13 ms·

Claude Code to be removed from Anthropic's Pro plan?

• alxhslm 5mo ago
  Annoying, signed up for a personal pro account a couple of weeks ago. No way I’m going to spend $200 just for a few personal projects.
  • dandaka 5mo ago
    no, most likely you will try codex and get more value (as I did)
  • vehemenz 5mo ago
    For $20, it seems like a no-brainer to switch to Codex. However, if you think you'll need the extra capacity of Max, it's $100, not $200.
• dallen33 5mo ago
  They should allow existing Pro plan users to keep using Claude Code.
• darrenc81 5mo ago
  Some top tier PR yet again... does Claude run their PR team on its own?
• netsec_burn 5mo ago
  I can't even sign up for Max (last tried yesterday), their credit card processor has issues.
• poetril 5mo ago
  I’ve got nearly 10 months left on my yearly subscription, I wonder what that means for my access.
  • UncleOxidant 5mo ago
    Same. I hope we're grandfathered in. Otherwise current pro subscribers who signed up with the understanding that they could use it in Claude Code are going to be extremely pissed and go off and sign up for alternatives (or start running local models instead). I mean, I guess they could say too bad, they got your money, but this would destroy their brand among people who are currently their most loyal users.
    • enedil 5mo ago
      Or also sue in fact or demand refunds.
    • skeledrew 5mo ago
      I don't want to leave, but I'm ready. The entire reason I got a Pro sub was so I can use Claude Code instead of going between browser and editor.
  • subscribed 5mo ago
    Same. I'm not a dev but I use CC a few times in a week and it's been a great help. However, my company paid for my annual subscription, so maybe I'll ask our lawyers for advice - the only reason they paid for this was my access to CC and with my use the next tier wouldn't make sense, AND no one will expect Anthropic to not nerf it too.
    • Aurornis 5mo ago
      Before you have lawyers look at it, wait until you’re actually impacted. Nothing has been removed from existing subscriptions yet and their employees Tweeted that existing subscriptions aren’t impacted.
      • 5mo ago
• JamesMcMinn 5mo ago
  I can't find an announcement yet, however the pricing page now shows it's not included, and various support articles have removed any mention of the the Pro plan including access to claude code. See [1] and [2] for an example of a support article that's had claude code removed as a Pro feature. I guess this is the beginning of the end for subsidised model access, at least from Anthropic. [1] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/8325606-what-is-the-pro-plan https://support.claude.com/en/articles/8325606-what-is-the-p... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20260420065828/https://support.claude.com/en/articles/8325606-what-is-the-pro-plan https://web.archive.org/web/20260420065828/https://support.c...
  • tmp10423288442 5mo ago
    5 minutes ago, I was seeing the old version of the page in which Claude Pro included Claude Code. I refreshed and now see that it does not.
  • _aavaa_ 5mo ago
    It’s now being explicitly shown as unavailable on the pro plan, scroll down to the comparison matrix.
  • thebiblelover7 5mo ago
    And this page as well, showing how to use Claude Code on the Max plan: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11145838-using-claude-code-with-your-max-plan https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11145838-using-claude...
  • UncleOxidant 5mo ago
    Claude Code is a freely downloadable CLI Agent. Why would they not let you use that anymore?
    • ezfe 5mo ago
      You have to login and authorize it? It costs money to process tokens.
    • foolswisdom 5mo ago
• thebiblelover7 5mo ago
  Previous page, when Claude Code was included: https://web.archive.org/web/20260421141017/https://claude.com/pricing https://web.archive.org/web/20260421141017/https://claude.co... Edit: fixed the url thanks to scq
  • jamietanna 5mo ago
    > The Wayback Machine has not archived that URL. Might have been taken down?
    • scq 5mo ago
      There seems to be some JS on the page that messes with the URL. Try this one: https://web.archive.org/web/20260421141017/https://claude.com/pricing https://web.archive.org/web/20260421141017/https://claude.co...
• hannahstrawbrry 5mo ago
  Claude Code page still shows it included with Pro/Max. https://claude.com/product/claude-code https://claude.com/product/claude-code
  • lukeasrodgers 5mo ago
    Claude Design was iterating on the plans page and decided to remove clutter and their review bot LGTM’d it as “minor copy change human review not required” and auto-merged it.
  • nubinetwork 5mo ago
    Shits confusing... I'm using the Claude code vscode plugin, yet my account page says I'm not using Claude code... so am I, or aren't I?
• ed 5mo ago
  This makes sense given Anthropic’s recent downtime and resource constraints. Opus 4.7 consumes tokens at a faster rate and folks were complaining that the Pro plan included too few credits for real work. And Anthropic now allows `claude -p` (which invokes Claude code) for 3rd party agents like OpenClaw, which consume far more tokens by running autonomously, 24/7.
  • sama004 5mo ago
    only if it actually improves the downtime, people were expecting the same when they revoked openclaw access but that didn't change anything
• verdverm 5mo ago
  I just cancelled my plan, but still have access to Pro and Code apparently until my cycle would have renewed. Hopefully they get a clear signal from this, especially if more of us cancel with the intention to sign back up should they reverse this decision.
  • jryb 5mo ago
    I’d be surprised if they’re running at less than 100% capacity after this. It’s just too useful to too many people for whom an $80/month increase is immaterial (I speculate)
    • verdverm 5mo ago
      This is not so much about capacity, I pay $X and I get a certain amount. This is much more about removing access to a feature I have access to. Having a chat with Claude Code (removed) seems to me to be likely less usage than Claude Cowork Tasks (more like open claw, cron triggers). This seems much more like a SaaS Tax. I would not be as unhappy if they kept the Code feature and gated my access to Opus. I mostly use Sonnet anyway
• chewz 5mo ago
  Makes sense. It is over for the little guy - home enthusiasts and vibe coders. Too many of them saturating resources for Max users. IF you cannot afford few hundred dollars subscription go out and breathe fresh air. But if you can, watch where the ball is rolling - few thousand dollars subscriptions and even less programmers.
  • whattheheckheck 5mo ago
    Vscode agent mode and github copilot can use Claude models and has feature parity with the .md customization for agents prompts skills etc. Not too expensive
    • user34283 5mo ago
      They slapped a 7.5x “promotional” multiplier on Opus 4.7 and they are removing Opus 4.6 in short order. I heard they disabled signups for non-business accounts too. Best forget about using Claude Opus models in Copilot.
      • michaelcampbell 5mo ago
        > Best forget about using Claude Opus models in Copilot. I noticed this morning that Opus isn't even one of the models in the `/model` command in Copilot. Highest I can get (on the paid, but least expensive) tier is Sonnet 4.6. I'm pretty sure Opus was allowed recently, but not now.
        • whattheheckheck 5mo ago
          Yeha not thrilled about that. Looks like you gotta build your own agent harness and self host or use aws bedrock for "sovereignty"
          • michaelcampbell 5mo ago
            Indeed; especially since I paid for a sub with some expectations, and those are being changed out from under me.
• Larrikin 5mo ago
  Why is management at Anthropic trying so hard to ruin their reputation with developers? I missed the OpenClaw hype but it was something that kept me excited about my yearly subscription. It makes no sense to do one of the higher tier plans unless they are directly generating you money.
  • verdverm 5mo ago
    Also note that they are letting OpenClaw be used again with `claude -p`, so a partial reversal
    • Xunjin 5mo ago
      And I thought MS was confused one on how to do pricing and business decisions.
      • dd8601fn 5mo ago
        Last I saw they have 21 products or services named Copilot. I think they still win the confusion prize.
        • Xunjin 5mo ago
          We should have "The Copilot Award goes to..." Every year for the most confusing product name/lineup
          • dd8601fn 5mo ago
            I love it. It’ll be doubly funny when the Xbox marketing team wins the Copilot Confusion Award.
    • jamietanna 5mo ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47853799 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47853799 for the curious
  • 5mo ago
• werd_eithw 5mo ago
  Their chat bot claims that pro users still have access to Claude Code.
  • aenis 5mo ago
    "You are absolutely right!"
• Xunjin 5mo ago
  Is this confirmed?!
• woeirua 5mo ago
  [flagged]
• skeledrew 5mo ago
  This is a joke, right... right??
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• dv_dt 5mo ago
  I predict this may get reversed as it would be a huge opening for glm, kimi, and qwen offerings. I'd switch instead of upgrading to Max
  • dd8601fn 5mo ago
    Do they have their own cli agents or just the api inference services?
    • jmcodes 5mo ago
      I don't think they do but you can always use OpenCode or Pi Agent.
      • hannahstrawbrry 5mo ago
        very easy to configure claude code to route to GLM as well.
    • charcircuit 5mo ago
      Moonshot AI has Kimi Code and their $20 per month plan had a lot more than Anthropic's (before 4.6 and the other changes to eat up your limit faster).
    • dv_dt 5mo ago
      Some do, I know of kimi code https://www.kimi.com/code https://www.kimi.com/code
  • skeledrew 5mo ago
    Time to do research.
• wilg 5mo ago
  Related perhaps to GitHub pausing signups for Copilot? https://github.blog/changelog/2026-04-20-changes-to-github-copilot-plans-for-individuals/ https://github.blog/changelog/2026-04-20-changes-to-github-c...
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• fuomag9 5mo ago
  I'm asking for a full refund of my plan via amex if this actually happens. Fuck them.
• vicchenai 5mo ago
  Saw this coming eventually. $20/month for autonomous agents running 24/7 was clearly not sustainable at API pricing. The part that's surprising is there's still no official announcement - just a quiet page edit.
  • boogerbuttcheek 5mo ago
    Choosing to do it quietly instead of letting everyone know is actually not that surprising.
    • deleted 5mo ago
      [deleted]
    • skeledrew 5mo ago
      And yet they're very aware that Hacker News, etc exists and so the awareness and backlash would be instant. It's like they want to get a lower rating from the community. Maybe that's their solution for the resource issue: make enough people mad so they abandon their subscriptions.
  • skeledrew 5mo ago
    > running 24/7 This was never the case though. There's a per week and per 5 hour quota. If you exhaust either you have to wait for the reset. What they're doing makes no sense.
  • moregrist 5mo ago
    The $20/mo plan never supported 24/7 autonomous agents. With Opus 4.5 and 4.6 I would hit resource limits after a reasonable amount of work, which corresponded to a variable amount of wall clock time. This makes me think either they’re severely resource constrained and need to focus on “high value” customers, they’re bleeding money on inference, or their sales and marketing team is incompetent. Regardless, this feels like a pretty big rug pull. Especially without a phase-out period and a real announcement. As someone using Claude Code on a personal hobby project to get a better feel for its capabilities, I’m not sure what to do now. I can’t justify the $100+/mo plans for a hobby project. My choices are then: - Code this project by hand, which would be fun but defeats the point of this being my agentic coding project. - Find another model and use Codex or OpenCode or whatever. - Put the project on a shelf till this shakes out. Fun times.
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• gozucito 5mo ago
  If it was removed from the pro plan, then the max plan should list claude code as one of its extras, and it doesn't. I would not jump to conclusions yet.
  • thyb23 5mo ago
    In the “Compare features across plans” section, Claude Code appears to be available only on the Max plan.
    • gozucito 5mo ago
      You're right. I didn't scroll down. I wonder why they didn't update the top cards that everyone see. They do it for claude Cowork but not claude code? That is not very transparent. How does it make sense? It's not like claude code is too niche to be included, it's in the main app and I know multiple non-techie people who use it.
  • civvv 5mo ago
    If you scroll down, you can clearly see that the Pro plan has an "x" on Claude Code now.
• guelo 5mo ago
  This is more ethical than what they've been doing, trying to keep those subscribers but limiting them to the point it's become unusable. But it's also kneecaping themselves because they'll miss out on any innovation and hype coming out of the hobbyist community.
• robertkarl 5mo ago
  I don't think I've ever been on such a rollercoaster with a company's reputation in the developer space. I started in January on the $20 plan, essentially my first agentic AI programming. I quickly started hitting limits developing several apps at the same time. I went up to the $200 plan after seeing the value. After seeing my own issues with 4.6 and the mega-post on Github about declining metrics in a decent dataset of claude chats by Stella Laurenzo at AMD (https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/42796 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/42796), I downgraded to the $100 plan. Hallucinations. Laziness. Lack of thinking. The responses on those mega-threads from Anthropic rubbed me the wrong way in a "you're holding it wrong" kinda way. In the past week, I downgraded back to the $20 plan because the Codex $20 plan on 5.4 was working so well for me. Then throw in other oddball events like the source code leak, and the super positive Anthropic events like their interactions with the current administration. It's a wild ride. I can't understand removing Claude Code from $20. I'm interested to see whether this is confirmed or not. I'm a career engineer and I went from being one of their most outspoken proponents (at least within my circle) and now.... I'm not.
  • jmcodes 5mo ago
    Same loved them, told my team about them, got them to switch off of cursor, now I'm telling them to swap to Codex. Anthropic really pissed me off with their harness crap. They're well within their rights but their communication over it was enough to get me to swap. I don't need extra hurdles when there's a perfectly valid alternative right there. They don't have the advantage they think they do.
    • operatingthetan 5mo ago
      I think we are inevitably heading to using the cheap Chinese models like Kimi, GLM, and Minimax for the bulk of engineering tasks. Within 3-6 months they will be at Opus 4.6 level.
      • robertkarl 5mo ago
        This was literally my task today, to try out Qwen 9B locally on my, albeit a bit memory-constrained at 18GB, macbook with pi or opencode. Before reading this update.
• civvv 5mo ago
  Does this mean that for enterprises using per-seat pricing, only the $100 premium seat gets access to claude code?
  • vict7 5mo ago
    Team plan shows “Claude code” in a main bullet point still. Which would indicate it is part of the team plan regardless if it has premium seats or not. But it seems this is all in a state of flux. And there’s the lovely asterisk at the bottom: > Prices and plans are subject to change at Anthropic's discretion.
  • conception 5mo ago
    Enterprise doesn’t have premium. Just api usage. Business accounts are like max 6x accounts.
• wilg 5mo ago
  People really have to internalize that these things are expensive to run, and that there isn't enough compute to go around, like actually for real for real, which is likely the source of this. My guess is its a temporary new sign up pause.
• nkzd 5mo ago
  Meh, $20 Codex is better at this moment anyway.
• danielspace23 5mo ago
  With GLM and Kimi getting better and better, with both still providing low-cost coding plans with higher quotas, and with how trivial it is to switch to them even within Claude CLI, I'm not sure what makes Anthropic think their users would rather pay 5x than switch to the competition.
  • zozbot234 5mo ago
    Never mind GLM and Kimi, even GPT 5.4 offers a great plan for $20/mo. Even if it gets increased rate limits after May, it's still quite likely that casual users won't be hitting them on a regular basis.
    • dv_dt 5mo ago
      openai is too toxic for many
      • michaelcampbell 5mo ago
        And I'm sure their bean counters are watching this VERY closely; if it doesn't sink A\ outright, there's no reason they won't up their prices too.
  • UncleOxidant 5mo ago
    I signed up for a 3 month plan with Z.ai so I could try out GLM-5.1. That was a few weeks ago when it was still $27 for 3 months, now it's $48 for 3 months. I hit limits at least as much as I do with Claude. I hit a weekly limit at one point and it said I wasn't going be able to get access again for 6 days so I must've somehow hit their weekly limit on day one of the week. And that after several timeouts.
  • mudkipdev 5mo ago
    The GLM coding plan price increased dramatically
    • davikr 5mo ago
• dminik 5mo ago
  Well, if there's one way to show that you're not profitable on inference, this would be it.
• tacker2000 5mo ago
  Funny, I just signed up for Pro a couple hours ago, to check how Claude Code works using this plan, instead of using my API keys. I got rate limited after about 30mins of coding and was thinking, who the hell i going to work like this? So they really seem to be running into extreme capacity issued now.
• DeathArrow 5mo ago
  I'm very happy with GLM 5.1, MiniMax M2.7 and Kimi K2.5. My wallet is happy, too.
  • HDBaseT 5mo ago
    [dead]
• gbalduzzi 5mo ago
  I think that Anthropic has capacity problems. They went all in on acquiring new customers but now they don't have enough capacity to both serve users and train new models, so they are trying to limit user usages. It is pure speculation of course, but I don't have any other explanations on the stuff they are pulling in the last 2 months.
  • gAI 5mo ago
    Yeah, this is pretty clearly what's going on, but I wish they'd be more transparent about it. Funneling compute to Mythos and Design, while auto-setting effort levels lower and removing user control of extended thinking. I don't think the need to shuffle compute around is unique to Anthropic, though. I suspect it's part of why Sora got killed. And everyone's having uptime issues. Are we reaching the limits of the available compute?
• quietsegfault 5mo ago
  Trying to chat with "fin" is like trying to argue with a bowl of congealed oatmeal. Me: Why is your website saying Claude Code is not included in Claude Pro subscriptions? "Fin", the slow, dopey AI agent: That’s confusing, but it usually comes down to what “Claude Code” means in that context. Claude Pro does include Claude Code (the Code tab in the desktop app, and Claude Code access for individuals). What Pro does not include is API access via the Claude Console. Those are separate products: Pro is for chat, and the Console is for building apps with the API. So if the website is saying “not included,” it’s likely referring to Console/API access, not the Claude Code feature itself. Did that clear up the confusion? Me: No. It clearly states on the pricing page that Claude Code is not included. Fin: That’s frustrating, <NAME>. The key detail is that Claude Code is included in Claude Pro, but API access via the Claude Console is not. So if the page you’re looking at says “Claude Code is not included,” it’s almost certainly referring to Console/API access (the developer platform), not the Claude Code feature itself. If you tell me the exact URL or screenshot of the page that says that, I can confirm which “Code” it’s talking about. Was that explanation helpful? Me: https://claude.com/pricing https://claude.com/pricing Fin: On https://claude.com/pricing https://claude.com/pricing, Pro does include Claude Code. It’s listed right there under Pro’s “Everything in Free, plus” bullets: “Includes Claude Code.” So if you’re seeing “not included” somewhere else on that page, it’s likely referring to something different than the Claude Code feature. The one thing Pro does not include is API access via the Claude Console (that’s a separate product). Also, the Code tab in the desktop app requires a Pro (or Max/Team/Enterprise) subscription, and it may not show for everyone yet since it’s still rolling out. Does that clear things up for you? Me: there is clearly an "x" at this page. escalate to a human immediately. and then the cycle continues. I'm cancelling my Anthropic subscription, sick of worrying about limits and getting banned and simply awful experience.
  • menthe 5mo ago
    [dead]
• tayo42 5mo ago
  Vibe coded ui bug? That sucks, I guess I'll cancel my Claude account. Not paying 100 dollars. That's crazy
• UncleOxidant 5mo ago
  I don't see it mentioned in the Max plan there either.
• spprashant 5mo ago
  I can't believe they are yanking tool access instead of just reducing the token quota or simply pulling Opus 4.7 access. To be fair even that would be poorly received, but at least people would have a choice of working within limits. Claude Code is their real winner, and a great ramp for newcomers coming into AI assisted development. They are playing straight into OpenAIs hands.
• tiberius_p 5mo ago
  It works for me at the moment on the pro plan. Is there a grace period until they enforce the new pricing?
  • UncleOxidant 5mo ago
    I would hope that we'd be grandfathered in since we signed up with the expectation that we could use it in Claude Code. I could see where maybe that might lead to problems down the line where they do some kind of update and "forget" that people who signed up before a certain date were supposed to be grandfathered in.
• wasabinator 5mo ago
  The enshitification intensifies.
• cambaceres 5mo ago
  That’s too bad, I just purchased a one year pro plan for my dad just for him to play around with CC when he retires next week.
• wrxd 5mo ago
  This is a risky move. I might have paid $20/month for my personal projects but the Max subscription is a bit steep. Now I'm going to learn more about local models. I don't need to be as good as a frontier model. Good enough and free from all this drama is a win for me
  • Xunjin 5mo ago
    "free of this drama" and free is great option for companies, of course most use API billing but let's not forget that there are places that budget is limited and being good enough is just perfect.
  • peab 5mo ago
    the cursor 20$ a month plan has been working great for me. You can use most models, and unlimited use of composer 2, which is surprisingly good
    • muyuu 5mo ago
      It's a volatile space. Cursor was just acquired by SpaceX, so let's see what happens.
      • rokob 5mo ago
        Wait what
        • muyuu 5mo ago
          Front page right now.
  • CrimsonShadow 5mo ago
    Same, I'm currently unemployed and the $20 help me to initiate many small projects. The recent taxing in the token made me start testing local models on my machine. Tho, Claude works better for the front end part imo.
  • dgb23 5mo ago
• sourabhv 5mo ago
  It's still included here https://claude.com/product/claude-code https://claude.com/product/claude-code
  • csullivannet 5mo ago
    Maybe they're putting out a weather balloon to test sentiment. That way when they're caught they can just point at the other page to say it was just a mistake.
    • Maxious 5mo ago
      Confirmed, 2% of users don't see Claude code included https://x.com/i/status/2046724659039932830 https://x.com/i/status/2046724659039932830
      • pixel_popping 5mo ago
        As if we could just blindly trust what he said :/ Could be 2, could 30, who knows (well, they do, but not us)
• pluc 5mo ago
  I posted this question two weeks ago: "What is your plan when the AI you have implemented throughout your company changes the results you've come to trust?" (https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/06/anthropic_claude_code_dumber_lazier_amd_ai_director/ https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/06/anthropic_claude_code...). Since then, I had to add: "or won't let you log in?": https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/44257 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/44257 "or makes stuff up?": https://dwyer.co.za/static/claude-mixes-up-who-said-what-and-thats-not-ok.html https://dwyer.co.za/static/claude-mixes-up-who-said-what-and... "or when it's down?": https://status.claude.com/incidents/6jd2m42f8mld https://status.claude.com/incidents/6jd2m42f8mld "or when you get banned?": https://bannedbyanthropic.com/ https://bannedbyanthropic.com/ "or installs spyware?": https://www.thatprivacyguy.com/blog/anthropic-spyware/ https://www.thatprivacyguy.com/blog/anthropic-spyware/ And this is all exclusively about Anthropic. It's insane. On any other tech, there would be a consensus to wait until it's stable, but not AI - we go full throttle when it's AI. Genuinely curious how people who have implemented this in serious companies are answering these questions, because my answer is to keep it the fuck out.
• zaptheimpaler 5mo ago
  This just made me gamble on a yearly subscription for Pro, hoping they will grandfather in existing customers..
  • angry_octet 5mo ago
    Please report back if they send you a Dear John email.
• ppetty 5mo ago
  Wonder where this leaves folks who paid the annual rate? Here’s what Claude said: https://claude.ai/share/1a4293bd-b2d4-41b7-a887-eb42b3ae8b6e https://claude.ai/share/1a4293bd-b2d4-41b7-a887-eb42b3ae8b6e “ The standard answer here is no — Anthropic does not typically refund the unused portion of annual plans , and annual subscribers won’t see prorated refunds, retaining access for the full remaining period instead. That said, your situation is a bit different — you’re not just canceling, you’re canceling because a feature you paid for was removed. That’s worth contacting Anthropic support directly about. Their support team can check your refund eligibility , and this kind of material change to the plan is exactly the case where a support escalation could go differently than a standard cancellation. You can reach them through the in-app support messenger at support.claude.com or via the thumbs-down feedback button. I’d recommend explaining specifically that Claude Code was a factor in your annual plan purchase. ”
  • Rekindle8090 5mo ago
    Just do a chargeback its an easy W. I dont see why you'd want to continue doing business with anthropic after a change to a 1 year contract out of cycle
• 0x_rs 5mo ago
  If true, very strange change when Codex (at both 20 & 100) is a much, much better deal for a model much better at most coding tasks, with way more usage even with the /fast mode enabled. Is losing most non-enterprise customers the right move for them?
  • mil22 5mo ago
    Equally, will offering a presumably unprofitably large quota of Codex tokens at $20 to retain non-enterprise customers turn out to be the right move for OpenAI? Would not be surprised to see OpenAI follow suit. Or perhaps OpenAI's LLMs are just so more compute efficient that they can actually offer that sustainably...
    • 0x_rs 5mo ago
      Feels to me it's a battle between who has the most compute. OpenAI does not seem to be struggling with their x2 usage on the new 100 Plan, which is very close to unlimited usage with the best performing model on the highest reasoning setting. Not mentioning the resets every 1 million customers, or the other generous usage multipliers last months. Meanwhile Anthropic seems to be desperately trying to cut down on inference with their changes to reasoning effort and more lately, so they might be focusing on what they consider to be more valuable customers for their long-term strategy. The 20 plan with Opus had gotten so bad on CC they might've just pulled the plug to stop people from complaining about usage limits. If OpenAI can burn money longer and capture the market from the bottom, I think they'd win in the long run.
      • williamstein 5mo ago
        What does " Not mentioning the resets every 1 million customers" mean?
        • 0x_rs 5mo ago
          >To celebrate 3 million weekly codex users, we are resetting usage limits. >We will do this every million users up to 10 million. >Happy building! https://x.com/sama/status/2041658719839383945 https://x.com/sama/status/2041658719839383945 Last reset today, after the 4 million users milestone.
• ykl 5mo ago
  At least for me Claude Code is still working on my Pro plan. I don't know if that's because the change simply hasn't propagated all the way through their systems yet (the change is now up on the main Claude pricing page and on their support pages, but not on the Claude Code landing page yet), or if it's because existing plans are grandfathered in, or what. In general Anthropic seems to be pretty bad at clearly communicating what is going on. I have both Claude Pro for Claude Code and ChatGPT Plus for Codex, and lately I've been reaching for Codex first more and more often... at least for the hobby stuff I'm using Claude/Codex on, they seem pretty much equivalent in terms of practical capability/usefulness.
  • barbazoo 5mo ago
    How long until OpenAI remove Codex from their cheap plan? Should we instead use a generic coding agent with a particular model and just pay per token?
    • happygoose 5mo ago
      pretty sure the codex cli itself is open source (and written in rust!) and can be used with any model.
• mmcconnell1618 5mo ago
  Anthropic clearly doesn't understand that customers see their brand as "Claude", Google's brand as "Gemini" and OpenAI's brand as "ChatGPT." They have so many plans and exclusions that they risk customer confusion. I was surprised when I was pay $200/month for Claude Code, finding it super helpful, and then I had to pay separately to get API access for an experiment. Why are so many parts of "Claude" separate from each other, especially on a $200/month subscription. Anthropic better get this sorted out with a proper product manager and marketing or they risk customers jumping to easier to understand platforms that are good enough.
  • robertkarl 5mo ago
    That also was really opaque to me RE: API access. I initially thought at $200/month I could get whatever I needed. I eventually set up a OpenAI API with a few bucks to try what I wanted to.
  • abeindoria 5mo ago
    >or they risk customers jumping to easier to understand platforms that are good enough. https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-raises-30-billion-series-g-funding-380-billion-post-money-valuation https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-raises-30-billion-s... I reckon they'll be fine. Not agreeing or disagreeing with you, but they have enough customers who won't leave.
• numbers 5mo ago
  does anyone have recommendations on replacing CC with something else for around $20-30 / month?
• uKER 5mo ago
  So their minimum workable offer for devs just went from $17 to $100. Also, I don't see how the Pro subscription is relevant anymore. Nobody pays $17 a month just to chat. I just unsubscribed. :) Time to try Chat GPT Codex, which even works with the free subscription (don't expect crazy token allowance, of course).
  • Aurornis 5mo ago
    > I just unsubscribed. :) Existing subscriptions are not impacted according to Tweets from their team. It’s apparently an A/B test they’re rolling out. If you actually wanted the $20/month Claude Code plan you may have just shot yourself in the foot.
    • mudkipdev 5mo ago
      Who would want Anthropic's business after they broke user trust?
• naet 5mo ago
  Seems like a pretty bad business move if it's really what they're doing. They should want devs using the product on a cheaper subscription to see the value with profitable limits on usage. I think the only reason to do this would be that they just can't scale up to service the volume they have and need to cut down significantly on the total number of users. Seems also like a rough business proposition. Most of the pro plan users would probably migrate to a competitor at a similar price point (I know I will). The only other possibility would be if they are losing too much money on the compute power and just can't offer it at that price anymore. But then upgrading the plan gives you more compute per dollar, so maybe they're just banking on people not actually using all of what they pay for? I had previously thought that the inference cost of using a trained model was relatively low and that most costs went into training new models, but maybe that is less true with the more powerful newer models. If it costs a ton more to serve Opus vs serving something like Kimi or Qwen, then I think most people just won't use the more expensive version for most things.
• npunt 5mo ago
  No particular opinion on this change, but generally pricing is a great way to separate dabblers from serious users. There isn’t a great deal of value in dabblers or what they produce, I imagine that training data isn’t worth much relative to the pro users. Similar pricing story with $100 yearly price for Apple developer accounts that people complain a lot about. The reality is if you’re serious about making something, these costs are pretty cheap. The folks hurt most by this are serious people in developing countries and young people starting out. Occasionally a dabbler turns into a serious user but I imagine that’s far less likely than people wish it were. The value to companies who make these changes is they don’t have low value users or low value contributions to worry about, which has its own not insignificant overhead. In the age of AI slop everywhere we’re likely to see a lot more attempts to separate the wheat from the chaff.
  • vehemenz 5mo ago
    The dabbler/serious user distinction isn't the only framing here. Assuming this limitation applies to team seats in the same way, at $20/mo, businesses could afford to have everybody on the plan. Plenty of folks write only a few hours of code per day—or even per week in their job. These are still professionals, not dabblers.
• whythismatters 5mo ago
  Hey, I'm a pro, and I feel genuinely insulted. I could consider going back to Claude Desktop + MCP, but I'm getting tired of this telenovela, and will probably cancel my sub and take my business elsewhere.
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• ryanmcgarvey 5mo ago
  Everyone that is upset about this should take note: you are not a (coding) customer at $20/mo. Their coding customers spend thousands per month (week!) on claude and it's growing faster than they can keep up with (source: I'm one of them, and I know many other like me. We're budgeting 10-20% of engineering salary spend on tokens). It sucks to no longer be able to code on the cheap anymore, but don't fool yourself into thinking you have any leverage here.
  • nickthegreek 5mo ago
    My leverage is i’m canceling my plan. Openai gives me codex+chatgpt for my $20. I use my claude code sparingly, but I enjoyed it and it works great when I needed it. Access to it was a reason they got my money a few months ago and it’s been a shit show of reduction of services since.
  • vehemenz 5mo ago
    I agree about the leverage point, but it was definitely possible to be a coding customer at $20/mo before, especially with Sonnet.
• johnduhart 5mo ago
  Pricing page reflects this: https://claude.com/pricing#individual-features https://claude.com/pricing#individual-features
  • OJFord 5mo ago
    That is exactly what TFA shows
    • michaelcampbell 5mo ago
      Only for some, though. My pricing page still shows Code on the Pro tier.
• akucharczyk 5mo ago
  It cracks me up when I hear takes like - 'if you're not using more than $20, the product isn't for you because you're not a real user.' If you use CC as an assistant rather than a replacement for your own thinking, follow SDD, and use the tool thoughtfully, you deliver a lot more and you don't need the 5x or 20x limit. It's a different story if you're vibe coding, but then we're not really talking about AI-assisted work - your three prompts barely count as doing any work. I've been on Pro for 2 years, but if this is how things are going, I'll look for an alternative. Luckily, there's plenty to choose from.
• Kaotique 5mo ago
  They will lose the individual subscribers for sure. My day job can pay up to the roof for ai access in this climate but personally I cannot.
  • vehemenz 5mo ago
    Believe me, plenty of "day jobs" are already stretching to pay for $20/mo for their users. Others in non-tech sectors are forced to use Copilot. Who knows what I would pay for a usable LLM out of my own pocket. Probably more than $200.
• 2001zhaozhao 5mo ago
  Huh? I just don't understand why they're doing this. Feels like shooting themselves in the foot, given that Claude's individual subscribers are a large part of who is introducing all their enterprise customers to them. Plus removing access is never good for public perception.
• KarlMertin 5mo ago
  https://claude.com/product/claude-code https://claude.com/product/claude-code - scroll to "Get started with Claude Code" and it's still lsited in the pro plan.
  • rideontime 5mo ago
    Ed’s replies show an archived Code support page that was changed today to remove mentions of Pro. They seem to be making these changes right now.
    • saghm 5mo ago
      > making these changes right now Would it really be that hard for them to just make all of the changes and then do a redeploy rather than doing them incrementally? It's not like they're just editing the raw HTML sitting on the server manually, right? Actually, don't answer that, I'm not sure I even want to know the answer.
      • AnonEM00se 5mo ago
        “Claude, remove the reference to Code in the pro plan everywhere on our website.” “Done” “You forgot this page.” “Done” “You also forgot this one” 3 hours later…
• fxd123 5mo ago
  Just tried Claude Code on my Pro plan. It worked. So no, it's not removed
  • HDBaseT 5mo ago
    I would assume users who have an existing subscription will be grandfathered in. It would seem misleading to sell monthly, or even yearly, subscriptions under the guise Claude Code comes with the subscription, for it to only be yanked out underneath you. (Although depending who you ask, Anthropic have already done actions similar to this).
  • mingus88 5mo ago
    I was billed $220 on Mar 1 for the pro plan If they rugpull Claude code from my already paid for annual subscription I’ll have to issue a chargeback
• jerrygenser 5mo ago
  so if you pick max-5x or mx-20x than pro... are you getting 0 now?
• skywhopper 5mo ago
  See also https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1srzhd7/psa_claude_pro_no_longer_lists_claude_code_as_an/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1srzhd7/psa_claud...
• Aurornis 5mo ago
  Claude Code still works on Pro plans as of right now. The Anthropic website has become inconsistent. Some places say Claude Code is included in the Pro plan, other pages don't.
• edzitron 5mo ago
  https://www.wheresyoured.at/news-anthropic-removes-pro-cc/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/news-anthropic-removes-pro-cc/ wrote it up. And relatively dry too!
• redrix 5mo ago
  Next they’ll slowly reduce how much CC usage you can get out of the $100 Max plan, then introduce a new $300 “Max Plus” plan with “40x” usage. “You asked, and we listened: Introducing Max Plus, our biggest plan yet, designed for those…” blah blah
  • colechristensen 5mo ago
    Yup, and Uber rides that used to be $5 are now $12. Because they stopped burning investor money and taking losses on each ride.
  • x0x0 5mo ago
    combined with 30-50% token inflation too. hmm.
  • kivle 5mo ago
    They already effectively halved it with the introduction of Opus 4.7 and the new tokenizer that basically gives you about half as much usage for the same price.. Convenient to price based on tokens, and leave what a token is a moving target..
    • shepherdjerred 5mo ago
      Source?
      • beering 5mo ago
        Look up independent tests of the new tokenizer for opus 4.7. I don’t think it was double, more like 140%ish of Opus 4.6.
    • theshrike79 5mo ago
      Source: I could easily work with the anthropic quotas before. Now I run into a wall constantly. I haven't changed the way I work, I've become more conscious of context sizes than before if anything. Still run out of quota constantly with 4.7.
• incognito124 5mo ago
  Dup: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47854477 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47854477
• kelsey98765431 5mo ago
  i cancelled cursor about 10 minutes ago and i'll cancel claude too
  • loloquwowndueo 5mo ago
    Back to coding by hand like our ancestors? Good for you! We should all do this, give them the finger.
    • selcuka 5mo ago
      Or you know, you can use a local model, or an open model with an independent provider.
      • loloquwowndueo 5mo ago
        Or, coding by hand :)
• SwellJoe 5mo ago
  Why would you even want a Claude subscription if not for Claude Code? Anthropic is obviously the best for programming, but probably nowhere else. Seems like a good way to onboard people to the Claude Code experience...everyone who's working seriously with it needs Opus, anyway. But, maybe that's the rub, if the Pro plan includes no Opus usage (which I think has always been the case), you might have a worse impression of Claude Code. Codex 5.4 is better than Sonnet, but not better than Opus. I dunno, I'm no business genius, but I think we're starting to see these companies try to find ways to make money instead of losing it.
  • ai_slop_hater 5mo ago
    I have been using https://claude.ai https://claude.ai and, initially, it was good, but, unfortunately, it keeps getting worse. I had it search for contact information for a certain public entity, and in Claude's response, all emails were being replaced with [email protected] or something like that. They also added an absolutely horrendous automatic markdown in the text input, so now you can't even properly enter your prompt. It actively gets in my way and prevents me from typing what I want. Fuck you Anthropic.
  • bezier-curve 5mo ago
    The pro plan does include Opus usage. I've noticed the limits on the web client are a bit higher than through CC, but probably more because of the increased token usage of agentic coding in general. Claude web is actually pretty good for dealing with random projects outside of code. I have a Home Assistant MCP server [1] behind a Cloudflare tunnel exposed to it that makes maintaining automations a lot easier. [1] https://github.com/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp https://github.com/homeassistant-ai/ha-mcp
  • lifis 5mo ago
    On LMArena, Claude Opus is ranked as the best at everything except image and video generation, which it does not support. That may be inaccurate, but it's plausible
  • croes 5mo ago
    Opus 4.5 was part of the pro plan and 4.6 too
• colechristensen 5mo ago
  I assume this has to do with the $20 tier now running out of provisioned tokens so quickly as to be not particularly useful, giving users a bad experience. The million token context + reduced caching period + new models using more tokens made this a probably unpopular but perhaps unavoidable development. There's a hard problem here balancing costs and experience. I'm afraid despite the bad experience for people that this is necessary and $20/month was just too big a loss to sustain.
  • Esophagus4 5mo ago
    > $20/month was just too big a loss to sustain. Is there any marginal cost associated with a new subscriber? I have always heard inference is cheap and the cost was in training, so I assumed any subscriber was making them money, just not enough to cover their insane fixed costs. But I am just guessing.
    • colechristensen 5mo ago
      There are two extremes, the "approx 0 marginal cost" camp and the "anthropic losing $5000/mo on every Max subscriber" camp. I strongly suspect both are wrong.
• zmmmmm 5mo ago
  It would signal quite a fundamental pivot if their "Pro" plan excludes coding but supports personal productivity (Cowork). Quite surprising given most people attribute Anthropic's success to their elevation of coding above everything else. To have casual users locked out of that would be a major hit you would think. Makes me curious about the internal thinking. One theory being they are in a capacity crisis and knocking Pro users off Claude Code is an emergency brake getting pulled. But an opposite theory is it's a revenue move and they think they have the lock in to pull it off. Especially if they are building up to IPO. Interestingly the Team subscription which is still $20/month/seat still includes Claude Code. But you need minimum 5 seats. So it could be a way to force people off individual plans and into enterprise plans where possibly things scale better for them, especially IPO/wise. When one user wants it in a company, probably they go buy 5 seats.
  • jareds 5mo ago
    I just switched from the $10 Copilot subscription to a $20 Claude subscription to get general AI and coding in one bill. I guess I'll try out GPT Codex.
    • sidrag22 5mo ago
      gpt allows you to wire their models into other CLI tools, I'm advising everyone I know to lean that direction. Not trying to become hostage to something like claude's ecosystem for the rest of my development career.
    • utilize1808 5mo ago
      They will eventually converge --- it's only a matter of time.
  • daemonologist 5mo ago
    I have to assume they're compute constrained and thus need to either raise prices or cut their lowest-margin products (which amounts to more or less the same thing, but with different optics), or turn away new users. My assumption is that people are able to very easily saturate Pro with Claude Code and therefore even though the quotas are lower (more than proportionally) the utilization of those quotas is higher enough that Pro is less profitable.
• redrix 5mo ago
  Next they’ll slowly reduce how much CC usage you can get out of the $100 Max plan, then introduce a new $300 “Max Plus” plan with “40x” usage. “You asked, and we listened: Introducing Max Plus, our biggest plan yet, designed for those…” blah blah
• OJFord 5mo ago
  New sign-ups only or affecting current subscriptions too?
• gpm 5mo ago
  Simultaneous with GitHub copilot dropping support for the Opus models in their $10/month plan...
• evil-olive 5mo ago
  if this is accurate, and not some "oops we made a vibe-coding mistake updating our website" I am going to hit the "cancel subscription" button so hard that my desk will break in half. I have an unlimited-usage API billing plan through my dayjob, but for obvious reasons they don't allow piggybacking personal usage onto that. so I paid for the $20/mo personal plan as an easy and relatively cheap method of professional development / keeping my skills current. I don't particularly mind paying $20/mo, but I'm absolutely not paying $100/mo. also, part of the reason I didn't mind paying for the personal subscription is that I liked having consistency between the tools I use for my dayjob and the ones I use for side projects. if that goes away, then I might as well switch away from Claude usage at work as well. I very much doubt Anthropic's revenue predictions for this change are taking things like that into account. making a change like this without an announcement, just sneaky updates to product pages, is also an absolutely unforgivable thing to do, in terms of me trusting them as a company.
• 2001zhaozhao 5mo ago
  Apparently it's just an A/B test. Legit LMAO moment, speedrunning reputation destruction to your entire userbase just to test a question whose answer you can probably already guess. --- > For clarity, we're running a small test on ~2% of new prosumer signups. Existing Pro and Max subscribers aren't affected. > When we launched Max a year ago, it didn't include Claude Code, Cowork didn't exist, and agents that run for hours weren't a thing. Max was designed for heavy chat usage, that's it. > Since then, we bundled Claude Code into Max and it took off after Opus 4. Cowork landed. Long-running async agents are now everyday workflows. The way people actually use a Claude subscription has changed fundamentally. > Engagement per subscriber is way up. We've made small adjustments along the way (weekly caps, tighter limits at peak), but usage has changed a lot and our current plans weren't built for this. > So we're looking at different options to keep delivering a great experience for users. We don't know exactly what those look like yet - that's what we're testing and getting feedback on right now. > When we do land on something, if it affects existing subscribers you'll get plenty of notice before anything changes. Will hear it from us, not a screenshot on X or Reddit. https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830 https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830 --- Personally I love how they have increased everyone's quotas to counteract the Opus 4.7 tokenizer change a few days ago, but are immediately regretting it and trying to cut off subscription users. If the subscriptions are unprofitable, then just communicate honestly, raise the price or lower limits for new subscribers transparently, and grandfather in existing users. That's what GLM coding plan is doing and it works fine for them. Don't ruin your reputation with opaque messaging and hidden changes. Lol
  • wrxd 5mo ago
    What does it mean that they’re running a test? If you’re one of the unlucky 2% you need to pay more?
    • wobfan 5mo ago
      Usually A/B testing is just on the surface, and when you actually subscribe you get the "better" terms of the possible options. Like, they're just advertising different terms to test how many people would still click on it and very likely start the subscription process, but after they click they go back to the usual terms. Changing the whole payment flow, account models and permissions in their backend just for a quick test is usually too much work. But yes, basically, if you're B and not A, and B has objectively worse terms than A, then you're just unlucky. But this is the essence of A/B tests. They are done by basically every company everytime, because it's the most straightforward and simple way to test new terms or designs.
• altitudinous 5mo ago
  Chickens have come home to roost. Someone had to pay for the servers and the debt, and its us!!
• rideontime 5mo ago
  Anthropic’s “Head of Growth” claims this is a “test”: https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830 https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830 This does not explain the changes to documentation.
  • 100ms 5mo ago
    He goes way beyond saying it's a test, he's legitimising the change in the follow-up rationale
  • toraway 5mo ago
    Wait what, so they're testing giving new users misleading information about included services in each tier as an upsell tactic?
    • Arcuru 5mo ago
      No, they're testing removing it from the Pro tier for new subscribers.
    • nemomarx 5mo ago
      No I think the test is that some new sign ups won't get Claude code in that tier if they pick it and they're seeing if users will still pay for it without it?
      • fluidcruft 5mo ago
        I think the test is that new sign-ups won't have it and will the loss of five new Pro subscriptions be offset by more than one new Max subscribers. Plenty of Pro subscribers never touch claude-code.
        • QuadmasterXLII 5mo ago
          Although the ones that never touch claude code are a free $20 a month, the ones that do are potentially a seventy to eighty dollar twenty dollars a month . it’s not instantly obvious which customers you prefer (revenue vs cash negative growth- on second thought obviously they prefer the second)
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• maxall4 5mo ago
  I have a Claude Pro tier subscription; Claude Code, as of right now, is still functional for me. If Anthropic does boot Pro-tier users off Claude Code, I will be cancelling my subscription.
  • hebleb 5mo ago
    I paid for the annual Pro plan in January...I know this mentions new users right now, but is there a chance they just take Code away?!
    • nemomarx 5mo ago
      They would probably grandfather existing users in for at least a year or something, you have to imagine. Even if this "test" goes very well and points to removal
      • sidrag22 5mo ago
        This test makes perfect sense with their actions the last few weeks, they think they've done enough to transition into the general public and away from devs and our goodwill no longer is something they should be concerned with. Its funny that openai, who in my eyes went for the general public rather than devs initially, seems to be semi pivoting and catching all the fallout from anthropic's recent behavior. It is a massive bummer, up until those few weeks ago, i was hard pulling for anthropic for quite some time, now i just dont care and hope something dope emerges quickly that signals i wont ever have to consider either of them.
        • democracy 5mo ago
          I think they will try to get into the enterprise as soon as possible - looking out for big purchases - figma, atlassian, asana, monday, etc...
  • jasonjmcghee 5mo ago
    Indeed. Codex on $20/m is incredibly usable. Lots of value. My anthropic subscription keeps being worth less and less.
• kzisme 5mo ago
  Curious how this will play out (if true) for folks who signed up for that annual plan - expecting Claude Code to be included.
• primer42 5mo ago
  So this is why they allowed Claude code to be used for open claw again - cuz code is going to more expensive customers
• jhack 5mo ago
  Are compute resources so tight they’d want to make their products as unappealing as possible on purpose?
  • deleted 5mo ago
    [deleted]
• jareds 5mo ago
  All I want is a reasonably priced subscription combining both coding AI and general AI in a single bill for non professional use that allows me to opt out of my data being used for training. Google limits history to 72 hours if you opt out of training even if you pay them $20 a month which rules them out for me. I guess I'm going to try the $20 chat gpt plan. At this point I am wondering if I need to accept that were moving to a token based model and get comfortable with opencode and manually switching models.
  • redox99 5mo ago
    Chatgpt $20 plan is a steal. There's nothing close.
• syntaxing 5mo ago
  With GitHub and Anthropic reducing subscription features, Chinese providers are looking more and more tempting.
  • anakaine 5mo ago
    Until you work for a company or government agency that is subject to any sort of technology audit. The moment offshore processes running in China comes up you'll have a never ending hole of questions to answer.
• xkcd-sucks 5mo ago
  Oh FFS claude code is the only reason I have a pro claude subscription. I don't even use my personal subscription all that much after spending all day with claude/bedrock at work. I will absolutely cancel my pro subscription and continue to use local / Codex if claude code stops working. I realize this duplicates a lot of sentiment already in this thread but anyone here with pull at Anthropic please understand it will undo a lot of the goodwill that made Claude so successful in the first place.
  • KiroWorker 5mo ago
    Maybe you can try Kiro. Happy to take feedback.
• Jarred 5mo ago
  From Amol, who is the Head of Growth: > For clarity, we're running a small test on ~2% of new prosumer signups. Existing Pro and Max subscribers aren't affected. https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830 https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830
  • causal 5mo ago
    Once again random tweets from insiders being the only clues we have to what Anthropic actual policy is
    • sidrag22 5mo ago
      you could try customer support, that chat bot will happily loop you with some more non answers, but try to make you feel good about those non answers :)
  • Bratmon 5mo ago
    This is the dumbest PR tactic in the book, and it annoys me that it works on so many people. April: "The fact that we're doing X isn't news because we're only starting to do X" August: "The fact that we've fully rolled out X isn't news because we started X in April"
  • q3k 5mo ago
    But the current plans are unsustainable and prices will have to be effectively raised sooner or later: > Engagement per subscriber is way up. We've made small adjustments along the way (weekly caps, tighter limits at peak), but usage has changed a lot and our current plans weren't built for this. https://xcancel.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046725282502173046 https://xcancel.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/204672528250217304...
• anarticle 5mo ago
  Nice. Bye.
• nh43215rgb 5mo ago
  How about team plan standard customer?($25) I suppose its only natural it would follow suit if not already
• xdennis 5mo ago
  The "5x" and "20x" no longer make sense for Max. It's supposed to be 5 times the Pro limits. But if only Max 5x has access, then they need to renamed to "Max 1x" and "Max 4x".
  • selcuka 5mo ago
    It could still mean 5x the Cowork limits.
  • HarHarVeryFunny 5mo ago
    5x 0 = 20x 0 = 0 Maybe this is coming next "We've determined that claude code is too dangerous to your code base to release, so we are withdrawing it"
• rob 5mo ago
  https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724846604963924 https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724846604963924 (Head of Growth @AnthropicAI) > When we launched Max a year ago, it didn't include Claude Code, Cowork didn't exist, and agents that run for hours weren't a thing. Max was designed for heavy chat usage, that's it. Is there a wager that this is 100% foreshadowing Claude Code will be removed from the $100-200/month Max plans soon and go to something like API-only? Or only available on like a new $500-1,000/month plan? Restrict the $100-200/month ones to Claude.ai (website) or Claude desktop app only? Either way, doesn't seem good to say it's a small test and then start justifying it in this direction.
  • anakaine 5mo ago
    That would be a fantastic way to kill the majority of engagement with the community of users. There are very few who can afford that.
  • p1necone 5mo ago
    Do they have a substantial userbase for this outside of claude code? The only two use cases for LLMs that seem to have significant traction are programming, and erotic roleplay lol. If they stop catering to devs, who is their market?
  • freshfunk 5mo ago
    FWIW, I just heard this guy (Head of Growth) on Lenny's podcast a few days ago and one of the things he explicitly mentioned was creating intentional friction for growth. This seems to be one of those tests.
• sriku 5mo ago
  https://claude.com/product/claude-code https://claude.com/product/claude-code seems to say it is included in Pro plan.
• jamalingo560 5mo ago
  I was working in my biggest project in the last 3 years and i dont got mutch money and they go there and cut claude code from pro like wtf so why am i even paying for pro
• bhhaskin 5mo ago
  And this is why local AI is going to be the future.
  • redleader55 5mo ago
    Local AI is almost impossible right now with the prices of RAM and GPUs and the sizes of decent models. No way spending even an optimistic 10k, but more likely 20k, on a setup that is good for 5-6 months makes any financial sense.
    • bhhaskin 5mo ago
      Not yet, but it's only a matter of time. Local AI doesn't need to be bleeding edge either. Even capabilities of older modals would be fine.
      • anakaine 5mo ago
        I disagree wholeheartedly. Older models do not perform anywhere near as well as newer models, and certainly not once you throw in agents that can sense check, security check, refa tor and balance, and research queries as they run behind the scenes.
    • nozzlegear 5mo ago
      Just get a Mac?
      • bassitone 5mo ago
        Impossible to find Mac minis in some areas, and if this goes through expect it to get worse. I settled for the AMD rough equivalent. It’s not perfect but it can still handle most of the work. Now if only extra ram would come down in price… I find I need about 5 GB more than I have
      • ares623 5mo ago
        Macs will just get more expensive. C'mon man, we're supposed to be Silicon Valley engineers, the pinnacle of human intellect.
• jareds 5mo ago
  How long until the $10 Github Copilot subscription goes away? That was a great deal for my limited personal programming. The only reason I switched from it to Claude was to get coding and general ai in a single bill.
  • leokeba 5mo ago
    https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/changes-to-github-copilot-individual-plans/ https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/changes-to-gi...
  • GaryBluto 5mo ago
    I think Github Copilot is in the process of slowly winding down right now. They've been putting very, very long (multiple day) rate limits on users for various esoteric reasons for weeks now and just yesterday or so paused signups.
  • seubert 5mo ago
    It already did, you cannot sign up for it right now.
• christophilus 5mo ago
  I feel like Anthropic has managed to burn good will faster than anyone I’ve seen since Elon Musk.
• brandonmarkus 5mo ago
  Anthropic NEED to get better at communicating with their customers. The most meaningful updates we get on changes come from employees on X. It's unprofessional and unsustainable.
• throwaway85825 5mo ago
  Frontier LLMs are not going to be economically viable when the free money runs out and they're expected to turn a profit.
• geetee 5mo ago
  The rug pull is coming
  • F7F7F7 5mo ago
    Max is next. He essentially admits to it in one of his tweets/posts. Explicitly citing it as an example of how they misjudged usage relative to pricing.
    • pixel_popping 5mo ago
      I wish they actually start doing $500 or $1000 a month plan to avoid having to use so many accounts to get work done.
• mastazi 5mo ago
  ANthropic never wanted my money anyway... they don't allow work + personal accounts to have the same phone number. I had to close my personal account otherwise I could not complete onboarding at work. So I pay for Codex instead.
  • MeetingsBrowser 5mo ago
    You need to onboard with your personal phone number at work? Why not with email?
    • mastazi 5mo ago
      Anthropic forces everyone to verify both.
      • MeetingsBrowser 5mo ago
        I have a seat in my company's enterprise plan and never gave a phone number.
        • mastazi 5mo ago
          Maybe it depends on the plan. We are on Team not Enterprise.
  • muwtyhg 5mo ago
    You should be blaming your employer for forcing you to use a personal device to access company resources. You should have been given a company phone or stipend.
    • mastazi 5mo ago
      I did complain about it in our chat and my boss later reached out, offering to set up a number on our company's Twilio account but by that time I had already entered my personal number.
  • 5mo ago
• prdonahue 5mo ago
  Hmm, we just bought my wife an annual subscription at the Pro tier, largely to use Claude Code. Wonder if she'd be grandfathered in or if we'll need to get a refund.
• TacticalCoder 5mo ago
  The clusterfuck about the various pages not being all upgraded to reflect the same story... I thought we now had advanced tools to which we could ask to do things like: "Remove all mention of Claude Code in the Pro, but not in the Pro Max plan". But apparently the CGI-days called and asked the webmaster to manually edit .html files one by one?
• bhelkey 5mo ago
  Can't you use Claude Code without a Claude model? E.g. can't you use this with a local model? Folks are assuming that only the $100 plan will include Claude Code access. I think a more likely scenario is that everyone will be able to use CC.
• Wowfunhappy 5mo ago
  Is Claude Code actually useful on the Pro plan? I remember when they first added Claude Code to Pro — it was limited to Max initially — and my first thought was that it seemed kind of stupid, because at one fifth of my current limit, I would be hitting walls all the time...
  • koshergweilo 5mo ago
    I would say it's definitely useful for side projects. You have to manage your context windows a bit more but it's still definitely worth the money
  • toraway 5mo ago
    It was for about the first 6 months after I subscribed, then the rate limits were tightened to the point of uselessness and pushed me to cancel and go for the Codex plan instead.
  • dml2135 5mo ago
    I’ve found that I hit the limit just around the end of the 5-hour window, so it’s definitely been usable for me. But I’ve mostly been using it for gitops infrastructure in my homelab. I wonder if the token usage is lighter than if I were developing an application.
• dzink 5mo ago
  Claude has become practically unusable for Pro users in the past few days. The Opus 4.7 blew through an entire 5 hour limit in one question and didn’t even finish answering it. Zero value delivered. Opus 4.6 is giving 2, maybe 3 questions before blowing through the Pro 5 hour limit as well. We are forced to use Sonnet which makes the same mistakes over and over and then to start trying with other companies. To make matters worse, it reuses old code as we try to survive between credit expiry so it re-introduced issues into the code with the limited credits, that we had already fixed on our own and with other models. Anthropic in just a few days has gotten me to try GLM 5.1, the new Kimi, and back to OpenAI. OpenAI also seems to introduce new bugs without being carefully micromanaged. The advantage Claude has is that the models are more careful and can refactor code instead of leading to bloat as they go. But the throttling happening now is breaking things and making the entire subscription unusable. I really hope they fix it soon.
  • aurareturn 5mo ago
    I hope people finally see why big tech is spending hundreds of billions in data center build out.
  • nemomarx 5mo ago
    I have to guess that they're compute limited somewhere or the new models are incredibly overusing tokens, so I guess you need to wait for new data centers to come online?
  • warunsl 5mo ago
    I thought it was just me. Even 4.6 is hitting limits so much sooner which I would have expected of 4.7
  • alexjplant 5mo ago
    My personal LLM coding stack is now OpenCode, Claude Sonnet for ideation on spec with OpenWhispr for voice-to-text, GLM-5.1 for the orchestrating loop, GLM-4.7 for coding, and DeepSeek R1 for review and validation. It works much, much better than the Claude Code setup I have at work for substantially less money to boot. At this rate I fully anticipate being able to run a comparable stack on a 128GB Mac Studio using quants of newer-generation distilled OSS models in a year or two. Being able to ramble to a computer for an hour about features and technical philosophy then have it build a nearly-working app for $50 is an exciting feeling. There's still a long tail of productionization and fixing what the model didn't adhere to but it's still incredible.
• jauntywundrkind 5mo ago
  Feels like a very strong chance that this is related to trying to find a way to navigate letting OpenClaw users on. https://docs.openclaw.ai/providers/anthropic https://docs.openclaw.ai/providers/anthropic https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47844269 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47844269
• dzonga 5mo ago
  ;) - use the Chinese models ;,>
• techpulselab 5mo ago
  [dead]
• nozzlegear 5mo ago
  Unrelated to the Claudge Code change, I'm fascinated by people on Twitter and Bluesky posting screenshots of the answers they get from AI like it's an original source of information. It's as if some users see the AI as an authority, and derive some kind of social capital from that authority. For example, in the OP's linked Bluesky thread, one person replies with "Fin says it’s included with Pro" and attached a screenshot from "Fin AI Agent" (which I haven't heard of) that claims Claude Code is still available on the Pro tier. Is that valuable? Personally I don't trust what any AI has to say, especially when the subject is currently in flux. https://bsky.app/profile/mattgreenrocks.bsky.social/post/3mk246pup3c2k https://bsky.app/profile/mattgreenrocks.bsky.social/post/3mk... Another example, I recently saw two people over on Twitter posting LLM responses at each other in a bitter argument about Vercel's security breach. They made no attempt to pretend they'd formulated the ripostes themselves, it was just screenshotting one-sided conversations... What's the point? They could've saved themselves the trouble by spawning two LLMs, naming them "John Doe" and "Fred Doe", then telling them to argue and post the name of the winner. Disclaimer: I don't use Twitter, Bluesky, Mastodon, etc., so maybe it's not that deep.
• gib444 5mo ago
  And of course you never want the first tier it's included on because you need actual usage, so in reality you need Max 20x - the price of which I can't even see on the pricing page
• quux 5mo ago
  I just bought my brother 6 months of pro so he could use Claude code. How do I request a refund
• alaudet 5mo ago
  The enshitification stage came quick.
• trashface 5mo ago
  I use it on Pro and was just thinking today, there is no way $20 covers the cost of it. But I'm long term unemployed and can't afford any higher tier, so if they drop it guess I'll have to find a non-anthropic solution somehow.
  • anakaine 5mo ago
    What do you mean "somehow"? There are plenty of alternatives in the market.
  • F7F7F7 5mo ago
    Sonnet in the Claude Code harness is hard to replicate out of the box. That vertical integration is not easily replaceable but by no means impossible... OpenCode and their Go plan will get you close if you're willing to put in the config work. For when you do need the larger models Fireworks has a pretty generous 'Pass' that comes out to about $7 a week for some of the larger bleeding edge models. Other than that Codex's $20 plan is still somewhat valuable though they keep reducing usage. Google's $20 plan will get you some Opus usage in Antigravity and a generous amount of Gemini. Not sure how long that will last as they've been tweaking pricing and planning language recently too.
• evmaki 5mo ago
  I would love someone to play devil's advocate against this perspective: While these tools stand to enable the democratization of productive capability in software engineering and other tasks (creating a renaissance for solopreneurs, let's say), what seems more likely to actually happen is that entrenched capital will become the only player with real access to this "knowledge as a utility" (was it Altman who called it that?). We already see this playing out in two fronts: 1) the gradual reduction of services and 2) the DRAM market, where local-first tools (i.e., potential disruptors of the emerging "knowledge monopoly" created by the big AI firms) are being stifled by supply shortages. How many promising small-to-medium-sized competitors are being snuffed out of existence (or never starting) due to the insanity of the DRAM/storage/CPU (soon) markets? The currently-subsidized access that we have to the big Opus-like models will, in parallel, be gradually be taken away until only the big players can afford it. And in the end what we will have is hyper-productive skeleton crews at a few consolidated firms performing (or selling expensive access to) basically all of the knowledge labor for society, with very little potential for disruption due to the hardware and "knowledge" scarcity engineered (in part, maybe) by this monopoly. Not necessarily a closely held belief – just a hunch – which is why I want to see what parts of the picture I might be missing.
  • primax 5mo ago
    Devils advocate here - pro and max tier customers for all the major inference providers are loss leaders from the data we have been able to figure out, and reverse engineer. They are effectively a marketing exercise. The real profitability is selling tokens to enterprise, and enterprise demand is growing so fast that they are short on the total amount of tokens they can generate per minute, and are prioritising rationally - enterprise gets a better experience - instead of optimizing for their lowest paying (and most loss leading) customers. We are in a hardware crunch right now but that won't be forever, and eventually (likely 2028) we will get experiences like we got in January from pro-sumer accounts again.
  • marcus_holmes 5mo ago
    Not only because of cost. Mythos has only been released to some of the big tech players because it's "too dangerous" [0] for us little people. It's easy to see this becoming a permanent position; the latest models and smarts are reserved for establishment members only, the riff-raff get the cast-offs. So the establishment is preserved and the status quo protected. [0] I'm putting scare/irony quotes around this, but if the reporting is accurate, there is something to this; we built the internet on string and duct tape, it's not hard to see how a very smart AI could cut it to ribbons.
• makingstuffs 5mo ago
  It’s seems like there are a lot fishy smells coming from the timing of the mythos announcement and the reports of issues with casual users. Combine that with the mass rejection of 4.7 it kinda seems like they are burning their ‘non research’ users in order to keep the Mythos users warm. I could be connecting unrelated dots here, but it sure as hell seems quite coincidental to me.
• quantum_state 5mo ago
  Claude Code started to suck since a couple of weeks ago. I want my money back!
• amazingamazing 5mo ago
  I was told Claude code was profitable on all subscriptions. Lol, turns out maybe you can be more profitable.
• eaf7e281 5mo ago
  Note that some companies, like Amazon, purchased and ran the Claude on their own hardware. They didn't change the model parameters during the Claude Opus 4.6 karma. If Anthropic continues to getting worse, try Amazon Kiro and other companies that run Claude on their own hardware. It might be expensive and have a worse experience compared to Claude's code, but at least the model itself is the "original flavor." These days, it's hard to ask for much.
  • KiroWorker 5mo ago
    I know people who work on Kiro, happy to take feedback. It'll get better.
• IgorPartola 5mo ago
  What a way to ruin goodwill with the very community they are trying to court. I am on a Pro subscription to use with Claude Code, but it sounds like the days of using it are numbered. I guess I will be trying the latest offering from OpenAI and Google tomorrow and if they are satisfactory I might just switch. Moreover, I have been recommending Anthropic's API solutions up to now to friends and clients. Based on this dumb move I will be now starting with this anecdote and then giving a very hedged recommendation. Realistically the future of all this is that open models become good enough that LLM as a service becomes a commodity with a race to the bottom in terms of cost. Given where we are today I can easily see open weight models in 2-3 years making Anthropic and OpenAI irrelevant for everyday development work (I justify this like so: if my coding agent is 10x smarter than I am, how would I understand if it did all the right things? I want someone of roughly my intelligence for coding. I can see use cases for like independent pharma work or some such where supergenius level intelligence is justified, but for coding ability for mere mortals to reason about the code is probably more important).
  • kobalsky 5mo ago
    > the very community they are trying to court After all, we may be a just a data source and not their intended demographic all along.
    • esafak 5mo ago
      The valuation is obviously based on the premise of their capturing the white collar economy. OpenAI's charter says so openly. And Chinese robots will come for blue workers next.
      • vasachi 5mo ago
        The economy, not the workers :) It feels like pretty soon white collar workers will be in a “You have nothing to lose but your chains” situation. Except we are not as fit as the proletariat of the past.
  • philipbjorge 5mo ago
• hgoel 5mo ago
  The only thing they'd need to do to enjoy the positive PR from the DoD spat is shut up and improve (or at least not worsen) product. Even the downtime would've been fine (as GitHub shows). Instead they're pissing it all away by letting employees make random announcements on random platforms.
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• rafael-lua 5mo ago
  I'm out of the loop. Do you guys use Claude subscriptions for Claude Code rather than just pay-as-you-go API keys? Is it cost related?
  • nemomarx 5mo ago
    I mean one is a flat 20 a month and pay as you go is going to go over that for any heavy coding use, right?
  • SoMomentary 5mo ago
    Yes, it's been a way better deal to go for a subscription than pay as you go for me in the past. I had a month where I burnt through ~3.8b tokens which was somewhere in the ballpark of $8k worth of savings. Now though I don't dare use spend tokens for basic note taking with Sonnet because I'm hitting the limit over a couple million tokens on the 20x plan, so they've really tightened the purse strings since November.
• ofjcihen 5mo ago
  The last couple of weeks using Claude has been…interesting to say the least. Additionally I run a constant hacking contest between GPT and Claude. It’s a toy project and it simulates an attack/defense of a small corporate network. Claude used to win pretty handily. Suddenly it’s started to lose 90% of the time. I thought GPT had gotten better but no, looking at the logs it seems that Claude is slower and more prone to running in circles. This is still the case when switching to Opus 4.7. I don’t know what that means but it’s undoubtedly worse.
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• code-things 5mo ago
  You know you can just code by typing and thinking, right? Like you don’t need to use AI if you’re a software engineer. I know, crazy idea. When we told you they’re getting you hooked and would rug pull you called us permanent underclass or something.
• KnuthIsGod 5mo ago
  Run your LLM locally. That is the only way to avoid being held captive by Anthropic / Meta / Google.
• rectang 5mo ago
  I see lots of speculation that Anthropic needs to cut usage because they are compute constrained. If that's the case, will they be focusing on reducing compute costs for their models? From what I can tell Opus 4.7 is more resource-intensive than Opus 4.6 is more resource-intensive than Opus 4.5.
• kylec 5mo ago
  The $20 plan showed me how good Claude Code was, and now I'm paying $100/month. I never would have paid $100 just to try out Claude Code.
  • kandros 5mo ago
    Many, including me tried the $100 just to try Opus (wasn’t available of pro before) and first thing I thought was “worth it” Let’s say my trust level and appreciation for the product for the past month had a big negative hit for me
• solaire_oa 5mo ago
  Bubble stress test, stage 1.
• Eufrat 5mo ago
  This just lends more fuel to AI skeptics that this entire thing is a massive, unsustainable grift. The explanation only adds confusion and implicitly means that this was not a mistake. What is someone to take away from this? That $20/month is not profitable? That Anthropic thinks that people are willing to pay a 400% markup without batting an eye? That Anthropic is desperately trying to clean up their burn rate? Why should we trust a company that can screw up basic PR this hard?
  • coffeefirst 5mo ago
    There’s also a very real possibility that the skeptics are right.
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• nvch 5mo ago
  I'm curious about their expectations and how they will interpret the results. On the one hand, the people there are supposedly among the smartest on the planet. On the other hand, they consistently forget that they're dealing with LOYAL humans, and these humans prefer respectful communication beforehand instead of being messed with every other day. My hope for reasonable behavior is to not handle it this way. Decrease limits and increase prices if you can't handle it and be _honest_ about it. Are they just looking for a way to rationalize another hostile act? And already have expectations like: - "minus 10% in pro signups" -> oh, let's drop those coders who won't pay anyway - "minus X% in pro signups and plus X% in max" -> awesome, PAY UP!
• takihito 5mo ago
  Are they trying to reduce cloud servers needed for AI because they're running out? I wish they'd be a little more honest in their response.
• davidcann 5mo ago
  To help you decide if you should keep your Claude subscription, you can see how much of your code is written by Claude Code with my project (open source, local): https://github.com/gelatinousdevelopment/buildermark https://github.com/gelatinousdevelopment/buildermark
• outlore 5mo ago
  Ahh couldn’t they vibe a solution to make CC cheaper?
• HDBaseT 5mo ago
  I know this would add to pricing/model/plan confusion but what about Claude Pro plan can only access Sonnet and Haiku Models via Claude Code? Opus is fairly useless on Pro given the rate limits anyways.
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• superasn 5mo ago
  [dead]
• inquisitive-me 5mo ago
  Jesus Christ, it’s literally going to become too big of a risk to depend on Anthropic. As someone who tries to manage usage for a small team they just added Claude Code to the Standard Team seat now they are removing it!? Not to mention that they will ban your entire organization from a bot deciding you violated their TOS with no communication and no way to contact anyone to understand what happened. If this is real we are switching to OpenAI or Gemini it is not worth all this non sense
• thrance 5mo ago
  I'm not going on max. I barely hit 20% of my weekly limits on pro, to hell with Anthropic if they drop this plan.
• Redster 5mo ago
  Will definitely discontinue my Pro subscription if it's true. Claude Code is the only reason I signed up in the first place.
• panavm 5mo ago
  [flagged]
• gbraad 5mo ago
  This makes me less likely to choose Claude Code, as this feels unreliable... Who says they will not change a few months down the line again.
• Anonasty 5mo ago
  Either they baited people with code and flexible usage limits until march and this was planned or they realized that they did too good of an product and it costs them too much. One thing is clear, Anthropics communications and leadership is horrible. You don't launch or remove features like this. How this is communicated and handle is something like mom+pop shop would do.
• vinhnx 5mo ago
  Anthropic reverts the “prosumer” AB testing, but damage is done.
• rock_artist 5mo ago
  The age of AI seems to forget some lessons from Google (and history in general). - Rapid changes hurts the trust of your brand and product. In Google case, using a new service product became something you’ll think multiple times as you are more likely to axe it than rivals or specialized equivalents. - While models currently has no clear winner. Anthropic’s core product is coding. But just as Skype, IE, Netscape their can always be another game changer you cannot count. - The Pro plan is already limited for true agentinc workflows. The limits now are so bad that a business that relies on it would need bigger plans. - Anthropic is already in a delicate situation where many devs are frustrated. Dropping or crippling the use even more just means this sector (which I can only assume is a big chunk) would switch to competitors tool that already try to compete. - Local models, whether as Google sees it “edge” or even further would also take bigger part in the future.
  • nerptastic 5mo ago
    “The limits now are so bad that a business that relies on it would need bigger plans.” Isn’t this the goal to some extent? They’ll probably have the standard “light” usage plan for weekend warriors or normal folk looking to play around. Companies that mandate usage and provide the subscription for hundreds of employees will have to cough it up, and will have no problem doing so if they want to compete with the others (or so the hype would allude to).
• ogou 5mo ago
  Most commercial websites, especially tech, run multiple A/B experiments in parallel to optimize signup funnels and tier conversions. Even so, there should always be a source of truth for people. We should have some way of verifying what we get for what we pay. There are laws about this as well. This guy's casual and crass response is a sign of disrespect for customers. Unfortunately, that is pervasive in the industry. The bubbles these teams work in are corrosive to empathy and real world impact.
  • jwilliams 5mo ago
    I think there is more here: Anthropic's whole market positioning is based on trust. It's literally their reason for being. The Claude constitution has a major section about not being deceptive. Now this is GTM, not the model, but there is clearly a coherence problem here... and if anyone should realize the important of their market positioning it's GTM.
    • beering 5mo ago
      Agreed that it’s 100% marketing. In some ways Anthropic is more of a for-profit corporation than OpenAI which is at least partially owned by a non-profit.
• m3kw9 5mo ago
  “Let’s see how they react, and they will be ok and we will be rich.”
• m3kw9 5mo ago
  They have till morning to clean up this giant PR mess. I think people will leave for codex
• wewewedxfgdf 5mo ago
  They'll remove it. Then some genius intern will say "if we offer it to the lowest level plans, the users will get hooked on how awesome it is!" Then Anthropic will put it back. Or they could just ask Claude if it is a good idea to remove.
• ramon156 5mo ago
  Cool, first remove OpenCode support so I have to use their shitty TUI, then remove that too. What a loss. Good thing GLM 5.1 is good enough
• wg0 5mo ago
  Practically speaking, the $20 plan is useless anyway given the limits and the way Claude Code consumes tokens with very little caching.
• estomagordo 5mo ago
  Wait. What is Anthropic without Claude? Serious question.
• globular-toast 5mo ago
  It's going to be interesting seeing the AI companies gouge people who are incapable without it.
• blitzar 5mo ago
  Every person who signs up for a pro subscription on that advertising has cause to sue for being miss-sold the product.
• gigatexal 5mo ago
  Anthropic should be increasing the value and services they offer not reducing it. It’s the Apple model. Yes you pay a ton more. But my 2013 MacBook Pro 15 I got in college lasted 10 years and was still fine even when it was stolen. That’s what you pay for. You pay for a ton of built in apps and functionality and quality. Arbitrarily removing things is customer and more importantantly good will hostile.
• curtisblaine 5mo ago
  They're trying to find every way to enshittify their partially unprofitable service. When they find a way that sticks, they'll go with it. This has become the preferred way of doing tech business in the US. Create a great thing, give it away for free, hook users in, try to squeeze them. In theory competition should limit this kind of behaviour, but for some reason they big companies all wait on another to start enshittification in unison. How this is legal still puzzles me but evidently that's how it goes. Here's my hot take: Anthropic et al. are trying to make developing a subscription-only job, and they've done that by illegally pirating pretty much the whole Internet. If they were to go out of business tomorrow and serving models was to become a commoditized service like storage we'd be all better off. Sure, we would have less research on frontier models, but we don't need AGI, we need good local models, RAM and good open source / weight AI tools.
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• emilyclark49 5mo ago
  No way
• jbvlkt 5mo ago
  This is exactly what happens with all agentic products in near future. Demand is way higher than supply right now. Also most programmers do not use agents yet so demand will grow even more. Building data centers is not easy and price of HW is skyrocketing.
• throwaw12 5mo ago
  We, as a society, need Open Source SOTA models and should be able to also train new models via distributed P2P network. Otherwise companies will keep exploiting using their dominant position. We were taught dictators are bad, monopolies are bad, but now allowing 2 companies control most of the software development
  • YmiYugy 5mo ago
    That seems not possible.
    • throwaw12 5mo ago
      at the moment - yes. but why not work towards it? * elect politicians who will support this * change laws to accommodate it - if corporations train data, on every usage they should pay higher taxes so they can't exploit the open data, but public ledger trained model is fine to use open data * similar tech exists (bitcoin, torrent), needs some modifications
• srvmshr 5mo ago
  It is perhaps better for Anthropic to do a price hike e.g. $25 or $30 for Pro with a clear/honest messaging e.g. "Running costs are high, price hike is unavoidable" than resorting to these tactics. These shenanigans are earning them no respect. The market is already annoyed on model serving QA issues, and now (recently) Opus limits. They don't want to lose to OpenAI - understandable - but these shortcuts won't earn them anything either.
• coopykins 5mo ago
  Anthropic is vibe running the company.
• jimnotgym 5mo ago
  Tangent, all those people who are coding in extreme niches, like embedded development, is AI helpful? Can it learn enough from stealing FOSS code to help?
• butlike 5mo ago
  I hope they really botch Claude Code to give all the developers a wakeup call about making a hard dependency to a for-profit entity that's essentially in it's startup phase. Like, we wouldn't adopt some newfangled framework just because it was on the front page of Hacker News. Why did we all jump on the new unproven technology here?
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• alexruf 5mo ago
  Sooner or later, Anthropic will probably have to take this step if they want to actually make money. Either way, they're going to lose a huge chunk of their user base because of it. I currently have a private Pro subscription for $20; I can just barely justify that amount for my personal hobby projects. Work-wise, my employer provides all of that for me, so I don't really care - this is just for my personal needs. But at $100, I'm out. The subscription isn't worth it to me just to run a few prompts in Claude Code once a week (yes, I'm still one of those people who is actually capable of, and enjoys, writing code by hand). I do use Claude Chat as well, but the free plan is more than sufficient for my needs (never ran into any limit until now). I simply have zero interest in Cowork and any products other than Claude Code. In short: if Claude Code is removed from the Pro plan, Claude in general will no longer be interesting for people like me.
• geye1234 5mo ago
  I was seriously considering investing in an RTX 6000 rig, and I think this is just enough to tip me over the edge. I know it's not as good as CC, but at least I know it'll be there tomorrow.
• quantum_state 5mo ago
  Claude Code has become useless anyway in the last few weeks. I want my money back!
• stoic5734 5mo ago
  Honestly? I hope they do. Because Pro plan is ridiculous if your productivity depends on it. Then there might be a chance for other products to get better if people move to those services.