IBM, Google, IonQ, and Microsoft are all chasing the same goal but taking completely different roads to get there

[Brittle Ronan]

IBM is betting on superconducting qubits and a clear public roadmap, with its Starling system targeting fault tolerance by 2029 and a new facility already under construction. Google has the Willow chip and just opened early research access to it, while quietly building an internal neutral-atom programme on the side. IonQ uses trapped ions, a fundamentally different approach that tends to produce fewer but much higher quality qubits, and has been signing commercial contracts. Microsoft spent nearly two decades on topological qubits and finally has a chip called Majorana 1, though independent physicists are still debating whether it does what Microsoft claims. All four are real companies doing real work, but they are nowhere near the same point on the road.

[Distant Sienna]

IBM publishing a public roadmap and actually tracking it is underrated. Most of the industry runs on vibes and press releases

[Tel92]

The Microsoft situation is genuinely strange. Either Majorana 1 is a decade ahead of everyone else or it is mostly hype. Very little middle ground

[Faded Owen]

IonQ signing actual commercial contracts while the others are still in lab mode is worth paying attention to. Revenue is a reality check

[StuckOnDestiny]

Google hedging by starting a neutral-atom programme while running Willow tells you they are not fully confident superconducting is the endgame either