But they're all converging on capability. Do I care if it's a 72% or 74% on SWEBench? Practically, probably not. And if I'm not paying per token locally, then if it takes a tiny bit longer to get to the result, I don't care.

▲

intrasight 4 days ago | parent [-]

Smartphones and laptops are also "converging", but Apple is always a year or two ahead so it doesn't matter. "Converging" is a meaningless term when things move quickly and cost billions to develop.

	▲	cmiles8 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Bad comparison. 1. People buy Apple because of the broader ecosystem of products and the “it just works” aspect of that ecosystem. Other companies make phones with features that are objectively better but folks don’t switch because the Apple ecosystem is sticky. Despite trying, neither OpenAI nor Anthropic has managed to move up the stack beyond “hey guys new model release today!” announcements that everyone yawns at. 2. Switching costs are real. It’s a PITA to switch not just the phone but everything else. Switching model providers is a line of code and takes almost no effort. Apple has a true moat which is why they can command a premium. OpenAI and Anthropic have no moat which is why they’re in trouble.
	▲	pornel 4 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Apple would have probably lost more customers if it didn't also create a hard-to-leave lock-in ecosystem. Lots of people use old iPhones and don't care about some "up to" benchmark bumped every year, but are stuck with iMessage contacts, their stuff in iCloud, Apple Watch or apps that are not allowed by Apple to even mention they have Android versions.
	▲	4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]