3 ms·

>So where's the non-sketchy, non-for-profit equivalent llama.cpp, kobold.cpp, oobabooga, llmstudio, etc. There are dozens at this point. And while many chalk

>So where's the non-sketchy, non-for-profit equivalent llama.cpp, kobold.cpp, oobabooga, llmstudio, etc. There are dozens at this point. And while many chalk the attachment to ollama up to a "skill issue", that's just venting frustration that all something has to do to win the popularity contest is to repackage and market it as an "app". I prefer first-party tools, I'm comfortable managing a build environment and calling models using pytorch, and ollama doesn't really cover my use cases, so I'm not it's audience. I still recommend it to people who might want the training wheels while they figure out how not-scary local inference actually is.

woadwarrior01 2y ago
> llmstudio ICYMI, you might want to read their terms of use: https://lmstudio.ai/terms https://lmstudio.ai/terms
evilduck 2y ago
> llama.cpp, kobold.cpp, oobabooga None of these three are remotely as easy to install or use. They could be, but none of them are even trying. > lmstudio This is a closed source app with a non-free license from a business not making money. Enshittification is just a matter of when.
- v9v 2y ago
  I would argue that kobold.cpp is even easier to use than Ollama. You click on the link in the README to download an .exe and doubleclick it and select your model file. No command line involved. Which part of the user experience did you have problems with when using it?
  - bdavbdav 2y ago
    You’re coming at it from a point of knowledge. Read the first sentence of the Ollama website against the first paragraph of kobold’s GitHub. Newcomers don’t have a clue what “running a GGUF model..” means. It’s written by tech folk without an understanding of the audience.
    - diggan 2y ago
      Ollama is also written for technical/developer users, by accident (it seems), even though they don't want it to be strictly for technical users. I've opened a issue asking them to make it more clear that Ollama is for technical users, but they seem confident people with no terminal experience can and will also use Ollama: https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/7116 https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/7116
      - lolinder 2y ago
        Why do you care? They're the ones who will deal with the support burden of people who don't understand how to use it—if that support burden is low enough that they're happy with where they're at, what motivation do you have to tell them to deliberately restrict their audience?
        diggan 2y ago
        > Why do you care? Like many in FOSS I care about making the experience better for everyone. Slightly weird question, why do you care that I care? > what motivation do you have to tell them to deliberately restrict their audience? I don't have any motivation to say any such thing, and I wouldn't either. Is that really your take away from reading that issue? Stating something like "Ollama is a daemon/cli for running LLMs in your terminal" on your website isn't a restriction whatsoever, it's just being clear up front what the tool is. Currently, the website literally doesn't say what Ollama actually is.
        lolinder 2y ago
        > Is that really your take away from reading that issue? Yes. You went to them with a definition of who they're trying to serve and they wrote back that they didn't agree with your relatively narrow scope. Now you're out in random threads about Ollama complaining that they didn't like your definition of their target audience. Am I missing something?
        2y ago

woadwarrior01 2y ago

> llmstudio ICYMI, you might want to read their terms of use: https://lmstudio.ai/terms https://lmstudio.ai/terms

evilduck 2y ago

> llama.cpp, kobold.cpp, oobabooga None of these three are remotely as easy to install or use. They could be, but none of them are even trying. > lmstudio This is a closed source app with a non-free license from a business not making money. Enshittification is just a matter of when.

v9v 2y ago
I would argue that kobold.cpp is even easier to use than Ollama. You click on the link in the README to download an .exe and doubleclick it and select your model file. No command line involved. Which part of the user experience did you have problems with when using it?
- bdavbdav 2y ago
  You’re coming at it from a point of knowledge. Read the first sentence of the Ollama website against the first paragraph of kobold’s GitHub. Newcomers don’t have a clue what “running a GGUF model..” means. It’s written by tech folk without an understanding of the audience.
  - diggan 2y ago
    Ollama is also written for technical/developer users, by accident (it seems), even though they don't want it to be strictly for technical users. I've opened a issue asking them to make it more clear that Ollama is for technical users, but they seem confident people with no terminal experience can and will also use Ollama: https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/7116 https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/7116
    - lolinder 2y ago
      Why do you care? They're the ones who will deal with the support burden of people who don't understand how to use it—if that support burden is low enough that they're happy with where they're at, what motivation do you have to tell them to deliberately restrict their audience?
      - diggan 2y ago
        > Why do you care? Like many in FOSS I care about making the experience better for everyone. Slightly weird question, why do you care that I care? > what motivation do you have to tell them to deliberately restrict their audience? I don't have any motivation to say any such thing, and I wouldn't either. Is that really your take away from reading that issue? Stating something like "Ollama is a daemon/cli for running LLMs in your terminal" on your website isn't a restriction whatsoever, it's just being clear up front what the tool is. Currently, the website literally doesn't say what Ollama actually is.
        lolinder 2y ago
        > Is that really your take away from reading that issue? Yes. You went to them with a definition of who they're trying to serve and they wrote back that they didn't agree with your relatively narrow scope. Now you're out in random threads about Ollama complaining that they didn't like your definition of their target audience. Am I missing something?
        2y ago