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

201–210 of 241 posts

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#201

Post by embedding-shape »

isqueiros wrote: post #199
SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the AWS Marketplace procurement model, where products mostly exist so that you can line item things through Amazon rather than going through a lengthy procurement process

Not surprised to see this is common. At my company basically everyone and their mother are using Claude Code via Bedrock, despite us having company-wide Windsurf, Copilot and ChatGPT Enterprise accounts

That sounds different, the parent is saying they're using that because then no new billing and stuff has to be negotiated/setup, but in your case everything is already setup and people have access, they just chose to use something else?

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#202

Post by athorax »

chillfox wrote: post #172
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.

I don't know what they have done to Claude, but when using through copilot it's truly awful compared to using it straight from the API. I have always just used the API, but I decided to give copilot a go on the weekend because of the cheap price. And I am seeing weird behavior like I have never seen before... It will somehow fail to use the file editing tool and then spend an absolutely huge amount of time/tokens bui…

This might have been bad timing. Copilot API broke things last weekend with caused a lot of tool calls in various agent harnesses to start failing like the edit tool.

Example zed issue https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/54219?issue=zed...

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#204

Post by october8140 »

everfrustrated wrote: post #3

This is quite the rug pull. I've been using the Pro+ with Opus 4.6 very successfully and being charged 3x rate was mostly acceptable. But removing Opus 4.6 and replacing with Opus 4.7 with a 7x rate is just insane!

If they don’t give refunds I can just do a charge back. It’s not what I paid for.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#205

Post by NoahZuniga »

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…

If you cancel you get a prorated refund

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#206

Post by pngwen »

I wonder what this will mean for all of my students. I have been weaving copilot into my software engineering and code centric courses, but that depends on copilot pro as provided by the GitHub education package. If those signups are paused too, that means I can’t bring in any new ones, at least not to this stack. For me, I’ll probably have to send them to Claude code where they will have to pay for access. (Though it is a better product IMHO.)

This points toward a deeper issue though. We’ll probably see more individual offerings dry up over time. That means you’ll have individuals stuck with hand coding while the hyper productive AI assisted coders will all be at large organizations. If that happens, we’ll enter a phase where computing will once more be available exclusively to the elite few.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#207

Post by sunaookami »

sunaookami wrote: post #46
wdroz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get a refund, from the article: > If you hit unexpected limits or these changes just don’t work for you, you can cancel your Pro or Pro+ subscription and you will not be charged for April usage. Please reach out to GitHub support between April 20 and May 20 for a refund.

>and you will not be charged for April usage They removed this now without notice but Wayback Machine still has it: https://web.archive.org/web/20260420190656/https://github.bl...

They now tacked on an Editor's note to the blog post.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#208

Post by charkubi »

Marsymars wrote: post #59
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.

> I don't understand why anyone would want to deal with Microsoft as a vendor if they don't have to. It can bill to our Azure sub and I don't have to go through the internal bureaucracy of purchasing a new product/service from a new vendor.

Microsoft's USP in one sentence.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#209

Post by rorylawless »

drewda wrote: post #90
hx8 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. Github Copilot is mostly for organizations that have an existing Azure bill and would rather see that go up then get a new vendor bill. Professional middlemen.

This is pretty straightforward compared to the giant universe of companies that resell Microsoft services. The number of intermediaries that some customers, especially governmental agencies, go through to get just an Azure bill can be wild...

I’ve recently been unwillingly exposed to this side of things. It’s truly an insane, there must be a better way?
Post reply on HN