Google seems to really pull ahead in this AI race. For me personally they offer the best deal and although the software is not quiet there compared to openai or anthropic (in regards to 1. web GUI, 2. agent-cli). I hope they can fix that in the future and I think once Gemini 4 or whatever launches we will see a huge leap again
I don't understand this sentiment. It may hold true for other LLM use cases (image generation, creative writing, summarizing large texts), but when it comes to coding specifically, Google is *always* behind OpenAI and Anthropic, despite having virtually infinite processing power, money, and being the ones who started this race in the first place.
Until now, I've only ever used Gemini for coding tests. As long as I have access to GPT models or Sonnet/Opus, I never want to use Gemini. Hell, I even prefer Kimi 2.5 over it. I tried it again last week (Gemini Pro 3.0) and, right at the start of the conversation, it made the same mistake it's been making for years: it said "let me just run this command," and then did nothing.
My sentiment is actually the opposite of yours: how is Google *not* winning this race?
> despite having virtually infinite processing power, money
Just because they have the money doesn't mean that they spend it excessively. OpenAI and Anthropic are both offering coding plans that are possibly severely subsidized, as they are more concerned with growth at all cost, while Google is more concerned with profitability. Google has the bigger warchest and could just wait until the other two run out of money rather than forcing the growth on that product line in unprofitable means.
Maybe they are also running much closer to their compute limits then the other ones too and their TPUs are already saturated with API usage.
Agreed, also worth pointing out that Google still owns 14% of Anthropic + Anthropic is signing billion dollar scale deals with Google Cloud to train their models on their TPUs. So Claude success indirectly contributes to Google success. The AI race is not only about the frontier models.
> OpenAI and Anthropic are both offering coding plans that are possibly severely subsidized
So does Google, in fact I believe their antigravity limits for Opus and Sonnet for the $20 plan has higher limits than CC $20 plan, and there is no weekly cap or I couldn't get it even with heavy usage, and then you have a separate limit for Gemini cli and for other models from antigravity.
Is that so? I haven't personally used Antigravity, I just heard a lot of people complaining as recently as ~1 month ago that they hit the rate limits very quickly by e.g. it accidentally reading in too large files.
I honestly do not wish Google to have the best model out there and be forced to use their incomprehensible subscription / billing / project management whatever shit ever again.
I don’t know what their stuff cost. I don’t know why would I use vertex or ai studio. What is included in my subscription what is billed per use.
They all suck. OpenAI ignores scanning limits and disabled routes in robots.txt, after a 429 "Too Many Requests" they retry the same url half a dozen of times from different IPs in the next couple of minutes, and they once DoS'ed my small VPS trying to do a full scan of sitemaps.xml in less than one hour, trying and retrying if any endpoint failed.
Google and others at least respects both robots.txt and 429s. They invested years scanning all the internet, so they can now train on what they have stored in their server. OpenAI seems to assume that MY resources are theirs.
For a personal plan to use premium Gemini AI features or for agentic development with Gemini CLI/Antigravity the billing is no more or less complicated then Claude Code or Codex CLI.
You pay for the $20/mo Google AI Pro plan with a credit card via the normal personal billing flow like you would for a Google One plan without any involvement of Google Cloud billing or AI Studio. Authorize in the client with your account and you're good to go.
(With the bundled drive storage on AI Pro I'm just paying a few bucks more than I was before so for me it's my least expensive AI subscription excluding the Z.ai ultra cheap plan).
Or, just like with Anthropic or OpenAI, it's a separate process for billing/credits for an API key targeted at a developer audience. Which I don't need or use for Gemini CLI or Antigravity at all, it's a one step "click link to authorize with your Google Account" and done.
You could decide to use an API key for usage based billing instead (just like you could with Claude Code) but that's entirely unnecessary with a subscription.
Sure, for the API anything involving a hyperscalar cloud is going to have a higher complexity floor with legacy cruft here and there, but for individual subscriptions that's irrelevant and it's pretty much as straightforward of a click and pay flow you'd find anywhere else.
after using aistudio fine for months suddenly my billing was cancelled and a week later im still waiting for it to be re-enabled.
Im at a total loss to how google can function this way, my only explanation is they somehow have a Philosophers Stone they generate wealth with because they sure as hell make it impossible to give them money.
Eventually the models will be generally be so good that the competition moves from the best model to the best user experience and here I think we can expect others will win, e.g. Microsoft with GitHub and VS Code
That's my hope but Google has unlimited cash to throw at model development and can basically burn more cash can openai and anthropic combined. Might tip the scale in the long run.
I just tried it on my S25. I can enable the option an open the APK but can't download it because it fails to create the VM because the S25 does not support Non-protected VMs, so I may require a rooted device. I guess I will stick to Termux but interesting feature nonetheless
I saw this too. Sometimes it "think" inside of the actual output and its much more likely to end up in the loop of "I am ready to answer" while it is doing that already
As the other commenter said win10 went out of support and only recently ~2 months ago the company I work for migrated to win11, I think now all the people that do not want to use win11 are forced to use it and complain
It's not shocking they added even more bloatware to every microsoft program so even with the same OS kernel it would probably take longer. At this point it also got out of hand for Microsoft themselves if you have heard how they are going to speed up the explorer. Not by making it faster but by preloading it on startup so it feels snappier, there are 20 years of technical debt in I think you cannot save this anymore (but I am to inexperienced to know that for sure)
The last time this subject came up someone in the thread jumped up to explain to me how Windows 11 has all these great new features that make it worth being many times less performant.
Every feature they listed was some anti-consumer thing that only a corporate customer would ever care about or want. Every single one.
What I learned is that Windows 11 is great for the customer, I'm just not the customer. I'm just the dummy who paid for it.
It persists across updates, can be customized with extremely granular control over what is removed/re-enabled, or using the default mode which works fantastically for most users with minimal risk of disabling something many people might prefer to keep (e.g Xbox app).
I’ve been using it for years on every machine/VM with Windows 11 installed. The OS gets out of my way completely both in terms of functionality and distractions like ads.
I cannot recommend it enough, I am eternally grateful to the maintainers for making Windows 11 feel like a modernized Windows 7 experience.
Most of it are turned off or possible to turn off in LTSC IoT version, which is only Win version reasonable to use without beenig annoyed when using it.
Unless something changed with 11, this is opt in, with a specific "save to your microsoft account option". I really don't see the issue here.
>- Hardware attestation
This is either a rehash of the "TPM 2.0 requirement" point above, or just outright false.
>- Telemetry/Data Collection
>- Extensive diagnostic data collection
This are the same thing restated
>- Forced automatic updates
>- Limited update deferral for Home users
Again, these are just the same thing.
>- Feature updates bundled with security updates
That's basically... every commercial OS out there? Good luck getting security updates on android (if your OEM even provides it) if you're not on the latest version. Some linux distros even have it as a selling point, aka. rolling release.
>- Device Management (Enterprise)
>- Intune/MDM integration
These are the same thing AND you have to jump through hoops to enable it. I really don't see the issue here.
>- Copilot integration
>- Windows Autopilot
You can just... not use it?
>- Azure AD requirements
???
Is this just restating the microsoft account requirement?
To be fair, while many of those are indeed optional or non-issues, the problem is that user experience has been degraded in w11 while there has been almost zero value-add for end users.
One random little thing to add on to the list of shitty things about Windows 11: the new default image-viewing program (Photos), is incapable of rendering multi-page TIFF files. No error message or anything, just displays the first page and acts like everything’s fine. The OLD image viewing program (Windows Photo Viewer), displays them no problem though…
These kinds of issues can be incredibly disruptive and distressing for non tech-savy users. You update your OS and suddenly it looks like a lot of your data are corrupted, with no explanation of how to get it back.
Forcing saving to OneDrive causes this issue a lot too. I was stunned to find that saving changes to an existing document will often try to save a new file in OneDrive instead. So if you don't notice this and go back to your original file, it will look like your changes weren't saved.
The only part of windows that really matters in the long run is win32 which has been extremely stable. You could go back to XP and not lose that many features. The fact that modern windows runs like ass has very little to do with backwards compatibility.
I don't necessarily disagree, but I do think there's an important distinction between technical debt and backwards compatibility. Yes The former can be caused by the latter, but I've worked in enough projects that didn't have to worry about backwards compatibility but were still riddled with technical debt to know that backwards compatibility is only one source of many.
It also happened to me in the gemini-cli. It tried to think but somehow failed and putted all thoughts into the output and tried again and again to switch to "user output". If was practically stuck in an infinite loop
This is exactly my go to. Monitoring and visualization in Btop and killing the process in htop. It makes it so much easier searching a process with a shortcut instead of navigating the TUI in btop to search
If you get it working. They don't seem to have an own website, the publisher links to Steam as the only place to purchase it, and Steam says it's only supported on Windows. Surely you can work around it with VMs, emulation, or other solutions, but sadly the creator declines to support that
Yeah, the cliff explosives being gated behind vulcanus sucks a bit but they made the cliffs a lot more bearable in 2.0
I think for a megabase run its a matter of how fast you can reach legendary and process everything in it and once you got that you can go really into megabasing this game.
Sadly they nerfed trains so hard by introducing Quality since everything got better but trains stayed the same which is a shame
Trains still got buffed by overhead rails. Those enable very compact designs, allow for easier hookups and reduce the usual intersection/signals pain by a lot.
I agree that no quality or endgame upgrades for trains is an odd choice, but I guess that's what the mods are for.
reply