AI’s Steve Jobs?, Big Tech AI Chaos, 2026 Crystal Ball

Channel: Alex Kantrowitz

Published at: 2026-01-13

YouTube video id: vOS-ZImcve8

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOS-ZImcve8

Does AI need its own Steve Jobs? Which
big tech company is climbing the AI
chaos ladder? And let's look ahead at
what will happen in 2026? [music]
That's coming up with MG Seagler right
after this. Welcome to Big Technology
Podcast. Well, it's not the first Monday
of the month, but this is the first real
Monday of [music] uh the month here,
January 12th, as we get 2026 kicked off,
which means [music] it's time for MG
Seagler to join us for his monthly spot.
We have a great show for you coming up.
We're going to talk about whether AI
needs its own Steve Jobs. [music] We're
going to talk a little bit about the
chaos that AI brings to big tech and
who's climbing that ladder. Of course,
we have [music] some breaking news that
Apple and Google have just signed the
deal for Google to power the new AI
functionality [music] within Siri. And
of course, uh it's since it's the first
uh our first episode together of the
year, let's take a [music] look ahead
and see what MG thinks is going to
happen in 2026. MG, great to see you.
Welcome back to the show.
>> Thank you. Great to be back with you in
the new year, Alex. Sorry for my rugged
appearance. Uh it's very cold and wintry
here in London, so I'm uh I'm still I'm
still uh in winter mode fully. Not in
2026 mode yet. [snorts]
>> That's right. Yeah, I have been
definitely checking the European
temperatures as I prepare myself
mentally and physically to make my way
out to Davos next week and shiver. So,
>> get ready. [laughter] There we go. So
this morning a a great piece by you came
into my inbox uh from Spyglass which
folks you can find at spyglass.org and
basically the piece argues that AI needs
its own Steve Jobs. uh this is obviously
a transformational
uh technology and we are starting to see
um a lot of skepticism around it and
especially in the US there is negative
sentiment whereas in places like China
and even Europe uh there's much more of
a positive approach to AI and you
basically say listen there's two strong
camps around AI there are those who
thinks it's the future uh and anyone who
thinks otherwise is a And then
there are those who think that AI is the
worst thing in the world and it's going
to ruin everything. And I think some of
the impetus behind this piece is
basically like if AI is going to live
its potential, it needs to get through
this perception problem otherwise it's
going to struggle to catch on with
consumers, struggle to catch on in
society, maybe face regulation and a
host of other, you know, lack of funding
and a host of other negative things. So
just talk a little bit about your thesis
of why you think AI needs its own Steve
Jobs and and why you think we're not
quite there yet.
>> Yeah. So this this sort of kicked off as
many posts I assume do for many people
these days and sort of a group chat I'm
in where a lot of folks were sort of
talking through some of these notions
mainly the idea as you noted that there
seems to be this dichotomy between um
the US and sort of in some ways the rest
of the world. But I think it's more
probably pronounced sort of US versus
the Asian countries at least from what
you know is reported and what we hear.
But I you know I live in London so I'm
here in Europe even though it's not part
of the EU famously anymore. Um, but
still there's there's definitely a I
would say a much more positive sentiment
that I feel like talking to people here.
And maybe that's maybe that's some level
of na naiv naivee or maybe that's um you
know something something else because
you're not sort of living and breathing
day-to-day
um sort of all the AI news non-stop. Um
but I do think per the post I think a
lot of it you know at least stems from
the notion that
people look to who are the who are the
folks who are sort of putting this out
there in the world and who's talking
about it and who's leading these these
AI companies right and obviously it's
all the big tech players and big tech is
uh you know problematic these days in
some fronts because it's obviously it's
the biggest companies in the world right
now in terms of market cap but also in
terms of employment and in terms of all
different sorts of things that are
important to the economy and I do think
that some of them have high levels of
trust uh and some of them have sort of
less high levels of trust. Uh but also
the individuals in in particular and
hence why I sort of kick off with the
the Steve Jobs notion because uh Steve
Jobs of course famously was uh you know
I think maybe the best ever to uh when
it came to unveiling new products and
sort of putting new technologies out in
the world. Um, and really, you know,
sort of the argument is is just going
back and watching some of those old
Steve Jobs keynotes and even when he was
much younger in his uh in his 20s and
30s, just talking through technology,
which obviously wasn't as as commonplace
as it became, and the piece, you know,
the Mac and everything, and he was
talking through sort of some notions to
some pretty lay lay people in the
audience who wouldn't necessarily be
able to to wrap their heads around it
fully, but he was able to get people
excited about these things. And that
reminds me of sort of the days that
we're in right now with AI and how do
you get people super excited about all
this stuff that's coming out there. So
anyway, there's a lot going on in there.
But I do think again, you know, backing
up to the to the big picture stuff, I
think that there's a a perception
problem for sure. And interestingly that
it's that it's in the American, you
know, market it seems like more so than
the other ones at this time.
>> Right. And so let me start to poke at
this argument a little bit because you
know the the argu count argument here is
who's really pitched software well with
charisma. I mean with Steve Jobs like
it's very clear the iPhone it does some
things that like you know people can
immediately grasp. Maybe that was Jobs's
gift is he was able to relate this
technology to regular people but it
doesn't really take you know too much of
a demo to be like this thing can make
phone calls it can connect to the
internet. You can take photos with it.
uh and there's an app store, right? But
whereas like
>> Chad GPT and it's like similar with
Google, right? Like Google actually has
done amazing marketing, but it's never
really been a pitch a pitch person like
you know, sort of demoing it. It's more
more of been like here's the emotional
side of being able to use Google to find
your like longlost relatives or
something like that. But with with
ChachiPT, it's the same thing. It's a
blank box. And so I wonder even if you
have like and and I think I I'd agree
with your premise that it's not like we
have the most charismatic people in the
world, you know, or at least people on
par with Jobs is Charisma pitching this
stuff. Um I just wonder if it's if it's
really possible for a software product
uh like Chachi PT to ever have a demo
like that that sort of uh sparks that
emotion in people and inspires people
the way that Jobs did with the iPhone.
Uh I would say that I think that that's
a really good push because sort of
towards the end of the article which is
about 200 words I do note that the
person who I think is most analogous to
jobs in the current sort of day and age
is Jensen Wang which you know obviously
is uh as you're talking about is is more
hardware and video is more hardware
focused than software. They have of
course software layers with CUDA and
things like that, but I think that he's
really good at those keynotes and those
have become like you know the the sort
of apparent in a way to the Apple
keynotes even though it's um it's
interesting cuz it's not so userfacing
you know the the hardware obviously it's
uh it's stuff that
>> it's incredible that Jensen is able to
do this because he like legitimately he
makes it mustsee TV.
>> Yes. And and instead of having an iPhone
to show, it's literally a board,
>> right?
>> But he's a genius when it comes to the
showmanship, right? Like he brings out
the big shield and, you know, is holding
it up like an Avenger and it's got chips
on it and stuff. And so he knows how to
like basically make it relate to people
even though that's that's a product that
again most people aren't buying.
Obviously people buy gaming cards, but
even then they they usually just check a
box on whatever you know Dell Dell or um
you know, Lenovo that they're buying and
then they they get the Nvidia graphics
card that they want with that. most
people aren't building their own
computers still and so let alone
building their own AI uh you know giant
infrastructure um as these big companies
are and who Nvidia's main clients are
right now and so again he's a genius in
the way that he's been able to make this
sort of I don't know if it's relatable
but at least fun and interesting to
watch. Um and again I think that that's
what Jobs was great at. But to your
exact point though, it's a little it's
probably a little bit easier when it's
going to be a product that people and
consumers can sort of use in their hands
like an iPhone or like the Mac or an
iPad, etc. Um, whereas Jensen's able to
to jin up this excitement around these
things that people aren't going to be
touching. But to your exact point on,
you know, software versus hardware,
again, he is Jensen is still selling
hardware for the most part and that's
what Jobs was doing for the most part.
Obviously, Apple is great in software
too, but to your point, like software is
harder to do. You have to do different
types of things. And in part, I think
it's harder still even with AI because
as you know, it's um it's even more of a
blank page problem, right? You can do
anything pretty much with AI. And so,
how do you exactly market that like
except for going after very sort of
specific and granular use cases? And so,
I think to your point about Google, like
I would imagine that OpenAI and they did
their first what Super Bowl commercial
last year, right? I would imagine that
all all the marketing ends up being sort
of more brand marketing like and more uh
you know pulling at heartstrings and but
also maybe showing off um you know very
verticalized utility whatever they they
happen to be going for in that in those
points.
>> Yeah. Here's my prediction for what
we're going to see as a Super Bowl ad
from one of these companies. I could be
wrong. I think we're going to see like
open AI basically come out and show the
journey of a person typing their
symptoms. No, maybe this would be too
much. typing their symptoms into open
into chat GPT and then finding out that
they have like a rare disease that a
doctor couldn't uh couldn't cure.
>> I like it. But they have to be careful
obviously when that's like and Google's
in the news right now for having to pull
back some search results, right? because
of they I think there was a there was an
investigation um by one of the
publications that basically found that
uh the the one the search one box thing
the AI populated um AI answers was sort
of giving some iffy information I guess
on liver function tests and things like
that and so so they have to be super
careful for anything that they do with
healthcare even though as as as well why
I think you're saying that they're all
going after this space right now right
open AI anthropic Google of course
Microsoft That's like this is one
healthcare is one of the verticals that
they think is going to be a big
certainly a big player and a big money
maker you know potentially for them but
advertising that is is a tricky beast
>> that is tricky maybe maybe it's like one
step down from it then maybe it's
somebody who's like on this like weight
loss journey and they have like a
sickopantic chat being like you're doing
great thanks you know share your stats
today oh look at the improvement that
you've had and then then you see them at
the end just like you know they're
sweating heading running across the
finish line of a marathon and it's like
Chad GPT enable the best version of
yourself or running side by side with
you.
>> There we go. That's a good tagline.
>> I like it. I I definitely think
something like that. Yeah. [snorts]
>> So, but but let's keep going on this
because it is really interesting. So,
okay. So, software I think we both agree
is going to is a little bit harder to
pitch than than like a phone that you
would hold. I wonder also if there's and
it is interesting because usually the US
is not the one that has this issue and
especially since there's the
reservations in the US but I wonder if
there's also like an inherent level of
creepiness to AI that is like somewhat
underappreciated especially maybe even
in our in the conversations not you and
I but just conversations I have on the
show where it's like yeah like AI can be
really useful but you do give it more
data than you've given any product
people like forming relationships with
this technology is you know maybe cool
in a way, but also somewhat creepy and
like
>> Yeah.
>> You know, you know, just like it's
almost like you don't even if you're if
you're running a company, you don't
really want to talk about how much
people are going to trust you with this
stuff. You almost kind of want them to
not think about it. Like being in a
casino and not thinking about the days
passing, [laughter]
>> right? So, you hide all the uh hide all
the windows and and all the clocks. Um,
yes, I I do think that there's
something, you know, unique and new
about AI that's that is also helping to
fuel a lot of this. Um, and a lot of it
is sort of I don't know if creepy
there's some level of creepiness for
sure with with the amount of personal
data that that these systems will
eventually are already sort of knowing
about you. And then of course there's
the sexbot stuff which is constantly in
the news obviously the romantic
relationship stuff the the tragic you
know suicide um situations that you know
AI may be a part of right now and sort
of all of that stuff is is sort of
building towards what I think you're
hitting on and and it's even more than
that right because it's like these a lot
of these companies as as we were just
saying like they are big tech and so you
know a company like Meta has already had
you know their whole wide range of
different sort of privacy issues.
Google's had their own privacy issues
obviously in the past as well. And so
when it's these companies that are also
the ones that are sort of, you know, at
the forefront of the new technology,
uh that's just going to sort of add fuel
to that fire. And then of course the
biggest one might be um the jobs
displacement stuff, right? Like it's not
just like and I hit on this in the
piece. So yes, some people the doomers
view this as existential and that it
might be the end of the world which you
know TBD obviously most people don't
believe that but there is some you know
percentage chance that keeps people keep
bringing up that maybe there is there is
a way in which this goes really really
badly but even if it doesn't even if you
don't believe that there is likely a
world in which a lot of just jobs are
displaced and a lot of jobs are lost
because of this technology and that's
not necessarily as we've talked about
before it's not necessarily fairly new
in the history of all technologies, but
it is going to be probably the most
acutely felt and certainly maybe the
fastest felt of any of those in the
previous like years and decades and
hundreds of years ago because this is
evolving so fast and because it's going
into these other businesses so fast. And
so I do think that people just read all
of these headlines um and and just know
like they see we talked about this
several weeks ago, but it's like the
dichotomy between these companies
spending more and more money than ever,
Microsoft, um Google, etc. on capex, but
at the same time doing layoffs, too. And
so even even within the big companies,
so not even, you know, not even outside
of tech, there's there's layoffs
happening within these companies. And
it's at least in part because they
believe that AI will be able to do a lot
of the jobs that are already being done
um you know within these companies right
now. And so I think all of that sort of
plays into um what it what's driving it.
And then yeah the the US thing you know
though remains like really interesting
because um in the other sort of places
around the world it just seems less um
less divisive than it is right now. And
I do think that some of it is um yeah,
just like the these big company
narratives, but also again I go back to
the individuals like it's just like do
you if you don't have that super
charismatic person on stage and maybe
Jensen is the person even though it's a
little weird because you know they're
not actually doing the AI big training
models. They're they're powering all of
that but they're not actually building
them themselves at least yet. Um, so
like what is it that actually gets
people comfortable with it or is it just
going to have to come with time and and
people using it and the world not ending
and people not losing their jobs or
maybe losing their jobs but AI helps
them find new jobs etc that kind of
stuff. Yeah, I I I will say it does it
is like the ultimate bargain that you
make with the technology like this
ultimate tech bargain, right? for a lot
of tech products is like you give a
little data you get a little utility and
we've been giving more and more and this
one is just like well you know the all
the the downsides are also the the
positives right it's like the more I
give to chat GPT the more useful it
becomes to me or even the more I use
this for my job uh the more evident it's
going to be that it can do parts of my
job and of course put me at risk but
it's also like something that makes me
so much more productive and and getting
back to so so maybe there's a technology
side but getting back to the person uh
side of of this. You spent a lot of time
in the piece talking about Sam Alman. Um
so, you know, it was interesting to me.
So, I I interviewed Sam at the end of uh
2025
>> and I thought it was a great
conversation. I thought we like really
went some some places that were new to
me and interesting news making. Um but
but in preparation I did uh you know I
watched like almost all of Sam's
interviews uh you know maybe again uh
cuz I've watched many of them before and
it was very interesting to me to see the
reaction to them in in the comments
underneath.
>> Yes.
>> Especially from non tech audiences. uh
Theo Von's podcast for instance, like if
you look at the Spotify comments, you
see um just a a it's almost a personal
reaction to Sam of distrust and uh now
maybe part of this is because of his
feud with Elon and there's a lot of Elon
fans out there and he did, you know, he
did take a nonprofit and turn it into,
you know, what's going to be a trillion
dollar IPO company. Um but but it was
surprising to me the level of of
personal vitriel that I saw there. What
do you what do you think is behind that?
>> Uh yeah, it's interesting you bring that
up. I think that was the exact jumping
off point in that uh that conversation I
was having too that sort of spurred this
along because it was like okay it
honestly it may have even been your
conversation with him where it's like
that's a great conversation like he's
saying a lot of you know reasonable
things and you know a lot of obviously
smart and savvy things about where this
is all heading and in your conversation
in that Theo van conversation with Ben
Thompson like a bunch of these
conversations all of the feedback you
see almost all the feedback you see is
exactly what you're talking about like
these super negative quick to judge uh
things that just do not trust in this
case Sam in particular but like I think
that it happens uh you know wider than
him I think that there's a lot of these
types of AI conversations where where
it's sort of the comments delve quickly
into that I mean honestly on a a much
lower level I even see it anytime I
publish anything that's sort of more
positive about AI and less skeptical
like immediately you get a bunch of
people jumping in and of course I'm used
to that from from old reporting days and
everything of comment sections and
whatnot. So, it doesn't bother me, but
it's it's interesting to me that it um
that immediately people just like assume
that you're like you have some sort of
ulterior motive even just writing about
like you know these technologies in in a
way that they view as not um in line
with their own again I I frame it as a
sort of a religious viewpoint. But I do
think that you hit on like the Elon
element of it. I think that that's
certainly a part of it. Certainly with
like a Theo von type audience, I'm not
so sure. But with your audience, like it
doesn't seem like it would be that, you
know, dynamic at play, but it's still
interesting that people jump to that.
And I don't know if, yeah, again, if
that's particular to Sam. I hit on it a
little bit cuz, you know, I knew him as
you did back in the day in his first
startup. um and and sort of watching how
this has evolved over the open AAI saga
from the blip, you know, when he when he
was ousted on forward and you know, all
of the subsequent sort of text messages
and emails that have come out as a
result of lawsuits, many of which from
from the Elon lawsuit basically point to
uh a lot of internal uh dissension uh
and and you know, strife within Open AI
about can we trust Sam? and and it's
sort of weird that it sort of is
spilling out into the public. Like it
seems like that's a weird um mirror of
of what was happening at least in the
earlier days um within that cohort of
OpenAI itself.
>> Yeah. Know as so that I think this is an
interesting mystery to me and it's
something that I'm going to you know
keep thinking about and maybe uh you
know continue to try to learn more
about. But um you know as we wrap up the
segment you like go through a lot of the
different um you know big personalities
uh in the AI world and think about like
who might be that might fill that uh
Steve Jobs role. Uh my dark horse is
Panos Pane at Amazon. He has a hardware
product. He's a very charismatic
presenter. Um you know we're going to
talk a little bit about how big tech
companies are fairing right now but um
I've got I have Alexa Plus. It's
actually better than I anticipated. So,
he, you know, obviously a long way to go
because that thing needs needs to get
even better. But maybe he's the person.
I don't know.
>> Yeah. And, you know, I put his name out
there. I do, it's interesting with these
big companies, right? Because you would
think like, okay, well, there's there's
Satcha Nadella and Sundai Sundar Pachai
and and Andy Jasse at Amazon, right?
It's like
some of them are of course certainly
Satya and Sundar are more forefront of
AI trying to give all the talking points
and become you know thought leaders as
as you sort of have to as you're selling
these both to the public but also to
enterprises and whatnot. So you want to
be out there sort of talking up um you
know what is the most what they view as
the most important technology right now.
But at the same time that's not their
only business. like Google has a massive
business beyond just what they're doing
with Gemini and and Microsoft has a
massive business beyond C-pilot and
Amazon has a massive business obviously
beyond Alexa and so um I do go to sort
of and a few of those at least the sec
the sort of uh tier below the people who
are in charge of AI and as you note uh
panos pane and Mustafa Sulleman at
Microsoft and then Deis Hassabus at uh
at Google and DeepMind and so are these
the people who do it and and you know I
go through like a little bit on each of
them and it doesn't really feel like it
to me. I think I think Demis has
probably the closest in terms of
credibility wise and this is just my own
sort of personal view of it. Um I don't
know him. I I don't have like a strong
point of view on it. Um but I just feel
like from what I've heard and and seen I
I think that he has some real
credibility certainly the tech uh the
tech credibility on that in that regard
and some of the others are a little a
little bit more marketing. Um, you could
say Jobs was like that though too,
right? Um, uh, certainly back in the
day. And so, yeah, that list and I would
just say just backing up for one second
to to Sam Alman because I do in that
piece, you know, I'm trying to be a
little bit more even-handed. It's not
all negative. Like I think that he is
right now the person who has taken up
that torch and some of that is obviously
because he's teamed up with Johnny IV,
right? And you can't avoid sort of that
parallel and Iive himself has said like
there's parallels there. And so yeah, if
you want jobs comparisons, that's a
pretty good route to take.
>> Yeah, you can't get any better than than
working with Johnny Iive on on a new
product. Um, but I do think like Sam and
the Open AI product team and strategy
has done a better job than anyone else.
You and I have talked about this a lot
on AI um to date. I think Google has
been catching up a bit and I think some
of the others as you note Amazon and
others have been starting to catch up a
little bit. But I do think that OpenAI
deserves a lot of credit for moving that
forward and getting us to the point
where like every time OpenAI launches
something whether or not it it turns out
to be a huge hit or just a sort of a
flash in the pan as maybe Sora was like
I do think that they do a good job
getting it out there much better than a
lot of other companies have done to
date. And so that's a that's a mark in
Sam's favor. Um, but again, I it's just
it's not none of these people even
they're they're interesting. They're
successful in their own right, but I do
not think that they're going to be the
ones who are able to sell this the way
that Steve Jobs could sell an iPhone to
the public. And maybe no one can. Maybe
that's unreasonable, but I do think that
that's what is playing into some of this
backlash.
>> Yeah. No, I definitely agree with your
point about OpenAI's ability to get the
products out there for sure. And on the
Demis front, uh, interestingly, and
maybe this is because they're Google,
uh, related, but they put out this, um,
documentary. It's called The Thinking
Game. I'm in the middle of it. Came out.
>> I've heard a lot about it. I heard a lot
about it break. I haven't watched it
yet. It's It's just on YouTube, right? I
think
>> on YouTube. Very good. It's with people.
>> Yeah. Very interesting. And it has 260
million views on YouTube.
>> What are the comments like on that? Any
is even just the first five, are there
are they negative? Are they positive?
like
>> it's possible that they're they're uh
curated, but um [laughter] people people
do love Demis in these in these
comments. So uh but you know again like
you know you know what's interesting the
focus of the documentary of course it's
on you know AI and you know LLM and
stuff like that but scientific
breakthrough
>> right
>> uh and you know the protein folding the
game playing and what that's going to
enable um old footage of Demis with his
like slide of like AI for science and
you see things I have it right right
here in front of me actually protein
folding genomics theorem proving quantum
chemistry climate science particle
physics. I think you know and they are
they are making real progress on these
fronts as much as we talk about uh LLM.
So maybe that maybe that's basically the
route is that they just need to go and
talk about about science and and just
you know compare that angle to what we
were talking about with with OpenAI and
Sam Alman. It's like
>> so Deep Mind with Demis has this
background. Yeah. they want to, you
know, they want to go after science
hard. Um, and they want to sort of build
discover new drugs and and you know,
Microsoft and Mustaf Sulman who also
obviously from Deepmind are sort of
trying to take that path as well.
Whereas Open AI all anyone hears about
at least for the past 6 months has been
like they were a nonprofit and now
they're not. And so like what are we
supposed to take from that? Like they're
worth a trillion dollars and they were a
nonprofit. How you know these people are
there's billion billionaires being
minted every day from this? It's like is
any of this real? Like again, all part
of the stew of what's going on here. So,
I agree that the uh the deep mind angle
that it seems like they're they're
taking from this this documentary on
down is a is a much safer and smarter
angle to probably play out,
>> right? And and you know that's the one
advantage of being I guess of being deep
mind is you do need that money and that
infrastructure but you're doing it
within a multi- trillion dollar company
whereas
>> it's right cuz it's not like Deep Mind
is still doing or you know Gemini is
still doing all of the same things that
OpenAI is. They all have to chase each
other, right? They launch new image like
Nano Banana. Is is Nano Banana a big
part of the documentary of like, you
know,
>> I haven't gotten to it yet, but
[laughter] it could it could be. But
yeah, you're right. It is it it is it is
interesting. And and I think that I
mean, we're going to get into
predictions a little bit, but these
these companies leaning on their edges
and sort of getting their positioning
now, especially as things commoditize,
is going to be a big deal this year.
All right, let's take a quick break and
come back and we're going to talk a
little bit about what this AI moment has
done in terms of the reshuffleling of
the deck of cards. Uh, as far as like
where big tech stands, it actually isn't
as as positive as, you know, it looked a
couple years ago or last year even. So,
I want to cover that and then we'll
we'll probably have time for some
predictions at the very end of the show.
So, we'll be back right after this. And
we're back here on Big Technology
Podcast with MG Seagler who joins us uh
once a month to talk about the uh the
latest in tech and AI. You can find his
writing at spyglass which is at
spyglass.org. Highly recommend it. Uh
all right, MG. So you wrote a little bit
about how um AI is like a chaos l chaos
is a ladder and the AI chaos is like
creating opportunities for companies uh
big tech companies in particular uh to
move up that ladder and u and reshuffle
the deck uh in terms of the power in in
the business and the technology
community. Uh we we'll go we'll we'll
touch on some of these companies, but
here's my big takeaway. I looked at, you
know, where these companies stand
compared to where they were previously,
and I found more of them, I don't want I
don't want to say falling down the
ladder, but like less up the ladder than
I, you know, previously expected. Here,
I'll just run through a couple. Uh
Microsoft, for instance, big OpenAI
deal. Now, they're kind of stuck in the
mud. It feels like uh there people are
asking questions about C-Pilot. they
don't have a standout product in a way
that they did when they were shuffling
state-of-the-art GPT models into into
Bing for instance. Um, so Azure is
growing growing in a big way. So maybe
that's and but that's probably just I
don't know is that reselling uh OpenAI
in a way that you know others don't have
access to because of exclusivity. Then
you Amazon was another big one, right?
Their big partnership you mentioned was
Anthropic. Um, you know, and and
Anthropic is now partnering with Nvidia
and Google and uh and uh who else? And
Microsoft, right?
>> You know, Alexa Plus is doing okay like
we talked about, but AWS isn't uh isn't
killing the world.
>> And then you have Apple, we've talked
about the Apple problems and then Meta,
right, which doesn't seem to have its
act together its act together in a way
that you know it did in the early days.
So my big takeaway from reading your
piece, I mean obviously Google's doing
well, but my big takeaway after reading
your piece is like, wait a second, like
do do are are are the big tech companies
not going to capitalize on this in a way
that we all thought and and maybe the
momentum is actually moving to the AI
labs themselves? Like is it is it that
big tech doesn't get as big of a boost
and the next big companies are the open
eyes and anthropics whose valuations,
you know, seem to double every few
weeks. what's your what's your
perspective here? Yeah, I wrote this a
few weeks ago, uh, you know, ahead of
the new year, so the end of last year,
and I was just, yeah, trying to take a
step back and look at, um, the current
states of the major players, you know,
as as you rattled off a bunch of them.
And again, like for my chaos ladder, uh,
analogy, I just think of like who are
the stable ones versus who are the less
stable ones. And I think definitely at
the top is is Google right now, but it
changes, right? Like Google was in the
middle of last year, their stock was
like super depressed. And I wrote about
that at the time um versus where the
other players were and like why was that
even though it seemed like they were you
know found found their footing with
Gemini but it still seemed like they
were sort of being undervalued by the
market. Fast forward to today literally
they just hit 4 trillion for the first
time. So they joined that club and you
know they're up like a one and a half
trillion I think in you know in the past
6 months in terms of market cap which is
just incredible obviously. Um, but it
just shows you like how how fluid this
sort of situation is that it can sort of
change uh that quickly for even a
company of that size. But I do view them
right now as the most stable. They've
got this Apple partnership sort of
locked in now it sounds like and so I
think that that stability is going to
probably continue for a while. Uh I do
view sort of anthropic as another one of
these more stable players certainly in
uh you know versus if you compare them
to where open AI has been. I think
OpenAI is a little bit more stable. You
say that they're all falling. I think
they're a little bit more stable than
they have been. Mainly because they
finally have this Microsoft thing at
least somewhat put to bed, right, the
deal and now they're they're the public
benefit.
>> I think OpenAI is is stable for sure.
>> They're more stable. Yeah. Then
certainly than a year ago, like where
everything was up in the air. There's
there's a lot of questions though,
right? And like you heard it towards the
end of the year, the notion, you and I
talked about it maybe in the last time
we were together, the open AI API,
right? Sorry, the open AI IPA, the
OpenAI IPO, do they go out this in 2026?
Can they possibly do that? And um if
that's the case, like is Anthropic,
obviously there's talk that they're also
going to do that. And if Anthropic beats
them out there, like that causes
potentially a lot of problems for
OpenAI. And so while they might be more
stable right now, they really need to
hunker down and get the business in
line, it feels like, in order to have
the correct narrative to be able to go
out if and when they need to, which it
sounds like they probably will need to
given the capital that they need to
raise. Um, and so again, the level of
stability that these companies uh have
right now, I think, is a moving target.
But it does feel a little bit to me like
they're starting to sort of not um
certainly not cement in place, but
starting to coalesce around these like
more stable and less stable pockets.
Meta's obviously unstable because they
they blew up everything. We'll see.
We're probably a few weeks away, maybe
less from whatever they're going to, you
know, announce in terms of coming out of
their new uh AGI super intelligence
efforts.
>> Their avocado model,
>> yeah, that's what the the code name was,
right? Yeah. So, we're going to see that
soon. Um, Microsoft, as you note, like
because of this sort of official
unofficial severing of the ties with
OpenAI, they're now free to do this on
their own, but it feels like, you know,
that hasn't been the the easiest going.
And and so, in some ways, they're sort
of held back by the success that they
saw with OpenAI, right? And and as you
note, they still have that exclusive
partnership. And so in many ways they
have this weird situation where they
have to sort of um obviously still
partner with open air on a number of
fronts and and they are but trying to do
their own thing and compete with them
and and make investments in anthropic
and do all these other things like uh
even though you know it's it's all sort
of competitive uh with one another and
so they're in a weird spot Amazon as you
know but again it's it sort of feels
like it's coalesing that that Google's
in a really good position right Now, uh,
Anthropic, I think, is in a pretty good
position because they it feels like they
have the right sort of model at least to
match, you know, what they're trying to
do. And then going on down the line,
like it goes from there. And, um, you
know, all the all the way down to sort
of the real the real chaotic uh, players
right now, which is the mainly the ones
that have that have blown it up and
tried and started over,
>> right? But, you know, it's interesting
because think about what we just listed
here. So, of the big tech companies, the
ones that are in, if to use your your
system in unstable or less stable
positions are Amazon, Microsoft, Apple,
and Meta.
>> I mean, that's four out of out of the
big five uh that are not in a good
position, which is surprising to me
because you would expect them
>> to be at this point, right? We're now
three three years and change past JPT's
release. You would expect them all to be
in prime position to be capitalizing on
this. And it's very rare for them to be
behind the eightball yet. That's where
it seems like they are.
>> I mean, I think that they they have
their each individual company that you
list there has their own reasons, right?
We talked about Microsoft's partnership
with OpenAI was sort of a double-edged
sword, right? Like it helped them a ton
in those early days, but now because
that's not an exclusive like thing, you
know, relationship that they have
anymore and they really feel like they
have to do their own thing, like they're
sort of they were behind the eightball
when they came out of that. In some
ways, I think Amazon is similar with
Anthropic, right? Like they relied on
Anthropic in the in a similar vein to
the way that that Microsoft and OpenAI
were working together. And so now
they've been trying to work on their own
models and have launched several of
them, but and they still have the
anthropic relationship too. And so part
of it is is all goes to the, you know,
the the ideas of like how um just
circular all of this stuff is, right?
And all of these players are working
with one another because there's the
cloud players that have to partner with
the model makers and some of the cloud
players are also model makers and then
eventually some of the model makers are
going to become cloud players and so uh
they all but they all have to sort of
work with one another and so you know at
the end of the day the only real winner
as you can see by the way the where they
are in the market is Nvidia and if uh if
that stands throughout the year we'll
see with all the competition that they
have coming their way on the chip front
but Um, but yeah, I mean, you're right
that the the players like these biggest
companies of the world, I think that
they are sort of still trying to find
their way and you see various reports to
this to this idea that they're trying to
figure out exactly what the right model
should be of how they're leveraging AI
and and they all say that everything's
great, right? like, oh, Meta is using it
to tailor ads and and yeah, Microsoft's
using it to sell Azure and it's and it's
going great and you can see it in the
bottom line and yada yada, but like
there's a reason why they're all
scrambling and why they're constantly
reshuffling their teams. And I do think
there will be a lot more of that in 2026
as they all try to jockey for a position
on this ladder,
>> right? I mean, I might get some emails
from this and I might regret saying
this, but what standout product does AI
product does Microsoft have outside of
selling AI services from Azure? What
standout product does AI product does
Amazon have outside of selling some AI
uh with AWS? What standout AI product
does Apple have? We both know that they
don't have one. And what standout
product does Meta have?
>> Uh, none AI products.
>> They have none. They have none.
Certainly none on the consumer front and
even on the enterprise front though,
right? Like that's long been what
Microsoft said would be, you know, sort
of that's always been their fallback,
right? If they couldn't do it on on
consumer side and obviously they try
across the board for every single
different technology that comes out and
they, you know, they don't have that
much success on the fronts, but like you
would think that they could fall back to
the the, you know, massive enterprise um
just sales, you know, sale through that
they sell through that they have. And
yeah, to your point, like they'll say
that everything it looks great and but
again, just watch the actions of these
companies. I think you're exactly right.
And I think for Microsoft in particular,
it's it's glaring because you hit on it.
They had not only the open air
relationship, they had Bing as like the
original like product out there. It was
going to make m it was going to make
Google dance. And who's dancing now?
It's Google. Like Microsoft is not
dancing, you know? So
>> no rhythm. [laughter] they got no
rhythm. Um, and it was a huge a huge
missed opportunity. They could have made
Bing a real potential competitor to
Google. And in some ways they they, you
know, they were probably too early, I'm
sure. And they stubbed their toe and
they pulled back, you know, the whole
>> obviously uh weird conversations. Yeah.
Going on [laughter]
>> what a moment in history that's
>> people leaving their wives and stuff
like that. But um but still they were
there and they they could have basically
had what chat GBT became and you know
they just didn't sort of focus on the
right elements of it.
>> I know I'm going a little longer on on
this than I anticipated but I do think
that we're really this is really worth
talking about. It's like then you look
at where the action is. Chat GPT ground
up claude code ground up.
>> Yep.
>> Gemini effectively ground up. Y
>> it's uh you know one of the things that
sort of stuck out with to me when I was
you know speaking with Sam was he was
like you can't just bolt AI on to
existing products you need to build
ground up
>> and you know as we have this discussion
you know those words are certainly like
>> seeming like they're ringing true like
it's the businesses the business picture
right now is looking like twofold one
you sell AI services to companies who
are trying to like build on your API or
two is you build these like native AI
five first products and you grow them
from the very start.
>> Yeah. And this story is nothing new,
right? Like this is what happened with
mobile too where like a bunch of players
rose because they built these mobile
first applications from Airbnb and you
know they started a little bit before
that obviously but that's what really
helped them take off. But Uber, Uber is
a great example, right? Like why why
didn't Avis where was Avis uh in the uh
[laughter] in the app store and
>> buying Teslas?
>> And so like but it's the same story of
like yeah you you've got to really go
after sort of the um owning the whole
experience and sort of doing it in a
native way. I even think back to when
when Facebook I mean I I often think
back to this these days because I feel
like it comes up a lot with Meta and and
what's been going on there recently
where it's like when they sort of made
their mistake around HTML 5 and thinking
like oh we don't need native mobile apps
like it's not going to be a big it's not
going to be a big deal. We're going to
do this extensible thing where you know
the open web is going to take over and
it just didn't play out that way. And
and Zuckerberg has said that that was
one of their their biggest mistakes in
the previous era at least. And so, you
know, again, like the notion of you got
to build these products around what the
technology is and not just try to bolt
on the technology. You see everyone make
the same mistake over and over again.
And to your exact point, I think it's a
good framing of it that like where is
Microsoft's 100% sort of, you know,
native AI product? Like they'll say it's
co-pilot, but it's sort of like, you
know, it's sort of like an amalgamation
of a bunch of things. First of all,
co-pilot, the branding is a mess because
it's the enterprise thing is called
co-pilot. The consumer thing is
co-pilot. They've got characters, cutesy
characters. They've got, you know, all
sorts of uh of non-cutesy things for
doing it within Office. They can't
figure out the brand. You go to
office.com and you're you're shoved into
Microsoft 365 app, whatever like the the
press cycle was around that, like their
awful branding. So [snorts] they've got
all sorts of of weird branding issues,
but uh Amazon would say obviously it's
Alexa and and they are having starting
it sounds like to have you know some
level of success with Alexa plus but in
some ways they were held back too
because Alexa is from the old generation
right of uh you know drop the plus but
Alexa was on millions and tens of
millions of devices and tens of millions
of homes and so they were yeah again
held back by the success of what they
had in in that front and so they don't
want to blow it up and start over and so
as a result Alexa plus I agree agree
it's like it's better than it was but it
still feels a bit tacked on and I don't
think it's particularly going to be good
for um you know sort of these go forward
future initiatives in AI whereas
something like chatebt they just keep
rocking and rolling rolling out these
new ideas and features because again
they've been building in this AI native
environment from the get-go.
>> Yeah. I mean, this conversation just
suggests to me like as we start thinking
about this is maybe AI is, you know, if
AI works, it's going to be more
disruptive than I think a lot of people
imagine because if it's going to pose
this threat to the incumbent tech
companies who, by the way, they're the
one putting all these this gapex into
into the equation, then what does it do
for everything else? And the last thing
I would say about this because this you
your point joged a thought in my head
like I feel like with AI you've often
heard it um said that it's basically
it's like a website right it's like
every company is going to have to have
AI in integrated and it's just
[clears throat] like every company had
to have a website and eventually a
mobile app and you know [snorts] it's
like table stake stuff right but what if
that's not the case right I mean I think
that it will be the case to a to a
degree I do think that all these sites
and services will have AI baked into
them but what if the really successful
ful companies are the ones that are
doing this like leveraging AI and I and
I've written about this and talked about
this a little bit in the past where it
does feel like AI
there are companies that jump um up in
sort of the echelons into the biggest
companies of the world by leveraging
sort of these new technological shifts
that come into place and I think most
everyone would agree uh that AI is one
of those and so if you're just really
tacking it on to your current products
that is not going to be what gets you to
over the trillion
market cap hump or two trillion or three
trillion, right? These companies that
are out there right now that are sort of
the sub1 trillion dollar tech companies
that are just trying to bolt this stuff
on. Like [clears throat]
if I were them in some ways, I would at
least have a skunk works project
internally to like build entirely new
products based off of AI and not just
trying to tack it on because that's
again history has shown that's the only
way to actually get into the
conversation and become one of the
biggest companies in the world is by
doing that.
>> Yep. And I think that's what Google has
done well.
>> Yes. Yes. There's a few companies that
have done that and Google is right there
at the forefront of that.
>> Yeah. Okay. So, uh I definitely want to
get into we have like 10 minutes left. I
want to get into some predictions. I
think you and I both believe despite the
the issues that Apple's had that it's
going to have a big year. One of your
predictions for this year is that the
folding phone is going to be a big hit
for Apple.
>> I think so. I mean, again, this is this
is a little bit going against the grain
because it does feel like that people
are maybe not skeptical of it, but I
know you and I have talked about it,
right? Like you were I I like the I have
a Pixel Fold as my sort of Android
backup device that I test things on, and
I do um generally like it a lot, but I I
think that I like it in that it it shows
me the way forward of how the the
folding iPhone will work. But I do think
like if they nail the screen without a
crease, which seems like out of CES,
there were some leaks that maybe Samsung
has a great screen that doesn't crease
anymore. So, it feels like the the
pieces are starting to fall into place.
Then you go into like I don't think it
will just necessarily be what everyone
just assumes, which is just the standard
iPhone that you unfold and then it's a
bigger screen. I wouldn't be shocked if
it's it's going to end up being sort of
like a little bit different of a use
case and the way that they market it
isn't a little bit different. There's
there's a whole weird no one knows for
sure, but there might be a different
aspect ratio to the front of the thing.
It might be a little like smaller and
fatter uh when it's when it's folded and
people might appreciate having a smaller
sort of device in their pocket. Um and
then when it's unfolded, maybe it's more
like an iPad mini, which is a device
that I love, but it hasn't really
resonated as big as as you know, sort of
the bigger iPads have. Um but so anyway,
so maybe there's these different um
these [snorts] different ways to sort of
frame it that does end up being a
success. And if it's timed well with
this new partnership with with Google to
get uh Gemini powering Siri, what if
it's one of the first devices with like
really good AI finally from Apple? That
could be a very compelling selling point
obviously.
>> Definitely. I'm looking forward for uh
to Tim Cook coming out there and
introducing the iPhone uh origami and
you're able to make your [laughter]
iPhone into a into a duck.
>> Yeah.
>> Um he retires if it's cook [laughter]
>> might be any number of people. He might
be
>> that'll be one hell of an of an iPhone
uh retirement. He turns it into like a
little fortune teller thing and then he
goes, "All right, I'm done everybody.
I'm going to give this over to John
Turnis. Have a have a good one."
>> Yeah. [laughter]
>> Yeah. But but but speaking of it of Tim
Cook, the um the Times had an article
that talked again. I mean, this is this
is more smoke than than you need to say
that something's going on here. He's The
Times had the story that said Tim Cook
has told friends he's tired. This guy's
going to retire. I think he's This is
not This is not the um This is the last
year, I think, for for Tim Cook. Just
just, you know, not based off of any
anything more than reading the reports,
but I I think he's done. Um, I think so
as well. I mean, obviously there's been
a bunch of there's always the push back,
right? Like, okay, so this report says
this, but like who would actually, you
know, leak that Tim Cook is telling
people that he's tired and I think
Gruber, you know, pushed back on that a
little bit and then, you know, German,
who's done a bunch of the reporting on
this, has pushed back on like the timing
of the whole thing. But I think you're
there's too much smoke now. Like clearly
the pieces are being put in place for
him to at least have the optionality to
step back when he wants to. and and it
does feel like it's going to be at some
point in this coming year. You saw there
was, you know, the news cycle around
they're letting Arthur Leon, who is the
current chair, um stand for re-election,
even though he's 75, which is the
unofficial official um time of
retirement for Apple board members. And
you would think that that has to play
directly into the notion that they're
going to have Cook obviously step into
that chairman role eventually, but
because he's not ready to step down from
the CEO role yet, you know, this is all
sort of the period of transition. But it
does again feel like that everything is
is moving into place to have Cook be
able to do that to step into that
chairman role and perhaps to let John
Turnis come in. You know, there was some
push in that same story about like, oh,
are there other candidates that that
could be in the offering? Um, you know,
a lot of the it's all the standard names
that are thrown out there. The problem
with most of them is that they're almost
the same age as Cook except for um Craig
Federigi, who is another one who I would
view as a legitimate contender to do the
job. Um, and it's I, you know, it has to
be sort of between those two, between
Turnis and Federigi. Um, but everyone,
you know, all the reporting points to
Turnis. Um, and so you have to believe
that that's the thing. The one thing
that I do think that's a wild card in
this, I'm very curious to see who they
hire to replace John Gandria. Um, as you
know, the head of AI. Um the the all the
reporting right now has of course like
um Mike Rockwell from Vision Pro is sort
of taken over the org and then he
reports up to Federigi who is sort of
overseeing the entire you know strategy
of that. And so either they let him
continue to run it but you think that
they they have to get a sort of an AI
focused technologist in there to
actually sort of oversee this entire
thing. And so who that ends up being, we
can go back to you and I talking la all
of last year about like who does Apple
acquire like maybe they do acquire
someone to bring in uh to bring in the
right talent uh in order just to lead
that division. I'm not going to say it's
like Ilasgiver. I don't think that
they're going to do a deal that's like
you know the $30 billion 304 $50 billion
that it would take to buy safe super
intelligence just to do that. But like
they need a name like that of that
caliber in order to lead this and give
people they they now have the sort of
band-aid stop gap if you want to call it
that, a very good band-aid in the Google
deal. But eventually Apple's going to
want to own this and do this themselves.
And so they need the right person that
they now have a years of runway thanks
to this Google deal to be able to work
behind the scenes on their own stuff.
>> Yeah, one of the popular names is going
to be Mrol. And we do have uh Mr. CEO
Arthur Mench coming on the show in a
couple of days. And uh at the end of the
conversation I said
>> oh I forgot to ask you are you going to
sell to Apple? And uh and he said uh I
he was at I think he was at Google Deep
Mind and he's like I didn't leave a big
company to start a company to get
acquired to go back to a big company.
Now uh money money talks.
>> Yes.
>> Uh but
>> money always talks but the EU talks too.
I don't know how much the EU will
[laughter] want,
>> right? They might their champion to be
bought by an American big debt company,
but
>> that's right.
>> We'll see.
>> Yeah. All right. Uh, so, so one more
prediction that you have is someone is
going to buy Perplexity. You don't think
it's going to be Apple? Um, who could it
be?
>> I think the most likely one is Samsung
for the obvious reasons that they have a
big partnership with them. Though
Samsung is in the process, it sounds
like, of more deeply integrating Gemini
as well. Um, you know, obviously they
they've been a longtime leader in the
Android space and so you'd think like
anything that Google does they're going
to be closely aligned with. But yeah,
again, they have the partnership with
Perplexity. I wouldn't be shocked. It's
going to be a big price, right? Like
that company I think was last valued at
15, no, maybe 20 now, um, 20 billion.
So, um, anything to take them off the
table will be immense uh, in terms of
price. So, it narrows down the options
of who could do it. I don't think it'll
be Apple for the reasons that we've
talked about. I think that Apple kicked
those tires and decided not to go down
that path. I don't think it'll be Google
for a host of reasons. They I don't
think they really need it. Um you could
see a Microsoft or someone like that
trying to come in and and do a deal that
again maybe helps reset or or establish
some sort of consumer more consumer
oriented foothold. Um something like
that wouldn't shock me. Um and there's a
you know you can go down the list of a
handful of other players, the Amazons of
the world and whatnot. Um, but uh I do
feel like the music is maybe slowing to
the point where they might have to
figure out the path forward for that
company in particular.
>> Yeah, I'm much less bullish on
Perplexity than I was. Uh, I just think
that like their functionality is just
going to be swallowed up by the Geminis
and the Chat GPTs of the world. And it's
like do you really need an AI search
engine to do the same thing that you can
do within chat bots?
>> Yeah. And they thought they thought like
the browser thing would be, you know, a
huge beach head. And they they said they
were going to buy Chrome, right? And uh
and Tik Tok, too. And
>> they had a year, didn't they?
>> So, they they've been looking for there
were these strategies and uh I think
they're sort of running out of options
of what the what the next strategy will
be in order to get uh to maintain that
momentum that they need to in order to
keep fundraising.
>> Website is spyglass.org. Definitely one
of my must readads uh whenever [music]
it comes to tech and AI. MG. It's always
great to speak with you. Thanks so much
for coming on the show.
>> Thank you, Alex. Great to chat as
always.
>> All right, everybody. Thank you for
listening and watching. We'll be back on
Wednesday, as I mentioned, with [music]
Arthur Mench and then on Friday, uh it's
our Arthur Mench, the Mistral CEO, and
then on Friday to break down the week's
news. Thanks again for listening and
watching, [music] and we'll see you next
time on Big Technology Podcast.