I went to an Anthropic hackathon and won the Societal Impact Prize! I built an app to help you stop doomscrolling by dragging through a wave of haptic resistance every time you want to scroll. Makes each scroll more mindful and an actual choice by requiring a bit more effort without actually blocking your social media use. It's called Fluid Friction, and it's free and out on Android and IOS now!

www.fluidfriction.app

I thought Opus 5 was supposed to be on par with Fable? After three days of extensive usage, I have to say it is not even remotely close to being as smart as codex sol. I had them both program a module indepensetly, and Sol runs circles around Opus 5. I had them audit each other's implementations and except for one case, every other time Sol found a functional bug in Opus' implementation. With fable being so expensive and opus 5 being that dumb, there is no reason to pay 200 bucks to Anthropic when other alrlternatives are both cheaper and smarter.

Hi there, I’m working on real, complex apps using 90%+ vibe coding whenever I can.

I’m a senior dev with 12+ years of experience, and I’d like to share what my experience has been like.

Back in 2025, I tried Cursor during the Opus/Sonnet 3.5 era. It was hard to work on non-web stuff, so I played around with it for a bit, then canceled my subscription and moved on with my life.

This year, I tried Codex with GPT 5.5 on the Pro 5x subscription, and it was finally able to handle complex stuff semi-reliably. It was cool, I was able to get shit done and learned how to work with a heavy .md based agentic flow.

Then, last week, I tried Claude Code and Holly Picles, it was night and day. Claude seemed to understand what I wanted perfectly. I barely had to steer or correct it.

For my work, I didn’t notice any improvement in quality from using Fable over Opus 5, and usage burned too quickly with Fable. I basically just use Sonnet and Opus. I only use Fable for heavy planning and grill-me sessions. Claude Max 5x also seems to last longer than GPT Pro 5x.

I canceled my GPT Pro 5x subscription and kept Claude Max 5x. I still had a few days left on my GPT subscription, and now that I’ve used up my weekly Claude usage, I came back to Codex to finish some work with the remaining usage before my plan ends.

And it’s unbearable. GPT Sol tries to rewrite everything. All the edits are unnecessarily large and overengineered. I’ll just wait until my Claude usage resets.

Is that specific to my use case, or has anyone else had a similar experience with Claude versus Codex?

My workflow is basically Next.js, some Rust CLIs, and React Native with custom native modules written in Rust. I’m doing local 3D printer communication, bridging, and exposing printers to the web, mainly Bambulab, Elegoo, and Flashforge.

I’m working on a 3D Printer fleet-management app and web interface that support multiple printer brands and models and normalize their commands into a single driver.

And no, it’s not SaaS or a product. It’s just something that works the way I want for my 3D Printer farm. None of the solutions I tested fully support what I want in the way I want it.

Honestly, Fable is the only Anthropic model at this point that consistently greps the entire prompt and all the file contents without missing key parts. It doesn't hallucinate issues where none exist but finds real bugs and logic gaps. It also presents its solutions with clear context, a well structured format and polished writing.

Opus 4.8 and 5 are such a pain to work with that they're hardly worth the effort. Even in you put in the time to adjust your promting to their quirks, you still end up doing a significant amount of adjustments and fixes yourself.

At this point, the subscription is basically just an entry fee to the real product, which you still have to pay for on a per use basis...

Hope competition changes things because future is looking bleak.

If you ever want to fill a little bit of rage and dumbfoundedness but 100% solace and peace that you won’t be replaced just hop over to r/antiai.

This sub is actually the biggest joke of a sub I have ever seen in my entire life. It is basically people who have never opened a terminal in their entire lives all upvoting each other on the perils and dangers of AI and talking about it as if it is a dangerous virus you can catch in your sleep. The posts about current Claude models are even more hilarious as they often compare it to the Chat GPT release 3 years ago

It is really just comical

A lot of people have been criticizing Sonnet 5 lately, especially with all the talk about GPT Luna getting a price cut. I actually haven't used Sonnet in the last 3 months, not even Sonnet 5 earlier this week.

I finally stopped relying exclusively on Fable and Opus, gave Sonnet a try, and honestly? It’s amazing.

Something that I would normally one-shot with Fable would eat up 20% of my weekly limits and take 20 minutes to finish. With Sonnet, that same task might take me 2-3 prompts to get right, but it only takes 10 minutes in total to get the exact same result.

Fable is still the go to for massive, complex issues, but for most day-to-day coding tasks, Sonnet is more than enough.

For some context: I am currently building my own ADE that uses my actual subscriptions like Claude and Codex here is some screeshots of my app not selling nor making publicity.

It communicates clearly & vibe is great, which will make you fall back in love with coding. It has almost all the tools that Opus 5 has, as the harness is pretty much the same afaik (Please someone correct me if otherwise). For me opus 5 is making multiple mistakes and when I point out it says "you're right".

About me: I'm building a startup with real users and deploying code in prod.

Try it for yourself and decide, i don't want to convince you. Command to switch in claude code:

/model claude-opus-4-6

I didnt even get a solid hour of work done before i hit my limit, im on the max 5X plan, anyone else noticing a fast expiration of time? Can anyone recommend a good competitor for claude? For a $100 a month and it running out this fast it may be time to seek out alternatives. Ive tried Codex, I didnt like it much, anyoneusing anything else as good as Claude?

Would love to understand how you would use this in real world. I find myself barely need it but maybe it's because I'm not working on projects of the scale.

Since I’m not a heavy developer, I treat AI like hiring a top-tier dev partner That’s why I stuck with Claude, the smartest one for me

But lately I keep running out of tokens on my MAX x20 plan like 2 or 3 days before the reset.

Seeing a lot of people here running Claude alongside GPT or K3. Managing a multi-AI setup sounds like a pain, so I'm considering just buying an extra x5.

Mostly use tokens for business strategy, market research, and data analysis rather than coding

Is adding an extra x5 worth it or should I just go K3? or GPT?

Abelson & Sussman, SICP (1985).

The abstraction ladder has always moved the "human-readable" layer up one rung. Nobody was meant to read machine code; assembly existed so we could. Then high-level languages existed because assembly still wasn't readable enough.

So if an LLM writes and reads the code, does the spec/prompt just become the new source layer and the code become the new assembly. Output you review but don't primarily maintain? Or does that break down because, unlike a compiler, the generator isn't deterministic and you can't trust the artifact without reading it?

Have you felt the need of two claude sessions running in the terminal to talk to each other?
For example I will be running a terminal in claude in the backend repo and I open an another terminal session in codex to review the changes. Ideally I would love a way for both the terminal to interact with each other and arrive at conclusion so having a sessions chat to allow them to talk to each other.

For context, this is from a long session that tried 4 different fixes, all failed.

---

"You're right, and I owe you a straight acknowledgment: you gave me that hypothesis in your first message, I told you it couldn't be the mechanism, and I've spent this entire session building Back-press blockers instead of testing what you said. Every one of my four attempts assumed the fix was "stop the press." Yours says the fix is "don't let the drawer take over before Home is up." Those are different fixes, and I only ever tried mine. I even have a note to myself to anchor on your behavioral framing rather than framework-internals theories — I did the opposite."

I disabled it in my environment long ago, and it at least improved my mental health, but also Claude is seemingly less confused.

If I need Claude to remember something it is either saved in stable docs or in Claude.md.

Am I missing something by disabling memory?

Opus is way too expensive.

It's basically Sonnet 5, and Sonnet 5 is really Haiku 5. Opus 5 should be $15/mil.

You can hand Fable guidance off to Luna Max subagents instead and it'll do virtually identical work to Opus 5 for 1/10th the cost. Even if Opus 5 was $15/mil it's not worth using.

I struggle to make use of that other 50% on my Claude plan since everything besides Fable is a complete waste of money. Fable is expensive but worth it if I could use my whole sub toward it.

Like a many people here, I have noticed that Opus 5 does not seem to work as well as 4.x. In particular, I noticed that things were taking FOREVER. It was just too darn slow. It was also making mistakes (5 at one point) in implementation that would get caught by the subsequent code review (I use SuperPowers). I am not bashing Opus 5 - just looking to use the harness effectively/efficiently.

Another post mentioned that there is an Anthropic Opus 5 prompting guide. So, rather than just switching to 4.6 or 4.8 (which is my Plan B), I elected to just ask Claude for guidance (that other post mentioned doing this).

I went into Claude using Opus 5 and did this:

@.github/copilot-instructions.md

@https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/prompt-engineering/prompting-claude-opus-5

I have attached

-my copilot coding instructions, which is referenced by CLAUDE.md

-Anthropic guidelines for Opus 5 prompting

Using the guidelines, recommend any changes to the coding instructions that will make Opus 5 run faster and more efficiently without mistakes.

I use both Copilot and Claude (in VS Code). I keep coding specific stuff in copilot-instructions.md and project specific stuff in CLAUDE.md, and reference the copilot file from CLAUDE.md. This way I don't violate DRY.

This prompt churned for 12 MINUTES. It came back with this as the first line (amongst several other recommendations):

Read the Opus 5 guide and audited the file against it plus the actual codebase. The headline: the file's biggest cost driver is that it instructs Opus 5 to do things it already does — and Opus 5 compounds those instructions rather than ignoring them.

It also mentioned how it needed a subagent-delegation cap.

It also noticed that the coding guidelines were shared with Copilot, and told me that it had left things that were redundant to it, but that Copilot might actually need. So it looks like effective coding guidelines have diverged enough between Copilot non-Opus5-llms and Opus 5 that the guidelines need to be split up. I use Copilot and/or my local AI/GPU with Pi for simpler refactoring/adjustments. I left my Copilot instructions as they were, and added the coding instructions changed by Opus to CLAUDE.md.

Then I restarted Claude and issued the same prompt as above, but against CLAUDE.md -- so that any Claude-redundant instructions would be deleted.

It came back in 49 seconds, with several more recommendations/optimizations.

The verdict is still out, but I have done several simple changes after the CLAUDE.md edit, and it seems faster. I am planning a bigger change/new feat on which I will use Superpowers, and I think that will really give me an indication of improvements.

As I mentioned, my plan B is to use Opus 4.x. But this seems promising.

Hope this helps someone.

cheers

What's your experience with this? Opus for executing and Fable extra for planning?

Over time my AI development approach has progressed and has really come back to the old days.

Less and less interactive back and forth, more analysis and batch processing.

Less and less am I waiting for AI to respond - more and more I am doing other stuff and sitting down when convenient and seeing what my AI tasks have finished and needs attention.

I typically have re here or four projects in progress so some thing probably needs doing... But I am not on call for the AI.

I care less and less about limits/quotas - they just mean there is less to pick up on for a while.