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

Google's Antigravity bait and switch

0xsid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 369 posts

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#302

Post by seaal »

bootlooped wrote: post #291
mark_l_watson wrote: post #274

The app over-write thing is not good. It took me 90 minutes to get the new chat Antigravity, the new Antigravity IDE, and Antigravity CLI installed and one task done on each. My 1 month subscription of Gemini Ultra is finished in three days and I revert to their $20/month plan. Assuming that daily and weekly quotas are OK for casual use, I will probably use AntiGravity CLI most of the time. Off topic, but maybe inter…

> Assuming that daily and weekly quotas are OK for casual use, I will probably use AntiGravity CLI most of the time. I would not assume that for 3.1 pro, but maybe the limits for flash 3.5 will be fine, and the model will be good enough for hobby stuff.

Quota for flash 3.5 is terrible, they just reduced quotas once again. $20 plan gives you 4x usage, previously it was 33x.

I get significantly more usage from $20 Claude plan using only Opus 4.7 - but at least the google plan gives me 5TB of storage now.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#303

Post by upbeat_general »

tartoran wrote: post #281
Sevii wrote: post #2

How did Google blow their AI lead? Why is Google the 2nd or 3rd tier player in the AI coding market? Why can't GCP supplant AWS? Because google can't help but constantly shoot its customers and itself in the foot.

> How did Google blow their AI lead? Google is not an "AI company", they just happened to have been 10 steps ahead of everyone but slept on it for too long, now scrambling to catch up..

If by "happened to" you mean pour significant resources for well-over a decade on many different AI research groups then yes, that's accurate. Depending on your definition of AI, it might even be two decades.

In fact, OpenAI was founded largely with the direct goal of preventing Google from being the sole winner in AI...

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#304

Post by Flere-Imsaho »

tartoran wrote: post #281
Sevii wrote: post #2

How did Google blow their AI lead? Why is Google the 2nd or 3rd tier player in the AI coding market? Why can't GCP supplant AWS? Because google can't help but constantly shoot its customers and itself in the foot.

> How did Google blow their AI lead? Google is not an "AI company", they just happened to have been 10 steps ahead of everyone but slept on it for too long, now scrambling to catch up..

Alphabet owns DeepMind, who are an AI company. In fact alphabet are lots of things, which is fine.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#305

Post by [deleted] »

zozbot234 wrote: post #93
KronisLV wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So much for AI getting cheaper. For now, that's DeepSeek: https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing/ (they have a discount until the end of the month, even after that they will have pretty good prices) Or GLM or Kimi, Mistral is also surprisingly passable. Or just have to open the wallet and give money to OpenAI or Anthropic for the subsidized tokens. > Google Enterprise accounts are sunsetting AI Ultra in…

These are models that can be run locally BTW. Just get enough hardware for your throughput requirements, have it grind on multiple batches of tokens 24x7 to get reasonable utilization (keeping the cloud for time-sensitive uses) and that's it, no more rug pulls.

[deleted]

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#306

Post by [deleted] »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #267

The original Antigravity editor is/was just a light reskin on VSCode. My normal workflow - even before the 2.0 update - was to run VScode and AG at the same time, on the same local codebase. AG would do the work, which I would then review in VSCode. Why not just download and run the IDE you want, alongside the agentic dev tool you want?

[deleted]

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#307

Post by josh-sematic »

postalcoder wrote: post #24

Google made its lack of interest in Antigravity IDE obvious from very early. Updates were few and far between and app-breaking bugs stuck around, despite tons of reports. Google's lack of focus is astounding. They sprinkle random products here and there and seem to then tepidly pick the product surface that is doing least bad and then tepidly focus on that. Compare that to every other AI lab, large and small that kno…

I’ve also heard on the engineering side performance is judged by heavily favoring launching products over keeping existing ones healthy and growing. You get what you incentivize…

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#308

Post by utopiah »

"We should be able to trust that our tools will remain the tools we actually signed up to use."

Yep... well that's what free software and open-source is for. You can't trust corporations so you MUST have the actual code. Harsh lesson but at least if something is learned and the mistake not repeated, that's OK.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#309

Post by heyyeah »

Did anyone else have the bug (?) where they had to consent to these: "Yes, I agree to help improve Antigravity IDE by allowing Google to collect and use my Interactions data, subject to the Google Antigravity IDE Terms of Service and Google Privacy Policy. I understand I can choose to opt out later whenever I want via my settings." data collection terms to finish the Antigravity IDE installation? I filed a bug and searched for the setting to switch it off.
Post reply on HN