Apple's WWDC 2025: The Great AI Hesitation (And What Steve Jobs Would Say About It)

Six days ago, Apple held its WWDC 2025 keynote, and honestly? It felt like watching a tech giant having an existential crisis. The company that once revolutionised personal computing with bold, paradigm-shifting moves seemed almost... apologetic. The stock dropped 2.5% on the day, wiping out £75 billion in market value, adding to Apple's already painful 19% decline this year.

Let me be candid - I've been an Apple devotee since my first white MacBook (you know, the one that turned beige if you breathed on it wrong), and I've never felt this conflicted about their direction. So let's unpack what actually happened, what it means for Apple's future, and whether Tim Cook's cautious approach would have Steve Jobs spinning in his grave.

When "Revolutionary" Becomes Incremental

Here's the uncomfortable truth: Apple's big visual reveal was "Liquid Glass" - a design language that sounds revolutionary but feels like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. They unveiled this aesthetic that will supposedly inform the next decade of iOS, iPadOS, and macOS development, complete with iOS 26, iPadOS 26, and macOS Tahoe.

The features themselves? Actually quite useful. The overhauled Shortcuts app now supports Apple Intelligence models for things like summarising PDFs, generating recipes, answering questions, and more. Spotlight can now be used to run shortcuts and take hundreds of actions, such as writing emails, setting reminders, and playing podcasts.

These are genuinely helpful updates that'll make our daily digital lives smoother.

But here's my frustration - in an era where ChatGPT is fundamentally reshaping how we interact with technology and Google's Gemini is pushing boundaries we didn't know existed, Apple gave us... prettier interfaces and smarter shortcuts. I'll absolutely use these features, but calling them revolutionary feels like calling a really good sandwich life-changing.

The Siri Confession That Said Everything

The most telling moment of the entire keynote? Craig Federighi, Apple's SVP of Software Engineering, said they won't have more to share about the much-anticipated AI-powered Siri features until next year. This is the same Siri that, according to reports, only performs as it should two-thirds of the time.

Let that sink in for a moment. Apple's voice assistant - the feature that should be their AI flagship - is working properly 67% of the time. If my car started only two-thirds of the time, I'd be shopping for a new one faster than you could say "unreliable technology." Yet Apple essentially said, "We need more time to meet our high-quality bar."

I understand the quality argument, I really do. But whilst Apple is perfecting their "high-quality bar," millions of users are switching to ChatGPT, Claude, and Google Assistant for actual AI assistance. The window of opportunity isn't waiting for Apple's meticulous timeline.

What Actually Launched (And Why It Almost Matters)

Let's give credit where it's due. Apple did announce some genuinely impressive AI features that deserve recognition:

• Visual Intelligence Enhanced: Now the feature will be able to interact with the information on your iPhone's screen. For instance, if you come across a post on a social media app, Visual Intelligence can conduct an image search related to what you see while browsing. This is actually brilliant - imagine identifying products, translating signs, or getting context about anything on your screen instantly.

• Live Translation: Apple Intelligence is powering a new live translation feature for Messages, FaceTime, and phone calls. This technology automatically translates text or spoken words into the user's preferred language in real time. This could be genuinely transformative for global communication - finally breaking down language barriers in real-time conversations.

• AI Workout Buddy: Apple's latest AI-driven workout coach uses a text-to-speech model to deliver encouragement while you exercise, mimicking a personal trainer's voice. Okay, this one might sound gimmicky at first, but it's actually clever positioning in the health and fitness space where Apple's already strong.

• Foundation Models Framework: Apple is now allowing developers to access its AI models even when offline. The company introduced the Foundation Models framework, which enables developers to build more AI capabilities into their third-party apps that utilise Apple's existing systems. This is potentially huge for developers and shows Apple understands that AI needs to be democratised, not hoarded.

• 
  

The problem isn't what Apple announced - it's what they conspicuously didn't announce. Where's the AI that can actually understand context across apps? Where's the Siri that can help me plan my day by intelligently looking at my calendar, email, and messages? Where's the bold vision of AI integration that makes the iPhone indispensable in an AI-first world?

The Vision Pro Question Mark (That Nobody's Asking)

Speaking of bold visions, let's talk about the elephant that barely got mentioned: the Vision Pro. Apple's £3,000+ bet on spatial computing has been conspicuously absent from the conversation. There was a brief mention of visionOS 26, but that's it.

Is the Vision Pro a dud? I don't think so. But is it the saviour Apple needs in the AI era? That's completely the wrong question.

The Vision Pro represents Apple's traditional playbook: create a premium, polished experience for early adopters, then iterate towards mainstream adoption. But spatial computing might be solving tomorrow's problems whilst Apple loses today's AI battle. It's like perfecting the ultimate horse-drawn carriage whilst everyone else is building cars.

That said, I genuinely believe spatial computing will eventually be transformative. The question is whether Apple can afford to wait for "eventually" whilst their AI competitors capture the immediate future.

What Would Steve Jobs Actually Think?

I know it's almost cliché to invoke Steve Jobs at this point, but indulge me. Jobs was famous for saying "People don't know what they want until you show it to them." He didn't focus group the iPhone to death - he built something revolutionary and trusted that people would understand its value.

Current Apple seems to operate from a different philosophy: "Let's make sure we get it perfect, even if that means being late to the party." This isn't necessarily wrong, but it's not particularly Jobsian either.

Jobs would have looked at ChatGPT's explosive success and said, "We need to leapfrog this, not catch up to it." He would have been frustrated by Siri's 67% success rate, but more frustrated by the cautious response to that failure. The man who killed the iPod with the iPhone wouldn't have been content with incremental AI improvements whilst the industry transformed around him.

But here's the twist - maybe Jobs would have been wrong this time. Maybe the methodical approach is what's needed in AI, where getting it wrong has bigger consequences than a buggy software update.

The Real Stakes (And Why They Matter)

The 20% stock drop tells us everything we need to know about market expectations. Investors didn't want prettier interfaces and better shortcuts - they wanted Apple to demonstrate AI leadership. They wanted proof that Apple could compete with OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft in the defining technology battle of our era.

Apple's cautious approach might be smart long-term product strategy, but it's creating a dangerous perception gap. Whilst Apple perfects on-device AI models, competitors are capturing mindshare, user habits, and developer loyalty. Network effects in AI are powerful - once users get comfortable with ChatGPT or Google's AI tools, switching costs become psychological, not just technical.

The bigger question isn't whether Apple will eventually deliver great AI features (they probably will), but whether they'll still be relevant in the AI conversation when they do.

My Contrarian Take (Because Someone Has to Say It)

Here's where I might surprise you: I think Apple's caution might actually be their secret weapon, but only if they execute it perfectly.

Whilst everyone else is racing to ship AI features that hallucinate, make mistakes, and occasionally provide harmful information, Apple is building AI that works reliably within the context of your personal device ecosystem. The Foundation Models framework enables developers to build AI capabilities that utilise Apple's existing systems, potentially creating an AI experience that's more integrated and trustworthy than anything else on the market.

The risk is that "eventually perfect" might come too late. The opportunity is that Apple could deliver AI that actually improves your life instead of just impressing you in demos.

What's Really at Stake (Beyond Stock Prices)

This isn't just about AI features or stock prices. This is about whether Apple can maintain its position as a platform company in an AI-first world. Every time someone chooses ChatGPT for a task instead of Siri, every time a developer builds an AI feature using OpenAI's APIs instead of Apple's tools, Apple loses a little bit of platform control.

The Vision Pro was supposed to be Apple's next platform bet, but spatial computing might be a solution looking for a problem. AI, meanwhile, is solving problems people have right now.

My Personal Creative Journey with This Dilemma

Writing this piece has been unexpectedly enlightening. I started wanting to criticise Apple's conservative approach, but I've found myself torn between frustration and admiration. Perhaps that tension perfectly captures where Apple finds itself.

This analysis isn't meant as a victory lap for Apple's critics or a defence of their strategy. It's an invitation to think critically about what we actually want from our technology. Do we want the excitement of cutting-edge AI that occasionally fails spectacularly, or the reliability of carefully crafted features that work consistently?

Too many tech companies rush to market with half-baked AI features, paralysed by fear of being left behind. Apple's approach might be the antidote to that panic.

The Uncomfortable Verdict

WWDC 2025 felt like Apple standing at a crossroads with a GPS that's constantly recalculating. They can continue perfecting the premium user experience they're known for, or they can embrace the messier, faster-moving world of AI innovation. The safe bet is that they'll try to do both, but history suggests that rarely works.

Steve Jobs might not be happy with the current approach, but he'd probably be even less happy with shipping buggy AI that doesn't work. The real question is whether Apple's "high-quality bar" strategy can coexist with the breakneck pace of AI development.

My prediction? Apple will eventually deliver impressive AI features, but they'll spend the next two years playing catch-up instead of leading. Whether that's acceptable depends on your tolerance for Apple's traditional "we'll be late, but we'll be right" approach.

In the age of AI, being fashionably late might just be unfashionably irrelevant.

But here's the thing about seemingly conservative strategies - they often reveal profound insights about long-term value creation. Maybe Apple's deliberate approach will transform what we expect from AI integration.

Stay curious about where this journey leads. The tech industry's most interesting stories often emerge from the most unexpected strategic choices.

What do you think? Is Apple's cautious approach to AI smart strategy or missed opportunity? I'd love to continue this conversation - drop your thoughts in the comments or share your own experiences with Apple's AI features.