This seems like AI washing to me. If the company was already doing well, the AI investments should allow it to grow faster and therefore still be able to give employees bonuses. This announcement implies they view this as a zero-sum investment. Well-run businesses tend not to think this way.
Very cool, congrats! I'm curious how you were able to achieve this given Apple's many undocumented APIs. Does it use private Neural Engine APIs or fully public Metal APIs?
Either way, this is a tremendous achievement and it's extremely relevant in the OpenClaw world where I might not want to have sensitive information leave my computer.
One major point I haven’t seen mentioned is maintenance.
Nvidia GPUs, particularly H100s, have a failure rate orders of magnitudes higher than traditional CPU-only hardware. I myself have accidentally melted an H100 during a large-scale training run.
While it’s trivial to replace a broken GPU in the ground, it seems to be infeasible in space during the life of the satellite. Getting a human or robot “fixer” spacecraft to it would likely cost more than the $30K GPU itself.
Greptile is a great product and I hope you succeed.
However, I disagree that independence is a competitive advantage. If it’s true that having a “firewall” between the coding agent and review agent leads to better code, I don’t see why a company like Cursor can’t create full independence between their coding and review products but still bundle them together for distribution.
Furthermore, there might well be benefits to not being fully independent. Imagine if an external auditor was brought in to review every decision made inside your company. There would likely be many things they simply don’t understand. Many decisions in code might seem irrational to an external standalone entity but make sense in the broader context of the organization’s goals. In this sense, I’m concerned that fully independent code review might miss the forest for the trees relative to a bundled product.
Again, I’m rooting for you guys. But I think this is food for thought.
I hear you, but why not use something like Google AI Mode or AI Overviews for that? That's pretty hard to beat for simple questions in terms of speed, especially for one-liners.
A hypothesis here is that well-crafted UI helps you understand/see options for what you don't yet know.
For example, here's an example for a "day trip plan in Bristol" that contains a canonical example (directly based on the query), but also a customization widget that presents some options that you might not have already thought about if you were just doing a text-based followup.
hey, sorry to hear that. web search is on by default, but we had some teething issues with it in the last hour. it should be fully fixed now. can you send some links that failed?
Thanks for the feedback, and I agree that it is very much early days for this product category. To be clear, our goal is to make the software specific for an audience: you. What's exciting, though, is that models are rapidly improving at building on-demand software and this will directly benefit Phind. There are still many edge cases, but I think it will get better quickly.
I agree that this answer was a bit wacky. Phind Fast is the fast and free model. Selecting Phind Large, GPT-5.1, and Claude models would be better for a modeling task like this.