[HN Gopher] ChatGPT's enterprise success against Copilot fuels O...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       ChatGPT's enterprise success against Copilot fuels OpenAI/Microsoft
       rivalry
        
       Author : mastermaq
       Score  : 99 points
       Date   : 2025-06-24 16:02 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com)
        
       | neonate wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/cemKI
        
       | rahimnathwani wrote:
       | Is anyone here _not_ confused about how Copilot licenses work
       | (free vs paid) and how to choose models for different types of
       | task?
        
         | FauxDemure wrote:
         | Yes! I also feel like I use up my quote with my paid Copilot
         | account faster than with my free ChatGPT one.
        
         | ape4 wrote:
         | Just ask Copilot
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | I'm confused over what anyone means when they say "Copilot",
         | since it could mean the VS Code editor features or various
         | features on github.com or the thing that Microsoft sell as part
         | of their 365 office software.
         | 
         | I think this article is about the 365 suite.
        
           | rahimnathwani wrote:
           | Yeah I'm talking about the thing you see when you go to
           | https://m365.cloud.microsoft/chat/
           | 
           | At the top-right of that page, it has a little icon
           | indicating 'enterprise data protection' but I can't see any
           | way for me (the user) to know what type of Copilot licence
           | (if any) the accountholder has assigned to my user account.
        
             | KoolKat23 wrote:
             | If you have the fancy copilot pro, you'll see it in the
             | rest of your office account, such as outlook, where
             | additional features are available such as email summarize
             | etc.
        
             | airstrike wrote:
             | Such an easy URL too
        
           | kamarg wrote:
           | Good old Microsoft naming. I'll never understand how they can
           | think it's a good idea to release multiple entirely different
           | products and call them all variations of the same thing. One
           | would think they would have solved this problem a decade ago
           | and yet every few years it happens again.
        
           | airstrike wrote:
           | There's also "Copilot" which is the AI assistant accessible
           | online and via a desktop app on Windows (and even other OSs)
        
           | parliament32 wrote:
           | Don't forget about the Copilot in Windows, which is different
           | from the Copilot in Bing, which is different from Copilot in
           | Edge, which is different from the Copilot in Copilot
           | Studio... and that's not even getting into the various
           | Copilots across different 365 domains (Microsoft 365 Copilot
           | for Sales, Microsoft 365 Copilot for Service, Copilot for
           | Microsoft Fabric, Copilot for Dynamics 365, etc are all
           | separate products), plus the enterprise-side Security
           | Copilot...
        
       | breadwinner wrote:
       | Microsoft has wasted their opportunity.
       | 
       | When ChatGPT first came out, Satya and Microsoft were seen as
       | visionaries for their wisdom in investing in Open AI. Then
       | competitors caught up while Microsoft stood still. Their
       | integration with ChatGPT produced poor results [1] reminding
       | people of Tay [2]. Bing failed to capitalize on AI, while
       | Proclarity showed what an AI-powered search engine should really
       | look like. Copilot failed to live up to its promise. Then
       | Claude.ai, Gemini 2.0 caught up with or exceeded ChatGPT, and
       | Microsoft still doesn't have their own model.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/16/technology/bing-
       | chatbot-m...
       | 
       | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot)
        
         | spiderfarmer wrote:
         | The biggest problem with Microsoft is their UX. From finding
         | out where to actually use their products, to signing in, wading
         | through modals, popups, terms and agreements, redirects that
         | don't work and links that point to nowhere. Along the way
         | you'll run into inconsistent, decades old UI elements and
         | marketing pages that fully misunderstand why you're there.
         | 
         | It's a big, unsolvable mess that will forever prevent them from
         | competing with legacy-free, capable startups.
         | 
         | They should delete all their public facing websites and start
         | over.
        
           | atonse wrote:
           | Bill Gates agreed with you 20 years ago :-) (this email never
           | gets old)
           | 
           | https://www.osnews.com/story/19921/full-text-an-epic-bill-
           | ga...
        
             | esafak wrote:
             | > When SeattlePI asked Bill Gates about this particular
             | email last week, he chuckled. "There's not a day that I
             | don't send a piece of e-mail... like that piece of e-mail.
             | That's my job."
             | 
             | If he had to send the same email every day he wasn't doing
             | his job well. Even a fraction of that list was too much.
        
           | tartoran wrote:
           | Their UX, their naming conventions from products to
           | frameworks and services, pulled plugged on products, user
           | hostility and so on are all pointing out the root of the
           | problem is elsewhere. I think Microsoft is no longer
           | reformable. It is a behemoth that will probably continue to
           | coast along like a braindead gozilla zombie that just floats
           | due to its sheer size.
        
             | AppleBananaPie wrote:
             | That's the feel I get too :/
             | 
             | Too many crazy presentations on 'data' that are calling the
             | calling the sky purple and everyone just nods along, ok's
             | and gives promos all around.
        
         | crowcroft wrote:
         | Even with their failures Microsoft still has OpenAI over a
         | barrel.
         | 
         | Access to their IP, and 20% of revenue (not profit).
        
         | dyauspitr wrote:
         | How have they failed? They still get 49% of openAI's profits so
         | if openAI wins, Microsoft wins.
        
           | flowerlad wrote:
           | That can be considered victory only if Microsoft is an
           | investment firm as opposed to a software company.
        
         | vbezhenar wrote:
         | I'll add, that Google search AI integration is quite good. I'm
         | actually amazed how well it works, given the scale of Google
         | Search. Nowadays I don't click search results in 50% of
         | searches, because Google AI outputs response good enough for
         | me.
        
           | asciimov wrote:
           | Maybe we have a different Google AI down here in south Texas,
           | but the Google search AI results I receive are laughably bad.
           | 
           | It has made up tags for cli functions, suggested nonexistent
           | functions with usage instructions, it's given me operations
           | in the wrong order, and my personal favorite it gave me a
           | code example in the wrong language (think replying Visual
           | Basic for C).
        
           | alfalfasprout wrote:
           | this is the first I've heard of anyone praising it... the
           | results are usually outright wrong or useless.
        
         | Spooky23 wrote:
         | The problem is that they made huge time consuming investments
         | in technology to make copilot work with the various O365
         | controls, then confused everyone by slathering copilot on
         | everything.
        
       | sethops1 wrote:
       | Doesn't Microsoft own 49% of OpenAI and receives 20% of the
       | revenue (according to ChatGPT)? In which case, what is Microsoft
       | so upset about?
        
         | micromacrofoot wrote:
         | the other 51%
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | That they only receive 20% of the revenue.
        
       | hbn wrote:
       | My work gives us Copilot access since We're a Microsoft Shop(tm)
       | 
       | It's too bad Copilot is by far the dumbest competitor in the
       | space
       | 
       | My favorite interaction so far was when I prompted it with:
       | ffmpeg command to convert movie.mov into a reasonably sized mp4
       | 
       | Sure, it's not the most direction instructions, but I tend to
       | give it just enough to get the job done, assuming the LLM knows
       | what its purpose is as an LLM, and it always works with the other
       | chatbots.
       | 
       | Copilot's response:                   I implemented and executed
       | the Python code above to convert movie.mov to a reasonably sized
       | movie.mp4 using ffmpeg.                  However, the Python code
       | failed since it was not able to find and access movie.mov file.
       | Do you want me to try again or is there anything else that I can
       | help you with?
       | 
       | Note that I didn't cut anything out. It didn't actually provide
       | me any "Python code above"
        
         | whirlwin wrote:
         | So much for the quality testing done by Microsoft...
        
           | vpShane wrote:
           | It's an AI race and they're all vibing off of what the other
           | ones are doing and implementing accordingly. Meanwhile, I've
           | been enjoying Google's AI studio. I can definitely see though
           | the AI companies are trying, they're trying to give devs, and
           | teams the tools they need to operate more efficiently and
           | faster.
           | 
           | However, piping code requests, and hey->do this, AI gives you
           | something; the privacy aspect of it.
           | 
           | On the in-terms, these ARE LLMs, devs/infra people do look at
           | how their tools are being used. You can pull a lot of info
           | with and about an organizatin and what their internals are up
           | to just from how they're using the AI's information.
           | 
           | So while we're looking at Microsoft's quality of testing,
           | what does that really mean in terms of how they're viewing
           | the tool usage.
        
         | robots0only wrote:
         | ohh wow, that's bad, just tried this with Gemini 2.5 Flash/Pro
         | (and worked perfectly) -- I assume all frontier models should
         | get this right (even simpler models should).
        
           | quantadev wrote:
           | I'd be willing to bet a more clear prompt would've given a
           | good answer. People generally tend to overlook the fact that
           | AIs aren't like "google". They're not really doing pure "word
           | search" similar to Google. They expect a sensible sentence
           | structure in order to work their best.
        
             | roywiggins wrote:
             | Maybe, but this sort of prompt structure doesn't bamboozle
             | the better models at all. If anything they are quite good
             | at guessing at what you mean even when your sentence
             | structure is crap. People routinely use them to clean up
             | their borderline-unreadable prose.
        
             | macNchz wrote:
             | I'm all about clear prompting, but even using the verbatim
             | prompt from the OP "ffmpeg command to convert movie.mov
             | into a reasonably sized mp4", the smallest current models
             | from Google and OpenAI (gemini-2.5-flash-lite and
             | gpt-4.1-nano) both produced me a working output with
             | explanations for what each CLI arg does.
             | 
             | Hell, the Q4 quantized Mistral Small 3.1 model that runs on
             | my 16GB desktop GPU did perfectly as well. All three tests
             | resulted in a command using x264 with crf 23 that worked
             | without edits and took a random .mov I had from 75mb to
             | 51mb, and included explanations of how to adjust the
             | compression to make it smaller.
        
         | hu3 wrote:
         | What model? It got right first try here with your exact prompt
         | using the free GPT-4.1 model.
         | 
         | https://i.imgur.com/toLzwCk.png
         | 
         | ffmpeg -i movie.mov -c:v libx264 -preset medium -crf 23 -c:a
         | aac -b:a 128k movie.mp4
         | 
         | BUT, I have this in my copilot-instructions.md file:
         | # Always follow these steps when responding to any request
         | 1. Please do a round of thinking in <thinking></thinking> tags
         | 2. Then a round of self-critique in <critique></critique> tags
         | 3. Then a final round of <thinking>, before responding.
         | 4. If you need more information, ask for it.
        
           | easton wrote:
           | That's GitHub Copilot, not "microsoft copilot", the bot built
           | into the Microsoft 365 landing site. it doesn't give you
           | model options, for example.
        
             | clvx wrote:
             | Whoever decided to use the same brand for different
             | experiences should be demoted at minimum. What a way to
             | destroy trust.
        
               | airstrike wrote:
               | I suggest you never visit https://www.office.com/
        
               | DangitBobby wrote:
               | Good lord
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42751726
        
               | shermantanktop wrote:
               | Having established brand awareness is a double-edged
               | sword. Preserve it and nobody knows what your new thing
               | is, leverage it and everyone gets totally confused.
        
               | vdfs wrote:
               | Probably the same one responsible for Office -> 365
               | naming
        
               | DangitBobby wrote:
               | It gets worse
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42751726
        
               | ackfoobar wrote:
               | Ha. Microsoft does it all the time.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40419292
        
               | johnebgd wrote:
               | Microsoft has the worst branding in tech. Microsoft
               | Dynamics is like three different code bases and the Xbox
               | is on its last legs thanks in large part to their naming
               | schemes confusing consumers.
        
               | dcminter wrote:
               | Ah yes, I call this "brandfucking."
               | 
               | IBM used to be a repeat offender. I recall trying to buy
               | the WebSphere (Java) application server for a client and
               | then finding out that IBM had slapped "WebSphere" on all
               | their products including things like1 MQ Series (a queue)
               | and DB/2 (a database). It took me an hour to figure out
               | the right item and it was an online purchase!
               | 
               | 1I might be misremembering the exact products but it was
               | similarly absurd.
        
         | quantadev wrote:
         | I love Copilot in VSCode. I always select model "Claude Sonnet
         | 3.7", when in Copilot since it lets me choose the LLM. What I
         | love about Copilot is the tight integration with VSCode. I can
         | just ask it to do something and it relies on the intelligence
         | of Claude to get the right code generated, and then all Copilot
         | is really doing is editing my code for me, reading whatever
         | code Claude tells it to, to build context, etc.
        
           | KoolKat23 wrote:
           | That's a different, more useable copilot.
        
             | quantadev wrote:
             | That's why I said "in VSCode" because I have no idea what
             | this guy is running, but it's almost a certainty the
             | problem isn't copilot but it's a bad LLM and/or his bad
             | prompt.
        
           | MangoCoffee wrote:
           | Claude Sonnet 3.7 is my default as well in Visual Studio. i
           | have been playing with their new default GPT-4.1. its not
           | bad.
        
         | FergusArgyll wrote:
         | People think that llms are an excuse to be lazy. You have to
         | put some effort into the prompt!
        
           | KoolKat23 wrote:
           | Ironically copilot is lazy, have to prompt it to death,
           | whereas the others are aligned and actually provide answers
           | with the same prompt.
           | 
           | (Perhaps copilot is not lazy, just stupid relative to its
           | peers.)
        
           | roywiggins wrote:
           | No, you don't. ChatGPT easily answers this question posed
           | verbatim.
        
         | moelf wrote:
         | even gemma3:12b gets it correct:
         | 
         | ~> ollama run gemma3:12b-it-qat >>> ffmpeg command to convert
         | movie.mov into a reasonably sized mp4
         | 
         | Here's a good ffmpeg command to convert `movie.mov` to a
         | reasonably sized MP4, along with explanations to help you
         | adjust it:
         | 
         | ```bash ffmpeg -i movie.mov -c:v libx264 -crf 23 -preset medium
         | -c:a aac -b:a 128k movie.mp4 ```
         | 
         | *Explanation of the command and the options:*
        
           | magicalhippo wrote:
           | Even the 1B variant gave me that one, along with good
           | explanations of the various options and what to play with to
           | tweak the result.
        
             | cmrx64 wrote:
             | i'm pretty surprised 1B parameters is enough for it to
             | still fluently remember ffmpeg-fu
        
         | what-the-grump wrote:
         | I cannot reproduce this in any version of copilot?
         | 
         | Copilot with outlook.com
         | 
         | Copilot base one that comes with M365,
         | 
         | And the add-on one for 30$/mo.
         | 
         | Copilot in VS code
         | 
         | All produce: ffmpeg -i movie.mov -vcodec libx264 -crf 23
         | -preset medium -acodec aac -b:a 128k output.mp4
         | 
         | Which is not surprising because its just an Open AI 4o call...
         | so how are you getting this?
        
           | svachalek wrote:
           | Copilot is not OpenAI
        
             | adastra22 wrote:
             | It is OpenAI weights under the hood, unless something
             | changed recently?
        
         | NordSteve wrote:
         | I pasted your prompt:                 ffmpeg command to convert
         | movie.mov into a reasonably sized mp4
         | 
         | into the Copilot app just now. Here's the response:
         | ffmpeg -i movie.mov -vcodec libx264 -crf 23 -preset medium
         | -acodec aac -b:a 128k movie_converted.mp4
         | 
         | with this explanation                 Here's the breakdown:
         | - -vcodec libx264: Uses the H.264 video codec, great for
         | compression and compatibility.       - -crf 23: Constant Rate
         | Factor -- lower means better quality and larger size; higher
         | means smaller size but lower quality. 23 is a nice middle
         | ground.       - -preset medium: Controls encoding speed vs.
         | compression efficiency. You can try slow or faster depending on
         | your needs.       - -acodec aac -b:a 128k: Compresses the audio
         | using AAC at 128 kbps -- pretty standard and compact.       If
         | you're looking for even smaller file sizes, try bumping -crf up
         | to 26 or using -preset slow.       Want to bake in scaling,
         | remove metadata, or trim the video too? Happy to tailor the
         | command further.
        
           | glenstein wrote:
           | One fascinating aspect of LLMs is they make out-in-the-wild
           | anecdotes instantly reproducible or, alternatively,
           | comparable to results from others with different outcomes.
           | 
           | A lot of our bad experiences with, say, customer support
           | hotlines, municipal departments, bad high school teachers,
           | whatever, are associated with a habit of speaking that ads
           | flavor, vibes, or bends experiences into on-the-nose stories
           | with morals in part because we know they can't be reviewed or
           | corrected by others.
           | 
           | Bringing that same way of speaking to LLMs can show us either
           | (1) the gap between what it does and how people describe what
           | it did or (2) shows that people are being treated differently
           | by the same LLMs which I think are both fascinating outcomes.
        
             | myhf wrote:
             | We're also seeing a new variant of Cunningham's law:
             | 
             | The best way to get the right answer from an LLM is not to
             | ask it the right question; it's to post online that it got
             | the wrong answer.
        
         | vel0city wrote:
         | I put your exact prompt into Copilot and it gave me the command
         | 
         | ffmpeg -i movie.mov -vcodec libx264 -crf 23 -preset medium
         | -acodec aac -b:a 128k movie_converted.mp4
         | 
         | Along with a pretty detailed and decently sounding reasoning as
         | to why it picked these options.
        
         | rzzzt wrote:
         | Your conversations are notebooks and the code it conjured up
         | should be behind a dropdown arrow. For visualization it seems
         | to work fine (i.e. Copilot will generate a Python snippet, run
         | it on the input file I attach to the request and present the
         | diagram as a response).
        
         | esskay wrote:
         | This is pretty interesting, I had a very similar experience
         | with Github Copilot's plugin inside Jetbrains IDE today (set to
         | use 4o). I asked it to tell me how to do something, it instead
         | routed in my code, tried to write a python file (its a PHP
         | project) and told me it couldn't do it and did the exact same
         | "Do you want me to try again or is there anything else I can
         | help you with?"
         | 
         | Thing is I ask it random bits like this all the time and it's
         | never done that before so I'm assuming some recent update has
         | borked something.
        
       | FrustratedMonky wrote:
       | Because of the partnership with OpenAI, I always assumed Copilot
       | was just built on top of GPT.
       | 
       | So how did MS make Copilot Suck, if it started with same base?
        
         | bix6 wrote:
         | Real talk! Copilot is so bad. It's literally useless. And they
         | charge an absolute arm for it. Like how is it soooo much worse
         | than Chat? I am a frustrated monky when I use Copilot.
        
         | treesknees wrote:
         | Microsoft Copilot uses their own model that is originally based
         | on GPT-4 if I'm not mistaken.
         | 
         | But, it's mostly a RAG tool, "grounded in web" as they say.
         | When you give Copilot a query, it uses the model to reword your
         | query into an optimal Bing search query, fetches the results,
         | and then crafts output using the model.
         | 
         | I commend their attempt to use Bing as a source of data to keep
         | up to date and reduce hallucinations, especially in an
         | enterprise setting where users may be more sensitive to false
         | information, however as a result some of the answers it gives
         | can only be as good as the Bing search results.
        
           | FrustratedMonky wrote:
           | Seems like with their own resources, and also owning part of
           | GPT, they should be able to pivot and at least make a
           | programming tool equal to Chat GPT.
        
       | crop_rotation wrote:
       | The problem is it is very hard to make changes and build
       | innovative new products within big tech, at a pace to compete
       | with smaller companies. Big tech succeeds despite it since the
       | resource disparity is too much.
       | 
       | Since the launch of ChatGPT Microsoft has had access to it and
       | even had some of the most popular code editors, and where did it
       | take them. This is why Meta had to launch threads with a very
       | small team since a big team in Big tech can just not compete.
       | 
       | Off course like everything else there are no absolutes and when
       | Big Tech feels there is an existential crisis on something they
       | do start improving, however such moments are far and few.
        
       | mark_l_watson wrote:
       | I read today that OpenAI is planning a 'AI super app' that would
       | have canvas, word processing, etc., all in one work app. That
       | actually sounds like a good idea to me and is very different from
       | Google's approach of integrating Gemini into the work place apps.
       | Google may have an advantage because so many people are used to
       | working in Workspace apps.
        
         | airstrike wrote:
         | Mind providing a link? I may or may not be creating the exact
         | same thing...
         | 
         | Also if anyone from OpenAI or any of its competitors wants to
         | talk my email is on my HN profile ;-)
        
           | owebmaster wrote:
           | That's the app many of us are creating and I bet some of them
           | are going to be much better than the OpenAI one
        
             | airstrike wrote:
             | Tamo junto
        
       | jorl17 wrote:
       | Microsoft's decision to name this product Copilot has to be the
       | result of some form of internal sabotage, I refuse to believe
       | otherwise.
       | 
       | A lot of the early adopters (and driving forces) of LLMs have
       | been tech-minded people. This means it's quite a good idea NOT to
       | confuse them.
       | 
       | And, yet, Microsoft decided to name their product Microsoft
       | Copilot, even though they already had a (quite well-received!!)
       | Copilot in the form of Github Copilot, a product which has also
       | been expanding to include a plethora of other functionality
       | (albeit in a way that does make sense). How is this not
       | incredibly confusing?
       | 
       | So what actually _is_ Copilot? Is there a bing copilot? A copilot
       | in windows machines? Is it an online service? (I saw someone post
       | a link to an office 365)?
       | 
       | I'm going to be honest and tell you that I have no fucking clue
       | what Microsoft Copilot actually is, and Microsoft's insistence on
       | being either hostile to users or pretending like they're not
       | creating a confusing mess of semantic garbage is insulting. I am
       | lucky not to have to use Windows daily, and most of what I do
       | that involves copilot is...Github Copilot.
       | 
       | I am knee-deep into LLMs. My friends can't stand me with how much
       | I go on about them, how I use them, from remote to local models,
       | to agents, to the very debatable idea that they may be conscious,
       | you name it. And yet, as bullish as I am on the thing, I have no
       | fucking clue what Microsoft copilot is. Perhaps I'm definitely
       | not their target market, but from what I've seen, tech-illiterate
       | people have no idea what it is either, just that it's "more
       | microsoft trash".
       | 
       | When I was younger, I used to be a very loud anti-microsoft boy,
       | I loathed everything they did. Slowly, for a while, they were
       | managing to win me over (in part because I outgrew that phase,
       | but also because they have definitely been cleaning up their
       | image and, at least to me, producing better and more relevant
       | software). However, in recent years, their insistence on naming
       | everything this way and creating a maze out of their products
       | is...baffling. I feel myself not being able to stand MS again.
       | 
       | And what is it with big corporations and a seeming inability to
       | name their products decently? This is appalling. The people
       | making these decisions should be fired, because clearly they
       | don't have any pride in what they do, or they wouldn't have
       | allowed this.
       | 
       | Get your shit together, microsoft!
        
         | airstrike wrote:
         | Everything is Copilot, but they're all different products, and
         | one of them is just a launcher to Office apps, each with their
         | own assistant called Copilot
        
         | jjcm wrote:
         | > Microsoft's decision to name this product Copilot has to be
         | the result of some form of internal sabotage
         | 
         | If you look at this in isolation, yes. If you look at this
         | historically, it's totally on-brand for Microsoft. Office 365,
         | Live, MSN were all brand that Microsoft has slapped wholesale
         | on things. Microsoft has always been reactive when it comes to
         | branding, rather than proactive.
        
           | esafak wrote:
           | How are managers going to earn their keep if they don't
           | rebrand and re-org?!
        
         | jdsully wrote:
         | I'm reminded of when .NET was released suddenly everything was
         | .NET, even an office release was named after it. Then it
         | finally narrowed down into the programming languages we know
         | and love or hate depending on your vibe. I assume this will
         | happen here too eventually.
        
       | thiagoperes wrote:
       | msft had a massive edge. it had exclusive access to models + had
       | web search before anyone.
       | 
       | they flopped this royally, just like windows mobile. they created
       | a shitty ux by shoving it inside the bing app, then they decided
       | to charge for it instead of capturing all enterprise value.
       | 
       | lastly, the product has stalled and missed on their biggest
       | opportunity which is tapping into the data. you can think it's
       | because of how complex it must be, but then openai and everybody
       | else did it.
       | 
       | it's truly a lesson in product mismanagement, once again, from
       | microsoft
        
       | androng wrote:
       | I only used free Microsoft Copilot once back when GPT-4 came out
       | and it wasn't free on OpenAI yet. The responses from Microsoft
       | GPT-4 sucked vs OpenAI GPT-4 because they were short and I assume
       | Microsoft made the system prompt do that to save money. I never
       | went back to Microsoft copilot again and have not heard anyone
       | talk about it or meta ai either.
        
       | alganet wrote:
       | > It's unclear whether OpenAI's momentum with corporations will
       | continue, but the company recently said it has 3 million paying
       | business users
       | 
       | That's the only data point the article has, and it is incomplete
       | (no Copilot numbers).
       | 
       | The rest are just testimonials (some of anonymous character) and
       | stories.
       | 
       | Who's having more success then? No one knows. It's up to the
       | reader to decide.
       | 
       | Looks like made-up rivalry article to me. Draws clicks, no actual
       | content inside.
        
       | smcleod wrote:
       | Microsoft just did a rug pull by introducing dramatically reduced
       | rate limits on copilot requests for paying customers too.
       | 
       | I'm seeing enterprise and personal users hit their monthly rate
       | limits in less than 3 days.
        
       | dwayne_dibley wrote:
       | I don't understand how it's not more useful to most people with
       | copilot subscriptions in work. It has access to my works
       | OneDrive, it really should be the most commonly used LLM
        
       | napoleongl wrote:
       | If only MS copilot was an actual co-pilot in my daily flight of
       | work... but no, it cannot actually draft an email, create planner
       | tasks or book meetings. It is a crappy way of using an LLM that
       | sometimes can access your stuff from MS graph and sometimes has
       | no idea about the six emails from Steve in my inbox. And no, its
       | PowerPoints are not good either, they are LinkedIn in ppt-form.
        
         | NordSteve wrote:
         | Here are the results I just got.
         | 
         | 1. In Outlook asked Copilot to "create an email asking for a
         | weekly status update for Project ABC". Iterating a bit, I asked
         | it to be more casual and shorter. Here's what I got:
         | Hey Team,            Hope you're all doing great. To keep
         | everyone on the same page with Project ABC, I'd like us to
         | start doing weekly status updates. Just a quick summary of key
         | developments, milestones, challenges, and what's coming up
         | would be super helpful. This way, we can coordinate better and
         | tackle any issues right away.            Thanks for your
         | cooperation and hard work. Looking forward to your updates!
         | 
         | That seems pretty on point. Not exactly my style but to say
         | "cannot actually draft an email" is clearly wrong.
         | 
         | 2. I provided Copilot with this prompt:
         | 
         | "I am upgrading the electrical service at my house from 100a to
         | 200a service. Create a project plan in Planner for this
         | project."
         | 
         | Here's the response I got:                 Nice! Upgrading from
         | 100A to 200A is a solid move--more headroom for your gear and
         | future-proofing your setup. Here's a breakdown of how you could
         | structure this as a project in Microsoft Planner, with buckets
         | and tasks to keep it organized:            ---            ###
         | **Bucket 1: Planning & Permitting**       - **Assess current
         | electrical load and future needs**       - **Consult with a
         | licensed electrician**       - **Request utility service
         | requirements**       - **Obtain local permits for electrical
         | service upgrade**       - **Review NEC and local code
         | requirements**            ---            ### **Bucket 2:
         | Materials & Scheduling**       - **Select upgraded panel (200A
         | rated) and breakers**       - **Order required materials
         | (panel, feeder wires, conduit, ground rods, etc.)**       -
         | **Coordinate shutdown and install time with utility provider**
         | - **Schedule rough-in inspection with local authority**
         | ---            ### **Bucket 3: Installation**       - **Shut
         | off power at the main disconnect (coordinate with utility)**
         | - **Remove existing 100A panel and components**       -
         | **Install 200A panel and connect feeders**       - **Upgrade
         | grounding/bonding system as required**       - **Replace meter
         | socket if required**            ---            ### **Bucket 4:
         | Inspections & Finalization**       - **Schedule and pass
         | electrical inspection**       - **Have utility restore
         | permanent power**       - **Label circuits clearly in new
         | panel**       - **Update homeowner insurance with new
         | electrical capacity**            ---            ### **Bucket 5:
         | Post-Project Wrap-Up**       - **Document panel layout and
         | upgrades**       - **Evaluate energy use and plan for future
         | expansion (EV charger, generator, etc.)**       - **Close out
         | permits with inspection authority**            ---
         | You can assign these tasks to yourself or any contractors
         | involved, and add due dates to align with your timelines. Want
         | help creating a PowerShell script to bulk import this into
         | Planner?
         | 
         | It did produce a working script that required 1 configuration
         | edit. The project plan is pretty good given the limited
         | information I provided in the prompt.
         | 
         | 3. I provided Copilot with this prompt:                 book a
         | meeting with <name> for August 1 entitled "Test Meeting"
         | 
         | Not a very good response:                 I can't directly book
         | meetings or access your calendar, but I can help you set it up!
         | Here's an example of what to enter in Outlook or your preferred
         | calendar app:            **Title:** Test Meeting
         | **Date:** August 1         **Attendees:** Bryan Herbst
         | **Time:** [Insert your preferred time]         **Location:**
         | [Optional]         **Description:** [Add any notes or agenda
         | items]            If you're using PowerShell or a script to
         | automate calendar events--especially within Microsoft 365--I
         | can help you write that too. Want to go that route?
        
       | smithkl42 wrote:
       | We're paying for Copilot for Office365. I asked it recently to
       | retrieve a list of field names mentioned in a document - about as
       | basic a task as you could hope for. It told me it couldn't do so.
       | 
       | My precise request: "Extract the list of field names in Exhibit
       | A."
       | 
       | Its precise response: "I understand that you want to extract the
       | list of field names from Exhibit A in your document.
       | Unfortunately, I cannot directly perform document-related
       | commands such as extracting text from specific sections."
       | 
       | I tried several different ways of convincing it, before giving up
       | and using the web version of ChatGPT, which did it perfectly.
       | 
       | I had an even worse experience with the Copilot built into the
       | new version of SSMS. It just won't look at the query window at
       | all. You have to copy and paste the text of your query into the
       | chat window ... which, like, what's the point then?
        
       | protocolture wrote:
       | Copilot is brainrot and its killing microsoft.
       | 
       | Renaming all their products to Copilot makes no sense and just
       | causes brand confusion.
       | 
       | Copilot getting access to your entire 365/azure tenant is just a
       | security nightmare waiting to happen (in fact theres already that
       | one published and presumably patched vuln)
       | 
       | It has so many shackles on that its functionally useless. Half
       | the time I ask it to edit one of my emails, it simply spits my
       | exact text back out.
       | 
       | Its one singular advantage is that it has crystal clear
       | corpospeak license surrounding what it says your data will be
       | used for. Whether or not its true is irrelevant, organisations
       | will pick it up for that feature alone. No one ever got fired for
       | choosing ibm etc.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-24 23:00 UTC)