OpenAI entered the latest AI-agent skirmish at its DevDay conference in San Francisco, unveiling Dots as a colorful, customizable assistant powered by GPT-6 Astra. Chief executive Sam Altman called it a “real-deal AI” agent, inspired by the agents “that we all watched in movies growing up.”¹

The timing was plainly competitive. Meta’s Muse platform had already attracted attention with cute avatars, a free dedicated virtual machine and frictionless access for Meta account holders. OpenAI showed Dots doing more than answering prompts: it can operate software and, in demonstrations, build virtual-world-like environments. Yet the most immediate difference was less glamorous: price. Dots is initially limited to Enterprise and Business Premium customers and paid ChatGPT subscribers, while Muse remains free.¹

Early hands-on testing suggests that divide reflects two sharply different product instincts. Dots can chat in one window while carrying out work in another virtual machine, with access to applications including Blender and GIMP. Users can also connect it to their own computer through the desktop ChatGPT app or call it to talk through a task. But rather than a casual personal shopper, it feels like “business software that can use other software” — essentially a coworker that can also order dinner.²

Altman has framed the product’s appeal more personally. “Dot is my favorite OpenAI product so far,” he wrote, saying it improves as it learns his workflow and style and takes on the tasks that become a “gravity well of dread.”Sam Altman (sama)³

That learning is also OpenAI’s potential lock-in play. A user may spread occasional queries across several chatbots, but handing an agent personal data, software access and recurring responsibilities is a much bigger commitment. Still, the early restriction could hobble that strategy: most of ChatGPT’s 1.2 billion users cannot yet try Dots, and some users remain wary of AI atrophy, data exposure and becoming dependent on a service whose cost can rise.⁴

Dots may be OpenAI’s bid to make the agent indispensable. Meta’s counterargument is simpler: make the first relationship free.