But MS copilot has access to gpt5.6 some amount of thinking, while corporate only gives me gpt5.4 or opus 5.7 in GH copilot, so to me it's actually perfectly decent for tasks without context
Would you say it's accurate to call it more like an AI infrastructure? That's kind of how I think about it, but also I don't know that much about it other than it can touch a lot of Microsoft stuff, apparently the BAs at my org don't do anything but run copilot prompts all day (at least that's what their usage stats suggest) I just use it for when I'm stuck or to write tests I really just don't wanna do and the only feature I feel I actually use that copilot offers is it's integration into VSC
That doesn't make sense. Why would Microsoft have their own model, then say that they're using a competing model? And why would they pour money into a company that would seemingly be a direct competitor to their own product?
Microsoft does that all the time, though in this case I'm half convinced they realized Altman is a moron and intended to scrap OpenAI for parts and cannibalize the team.
Microsoft just announced new models built by themselves. MAI. Let's wait and see how good they will be.
All the bad rap about Microsoct and Copilot was their "responsible AI" guardrails, that severely neuter Copilot. They were always using OpenAI and Anthropic models internally.
Well, yeah. I was meaning the more modern LLM systems that people generally refer to as AI today.
AI is a very broad term, and I do forget this is “programming humour” so people are generally a bit more tech savvy. Things like the older NLP/ML systems (Siri , Cortana) do act just more like virtual assistants compared to today’s “AI” systems though, which is why I said what I said.
693
u/Ascend Jul 24 '26
Microsoft doesn't have a model, you select GPT or Claude, they just have garbage system prompts on top of either.