← Back to context

Comment by XCSme

4 days ago

Same question for Atrophic.

Personally I only see Google (Gemini), X (Grok) and the Chinese models having a chances to still be alive in 1-2 years.

Anthropic are making a very convincing play for business and "enterprise" customers - first with Claude Code and now with Cowork and especially Claude for Excel. The revenue growth they've announced has been extremely impressive over the past year.

X has only brand recognition right now, and an extremely toxic one.

Big customers may buy but won't give them logos, people who are offended by Musk's worldview won't pay them either. You don't do well with a toxic brand: just look at Ye having to buy full page apologies ads to try and sell a record.

  • X?

    Don't they have the biggest budget and largest GPU farm?

    Also grok-4.1-fast was one of the top models for a long time, especially in real world usage.

It's funny you say that, I thought this would be an article about how Anthropic have managed to produce a better (coding) product than OpenAI despite having 1/10th of the funding.

The new versions of Opus (4.5 and 4.6) are absolutely amazing - first time I've felt it necessary to throw hundreds of dollars in a single month at Cursor.

I heard similar things about the older models too (Sonnet 3.5 beating GPT-4 etc.) but sadly only jumped on the Cursor train in the last 12 months or so.

  • The problem is not the models, is the moat and budget. Google and X still have money and are profitable, all the other AI companies are losing billions per year.

    And customers will happily switch from one model to another in a heartbeat.

> Personally I only see Google (Gemini), X (Grok) and the Chinese models having a chances to still be alive in 1-2 years.

I'd make it more general - the only AI tokens providers that will last past the bubble are those companies that are already self-sustaining via other product channels.

Any company that has AI as their one and only product aren't going to survive.