OpenAI launched ChatGPT Atlas this week, promising an AI-powered browsing experience that could reshape how we navigate the web. But early hands-on testing reveals a fundamental question: are AI browsers solving problems that actually exist? TechCrunch's reporters who tested the browser describe it as offering "slight efficiency gains at best" while raising concerns about security risks and whether normal users would actually want to watch an AI agent slowly click around websites.
OpenAI's ChatGPT Atlas browser launch this week sparked a crucial debate among tech insiders: who exactly are AI browsers for? The question isn't just academic - it cuts to the heart of whether the industry's latest obsession with "agentic" web experiences addresses real user needs or simply showcases impressive but impractical technology.
TechCrunch reporters who've actually tested Atlas and competing AI browsers like Comet paint a sobering picture. "The most generous estimation of them is, it's a slight efficiency gain," Max Zeff explained during the latest Equity podcast episode. "Most of the time you're slowly watching it click around on a website, doing some task that I would probably never do in the real world."
That disconnect between demo magic and daily utility reveals a familiar pattern in tech waves. Companies build sophisticated solutions for problems that may not actually exist at scale. The classic example Zeff mentioned - having an AI agent look up a recipe and automatically add ingredients to Instacart - sounds impressive in product demos but doesn't reflect how most people actually shop or cook.
The browser wars have historically been brutal for challengers. Sean O'Kane noted that "other companies try to compete in the browser space and they always lose because it's just impossible to make money on a browser as a product." Previous attempts to dethrone Chrome and Safari failed precisely because browsers don't generate direct revenue - they're loss leaders that support larger business models.
But OpenAI enters this battlefield with a significant advantage: virtually unlimited funding. Following its recent $6.6 billion funding round at a $157 billion valuation, the company can afford to operate Atlas as a long-term strategic play rather than an immediate profit center. "OpenAI doesn't need to make money on this thing in the next year or two," O'Kane observed.
The deeper concern extends beyond individual browser success to the future of web interaction itself. If AI browsers gain traction, websites might become less important as more browsing gets mediated through AI interfaces and chatbots. This "agentic web" vision could fundamentally alter how information flows online, potentially concentrating control with AI companies rather than maintaining the open web's distributed nature.
