Apple’s big ChatGPT tie-up was supposed to make Siri feel smarter. Instead, it may have left OpenAI feeling like it got baited.
According to reporting cited by Ars Technica, OpenAI is now exploring legal options after Apple’s integration of ChatGPT into its products allegedly failed to deliver what OpenAI expected. The partnership was originally pitched as a huge distribution win: ChatGPT inside Apple’s ecosystem, potentially reaching millions of iPhone, iPad, and Mac users.
For a company like OpenAI, that kind of placement is gold. Apple users are everywhere, including Malaysia and the wider SEA market, where iPhones remain aspirational devices even when Android dominates volume. If ChatGPT had been deeply woven into Siri and Apple Intelligence, it could have pushed a lot more casual users into paid AI subscriptions.
But insiders reportedly told Bloomberg that OpenAI is unhappy with how Apple actually implemented the feature. One big complaint: users apparently need to specifically mention “ChatGPT” when asking Siri for help. That sounds small, but for everyday users, it adds friction. If your mum, your classmate, or your colleague has to remember the magic word before Siri hands off to ChatGPT, many people simply won’t use it.
OpenAI is also reportedly frustrated by Apple’s interface choices, including smaller response windows that make ChatGPT’s answers feel limited or easy to ignore. From OpenAI’s point of view, that could make the integration look weaker than the standalone ChatGPT app — and potentially hurt the brand.
The bigger issue is expectation versus reality. OpenAI reportedly believed the Apple deal could generate billions of dollars a year in subscriptions. Now, sources claim the company suspects Apple did not properly promote the integration and may not have made a serious effort to help ChatGPT shine.
That tension matters because Apple is still trying to convince users that Apple Intelligence is worth caring about. In Malaysia, most iPhone users are not buying a new device just because Siri got a bit smarter. AI features need to feel useful in daily life — summarising notes, helping with messages, planning trips, studying, coding, translating, and handling work tasks. If the ChatGPT link feels hidden or clunky, it will not move the needle.
There is also legal drama in the background. Elon Musk has sued Apple and OpenAI, arguing that their deal harms competition. His case claims the partnership helps ChatGPT dominate the chatbot market while protecting Apple’s smartphone business. So far, the lawsuit has survived dismissal attempts, though the court has not ruled on whether Musk’s claims are actually strong.
Interestingly, the reported Apple-OpenAI friction may weaken Musk’s narrative. If both companies are genuinely unhappy with each other, it becomes harder to paint them as tightly aligned partners conspiring against rivals. Apple is also reportedly testing Siri integrations with Anthropic’s Claude and Google Gemini, which makes the deal look less exclusive.
A judge has now ordered Apple to hand over certain internal documents linked to the agreement, including materials involving Apple software chief Craig Federighi and possible exclusivity language around AI providers. Apple does not have to provide Tim Cook’s internal messages for now, but more details about the deal could surface by mid-June.
For users, the practical takeaway is simple: the AI assistant war is still messy. Apple wants better AI without giving up control of the iPhone experience. OpenAI wants distribution without being buried inside someone else’s UI. Google, Anthropic, xAI, and others are all fighting for the same screen time.
For Malaysia and SEA, this could affect which AI tools become default on our phones. If Apple opens Siri to multiple AI partners, users may eventually get more choice. If Apple keeps things tightly controlled, the “smart assistant” experience may depend less on the best AI model and more on whoever gets the best placement.
Apple is expected to show a revamped Siri in June, which could still smooth things over. But right now, this looks less like a dream AI partnership and more like two tech giants realising they wanted very different things.
Source: Ars Technica