Can we change the title to “GitHub _signs_ deals with Google, Anthropic” ? The original got me thinking it already had deals it was getting out of
[deleted]
GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
161–170 of 742 posts
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#162Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#163Can we change the title to “GitHub _signs_ deals with Google, Anthropic” ? The original got me thinking it already had deals it was getting out of
To "cut a deal" is a common (American?) English idiom meaning to "make a deal". But agree that it's better to avoid using idioms on a site that has many visitors for whom English is not their first language.
[flagged]
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claude is better than OpenAI for most tasks, and yet OpenAI has enormously more users. What is this, if not first mover advantage?
Most people's first exposure to LLMs was ChatGPT, and that was only what - like 18 months ago it really took off in the mainstream? We're still very early on in the grand scheme of things.
Yes it's silly to talk about first mover advantage in sub 3 years. Maybe in 2026 we can revisit this question and see if being the first mattered.
First mover being a general myth doesn't mean being the first to launch and then immediately dominating the wider market for a long period is impossible. It's just usually means their advantage was about a lot more than simply being first.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claude is only better in some cherry picked standard eval benchmarks, which are becoming more useless every month due to the likelihood of these tests leaking into training data. If you look at the Chatbot Arena rankings where actual users blindly select the best answer from a random choice of models, the top 3 models are all from OpenAI. And the next best ones are from Google and X.
Bullshit. Claude 3.5 Sonnet owns the competition according to the most useful benchmark: operating a robot body in the real world. No other model comes close.
Yeah, but Mistral brews a mean cup of tea, and Llama's easily the best at playing hopscotch.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#166History has shown being first to market isn't all it's cut out to be. You spend more, it's more difficult creating the trail others will follow, you end up with a tech stack that was built before tools and patterns stabilized and you've created a giant super highway for a fast-follower. Anyone remember MapQuest, AltaVista or Hotmail? OpenAI has some very serious competition now. When you combine that with the recent…
Given that Hotmail is now Outlook.com, maybe that's a bad example.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#167Github was an early OpenAI design partner. OpenAI developed a custom LLM for them. It's so interesting that even after that early mover advantage they have to go back to the foundation model providers. Does this mean that future tech companies have no choice but to do this?
It may not be a model quality issue. It may be that GitHub wants to sell a lot more of Copilot, including to companies who refuse to use anything from OpenAI. Now GitHub can say "Oh that's fine, we have these two other lovely providers to choose from." Also, after Anthropic and Google sold massive amounts of pre-paid usage credits to companies, those companies want to draw down that usage and get their money's worth.…
I think that the credit scenario is more true for OpenAI than others . Existing Azure commits can be used to buy OpenAI via the marketplace. It will never be as simple for any non Azure partner (Only Github is tying up with Anthropic here not Azure)
GitHub doesn’t even support using those azure managed APIs for copilot today, it is just a license you can buy currently and add to a user license. The best you can do is pay for copilot with existing azure commits .
This seems about not being left behind as other models outpace what copilot can do with their custom OpenAI model that doesn’t seem to getting updated .
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#168This is pretty exciting. I'm a copilot user at work, but also have access to Claude. I'm more inclined to use Claude for difficult coding problems or to review my work as I've just grown more confident in its abilities over the last several months.
The speed with which AI models are improving blows my mind. Humans quickly normalize technological progress, but it's staggering to reflect on our progress over just these two years .
Lots of progress, but I feel like we've been seeing diminishing returns. I can't help but feel like recent improvements are just refinements and not real advances. The interest in AI may drive investment and research in better models that are game-changers, but we aren't there yet.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#169History has shown being first to market isn't all it's cut out to be. You spend more, it's more difficult creating the trail others will follow, you end up with a tech stack that was built before tools and patterns stabilized and you've created a giant super highway for a fast-follower. Anyone remember MapQuest, AltaVista or Hotmail? OpenAI has some very serious competition now. When you combine that with the recent…
Claude is better than OpenAI for most tasks, and yet OpenAI has enormously more users. What is this, if not first mover advantage?
They seem to be going after different markets, or at least having differing degrees of success in going after different markets.
OpenAI is most successful with consumer chat app (ChatGPT) market.
Anthropic is most successful with business API market.
OpenAI currently has a lot more revenue than Anthropic, but it's mostly from ChatGPT. For API use the revenue numbers of both companies are roughly the same. API success seems more important that chat apps since this will scale with success of the user's business, and this is really where the dream of an explosion in AI profits comes from.
ChatGPT's user base size vs that of Claude's app may be first mover advantage, or just brand recognition. I use Claude (both web based and iOS app), but still couldn't tell you if the chat product even has a name distinct from the model. How's that for poor branding?! OpenAI have put a lot of effort into the "her" voice interface, while Anthropic's app improvements are more business orientated in terms of artifacts (which OpenAI have now copied) and now code execution.
Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic
#170This is pretty exciting. I'm a copilot user at work, but also have access to Claude. I'm more inclined to use Claude for difficult coding problems or to review my work as I've just grown more confident in its abilities over the last several months.
I use both Claude and ChatGPT/GPT-4o a lot. Claude, the model, definitely is 'better' than GPT-4o. But OpenAI provides a much more capable app in ChatGPT and an easier development platform. I would absolutely choose to use Claude as my model with ChatGPT if that happened (yes, I know it won't). ChatGPT as an app is just so far ahead: code interpreter, web search/fetch, fluid voice interaction, Custom GPTs, image gene…
Are there any good 3rd-party native frontend apps for Claude (on MacOS)? I mean something like ChatGPTs app, not an editor. I guess one option would be to just run Claude iPad app on MacOS.