Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apps SDK

developers.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 397 posts

Re: Apps SDK

#11

Post by markab21 »

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#12

Post by mhl47 »

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#13

Post by jsheard »

jasonsb wrote: post #4

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

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#14

Post by Handy-Man »

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#15

Post by spullara »

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

Re: Apps SDK

#16

Post by chatmasta »

rushingcreek wrote: post #6

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.…

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#17

Post by cefboud »

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#18

Post by alvis »

rushingcreek wrote: post #6

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.…

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…

Re: Apps SDK

#19

Post by elpakal »

naiv wrote: post #3

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

Are they still expecting us to get paid based on “revenue sharing”?

Re: Apps SDK

#20

Post by p0seidon »

mhl47 wrote: post #12

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 "p…

Which post was that?
Post reply on HN