Live data from Hacker News

Antigravity 2.0

antigravity.google

31–34 of 34 posts

Re: Antigravity 2.0

#31
post #6
post #2

It's wild how much these agent interfaces have aligned UI-wise. There's almost zero difference between all of them.

It's kind of bizarre in that it's not like this is an optimal interface, either. I mean, it's fine, but why not try something different? I also don't really get why TUI's have become such a big deal, other than maybe nerd bait. The only time I want a TUI is when I'm SSH'd into a machine, which isn't very often? TUI's have so many downsides. Selecting text is inconsistent, copy paste is inconsistent, mouse behaviors..…

I'll take this bait.

First up - I completely agree that parts of the terminal experience are decidedly lackluster, you can make them "fine" but the general experience doesn't align with consistent OS principles users are familiar with, and I agree that good mouse support, expected copy and paste, selection behaviors, adding files/attachments to prompts, etc... all could be better (and actually are mostly better on decent modern terminals, as an aside)

But... And this is the big but... LLMs are basically text IO systems. And terminals are designed from the ground up to allow text IO to control the entire system, including the TUI (ex - multiplayer agent tmux is a fun demo).

It's a genuinely powerful pairing, and basically ALL of the non-TUI systems basically end up just embedding a terminal [cough* xterm *cough] and becoming a non-standard TUI themselves, anyways.

So TUIs have become a big deal because it's the obvious and easy way to give an LLM "computer use" skills, without spending a fortune on tokens doing graphical processing for GUIs, which are geared towards humans and not agents, and are generally less powerful anyways.

Re: Antigravity 2.0

#32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini CLI was utter shit and always had delayed model release on top of it. I'm not kidding when 1 hour automated vibe-coding led to an agent 30% cheaper and faster on 1:1 tasks with the SAME Gemini models (re-ran on 50 past tasks) , genuinely shameful that Google even released this, it was so buggy, trapped in infinite loops as well and so-on. Antigravity is a whole different product, the only way I use it currentl…

Gemini CLI didn't refuse to perform security audits of code. That makes it better than Antigravity, IMHO. Security audits are the one thing everyone needs to be doing with AI, now, even if you're not doing any other work with AI. If you hate LLMs you still need to defend against them. And, the US providers seem to all be racing to make that capability inaccessible to anyone who isn't at a Fortune 500 and able to use…

> And, the US providers seem to all be racing to make that capability inaccessible to anyone who isn't at a Fortune 500 and able to use their "cyber" versions.

Because it's valuable. I'd be surprised if the big providers didn't go even further with this idea. Need your agent to write some C++? Gotta upgrade to the "system developer" package (a $100/mo add-on to your subscription). SQL? You'll need the DBA package. Working with hardware/firmware (or anything that might be construed as reverse engineering or hardware hacking)? You'll need a verified computer engineering account for that.

Re: Antigravity 2.0

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini CLI didn't refuse to perform security audits of code. That makes it better than Antigravity, IMHO. Security audits are the one thing everyone needs to be doing with AI, now, even if you're not doing any other work with AI. If you hate LLMs you still need to defend against them. And, the US providers seem to all be racing to make that capability inaccessible to anyone who isn't at a Fortune 500 and able to use…

> And, the US providers seem to all be racing to make that capability inaccessible to anyone who isn't at a Fortune 500 and able to use their "cyber" versions. Because it's valuable. I'd be surprised if the big providers didn't go even further with this idea. Need your agent to write some C++? Gotta upgrade to the "system developer" package (a $100/mo add-on to your subscription). SQL? You'll need the DBA package. Wo…

And, everyone will go to Chinese/open models. Which, I guess, is why the US providers are angling for regulatory capture to lock in their monopoly for a few years and guarantee US decline in tech to the status of an "also ran".

Re: Antigravity 2.0

#34

For a v2.0 this doesn't seem to bring anything new to the table or the page is not very good at communicating what makes this unique compared to Codex or Claude Work. Either way good for Google but I do not expect this to gain a lot of traction, it has been almost months now since I've heard someone talk positively about the Google models and other AI offerings. It's too little, too late.

I use Antigravity and Gemini daily because it’s cheap and so is the company I work at.

It really isn’t anywhere near as bad as people seem to imagine. I’ve developed a lot of good code with it. I sometimes supplement it with my personal Claude Code account but really, it doesn’t make that much difference, especially if you’re giving it feedback as it goes.

It seems to me that a lot of the preference for Claude Code right now is not based on actual functionality - it’s just what everyone has come to believe is better.

Post reply on HN