If you are still investing in these companies or plan to in the IPO, the financial ruin you experience is your own doing, you are ignoring every sign that this isn’t going to work out. None of these numbers make sense and point to AI being a commodity with razor thin margins and a race to the bottom. Would you invest heavily in a toilet paper company that took massive amounts of power to produce each version that is 1% softer or stronger every six months?
Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
331–340 of 740 posts
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#332I am getting close to dumping Anthropic. I like their models in general, but boy I have hit their "F you, I ain't gonna help" too many times now on innocent things. Ain't nobody wanna deal with that. I have never gotten that from Antigravity and if I did I woupd tey Codex then go to Openrouter and leave US models behind. I mean, who says "screw you" to requests to get 35+ year old vintage computers working? Claude, t…
GLM 5.3 will probably do your vintage computing work without fuss.
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am because Claude has figured out I am a biochemist and therefore even asking Fable what the weather is gets me bumped back to Opus, sometimes even Opus 4.8 instead of 5. Kimi? GLM 5.3? DeepSeek? No such problem. I can literally open a new chat with just "Hello" and it gets bumped.
Memories break Fable 5 for me as well in chatbot. I ask Opus a lot of sec related stuff and now if I even type “hello” in chat it gets insta-downgraded to Opus 5.
Wow, that's totally crazy. Does it happen even if you clear out the "offending" memory entries?
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
As Anthropic does this, OpenAI Is giving everybody resets like every other day now on Twitter. I'm strongly considering biting the bullet and just ditching my $200/month Claude Code plan for the Codex one instead, especially because I keep running into my weekly limits (even sticking to Opus.)
I got the AI ultra plan for gemini, the models are lower quality than claude and codex for sure but it comes with a pretty high limit for my purposes and I haven’t reached the weekly limit yet after about 3 weeks of usage. I have enterprise claude at work, the budget isn’t particularly great and I keep running out within a week tops with any serious work. Not even considering it for a personal plan with how quickly t…
> I’m sticking with gemini for now given the 20TB cloud storage and youtube premium that comes with it
I used to have the Google One with Gemini and Drive space and YT Premium separately for my family. A credit card expiration lapse lead to closing YT Premium and being locked away. Why? it was because Google One plan bundles YT Premium Lite as an extra. So they actively blocked me from getting Premium back for a month.
Now I moved to YT Premium on my wife's account and downgraded One to lowest tier. Never heard of a company forbidding users to upgrade their plans before this. I suspect Google really wants users on Google One no matter what they want. I was barely using Gemini anyway, already have claude and codex plans.
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#335Wow the sentiment here is so negative. I'm on the $200 plan (work pays) and I also have the $20 OpenAI plan (I pay) and keep a balance on OpenRouter. There is nothing as good as Fable, not even close. I recently had it run a 18 hour autonomous rebuild of a project (moving from Spark to Pandas for performance/data size trade off issues). It orchestrated Opus sub-agents flawlessly for 18 hours. It even did a great job…
I think you need to spend more time with Sol. If you think there is nothing even close to as good as Fable - my guess is you haven’t spent as much time getting as familiar with working with those models as you have with Claude’s.
Codex is more token efficient and tends to get better results than Fable with less need for extreme token burning shenanigans like 18 hours of subagents.
I spend 10+ hours a day in both agents, typically side by side. I often have them do direct “bakeoffs” from identical prompts in separate work trees. Most of the time, Sol’s work is better than Fable’s. Not always. It’s situational. But it’s certainly not the case that Fable is in a league of its own or anything.
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#336This article totally misses the fact that fable is not ZDR!!! no serious large corporation can use it (or at least without a lengthy legal review)
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#337Wow the sentiment here is so negative. I'm on the $200 plan (work pays) and I also have the $20 OpenAI plan (I pay) and keep a balance on OpenRouter. There is nothing as good as Fable, not even close. I recently had it run a 18 hour autonomous rebuild of a project (moving from Spark to Pandas for performance/data size trade off issues). It orchestrated Opus sub-agents flawlessly for 18 hours. It even did a great job…
> $200 plan (work pays) so violating the TOS? Or work pays for a plan you cannot use at work?
What part of the tos is violated?
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#338Mythos? That's only for super special corporations, you need not apply. Fable? Can't even look at it wrong without running into cybersecurity lockouts. And even if you get past this, it's limited to So stingy. Even with OpenAI's recent usage troubles, they're still so much better than Anthropic it's not even funny. Re-ran the code review with Sol as a benchmark and it turns out Sol's performance is within 70%-90% of…
Even if you get past these problems, those models are available only under the condition that Anthropic retains your data.
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#339Wow the sentiment here is so negative. I'm on the $200 plan (work pays) and I also have the $20 OpenAI plan (I pay) and keep a balance on OpenRouter. There is nothing as good as Fable, not even close. I recently had it run a 18 hour autonomous rebuild of a project (moving from Spark to Pandas for performance/data size trade off issues). It orchestrated Opus sub-agents flawlessly for 18 hours. It even did a great job…
I like this story. How did you verify the output? How big is the codebase? Why it took 18 hours? Could you implement it with a small local agent and breaking the task down yourself in two days (i know it sounds like a loaded question, it is not).
I think the rewrites are the main story for llms in code (hot take). Writing greenfield code at the seams also something which might work well.
Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm going to be sad when they retire 4.6. It's not my daily driver but it's still my go-to when the other models are being stupid in one way or another (either being too verbose, or lecturing me about how what I'm asking for is evil and bad).
Can you give an example? It's a bit entertaining to read this given all the years long (and still ongoing) posturing about LLM sycophancy (not that all of these couldn't be true at the same time).
Example: https://gist.github.com/DavidBuchanan314/14ad6977ac3b45af746...
(yes, it was a very lazy prompt I could easily have googled, but that makes the refusal even more bewildering)