Cabel SasserOn the eve of these Apple Event times, I will only say that testing Apple Intelligence on my Mac has led to many existential feature questions*.
But it is definitely funny how it has it out for my dad
*why? how does this help. i’m still opening the emails and the messages regardless of the summaries. in fact i’m MORE likely to open them more urgently, interrupting my work quicker, because the summaries can sometimes miss key information and i don’t want my brain to think i “read” them when i didn’t. the emails it prioritizes for me are often just emails about cancelled calendar events, already reflected on my calendar. so what is the… goal? to read my email less? how does this help that goal?
Matt Barlow@cabel I can sorta see it for people who get tons and tons of email and want a way to prioritise what they read first? Pure speculation though; I get little enough email that even categorisation isn’t particularly useful.
But messages seems an odd one. The message body is much shorter for one, but also the contents are typically much more personal, even if casually so? Something about a machine summarising things loved ones are saying doesn’t sit right with me
Connor Mason@barlow @cabel Yes, this is a good use case. I get an enormous amount of email, and the summarization has been somewhat useful simply for prioritization. I still don’t trust it not to skip important details, so it’s not preventing me from actually reading the emails myself. But I do use it for email triage—quickly assessing if a long-winded email is urgent or whether I can deal with it later (and still read it myself).