I had the exact same issues with the latter - randomly stops working, wipes chat history, just generally seems to be totally broken. But the former works totally fine and still lets you select sonnet/opus. My experience was before this recent 4.6 -> 4.7 change though.

I never understood the low visibility.

Expensive ram is annoying. I don't look forward to expensive ai.

The change applies to existing subscriptions, some paid a year in advance.

I just found out via other news sources, and was surprised I hadn't seen it on HN already.

Speaking as someone where he only 'real' option we have at work is Copilot Plugin, but I also use Copilot Plugin at home....

This is a shitty shitty shitty move.

As a personal user, I can now only use Opus 4.7 at a 7.5x 'Introductory' multiplier if I upgrade to pro+, but at work I can still apparently do Opus 4.6 at a 3x Multiplier on my work 'enterprise' account.

Honestly it strikes me as though someone at Github Copilot took Palantir's manifesto to heart; Screw the individual, consolidate power to companies on every level.

Enterprise might stick around, but individually, I reckon the developers will flock to OpenCode + open weights (Qwen/GLM/Codestral). The problem then is, if the open weight models impress these new adopters, they will shout about it from rooftops (conferences, social media, blogs) in unison, which might result in an exodus. Especially troublesome considering developers are a major market for both frontier labs (Anthropic & OpenAI) & its IPO ambitions.

This was my first thought too but apparently you can just use Claude Code within VSC: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/vs-code

For what its worth, i have been paying for Pro+ and i still got locked out of Opus. I only have access to Opus 4.7 at 7.5x

From what I've been gathering, this split in success seems to depend a lot on the types of tasks, the domains / programming languages / frameworks used, and style of prompting.

I couldn't get 5.2 to follow instructions for the life of me, even when repeating multiple times to do / not do something. 5.3-codex was an improvement and 5.4 while _usually_ decent still regularly forgets, goes on unnecessary tangents, or otherwise repeatedly stops just to ask for continuation.

Sure, I'm paying 3x more per request, but I'm also doing 5x fewer requests.

Or well, used to. Still bummed about them dropping 4.6.

It felt like I constantly have to go back and either fix things or I just didn't like the results. Like the forward momentum/progress on my projects overally wasn't there over time. Even with tho its cheaper it just doesn't feel worth it, to the point I start to feel negative emotions.

I'm actually a bit worried that I've somehow become to feel more negative emotions with agentic coding. Quicker to feel frustrated somehow when things aren't working.

But seeing that they are stopping to get new subscriptions, and rumours/evidence that they plan to increase coefficients of remaining models, it seems they want us to see "the writing on the wall"

Warning: baseless speculation/theorizing ahead.

This is the consequence of LLM inference being really expensive to run, and LLM inference companies being really attractive to VCs. The VC silly money means their costs are totally decoupled from revenue for a while, but I guess eventually people look at incomings vs outgoings and start asking questions.

Previous big trends like SaaS apps, NFTs, blockchain etc were similarly attractive to VCs (for a period of time at least for the last two, the first one is still pretty attractive to VCs), but nowhere near as expensive to run so the behaviour of the companies running them wasn't quite the same.

Guess it’s time to rediscover the lost art of programming without an LLM.

Think GitHub will do that eventually, just like everyone else is. TFA ends with:

  The actions we are taking today enable us to provide the best possible experience for existing users while we develop a more sustainable solution.

I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a large, realistic codebase, and I can count the number of times I needed to use Opus on one hand. Most of the time, Haiku is fine. About 10% of the time I splurge for Sonnet, and honestly, even some of those are unnecessary.

Folks are complaining because they lost unlimited access to a Ferrari, when a bicycle is fine for 95% of trips.

Why would it be illegal in any country? Did you pay for an year upfront? Even if so they're offering a pro-rated refund according to the linked blog post:

> If you hit unexpected limits or these changes just don’t work for you, you can cancel your Pro or Pro+ subscription and receive a refund for the time remaining on your current subscription by visiting your Billing settings before May 20

Not sure where the expectation that a business should continue serving you at a given price till the end of time no matter what came from.

It can bill to our Azure sub and I don't have to go through the internal bureaucracy of purchasing a new product/service from a new vendor.

> Claude Code to be removed from Pro Tier? > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47855565

It doesn't matter how competent the actual model is, or how long it's able to operate independently, if the harness can't handle it and drops responses. Made me think are they even using their own harness?

At least Anthropic is obviously dogfooding on Claude Code which keeps it mostly functional.

Now, it may be the right call to immediately give up and shutdown after Opus 4.5, but models and subscriptions are in flux right now, so the right call is not at all obvious to me.

The agentic AI models could be commoditized, some model may excel in one area of SWE, while others are good for another area, local models may be at least good enough for 80%, and cloud usage could fall to 20%, etc. etc.

Staying in the market and providing multi-model and harness options (Claude and Codex usable in Copilot) is good for the market, even if you don't use it.

I have always just used the API, but I decided to give copilot a go on the weekend because of the cheap price. And I am seeing weird behavior like I have never seen before... It will somehow fail to use the file editing tool and then spend an absolutely huge amount of time/tokens building a python script to apply the edit in a sub process... And it will spin it's wheels on stuff the API routinely just gets right in one shot.

That's the only reason.

In many enterprises you'd need to be very lucky to get an approval for any service that doesn't come from MS.

I was actually hoping they would change it to something that more closely tracks their actual costs so that they wouldn't have to rug-pull this badly. In particular what was really bad about it was that sending prompts to agents while they were working (to give them corrections) cost extra so I stopped doing that (after initially OpenCode didn't cause billing for that, until they became official).

Copilot (before today) had one of the simplest & cheapest pricing on the market.