it works and it works super well. I have not installed, I usually never install betas. I actually do plan on this one. This is part and parcel of I was still unpacking last year. I have to find my last year's iPhone, my spare iPhone that I carry with me is actually two years ago iPhone. It's been a busy week, so I apologize. I was not properly prepared for the show. But by all accounts, everyone who's talked about it says it just works.
A
Andrew6:06
Mhm.
B
Ben Thompson6:06
And it just works. That's what Apple needs to get back to, is it just works. And
A
Andrew6:13
Yeah.
B
Ben Thompson6:14
It seems like it does.
A
Andrew6:15
Well, we shall see. Boyan responding to your WWDC article on Tuesday wrote in and said, 'Apple is not thinking different. It is living in the past. It is living in the past and becoming a victim of when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail mentality. That is exactly the mistake that Microsoft made with mobile. They tried to shoehorn everything into a Windows viewpoint. Apple is replaying the same playbook. If AI changes the world like its biggest protagonist think it will, Apple will be in deep trouble. Fortunately for them, it is very likely that AI becomes just another very useful software layer and Apple dodges a bullet. Do you agree with that?'
B
Ben Thompson7:03
Boyan or two Boyans?
A
Andrew7:04
Uh, one Boyan.
B
Ben Thompson7:06
Uh
A
Andrew7:07
[laughter]
B
Ben Thompson7:07
Because Boyan's last sentence completely refutes the first like five sentences. If in fact Apple AI is just another very useful software layer, then that means Apple is in fact thinking different by not spending hundreds of billions of dollars and going their own way and sticking with the iPhone paradigm. So, which is it, Boyan? I feel like I don't even need to answer. The guy answered himself.
A
Andrew7:33
I mean, I would say they are demonstrably thinking differently than the rest of tech and have been over the last several years.
B
Ben Thompson7:40
Demonstrably anchoring themselves in the iPhone paradigm.
A
Andrew7:45
Mhm.
B
Ben Thompson7:46
That doesn't mean it's wrong. That was a point I was trying to make. I didn't love my article this week for a few reasons, one of which was this. I had to rewrite the ending multiple times because I was trying to say, 'Look, all these critiques like Boyan's critique is totally legitimate. Apple's totally doing what's best for them. They're totally doing what makes sense for their model. They're totally not investing in things that they're probably not good at.' And all these reasons
A
Andrew8:13
Any differently than they were over the last 10 or 15 years.
B
Ben Thompson8:16
And all these things, but when you articulate that companies are doing what is good for them and in their interest, it's usually followed by a but.
A
Andrew8:27
Mhm.
B
Ben Thompson8:28
The world's different now and this is totally wrong thinking. Sometimes it's just right thinking. You're just fortunate enough that actually the model works. And the fact of the matter is, I have talked about multiple times, Boyan, you should give me a little credit here. Or one of the Boyans, Boyan one, that there's yes, you can imagine a future of a different UI paradigm, just-in-time UI, there when you need it, gone when you don't, agents working in the background on your behalf, much more anticipatory of your needs. All these ambient sensors and input devices. This is why I talked about it in the context of Project Solera a bit. Which again, I love that demo even though it almost probably will never ship. It's going to be vaporware. But it was a tangible articulation of a completely different model of computing that is not like the iPhone at all. It's the exact opposite. It's what Boyan one says is coming and Apple is screwed. But then Boyan two is here and saying, 'Actually the iPhone's pretty phenomenal.'
A
Andrew9:33
Mhm.
B
Ben Thompson9:33
And in a context where what do consumers pay for?
A
Andrew9:39
Um
B
Ben Thompson9:40
Give me one service that consumers pay for.
A
Andrew9:43
Uh, what do you mean? Like a software service? I don't know.
B
Ben Thompson9:47
Netflix.
A
Andrew9:48
Mm. Yeah.
B
Ben Thompson9:49
What is Netflix?
A
Andrew9:51
Entertainment.
B
Ben Thompson9:51
I should have put Netflix in the article because that helped make my point more. I should have said customers don't pay for it. They don't pay for productivity. They pay for entertainment. The iPhone is a phenomenal entertainment device. That is its number one functionality. It's social media, vertical video, talking to your friends. Now, is it also a productivity device? Absolutely. One of the most useful productivity devices in the world. But it's used by people to do work. I do most of my work on the iPhone. I do my actual writing. Someone was asking me for my software stack. It's funny, I have this superpowered MacBook Pro, but I use it like a text editor and some Excel spreadsheets maybe. I do most of my reading, most of my thinking, a lot of my sketching out ideas on my phone. I use an iPhone like a Gen Z maniac.
A
Andrew10:42
Mm.
B
Ben Thompson10:42
And it is definitely a productivity device. But for most people, they're not doing work most of the time. They
A
Andrew10:52
Yeah.
B
Ben Thompson10:53
Entertainment is just as important, more important in fact, than productivity. And on that vector, what perspective is any of these devices better than a phone?
A
Andrew11:07
I mean, we'll see. It might be 10 years before any sort of device emerges that could actually challenge the premise of the phone.
B
Ben Thompson11:15
Boyan, I agree with Boyan too here. I'm coming around to, you know, Apple maybe is lucky to be in this situation. Better be lucky than good.
A
Andrew11:26
No, exactly. And I look at what they announced this past week and Apple doesn't need to hit home runs in AI to win in AI and to double down on all those advantages. That makes sense.
B
Ben Thompson11:41
In AI, they need to sometimes it's sufficient to maintain your position. Right? They're not going to be the best AI.
A
Andrew11:54
Best model. No, exactly. But I guess to change the metaphor, Apple is like the
B
Ben Thompson11:59
Most used AI though.
A
Andrew12:01
What about Apple as the Spurs in the second half of game four last night? They're up 25 points and the key for them here is to not miss nine 3s in a row and just completely strike out.
B
Ben Thompson12:15
Why are you taking nine 3s in a row like you're behind? Just getting layups and free throws would get the job done.
A
Andrew12:24
[laughter]
B
Ben Thompson12:25
And I think that's what WWDC was this year and it's perfectly sensible as far as I'm concerned. Jonathan says,