←back to thread

We're Joining OpenAI

(www.alexcodes.app)
192 points liurenju | 9 comments | | HN request time: 0.6s | source | bottom
1. whinvik ◴[] No.45120518[source]
The failed Windsurf bid and this makes me think OpenAI feels they need to focus more on the coding agent use case.

Still thinking about the endgame. Its not obvious to me if OpenAI/Anthropic will become competitors to coding startups like Cursor or continue to be model providers.

replies(5): >>45120559 #>>45120593 #>>45120610 #>>45122333 #>>45122507 #
2. CuriouslyC ◴[] No.45120559[source]
Neither type has agents in their DNA. The IDE agent companies are dragging an enormous vestigial appendage, and the the scientists at frontier labs are stuck in the next token prediction mindset. This needs a systems engineering approach with online learning from feedback and high throughput optimization experiments run end to end.
3. on_meds ◴[] No.45120593[source]
In my view Anthropic is already a competitor to Cursor, while also being a model provider to them.

OpenAI has been trying to get into the space with their multiple product offerings all called “codex” but execution has been lacking.

So this is very much a play at becoming more competitive in the space.

4. gabelschlager ◴[] No.45120610[source]
I think the endgame is a shift toward a platform of services that tightly bind users to a single LLM provider.

Right now, many small startups are essentially just thin wrappers around ChatGPT. Once it becomes clear which ideas and solutions gain real traction, providers like OpenAI/Anthropic can simply roll out those features natively removing any need for a third party.

In a sense, a lot of what happened with the mobile market. For example, there's no need for a QR scanner or document scanner app anymore, if your phone starts to offer it natively.

replies(2): >>45120719 #>>45121358 #
5. kaptainscarlet ◴[] No.45120719[source]
Does anyone else remember how we used to have flash light apps all over the playstore and how they quickly varnished once the feature was implement natively?
replies(1): >>45122988 #
6. tern ◴[] No.45121358[source]
This seems correct to me. I'm unusually appreciative of vertical integration (life-long Apple user, etc.), and I can already feel the vendor lock-in tightening. I have no need for anything other than my ChatGPT subscription, and adding other tools appears to offer marginal gain at double the cost.

This type of bundling appears to be one of the strongest forces in the economy today, and I think comes about consistently due to a confluence of efficiencies of scale, coordination, and second-order effects of prestige (being able to hire and pay large numbers of outlier high performing employees, etc.)

I've learned not to bet against it, except in niche areas.

7. dragonwriter ◴[] No.45122333[source]
> Its not obvious to me if OpenAI/Anthropic will become competitors to coding startups like Cursor or continue to be model providers.

They’ll do both: continue to be model providers while also leveraging their position as model providers to own as many of the valauble markets in which models are used as possible. Kind of like Amazon and its role as both infrastructure provider and direct competitors to other sellers (on the shopping/logistics side) and SaaS vendors (on the AWS side).

8. _mu ◴[] No.45122507[source]
> Still thinking about the endgame.

It is said by some that the endgame is agents, like Devin. The IDEs are just the start of AI coding.

9. kjkjadksj ◴[] No.45122988{3}[source]
Almost everything in ios since ios1 has been a sort of in house copy of a jailbroken tweak. I feel like that is just how these huge companies actually innovate featuresets now. No one has agency to drive change from within, so they see what the community has built and is using and shamelessly copy it as it. Easier to sell to management that you should steal an already bright idea than to try and prove your own novel idea is worth pursuing.