5 ms·

when your stuff is world class - you say your competition is google, we're gonna eat their search market share, have intelligent ads more targeted than google s

by dzonga 11mo ago

when your stuff is world class - you say your competition is google, we're gonna eat their search market share, have intelligent ads more targeted than google search ever could since people feed very personal info on chatgpt. now that google is leading - you say google is not our competition so you stop being compared to google & so you can raise globs of money on a false premise

charlieyu1 11mo ago
I mean anyone who has used any AI products of Google can agree they are horrible
solumunus 11mo ago
Google is leading how? By what metric? They’re potentially well positioned but they are currently doing poorly as far as I can tell. None of their offerings are the most popular option.
- shaftway 11mo ago
  https://lmarena.ai/leaderboard https://lmarena.ai/leaderboard allows you to do your own blind A/B testing, but they aggregate user choices. Looks like Google is in first place in the vast majority of the metrics, not far behind in the rest, and ahead of OpenAI in every category.
  - credit_guy 11mo ago
    It's a bit unfair. ChatGPT has a version that is so expensive that it appears nobody on that leaderboard used it [1]. It is called ChatGPT 5 Pro and its priced at $120/1M tokens. Claude Opus 4.5 has a price of $25/1M tokens [2]. Gemini 3 Pro is $18/1M tokens (assuming more than 200k tokens) and Sonnet 4.5 is $22.5/1M tokens (same assumption). I would expect that ChatGPT 5 Pro would be better than any of these other models, but I have no way of testing. The next most expensive OpenAI model is ChatGPT 5.1, which costs only $10/1M tokens, so significantly cheaper than all its competitors. It seems to me that's fair for this model to come on the 3rd or 4th place, given that. [1] https://openai.com/api/pricing/ https://openai.com/api/pricing/ [2] https://www.claude.com/pricing#api https://www.claude.com/pricing#api [3] https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing
  - solumunus 11mo ago
    Having marginally better models is not winning the race. Their models are good but their products are bad, or at least not the best. They aren’t winning in adoption and this is currently a market share battle. I can argue that Firefox is marginally better than Chrome but that doesn’t mean Firefox is winning the race does it?
- DANmode 11mo ago
  First-mover advantage.
DANmode 11mo ago
Google was their competition, is likely the closest version to their internal sentiment.

by dzonga 11mo ago

charlieyu1 11mo ago

I mean anyone who has used any AI products of Google can agree they are horrible

solumunus 11mo ago

Google is leading how? By what metric? They’re potentially well positioned but they are currently doing poorly as far as I can tell. None of their offerings are the most popular option.

shaftway 11mo ago
https://lmarena.ai/leaderboard https://lmarena.ai/leaderboard allows you to do your own blind A/B testing, but they aggregate user choices. Looks like Google is in first place in the vast majority of the metrics, not far behind in the rest, and ahead of OpenAI in every category.
- credit_guy 11mo ago
  It's a bit unfair. ChatGPT has a version that is so expensive that it appears nobody on that leaderboard used it [1]. It is called ChatGPT 5 Pro and its priced at $120/1M tokens. Claude Opus 4.5 has a price of $25/1M tokens [2]. Gemini 3 Pro is $18/1M tokens (assuming more than 200k tokens) and Sonnet 4.5 is $22.5/1M tokens (same assumption). I would expect that ChatGPT 5 Pro would be better than any of these other models, but I have no way of testing. The next most expensive OpenAI model is ChatGPT 5.1, which costs only $10/1M tokens, so significantly cheaper than all its competitors. It seems to me that's fair for this model to come on the 3rd or 4th place, given that. [1] https://openai.com/api/pricing/ https://openai.com/api/pricing/ [2] https://www.claude.com/pricing#api https://www.claude.com/pricing#api [3] https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing
- solumunus 11mo ago
  Having marginally better models is not winning the race. Their models are good but their products are bad, or at least not the best. They aren’t winning in adoption and this is currently a market share battle. I can argue that Firefox is marginally better than Chrome but that doesn’t mean Firefox is winning the race does it?
DANmode 11mo ago
First-mover advantage.

DANmode 11mo ago

Google was their competition, is likely the closest version to their internal sentiment.