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

51–60 of 369 posts

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#51

Post by elorant »

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.

Because their strategy wasn’t to become leaders but to be as good as it takes to erode the lead of others. They have the cash cow of search so they don’t rely on AI to succeed. All they need is to keep publishing new products/services to keep OpenAI from taking the initiative. Between that and the Chinese models all they have to do is wait for the bubble to burst at which point every major AI lab would go bust.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#52

Post by Jgrubb »

ozten wrote: post #37
drdrek wrote: post #3

I'm very surprised, goggle are usually known for their customer focused approach and long standing support of legacy systems!

For me it is their personable account reps and customer service. It’s the human touch we’ve come to associate with the “Don’t be Evil” brand.

Part of the magic of their account rep strategy is how they keep them on your account for so long, you get to develop not just a rapport but a trust that they truly understand your business. It gives me faith that when they advise us on their new AI products, they're going to be a good fit.

Edit: I forgot to mention the curiosity and humility they bring to our calls. If I point out another vendors approach to a problem that we have, they always lean in and want to help improve their offerings from our feedback. They know it's not enough just to "be Google".

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#53

Post by embedding-shape »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #35
embedding-shape wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the labs astroturf all the social media, HN is not unique and OpenAI wouldn't be the only ones. I even receive offers sometimes on my email put in my HN profile, asking me to post about their project in exchange for money. Be skeptical of anything you read online, not just what you think is "obvious astroturf".

Wait what? Why don't I get emails like this too? /s (on a serious note, do you feel comfortable naming and shaming such companies, this is sort of a serious accusation imo and if not then how much money they are trying to give. It would be an interesting discussion and feel free to mail me if its confidential, waiting for your response and have a nice day :-D)

Nah, maybe one day I do a collective public post of it, for now I just try to get their company and/or name first, then forward it to HN themselves so they can ban them and keep an eye out for them.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#54

Post by browningstreet »

ozgung wrote: post #18

I want to Ask HN relating to this: What can be the motivation behind this change? Is this the preferred way of using AI coding tools nowadays? I've been using Antigravity mainly because of its tab completions. So I can work in code like in a traditional way and AI assists me. But it was a broken experience and now they are moving away from IDE based tool. The alternative is you write the prompt and it does everything…

I'm surprised anyone thought Google would stay committed to an IDE product built on Microsoft's VS Code.

This was clearly an experiment or stepping stone, they were never going to stick to this path. It was always going to go away.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#56

Post by embedding-shape »

infecto wrote: post #45
embedding-shape wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was not until the last year or so that Anthropic started punching above their weight. Anthropic's stuff been useful for the last two years I'd say, especially in the beginning of Claude Code, but as soon as the Codex TUI was available, I was daily-driving both of them, literally executing the same prompts for each of them and comparing the final results, and Codex simply writes better code in 9/10 cases (but sti…

Claude Code has only been around for a year and change. At least for our internal tests 2 years ago Anthropic models started to at least become semi-useful but they still were not great, they struggled with structured output. Prior to that their alignment strategy made the products highly unhelpful in an API context. The past 6 months to a year is where Anthropic has really shined, they have model parity and sometime…

> Claude Code has only been around for a year and change.

We've been experimenting with "agent harnesses" way before that though, I'm sure the first time I tried building that sort of thing was in 2023 sometime with GPT3, and I'm like 80% confident I tried the same sort of TUI experience as CC from some random user before Claude Code even became public.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#57

Post by throwa356262 »

ozgung wrote: post #18

I want to Ask HN relating to this: What can be the motivation behind this change? Is this the preferred way of using AI coding tools nowadays? I've been using Antigravity mainly because of its tab completions. So I can work in code like in a traditional way and AI assists me. But it was a broken experience and now they are moving away from IDE based tool. The alternative is you write the prompt and it does everything…

Google corporate culture where users are just numbers someone's performance report is why this happens.

Google could easily A/B test half of their users away from their products and nobody would get fired for it

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#59

Post by RationPhantoms »

charcircuit wrote: post #50
drdrek wrote: post #3

I'm very surprised, goggle are usually known for their customer focused approach and long standing support of legacy systems!

As long as the legacy systems have billions of users. Otherwise they get shutdown once people run out of interest. See https://killedbygoogle.com/

You might have missed it but the OP's comment was dripping in literal sarcasm. Google's track record for product management is poor.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#60

Post by KeplerBoy »

riskassessment wrote: post #46

I was surprised people were so willing to jump to closed source IDEs just for access to coding agents. The trade-off you pay for tight integration between the IDE and the coding agent is lock-in because the barrier to switching IDEs is nontrivial. Your coding environment stands a lower chance of disruption when you use an open source IDE with a CLI agent. Yes it's slightly annoying to separate the agent from the IDE…

Antigravity is just a vs code (more correctly: codeium) skin with Google telemetry and agent Integration. You can switch back to Microsoft's or cursor's flavor in minutes.
Post reply on HN