I think as models get commoditized, that doesn't really matter. In fact, the UI is what becomes important. We can already see this with Deepseek and other Open-Source models.
Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
11–20 of 21 posts
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#12I mean, how many SaaS startups are just UIs around Postgres databases?
[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#13I think as models get commoditized, that doesn't really matter. In fact, the UI is what becomes important. We can already see this with Deepseek and other Open-Source models.
I've heard this idea echoed quite a few times.
But can anybody name a wrapper company as/more valuable than foundation model companies like OpenAI, DeepSeek, Anthropic, Mistral, etc?
Only one that comes to mind is Perplexity, but they're a bit more than a wrapper startup - I think there's some hardcore engineering to get their web search product working so well.
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#14I mean, how many SaaS startups are just UIs around Postgres databases?
What are some truly valuable companies that would be accurately described as just "UIs around Postgres"?
I think it's a non-sequitur - either companies are much more than just UIs around a DB, or those companies just aren't very valuable (in which case, who cares).
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#15I mean, how many SaaS startups are just UIs around Postgres databases?
What are some truly valuable companies that would be accurately described as just "UIs around Postgres"? I think it's a non-sequitur - either companies are much more than just UIs around a DB, or those companies just aren't very valuable (in which case, who cares).
The exact same holds for the pure AI wrappers - they'll end up similarly valued to UIs around Postgres.
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#16I think as models get commoditized, that doesn't really matter. In fact, the UI is what becomes important. We can already see this with Deepseek and other Open-Source models.
I've heard this idea echoed quite a few times. But can anybody name a wrapper company as/more valuable than foundation model companies like OpenAI, DeepSeek, Anthropic, Mistral, etc? Only one that comes to mind is Perplexity, but they're a bit more than a wrapper startup - I think there's some hardcore engineering to get their web search product working so well.
Of course there aren't any that are more valuable.
But take Notion, Asana, Trello. All of them started out.. like a UI around a database. And they're plenty valuable now. More valuable than Oracle, the highest valued DB company? Maybe not, but still very much successful companies. They didn't start out with 500 integrations.
I think Character.ai is already very profitable, and that's a pure wrapper.
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#17I mean, how many SaaS startups are just UIs around Postgres databases?
What are some truly valuable companies that would be accurately described as just "UIs around Postgres"? I think it's a non-sequitur - either companies are much more than just UIs around a DB, or those companies just aren't very valuable (in which case, who cares).
[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#18I mean, how many SaaS startups are just UIs around Postgres databases?
How many startups are UIs around rsync?
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#19Earlier on, they were just wrappers. The models are like an engine, and everyone puts them in a cardboard box and calls it a car.
But we're seeing companies like Cursor which pay a lot of attention to how the models interact with everything. They're not just prompting the AI, they index files, they search and mimic styles. You can @ a certain file to use it as a reference. The composer is autonomous, even extracts commands from the AI to run, or extracts only the code needed. And it double checks that what it's writing is true. There's a whole system in there, it represents more like a modern car with proper driveshaft, gears, pedals and stuff. Copilot still feels like a box on four wheels attached to an engine.
Perplexity was a wrapper earlier on and arguably it might still be. But they've used AI more effectively than Google to figure out what a person is actually trying to search for, and suggest those things.
I think most of these companies will have minimal value added at the start and slowly start to refine it. It's hard to say what percentage.
Re: Ask HN: How many AI startups are just OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. API calls with a UI?
#20I think as models get commoditized, that doesn't really matter. In fact, the UI is what becomes important. We can already see this with Deepseek and other Open-Source models.
I've heard this idea echoed quite a few times. But can anybody name a wrapper company as/more valuable than foundation model companies like OpenAI, DeepSeek, Anthropic, Mistral, etc? Only one that comes to mind is Perplexity, but they're a bit more than a wrapper startup - I think there's some hardcore engineering to get their web search product working so well.
> But can anybody name a wrapper company as/more valuable than foundation model companies
Ask the same question about databases. Then consider these wrapper companies: Salesforce, LinkedIn, AirBnB, Workday, ...
The only database company worth more then Salesforce is Oracle. Other database companies are worth much less.