BenceRed
Joined 1 year ago
Joined 1 year ago
On the point of microVMs, agreed that it's a very difficult problem to solve. Luckily sandbox providers are continuously improving their APIs to make this slightly easier, but I wouldn't be surprised if we need to migrate over to AWS Lambda MicroVMs and roll a lot of the orchestration logic ourselves. Our goal is to get our P95 project setup time (i.e. connect -> fully running in the sandbox) to around 5 minutes, most of which we imagine being dependency installation. This is one clear point of differentiation where if we nail it, we'd be leagues above the rest of the competition.
The legacy players such as Devin, Cursor, and Factory are certainly well entrenched in their market position, but this space has the unique advantage of completely reworking how it operates every 6 months. These existing tools need to balance keeping up with new user demand for features, while also maintaining the old legacy workflows for their existing customers. We're lucky in that we can now build a product that we believe resembles how the majority of development will work ~1 year from now, meaning we have a lot more flexibility in how we can move forward.
And fundamentally, outside of large enterprise features like on-prem deployment, the key differentiators are 1) UX, 2) cost, and 3) harness performance. We can certainly win at the first, are at parity with the second, and likely struggle at the third (need to do benchmarks/evals -- if those go poorly then we'll transition from the custom harness to using the first party Claude Code/Codex. So quite fixable.)
And I've made some changes to the coupon, does it work now?
This specificity helps Sol stay on track (most of the time). It doesn't work as well when the comment questions a complex piece of the architecture though.
What does your current setup look like? And are you using an open source solution like OpenInspect for your in-house version, or building it from the ground up?
I think it comes down to whether configuration or ease of use is valued more, and Hoplite favours the latter a bit more. (They shouldn't really be mutually exclusive, but we have a long way to go before we're happy claiming that we match/beat self-hosting in that area)
Using us means losing freedom and control with regards to infrastructure, however we think that's a tradeoff people would want to make in exchange for easier onboarding and a more polished experience.
Noted the pricing feedback! We're still figuring out exactly what works best so it's still very much so subject to change.
We also have an MCP server that you can use to delegate tasks (e.g. research, debugging, SRE work) to Hoplite via your existing local setup.