11 ms·

Apps SDK

468 points by alvis 1y ago

MaxPock 1y ago
Tencent already has this with WeChat.Good to see it on chatgpt finally
compacct27 1y ago
“Build our platform for us!”
naiv 1y ago
Remember "GPTs" and the thing before it which I don't even remember now. I think this will go the same route .. to nowhere
- elpakal 1y ago
  Are they still expecting us to get paid based on “revenue sharing”?
- minimaxir 1y ago
  The GPT App Store (which is technically now obsolete with this SDK) was funny.
jasonsb 1y ago
They promised AGI and delivered SDKs. I think I'm gonna skip this one..
- jsheard 1y ago
  Hey don't sell them short, they also delivered a TikTok clone with vertically integrated slop generation. It's the 5D Chess path to AGI, they just need to rot the average human brain until the bar for super-human intelligence is reduced to an attainable level.
  - Narciss 1y ago
    This was funny
alvis 1y ago
So it’s take 2 for Open AI’s App Store moment. But this time surfing Anthropic’s MCP wave. Smart interop.. or just chasing the cool kids?
- apwell23 1y ago
  mcp was a dud
  - consumer451 1y ago
    What is the superior way for an LLM to interact with your product?
    - apwell23 1y ago
      llm can call my existing apis fine. curious what kind of problems you are running to with your existing apis?
      - consumer451 1y ago
        I want LLM chat integration with my product. So far, it seems that if you give an LLM a few tools to create projects and other entities, they seem to be very good at using them. The user gets the option of chat driven ui for our app, with not that much work for limited features. Currently building internal MCP servers to make that easy. But I can imagine having a public one in the future.
      - brazukadev 1y ago
        Tool calling is one of at least 5 core features of MCP
        apwell23 1y ago
        ok but not sure why i need to build an mcp for my product if llms can already call my existing apis ?
rushingcreek 1y ago
I think this is very interesting, but it is reminiscent of what we built with Phind 2 where the answer could include dynamic, pre-built widgets. The problem with this approach is precisely that these apps/widgets have hard-coded input and output schema. They can work quite well when the user asks something within the widget's capabilities, but the brittleness of this approach starts showing quickly in real-world use. What if you want to use more advanced filters with Zillow? Or perhaps cross-reference with StreetEasy? If those features aren't supported by the widget's hard-coded schema, you're out of luck as a user. What I think it much more exciting is the ability to completely create generative UI answers on the fly. We'll have more to say on this soon from Phind (I'm the founder).
- chatmasta 1y ago
  Phind is awesome. I often forget to use it until legacy search engines fail to surface what I’m looking for after a dozen searches. Phind usually finds it. That said, I used it a lot more a year ago. Lately I’ve been using regular LLMs since they’ve gotten better at searching.
  - rushingcreek 1y ago
    Thanks for the feedback. I think that our main differentiator going forward will be this generative UI on the fly for answering questions as opposed to search alone.
    - dleeftink 1y ago
      In a similar boat, but have been increasingly returning to for its quick notebook/charting capabilities. Would be awesome to somehow be able to select between different UI modes offering search, ranking, graphing or else depending on user needs.
- alvis 1y ago
  Given there is already a MCP-UI project, I’m not surprised it can be done. But even that I’m not very convinced that it’s the right approach. After all, it’s still far too slow for real usage…
ttoinou 1y ago
Does anyone think small players (like an independent developer) will be accepted ? Sounds like it will only for the big whales
chvid 1y ago
Discovery, monetization. What is in it for developers?
- spongebobstoes 1y ago
  deploying an app to 700M people?
  - artisin 1y ago
    Not only do you get to deploy your app to 700M users; you also get to provide responsive support for every single one of them! Per the docs: 'Every app comes from a verified developer who stands behind their work and provides responsive support' That's thinly veiled corporate speak for, Fortune 500 or GTFO
  - saberience 1y ago
    That's like saying making a website is like deploying an app for 7B people. Sure, but deploying a website or app doesn't mean anyone's going to use it, does it? I could make an iOS app, I could make a website, I could make a ChatGPT app... if no one uses it, it doesn't matter how big the userbase of iOS, the internet, or ChatGPT is...
    - jryle70 1y ago
      Well, if you don't make it nobody would use it for sure.
    - handfuloflight 1y ago
      Right this same sleight of hand is encoded in the language used in the announcement to make building on this platform to be attractive seeming.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
benatkin 1y ago
They're looking like Facebook did with their phone project and later the metaverse - too big for their britches.
- MaxPock 1y ago
  Lmfao..you've reminded me of the phone they made with HTC that had a Facebook button .
  - sieep 1y ago
    We've already sorta come full circle with the Meta glasses having a physical button to interact with the Facebook AI
markab21 1y ago
The skepticism is understandable given the trajectory of GPTs and custom instructions, but there's a meaningful technical difference here: the Apps SDK is built on the Model Context Protocol (MCP), which is an open specification rather than a proprietary format. MCP standardizes how LLM clients connect to external tools—defining wire formats, authentication flows, and metadata schemas. This means apps you build aren't inherently ChatGPT-specific; they're MCP servers that could work with any MCP-compatible client. The protocol is transport-agnostic and self-describing, with official Python and TypeScript SDKs already available. That said, the "build our platform" criticism isn't entirely off base. While the protocol is open, practical adoption still depends heavily on ChatGPT's distribution and whether other LLM providers actually implement MCP clients. The real test will be whether this becomes a genuine cross-platform standard or just another way to contribute to OpenAI's ecosystem. The technical primitives (tool discovery, structured content return, embedded UI resources) are solid and address real integration problems. Whether it succeeds likely depends more on ecosystem dynamics than technical merit.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
mhl47 1y ago
There was a recent post here about how deeply ingrained the chat interface is in OpenAIs organization. This really doubles down on that, but does anyone really like to interact with so much language instead of visual elements? Also feels horrible that you are supposed to remember a bunch of app names like "zillow" and punch them in the chat. And like an opportunity for them to slowly introduce ads for this apps or "preferential discovery", if you will, as monetization strategy. Personally I don't hope thats the future.
- p0seidon 1y ago
  Which post was that?
  - mhl47 1y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44573195 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44573195 (in the article, search for:"Chat runs really deep")
- agentcoops 1y ago
  Very much agreed. I think the dominance of the chat interface to LLMs has materially impaired the general usefulness of these tools — the sooner it goes away the better. It’s almost impossible to explain to a non-engineer how the illusion of a continuous conversation is crafted through context management and why past moments in a conversation might fall out of memory. My general advice to non-technical friends is to create a new conversation for each prompt so that they can get a more deterministic sense of how to formulate instructions and which are successful. I was really hoping Apple would make some innovations on the UX side, but they certainly haven’t yet.
- baby_souffle 1y ago
  I feel like we're rehashing the debate around whether or not a GUI or terminal is more powerful. For a large number of tasks that cleanly generalize into a stream of tokens, command line or chat is probably superior. We'll get some affordances like tab auto completion to help remember the name of certain bots or mCP endpoints that can be brought in as needed... But for anything that involves discovery, graphical interaction feels more intuitive and we'll probably get bespoke interfaces relevant to that particular task at hand with some sort of partially hidden layers to abstract away the token stream?
Handy-Man 1y ago
This is them trying to build ChatGPT into platform, from which they will take some portion of revenue generated by these apps...hmm where have I seen this before.
spullara 1y ago
We have been building MCP servers and this looks very good directionally. Fills a bunch of holes in the protocol and gives meaning to something that were kind of like placeholders. Being able to return UI to the client is fantastic and will make lots of things possible. We have been working on these kinds of things assuming that the clients would improve to meet us. https://lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?2122 https://lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?2122
cefboud 1y ago
This is an interesting branding exercise. Presenting MCP as 'Apps' makes it sound more accessible, while tools and MCP server sound very technical. Add a demo with Expedia and Spotify and you have an MCP that's end-user ready.
- NewEntryHN 1y ago
  This is not just branding, MCP is an implementation detail; the product is chatting with apps.
- lossolo 1y ago
  Ye, that's basically an MCP server, that can be used by ChatGPT.
disiplus 1y ago
Honestly I see how somebody like kayak.com would build a "app" they work through commission, they don't care from where is the booking coming from. But they will sort the flight tickets based where do they earn the best commission. What's in there for me as a user ?. Also will openai let different providers pay for the top placement when somebody tries to buy ticket on chatgpt ?
testfrequency 1y ago
Wow. “CEO” Fidji Simo must really need something to do. Maybe I’m cynical about all of this, but it feels like a whole lot of marketing spin for an MCP standard.
emilsedgh 1y ago
I see a lot of negative comments here but to me, it was obvious this is where OAI should land. They want to be the platform in which you tell what you want, and OAI does it for you. It's gonna connect to your inbox, calendar, payment methods, and you'll just ask it to do something and it will, using those apps. This means OAI won't need ads. Just rev share.
- nicce 1y ago
  > This means OAI won't need ads. Ads are defenitely there. Just hidden so deeply in the black box which is generating the useful tips :)
  - thebigkick 1y ago
    If you ask it to build a headless frontend web app, it immediately starts generating code with Next.js. I’ve always wondered how it was trained to default to that choice, given the smorgasbord of web frameworks out there. Next.js is solid, but it’s also platform-ware, tightly coupled to commercial interests. I wish there were more bias toward genuinely open-source technologies.
    - jerojero 1y ago
      There's probably different ways the LLM converged to it. One could be for example: from people asking online which tools they should use to build something and being constantly recommended to do it with Next.js Another could be: how many of the code that was used to train the LLM is done in Next.js Generally, the answer is probably something along the lines of "next.js is kind of the most popular choice at the time of training".
    - b_e_n_t_o_n 1y ago
      To me it feels like the default choice in the industry, perhaps it's not and I'm wrong but if I could have that feeling I can see how the AI can as well.
      - 1y ago
danjl 1y ago
If only this somehow resulted in fewer, better apps. <sigh>
ttoinou 1y ago
That’s a great idea and Im wondering if Telegram can follow this path too, since they’re so advanced in mobile UX / UI, constantly updating their app and have some kind of crypto payments support.
fny 1y ago
It’s remarkable that will inevitably rush to build free apps that only reinforce OpenAI’s moat while cannibilizing their own opportunities.
- tantalor 1y ago
  When the iPhone came out, there were like 6 apps, and no app store. In 2024, iOS App Store generated $1.3T in revenue, 85% of which went to developers.
  - hmate9 1y ago
    That figure sounds way too high Edit: yes I understand it is correct, but still it sounds like an insane amount
    - moralestapia 1y ago
      It's true, though. It is now evident why Flash was murdered.
      - tracker1 1y ago
        Because it was buggy, known for security holes and the single biggest source of application crashes in all software in the late 90's through early 00's.
        moralestapia 1y ago
        [flagged]
        tracker1 1y ago
        Drank the kool-aid?!? I worked in the eLearning space, I was a prominent user and developer for Flash/Flex content... there was some interesting tooling for sure, I also completely disabled it on my home computers as a result of working with it. I had a lot of hopes after the Adobe buyout that Flash would morph into something based around ActionScript (ES4) and SVG. That didn't happen. MS's Silverlight/XAML was close, but I wasn't going to even consider it without several cross-platform version releases.
MaxPock 1y ago
This is honestly useful. "Find me hotels in Capetown that have a pool by the beach .Should cost between 200 dollars to 800 dollars a night "
- pphysch 1y ago
  [injected with guerilla ads] I don't see how this is a significant upgrade over the many existing hotel-finder tools. At best it slightly augments them as a first pass, but I would still rather look at an actual map of options than trust a stream of generated, ad-augmented text.
  - elpakal 1y ago
    The benefit I see is that it meets users where they presumable already are (GPT). As other comments allude to here, it's clear they see themselves as a staple of the user's online experience.
  - b_e_n_t_o_n 1y ago
    I think the end game is that rather than spitting out text back, the LLM transforms your plaintext request to something processable, and then chooses some relevant widgets to display the results.
  - AlBentley 1y ago
    exactly. Booking.com etc can just use OpenAI APIs to enable a similar voice/ chat interface on top of their search, and then the UX is not limited to 'cards'. The UI 'cards' will naturally becoming ever increasing, and soon you end up back with a full app within ChatGPT or ChatGPT just becomes an app launcher. The only advantage I can see is if ChatGPT can use data from other apps/ chats in your searches e.g. find me hotels in NYC for my upcoming trip (and it already knows the types of hotels you like, your budget and your dates)
- zzo38computer 1y ago
  I would not want to use LLMs for such a thing like that. Something like SQL queries or other kind of computer codes would be better. You would have to read the documentation, but it can be specified more precisely and more accurately. If you have a local program that can manage these queries (and then convert them to the remote service's format; a service could provide a file to specify the schema and the estimated cost of different fields) and interact with multiple services (including local files), then that will be better, without having to worry about problems with OpenAI, require as much power that OpenAI uses, more privacy violations than is necessary, etc. However, it might be useful for people who do want to use that instead.
wiradikusuma 1y ago
In 2018, I founded a startup specializing in chatbot for events. At the time the platforms were Alexa Skills, Actions on Google, and Messenger Platform (and LINE Bot, for people in Asia). I guess what's old is new again, but with fancier tech. This time will be different?
- jerf 1y ago
  We've actually got systems that can understand English now. Chatbots don't have to be glorified regular expression matches or based on inferior NLP. I've thought more than once that the true value of LLMs could well be that they essentially solve the language comprehension problem and that their ability to consume language is relatively underutilized compared to our attempts to get them to produce language. Under all the generative bling their language comprehension and ability to package that into something that conventional computing can understand is pretty impressive. They've even got a certain amount of common sense built in.
  - b_e_n_t_o_n 1y ago
    Yeah this seems accurate to me. All the talk of a bubble etc, but LLMs see genuinely useful at tasks like this and I'm sure we'll find more uses as time goes on.
- Traubenfuchs 1y ago
  Do people even want chatbots for events? I personally prefer well curated information.
  - cruffle_duffle 1y ago
    "I personally prefer well curated information." The LLM will do the curation.
- apt-apt-apt-apt 1y ago
  Chatbots with and without GPT is like comparing a car with round vs triangular wheels
irrationalfab 1y ago
This feels like the death of the app, and the rise of the micro-app.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
fidotron 1y ago
This conception makes sense iff you believe in ChatGPT as the universal user interface of the future. If anything the agentic wave is showing that the chat interfaces are better off hidden behind stricter user interface paradigms.
- nextworddev 1y ago
  The apps can send any arbitrary HTML / interface back though. e.g. Coursera can send back a video player
  - foobarian 1y ago
    This will be a bunch of rushed garbage. It will be like Java applets
    - nextworddev 1y ago
      Maybe, but don't forget they are godly at iteration.
- asim 1y ago
  It's not just as ChatGPT as the interface. It's that Chat with AI will now be the universal interface and every tech company will have their version of it. Everything you want to do will happen in one place. Cards will provide predefined and interactive experience. Over time you'll see entirely dynamic content get generated on the fly. The user experience is going to be one where we've shrunk websites to apps and apps to cards or widgets. Effectively any action you need to take can be done like this and then agents can operate more complex workflow in the background. This is probably the interface for the next 10 years and what replaces the mobile app experience and stronghold that Apple or Google have. This lasts until fully immersive AR/VR become a more mainstream thing. At that point these cards are on a heads up display but we'll be looking at something totally different. Like agents roaming the earth...
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
siva7 1y ago
This feels like a fever dream. As a developer everything changes every week. A new model, a new tool, a new sdk, paradigm we have to learn. I'm getting tired of all that shit.
- nlarew 1y ago
  Who says you have to learn this? You are free to ignore it if it's overwhelming. I'd much rather see a thriving ecosystem full of competition and innovation than a more stagnant alternative.
  - throwacct 1y ago
    With what exactly? They are desperately trying to create a "marketplace" and become gatekeepers on the backs of developers and businesses alike. There's no innovation here.
    - serial_dev 1y ago
      I guess what’s implied is that developers and businesses would innovate, not OpenAI directly.
      - throwacct 1y ago
        Knowing OAI's history, only big whales could survive being copied by the platform's owner—case in point: Amazon Basics. They're so big that most of the time, SMBs can't escape them and don't have a choice but to cave to Amazon's demands. Is your product successful? Great, I'll copy you, add the "Amazon basics" label, and start bombarding users with my "product".
        pkaye 1y ago
        Amazon basics is a private label just like Costco and the Kirkland Brand. Same thing with Walmart, Target, Trader Joes, etc. And if these SMBs don't have to deal with Amazon, they will have to deal with a dozen copycats from China for anything that becomes a hit.
darkwater 1y ago
Oh, I guess tomorrow when American HQs come online we will get some new shiny thing barely tested that needs to be deployed in production ASAP. Or maybe there is already something waiting for me in Slack...
itsnowandnever 1y ago
this seems kinda silly, especially given their previous app store flop. but I'm just happy there's some spark and competition in tech again. it's felt like the industry has been pretty stagnant since web 2.0 (more stagnant than any other time in the last 40-50 years, anyway). but this AI stuff feels like another "1977 Trinity" moment so, best of luck to OAI. we'll see how this plays out
nextworddev 1y ago
Your SaaS / Business is my Tool
hubraumhugo 1y ago
Why does everyone think chat is better UX than traditional interfaces? I get the AI hype, but so many products are not a fit for chat interfaces. Why would I use a chat to do what could be done quicker with a simple and intuitive button/input UX (e.g. Booking or Zillow search/filter)? Chat also has really poor discoverability of what I can actually do with it.
- throwacct 1y ago
  This x100. This is HCI 101. I'm glad I took that class during my master's program. It opened my eyes to a new world.
WillieCubed 1y ago
It's poetic that Google attempted to pursue apps within Google Assistant years ago, but the vision of apps within an AI assistant is more feasible now with LLMs that (whether actually or not) understand arbitrary user intents and more flexible connectors to third party apps via MCP (and a viral platform with 700+ million weekly active users). Custom GPTs (and Gemini gems) didn't really work because they didn't have any utility outside the chat window. They were really just bundled prompt workflows that relied on the inherent abilities of the model. But now with MCP, agent-based apps are way more useful. I believe there's a fundamentally different shift going on here: in the endgame that OpenAI, Anthropic et al. are racing toward, there will be little need for developers for the kinds of consumer-facing apps that OpenAI appears to be targeting. OpenAI hinted at this idea at the end of their Codex demo: the future will be built from software built on demand, tailored to each user's specific needs. Even if one doesn't believe that AI will completely automate software development, it's not unreasonable to think that we can build deterministic tooling to wrap LLMs and provide functionality that's good enough for a wide range of consumer experiences. And when pumping out code and architecting software becomes easy to automate with little additional marginal cost, some of the only moats other companies have are user trust (e.g. knowing that Coursera's content is at least made by real humans grounded in reality), the ability to coordinate markets and transform capital (e.g. dealing with three-sided marketplaces on DoorDash), switching costs, or ability to handle regulatory burdens. The cynic in me says that today's announcements are really just a stopgap measure to: - Further increase the utility of ChatGPT for users, turning it into the de facto way of accessing the internet for younger users à la how Facebook was (is?) in developing countries - Pave the way for by commoditizing OpenAI's complements (traditional SaaS apps) as ChatGPT becomes more capable as a platform with first-party experiences - Increase the value of the company to acquire more clout with enterprises and other business deals But cynicism aside, this is pretty cool. I think there's a solid foundation here for the kind of intent-based, action-oriented computing that I think will benefit non-technical people immensely.
throwacct 1y ago
Yeah... no. I'm going to pass. The premise is bad from any angle. In the case of businesses, why "create" another "Amazon" and compete with other brands when the focus should be on getting customers through my sales funnel? For developers is much worse since they are going to copy Amazon's model with brands that found a niche: Amazon Basics. In this case, it'll be OpenAI "core" (or something like that), where you do all the work, and when your "app" is somewhat famous enough or getting traction, they'll copy it, rebrand it, and bombard all old and new customers to use it instead of yours. I'mma call it now just for the fun of it: This will go the way of their "GPT" store.
- jarjoura 1y ago
  Companies like OpenTable that make money on the backend for connecting you with the restaurant will happily partner with OpenAI on this. There are plenty of brokers that will add immense value to ChatGPT for free and if users go there looking for something, it's only a matter of time. Right now, I only like using the chat interface to answer questions I can't quite form into searches, but I also don't go directly to a chat bot to book dinner reservations. However, if I'm using the service to riff on ideas for a romantic thing to do with my partner, and it somehow leads me to resturant reservations, I do think I would engage with it and come back to ChatGPT in the future for novel interactions like that.
mirzap 1y ago
Is it just me, or does it seem odd that if you truly believed AGI would be achieved within a few years, you wouldn’t launch an app store for AI apps? I don’t think an app store makes any sense in a post-AGI world.
OtherShrezzing 1y ago
OpenAI launched an App Store in Nov 2023. A 23 month turnaround from major feature launch, to deprecation, to relaunch is a commitment to product longevity that’d put Google to shame.
- AlphaAndOmega0 1y ago
  I found it genuinely impressive how useless their "GPTs" were. Of course, part of it was due to the fact that the out-of-the-box models became so competent that there was no need for a customized model, especially when customization boiled down to barely more than some kind of custom system prompt and hidden instructions. I get the impression that's the same reason their fine-tuning services never took off either, since it was easier to just load necessary information into the context window of a standard instance. Edit: In all fairness, this was before most tool use, connectors or MCP. I am at least open to the idea that these might allow for a reasonable value add, but I'm still skeptical.
  - scottoreily 1y ago
    [dead]
  - CharlieDigital 1y ago
    > I get the impression that's the same reason their fine-tuning services never took off either Also, very few workloads that you'd want to use AI for are prime cases for fine-tuning. We had some cases where we used fine tuning because the work was repetitive enough that FT provided benefits in terms of speed and accuracy, but it was a very limited set of workloads.
    - apwell23 1y ago
      > fine tuning because the work was repetitive enough that FT provided benefits in terms of speed and accuracy, can you share anymore info on this. i am curious about what the usecase was and how it improved speed (of inference?) and accuracy.
helloguillecl 1y ago
Chat offers a far better experience than using Google—no more searching through spam-filled results, clicking between sponsored links, accepting endless cookie banners, and trying to read a tiny bit of useful content buried among ads and clutter. It has the potential to bridge the gap between pure conversation and the functionality of a full website.
- d4mi3n 1y ago
  I’m just worried they we’ll go from very obvious advertising to advertising that’s a lot harder to spot. I can block adds on a search engine. I cannot prevent an LMM from having hidden biases about what the best brand of vodka or car is.
  - helloguillecl 1y ago
    I agree. But Google has gone in that direction long ago: ads are now harder to distinguish from genuine search results. In many cases, the organic results are buried so deep that they don’t even appear in the first visible section of the page anymore.
  - somuchdata 1y ago
    Google could also have allowed invisible pay-for-placement without marking it as an ad. Presumably they didn't do that because undermining the perceived trustworthiness of their search results would have been a net loss. I wonder if chat will go in that same direction or not.
    - jerojero 1y ago
      Pretty sure it's illegal to present advertisement and not label it as such in some form. But as with everything, as new technologies emerge, you can devise legal loopholes that don't totally apply to you and probably need regulation before it's decided that "yeah, actually, that does apply to me".
saberience 1y ago
What is the incentive for developers to build apps for this platform? I don't see any way of monetizing them at all.
- jimmydoe 1y ago
  fear of missing out, as always, be the first flappy bird in the store.
bonoboTP 1y ago
This is part of the fight regarding whether we will have utility apps inside the chat app or chatboxes inside the utility apps. Obviously OpenAI would prefer that they are in the driver seat and delegate to passive apps, while regular apps like Booking would prefer to be the app the user uses and to run an AI chatbox nested inside their own app UI, so they can swap it out etc. Convenience-wise probably this model is more viable, and things will get centralized to the AI apps. And the nested utilities will be walled gardens on steroids. Using custom software and general computing (in the manner of the now discontinued sideloading on Android) will get even further away for the average person.
- somuchdata 1y ago
  They also released ChatKit today for building in-app chat UI experiences, so it seems like OpenAI is trying to make sure they get a larger slice of the pie no matter which interaction model wins.
whinvik 1y ago
Ads. They created ads. Now (or eventually) they can charge app developers to be featured first for a specific use case.
- risyachka 1y ago
  How else would the company sell their product? and keep people employed. Of course ads will be there and this is good. A bad thing would be if they took a bunch of traffic from google and then gave no way to promote your products. That would lead to companies closing and layoffs and economy decline.
  - whinvik 1y ago
    Just to clarify, my original comment was neutral about whether its a good or a bad thing. It was just a statement of observation.
- sumedh 1y ago
  Ads was always the end goal, they have an opportunity to become a bigger player than Google in the ad space. Instead of the user wasting time, ChatGpt can come up with the recommendations.
nthypes 1y ago
chat is the best interface for information retrieval and REPL-like experiences. for all the rest, chat is horrible.
darajava 1y ago
I don't understand, what could be built with this platform that wouldn't be made obsolete by conceivable updates to ChatGPT? Another commenter suggested a hotel search function: > Find me hotels in Capetown that have a pool by the beach .Should cost between 200 dollars to 800 dollars a night ChatGPT can already do this. Similarly, their own pizza lookup example seems like it would exist or nearly exist with current functionality. I can't think of a single non-trivial app that could be built on this platform - and if there are any, I can't think of any that would be useful or not in immediate danger of being swallowed by advances to ChatGPT.
- bonoboTP 1y ago
  There are multiple branches they are exploring. This is a more structured one. But they also work on Agents that load the website and produce clicks to do the task. Also, this requires hand design, but they also work on generating the gui just-in-time, based on context. They also have this new design gui for visual programming of agents, with boxes and arrows. It's going to be a hybrid of all these. Obviously the more explicit work done for interoperability, the easier it is, but the gaps can be bridged with the common sense of the AI at the expense of more time and compute. It's like, a self driving car can detect red lights and speed limit signs via cameras but if there are structured signals in smart infrastructure, then it's simpler and better. But it's always interesting to see this dance between unstructured and structured. Apparently any time one gets big, the other is needed. When theres tons of structured code, we want AI common sense to cut through it because even if it's structured, it's messy and too complicated. So we generate the code. Now if we have natural language code generators we want to impose structure onto how they work, which we express in markup languages, then small scripts, then large scripts that are too complex and have too much boilerplate so we need AI to generate it from natural language etc etc
- mindwok 1y ago
  ChatGPT can only do this now because the information is essentially freely available. Booking.com etc post their pages on the web to get traffic. In the world OpenAI is imagining, people will rarely if ever interact with the internet directly, it’ll instead all be through intermediary LLMs. In that world, the organisations that own authoritative information about hotel prices and locations will not make that freely available to LLMs, they will sell it. ChatGPT is trying to get ahead by encouraging them to embed themselves directly into their platform so they get first dibs on this kinda stuff before they put up the walls.
skeeter2020 1y ago
Seems wild to have an App SDK for a technology that's 1. supposed to free us from purpose-built APIs and interfaces, and 2. comprised entirely of a single textbox. Feels perhaps more like a MS-type strategy of standards and formal rules intended to lock down the extended ecosystem?
- reed1234 1y ago
  I think they want businesses to be more tightly integrated with ChatGPT to open up future opportunities for monetization.
outlore 1y ago
remember when custom GPTs would just need an OpenAPI spec to be compatible with any existing API out there? we've been through this app store journey once before, maybe it's different this time since we now have agents and MCP
Illniyar 1y ago
I can't understand the documentation. How are the interactive elements embedded in the chat? Are they just iFrames? The docs mention returning resources, and the example is returning a rust file as a resource, which is nonsensical. This seems similar to MCP UI in result but it's not clear how it works internally.
- willtheperson 1y ago
  If the connector is enabled by the prompt or via a UI interaction, it calls your MCP server. They have created some meta fields your tool can respond with, one of which is something about producing a widget along with a field for html. In the current implementation, it makes an iframe (or webview on native) that loads a sandboxed environment which then gets another iframe with your html injected. Your html can include meta field whitelisted remote resources.
- selvan 1y ago
  An MCP server exposes tools that a model can call during a conversation and returns results according to the tool contracts. Those results can include extra metadata—such as inline HTML—that the Apps SDK uses to render rich UI components (widgets) alongside assistant messages. More: https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples?tab=readme-ov-file#mcp--apps-sdk-overview https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples?tab=readm...
  - ares623 1y ago
    Imagine rendering content from an app with user submitted data.
spullara 1y ago
Do the examples work for any else? https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1 https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1
Dig1t 1y ago
Just let the AI control my mouse and keyboard, let it use my device like a human. There's a huge swath of software already designed to be used by humans and anyone who uses ChatGPT knows that it's already been trained on every scrap of knowledge on how to use any existing complex software.
LudwigNagasena 1y ago
Glad to see no AGI hubris in this presentation, but we also haven’t see anything groundbreaking: their own version of GUI plugins, their own version of a workflow builder, and an aspiration to take cut of every transaction on the web. I hope their GUI integration will be eventually superseded by native UI integration. I remember such well thought out concepts dating back to 2018 (https://uxdesign.cc/redesigning-siri-and-adding-multitasking-features-to-ios-70c2f1a1569b https://uxdesign.cc/redesigning-siri-and-adding-multitasking...).
- zmmmmm 1y ago
  AGI is so last year. Now it's all ASI which is great because it was achieved in like 1968 or something so nobody trying to achieve it can possibly fail
  - nsonha 1y ago
    it's funny to see lay people and some CEOs AGI this AGI that in the past 5 years and actual tech people know that it's very irrelevant to what's happening right now.
alganet 1y ago
Developers, developers, developers! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fcSviC7cRM&t=34s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fcSviC7cRM&t=34s
ed 1y ago
Anyone able to get this to work? Lots of folks (myself included) are reporting it doesn't: https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1 https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1
- brazukadev 1y ago
  Everything openai releases never work in the first days/weeks/ever. We won't be replaced by AI anytime soon.
sailfast 1y ago
Why would I want to enable OpenAI to collect an Apple Tax from me down the road? Sure, this helps app partners access their large user base and grows their functionality too - but the end game has to be lock-in with a 30% tax right?
- mrcwinn 1y ago
  For the same reason everyone's fine with an Epic tax down the road. It costs you nothing today.
ed 1y ago
A bit underwhelming when you see what's actually on offer. "Apps" are really just MCP servers, with an extension to allow returning HTML. A lot of the fundamental issues with MCP are still present: MCP is pretty single-player, users must "pull" content from the service, and the model of "enabling connections" is fairly unintuitive compared to "opening an app." Ideally apps would have a dedicated entry point, be able to push content to users, and have some persistence in the UI. And really the primary interface should be HTML, not chat. As such I think this current iteration will turn out a lot like GPT's.
- reb 1y ago
  MCP has this in the spec: it's called "elicitation", and I'm pretty confident this push from OpenAI sets the stage for them to support it. Once a service can actively involve you and/or your LLM in ongoing interaction, MCP servers start to get real sticky. We can safely assume the install/auth process will also get much less technical as pressure to deliver services to non-technical users increases.
  - ed 1y ago
    > Once a service can actively involve you and/or your LLM in ongoing interaction Is there any progress on that front? That would unlock a lot of applications that aren't feasible at the moment. Edit: Sampling is a piece of the puzzle https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/client/sampling https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/cli... I also see a lot of discussion on Github around agent to agent (a2a) capabilities. So it's a big use case, and seems obvious to the people involved with MCP.
- penetrarthur 1y ago
  And Dropbox is just an FTP server with SVN.
sert_121 1y ago
It's interesting to see how chatgpt is becoming more and more of a starting point of the web exploration, at which they're like, why even bother searching at this point, we'll just have default workflows for maps, buy (integration of stripe already marks it), booking airlines etc, which covers so much basic stuff people would do anyways. The biggest bottleneck for this for the past two years imo wasn't the models, but the engineering and infra around it, and the willingness of companies to work with openaio directly. Now that they've grown and have a decent userbase, companies are much more willing to pay/or involve themselves in these efforts. This has eventual implications outside user-heavy internet use (once we see more things built on the SDK), where we're gonna see a fork in the web traffic of human centric workflows through chat, and an seo-filled, chat/agent-optimized web that is only catered to agents. (crossposted)
- spullara 1y ago
  OpenAI has had this opportunity to do this since their meteoric adoption and fumbled it with plugins and then GPTs. Ironically, Anthropic's MCP could be just the ingredient needed to capture this position.
- stackedinserter 1y ago
  The main showstopper here is trust. I just can't let anything AI make decisions that have consequences, like spending money, buying anything, planning vacations, flights etc. It's so bad now (I've just tried) that I'm not sure if it will ever gain my trust.
  - 3s 1y ago
    not to mention the privacy concerns associated with connecting my entire life to OpenAI or Anthropic. If you have the memory feature enabled, it's scary how much ChatGPT knows about you already and can even infer implicit thoughts and patterns about you as a person.
    - sert_121 1y ago
      I am sure it already knows a lot regardless of the memory feature, as long you're sharing your chat history/ have your history enabled, but I agree, it'd simply worsen it.
klysm 1y ago
I guess openai is trying to execute the google playbook?
- saxelsen 1y ago
  I'll bet $100 they're seeing an opportunity to dethrone Google as the entrance point to the web and this is a big part of it. It feels like OpenAI's mission has changed from "We want to do do AGI" to "it'll be easier to do AGI with a lot of money, so let's make a lot of money first" to "we have a shot at becoming bigger than Google and stealing their revenue. Let's do that and maybe do AGI if that ever works out"
  - klysm 1y ago
    I don’t think openai is that goal oriented around AGI whatever their posturing may be. They have to cash in eventually and are probably trying to figure out a pathway to a viable business.
    - saxelsen 1y ago
      I agree with you. Just disappointing that it's just another company slowly abandoning their mission in favor of profits.
unit149 1y ago
[dead]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
hamonrye 1y ago
1GK AMD chips will accelerate
dawnerd 1y ago
I’ve still yet to see how this improves anything? I saw someone mentioning it can use Spotify. Okay but like so can older gen assistants. Seems like they’re just trying to sell a much more expensive way of doing something that already exists.
pu_pu 1y ago
This really feels like a missed opportunity to build something genuinely new, something that actually plays to the strengths of LLMs, instead of just embedding a fixed set of app screens inside chat. Ideally, users should be able to describe a task, and the AI would figure out which tools to use, wire them together, and show the result as an editable workflow or inline canvas the user can tweak. Frameworks like LlamaIndex’s Workflow or LangGraph already let you define these directed graphs manually in Python where each node can do something specific, branch, or loop. But the AI should be able to generate those DAGs on the fly, since it’s just code underneath. And given that LLMs are already quite good at generating UI code and following a design system (see v0.app), there’s not much reason to hardcode screens at all. The model can just create and adapt them as needed. Really hope Google doesn’t follow OpenAI down this path.
- beefnugs 1y ago
  Actually these giant companies have proven innovation is impossible. Any company that tries just gets stepped on by the bigger papa company stealing their idea and putting them out of business. (Also read the documentation, they specifically mention that you can tell it to create new flow paths)
tonysurfly 1y ago
This is a great idea.
defraudbah 1y ago
lol, their github is filled with "got the same issue" comments, imaging debugging and teaching your users how to use a blackbox
- brazukadev 1y ago
  Openai knows how to create models but is terrible at creating software
  - defraudbah 1y ago
    i think it's easy to hire experienced engineers these days, not so easy with ML devs, so looking forward to see how this works out for them. I am actually happy to see anything that OpenAI does, it brings more work to me :)
melodyogonna 1y ago
Soon they'll start serving ads, you just know they're eying Google's lunch
doppelgunner 1y ago
I think voice or chat is the best interface for AI tools because you don’t need to learn how to use them. We already do it every day.
mightymosquito 1y ago
I really think this is Open AIs opening the eco system moment which is equivalent to google opening up Android or facebook allowing gaming platforms like zynga to grow on their platform. To me it seems like a strategic shift from pure AI research and the AGI snake oil to other supposed tangible stuff. In short, the AI revolution is mostly over, and we seem to be back in the realm of software.
petecapecod 1y ago
Hey Sam that's a mighty fine moat you just put up around your castle Or wall if you like that metaphor better. While Apps do sound and look like the future, I feel like we're headed down the same road as the App and Google Play stores with this. Sooner or later OpenAI is going to use this to take a cut $$ of the payments going through the system. Which they most likely need and deserve, but still any time you close off part of the web it makes the web less open and free.
AlfredBarnes 1y ago
People prefer no ads, that's why its easy to dip into chatgpt get a good enough answer and avoid the rest of the enshitification of every website.
todotask2 1y ago
One interesting I found, the docs, is using Astro Starlight.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
aryehof 1y ago
I wonder if I have just seen the future. A movement away from mobile apps (and some aspects of websites), to apps in an AI model? Can’t say I'm unhappy to see the authoritarian duopoly of the existing app stores challenged. One question that comes to mind is how will multiple providers of similar products and services be recommended/discovered? Perhaps they wont be recommended, but just listed instead as currently done by search engines. Is AISO our future - AI Search Optimization?
mercury24aug 1y ago
It's funny how OpenAI announced Apps SDK without the SDK. Anyway, we was so excited to get my hands dirty that we built our own SDK: https://github.com/fractal-mcp/sdk https://github.com/fractal-mcp/sdk

Apps SDK

468 points by alvis 1y ago

MaxPock 1y ago

Tencent already has this with WeChat.Good to see it on chatgpt finally

compacct27 1y ago

“Build our platform for us!”

naiv 1y ago

Remember "GPTs" and the thing before it which I don't even remember now. I think this will go the same route .. to nowhere

elpakal 1y ago
Are they still expecting us to get paid based on “revenue sharing”?
minimaxir 1y ago
The GPT App Store (which is technically now obsolete with this SDK) was funny.

jasonsb 1y ago

They promised AGI and delivered SDKs. I think I'm gonna skip this one..

jsheard 1y ago
Hey don't sell them short, they also delivered a TikTok clone with vertically integrated slop generation. It's the 5D Chess path to AGI, they just need to rot the average human brain until the bar for super-human intelligence is reduced to an attainable level.
- Narciss 1y ago
  This was funny

alvis 1y ago

So it’s take 2 for Open AI’s App Store moment. But this time surfing Anthropic’s MCP wave. Smart interop.. or just chasing the cool kids?

apwell23 1y ago
mcp was a dud
- consumer451 1y ago
  What is the superior way for an LLM to interact with your product?
  - apwell23 1y ago
    llm can call my existing apis fine. curious what kind of problems you are running to with your existing apis?
    - consumer451 1y ago
      I want LLM chat integration with my product. So far, it seems that if you give an LLM a few tools to create projects and other entities, they seem to be very good at using them. The user gets the option of chat driven ui for our app, with not that much work for limited features. Currently building internal MCP servers to make that easy. But I can imagine having a public one in the future.
    - brazukadev 1y ago
      Tool calling is one of at least 5 core features of MCP
      - apwell23 1y ago
        ok but not sure why i need to build an mcp for my product if llms can already call my existing apis ?

rushingcreek 1y ago

I think this is very interesting, but it is reminiscent of what we built with Phind 2 where the answer could include dynamic, pre-built widgets. The problem with this approach is precisely that these apps/widgets have hard-coded input and output schema. They can work quite well when the user asks something within the widget's capabilities, but the brittleness of this approach starts showing quickly in real-world use. What if you want to use more advanced filters with Zillow? Or perhaps cross-reference with StreetEasy? If those features aren't supported by the widget's hard-coded schema, you're out of luck as a user. What I think it much more exciting is the ability to completely create generative UI answers on the fly. We'll have more to say on this soon from Phind (I'm the founder).

chatmasta 1y ago
Phind is awesome. I often forget to use it until legacy search engines fail to surface what I’m looking for after a dozen searches. Phind usually finds it. That said, I used it a lot more a year ago. Lately I’ve been using regular LLMs since they’ve gotten better at searching.
- rushingcreek 1y ago
  Thanks for the feedback. I think that our main differentiator going forward will be this generative UI on the fly for answering questions as opposed to search alone.
  - dleeftink 1y ago
    In a similar boat, but have been increasingly returning to for its quick notebook/charting capabilities. Would be awesome to somehow be able to select between different UI modes offering search, ranking, graphing or else depending on user needs.
alvis 1y ago
Given there is already a MCP-UI project, I’m not surprised it can be done. But even that I’m not very convinced that it’s the right approach. After all, it’s still far too slow for real usage…

ttoinou 1y ago

Does anyone think small players (like an independent developer) will be accepted ? Sounds like it will only for the big whales

chvid 1y ago

Discovery, monetization. What is in it for developers?

spongebobstoes 1y ago
deploying an app to 700M people?
- artisin 1y ago
  Not only do you get to deploy your app to 700M users; you also get to provide responsive support for every single one of them! Per the docs: 'Every app comes from a verified developer who stands behind their work and provides responsive support' That's thinly veiled corporate speak for, Fortune 500 or GTFO
- saberience 1y ago
  That's like saying making a website is like deploying an app for 7B people. Sure, but deploying a website or app doesn't mean anyone's going to use it, does it? I could make an iOS app, I could make a website, I could make a ChatGPT app... if no one uses it, it doesn't matter how big the userbase of iOS, the internet, or ChatGPT is...
  - jryle70 1y ago
    Well, if you don't make it nobody would use it for sure.
  - handfuloflight 1y ago
    Right this same sleight of hand is encoded in the language used in the announcement to make building on this platform to be attractive seeming.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

benatkin 1y ago

They're looking like Facebook did with their phone project and later the metaverse - too big for their britches.

MaxPock 1y ago
Lmfao..you've reminded me of the phone they made with HTC that had a Facebook button .
- sieep 1y ago
  We've already sorta come full circle with the Meta glasses having a physical button to interact with the Facebook AI

markab21 1y ago

The skepticism is understandable given the trajectory of GPTs and custom instructions, but there's a meaningful technical difference here: the Apps SDK is built on the Model Context Protocol (MCP), which is an open specification rather than a proprietary format. MCP standardizes how LLM clients connect to external tools—defining wire formats, authentication flows, and metadata schemas. This means apps you build aren't inherently ChatGPT-specific; they're MCP servers that could work with any MCP-compatible client. The protocol is transport-agnostic and self-describing, with official Python and TypeScript SDKs already available. That said, the "build our platform" criticism isn't entirely off base. While the protocol is open, practical adoption still depends heavily on ChatGPT's distribution and whether other LLM providers actually implement MCP clients. The real test will be whether this becomes a genuine cross-platform standard or just another way to contribute to OpenAI's ecosystem. The technical primitives (tool discovery, structured content return, embedded UI resources) are solid and address real integration problems. Whether it succeeds likely depends more on ecosystem dynamics than technical merit.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

mhl47 1y ago

There was a recent post here about how deeply ingrained the chat interface is in OpenAIs organization. This really doubles down on that, but does anyone really like to interact with so much language instead of visual elements? Also feels horrible that you are supposed to remember a bunch of app names like "zillow" and punch them in the chat. And like an opportunity for them to slowly introduce ads for this apps or "preferential discovery", if you will, as monetization strategy. Personally I don't hope thats the future.

p0seidon 1y ago
Which post was that?
- mhl47 1y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44573195 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44573195 (in the article, search for:"Chat runs really deep")
agentcoops 1y ago
Very much agreed. I think the dominance of the chat interface to LLMs has materially impaired the general usefulness of these tools — the sooner it goes away the better. It’s almost impossible to explain to a non-engineer how the illusion of a continuous conversation is crafted through context management and why past moments in a conversation might fall out of memory. My general advice to non-technical friends is to create a new conversation for each prompt so that they can get a more deterministic sense of how to formulate instructions and which are successful. I was really hoping Apple would make some innovations on the UX side, but they certainly haven’t yet.
baby_souffle 1y ago
I feel like we're rehashing the debate around whether or not a GUI or terminal is more powerful. For a large number of tasks that cleanly generalize into a stream of tokens, command line or chat is probably superior. We'll get some affordances like tab auto completion to help remember the name of certain bots or mCP endpoints that can be brought in as needed... But for anything that involves discovery, graphical interaction feels more intuitive and we'll probably get bespoke interfaces relevant to that particular task at hand with some sort of partially hidden layers to abstract away the token stream?

Handy-Man 1y ago

This is them trying to build ChatGPT into platform, from which they will take some portion of revenue generated by these apps...hmm where have I seen this before.

spullara 1y ago

We have been building MCP servers and this looks very good directionally. Fills a bunch of holes in the protocol and gives meaning to something that were kind of like placeholders. Being able to return UI to the client is fantastic and will make lots of things possible. We have been working on these kinds of things assuming that the clients would improve to meet us. https://lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?2122 https://lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?2122

cefboud 1y ago

This is an interesting branding exercise. Presenting MCP as 'Apps' makes it sound more accessible, while tools and MCP server sound very technical. Add a demo with Expedia and Spotify and you have an MCP that's end-user ready.

NewEntryHN 1y ago
This is not just branding, MCP is an implementation detail; the product is chatting with apps.
lossolo 1y ago
Ye, that's basically an MCP server, that can be used by ChatGPT.

disiplus 1y ago

Honestly I see how somebody like kayak.com would build a "app" they work through commission, they don't care from where is the booking coming from. But they will sort the flight tickets based where do they earn the best commission. What's in there for me as a user ?. Also will openai let different providers pay for the top placement when somebody tries to buy ticket on chatgpt ?

testfrequency 1y ago

Wow. “CEO” Fidji Simo must really need something to do. Maybe I’m cynical about all of this, but it feels like a whole lot of marketing spin for an MCP standard.

emilsedgh 1y ago

I see a lot of negative comments here but to me, it was obvious this is where OAI should land. They want to be the platform in which you tell what you want, and OAI does it for you. It's gonna connect to your inbox, calendar, payment methods, and you'll just ask it to do something and it will, using those apps. This means OAI won't need ads. Just rev share.

nicce 1y ago
> This means OAI won't need ads. Ads are defenitely there. Just hidden so deeply in the black box which is generating the useful tips :)
- thebigkick 1y ago
  If you ask it to build a headless frontend web app, it immediately starts generating code with Next.js. I’ve always wondered how it was trained to default to that choice, given the smorgasbord of web frameworks out there. Next.js is solid, but it’s also platform-ware, tightly coupled to commercial interests. I wish there were more bias toward genuinely open-source technologies.
  - jerojero 1y ago
    There's probably different ways the LLM converged to it. One could be for example: from people asking online which tools they should use to build something and being constantly recommended to do it with Next.js Another could be: how many of the code that was used to train the LLM is done in Next.js Generally, the answer is probably something along the lines of "next.js is kind of the most popular choice at the time of training".
  - b_e_n_t_o_n 1y ago
    To me it feels like the default choice in the industry, perhaps it's not and I'm wrong but if I could have that feeling I can see how the AI can as well.
    - 1y ago

danjl 1y ago

If only this somehow resulted in fewer, better apps. <sigh>

ttoinou 1y ago

That’s a great idea and Im wondering if Telegram can follow this path too, since they’re so advanced in mobile UX / UI, constantly updating their app and have some kind of crypto payments support.

fny 1y ago

It’s remarkable that will inevitably rush to build free apps that only reinforce OpenAI’s moat while cannibilizing their own opportunities.

tantalor 1y ago
When the iPhone came out, there were like 6 apps, and no app store. In 2024, iOS App Store generated $1.3T in revenue, 85% of which went to developers.
- hmate9 1y ago
  That figure sounds way too high Edit: yes I understand it is correct, but still it sounds like an insane amount
  - moralestapia 1y ago
    It's true, though. It is now evident why Flash was murdered.
    - tracker1 1y ago
      Because it was buggy, known for security holes and the single biggest source of application crashes in all software in the late 90's through early 00's.
      - moralestapia 1y ago
        [flagged]
        tracker1 1y ago
        Drank the kool-aid?!? I worked in the eLearning space, I was a prominent user and developer for Flash/Flex content... there was some interesting tooling for sure, I also completely disabled it on my home computers as a result of working with it. I had a lot of hopes after the Adobe buyout that Flash would morph into something based around ActionScript (ES4) and SVG. That didn't happen. MS's Silverlight/XAML was close, but I wasn't going to even consider it without several cross-platform version releases.

MaxPock 1y ago

This is honestly useful. "Find me hotels in Capetown that have a pool by the beach .Should cost between 200 dollars to 800 dollars a night "

pphysch 1y ago
[injected with guerilla ads] I don't see how this is a significant upgrade over the many existing hotel-finder tools. At best it slightly augments them as a first pass, but I would still rather look at an actual map of options than trust a stream of generated, ad-augmented text.
- elpakal 1y ago
  The benefit I see is that it meets users where they presumable already are (GPT). As other comments allude to here, it's clear they see themselves as a staple of the user's online experience.
- b_e_n_t_o_n 1y ago
  I think the end game is that rather than spitting out text back, the LLM transforms your plaintext request to something processable, and then chooses some relevant widgets to display the results.
- AlBentley 1y ago
  exactly. Booking.com etc can just use OpenAI APIs to enable a similar voice/ chat interface on top of their search, and then the UX is not limited to 'cards'. The UI 'cards' will naturally becoming ever increasing, and soon you end up back with a full app within ChatGPT or ChatGPT just becomes an app launcher. The only advantage I can see is if ChatGPT can use data from other apps/ chats in your searches e.g. find me hotels in NYC for my upcoming trip (and it already knows the types of hotels you like, your budget and your dates)
zzo38computer 1y ago
I would not want to use LLMs for such a thing like that. Something like SQL queries or other kind of computer codes would be better. You would have to read the documentation, but it can be specified more precisely and more accurately. If you have a local program that can manage these queries (and then convert them to the remote service's format; a service could provide a file to specify the schema and the estimated cost of different fields) and interact with multiple services (including local files), then that will be better, without having to worry about problems with OpenAI, require as much power that OpenAI uses, more privacy violations than is necessary, etc. However, it might be useful for people who do want to use that instead.

wiradikusuma 1y ago

In 2018, I founded a startup specializing in chatbot for events. At the time the platforms were Alexa Skills, Actions on Google, and Messenger Platform (and LINE Bot, for people in Asia). I guess what's old is new again, but with fancier tech. This time will be different?

jerf 1y ago
We've actually got systems that can understand English now. Chatbots don't have to be glorified regular expression matches or based on inferior NLP. I've thought more than once that the true value of LLMs could well be that they essentially solve the language comprehension problem and that their ability to consume language is relatively underutilized compared to our attempts to get them to produce language. Under all the generative bling their language comprehension and ability to package that into something that conventional computing can understand is pretty impressive. They've even got a certain amount of common sense built in.
- b_e_n_t_o_n 1y ago
  Yeah this seems accurate to me. All the talk of a bubble etc, but LLMs see genuinely useful at tasks like this and I'm sure we'll find more uses as time goes on.
Traubenfuchs 1y ago
Do people even want chatbots for events? I personally prefer well curated information.
- cruffle_duffle 1y ago
  "I personally prefer well curated information." The LLM will do the curation.
apt-apt-apt-apt 1y ago
Chatbots with and without GPT is like comparing a car with round vs triangular wheels

irrationalfab 1y ago

This feels like the death of the app, and the rise of the micro-app.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

fidotron 1y ago

This conception makes sense iff you believe in ChatGPT as the universal user interface of the future. If anything the agentic wave is showing that the chat interfaces are better off hidden behind stricter user interface paradigms.

nextworddev 1y ago
The apps can send any arbitrary HTML / interface back though. e.g. Coursera can send back a video player
- foobarian 1y ago
  This will be a bunch of rushed garbage. It will be like Java applets
  - nextworddev 1y ago
    Maybe, but don't forget they are godly at iteration.
asim 1y ago
It's not just as ChatGPT as the interface. It's that Chat with AI will now be the universal interface and every tech company will have their version of it. Everything you want to do will happen in one place. Cards will provide predefined and interactive experience. Over time you'll see entirely dynamic content get generated on the fly. The user experience is going to be one where we've shrunk websites to apps and apps to cards or widgets. Effectively any action you need to take can be done like this and then agents can operate more complex workflow in the background. This is probably the interface for the next 10 years and what replaces the mobile app experience and stronghold that Apple or Google have. This lasts until fully immersive AR/VR become a more mainstream thing. At that point these cards are on a heads up display but we'll be looking at something totally different. Like agents roaming the earth...
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago

siva7 1y ago

This feels like a fever dream. As a developer everything changes every week. A new model, a new tool, a new sdk, paradigm we have to learn. I'm getting tired of all that shit.

nlarew 1y ago
Who says you have to learn this? You are free to ignore it if it's overwhelming. I'd much rather see a thriving ecosystem full of competition and innovation than a more stagnant alternative.
- throwacct 1y ago
  With what exactly? They are desperately trying to create a "marketplace" and become gatekeepers on the backs of developers and businesses alike. There's no innovation here.
  - serial_dev 1y ago
    I guess what’s implied is that developers and businesses would innovate, not OpenAI directly.
    - throwacct 1y ago
      Knowing OAI's history, only big whales could survive being copied by the platform's owner—case in point: Amazon Basics. They're so big that most of the time, SMBs can't escape them and don't have a choice but to cave to Amazon's demands. Is your product successful? Great, I'll copy you, add the "Amazon basics" label, and start bombarding users with my "product".
      - pkaye 1y ago
        Amazon basics is a private label just like Costco and the Kirkland Brand. Same thing with Walmart, Target, Trader Joes, etc. And if these SMBs don't have to deal with Amazon, they will have to deal with a dozen copycats from China for anything that becomes a hit.

darkwater 1y ago

Oh, I guess tomorrow when American HQs come online we will get some new shiny thing barely tested that needs to be deployed in production ASAP. Or maybe there is already something waiting for me in Slack...

itsnowandnever 1y ago

this seems kinda silly, especially given their previous app store flop. but I'm just happy there's some spark and competition in tech again. it's felt like the industry has been pretty stagnant since web 2.0 (more stagnant than any other time in the last 40-50 years, anyway). but this AI stuff feels like another "1977 Trinity" moment so, best of luck to OAI. we'll see how this plays out

nextworddev 1y ago

Your SaaS / Business is my Tool

hubraumhugo 1y ago

Why does everyone think chat is better UX than traditional interfaces? I get the AI hype, but so many products are not a fit for chat interfaces. Why would I use a chat to do what could be done quicker with a simple and intuitive button/input UX (e.g. Booking or Zillow search/filter)? Chat also has really poor discoverability of what I can actually do with it.

throwacct 1y ago
This x100. This is HCI 101. I'm glad I took that class during my master's program. It opened my eyes to a new world.

WillieCubed 1y ago

It's poetic that Google attempted to pursue apps within Google Assistant years ago, but the vision of apps within an AI assistant is more feasible now with LLMs that (whether actually or not) understand arbitrary user intents and more flexible connectors to third party apps via MCP (and a viral platform with 700+ million weekly active users). Custom GPTs (and Gemini gems) didn't really work because they didn't have any utility outside the chat window. They were really just bundled prompt workflows that relied on the inherent abilities of the model. But now with MCP, agent-based apps are way more useful. I believe there's a fundamentally different shift going on here: in the endgame that OpenAI, Anthropic et al. are racing toward, there will be little need for developers for the kinds of consumer-facing apps that OpenAI appears to be targeting. OpenAI hinted at this idea at the end of their Codex demo: the future will be built from software built on demand, tailored to each user's specific needs. Even if one doesn't believe that AI will completely automate software development, it's not unreasonable to think that we can build deterministic tooling to wrap LLMs and provide functionality that's good enough for a wide range of consumer experiences. And when pumping out code and architecting software becomes easy to automate with little additional marginal cost, some of the only moats other companies have are user trust (e.g. knowing that Coursera's content is at least made by real humans grounded in reality), the ability to coordinate markets and transform capital (e.g. dealing with three-sided marketplaces on DoorDash), switching costs, or ability to handle regulatory burdens. The cynic in me says that today's announcements are really just a stopgap measure to: - Further increase the utility of ChatGPT for users, turning it into the de facto way of accessing the internet for younger users à la how Facebook was (is?) in developing countries - Pave the way for by commoditizing OpenAI's complements (traditional SaaS apps) as ChatGPT becomes more capable as a platform with first-party experiences - Increase the value of the company to acquire more clout with enterprises and other business deals But cynicism aside, this is pretty cool. I think there's a solid foundation here for the kind of intent-based, action-oriented computing that I think will benefit non-technical people immensely.

throwacct 1y ago

Yeah... no. I'm going to pass. The premise is bad from any angle. In the case of businesses, why "create" another "Amazon" and compete with other brands when the focus should be on getting customers through my sales funnel? For developers is much worse since they are going to copy Amazon's model with brands that found a niche: Amazon Basics. In this case, it'll be OpenAI "core" (or something like that), where you do all the work, and when your "app" is somewhat famous enough or getting traction, they'll copy it, rebrand it, and bombard all old and new customers to use it instead of yours. I'mma call it now just for the fun of it: This will go the way of their "GPT" store.

jarjoura 1y ago
Companies like OpenTable that make money on the backend for connecting you with the restaurant will happily partner with OpenAI on this. There are plenty of brokers that will add immense value to ChatGPT for free and if users go there looking for something, it's only a matter of time. Right now, I only like using the chat interface to answer questions I can't quite form into searches, but I also don't go directly to a chat bot to book dinner reservations. However, if I'm using the service to riff on ideas for a romantic thing to do with my partner, and it somehow leads me to resturant reservations, I do think I would engage with it and come back to ChatGPT in the future for novel interactions like that.

mirzap 1y ago

Is it just me, or does it seem odd that if you truly believed AGI would be achieved within a few years, you wouldn’t launch an app store for AI apps? I don’t think an app store makes any sense in a post-AGI world.

OtherShrezzing 1y ago

OpenAI launched an App Store in Nov 2023. A 23 month turnaround from major feature launch, to deprecation, to relaunch is a commitment to product longevity that’d put Google to shame.

AlphaAndOmega0 1y ago
I found it genuinely impressive how useless their "GPTs" were. Of course, part of it was due to the fact that the out-of-the-box models became so competent that there was no need for a customized model, especially when customization boiled down to barely more than some kind of custom system prompt and hidden instructions. I get the impression that's the same reason their fine-tuning services never took off either, since it was easier to just load necessary information into the context window of a standard instance. Edit: In all fairness, this was before most tool use, connectors or MCP. I am at least open to the idea that these might allow for a reasonable value add, but I'm still skeptical.
- scottoreily 1y ago
  [dead]
- CharlieDigital 1y ago
  > I get the impression that's the same reason their fine-tuning services never took off either Also, very few workloads that you'd want to use AI for are prime cases for fine-tuning. We had some cases where we used fine tuning because the work was repetitive enough that FT provided benefits in terms of speed and accuracy, but it was a very limited set of workloads.
  - apwell23 1y ago
    > fine tuning because the work was repetitive enough that FT provided benefits in terms of speed and accuracy, can you share anymore info on this. i am curious about what the usecase was and how it improved speed (of inference?) and accuracy.

helloguillecl 1y ago

Chat offers a far better experience than using Google—no more searching through spam-filled results, clicking between sponsored links, accepting endless cookie banners, and trying to read a tiny bit of useful content buried among ads and clutter. It has the potential to bridge the gap between pure conversation and the functionality of a full website.

d4mi3n 1y ago
I’m just worried they we’ll go from very obvious advertising to advertising that’s a lot harder to spot. I can block adds on a search engine. I cannot prevent an LMM from having hidden biases about what the best brand of vodka or car is.
- helloguillecl 1y ago
  I agree. But Google has gone in that direction long ago: ads are now harder to distinguish from genuine search results. In many cases, the organic results are buried so deep that they don’t even appear in the first visible section of the page anymore.
- somuchdata 1y ago
  Google could also have allowed invisible pay-for-placement without marking it as an ad. Presumably they didn't do that because undermining the perceived trustworthiness of their search results would have been a net loss. I wonder if chat will go in that same direction or not.
  - jerojero 1y ago
    Pretty sure it's illegal to present advertisement and not label it as such in some form. But as with everything, as new technologies emerge, you can devise legal loopholes that don't totally apply to you and probably need regulation before it's decided that "yeah, actually, that does apply to me".

saberience 1y ago

What is the incentive for developers to build apps for this platform? I don't see any way of monetizing them at all.

jimmydoe 1y ago
fear of missing out, as always, be the first flappy bird in the store.

bonoboTP 1y ago

This is part of the fight regarding whether we will have utility apps inside the chat app or chatboxes inside the utility apps. Obviously OpenAI would prefer that they are in the driver seat and delegate to passive apps, while regular apps like Booking would prefer to be the app the user uses and to run an AI chatbox nested inside their own app UI, so they can swap it out etc. Convenience-wise probably this model is more viable, and things will get centralized to the AI apps. And the nested utilities will be walled gardens on steroids. Using custom software and general computing (in the manner of the now discontinued sideloading on Android) will get even further away for the average person.

somuchdata 1y ago
They also released ChatKit today for building in-app chat UI experiences, so it seems like OpenAI is trying to make sure they get a larger slice of the pie no matter which interaction model wins.

whinvik 1y ago

Ads. They created ads. Now (or eventually) they can charge app developers to be featured first for a specific use case.

risyachka 1y ago
How else would the company sell their product? and keep people employed. Of course ads will be there and this is good. A bad thing would be if they took a bunch of traffic from google and then gave no way to promote your products. That would lead to companies closing and layoffs and economy decline.
- whinvik 1y ago
  Just to clarify, my original comment was neutral about whether its a good or a bad thing. It was just a statement of observation.
sumedh 1y ago
Ads was always the end goal, they have an opportunity to become a bigger player than Google in the ad space. Instead of the user wasting time, ChatGpt can come up with the recommendations.

nthypes 1y ago

chat is the best interface for information retrieval and REPL-like experiences. for all the rest, chat is horrible.

darajava 1y ago

I don't understand, what could be built with this platform that wouldn't be made obsolete by conceivable updates to ChatGPT? Another commenter suggested a hotel search function: > Find me hotels in Capetown that have a pool by the beach .Should cost between 200 dollars to 800 dollars a night ChatGPT can already do this. Similarly, their own pizza lookup example seems like it would exist or nearly exist with current functionality. I can't think of a single non-trivial app that could be built on this platform - and if there are any, I can't think of any that would be useful or not in immediate danger of being swallowed by advances to ChatGPT.

bonoboTP 1y ago
There are multiple branches they are exploring. This is a more structured one. But they also work on Agents that load the website and produce clicks to do the task. Also, this requires hand design, but they also work on generating the gui just-in-time, based on context. They also have this new design gui for visual programming of agents, with boxes and arrows. It's going to be a hybrid of all these. Obviously the more explicit work done for interoperability, the easier it is, but the gaps can be bridged with the common sense of the AI at the expense of more time and compute. It's like, a self driving car can detect red lights and speed limit signs via cameras but if there are structured signals in smart infrastructure, then it's simpler and better. But it's always interesting to see this dance between unstructured and structured. Apparently any time one gets big, the other is needed. When theres tons of structured code, we want AI common sense to cut through it because even if it's structured, it's messy and too complicated. So we generate the code. Now if we have natural language code generators we want to impose structure onto how they work, which we express in markup languages, then small scripts, then large scripts that are too complex and have too much boilerplate so we need AI to generate it from natural language etc etc
mindwok 1y ago
ChatGPT can only do this now because the information is essentially freely available. Booking.com etc post their pages on the web to get traffic. In the world OpenAI is imagining, people will rarely if ever interact with the internet directly, it’ll instead all be through intermediary LLMs. In that world, the organisations that own authoritative information about hotel prices and locations will not make that freely available to LLMs, they will sell it. ChatGPT is trying to get ahead by encouraging them to embed themselves directly into their platform so they get first dibs on this kinda stuff before they put up the walls.

skeeter2020 1y ago

Seems wild to have an App SDK for a technology that's 1. supposed to free us from purpose-built APIs and interfaces, and 2. comprised entirely of a single textbox. Feels perhaps more like a MS-type strategy of standards and formal rules intended to lock down the extended ecosystem?

reed1234 1y ago
I think they want businesses to be more tightly integrated with ChatGPT to open up future opportunities for monetization.

outlore 1y ago

remember when custom GPTs would just need an OpenAPI spec to be compatible with any existing API out there? we've been through this app store journey once before, maybe it's different this time since we now have agents and MCP

Illniyar 1y ago

I can't understand the documentation. How are the interactive elements embedded in the chat? Are they just iFrames? The docs mention returning resources, and the example is returning a rust file as a resource, which is nonsensical. This seems similar to MCP UI in result but it's not clear how it works internally.

willtheperson 1y ago
If the connector is enabled by the prompt or via a UI interaction, it calls your MCP server. They have created some meta fields your tool can respond with, one of which is something about producing a widget along with a field for html. In the current implementation, it makes an iframe (or webview on native) that loads a sandboxed environment which then gets another iframe with your html injected. Your html can include meta field whitelisted remote resources.
selvan 1y ago
An MCP server exposes tools that a model can call during a conversation and returns results according to the tool contracts. Those results can include extra metadata—such as inline HTML—that the Apps SDK uses to render rich UI components (widgets) alongside assistant messages. More: https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples?tab=readme-ov-file#mcp--apps-sdk-overview https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples?tab=readm...
- ares623 1y ago
  Imagine rendering content from an app with user submitted data.

spullara 1y ago

Do the examples work for any else? https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1 https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1

Dig1t 1y ago

Just let the AI control my mouse and keyboard, let it use my device like a human. There's a huge swath of software already designed to be used by humans and anyone who uses ChatGPT knows that it's already been trained on every scrap of knowledge on how to use any existing complex software.

LudwigNagasena 1y ago

Glad to see no AGI hubris in this presentation, but we also haven’t see anything groundbreaking: their own version of GUI plugins, their own version of a workflow builder, and an aspiration to take cut of every transaction on the web. I hope their GUI integration will be eventually superseded by native UI integration. I remember such well thought out concepts dating back to 2018 (https://uxdesign.cc/redesigning-siri-and-adding-multitasking-features-to-ios-70c2f1a1569b https://uxdesign.cc/redesigning-siri-and-adding-multitasking...).

zmmmmm 1y ago
AGI is so last year. Now it's all ASI which is great because it was achieved in like 1968 or something so nobody trying to achieve it can possibly fail
- nsonha 1y ago
  it's funny to see lay people and some CEOs AGI this AGI that in the past 5 years and actual tech people know that it's very irrelevant to what's happening right now.

alganet 1y ago

Developers, developers, developers! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fcSviC7cRM&t=34s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fcSviC7cRM&t=34s

ed 1y ago

Anyone able to get this to work? Lots of folks (myself included) are reporting it doesn't: https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1 https://github.com/openai/openai-apps-sdk-examples/issues/1

brazukadev 1y ago
Everything openai releases never work in the first days/weeks/ever. We won't be replaced by AI anytime soon.

sailfast 1y ago

Why would I want to enable OpenAI to collect an Apple Tax from me down the road? Sure, this helps app partners access their large user base and grows their functionality too - but the end game has to be lock-in with a 30% tax right?

mrcwinn 1y ago
For the same reason everyone's fine with an Epic tax down the road. It costs you nothing today.

ed 1y ago

A bit underwhelming when you see what's actually on offer. "Apps" are really just MCP servers, with an extension to allow returning HTML. A lot of the fundamental issues with MCP are still present: MCP is pretty single-player, users must "pull" content from the service, and the model of "enabling connections" is fairly unintuitive compared to "opening an app." Ideally apps would have a dedicated entry point, be able to push content to users, and have some persistence in the UI. And really the primary interface should be HTML, not chat. As such I think this current iteration will turn out a lot like GPT's.

reb 1y ago
MCP has this in the spec: it's called "elicitation", and I'm pretty confident this push from OpenAI sets the stage for them to support it. Once a service can actively involve you and/or your LLM in ongoing interaction, MCP servers start to get real sticky. We can safely assume the install/auth process will also get much less technical as pressure to deliver services to non-technical users increases.
- ed 1y ago
  > Once a service can actively involve you and/or your LLM in ongoing interaction Is there any progress on that front? That would unlock a lot of applications that aren't feasible at the moment. Edit: Sampling is a piece of the puzzle https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/client/sampling https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/cli... I also see a lot of discussion on Github around agent to agent (a2a) capabilities. So it's a big use case, and seems obvious to the people involved with MCP.
penetrarthur 1y ago
And Dropbox is just an FTP server with SVN.

sert_121 1y ago

It's interesting to see how chatgpt is becoming more and more of a starting point of the web exploration, at which they're like, why even bother searching at this point, we'll just have default workflows for maps, buy (integration of stripe already marks it), booking airlines etc, which covers so much basic stuff people would do anyways. The biggest bottleneck for this for the past two years imo wasn't the models, but the engineering and infra around it, and the willingness of companies to work with openaio directly. Now that they've grown and have a decent userbase, companies are much more willing to pay/or involve themselves in these efforts. This has eventual implications outside user-heavy internet use (once we see more things built on the SDK), where we're gonna see a fork in the web traffic of human centric workflows through chat, and an seo-filled, chat/agent-optimized web that is only catered to agents. (crossposted)

spullara 1y ago
OpenAI has had this opportunity to do this since their meteoric adoption and fumbled it with plugins and then GPTs. Ironically, Anthropic's MCP could be just the ingredient needed to capture this position.
stackedinserter 1y ago
The main showstopper here is trust. I just can't let anything AI make decisions that have consequences, like spending money, buying anything, planning vacations, flights etc. It's so bad now (I've just tried) that I'm not sure if it will ever gain my trust.
- 3s 1y ago
  not to mention the privacy concerns associated with connecting my entire life to OpenAI or Anthropic. If you have the memory feature enabled, it's scary how much ChatGPT knows about you already and can even infer implicit thoughts and patterns about you as a person.
  - sert_121 1y ago
    I am sure it already knows a lot regardless of the memory feature, as long you're sharing your chat history/ have your history enabled, but I agree, it'd simply worsen it.

klysm 1y ago

I guess openai is trying to execute the google playbook?

saxelsen 1y ago
I'll bet $100 they're seeing an opportunity to dethrone Google as the entrance point to the web and this is a big part of it. It feels like OpenAI's mission has changed from "We want to do do AGI" to "it'll be easier to do AGI with a lot of money, so let's make a lot of money first" to "we have a shot at becoming bigger than Google and stealing their revenue. Let's do that and maybe do AGI if that ever works out"
- klysm 1y ago
  I don’t think openai is that goal oriented around AGI whatever their posturing may be. They have to cash in eventually and are probably trying to figure out a pathway to a viable business.
  - saxelsen 1y ago
    I agree with you. Just disappointing that it's just another company slowly abandoning their mission in favor of profits.

unit149 1y ago

[dead]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

hamonrye 1y ago

1GK AMD chips will accelerate

dawnerd 1y ago

I’ve still yet to see how this improves anything? I saw someone mentioning it can use Spotify. Okay but like so can older gen assistants. Seems like they’re just trying to sell a much more expensive way of doing something that already exists.

pu_pu 1y ago

This really feels like a missed opportunity to build something genuinely new, something that actually plays to the strengths of LLMs, instead of just embedding a fixed set of app screens inside chat. Ideally, users should be able to describe a task, and the AI would figure out which tools to use, wire them together, and show the result as an editable workflow or inline canvas the user can tweak. Frameworks like LlamaIndex’s Workflow or LangGraph already let you define these directed graphs manually in Python where each node can do something specific, branch, or loop. But the AI should be able to generate those DAGs on the fly, since it’s just code underneath. And given that LLMs are already quite good at generating UI code and following a design system (see v0.app), there’s not much reason to hardcode screens at all. The model can just create and adapt them as needed. Really hope Google doesn’t follow OpenAI down this path.

beefnugs 1y ago
Actually these giant companies have proven innovation is impossible. Any company that tries just gets stepped on by the bigger papa company stealing their idea and putting them out of business. (Also read the documentation, they specifically mention that you can tell it to create new flow paths)

tonysurfly 1y ago

This is a great idea.

defraudbah 1y ago

lol, their github is filled with "got the same issue" comments, imaging debugging and teaching your users how to use a blackbox

brazukadev 1y ago
Openai knows how to create models but is terrible at creating software
- defraudbah 1y ago
  i think it's easy to hire experienced engineers these days, not so easy with ML devs, so looking forward to see how this works out for them. I am actually happy to see anything that OpenAI does, it brings more work to me :)

melodyogonna 1y ago

Soon they'll start serving ads, you just know they're eying Google's lunch

doppelgunner 1y ago

I think voice or chat is the best interface for AI tools because you don’t need to learn how to use them. We already do it every day.

mightymosquito 1y ago

I really think this is Open AIs opening the eco system moment which is equivalent to google opening up Android or facebook allowing gaming platforms like zynga to grow on their platform. To me it seems like a strategic shift from pure AI research and the AGI snake oil to other supposed tangible stuff. In short, the AI revolution is mostly over, and we seem to be back in the realm of software.

petecapecod 1y ago

Hey Sam that's a mighty fine moat you just put up around your castle Or wall if you like that metaphor better. While Apps do sound and look like the future, I feel like we're headed down the same road as the App and Google Play stores with this. Sooner or later OpenAI is going to use this to take a cut $$ of the payments going through the system. Which they most likely need and deserve, but still any time you close off part of the web it makes the web less open and free.

AlfredBarnes 1y ago

People prefer no ads, that's why its easy to dip into chatgpt get a good enough answer and avoid the rest of the enshitification of every website.

todotask2 1y ago

One interesting I found, the docs, is using Astro Starlight.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

aryehof 1y ago

I wonder if I have just seen the future. A movement away from mobile apps (and some aspects of websites), to apps in an AI model? Can’t say I'm unhappy to see the authoritarian duopoly of the existing app stores challenged. One question that comes to mind is how will multiple providers of similar products and services be recommended/discovered? Perhaps they wont be recommended, but just listed instead as currently done by search engines. Is AISO our future - AI Search Optimization?

mercury24aug 1y ago

It's funny how OpenAI announced Apps SDK without the SDK. Anyway, we was so excited to get my hands dirty that we built our own SDK: https://github.com/fractal-mcp/sdk https://github.com/fractal-mcp/sdk