Apple could win the AI race without running
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
Apple isn't burning mountains of cash to buy GPUs for the sake of training AI models and processing prompts.
- Nor is it investing huge sums in frontier labs like OpenAI or Anthropic, as are rivals like Amazon and Microsoft.
Why it matters: Apple may reap the rewards of everyone else's spend. Success from the sidelines.
Apple's playbook: Keep selling high-end consumer hardware that will become even more essential as AI becomes more ubiquitous.
- AI advancements could lead to shorter upgrade cycles, while Apple's reputation for enhanced privacy could become an enhanced selling point.
- All the while, "taxing" the frontier labs via the App Store. It doesn't matter to Apple which app gets used most, so long as it's being used.
Behind the scenes: This is an argument that more and more investors, including some VCs with big AI positions, have been whispering about.
Zoom in: OK, it's not a sure bet.
- For starters, Apple does want/need to improve Siri. If it ultimately uses Google's Gemini models, the capacity will need to come from somewhere.
- There's also OpenAI's efforts to create its own branded hardware, designed by longtime Apple star Jony Ive. If successful, it could dent the iEmpire — or maybe even end the primacy of apps.
Wildcard: It's possible that the our primary AI devices won't be mobile. They'll be something else, running agents. What's in our pocket will be used more like the original iPhone — talk, text, and listen to music.
- In this case, Apple remains likely to benefit. As Axios' Ina Fried notes: "Lots of people are coding on their Macs and the Mac mini is sold out as enthusiasts use them to run agents like OpenClaw."
The bottom line: Apple's Tim Cook seems to be echoing the wisdom of Joshua, a rogue AI from the 1983 film War Games: "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play."
