You've still not explained why, you've just reasserted "because they said so".
What is the upside to Anthropic if we use ClaudeCode but not OpenCode? If it is such a loss leader, why would they even offer it? By using it, even within their terms, you are still abusing their good will. No?
(You also said the alternative to not liking the terms is to use their API. There is another alternative, which is to keep using it against their ToS and risk a ban. Or use a different provider. So the situation is more nuanced than "this" or "that")
Yes. That is all that matters. That is the contract you've signed with the business, end of story.
They have their reasons (3P clients suck at caching, this is a subsidized tier to create subscription lock in, etc) but that's besides the point. If you sign a contract, you abide by its restrictions or you categorically abusing the offering.
> There is another alternative, which is to keep using it against their ToS and risk a ban.
No one working on a project of value and no sane business would do this. The people doing this are not serious/mature people.
Frankly any dev that intentionally does this at a real company would be fired.
Ah, but the ToS I agreed to didn't state it.. they even admitted it wasn't clear and then unilaterally revised it.
And yes, I agree businesses must abide by the ToS, it would be too much of a business risk not to.. but individual users, using for their own purpose can make their own choice.
An individual choosing to not abide by their unfair ToS is perfectly reasonable and doesn't make them unserious or immature people, and it's pretty weak to make it an ad hominem attack.
But if you think their reasoning is solely that opencode has poor caching, then the solution is to make it chew through the quota quicker (which i think it already does), or provide guidance on how to do it better. The arms race of trying to block it will be a war they will eventually lose.
If Claude code can have great performance by optimised caching and Opencode doesn't.. I'll run out of quota using a third party client and have a terrible experience, and the choose to use Claude code instead because wit is superior.
Consider this: you are Anthropic. There are some Claude Code used cases that will have poor caching performance. Let's say these are 10% of your use cases.
You explicitly don't count cache misses right now because it would make the UX poor for these use cases. It's no big deal since the remaining 90% of use cases can subsidize the 10%.
Now open source clients become a thing. Instead of 10% of usage having poor caching, it grows to 50%. You can no longer subsidize those users because the economics don't work.
You have to start counting cache misses and the UX goes to shit for everyone.
The maintaining team is incredibly petty though. Tantrums when they weren't allowed to abuse Claude subscriptions and had to use the API instead. They just removed API support entirely.
Anthropic has zero problems with API billing, there's no chance they told him to rip that out.
Reading through his X comments and GitHub comments he is behaving immaturely. I don't trust what he's saying here. Ripping out Claude API support was just throwing a tantrum. Weird given his age - he's old enough to be more mature.
‘abuse’. The same rate limits apply, the requests still go to the same endpoints.
Even as a CC user I’m glad someone is forcing the discussion.
My prediction: within two years ‘model neutrality’ will be a topic of debate. Creating lock-in through discount pricing is anti-competitive. The model provider is the ISP; the tool, the website.
> The same rate limits apply, the requests still go to the same endpoints.
That is not the point. That is a mere technicality.
You signed a contract. If you don't ignore the terms of the contract to use the product in a way that is explicitly prohibited, you're abusing the product. It is as simple as that.
They offer a separate product (API) if you don't like the terms of the contract.
Also, if you really want to get technical: the limits are under the assumption that caching works as intended, which requires control of the client. 3P clients suck at caching and increase costs. But that is not the overarching point.
> Creating lock-in through discount pricing is anti-competitive.
Literally everyone does this. OpenAI is doing this with Codex, far more than Anthropic is. It's not great but players much bigger than Anthropic are using discount pricing to create an anti-competitive advantage.
> Because that could be easily resolved by factoring % cache hits into the usage limits.
Absolutely not, you are not thinking from a product perspective at all.
You might not want to capture cache % hits in usage limits because there may be some edge cases you want to support that have low hits even with an optimized client. Maybe your caching strategy isn't perfect yet, so you don't count hits to keep a good product experience going.
OSS clients that freeload on the subscription break your ability to support these use cases entirely. Now you have to count cache hits at the expense of everyone else. It is a classic case of some people ruining the experience for everyone.
> Why is the 'Apple electric company' selling cheaper electricity to households with Apple devices?
Why does Netflix not let you use your OSS hacked client of choice with your subscription?
> Literally everyone does this. OpenAI is doing this with Codex, far more than Anthropic is.
And yet, OpenAI have publicly said they welcome OpenCode users to use their subscription package. So how are they being anti-competitive "far more" than Anthropic?
Companies are absolutely allowed to lock down their own products. Netflix is a great example, you don't bring your own client for Netflix.
The whining/entitlement in this thread is ridiculous. The API is always there for you to use as you desire.
If you want to use the loss leader on the other hand, you agree to abide by certain terms. But if you don't want to do that, just use the API. It's not that hard.
This just increases the price for everyone. The API is always there if you don't want to use the loss leader. The entitlement in this thread is insane.
reply