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

91–100 of 740 posts

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

#91

Post by sajithdilshan »

preommr wrote: post #79
sajithdilshan wrote: post #4

Every software engineer in my company uses Claude code heavily. However we’ve never enabled Fable and only use Opus, Sonnet and Haiku. Nobody has complained and seems like for every use case we have Opus is more than powerful enough, especially with Opus 5

> Every software engineer in my company uses Claude code heavily. I find it funny how OpenAI got caught lacking for a very brief window, but it turned out to be a very critical turning point. Like a guy that that's at the top of their game the entire year, and the one day they have the flu, the CEO does a surprise performance review.

Yes, the critical point was end of last year, beginning of this year. Especially around the time Opus was released.

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

#92

Post by rowanG077 »

ericol wrote: post #66

The problem is that they are not solving the problem they ought to be solving. I don't want Shakespeare, I want Bob the builder. Half of my work is telling claude how to behave. I'm pretty certain they have enough _data_ to realize people do the same thing time and time again. Check this comment of mine for a better explanation of this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49413353

This is really it for me as well. At the heights of complexity AI can do magical things. But really a lot of the time I just want it to do mundane things right. And currently it just cannot. It writes garbage text, consistently ignores something you have told it, makes mistakes a human makes once but the AI remains uncorrectable.

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

#93

Post by jeffnash »

margorczynski wrote: post #55
jeffnash wrote: post #33

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 pri…

> whether you are locked into the Ant/OAI ecosystem or not I think the problem (for Ant/OAI) is that there is no sensible lockin or moat. LLMs are essentially interchangeable and stuff like a harness doesn't offer enough value on its own for someone to be locked into using one of them. Now with the onslaught of the Chinese models that offer almost the same quality for much less money they have a very serious problem…

Agreed 100% for the consumer case: an empty chatbox is just about the least sticky surface I could ever imagine. I saw a mobile interstitial ad for Kimi recently whose hook was basically "Tired of paying for expensive ChatGPT? Download the Kimi app, it's the same thing but cheaper". I myself bounce between token subscriptions like no one's business and use Pi/OMP for maximum model flexibility when coding (and it's a few env variables or lines of (TO|YA)ML|JSON to switch providers in Codex, Grok Build, CC). I even self-host and try to use OpenWebUI + CLIProxyAPI when I can for all my chats.

Enterprise is a whole different ballgame IMO with countless technical, compliance, and employee adoption considerations that add friction to switching. It's also where both Anthropic and (as of last week) OpenAI get the bulk of their revenue, and, incidentally, the venue where US Government regulations on Chinese models would have the most impact.

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

#95

Post by varispeed »

bentt wrote: post #27

They've put themselves in a corner. Fable was too good and they gave it away with the $20 plan. It had to be a big step from Opus 4.8 to show progress, and Opus 4.8 is GREAT at coding in many different domains. But they're getting killed on token cost. They have to get people paying more for tokens. So then they put Fable in the $200 plan and release Opus 5. I'm suspicious of Opus 5. It is mostly worse than 4.8. It _…

[dead]

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

#96

Post by anon373839 »

porridgeraisin wrote: post #50
tcp_handshaker wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The bubble is _not_ on models becoming more intelligent and solving arc-agi-999. They are already good enough at what they mechanically are. You have to use the right harness, right verifiers (automatic where possible, human where not), etc much much more specific than a generic one like claude code or codex, and it will also be able to work within constraints and be the "proposer" of an imaginary optimisation proble…

The issue is that, if there is a “good enough” point approximately here, it is only a matter of time before models become small and efficient enough not to need all those data centers. Though, it should be good for companies that sell computers (like Apple) rather than putting a toll booth in front of a pile of numbers.

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

#97

Post by chrisgarand »

rafaelmn wrote: post #58
alasdair_ wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can turn off the reverting to opus with an option.

I did not know that - but what happens then I get denied and I plead with the model that my usecase doesn't violate its TOS ? Edit prompt till I get it to pass ? Reverting is annoying but being flagged for security questions while I'm doing code review is insane.

Yes, you get to re-try it until it might pass. Each attempt uses tokens at Fable level though. I once burned through a 4 hour window ($20 plan) in 4 attempts to re-frame the request.

You want to disable "Switch models when a message is flagged"[1]

[1] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16049681-why-claude-s...

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

#98

Post by dham »

sajithdilshan wrote: post #89
dham wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A model is just another thing to plugin to a harness. I don't give it much more thought than that. If developers are still caught up on Claude Code, or Codex that's just not a long term thing. It's best to develop workflows locally and in the cloud with open harnesses. I know this will be the future because that's how it worked on every other system that developers use. Sure there are Microslop and Oracle db users bu…

That’s not true. Before AI, I have been using Jetbrains IDEs as far as I can remember. Also have been using MacBooks for work since my first job. You don’t have to generalise everything. If a particular specialised tool is good at its job just use it instead of re-inventing the wheel

Models will be a commodity

> good at its job just use it instead of re-inventing the wheel

Exactly why is everyone reinventing a harness every month. There will be Microslop / Oracle harnesses and there will be 1 or 2 open source ones that win.

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

#100

Post by mikert89 »

im using fable almost exclusively, i just buy a new 200$ license if i run out of capacity. its so much better, easily worth it given how much work I get done. I built a code, deploy, e2e test loop with my full aws infra, fable just implements linear tasks constantly, 5 at a time, tests the whole thing end to end

if people dont see why they need a model this smart, they probably arent using ai enough

Post reply on HN