Apple weighs Gemini for Siri: fast upgrade or in-house AI

Apple’s AI crossroads tightened this week as multiple reports say the company is quietly weighing an extraordinary course correction: instead of shipping its own large language model as the core of the long‑promised Siri overhaul, Apple is exploring licensing or otherwise using Google’s Gemini — a move that would trade absolute control for speed and capability at a moment when rivals are already embedding powerful assistants across phones, search, and desktop experiences. (investing.com, cnbc.com)

Background: what changed and why this matters​

Apple announced a broad “Apple Intelligence” strategy to upgrade Siri and iOS with generative AI, but engineering setbacks pushed that rollout beyond its original timetable and into 2026. The delay has been public for months and has prompted internal reorganization, a runoff of top AI talent, and speculation inside and outside Apple about whether the company can build the needed foundation models itself — or whether it will outsource critical components. (macrumors.com, cnbc.com)
At the same time, Google’s Gemini family is now embedded across Search, Android, and many Google products; Google reports that AI‑driven search features (AI Overviews / AI Mode) are being used by over a billion people and that Gemini powers heavy token volumes inside Search. Those adoption numbers help explain why Apple might see Gemini as a pragmatic short‑cut to a competitive Siri experience. (blog.google)
Inside Apple, the reported posture is pragmatic: engineers are running a “bake‑off” between in‑house models (code‑named projects like Linwood) and third‑party alternatives (code‑named Glenwood), with Apple testing whether a third‑party LLM can be hosted inside Apple’s controlled Private Cloud Compute environment and still meet the company’s privacy bar. That dual‑track strategy — build and buy evaluated in parallel — is central to the latest reporting and to internal documents and job listings that signaled the company’s pivot to an “answer engine” approach. (9to5mac.com)

---

Apple + Google: what the reports actually say​

The core claims (verified)​

• Apple has engaged Google in exploratory talks about a custom Gemini model to power an upgraded Siri; those discussions are reportedly early and no deal is finalized. (investing.com, macrumors.com)
• Apple postponed the public launch of the most ambitious Siri/Apple Intelligence features into 2026 after internal quality and architectural concerns; company executives have publicly described a second‑generation architecture being developed before general release. (macrumors.com, cnbc.com)
• Google’s Gemini models are already a foundational part of new Search experiences (AI Overviews / AI Mode) and are being used at scale inside Google products — a fact Google has reported directly. (blog.google)

Cross‑checked corroboration​

• Multiple independent outlets reported the Apple–Google conversations citing the same anonymous sources or Bloomberg reporting; Reuters, CNBC and industry press referenced the Bloomberg/insider coverage and observed short‑term market reactions. Those parallel reports strengthen the core fact that talks occurred even if the terms remain private. (investing.com, cnbc.com)

What cannot be verified (flagged)​

• Any specific commercial terms (pricing, exclusivity, revenue share, or the precise technical SLAs Google would accept) are not publicly known and have not been disclosed by either company. Those are legitimately private negotiations and should be treated as unverified until one of the parties confirms details.
• Exact compensation figures cited in some coverage for departed engineers — six‑ or seven‑figure signing bonuses and large stock grants — are often reported via unnamed sources and should be treated with caution unless filings or the individuals confirm them. (macrumors.com)

---

The strategic case: why Apple might consider Gemini​

Apple has clear incentives to consider an external model, and the logic is straightforward:

• Speed to market: Apple’s brand and hardware cycle mean missed AI ship windows can translate into lost upgrade momentum for new iPhone launches. Leveraging an already‑trained, widely tested model could accelerate a meaningful Siri relaunch. (macrumors.com)
• Quality parity: Gemini and other cloud‑scale models currently outperform many smaller on‑device models in multi‑step reasoning and multimodal tasks; licensing a high‑performing model could deliver a more competitive conversational assistant. (pymnts.com, techcrunch.com)
• Distribution and optics: Apple must balance an engineering-first, privacy‑centric ethos with market expectations; shipping a noticeably capable Siri on schedule helps maintain consumer confidence during a high‑visibility iPhone cycle.

Benefits for Google are equally clear:

• Distribution and default placement with Apple remain among Google's most valuable distribution channels; placing Gemini at Siri’s core would dramatically broaden Gemini’s footprint and give Google another leg for monetizing its model and APIs. (barrons.com)
• Strategic positioning: embedding Gemini inside Apple devices complicates the narrative of Google as a mere search provider on Apple platforms and increases the stickiness of Google’s AI stack. (pymnts.com)

---

Technical and privacy considerations: can it work under Apple’s rules?​

Apple’s public posture has been consistent: whenever possible, AI should favor on‑device computation and the company’s “Private Cloud Compute” framework — a hybrid approach meant to give Apple control over data flow and encryption while offloading intensive workloads to controlled cloud infrastructure when needed. Any third‑party model that Apple would accept must conform to those constraints. (blog.google)
Key technical constraints Apple will need to reconcile:

• Data sovereignty and auditability: Apple’s privacy marketing is a core competitive differentiator; a Gemini instance running on Apple’s hardware or in dedicated Apple‑controlled cloud zones is technically feasible, but operational detail (data retention, model updates, telemetry) must satisfy Apple’s internal controls and regulatory commitments.
• Latency and energy: High‑quality generative AI at scale still often uses large models that require substantial GPU capacity; Apple’s neural engines and on‑device accelerators are powerful, but for the heaviest reasoning tasks Apple will likely need cloud inferencing to meet user expectations without draining devices. The trade‑off between on‑device privacy and cloud‑scale capability is central to the architecture choices. (techcrunch.com)
• Versioning and control: If Apple accepts a Google model, it must ensure predictable updates, bias mitigation, and content safety consistent with Apple’s standards — nontrivial operational and legal challenges for any external provider.

---

Market context and data points (verified)​

• Market share snapshot: independent trackers show OpenAI’s ChatGPT dominating global chatbot usage, with Gemini remaining in low single digits for chatbot share despite Gemini’s broad use inside Google Search’s AI features. StatCounter’s chatbot market tracking reported ChatGPT at about 80.9% share and Gemini near 2.2% in mid‑2025; other sector trackers show similar dominance for OpenAI but differences in the mid‑pack. Those statistics illustrate why Google would value Apple as a distribution partner even if Gemini is already embedded in Search. (gs.statcounter.com, deepserp.com)
• Scale of Google Search AI features: Google states that AI Overviews and other Search AI features have already reached well over a billion monthly users and have been used “billions” of times during trials; that scale is an important technical validation for Gemini’s reliability in user‑facing contexts. (blog.google)
• Talent movements and morale: reporting shows several prominent Apple AI researchers have left for competitors such as Meta and OpenAI, often attracted by larger compensation packages and faster‑moving projects; that churn has pressured Apple’s foundation models team and is a proximate reason for Apple to consider external options. Financial details of individual hires were reported by industry press but are generally based on anonymous sources. (macrumors.com)

---

Risks and downsides of an Apple‑Gemini tie​

• Brand and trust erosion
• Apple markets privacy and control; outsourcing the “brain” of Siri to a direct competitor — even if running inside Apple infrastructure — risks consumer perception that Apple has ceded control. That perception could undercut a major pillar of Apple’s product positioning.
• Antitrust and regulatory optics
• Regulators already scrutinize distribution agreements like Google’s search placement on Safari; a deeper product tie between Apple and Google could attract regulatory attention and complicate existing remedies or negotiations. Recent antitrust rulings underscore how sensitive search distribution remains. (barrons.com, reuters.com)
• Technical and operational lock‑in
• Relying on an external model can create dependency on a partner’s roadmap, licensing terms, and update cadence — issues Apple historically avoids. If Gemini evolves or changes policy in a way Apple dislikes, Apple’s ability to pivot quickly would be reduced.
• Developer and ecosystem fragmentation
• Apple’s long‑term vision for an answer engine and APIs inside its ecosystem is premised on owning the stack. Outsourcing part of that stack would change the development story for third‑party devs and could create fragmentation between “native Apple AI” and “third‑party‑powered Siri” behaviors.

---

What the iPhone 17 launch tells us right now​

Apple’s September launch cycle is a natural pressure point: shipping a flagship iPhone without a demonstrably upgraded Siri or Apple Intelligence feature set risks dampening upgrade incentives for consumers who were told AI would be a key differentiator. Public reporting suggests Apple elected to understate or delay AI messaging at the iPhone 17 event, emphasizing hardware improvements and keeping a quieter tone on generative AI until engineering is ready. That posture fits with the company’s conservative rollout strategy but leaves an opening for rivals to headline AI features. (theverge.com, investopedia.com)

---

Potential scenarios and their likely outcomes​

1) Apple licenses a custom Gemini variant and ships Siri powered by Gemini inside Private Cloud Compute​

• Outcome: fastest path to delivering a competitive Siri; market reaction could be positive if the assistant is meaningfully better. Google gains distribution; Apple retains some privacy controls but surrenders model ownership.
• Likely regulatory and perception costs: moderate to high. (investing.com, blog.google)

2) Apple ships a hybrid: core personal context and low‑risk assistant tasks on‑device, heavy reasoning routed to a licensed cloud model​

• Outcome: balanced approach that preserves Apple’s privacy narrative while accepting cloud dependencies for complex tasks. Operationally complex but plausible given Apple’s Private Cloud Compute plans.
• Likely perception: defensible if Apple communicates clearly.

3) Apple sticks exclusively with an in‑house model and delays further until performance and control meet Apple’s standards​

• Outcome: greatest long‑term independence and privacy assurances, but continued lag in product capability and increased risk of losing customers to rivals in the short term.
• Likely market effect: potential near‑term friction with investors and consumers; long‑term positioning depends on Apple’s model progress.

---

Practical implications for users and enterprises​

• Consumers who prioritized “AI” as the reason to upgrade may have delayed purchases because of Apple’s staggered rollout; if Apple opts to use Gemini, those buyers could see a near‑term functional boost.
• Enterprises and developers should watch how Apple exposes any AI APIs: Apple’s pattern has been conservative with SDKs and developer access; an externally powered Siri that remains a closed Apple product would limit third‑party extensibility.
• Privacy‑conscious users will scrutinize the hosting, telemetry, and data retention terms Apple negotiates; Apple’s communications around Private Cloud Compute will be the key signal.

---

What to watch next (timelines and indicators)​

• Official statements from Apple and Google about any licensing agreement (if they occur), and any developer documentation describing where model inferencing occurs (on‑device vs Apple Private Cloud).
• Regulatory filings or antitrust commentary that reference deeper Google–Apple integration; such filings could appear rapidly if negotiations accelerate. (reuters.com)
• Product previews or beta releases: Apple has internal targets indicating a spring 2026 release window for the revamped Siri; public betas ahead of that timeframe would be the clearest sign Apple is ready to ship either in‑house or licensed tech. (macrumors.com)
• Market share and usage metrics for Gemini vs ChatGPT from independent tracking (StatCounter and other trackers) to measure whether the partnership meaningfully shifts user behavior. (gs.statcounter.com)

---

Final assessment: pragmatic necessity versus strategic risk​

Apple faces a classic trade‑off: deliver a world‑class assistant quickly and accept third‑party dependence, or retain vertical control and risk ceding feature momentum to competitors. The company’s decision framework — build vs. buy while protecting privacy through Private Cloud Compute — is rational and technically feasible, but not without reputational and regulatory exposure.
An Apple‑Gemini alignment would be a shock to the “Apple owns the stack” narrative, but it could also be the pragmatic move that restores parity in user experience with rival phones and search experiences. Conversely, insisting on fully in‑house models could preserve brand identity but prolong a capability gap in a market where expectations for AI assistants are accelerating.
Both outcomes hold upside and material risk. The near‑term consumer win favors a Gemini partnership; the long‑term platform control argument favors Apple’s in‑house ambitions. Which one Apple chooses will reveal how the company weighs speed and capability against control, privacy and independence — and that choice will shape the mobile AI ecosystem for years. (investing.com, blog.google)

---

Conclusion
Apple’s reported talks with Google to use Gemini for Siri are not the end of Apple’s in‑house ambition but a clear signal that the company recognizes the scale and complexity of modern AI. The move would bring immediate capability benefits while posing real challenges to Apple’s privacy story and independence. As the company runs its internal bake‑off and targets a spring 2026 delivery window for the revamped Siri, the industry will be watching three things closely: the technical architecture Apple chooses (on‑device vs cloud), the contractual and operational safeguards for user data, and whether Apple can retain its platform control while delivering the AI features users now expect.

---

Source: 24/7 Wall St. Google Will Save Apple