a little cope for the fact that apple failed to present state of the art performance
Technical capability is rarely more important than product market fit.
The way to minimize hallucination is to use LLMs to manipulate text (translate, summarize, query, reword, etc) rather than generate it out of thin air, and arguably Apple are doing this by integrating LLM use into the product and therefore controlling it's application, rather than just providing a chat interface that people are wont to use an hallucinating "search engine"/oracle.
E.g. Apple generating emojis using a diffusion model is clearly less SOTA than other image models, but could be a really neat feature from a product/user perspective. Would a better diffusion model help? Maybe, but it probably changes the product less than all the UI and tight integration work they will have done.
If I was to guess, I would guess many more emoji's will get created through this feature than images generated in Microsoft's 'Image Creator' in Paint (I could be wrong - just my gut feel).
Apple relegated ChatGPT to a 3rd tier AI capability for "google answers", and "write me a poem" party tricks, and rightfully put it behind a privacy disclaimer. It looks barely better than the various ChatGPT shortcuts so many people have cobbled together. That part of the announcement stuck out like a sore thumb and looked to me like a huge L for OpenAI. The "partnership" was a nothingburger. Like someone at Apple agreed to it early on but then late in the project realized it wasn't needed at all. So much for SOTA.
It certainly is. And the Rabbit R1. How in the world did people who supposedly know anything about AI think they could make that work as a standalone device detached from rich context. The sad thing is, rich context may not be possible outside of OS-level integration that is gate kept, but I still think they're idiots for trying.
It is mainly B2B market in reality. Look for the API capabilities: https://platform.openai.com/docs/introduction