It also restricted Microsoft from "partnering" with anyone else. Wouldn't be surprised if we see another news like Amazon, Alphabet investing in Anthropic.
I don't think Microsoft ever had that restriction. They partnered with everyone already. https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2025/11/18/microsoft-nvidia... https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/deepseek-r1-is-now-av... https://ai.azure.com/
This gives OpenAI the ability to goto AWS instead of exclusively on Azure. I guess Azure really is hanging on by a thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242
Isn't this expected if OpenAI models are going to be listed on AWS GovCloud as a part of the Anthropic / Hegseth fall-out?
Am I crazy, or was this press release fully rewritten in the past 10 minutes? The current version is around half the length of the old one, which did not frame it as a "simplification" "grounded in flexibility" but as a deeper partnership. It also had word salad about AGI, and said Azure retained exclusivity for API products but not other products, which the new statement seems to contradict. What was I looking at?
They forgot the "hey ChatGPT, rewrite this to have better impact on the company stock" before submitting it
This gives OpenAI the ability to goto AWS instead of exclusively on Azure. I guess Azure really is hanging on by a thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242
And Azure still doesn't support IPv6, looking at the GitHub[1].
Nadella had OpenAI by the short and curlies early on. But all I've seen from him in the last couple of years is continuously acquiescing to OpenAI's demands. I wonder why he's so weak and doesn't exert more control over the situation? At one point Microsoft owned 49% of OpenAI but now it's down to 27%?
> Any monopoly with viable economics for profit with no threat of competition yields monopoly profits "With viable economics" is the point. My "ludicrous statement" is a back-of-the-envelope test for whether an industry is nonsense. For comparison, consolidating all of the Pets.com competitors in the late 1990s would not have yielded a profitable company.
Very convenient to leave out Amazon in your back of the envelope test, whose internal metrics were showing a path toward quasi-monopoly profits. Do you argue in good faith? There’s a difference between being too early vs being nonsense.
Malcolm Harris' Palo Alto explained the failures of many dotcom startups and Amazon's later success in the field (in part) to the fact that dotcom era delivery was done by highly trained, highly compensated, unionized in-company workers, meanwhile Amazon prevents unions, contracts (or contracted, I'm not up to date on this) companies for delivery and has exploitative working conditions with high turnover, the economics are very different and are a big contributor to their success
This gives OpenAI the ability to goto AWS instead of exclusively on Azure. I guess Azure really is hanging on by a thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242
And Azure still doesn't support IPv6, looking at the GitHub[1]. [1] https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/10539