Google’s Gemini has a branding problem, and so does the rest of AI

Google’s pitch for Gemini Live’s new voice features is simple: you shouldn’t have to guess whether a task needs Spark, a Daily Brief, or a quick search. That sounds clean. The trouble is that Google itself has turned Gemini into a small zoo of labels, icons, and modes, and the result is anything but clean.

Inside the Gemini app, users can hop between chat, Spark, and Daily Brief. Each one sits in its own little lane. That may make sense to the people building the product, but it makes the app feel crowded to everyone else. It also sends an awkward signal: if Gemini really had one obvious reason to exist, it probably wouldn’t need this much branding scaffolding.

Daily Brief is the clearest example of the problem. Google describes it as “proactive, personalized updates” pulled from apps like Gmail and Calendar. In theory, that sounds helpful. In practice, the feature doesn’t seem to know the difference between something important and something merely familiar. It can push users to continue research started in the chatbot, or even nudge them about previous Google searches. That’s a thin line between useful and creepy, and Google seems happy to stride right over it.

Spark has the opposite issue. It sounds more useful, because it’s the part of Gemini that can take action for you. But Google still wraps it in its own brand, as if a mainstream user needs to care which “side” of the app they’re on. They don’t. They just want to ask for something and have the software sort out the rest.

That isn’t just a Gemini problem. Anthropic asks people to choose between “chat” and “Cowork,” and until this week those modes didn’t even share memory. ChatGPT also splits itself between “Chat” and “Work.” The industry keeps exposing its internal wiring to users, then acts surprised when the whole thing feels awkward. Apple’s more understated approach may be the smarter bet: make the tools people already use a bit better, and skip the ceremony.