31–40 of 235 posts
Could it be that supporting multiple platforms open up more support tickets and adds more work to keep the software working on those new platforms? As someone who built apps for Windows, Linux, macOS, iOS and Android, it is not trivial to ensure your new features or updates work on all platforms, and you have to deal with deprecations.
Ollama is sketchy enough that I run it in a VM. Which is odd because it would probably take less effort to just run Llama.cpp directly, but VMs are pretty easy so just went that route. When I see people bring up the sketchiness most of the time the creator responds with the equivalent of shrugs , which imo increases the sketchiness.
Ollama is sketchy enough that I run it in a VM. Which is odd because it would probably take less effort to just run Llama.cpp directly, but VMs are pretty easy so just went that route. When I see people bring up the sketchiness most of the time the creator responds with the equivalent of shrugs , which imo increases the sketchiness.
Ollama needs competition. I’m not sure what drives the people that maintain it but some of their actions imply that there are ulterior motives at play that do not have the benefit of their users in mind. However such projects require a lot of time and effort and it’s not clear if this project can be forked and kept alive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For starters: - It doesn't have a website - It doesn't have a download page, you have to build it yourself
> - It doesn't have a download page, you have to build it yourself I'd wager that anyone capable enough to run a command line tool like Ollama should also be able to download prebuilt binaries from the llama.cpp releases page[1]. Also, prebuilt binaries are available on things like homebrew[2]. [1]: https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/releases [2]: https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/llama.cpp
Can someone explain what the point of ollama is? Every time I look at it, it seems like it's a worse llama.cpp that removes options to make things "easier".
My biggest gripe with Ollama is the badly named models, e.g. under deepseek-r1, it defaults to the distill models.
But defaulting to a 671b model is also evil.
This is going to sound like a troll, but it's an honest question: Why do people use Ollama over llama.cpp? llama.cpp has added a ton of features, is about as user-friendly as Ollama, and is higher-performance. Is there some key differentiator for Ollama that I'm missing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For starters: - It doesn't have a website - It doesn't have a download page, you have to build it yourself
> - It doesn't have a download page, you have to build it yourself I'd wager that anyone capable enough to run a command line tool like Ollama should also be able to download prebuilt binaries from the llama.cpp releases page[1]. Also, prebuilt binaries are available on things like homebrew[2]. [1]: https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/releases [2]: https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/llama.cpp
The same reason I use apt install instead of compiling from source. I can definitely do that, but I don't, because it's just a way to get things installed.