MCP started from an accessibility direction, which is why it’s catching on.
Headaches are inevitable, but don’t network effects often dominate technological superiority?
MCP started from an accessibility direction, which is why it’s catching on.
Headaches are inevitable, but don’t network effects often dominate technological superiority?
Also, I thought Jules was the "coding agent" they are working on. Now this is taking it over or is this like another case of Google self-competing?
Someone needs to take charge at this company with a strong vision, because they are all over the place and spreading themselves thin, which in turn spreads thin the customer/brand equity.
At this point, as someone who: - Has been writing Android code for about 13 years now
- Has collaborated with Google on stuff
- Lead Google developer communities and conferences
- Knows many, many GDE's and has discussions with them often
- Uses Gemini API for their product
I'm so damn confused. How is a normal customer expected to understand then?
- They have 2 SDK's for communicating to their Gemini API.
- The documentation is spread and thrown all over the place.
- Half the time I'm trying to do something I have to dig through their code to find how to.
- The features I really want are rate limited or available only to private testers.
- They have 3 coding agents now.
- Even thought they have access to my Google Account and my phone, their Gemini app is useless.
- I tried to do a basic thing (add a service account) in Google Cloud recently, which wasn't allowed due to default rules that are deprecated and are so confusing to change due to their confusing UX.
The only usable thing is the AI studio, which is a great tool for experimenting with diff models and improved the DX of getting a Gemini API key by a mile.
I'd say congrats on the release, but honestly this is such a mid low hanging fruit of a product.
Imagine the meetings where they decide to add personal illustrated storybooks before fixing chat histories
So I just avoid it and generally think the whole thing isn’t serious, because nobody seems to care enough about the safety implications of building AGI with legal terms which are logically impossible to satisfy to demonstrate appropriate attention to detail (aka, yall are noobs)
Deleted Comment
what if that setting were an enum every operator started with AiMode::Off so we can consciously opt-in, plus then Zed could have more AI Mode levels besides just on or off?
Maybe there could be a level for experienced programmers and another level for vibe coders, and prompts / permissions could be set accordingly?
I want to like Gemini in Cursor, for the 1M token context but for some reason the outcomes don’t match the benchmarks (for me)
Deleted Comment
Like it or not this makes sense as a business move. Microsoft is positioning itself for the next phase of the current AI hype cycle where standalone AI products will struggle and the “it’s a feature not a product” phase will take hold.
If they fuck up the core business rushing into AI, then aren’t they likely to get replaced by something else that does the core thing better?
Not to mention all the earnest worries about them reading private codebases to train AI nobody asked for.
You’d think being a trusted source of truth for many critical codebases would be “enough”