Talk:Virtual assistant

External links modified

I have just added archive links to one external link on Automated online assistant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100607040004/http://www.insurancetech.com:80/blog/archives/2010/06/aetnas_gorgeous.html? to http://www.insurancetech.com/blog/archives/2010/06/aetnas_gorgeous.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:52, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Name

>Most common name for this item is now "virtual assistant"

• I actually agree that this name is way better than "Intelligent personal assistant". However, I think there should be some background info regarding this re-appropriation of the term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.126.220.238 (talk) 11:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia naming-conventions would normally title it "Virtual assistant (computing)" or the like. @Keizers: you cool with renaming it that? -- dsprc ^[talk] 17:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Two tables

Why are there now two tables in this article? I'm asking because it bothers me that only commercial products got the exposure by being on top of the article. I mean, the table is above index of the article, that's some serious exposure.

Where can we properly debate about how the structure of this article should look like and what terminoligy to use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.126.220.238 (talk) 06:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Yea it was jacked-up. Problematic additions have been removed. You're more than welcome to do so yourself next time. One can discuss layout and content on this talk page -- or pretty much anywhere, really. -- dsprc ^[talk] 17:24, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure what jacked up means, exactly, but I was trying to help - having every VA in history in a table is not helpful. Somewhere prominently we need to acknowledge the top 5 or so which are prominent in the market.Keizers (talk) 03:13, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

@Keizers: Table and images were floating above Table of Contents; see MOS:LAYOUT for general info. How about we spin-off the extensive list to its own article? You can have major 5 (or whatever) with {{main article}} hanging below section header pointing toward others. That way this article can be clean, and long comparative list can still be around for those seeking such information. Would need to decide if it should be named "List of..." or "Comparison of..." -- dsprc ^[talk] 20:19, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 19 March 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 05:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

---

Virtual assistant (artificial intelligence) → Virtual assistant – Virtual assistant for a person is not very widely used anymore and the AI type of virtual assistant has double the hits Keizers (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

• Support I think that the rising popularity of AI assistants makes the occupation the non-primary topic. Not nearly as many people use the human virtual assistants as the AI ones._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:28, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposal: Review the content of "Full comparison of assistants" table

Good day

I think it's reasonable to review the content of the table, in particular: review the criteria of comparison and the list of columns.

First of all, it's strange that in a single table both hardware-related physical characteristics (related to particular devices and even models of devices like the presence of HDMI and external I/O ports) and software characteristics are compared. Not all virtual assistants has a flagship hardware with them. Maybe it's better to concentrate on more generic features of assistants, on features that doesn't depend on a hardware?

Second, if the hardware side is decided to be kept in a table, maybe it's reasonable to add additional column like "Core hardware product" or "Flagship device". That will clarify which device we are talking about in a table. Or, only if it's reasonable, to preserve hardware-related features as is in a meaning of "the software can support such hardware functions as video output, external GPIO..." and so on.

Third, maybe it's reasonable to replace features related to proprietary technologies (like Google Chromecast) with more generic names (like "Media streaming"). Otherwise it'll be needed to add a column for each of the streaming technologies (like Apple AirPlay and Amazon Alexa Cast) to be unbiased.

Summarizing, maybe we should concentrate on generic software-related features of assistants that better represent their functionality and utility for end users.

The proposed list of characteristics (columns) is:

• name
• developer
• free software
• device support (speakers/TVs/smartphones/computers/etc)
• interface support (voice/on-screen/etc.)
• video support (yes/no/internal display/external display)
• smart home and IoT control (yes/no)
• streaming support (audio/video/no support)
• companion app (yes/no)
• always listening / always on
• calls between devices (yes/no)
• and so on if needed

Serhii Kostiuk (talk) 20:13, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

At a higher-level concern, what are the inclusion criteria? The table appears to be mostly bluelinks. There are some redlinks, and some of those were formerly blue until their target article got deleted. There are a few simple extlinks also. Should the table be "entries that have WP articles", or the weaker "entries supported by third-party cites", or unrestricted? We need to avoid WP:NOTDIR and especially random spam. DMacks (talk) 18:05, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@GermanJoe: per this pair of edits, has moved the table to be "Comparison of notable assistants" (adding "notable") as explicit descriptor) and removed all that aren't wiki-bluelinks likewise. I support this criterion. DMacks (talk) 15:05, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

I didn't see this talkpage discussion (sorry), thanks for the ping. Just noticed and cleaned up the excessive link spam for non-notable entries in the list. Anyway, a clear "no article = no addition" rule is the easiest to handle and helps to avoid common drive-by spam. No opinion regarding the suggested additional columns. Of course anyone can add sourced relevant information or tweak the current structure if needed. GermanJoe (talk) 16:08, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

The current table does not make sense. Almost all the columns have N/A values. It looks like ads for Mycroft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexantoniogonzalez2 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added Info about one of the first ever consumer speech recognition product Rex the Dog with a Cnet article link. I added this yesterday with a link to a product demo on You Tube, but this was not allowed. I am new to posting.

Got lots of complementary market information about this topic to help readers map out what this market looks like. Add a Voice assistants in home entertainment section Suggest adding information about the categories and use cases of VPAs and also the brands and technologies working in each sector. I have 2 images that I could share which show this clearly Secondly I have an VA infographic which breaks down VA in the home/WW shipments and device types. All in public domain, from Futuresource and useful for educating readers about this market. I am not sure what format it needs to be in? I want to share useful insights which map out key tech and brands in the tech sectors Futuresource has knowledge in. I am new here! --FinneyBob (talk) 12:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)Finneybob--FinneyBob (talk) 12:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

References

Reply 28-MAR-2019

  Specification requested  

• It is not known what changes are requested to be made. Please see the collapsible section below titled Edit request format for a description of how to submit your edit request, which should be in the form of "Change x to y using z".

Edit request format

"Please change x to y using z." x A verbatim description of the old text to be removed from the article (if any) y A verbatim description of the new text to be added to the article (if any) z A reference which verifies the requested change Example edit request: Please change: "The Sun's diameter is 25 miles."  ↑This is x↑  to read as: "The Sun's diameter is 864,337.3 miles."  ↑This is y↑  using as a reference: Harinath, Paramjit (2018). The Sun. Academic Press. p. 1.  ↑This is z↑

When ready to proceed, please alter the {{request edit}} template's answer parameter to read from |ans=yes to |ans=no. Thank you!
Regards,  Spintendo  14:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Notes