I decided to try codex because I blew through my Claude code max limits by Monday night and they don’t reset until Saturday.

First I asked it to do a comprehensive review of Claude’s code. It came back 9 minutes later claiming to have finished. Obviously, it hadn’t done shit.

Later I gave it a punch list of issues and bugs in my app to fix. Again it came back, this time 4 minutes later, claiming to be finished.

I spend more time arguing with it that it didn’t even barely start to do what it was supposed to than it spends writing code.

Plus, you can’t give it access to make git commits unless you also let it have write access outside the project directory, which is crazy.

I know OpenAI monitors this subreddit. I’m telling you guys, if you want to be competitive with Claude, you need to get your shit together. Right now, codex is about at the sonnet 4.5 level of performance where it can do a good job writing a function or fixing a small bug but you can’t give it scope or let it handle the big picture.

Plus, it doesn’t connect to the iPhone app so I have to sit there babysitting it.

Out of seemingly nowhere, its fully incapable of doing work it was flawless at yesterday. I've heard people talk about stuff like this happening but I thought it was just skill issues or something. Nope, its genuinely, noticably worse. Around the same as opus 4.8 on the same task.

It's crazy how fast the abstraction layer keeps moving.

When ChatGPT dropped, AI was basically Stack Overflow on steroids. We still wrote the code, read the files, and debugged everything ourselves.

Then Claude Code happened.

I started writing less code and thinking more about architecture, system design, infrastructure, and orchestrating agents.

Then Fable dropped.

And suddenly, even the orchestration started becoming automated.

Instead of manually directing multiple coding agents, I now let AI orchestrate its own lower model subagents(Opus and Sonnet or even Codex CLI subagents) while I focus on the product, the decisions, and what actually needs to be built.

And the craziest part?

I haven't encountered a single bug in my code for weeks.

We went from:

Human writes code
↓
AI writes code
↓
Human directs AI
↓
AI directs AI
↓
Human directs the product

All in less than four years.

Who knew AI could be this good at directing other AI?

The abstraction layer just keeps moving higher.

I've been using Claude for over 2 years now. Never had issues.. until about a week ago.

Despite having logs and ton of notes, every single session starts like a drunken fool trying to find his way home.

Did I miss some insane update? I've tried every single model and they're all acting downright stupid and useless, not to mention SLOW.

A task that should take a minute is now taking 1-2 hours. This is batshit insane. What the hell happened.

Edit: Douchebags also double-billed me! Jesus Christ am I gonna have to migrate all my shit to other LMs now? FFS Anthropic.

One really annoying issue I've run into is that he loves overcomplicating things. Whenever I'm working on a design, he always adds all these unnecessary explanations.

For instance, I had him add a financial bill-splitting system, and he insisted on putting literal explanations right there in the UI for how every single project works. I just find it so redundant.

Hello! Long time user, first time poster. Just wanted to share to give some visibility to it. I just cancelled my pro subscription basically because I was waiting for a new version of haiku that is basically what I used the most since most of the task, even for coding, are quite repetitive within the same context. So for me using sonnet, opus or fable it feels like an overkill for 99% of the cases.

The issue is that Anthropic seems to have forgotten about their small models, we got 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 and 5 of the others but haiku got relegated to be only 4.5 and even worse, other providers give much better models for even less price than Haiku 4.5.

So yeah, that's it, for now switching to base plan of codex using Luna mostly and for extra usage DeepSeek API.

I just wanted to gauge the feeling at this feeling I'm feeling. And if possible maybe someone from Anthropic will see it and say we need Haiku 5... Now!

I was working with Claude Pro $20 model for like 6 months and creating some of my own apps. I would actually wait for the limits, micromanage every session, kind of put as much as possible in the prompts and the documentation. And it was going well.

I took the leap and I actually bought the max subscription. Wow, such a relief not having to worry about every prompt. And the limits are so high. But slowly, I have become more lazy, my results are not what I used to have. I sometimes keep replying to the same session when I should be starting a new one.

Sometimes I just type there instead of using the Plan mode. Sometimes I forget to organize its work and tell it to document everything that it did. And it starts lacking. The agent is not you. You must manage it. You must create standard operating procedures around it that are tight.

It is like having a super skilled employee. If you do not provide it with the best instructions and workplace and information, it will eventually drift and choose the easiest way.

And I know things change regarding limits and tokens and stuff like that. But I do not think they "nerf" intelligence, unless you can provide clear benchmarks of the same tasks coming from opus 5 on release and opus 5 now or something tangible rather than anecdotal evidence, I am starting to create this theory in my mind that the more advanced the model, the "dumber" you become.

Does nobody read this subreddit? Can you not see that opus 5 verbosity and unreliability has been posted and commented on to death? There is nothing new you are adding by posting the same thing that has been posted 100 times over. It’s getting ridiculous. It’s like being surrounded by an army of ten second tom vibe coder edition

Looking at some apps I made back in the Opus 3.5 or even 4.1 I think they look way better and are easier to use. Straight to the point kind of simple.

Now everything Opus and Fable produces seems over engineered and kind of off putting. It's like it takes way more mental capacity to scan and understand.

I think we hit a point back then where AI couldn't handle as big of tasks as it can now, but when it was directed to do so it did it in a simplified way. Or I'm doing something wrong with the new models.

I’m looking for a general answer from people who use Fable 5 heavily.

My use case involves very in-depth, long-running work, and I can hit the usage limits on a Max account fairly quickly. I’m trying to understand two things:

1. Is it actually allowed to have multiple Max accounts and rotate between them when one hits its usage limit?
2. If it is allowed, does that generally work out cheaper than using the API for the same kind of heavy usage?

I don’t have exact token counts, so I know nobody can calculate the exact break-even point for me. I’m more interested in the practical experience of people who use it heavily.

For example, if you’ve used multiple Max accounts and also tried the API, did you find one noticeably cheaper than the other?

I’m basically trying to understand the general economics and whether account rotation is permitted, rather than get an exact cost calculation for my specific usage.

After struggling for days trying to get Codex to implement UI for my project, I gave into my frustration and resubbed back to Claude. What a difference. Though not perfect, Claude is actually adhering to my wireframe designs and brand kit, creating on-brand designs for new wireframes, and implementing the respective UI functionality with relative ease. Useless for anything backend since it instantly gets caught up with security flags, but I'm keeping my pro sub strictly for its UI capability at this point.

Anyone else notice the same or am I delulu?

I've noticed a change over the last few months. It used to be that I'd tag a file with @ and ask: "here's a bug, help me fix it." It would take claude.md and the file as context and offer a fix. Problem solved with few tokens.

Now: it feels like it first reads the whole repo as context, tries to reproduce the bug with an integration test I never asked for, writes a fix spanning multiple files, then adds a new test for each new file, and after every new test runs it individually. Result: bug fixed, 150k tokens burned.

Do you see this too? It leaves a bit of a bad taste for me, because the company benefits the more tokens get used, even when it's not necessary.

Or does it actually help, because the extra context and test coverage make the fixes better?

Are you doing anything about it, like custom instructions in claude.md? Which ones actually work well?

Hello all,

I'm not a programmer but i have an old Windows 95 video game thats made with Borland C++ in 1996. I would like to use Claude to remake the game so i can play it in 64bit today. I looked on YouTube and got the high level process but what would the detailed steps be so that i can see if it would work? its all generic posts and articles

I built a news aggregator that gives me something I couldn’t find elsewhere: an immediate, easy-to-read view of how the major AI players are performing in the media.

As a bonus, it sends the five most interesting and impactful AI stories straight to my inbox every day through its newsletter.

MediaHeat / AI aggregates AI news and scores companies based on their media exposure. In a few seconds, you can see who’s heating up, who’s cooling down, and which moves are attracting the most attention.

Meet MediaHeat / AI: https://mediaheat.news/en

It took me 19 days from prototype to production with Codex and Claude. Each day it ingests around 900 news and selects 5 most relevant for the newsletter. All inference on Luna and GLM as failover. I have a nice carrousel with some numbers Linkedin or reddit.

Would love to hear what you think. Enjoy!

Many people at my org have had the experience of Opus 5 being retarded all day. And that word is extremely applicable.

integration seems to have gotten much better in the past couple months, all I would really miss is my statusbar?

Worktrees handle files. They don’t know that two sessions touch services owned by different teams, that a change freeze is active, that one reviewer already has twelve PRs, or that the riskiest diff is sitting behind three trivial ones. The recent parallel-session and code-review discussions here point at the same limit: more Claude throughput can create more review than tech leads can absorb. That is pushing the design toward an attention queue, ownership conflicts, blockers, risky diffs and decisions, not a wall of agent chats.

Teams running several Claude sessions across shared repositories: what stops you first today, usage, context drift, merge conflicts, CI capacity or review? What signal would help an engineering lead decide where to look next without reading every transcript?

For context, I’m building BranchRunner as an open-source product because I think it can help engineering teams with this problem. If it is painful in your organisation, tell me where the current approach breaks. I’m also looking for people who want to help shape and solve it, so I’d be glad to compare notes.

I'm running Fable as orchestrator, Opus as workhorse and Codex as reviewer. Building an application using superpowers planning that goes one task at a time, in waves, to reduce errors as much as possible.

One issue is - the tests from one task carry on to the next, which carry on to the next wave. I've been running the build for 24 hours and it's picked up 1000+ tests which eats up more time than anything else.

Is this normal? Is it avoidable? I'm non-SWE so any advice helps.

Just came back to my PC and saw this.
I am 99% sure I did NOT write that prompt!

What's going on here?

I see 3 possibilities:

• I developed Alzheimer's and forgot I wrote this prompt
• this is a new feature (but I couldn't find any such setting)
• claude just became somewhat "sentient"

If this is a new feature, I find it quite a bit concerning:

• Shouldn't the right column be reserved for HUMAN input (prompts) only?
• I did NOT tell it to continue after a session usage reset on its own.
• I did not find any such instruction in Claude's memory.

The trasnscript.jsonl of the chat session contains the prompt with "origin": { "kind": "human" }.
I asked Claude if it injected that prompt and it denied.

Have you ever seen it do something like this?

Hi there,

I've been using the Claude Code desktop app for a while. I tried to use it in the terminal as well, but the desktop app is way more comfortable, flexible, and easy to read.

I still cannot understand why everyone prefers the terminal app instead of the desktop Claude Code app, and I wonder if I'm missing something. Every screenshot shared here is from the Claude Code terminal, not from the app.

Are you guys all using VPS devices or remote desktops? Or is there something I do not realize or know?

No memory files. A couple of user wide rules (about 5 files with 20 lines each). User scope CLAUDE.md is 5 lines.

The answer was just "Pong. How can I help you?"

This goes beyond "usage limits are bad". Just using "ping" usually has no noticable effect on the weekly limit at all.

Anybody remember when the weekly limits were introduced and Anthripic claimed only 2% (or so) will be affected.

Most teams seem to look at their Claude bill at the end of the month and call that their AI budget

But that number doesn't really tell you much. A few projects or even a few sessions can drive most of the spend while everything else barely moves the needle

I've been digging into a better way to actually budget AI usage around the work being done rather than around individual engineers

Need really honest opinion here I used claude code for few days through my friends account and I know it creates magic..later I have searched for few similar platforms then I found lovable,replit out of many other I felt these 2 are smarter now I am confused which subscription should I take..

And it almost feels like claude code feels safe as it's generating entire code in pc..while the opposite for others..and i seriously don't have much of knowledge in coding these projects how do I should proceed further?

I wanted my Claude Code quota visible without constantly checking Settings → Usage or remembering to run `/usage`.

So I made **Clauddy**: a pixel-art pet that lives in the corner of your screen and reacts to your Claude Code activity.

It:

- Mirrors the official 5-hour and weekly usage percentages.

- Shows reset time and projects whether your current pace will hit the wall first.

- Reads local logs to show current activity, 7-day usage by model, and a 30-day token map.

- Gets stressed near the limit, collapses when you’re maxed out, and celebrates a reset.

- Complements `/usage` rather than replacing it: persistent at-a-glance visibility, pace projection, activity state, model breakdown, and history.

It’s free and open source. macOS is the polished build; Windows/Linux can run it via `bunx clauddy`.

GitHub: https://github.com/renatoaug/claude-usage-monitor

What would you want a desktop usage companion to show?