If Google helps Apple beat Google, does everyone lose?

Call me cynical, but from time to time, I hear about a “leak” that’s so positive I wonder if it’s actually a press release in disguise. In August, for instance, the transcript of an internal Apple meeting escaped into the wild and revealed that the company, get this, had amazing products ready to launch. And last week it emerged, no doubt to Apple’s consternation, that its upcoming partnership with Google will result in Siri getting a raft of new features without having to make any compromises whatsoever in terms of privacy and the user interface.

Boy, I really hope somebody got fired for that blunder!

Ultimately, news that Apple’s makeover of its misfiring Siri voice assistant will be powered by Google Gemini rather than in-house technology is a black eye for Cupertino, which has all along said that it will innovate, not spend, its way to AI relevance. Simply buying an established model was always an option for cash-rich Apple, but it preferred to make its own. That’s not to say that Apple is too proud to acquire; Siri itself is an acquired product. It just prefers to absorb small companies, rather than ask for help from an equally large and powerful rival, so that it can maintain control.

Basing Siri on Google Gemini, then, is a concession of defeat, and the question is what that defeat will cost. Of course, it will result in more features and very likely a far more capable Siri. Google is in a better position than Apple to deliver on the reckless promises and vaporware demos we heard and saw at WWDC 2024. The question is what compromises Apple will be asked to make, and which compromises it will be prepared to make, in return.

The privacy element is the most important, being essentially Apple’s unique-selling proposition. And Apple is clearly conscious that working with Google might make customers nervous about who is going to be able to do what with their data, because assurances were issued even before the report in The Information. In the otherwise detail-light official announcement, the two firms hastened to collectively tell us that Apple Intelligence “will continue to run on Apple devices and Private Cloud Compute, while maintaining Apple’s industry-leading privacy standards.” The leak further emphasised that customer data won’t go anywhere near Google’s servers and that Apple’s “privacy pledge” will be maintained.

No compromises on privacy, then. Likewise, albeit more superficially, we are assured that Siri, along with other Apple Intelligence features, is going to continue to look and behave like an Apple product, not a Google one. Google will reportedly tweak Gemini to Apple’s specifications, and Apple’s own engineers will be able to modify it if they prefer. The mysterious sources in The Information report even claim that prototypes of the new software don’t feature any Google branding, although I’d be surprised if the final shipping product completely erased Google’s existence, since Google and ChatGPT currently get namechecks when you use their respective services in Visual Intelligence. Credit where credit’s due, after all.

Still, even if Google gets to put its name on GemiSiri (Sirini?) the signs appear to be positive that it will remain a fundamentally Apple product in both fundamentals and cosmetics. But do you know the best thing about leaking favorable information rather than announcing it in an official statement? There’s absolutely no consequences if those anonymous sources later turn out to be wrong. And I’m in a suspicious mood.

Put it this way. What’s in it for Google?

On the face of it, we’re asked to believe that one of the most ruthless companies in the world has found itself in a position of power over its principal rival, able to make or break that rival’s prospects in the all-important AI arena. And instead of invoicing Tim Cook for a pound of flesh, Sundar Pichai bent over backwards to help?

I’m not saying it’s surprising for one tech giant to work with another; this happens all the time. Apple continued to work profitably with Samsung even while the two companies were suing each other in multiple courtrooms around the world. But it’s surprising for the tech giant with all the power in the relationship to go along with all of the other giant’s requests. I’m reminded of the moment (spoiler alert) where Mr. Wickham marries Lydia Bennett near the end of Pride and Prejudice, and her father can only wonder in despair what this uncharacteristically honourable act will cost him. Why would Google help Apple if it’s not to further its aims and improve its position?

Perhaps, like Wickham, Google has merely asked for an exorbitant amount of money. Apple has money, and Google likes money, as do we all. Money is useful; it can be exchanged for goods and services, not to mention political influence. But I’m not entirely convinced this is the one. For all its cash reserves Apple is bizarrely tight-fisted, protective of its profit margins to the extent of nickel-and-diming its customers, resisting self-repair at all costs, and even sticking ads in Apple Maps. If Pichai wrote an enormously long number on a piece of paper and slid it meaningfully across the table, I’m 99% sure that Cook would slide it back and turn the conversation to manageable compromise.

So does that mean customer privacy is negotiable? Again, I suspect not, not least because the privacy pledge was highlighted in the official announcement as well as the leak. That’s an assurance that Apple will have to stand behind when the product launches. But a lot can be hidden behind a public assurance, provided you keep things vague. Your data will be kept on your own device and Apple’s protected architecture rather than Google’s servers. At the same time, it may prove mutually beneficial, and allowable within the terms of the privacy pledge, for the companies to share general anonymised usage data.

Some may argue that the deal is worth it for Google purely for the higher profile it will give to Gemini, which may be light-years ahead of Siri but has legitimate rivals of its own. I’m reminded of the arrangement making Google search the default on all iPhones, which reportedly nets Apple tens of billions per year. Google might be prepared to pay Apple something for the privilege of Gemini being the default AI on all iPhones, but it’s scarcely as lucrative as being the default search engine, which means an enormous volume of search ads. And in this case, it isn’t even allowed to harvest any data and has to give up control of the interface. And Apple needs a working AI platform. It’s not remotely the same dynamic.

In the end, the most likely answer is some complex mixture of incentives that may never be completely understood outside the companies (or outside an antitrust court hearing). Money may well be changing hands, more likely in the Googlewards direction, but I can’t imagine it will be enough to make the arrangement worthwhile on its own. So there may also be some data sharing in general terms. And perhaps some prominent branding, or favorable placement in the App Store. Maybe Apple won’t have quite as much control over the design as The Information’s anonymous sources would like us to believe.

At this point, it’s all speculation. But one thing is clear: Apple has got itself into an awkward spot, and Google is in a position to profit. And to paraphrase Austen, Sundar Pichai would be a fool if he let Apple have access to Gemini for a farthing less than a few billion pounds.

Welcome to our weekly Apple Breakfast column, which includes all the Apple news you missed last week in a handy bite-sized roundup. We call it Apple Breakfast because we think it goes great with a Monday morning cup of coffee or tea, but it’s cool if you want to give it a read during lunch or dinner hours too.

Trending: Top stories

20 years ago, the first MacBook Pro changed the world. Will history repeat itself?

There’s never been a worse time to buy an iPhone 16e.

Jason Cross explains why Apple’s M5 Pro and Max chips will be worth the long wait.

The state of Apple and AI: The good (Gemini), the bad (xAI), and the ugly (Grok).

Not convinced of macOS Tahoe’s terrible design? Here’s the best (worst) example.

Here’s everything you need to know about Creator Studio, Apple’s new pro app bundle.

Podcast of the week

Apple could release some major products that change how we think about the iPhone and MacBook Pro. In the latest episode of the Macworld podcast we reveal what you can expect in the second half of 2026.

You can catch every episode of the Macworld Podcast on YouTube, Spotify, Soundcloud, the Podcasts app, or our own site.

Reviews corner

• Flexbar: The Touch Bar replacement you’ve been missing.
• Blue Prince: A magical mystery tour of a game, packed with tantalizing puzzles.

The rumor mill

Siri is expected to gain these 7 new features when Google Gemini takes over.

Apple might have just revealed the launch date for the M5 Pro/Max MacBook Pro.

A case maker might have leaked the iPhone Fold design.

Software updates, bugs, and problems

This strange Google Fast Pair flaw even puts users with iPhones at risk.

Verizon is paying $20 to anyone affected by last week’s outage–here’s how to get it.

‘Inexcusable’ Logitech blunder borked its Mac mice, but there’s a fix.

Further examination could explain why iOS 26’s adoption rates are so low.

And with that, we’re done for this week’s Apple Breakfast. If you’d like to get regular roundups, sign up for our newsletters, including our new email from The Macalope–an irreverent, humorous take on the latest news and rumors from a half-man, half-mythical Mac beast. You can also follow us on Facebook, Threads, Bluesky, or X for discussion of breaking Apple news stories. See you next Monday, and stay Appley.