Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 241 posts

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#71

Post by rcleveng »

plasma_beam wrote: post #60
hx8 wrote: post #54

I really dislike these AI middleman plans. The value-add that Microsoft brings to Github Copilot is near zero compared to directly buying from Anthropic or OpenAI, where 99% of the value is being delivered from. I don't understand why anyone would want to deal with Microsoft as a vendor if they don't have to. The short period of discounted usage was always the obvious rug pull.

Because if you’re a vscode user up until a couple days ago you could hammer Opus 4.6 all day every day and pay nowhere close to the Claude Max plan. Many people exploited this and the subsidy is closing.

Just use claude code directly with a pro plan instead of copilot for roughly the same cost.

On wait, nevermind.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47855565

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#72

Post by selcuka »

rcleveng wrote: post #71
plasma_beam wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if you’re a vscode user up until a couple days ago you could hammer Opus 4.6 all day every day and pay nowhere close to the Claude Max plan. Many people exploited this and the subsidy is closing.

Just use claude code directly with a pro plan instead of copilot for roughly the same cost. On wait, nevermind. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47855565

> Just use claude code directly with a pro plan

Usage limits are/were higher in Copilot. They also charge per prompt, not per token.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#73

Post by selcuka »

timr wrote: post #70
alexaholic wrote: post #28

I have a GitHub Pro subscription, renewed for the 2nd year, and I just found out I can no longer use Opus with it. Opus was one of the reasons I had a subscription in the first place. Opus 4.6 had a 3x multiplier in Pro. Now the new Opus 4.7 model has 7.5x in Pro+, which offers 5x more requests, but costs 4x more than Pro. So now Opus is essentially 2x the price it used to be. It’s likely that Sonnet 4.7 will be the…

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

> Most of the time, Haiku is fine.

Haiku is most definitely not fine for the code bases that I work on. Sonnet is probably fine for most daily tasks, but Opus is still needed to find that pesky bug you've been chasing, or to thoroughly review your PR.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#74

Post by to11mtm »

davepeck wrote: post #8

This thread is pretty quiet for what strikes me as a substantial set of changes with, presumably, more substantial changes still to come for anyone not grandfathered into a Pro plan. I get the impression that the intersection of HN posters and Copilot users is quite small in practice; that Claude Code and Codex suck up all the oxygen in this room. But it seems plausible we’ll see similar “true costs greatly exceed ou…

....

Speaking as someone where he only 'real' option we have at work is Copilot Plugin, but I also use Copilot Plugin at home....

This is a shitty shitty shitty move.

As a personal user, I can now only use Opus 4.7 at a 7.5x 'Introductory' multiplier if I upgrade to pro+, but at work I can still apparently do Opus 4.6 at a 3x Multiplier on my work 'enterprise' account.

Honestly it strikes me as though someone at Github Copilot took Palantir's manifesto to heart; Screw the individual, consolidate power to companies on every level.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#75

Post by ihsw »

plasma_beam wrote: post #60
hx8 wrote: post #54

I really dislike these AI middleman plans. The value-add that Microsoft brings to Github Copilot is near zero compared to directly buying from Anthropic or OpenAI, where 99% of the value is being delivered from. I don't understand why anyone would want to deal with Microsoft as a vendor if they don't have to. The short period of discounted usage was always the obvious rug pull.

Because if you’re a vscode user up until a couple days ago you could hammer Opus 4.6 all day every day and pay nowhere close to the Claude Max plan. Many people exploited this and the subsidy is closing.

Opus 4.6 is no longer available and Opus 4.7 chews through monthly limits with reckless abandon. The value-add of GH Copilot is basically gone (at least for individuals on the Pro or Pro+ plans.)

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#77

Post by rcleveng »

selcuka wrote: post #72
rcleveng wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just use claude code directly with a pro plan instead of copilot for roughly the same cost. On wait, nevermind. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47855565

> Just use claude code directly with a pro plan Usage limits are/were higher in Copilot. They also charge per prompt, not per token.

Yes, I loved my $10 a month person subscription for light coding tasks, it worked great. I'd use claude code max for heavy lifting, but the $10 a month copilot plan kept me off cursor for the IDE centric things.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#78

Post by to11mtm »

timr wrote: post #70
alexaholic wrote: post #28

I have a GitHub Pro subscription, renewed for the 2nd year, and I just found out I can no longer use Opus with it. Opus was one of the reasons I had a subscription in the first place. Opus 4.6 had a 3x multiplier in Pro. Now the new Opus 4.7 model has 7.5x in Pro+, which offers 5x more requests, but costs 4x more than Pro. So now Opus is essentially 2x the price it used to be. It’s likely that Sonnet 4.7 will be the…

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

> I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a large, realistic codebase, and I can count the number of times I needed to use Opus on one hand. Most of the time, Haiku is fine. About 10% of the time I splurge for Sonnet, and honestly, even some of those are unnecessary.

I mean at some point some people learn...

I was doing Opus for nasty stuff or otherwise at most planning and then using Sonnet to execute.

Buuuuut I'm dealing with a lot of nonstandard use cases and/or sloppy codebases.

Also, at work, Haiku isn't an enabled model.

But also, if I or my employer are paying for premium requests, then they should be served appropriately.

As it stands this announcement smells of "We know our pricing was predatory and here is the rug pull."

My other lesser worry isn't that Opus 4.7 has a 7.5x multi, it's that the multiplier is quoted as an 'introductory' rate.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#79

Post by timr »

selcuka wrote: post #73
timr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

> Most of the time, Haiku is fine. Haiku is most definitely not fine for the code bases that I work on. Sonnet is probably fine for most daily tasks, but Opus is still needed to find that pesky bug you've been chasing, or to thoroughly review your PR.

> Haiku is most definitely not fine for the code bases that I work on. Sonnet is probably fine for most daily tasks, but Opus is still needed to find that pesky bug you've been chasing, or to thoroughly review your PR.

Yeah, I hear that a lot, but it never comes with proof. Everyone is special.

I’m sure you’d find that Haiku is pretty functional if there were a constraint on your use.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#80

Post by ThunderSizzle »

timr wrote: post #70
alexaholic wrote: post #28

I have a GitHub Pro subscription, renewed for the 2nd year, and I just found out I can no longer use Opus with it. Opus was one of the reasons I had a subscription in the first place. Opus 4.6 had a 3x multiplier in Pro. Now the new Opus 4.7 model has 7.5x in Pro+, which offers 5x more requests, but costs 4x more than Pro. So now Opus is essentially 2x the price it used to be. It’s likely that Sonnet 4.7 will be the…

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

Haiku is complete crap compared to sonnet in GHCP. A basic task in Haiku takes 3 prompts with a lot of correction. 1 prompt in sonnet. It isn't worth a third of the price if I have to fix it twice.
Post reply on HN