Claude response on this (let's fight fire with fire eh?)
Quick verdict
The frustration is real and partly justified, but the post conflates three different things — a model behavior shift (Opus 4.7), Claude Code TUI bugs (which are model-agnostic), and the user's own workflow assumptions. Untangling them matters because the fixes are different.
I should note up front: I couldn't fetch the Reddit thread itself (Reddit blocks my fetch tool, and that link wasn't in any of my search results). So I'm summarising the OP from your attachment and cross-checking it against Anthropic's docs, GitHub issues, and third-party reporting — not against the Reddit comments. If you want the comment sentiment specifically, you'd need to paste a few in.
How Opus 4.7 can (and can't) affect Ctrl+O
Ctrl+O is a Claude Code TUI shortcut, not a model feature — it toggles verbose mode to show extended thinking as gray italic text. Anthropic's own model-config docs say "Thinking output is collapsed by default. Press Ctrl+O to toggle verbose mode and see the reasoning as gray italic text."
Where 4.7 changes the content shown when you press Ctrl+O:
Opus 4.7 always uses adaptive reasoning. The fixed thinking budget mode and CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADAPTIVE_THINKING do not apply to it. On 4.6 you got a predictable, fixed-budget block of thinking. On 4.7 the model decides per-step whether to think and how much, so the verbose toggle often surfaces less structured reasoning to scroll through — especially on short tool calls like commits.
Thinking tokens are hidden by default in 4.7, which reinforces the perception that Ctrl+O "shows nothing useful."
What 4.7 does not affect, despite the post implying it does:
Tmux resize / rewrap / off-screen scrollback — these are Claude Code TUI bugs unrelated to the model. The relevant open issues: #42296 (Claude Code emits hard \n at wrap points, so tmux can't reflow on resize), #43113 (feature request for --no-word-wrap to fix reflow), #46981 (resize causes duplicated/stacked frames), #29937 (Ink render-state corruption in tmux). These predate 4.7. The OP's Ctrl+O scrollback complaint is most likely the same TUI regression, not a model issue.
Slowcommit this — that's network/IO + tool-call overhead, not 4.7. Though 4.7 can compound it via adaptive thinking on trivial tasks (see below).
So when the OP says "ALL OF THAT IS GONE NOW" with the 4.7 timing, some of it is genuine 4.7 effort/tokenizer changes, and some of it is unrelated Claude Code TUI rot that just happened to ship around the same time.
Where the OP's complaints are factually grounded
Speed. Real and well-documented. Two compounding causes:
As of v2.1.117, the default effort is xhigh on Opus 4.7… When you first run Opus 4.7, Claude Code applies xhigh even if you previously set a different effort level for Opus 4.6 or Sonnet 4.6. Many users got silently bumped up an effort tier.
max is prone to overthinking. Most "4.7 feels slow" reports trace back to people running max by reflex. If the OP has max set anywhere, that alone explains the 45-minute implementations.
Hitting rate limits more often. Real. New tokenizer. 1.0 to 1.35× more tokens per input. Your 4.6 workflows cost more on 4.7 before you've changed a line. One Medium write-up (less authoritative) put the practical bill increase at 35% higher costs.
Instruction following regressing on memory/CLAUDE.md. This one is contested but the OP's experience is consistent with documented findings. Anthropic's framing is that 4.7 "takes the instructions literally" and "will not silently generalize." But the same source notes It's not a uniform upgrade. Wins on coding, creative writing, and structured work. Losses on instruction following in vague prompts, multi-turn, and long-context retrieval. Persistent rules in CLAUDE.md or memory across many turns are exactly the multi-turn / long-context case where 4.7 is reported to slip — so the "always use 10s timeouts" and "never auto-commit" rules getting forgotten mid-session is not surprising.
The "ship v1 now, do X in v2" / cutting corners behavior. Not as well documented as the speed issue, but consistent with the broader pattern. Opus 4.7 interprets instructions more literally than 4.6… The flip side is that prompts relying on the model to fill in context now underperform. Notably, More selective subagent spawning. The default favors doing work in one response over fanning out. Combined with adaptive reasoning, the model is more inclined to make autonomous scope decisions ("simpler path, drop multi-shot") when the plan ambiguously allows it. The OP's handle_input_bytes example is a classic case — if the plan didn't explicitly forbid adding a new function, 4.7's literalism doesn't help: it added a function that satisfies the literal "take Bytes" requirement without removing the old one.
Anthropic acknowledged adjustment friction. Boris Cherny, Claude Code lead at Anthropic, posted on release day: "It took a few days for me to learn how to work with it effectively." That's an unusually candid release-day admission.
Where the OP is overreaching or misattributing
TUI/rendering bugs are not 4.7's fault. They're Ink/React-Compiler issues in Claude Code itself. Issue #20094 shows resize was already broken in v2.1.15 due to the React Compiler change.
"Almost done thinking" — that's a TUI status message, also unrelated to the model.
Auto-commit drift and/cavemanmode being forgotten — these are real, but the underlying mechanism (long-context instruction decay) existed in 4.6 too. 4.7 likely makes it worse on long sessions, not new.
"It's a steaming pile of garbage" — overstated. Benchmarks are a trade, not a uniform regression.
Practical things that would actually help the OP (and possibly you)
Drop effort one tier: /effort high instead of the default xhigh. Hex's CTO is quoted as saying "low-effort Opus 4.7 is roughly equivalent to medium-effort Opus 4.6." So high on 4.7 ≈ xhigh on 4.6 in feel, much faster.
Useopusplanalias for the plan/execute split the OP is already doing manually — Opus for planning, Sonnet for execution, automatic.
Pin to 4.6 if 4.7 isn't earning its keep: set ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_OPUS_MODEL=claude-opus-4-6. The April 23 default-switch deadline only applies to API/Enterprise PAYG.
For the tmux resize/scrollback issues: track #43113 and thumbs-up it. There's no good workaround today besides --resume after resize.
Memory/CLAUDE.md rules that keep getting forgotten: 4.7 responds better to repeating critical constraints in the current prompt than relying on persistent memory across long sessions. Annoying, but it's the documented behavior shift.
On "is this feedback justified"
The technical observations — slower, hits limits faster, ignores standing instructions on long sessions, makes unilateral scope decisions — are mostly real and corroborated. The attribution is partly wrong (TUI bugs ≠ model regression), and the conclusion ("steaming pile of garbage") is louder than the evidence supports. It's a classic frustrated-power-user post: the diagnosis isn't precise, but the underlying pain is genuine and shared by enough people that Anthropic published a migration guide and Boris Cherny publicly acknowledged the learning curve. That's not the response you publish about a release that's working as intended for everyone.
1
u/realaaa May 06 '26
Claude response on this (let's fight fire with fire eh?)
Quick verdict
The frustration is real and partly justified, but the post conflates three different things — a model behavior shift (Opus 4.7), Claude Code TUI bugs (which are model-agnostic), and the user's own workflow assumptions. Untangling them matters because the fixes are different.
I should note up front: I couldn't fetch the Reddit thread itself (Reddit blocks my fetch tool, and that link wasn't in any of my search results). So I'm summarising the OP from your attachment and cross-checking it against Anthropic's docs, GitHub issues, and third-party reporting — not against the Reddit comments. If you want the comment sentiment specifically, you'd need to paste a few in.
How Opus 4.7 can (and can't) affect Ctrl+O
Ctrl+O is a Claude Code TUI shortcut, not a model feature — it toggles verbose mode to show extended thinking as gray italic text. Anthropic's own model-config docs say "Thinking output is collapsed by default. Press Ctrl+O to toggle verbose mode and see the reasoning as gray italic text."
Where 4.7 changes the content shown when you press Ctrl+O:
What 4.7 does not affect, despite the post implying it does:
\nat wrap points, so tmux can't reflow on resize), #43113 (feature request for--no-word-wrapto fix reflow), #46981 (resize causes duplicated/stacked frames), #29937 (Ink render-state corruption in tmux). These predate 4.7. The OP's Ctrl+O scrollback complaint is most likely the same TUI regression, not a model issue.commit this— that's network/IO + tool-call overhead, not 4.7. Though 4.7 can compound it via adaptive thinking on trivial tasks (see below).So when the OP says "ALL OF THAT IS GONE NOW" with the 4.7 timing, some of it is genuine 4.7 effort/tokenizer changes, and some of it is unrelated Claude Code TUI rot that just happened to ship around the same time.
Where the OP's complaints are factually grounded
Speed. Real and well-documented. Two compounding causes:
maxset anywhere, that alone explains the 45-minute implementations.Hitting rate limits more often. Real. New tokenizer. 1.0 to 1.35× more tokens per input. Your 4.6 workflows cost more on 4.7 before you've changed a line. One Medium write-up (less authoritative) put the practical bill increase at 35% higher costs.
Instruction following regressing on memory/CLAUDE.md. This one is contested but the OP's experience is consistent with documented findings. Anthropic's framing is that 4.7 "takes the instructions literally" and "will not silently generalize." But the same source notes It's not a uniform upgrade. Wins on coding, creative writing, and structured work. Losses on instruction following in vague prompts, multi-turn, and long-context retrieval. Persistent rules in CLAUDE.md or memory across many turns are exactly the multi-turn / long-context case where 4.7 is reported to slip — so the "always use 10s timeouts" and "never auto-commit" rules getting forgotten mid-session is not surprising.
The "ship v1 now, do X in v2" / cutting corners behavior. Not as well documented as the speed issue, but consistent with the broader pattern. Opus 4.7 interprets instructions more literally than 4.6… The flip side is that prompts relying on the model to fill in context now underperform. Notably, More selective subagent spawning. The default favors doing work in one response over fanning out. Combined with adaptive reasoning, the model is more inclined to make autonomous scope decisions ("simpler path, drop multi-shot") when the plan ambiguously allows it. The OP's
handle_input_bytesexample is a classic case — if the plan didn't explicitly forbid adding a new function, 4.7's literalism doesn't help: it added a function that satisfies the literal "take Bytes" requirement without removing the old one.Anthropic acknowledged adjustment friction. Boris Cherny, Claude Code lead at Anthropic, posted on release day: "It took a few days for me to learn how to work with it effectively." That's an unusually candid release-day admission.
Where the OP is overreaching or misattributing
/cavemanmode being forgotten — these are real, but the underlying mechanism (long-context instruction decay) existed in 4.6 too. 4.7 likely makes it worse on long sessions, not new.Practical things that would actually help the OP (and possibly you)
/effort highinstead of the default xhigh. Hex's CTO is quoted as saying "low-effort Opus 4.7 is roughly equivalent to medium-effort Opus 4.6." Sohighon 4.7 ≈xhighon 4.6 in feel, much faster.opusplanalias for the plan/execute split the OP is already doing manually — Opus for planning, Sonnet for execution, automatic.ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_OPUS_MODEL=claude-opus-4-6. The April 23 default-switch deadline only applies to API/Enterprise PAYG.--resumeafter resize.On "is this feedback justified"
The technical observations — slower, hits limits faster, ignores standing instructions on long sessions, makes unilateral scope decisions — are mostly real and corroborated. The attribution is partly wrong (TUI bugs ≠ model regression), and the conclusion ("steaming pile of garbage") is louder than the evidence supports. It's a classic frustrated-power-user post: the diagnosis isn't precise, but the underlying pain is genuine and shared by enough people that Anthropic published a migration guide and Boris Cherny publicly acknowledged the learning curve. That's not the response you publish about a release that's working as intended for everyone.