5 ms·

As far as I can tell Google Gemini has the best overall integrations (Android, WearOS, Google Home) with the only voice recognition that actually works (Gemini

As far as I can tell Google Gemini has the best overall integrations (Android, WearOS, Google Home) with the only voice recognition that actually works (Gemini Live). Anthropic Claude has the best integrations with coding; what would make sense is for them to focus on that segment. Other AI companies don't have anything really compelling. Meta has a model that's fully open-source, but then that's not particularly useful outside of helping them remain somewhat relevant, but not market-leading.

fragmede 8mo ago
Model available != open source
karmasimida 8mo ago
> Anthropic Claude has the best integrations with coding Disagree, Codex is neck and neck with A/ on coding front
sauercrowd 8mo ago
The tide seems to be shifting on codex, but also lets not forget openai has a brand that none of the others have - it's _the_ AI. Sure Google can go against that, but it's openai is definitely in a much better spot. It's pretty important for a consumer market.
- owebmaster 8mo ago
  This thing about openai brand is changing fast. In the dev circles I'm part of, everybody dislikes OpenAI and prefer Claude. How long it'll take for the same to happen with the normies?
  - frde_me 8mo ago
    You see, in my circles (me included), people are shifting _to_ codex since 5.3 codex came out. The only places where I hear people say claude is better is: - Frontend design - Random computer use tasks But people trust codex for large scale architecture and changes
    - nchie 8mo ago
      I use Claude for work and Codex for private use due to already having a Plus subscription. I can't say that I have noticed that 5.3-Codex is much better, but it's definitely on par with Opus 4.6, and its limits for $25/months is comparable to Max x5 at 1/4th of the cost (not to mention pay-per-token which we use at work). Claude Code is generally a much better experience though.
- chasd00 8mo ago
  The thing is though, Google Gemini is pretty good and it's not super hard to switch to and, the real moat, Google can just keep improving, integrating Gemini, and gathering customer while just waiting for OpenAI to go bankrupt. Basically, everyone on the planet has to pay OpenAI to keep them in business. If they don't get the vast majority of the market OpenAI can't pay their bills. Google is going to just starve OpenAI out.
christophilus 8mo ago
I’m not sure. I started using Codex last week. Codex, at $20/mo is a very good value.
- otagekki 8mo ago
  Indeed! For now let's enjoy it as much as we can. The VC-subsidized price of $20 won't last eternally I'm afraid
gizmodo59 8mo ago
If you haven’t used codex with gpt-5.3-codex (high or xhigh) you are missing out. Claude is still good at conversations but boy I can have codex go at a problem and it does better than Claude almost all the time. Front end and product UX Claude is slightly better but given the very very generous limits of codex, they are the best bang for buck
- cmrdporcupine 8mo ago
  Absolutely this. Codex right now is the superior coding model.
- coreyburnsdev 8mo ago
  this is my experience as well, just cancelled my claude subscription as I'm tired of it the 5 hour window being filled up within 30 minutes of use, and not even fixing the problem that codex finds almost immediately. also found for frontend that gemini 3.1 pro is better than the rest if you really play with it.
  - Imanari 8mo ago
    How is gemini 3.1 doing in agentic harnesses? Did they catch up?
- riskable 8mo ago
  Has it been sped up at all? Last time I used codex (which was with 5.1 I think), it was pretty slow. I mean, it did a fantastic job at figuring out hard bugs across multiple languages ("why is this image not lining up in this server-rendered template?"; Python, JS, CSS, and the template lang) but it took quite a long time. Long enough that I wouldn't want to use it for anything but the most complex things.
  - gizmodo59 8mo ago
    5.1 is 100 years old in AI world.
chasd00 8mo ago
> Anthropic Claude has the best integrations with coding; what would make sense is for them to focus on that segment. the problem with coding is the value is really in the harness and orchestration both of which are accessible to the opensource community. ClaudeCode isn't that big of a deal unless Anthropic makes it so that you can only access the models that ClaudeCode uses through ClaudeCode. If not, then projects like pi and opencode have the advantage in the long run. Also, these harnesses being node modules (of all things) make them very easy to reverse engineer with the help of... claudecode ironically.

fragmede 8mo ago

Model available != open source

karmasimida 8mo ago

> Anthropic Claude has the best integrations with coding Disagree, Codex is neck and neck with A/ on coding front

sauercrowd 8mo ago

The tide seems to be shifting on codex, but also lets not forget openai has a brand that none of the others have - it's _the_ AI. Sure Google can go against that, but it's openai is definitely in a much better spot. It's pretty important for a consumer market.

owebmaster 8mo ago
This thing about openai brand is changing fast. In the dev circles I'm part of, everybody dislikes OpenAI and prefer Claude. How long it'll take for the same to happen with the normies?
- frde_me 8mo ago
  You see, in my circles (me included), people are shifting _to_ codex since 5.3 codex came out. The only places where I hear people say claude is better is: - Frontend design - Random computer use tasks But people trust codex for large scale architecture and changes
  - nchie 8mo ago
    I use Claude for work and Codex for private use due to already having a Plus subscription. I can't say that I have noticed that 5.3-Codex is much better, but it's definitely on par with Opus 4.6, and its limits for $25/months is comparable to Max x5 at 1/4th of the cost (not to mention pay-per-token which we use at work). Claude Code is generally a much better experience though.
chasd00 8mo ago
The thing is though, Google Gemini is pretty good and it's not super hard to switch to and, the real moat, Google can just keep improving, integrating Gemini, and gathering customer while just waiting for OpenAI to go bankrupt. Basically, everyone on the planet has to pay OpenAI to keep them in business. If they don't get the vast majority of the market OpenAI can't pay their bills. Google is going to just starve OpenAI out.

christophilus 8mo ago

I’m not sure. I started using Codex last week. Codex, at $20/mo is a very good value.

otagekki 8mo ago
Indeed! For now let's enjoy it as much as we can. The VC-subsidized price of $20 won't last eternally I'm afraid

gizmodo59 8mo ago

If you haven’t used codex with gpt-5.3-codex (high or xhigh) you are missing out. Claude is still good at conversations but boy I can have codex go at a problem and it does better than Claude almost all the time. Front end and product UX Claude is slightly better but given the very very generous limits of codex, they are the best bang for buck

cmrdporcupine 8mo ago
Absolutely this. Codex right now is the superior coding model.
coreyburnsdev 8mo ago
this is my experience as well, just cancelled my claude subscription as I'm tired of it the 5 hour window being filled up within 30 minutes of use, and not even fixing the problem that codex finds almost immediately. also found for frontend that gemini 3.1 pro is better than the rest if you really play with it.
- Imanari 8mo ago
  How is gemini 3.1 doing in agentic harnesses? Did they catch up?
riskable 8mo ago
Has it been sped up at all? Last time I used codex (which was with 5.1 I think), it was pretty slow. I mean, it did a fantastic job at figuring out hard bugs across multiple languages ("why is this image not lining up in this server-rendered template?"; Python, JS, CSS, and the template lang) but it took quite a long time. Long enough that I wouldn't want to use it for anything but the most complex things.
- gizmodo59 8mo ago
  5.1 is 100 years old in AI world.

chasd00 8mo ago

> Anthropic Claude has the best integrations with coding; what would make sense is for them to focus on that segment. the problem with coding is the value is really in the harness and orchestration both of which are accessible to the opensource community. ClaudeCode isn't that big of a deal unless Anthropic makes it so that you can only access the models that ClaudeCode uses through ClaudeCode. If not, then projects like pi and opencode have the advantage in the long run. Also, these harnesses being node modules (of all things) make them very easy to reverse engineer with the help of... claudecode ironically.