Apple Foundation Models

(platform.claude.com)

87 points | by MehrdadKhnzd 3 hours ago

14 comments

  • rock_artist 19 minutes ago
    While I'm happy with Apple introducing this abstraction. my main concern was with local models.

    I'd love using Gemma4 as an example. but thinking of a user. if 10 Apps each uses same model and downloads it, the phone will be bloated.

    I still didn't understand if Apple provided a way for multiple apps uses same on-device model (without tricky namespaces and permissions).

    I didn't see anything suggesting that's the case.

  • adithyassekhar 2 minutes ago
    > Requests go directly from your app to the Claude API; Apple is not in the request path and does not see prompts or responses.

    I know this is from a developer perspective. But as a consumer this is just funny.

  • daniel_iversen 1 hour ago
    Is this Apple encouraging developers to go through their api abstraction layer to use LLMs so that when they launch their own (which I think we’ve heard they’ve been spending lots of money on training and might be somehow involved with Siri or current Apple AI?) that they can easily help devs make a seamless transition? Or is it just a developer nicety or something else?
    • NorwegianDude 27 minutes ago
      A dark, but not totally unfair take: It makes it easier for Apple to take payment for the models others provide, and even allows Apple, if they want to, to use the data to build a dataset for training their own models based on how users use third party models. It's only on Apple devices this API is used, so they split up the market by not letting developers use the same system if they want things to work on iOS, locking users even more in.
      • oefrha 11 minutes ago
        Call it Intelligence Store and charge… wait for it… 30%.
    • tarcon 20 minutes ago
      Apple has some clever mechanics to protect user data. I had to work with App tracking stuff lately and their approach to keeping user details private with anonymized cohorts (SKAN, Differential Privacy) before reporting tracking events to third party platforms was surprisingly well thought out. There is value in having them in your loop if you care about privacy.
    • pprotas 1 hour ago
      The cynic (or realist?) in my thinks this abstraction layer is Apple's way of making sure that users give their own Apple Intelligence credit for the underlying LLM functionality, even if another company is actually providing the LLM.
      • _the_inflator 46 minutes ago
        Assembled in Cupertino once more. ;)
    • thombles 48 minutes ago
      There are already on-device models that you can use through this framework as a developer. Claude would just be an additional one.
    • FinnKuhn 1 hour ago
      Maybe they plan to have the providers pay for being the default model? So basically, what Google is doing right now for search engines. The difference however is that Google is making money with additional search requests while AIs are (as of now) losing money with additional requests. I don't see the business case for them yet though.
    • mathisfun123 1 hour ago
      > which I think we’ve heard they’ve been spending lots of money on training and might be somehow involved with Siri or current Apple AI

      Lol bro this is literally it this is the model they've been training (was Apple Foundation model not a big enough hint?)

  • 21-DOT-DEV 2 minutes ago
    > Usage is billed to your Anthropic account at standard API pricing.

    While expected, it’s still a bummer.

  • _pdp_ 6 minutes ago
    From app developer standpoint why would anyone ship claude keys like that ... or am I missing something? From consumer standpoint - I guess they can use their own keys but it is not something that is very user friendly as you can imagine.
    • nl 1 minute ago
      [dead]
  • Traster 3 minutes ago
    This seems smart. Apple, despite not really leading in AI themselves, are right on the hot path of where developers are going to yolo slop into the ecosystem. Make a tonne of sense to define a nice clean API that places like Anthropic can build on top of and expose to developers.

    It's also smart for them to make sure the billing is going direct from Anthropic to the developer. The initial thought is "That means Apple's not taking a cut", but from the other side of it, developers who use this API are going to have to expose that cost to customers somehow, and that translates to subscription/InAppPurchase etc. on top of which Apple will get it's 30%.

  • HelloUsername 5 minutes ago
    Does "Apple Intelligence" need to be Turned On for this as well?
  • me551ah 11 minutes ago
    So where does the api key reside? You can’t ship it on the iOS client since anyone can read and abuse it
  • zkmon 53 minutes ago
    Coding agent itself an imposed layer. Now they are adding one more layer? Many times I think of coding agent as the vendor supervisor from the body shops of the 90's who promise the customer everything under the sky and thrash the poor contractor to deliver. Coding agents consume 10x more tokens just like how body shops charged their customers vs how they paid the contractors. For a simple test, the same task that makes the model to go out of context length when used via a coding agent, runs fine when prompted directly.

    Layers are luxury and remove control and transparency.

  • _josh_meyer_ 1 hour ago
  • gregman1 43 minutes ago
    So actually the most successful AI was OpenRouter Intelligence? Pronounced as OÏ.
  • mlpicker 13 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • tonyoconnell 1 hour ago
    [flagged]