4 ms·
Makes sense that this is the only way to compete with Microsoft. (See also how MS attacked Slack by including Teams for “free”.)
by dochtman 2y ago
Makes sense that this is the only way to compete with Microsoft.
(See also how MS attacked Slack by including Teams for “free”.)
- PittleyDunkin 2y agoWhy not compete with microsoft by not pushing AI? This allows costs to stay low while making customers happier.
- jsheard 2y agoGoogle already spent a lot of money on Gemini and now they have to justify it or the shareholders will get mad.
- b112 2y agoWhat? Google is absolutely not even remotely concerned with such things. Their bring-to-market strategy for products is basically "Spend billions a year on developing random things" and then "OK, it's been a year, cancel 1/2 of them".
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago> Their bring-to-market strategy for products is basically "Spend billions a year on developing random things" and then "OK, it's been a year, cancel 1/2 of them". This evidently doesn't apply to their chatbot efforts.
- htrp 2y agolamda, bard, palm (v1 and v2) don't necessarily agree with you there
- verdverm 2y agoA lot of customers want these features (especially those people who only work in the browser because their job duties are vastly different from the average HN user)
- nkozyra 2y agoAgree, which is why it was nice(r) as an add-on.
- daveguy 2y agoApparently they don't want it if Google had to force the feature on everyone to raise revenue.
- verdverm 2y agoThis is likely a misreading from personal preference Getting these features for $2 instead of $20 likely appeals to a lot of people. It's 10% the price and may only be one of several reasons for the price increase (inflation is likely another)