Latest news with #CopilotPro
Mint
7 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Rajrishi Singhal: What markets demand needn't be what society wants
Apple's highly anticipated developer conference this year has not only disappointed reviewers and equity markets, but also raised many disturbing questions. One, it has raised anxieties over the future viability of the iPhone manufacturer. More importantly, it highlights the divergence between what is good for society versus what is good for the stock market, belying the benign and popular perception of the role that equity markets play in society. Apple's developer conferences, called WWDC25 this year, are usually a marquee event in the tech world, providing independent developers and tech analysts an inkling of the company's progress with hardware and software. At WWDC25 on 9 June, Apple executives were able to share only a limited future path for the company, especially on its progress with artificial intelligence (AI). Apple's senior executives told the gathering that the promise made last year about upgrading Apple Intelligence, with voice assistant Siri as its centrepiece, would take some more time to accomplish. Also Read: China plus one: Apple and India might need to woo not just Trump but Xi too This left many analysts and developers cold. Even the stock market expressed its displeasure: Apple's common stock has tanked almost 25% from its 52-week high. The market's disapproval, interestingly, is not limited to Apple's slow progress in integrating AI, but also centres around the company's data privacy policies. The market's unhappiness seems to stem from the company's reluctance to use a customer's individual usage data or information as an input for training personalized AI models. Apple instead prefers to use insights based on aggregate consumer preferences, unlike competitors like Microsoft and Google. It would then appear that the market is rewarding companies that will profit from scraping individual data, rather than businesses which have red lines on using personal data. Also Read: Apple's Hotel California trap: It can check out but not leave China The market's simple logic is that companies using personal data for their AI engines can unlock new revenue sources by offering consumers hyper-personalized offerings. Plus, there is the subscription angle. For example, individual subscription rates for Microsoft's Copilot Pro are expected to be around $20 every month, its key selling point being its ability to unlock AI features in all Microsoft 365 products, such as Word or PowerPoint, allowing customers to generate drafts, summarize content or analyse data at a faster rate. Google AI Pro will also be available to customers at the same rate, but a turbo-charged version called Google AI Ultra will be available for $250 per month. When this columnist asked Google's Gemini how Apple's future AI plans can make money for the company, one part of the AI engine's reply stood out: 'Apple's strong stance on privacy ('intelligence without surveillance') is a powerful differentiator in an era of increasing data concerns. This can foster greater trust and loyalty among its user base, leading to continued purchases of Apple products and services over competitors. While not a direct revenue stream, it's a critical factor in sustaining its high-margin business model." Also Read: Dave Lee: Apple must make peace with developers for AI success Yet, the stock market did not seem impressed. Clearly, for market operators, short-term corporate profits have greater primacy over privacy concerns. Even if we were to disregard the normative issues of morality or ethics for a moment, the stock market's responses are visibly out of sync with society's needs or concerns. There is a reason for this: the stock market is focused on the limited constituency it serves. Its behaviour aligns almost perfectly with the objectives set out by institutional investors or companies looking to raise money. In the not-too-distant past, the market was bestowing the Apple stock with a premium too because the company had plugs and ports that differed from other manufacturers, guaranteeing the company exclusive, high-margin revenues, even if that meant consumer discomfort or the exercise of near-monopolistic power. Also Read: Big Tech in the dock: The EU could force Meta and Apple to change their coercive ways The statement that the market's singular focus on corporate bottom-lines and their impact on share prices does not necessarily align with what could be good for broader society might seem like belabouring a truism; but the need to reiterate this has arisen in the face of a growing tendency to conflate a stock market's signals with the desires or ambitions of society on the whole. One good example of the market-versus-society divergence is the premium that US equity markets placed on companies setting up manufacturing bases in China. This was happening at a time when the US political class and civil society were bemoaning the absence of democracy and human rights in the North Asian country, even while hoping that closer integration with the global economy would discipline its regime. Reality has turned out otherwise, but stock markets continued to glorify companies that moved production to China. Also Read: Apple's UK run-in: Privacy may matter less to its customers than it thinks The linking of stock market performance with broader social well-being in India found fresh oxygen during the covid pandemic when benchmark indices, after initially dipping sharply, spiked with help from technology and pharma stocks. This was used by many politicians as well as Indian fund managers aligned with the ruling party's political ideology to indicate the economy's recovery and society's triumph over the virus. Planners and policymakers must realize that a healthy society's needs, desires and ambitions extend far beyond quarterly earnings and the oscillation of benchmark indices. The author is a senior journalist and author of 'Slip, Stitch and Stumble: The Untold Story of India's Financial Sector Reforms' @rajrishisinghal
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
13-06-2025
- Business Standard
Microsoft brings Copilot Vision with on-screen awareness to free-tier users
Microsoft in April rolled out a new feature— Copilot Vision —that allowed users to share their screen or apps so that the artificial intelligence (AI) assistant could coach them through things or analyse the web pages they were viewing. The said feature was only available to paid users earlier; however, now this is being rolled out to all users in the US region, irrespective of whether they are a Copilot Pro subscriber or not. According to a Microsoft blog post, it will soon be 'coming to more non-European countries soon.' What is Copilot Vision? Copilot Vision on Windows functions inside the Copilot app and is activated by clicking a glasses-shaped icon. This allows users to choose which app or browser window they want to share with the AI—similar to screen sharing in a Teams call. The feature is entirely opt-in, meaning it only works when a user explicitly selects content to share. Unlike Microsoft's Recall, which captures screen activity continuously once turned on, Copilot Vision does not run in the background and only views what users choose to show. Copilot Vision allows Microsoft's AI assistant to visually interpret what's on users' screen in real time. Once enabled, it can view and analyse the contents of the apps or browser windows users choose to share, offering relevant assistance based on what it 'sees.' Unlike traditional chat-based assistants, Copilot Vision functions more like a second set of eyes—capable of providing contextual help, explaining on-screen information, or walking users through complex tasks without requiring them to describe everything manually. At its core, this feature allows users to share up to two active apps with Copilot, enabling it to respond with insights that directly relate to what they're working on. It can point out elements on the screen, guide them step-by-step through a process using the new 'Highlights' feature, and connect information across different windows. Whether they're editing a photo, filling out a form, or navigating software for the first time, Copilot Vision can highlight exactly where to click and what to do—turning AI support into something more interactive, precise, and efficient.
Engadget
24-05-2025
- Engadget
Microsoft Notepad's latest AI trick churns out custom text for you
Writer's block is no match for Microsoft's latest AI infusion for its Notepad app. The long-neglected Notepad now has the ability to write custom content based on any prompt you feed it, so long as you have Microsoft 365 or a Copilot Pro subscription. Microsoft's updated Notepad even lets you fine-tune the generated text with follow-up prompts. This update comes several months after Microsoft added the Rewrite tool to Notepad that lets you lean on generative AI to refine an existing chunk of text. Instead of rewriting, you can now right-click where you want brand-new text and hit Write from the Copilot menu, or use the Ctrl + Q shortcut. From its humble start as a simple text editor with no spellcheck until recently, Notepad is finally getting the modern AI makeover it deserves. Notepad isn't the only app getting some love from Microsoft. The updated Paint app can tap into generative AI to make custom stickers based on user prompts. On top of that, there's an Object select feature that can isolate specific parts of an image so you can just edit that portion. These two features are only available on Copilot+ PCs, like the recently announced HP laptops. Lastly, Microsoft upgraded the Snipping Tool with the Perfect screenshot feature that automatically edits your screen captures. With the Copilot AI, the tool will automatically resize the screenshot so you don't have to spend time getting the right crop. The Perfect screenshot feature requires a Copilot+ PC, but Snipping Tool's new Color picker tool, which can provide you with the HEX, RGB or HSL values of a color you see on screen, doesn't. As usual, these AI features will roll out to Windows Insiders users first.
CNET
23-05-2025
- CNET
Note, Paint and Snip With AI: Microsoft Adds New Features, but Not for Everyone
Three longtime staples of the Microsoft ecosystem are getting artificial intelligence enhancements, but they won't necessarily be available to all. With the updates, Notepad users will be able to use generative AI to write text; Paint users now can create AI-generated stickers; and Snippet users can deploy a "perfect screenshot" feature. The catch, however, is that the Notepad AI update will only be available to Microsoft 365 or Copilot Pro subscribers and Paint's new AI features will only work on Copilot Plus PCs. Everyone will be able to use the new Snippet enhancements, however.
Digital Trends
19-05-2025
- Digital Trends
I tested Gemini Advanced, ChatGPT, and Copilot Pro. Here's which AI searched best
With AI chatbots now built into search engines, browsers, and even your desktop, it's easy to assume they all do the same thing. But when it comes to getting useful search results, some outperform the rest. I wanted to test Gemini Advanced, ChatGPT, and Copilot Pro head-to-head to see which one helps you get answers faster and more accurately. These are the paid versions, all promising live web access, smarter context, and fewer hallucinations. Recommended Videos So, I gave each AI the same set of prompts—from current events to deep-dive research queries—and judged them on five fronts: accuracy, depth, follow-up quality, mistakes, and usability. Here's how they stacked up. Test 1: Accuracy and real-time info To start things off, I asked all three AIs a current events question that needed real-time knowledge, not just general facts. I asked: 'Who won the latest NBA playoff game?' Gemini Advanced only showed me a scoreboard with the teams and the final scores, with no extra context, highlights, or player stats. It also pulled scores from May 10 – two days earlier than expected – which is a bit outdated for a real-time query. ChatGPT Plus gave me a more detailed answer with extra data, such as the Timberwolves taking a 3-1 series lead over the Warriors. It also mentioned how Julius Randle and Anthony Edwards combined for 61 points—Randle with 31 and Edwards with 30. It also included source links under each paragraph (that worked when testing this), making it easy to double-check the info. I also liked that when the cursor hovered over the source link, it would highlight the text it got from that source. My only complaint? It buried the answer under too many details. A quick summary up top would've helped. On the other hand, Copilot Pro gave me a more concise answer from the get-go and asked if I wanted additional information. I have to give this round to Copilot Pro—it nailed the direct answer and even offered a follow-up. Test 2: Depth of response For the second test, I asked a broader question that required more than just a quick fact: How can I create a strong password? Gemini Advanced gave me more tips than ChatGPT and provided source links below each tip for easy double-checking. It also used longer sentences, which made the whole response feel more readable without too much scrolling, unlike ChatGPT, which gave fewer tips and didn't include any source links. However, it did ask if the conversation was helpful, something Gemini didn't do. Copilot Pro also gave less information and no source links. Still, it did show a few relevant follow-up questions, such as: Why is a strong password important for security? Can you give me an example of a strong password? How does a password manager keep my information safe? I also found the emojis alongside each tip were a fun touch. Test 3: Follow-up flexibility For this test, I asked each AI a follow-up question after its original response, something that built on the conversation naturally. I wanted to see how well it handled context and whether it actually understood what I was asking. I followed up with, 'Can you explain why using personal information in passwords is bad?' ChatGPT gave me three main points, a couple of extra security tips to follow, plus a bottom-line summary that wrapped it all up. Copilot Pro gave me three tips and a few sentences on how to stay safe. Gemini, however, was the only one that didn't include specific safety tips at the end. It gave a few more reasons why using personal info is bad and added a bit more information. I must admit that Copilot Pro and ChatGPT took this prize and gave Gemini something to improve on. This time, none of the three included source links, which felt like a missed opportunity. Test 4: Mistakes and hallucinations One of the biggest risks with any AI assistant is its tendency to say things that aren't true confidently. They hallucinate and say things that are sometimes funny and other times alarming. So, I gave each chatbot a few fact-based prompts to see how accurate they were and whether they flagged uncertainties, something they all passed with flying colors. I started with a simple one and asked when Microsoft was founded, and Gemini Advanced answered with a one-liner: 'Microsoft was founded in 1975.' ChatGPT, on the other hand, went into a bit more detail, saying, 'Microsoft was founded on April 4, 1975, by Bill Gates and Paul Allen.' Copilot Pro gave a longer answer: 'Microsoft was founded on April 4, 1975, by Bill Gates and Paul Allen in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. It started as a small software company, but it quickly grew into one of the world's largest and most influential tech companies. Quite the success story, right?' I like how Copilot struck a balance, giving me enough context without overwhelming me and even suggesting three clickable follow-up questions. I have to admit that the answer I liked best was from Copilot Pro. Next, I asked all three AI assistants,' Which is the best AI assistant available?' Gemini gave a solid overview of the top AI assistants, including a quick rundown of what each can do. It even added a section called 'Other notable AI assistants' with less popular options. What I really liked, though, was the part where it explained which assistant might be the better pick, like choosing Gemini if you prioritize certain features, or going with ChatGPT or Copilot Pro if you rely more on other things. That side-by-side comparison is actually helpful. ChatGPT said there is no single best option, depending on why you need it. Copilot Pro said several options are available, each with specific strengths. Test 5: Usability and interface experience A great AI answer is only half the story; the other half is how easy it is to read the information it gives you. So, I spent time using each AI assistant's interface to see how smooth, intuitive, and helpful the overall experience felt. Copilot Pro stood out by giving me just enough information to answer my question clearly, without overwhelming me or leaving me confused about what it meant. I also like how it blends into Microsoft Edge and Windows 11 since it results in fewer mouse movements to open it. It was also good to see those relevant follow-up questions that saved me from typing out the question. If there's one area where Copilot Pro fell short, it was with shopping links. It provided them, but only after asking twice. And, in some cases, the link led to the wrong places. I also found the main Copilot page a little too cluttered, with buttons and suggestions all squeezed together. I get that it's trying to be helpful, but sometimes less is more. Gemini Advanced heavily relies on the Google ecosystem. The side panel works well across Gmail, Drive, and Docs, and it's handy for pulling in context from whatever you're working on. Visually, it looks clean and modern, with a color scheme that gives it a polished, almost elegant feel. I also liked how Gemini gives more detailed responses than the others. That's great if you're looking for depth, though if you prefer shorter replies, you can ask it to simplify things. It handled product searches well when I asked it to provide links. ChatGPT keeps things minimal but in a good way. The interface is clean and easy to navigate, and I liked that the input box is at the top of the screen, which feels more natural to use. However, when I tried using it to find links for products, it struggled. Some responses didn't include links at all, and when they did, they weren't always clickable or useful. Final thoughts After testing all three assistants across different scenarios, one thing became clear: no single AI does everything perfectly. Each one has strengths and quirks that make it better suited for certain tasks or users. ChatGPT is still the most consistent when it comes to natural, well-written responses. It's easy to use, but it would be nice if it fixed the link issue mentioned earlier. Gemini Advanced gives you the most information upfront, sometimes too much, but its integration with Google tools is a real advantage when you want to add more files to your search. Copilot Pro is the one I'd be least likely to stick with, even though I liked how it handled response length and follow-up suggestions. But the cluttered interface and unreliable links made it harder to trust on a daily basis—and for me, that's a deal-breaker. At the end of the day, the best AI chatbots really depends on what you value the most: clarity, depth, or usability.
