3 ms·
As someone who actually had to build on Gemini, it was so indefensibly broken that I couldn't believe Google really went to production with it. Model performanc
by jzebedee 2y ago
As someone who actually had to build on Gemini, it was so indefensibly broken that I couldn't believe Google really went to production with it. Model performance changes from day to day and production is completely unstable as Google will randomly decide to tweak things like safety filtering with no notice. It's also just plain buggy, as the agent scaffolding on top of Gemini will randomly fail or break their own internal parsing, generating garbage output for API consumers.
Trying to build an actual product on top of it was an exercise in futility. Docs are flatly wrong, supposed features are vaporware (discovery engine querying, anybody?), and support is nonexistent. The only thing Google came back with was throwing more vendors at us and promising that bug fixes were "coming soon".
With all the funded engagements and credits they've handed out, it's at the point where Google is paying us to use Gemini and it's _still_ not worth the money.
- wewtyflakes 2y ago> Docs are flatly wrong This +999; I couldn't believe how inconsistent and wrong the docs were. Not only that, but once I got something successfully integrated, it worked for a few weeks then the API was changed, so I was back to square one. I gave it a half-hearted try to fix it but ultimately said 'never again'! Their offering would have to be overwhelmingly better than Anthropic and OpenAI for me to consider using Gemini again.
- victor106 2y agoSame experience here. I had hopes of Google able to compete with Claude and OpenAI. But I don’t think that’s the case. Unless they come out with a product that’s 10x better in the next year or so I think they lost the AI race.
- ldjkfkdsjnv 2y agoThe engineers at google are bad, they keep hiring via pure leetcode. Cant ship working products
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]