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

131–140 of 397 posts

Re: Apps SDK

#131

Post by zackangelo »

typpilol wrote: post #78
seydor wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A platform requires a user moat or unfair advantage. Having a better quality model is neither

How's having the best model not a most?

Because it depends on how much better “best” is. If it’s only incrementally better than open source models that have other advantages, why would you bother?

OpenAI’s moat will only come from the products they built on top. Theoretically their products will be better because they’ll be more vertically integrated with the underlying models. It’s not unlike Apple’s playbook with regard to hardwares and software integration.

Re: Apps SDK

#132

Post by jimmydoe »

emilsedgh wrote: post #31

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.

> This means OAI won't need ads. Just rev share.

They obviously want both. In fact they are already building an ad team.

They have money they have to burn, so it makes sense to throw all the scalable business models in the history, eg app store, algo feed, etc, to the wall and see what stick.

Re: Apps SDK

#133

Post by helloguillecl »

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#135

Post by throwacct »

pkaye wrote: post #121
throwacct wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

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.

Please check how Amazon Basics works and what SMBs are saying.

Re: Apps SDK

#136

Post by d4mi3n »

helloguillecl wrote: post #133

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.

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.

Re: Apps SDK

#137

Post by notatoad »

fidotron wrote: post #50

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.

i can't imagine that users will be interested in asking chatGPT to ask zillow things, or ask chatGPT to ask canva to do things. that's a clunky interface. i can see users asking chatGPT to look up house prices, or to generate graphics, but they're not going to ask for zillow or canva specifically.

and if the apps are trusting ChatGPT to send them users based on those sort of queries, it's only a matter of time before ChatGPT brings the functionality first-party and cuts out the apps - any app who believes chat is the universal interface of the future and exposes their functionality as a ChatGPT app is signing their own death warrant.

Re: Apps SDK

#138

Post by lossolo »

cefboud wrote: post #17

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.

Ye, that's basically an MCP server, that can be used by ChatGPT.

Re: Apps SDK

#139

Post by saberience »

spongebobstoes wrote: post #30
chvid wrote: post #8

Discovery, monetization. What is in it for developers?

deploying an app to 700M people?

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...

Re: Apps SDK

#140

Post by irrationalfab »

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.…

> If those features aren't supported by the widget's hard-coded schema, you're out of luck as a user.

Chat paired to the pre-built and on-demand widgets address this limitation.

For example, in the keynote demo, they showed how the chat interface lets you perform advanced filtering that pulls together information from multiple sources, like filtering only Zillow housers near a dog park.

Post reply on HN