Alphabet Inc.\u2019s Google is months behind schedule on delivering Gemini 3.5 Pro, its most powerful flagship AI model, because the company has been taking time to try to improve its capabilities, particularly in coding, according to people familiar with the matter.<\/p>\n
The delay has been a source of frustration for Google engineers, AI researchers and managers, many of whom are concerned the company risks losing an edge in the market as rivals Anthropic and OpenAI produce models that exceed Gemini\u2019s capabilities, according to 10 current and former employees. Google has multiple layers of stakeholders involved in preparing models for release, working to weave AI across a vast product portfolio, including search, maps and YouTube, which can cause delays, said the people, who declined to be named discussing internal concerns.<\/p>\n
Both OpenAI and Meta Platforms Inc. recently released new models that further outpace Google\u2019s current offerings in AI for writing code. Late last month, Google updated the data being used to train Gemini in an attempt to improve these skills, but the results were disappointing, one of the people said. Shares slipped as much as 3.2% on Thursday.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re shipping quickly across a wide range of models while keeping them highly cost-effective for customers,\u201d a Google spokesperson said in a statement. Google was widely expected to release the 3.5 Pro at its May developer conference. Google has also been in talks with the U.S. government, which has been increasingly monitoring AI companies\u2019 most advanced models, about its capabilities, as well as the standards that should be applied to the industry for safety. \u201cWe\u2019re currently testing 3.5 Pro, an upgraded Flash model, and other models with partners, and we\u2019re productively engaged with the U.S. government on model testing and broader frameworks.\u201d<\/p>\n
Early this year, Anthropic faced whiplash from the U.S. after internal testing flagged dangerous cybersecurity capabilities in its latest models, forcing the startup to temporarily pull them. OpenAI has voluntarily limited and staggered the release of its newest AI model after facing national security concerns and significant pressure from the Trump administration.<\/p>\n
Google\u2019s popular products are a gateway to generative AI for everyday people, and can yield data that make their answers smarter. But encouraging leadership of every department to move in the same direction is like trying to boil an ocean, one ex-employee said. When mandates shift or efforts end up duplicated in multiple departments, it gets even more difficult to maintain a cohesive strategy, current and former employees said. It\u2019s also a challenge for any one offering to get the resources it would need to succeed, and to gain traction in the market, they said.<\/p>\n
After the launch of ChatGPT in late 2022 sparked concerns that Google\u2019s search engine would become obsolete, the company declared a \u201ccode red\u201d \u2014 a useful tactic for cutting through the layers of bureaucracy and internal competition that often slow Google\u2019s product efforts. But now, racing in AI is the normal state of the company, one employee said.<\/p>\n
Google co-founder Sergey Brin and others were advocating for Google to move faster to seize opportunities in AI coding, but their efforts were slowed by competing factions within the company, two former employees said. Cloud computing unit Google Cloud, research lab Google DeepMind and the team behind the Android operating system are all building AI coding tools for developers, with involvement from some consumer product teams, too, people familiar with the work said.<\/p>\n
Efforts to win at coding have also been up against some engineers at Google with a more purist stance, who believe that all important code should be human-written to adhere to Google standards, ex-employees said. Early in the rollout of the technology, employees also faced restrictions on using Gemini to write or analyze software over concerns that proprietary code could leak into the AI model\u2019s training data, they said. Those policies, which have since been relaxed, limited opportunities for engineers to experiment with AI development.<\/p>\n
Google said it announced at its most recent Cloud conference that 75% of code at the company is now generated by AI, meaning it\u2019s being reviewed and surviving to production \u2014 and meeting Google\u2019s standards. The company also said it streamlined some of its coding tools across products, mostly consolidating them under Google Antigravity, which provides the scaffolding for data, memory and safety protocols that the AI needs to interact with operating systems and applications.<\/p>\n
Google is taking steps to reduce internal confusion. Chief AI Architect Koray Kavukcuoglu is working with Google\u2019s main engineering team to unite the company\u2019s internal artificial intelligence coding tools. And earlier this year, the company formed a team within DeepMind to tackle AI coding, led by research engineer Sebastian Borgeaud, Bloomberg has reported. <\/p>\n
Engineers within Google are now expected to use AI to generate code. But when they try to use AI, they often hit capacity constraints due to competition for computing power within Google.<\/p>\n
AI researchers say that Gemini\u2019s strongest selling point is querying Google search data, while Anthropic and OpenAI have taken the lead on building the most powerful models. Google says it has other strengths in AI, like the ability to work with various types of input like images or videos, and progress in AI world models, which can mimic physical environments.<\/p>\n
Some researchers\u2019 frustration with Google\u2019s position in the AI race has contributed to a wave of departures to Anthropic and other top labs, according to former employees. <\/p>\n
Only some teams are allowed to use Anthropic\u2019s Claude. Access became restricted to teams doing cutting-edge research and other high-priority projects. <\/p>\n
While they wait for the 3.5 Pro version of Gemini, Google customers have had a mixed experience with Gemini 3.5 Flash. Rodrigo Davies, a product manager at design platform Figma, said the company recently added 3.5 Flash to its newly launched \u201cFigma agent,\u201d an AI assistant that helps designers generate and iterate on ideas. For Figma, the model hit a sweet spot of speed and quality.<\/p>\n
But Freddy Vega, chief executive officer and founder of Platzi, a Latin American education-technology platform, said 3.5 Flash occupies an awkward middle ground: It is more expensive than Google\u2019s previous 3.1 Flash model, yet slower, and it remains far less capable than premium offerings from competitors. He said the model often struggles with structured data.<\/p>\n
For tasks requiring a balance of speed and reasoning, his team has shifted away from Google to one of Anthropic\u2019s mid-tier models.<\/p>\n
Love and Alba write for Bloomberg. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Alphabet Inc.\u2019s Google is months behind schedule on delivering Gemini 3.5 Pro, its most powerful flagship AI model,…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":110029,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[24,5189,532,10987,32187,9981,2408,56659,132,46701,1430,56660,527,157,572,796],"class_list":["post-110028","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-google","tag-ai","tag-code","tag-company","tag-effort","tag-flash-model","tag-former-employee","tag-gemini","tag-gemini-delay","tag-google","tag-google-engineer","tag-google-gemini","tag-internal-concern","tag-model","tag-openai","tag-people","tag-team"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110028","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=110028"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110028\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/110029"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110028"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110028"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110028"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}