6 ms·
> Microsoft will no longer pay a revenue share to OpenAI. I feel this looks like a nice thing to have given they remain the primary cloud provider. If Azure im
by dinosor 5mo ago
> Microsoft will no longer pay a revenue share to OpenAI.
I feel this looks like a nice thing to have given they remain the primary cloud provider. If Azure improves it's overall quality then I don't see why this ends up as a money printing press as long as OpenAI brings good models?
- JumpCrisscross 5mo agoOpenAI was also threatening to accuse "Microsoft of anticompetitive behavior during their partnership," an "effort [which] could involve seeking federal regulatory review of the terms of the contract for potential violations of antitrust law, as well as a public campaign" [1]. [1] https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/openai-and-microsoft-tensions-are-reaching-a-boiling-point-4981c44f?mod=article_inline https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/openai-and-microsoft-tensions-ar...
- someguyiguess 5mo agoPot? Meet Kettle.
- aurareturn 5mo agoDoes this mean Microsoft gets OpenAI's models for "free" without having to pay them a dime until 2032? And on top of that, OpenAI still has to pay Microsoft a share of their revenue made on AWS/Google/anywhere until 2030? And Microsoft owns 27% of OpenAI, period? That's a damn good deal for Microsoft. Likely the investment that will keep Microsoft's stock relevant for years.
- dzonga 5mo agoown 27%. but are entitled to OpenAI profits of 49% for eternity (if OpenAI is profitable or government steps in)
- aurareturn 5mo agoown 27%. but are entitled to OpenAI profits of 49% for eternity (if OpenAI is profitable or government steps in) Where is the 49% coming from? The new deal does not talk about that.
- lokar 5mo agoDoes anyone expect azure quality to improve? Has it improved at all in the last 3 years? Does leadership at MS think it needs to improve? I doubt it
- jakeydus 5mo agoDon’t worry I’m sure there’s a few products without copilot integration still. They’ll get to them before too long.
- gchamonlive 5mo agoNo and at this point tying yourself to azure is a strategic passive and anyone making such decisions should be held responsible for any service outage or degradation.
- jiggawatts 5mo agoThis is certainly... an opinion. AWS's us-east-1 famously takes down either a bunch of companies with it, or causes global outages on the regular. AWS has a terrible, terrible user interface partly because it is partitioned by service and region on purpose to decrease the "blast radius" of a failure, which is a design decision made totally pointless by having a bunch of their most critical services in one region, which also happens to be their most flaky.
- lokar 5mo agoI don’t see how you could care (a lot) about both the UI and reliability.
- jiggawatts 5mo agoOne is caused by the other. Amazons engineers decided to split the interface in a “user hostile” manner with the stated purpose of increasing reliability… which didn’t materialise. The clunky UI did. Or maybe you can provide a better explanation for why users had to “hunt” through hundreds(!) of product-region combinations to find that last lingering service they were getting billed $0.01 a month for? This just doesn’t happen in GCP or Azure. You get a single pane of glass.