redhale

When I browse the store, I specifically do it in a browser because the client is so unpleasant to use. For launching games I have no choice. I love Steam as a concept and company, but it is not an enjoyable app to use by its own merits, in my opinion.

If you're in the Claude ecosystem, Artifacts can fill a similar purpose. They've gotten really good, if you haven't checked back on them in a while. The recent Docs and Slides update especially is fantastic for working on deliverables in those formats.

And I think most people who hate Jira actually just hate the process their company has imposed inside of Jira.

The vanilla out of the box product is actually quite close to old Trello, in simplicity. But there are so many ways to fuck it up and overcomplicate it, and so many companies proceed to fuck it up and overcomplicate it.

> I can just pull out the Amex and everything works

Must be nice to have money to burn. But if I had to guess, this doesn't seem like representative consumer behavior that Anthropic or OpenAI should rely on holding up at scale.

> subscription gross margins are way lower than API and meaningfully reduce revenue per MW for both OpenAI and Anthropic

I don't know about everyone else, but there is no way in hell I would pay even $200 for API-priced tokens for personal use. So at least for my sample size of one, Anthropic's revenue would not be higher if they dropped their subscription plan (they would get $0 from me instead of $200 per month).

Wow, it only took AWS ... 24 years to develop this technology. Amazing progress, we're living in the future! /s

Could not agree more, this needs to be table stakes for any usage based service.

I'm definitely willing to be corrected, but I think it just means that this improvement is close to pure noise -- not good or bad necessarily. Just not a good signal.

To me the really bad sign is that this is the benchmark that they selected to highlight. Why not one of the less-saturated benchmarks where this harness could (in theory) show meaningful improvement over the OpenCode baseline? Seems fishy to me.

I don't want to be too negative, but ... all this for a 0.8% improvement in SWE-bench Verified (90.2 for OpenCode vs 91)? And why is this (saturated) benchmark the one coding benchmark chosen to showcase on the homepage?

Without trying it, this seems like its probably just a massive waste of tokens.

Same experience here -- Google Home has turned into absolute garbage, virtually unusable. It was never perfect but holy shit have they poured gasoline on the dumpster fire with whatever they have done with Gemini.

HN never fails to be disappointed.

I don't mean to pick on you, but the negativity of this post is pretty typical of HN. God forbid people try to inject a little joy into their day on our way to the AIpocalypse.

My gf loves the custom Codex "pet" she created that emotes as she uses Codex to build her recipe website. I don't care to turn the pet on when I'm using Codex, but I can't believe there are people who find a way to complain about it being an option. Please lighten up.

> being "90th percentile" (on what exactly?)

From context, I took this to mean 90th percentile in token usage. So yes, being a top token user does require extensive AI use.

This doesn't really match my experience, but all I have to counter your anecdotal evidence is my own anecdotal evidence.

In my opinion, concluding that Copilot is "winning" right now is like concluding that Internet Explorer was winning while Chrome was still young. It may be technically true, but it's easy to see the writing on the wall -- that it's only winning because it is the default option available at most companies.

I have never met a satisfied Copilot user, and as a consultant I met a lot of Copilot users. It's hard to believe how totally and completely Microsoft is shitting the bed. As you point out, they have the enterprise integrations. Why can't the build a good product with them? Generational blunder, in my opinion.

There seems to be an unstated assumption here that "handcrafted" code is somehow _better_ or _more desirable_ than AI-written code, all else being equal. I would ask for evidence of that claim.

I've worked in corporate environments for nearly two decades, and I can assure you that I have seen a lot of very low-quality "handcrafted" code running in production. I don't really see "handcrafted" as a signifier of quality, even if I agree that SOME SPECIFIC handcrafted code is better than SOME SPECIFIC AI-written code (and vice versa).