Because Google has the money to build 10 different versions/iterations of Gemini and can essentially force one to work. They have most people's data and most people use them for mail/search/browser/maps as well.

In my opinion though this is a race to the bottom rather than a winner takes all situation so I don't think anyone is coming out ahead once the dust settles.

▲

stouset 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Google built ten different chat products, how did that go?

	▲	XorNot an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Does it matter? Microsoft won by default with Teams because it actually turns out no one cares about chat or even has a choice in it: employees use whatever the company picks.

▲

kingkawn 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This was the same argument made for Google Wave and Google+ and both completely tanked

▲

thewebguyd 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The tech behind wave eventually made its way into Google docs though and pioneered collaborative document editing, so wasn't a complete failure even though the product itself was killed.

No comment on Google+, Google has a storied history of failure on any kind of social media/chat type products.

Where Google wins is just simply having enough money to outlive anyone else. As the saying goes "the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" In this case, Google is the market and they can just keep throwing money at the wall until OpenAI, Anthropic, etc. go under.

	▲	vidarh an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Google Docs has no features remotely like what Google Wave was. And there was collaborative editing long before Google Wave.

▲

hackingonempty 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Social media has strong network effects that keeps competitors at bay. What network effects are OpenAI/Anthropic/etc accumulating?

▲

heavyset_go 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, but Gemini is actually good and so are their APIs.