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

Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 740 posts

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#31

Post by YuechenLi »

hellisothers wrote: post #14
YuechenLi wrote: post #11

Fable is just way too expensive and limited compared to GPT 5.6 Sol, and the only task that requires that level of intelligence is frontier scientific research. I use GPT/Codex primarily for coding and usually keep Claude on Sonnet 5 most of the time as I use Claude primarily to debug/brainstorm/make frontends as a supplement to GPT.

I thought Sol was on par with Opus, so comparing it to Fable is apples and (very expensive) oranges?

Yeah, it's pretty much apples to oranges, and I don't consider GPT and Claude to be interchangeable at all. From my anecdotal experience, GPTs generally codes more creatively and verbosely but Claudes tend to code more carefully and precisely, so the result is that GPTs generally finds more creative solutions to problems but also writes buggier code, which is why I converged on the setup of GPT/Codex for implementation and Claude for debugging, which feels more like a force multiplier than using each model individually.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#32

Post by igravious »

cmenge wrote: post #12
felixgallo wrote: post #5

[flagged]

Just cancelled my Claude subscription and used Ox Alpha Free through OpenCode (so that's one). In my view, from the testing I did since Thursday, it's better than Fable. I had just finished a rather large task that Fable completed, including a /review and an /ultrareview. Ox Alpha found bugs that Fable and Opus missed, and it continued to build things like a pro. It does have issues with availability - but it's on a…

Intriguing. Who is it? What is it? any ideas?

https://openrouter.ai/stealth/ox-alpha

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#33

Post by jeffnash »

Hasn't it always been the premise that intelligence would get cheaper? To me, on the enterprise side, it seems like firms are finally getting the memo that, whether you are locked into the Ant/OAI ecosystem or not, you don't need the smartest, most expensive model to do every single task. This is a good thing for overall adoption. Whether that trickles down into regular user behavior, especially with subscription pricing, remains to be seen; even though I intellectually know I don't need Sol for a simple refactor, I am sometimes hesitant to choose Luna/Terra, as it's hard to accept using something positioned, even implicitly, as 'worse'. Remembering that the smaller models tend to be faster is what usually pushes me over the edge.

Anthropic in particular is much more compute-constrained than OpenAI and SpaceXAI and has relied on partnerships to provide inference. This reality factors into their pricing and usage limits (they started 'adjusting' the 5-hour limits during peak hours, and it certainly wasn't an upward adjustment). Accordingly, this is presumably what Anthropic wants, given they develop and release the lower-end models, suggest users use them in various nudges within their product, position the bigger/more expensive models as "For the most complex tasks" in their UIs, and so on.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#34

Post by colingauvin »

felixgallo wrote: post #30
dgellow wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fable guardrails are insanely restrictive, are you denying that’s the case?

[flagged]

It has figured it out through the software that I work on, data that I analyze, questions I ask, etc. I guess I can't prove it's because I'm a biochemist, but that's the only thing that makes any sense. Either way it won't let me use Fable.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#35

Post by kami23 »

felixgallo wrote: post #30
dgellow wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fable guardrails are insanely restrictive, are you denying that’s the case?

[flagged]

Yes that is exactly what's happening.

Claude keeps track of memory if you've turned that on so all conversations are somehow tracked over time Claude randomly will mention that I'm a developer while I'm asking unrelated questions and say oh because you're a developer you might like this or because of my background and infrastructure you might find this interesting and I always get creeped out by it.

They have the concept of incognito chats, but I can see those being worse without context from other conversations happening.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#38

Post by Yizahi »

jamiek88 wrote: post #15
tcp_handshaker wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a $3 trillion bubble riding on this not being true.

Right? If we’ve already reached ‘good enough’ then there’s rough waters ahead.

I have a sneaking suspicion that someone at Google may be making the same bet, looking at the faster and faster Flash models which provide acceptable results to a lot of people (outside of coding).

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#39

Post by deadbabe »

jamiek88 wrote: post #15
tcp_handshaker wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a $3 trillion bubble riding on this not being true.

Right? If we’ve already reached ‘good enough’ then there’s rough waters ahead.

For Anthropic. But not for the AI industry at large.

Cheaper, more powerful AI will continue to expand the bubble. Projects will get more ambitious. Everyone will build out their own custom little software. Code diversity expands and requires even more AI.

Post reply on HN