You’ve probably heard someone say, “Apple is losing the AI race” or “Apple’s AI is failing.” What if being behind in AI was intentional? Or maybe even a winning strategy?
For years now, the media has treated Apple’s caution in integrating AI as a failure, approaching every major developer event as a disaster. That framework failed to examine what the company was doing behind the scenes.
Apple has spent decades exploring how to bring new technology to real people. Apple didn’t need to jump into flashy demos that sounded on stage but didn’t appeal to everyday users.
Choosing when to use technology is a business strategy, not an act of cowardice.
As consumers of technology, we also have embarrassing conflicts. We’ve been asking Apple to hurry up with its AI integration, while stressing that we’re tired of the AI hype. We are always looking for new things, and we complain about useless new things.
During yesterday’s WWDC keynote event, Apple’s senior vice president of software engineering, Craig Federighi, offered a general line about AI, calling it “an incredibly powerful technology that has the potential to shape society in profound ways, and with the right care, unlock meaningful benefits for people everywhere.”
But he also pointed out that Apple isn’t about chasing trends that offer less value. “Some seem to be rushing forward, seeming to pursue AI for AI’s sake, without considering the people — all of us — that it is ultimately meant to serve.”
It seems reasonable. I also thought that we don’t want a functional or useless AI in tech companies. I also thought we were starting to get allergic to AI washing.
Apple is playing coy when it comes to AI
WWDC’s key note rhythm and language are also important.
Artificial intelligence was not seen in the first part of the keynote, where it was first mentioned. exactly 28 minutes into the 1 hour event.
It was only after the shiny parts settled down that Federighi stepped in and said that Apple can’t compete with AI unless it’s private and useful. That line went down because it exposed Apple’s greatest asset: consumer trust.
We are right to be concerned about our data being intercepted and sold to bad actors. We are right to be concerned about how AI can harm our safety and security. Companies like OpenAI, xAI and Meta have lost public trust and have had to make major policy changes so we can trust that our sensitive information is protected.
Apple is deliberately careful with the word “AI.” At least someone in the company should know that most of us are cold or check when we hear it. Saving vocabulary is a strategic decision aimed at avoiding isolation, and it will pay off for Apple in the long run.
“WWDC 2026 is Apple’s true AI test,” Francisco Jeronimo, vice president of consumer devices at International Data Corporation, said in an emailed statement to CNET. “Apple doesn’t need to win AI by having the biggest model or loudest demo. It needs to make AI trusted, usable and invisible throughout the ecosystem.”
Apple is not spending money on AI
Note, too, that Apple treats AI models as property to be licensed or used in partnership rather than a reason to declare war on its competitors. There is no need to pursue all AI investments unless there is a real market for it – and it proves profitable.
That last point is important.
The current AI hype, with its massive cloud computing, training and infrastructure requirements, is expensive. It’s shocking like that. A website called Is AI Beneficial Yet? tracks how much investment frontier AI companies have made versus how much they’ve generated in revenue. If the big red bars are any indication, big players like Amazon, Alphabet (Google) and Meta are not seeing a profitable return on their AI investments, costing them billions. (In the few minutes I spent on the page, $20 million was spent on AI.)
Meanwhile, Apple has avoided spending hundreds of billions of dollars on data centers and computing, giving the giant something if — or when — the bubble pops.
Apple’s approach looks like this: Invest where there’s a clear benefit and where privacy is aligned with users — and comment on the rest until it makes sense. Instead of going all in on AI devices, products and services, Apple is betting on the growing use of local AI functions and device-based models, especially with the company’s most efficient chips.
When the AI bubble bursts, who survives?
So, who survives the worst of the bubble? Companies that built customer value instead of user demos, relied on privacy and trust as selling points and avoided big, irreversible infrastructure bets. The survivors kept a large amount of money in the marketing of selling products, and made AI an ingredient — not a proprietary.
Apple seems well-positioned to survive the AI threat.
If the market adjusts to all the cloud splurge and flash demo, Apple will be standing with tools that work for people on its devices and a solid reputation (ie, brand loyalty) that most of its competitors lack. That doesn’t mean Apple doesn’t have mistakes or failed products, but it does mean it’s less prone to overspending or misreading consumer demand.
Apple still needs to prove that these models are the same device improve Siri give us a price. But for now, the company is picking its battles and its time.