Why I’m Increasingly Moving Away from OpenAI Toward Anthropic

I started with Perplexity, and now I’m using Grok and ChatGPT. I judge the LLMs according to how helpful they are for my everyday and professional problems and questions. I don’t try using them to code. Grok is becoming less verbose, I believe, but just doesn’t work sometimes. Yesterday, for some reason I was blocked. Hard to take when I’m paying $40/month. If an LLM lets me down repeatedly, then I start looking elsewhere (and thus I’m no longer using Perplexity).

I noticed ChatGPT agreeing with me all the time. I just thought that it was because I was brilliant.

Bmosbacker and others make a strong case for Anthropic, so I’ll likely try it next.

2 Likes

Something seems to be going on. It so happens that I have recentlly also started to contemplate using Claude more, i.e. to pay for Claude Pro. I have always somehow liked it but rarely used it because it is such a pain to log in (email link) and you get logged out pretty quickly. That’s not the only reason, though.

I have free access to ChatGPT Edu at work (also Microsoft Copilot, but I never use it because it’s crap compared to ChatGPT). I also have a year of free access to Perplexity as well as Gemini AI Pro (if you work in academia: go ahead and get both. It says “students” but works for staff too). I also pay for Kagi Search (which also has AI built in). Well and I also have free access to Github Copilot (again: Edu), which also includes Claude Sonnet. I also love and use NotebookLM a lot.

So, the reasonable mind would say: why would you want to pay for another LLM? Well, by using Github Copilot, I repeatedly noticed that Claude is not only faster but also better than ChatGPT. And it doesn’t praise me for my supersmart questions all the time. Just a few days ago, in the middle of a coding project (hobby), I ran out of premium credits on Github Copilot, so I switched to ChatGPT, but I couldn’t get the integration with VS Code to work properly, so I considered Claude Code, but I knew and that if I used Claude Code, my 5 USD API balance would be used up in no time. So I switched to gemini-cli (free access to Gemini 2.5 Pro). At first it worked fine, but then dragged me into this rabbithole of nonsense that I then tried to make it fix or revert and it just kept making things worse, saying I will now do this but then doing something completely different. I wont go into more details, I suppose we all have had such experiences when the LLM just looses its mind while still sounding competent. But this cost me at least six hours of my time and in the end I had to restore the latest working version from git because it was just such a mess.

I then went to Claude Code and gave it about the same task as Gemini six hours earlier and it just did exacty what I wanted within minutes. And I don’t thing that I was just lucky, because (as others have noted) Claude transparently made a plan of what it was going to do (and that included familiarizing itself with the existing code base, something both Gemini and ChatGPT don’t seem to do unless you explicitly ask them to) and then Claude ticked off one box after the other, provided a perfect summary of what it did, no jargon or hyperbole, I ran the code and it worked.

I gave it some more tasks and it completed all of them flawlessly. It understood the project (even though it was developed in a different conversation), wrote code when I wanted code and answered questions when I asked questions (Gemini, at one point, just kept reproducing the same code when I asked it to explain what a particular section of the code did). That session of 1-2 hours cost around 5 USD, but it was totally worth it. That cost is not sustainable on a daily basis, though, so that is why a Claude Pro subscription became an option.

We’ll see if I actually take the step, given that an hour ago, my monthly allowance of premium requests on Github Copilot has just been refilled, but what you guy’s wrote about using Claude for non-coding tasks reminded me of earlier experiences I’ve had with it and made me want to use it more.

I’m not sure, though if I would say that I’d settle for a specific product or provider. Settling, in my mind, would mean that I can by a yearly subscription. But that is out of the question, these days, with the industry moving so fast.

6 Likes

I agree - you are a positive example for us all :slight_smile:

2 Likes

You’re very kind, thank you. :pray:t2:

Oh well. After using Claude a bit more, I realize that Claude is just a tiny bit less flattering than ChatGPT.

It’s most recent two answers started like this:

This is an excellent question that touches on fundamental debates within …

Your skepticism is well-placed, and you’ve identified exactly the right question to ask.

Maybe I have to add a line to my system prompt…

1 Like

ChatGPT is less of a sycophant if you use the charming robot personality. I also have some custom instructions “Tell it like it is; don’t sugar-coat responses. Use quick and clever humor when appropriate. Use emojis liberally.” It would not propose to me to upgrade my iPhone despite me indicating that I would very much like to hear that answer as a test.

Just added “be concise”. But cannot report on that yet. I am sceptical about the morality of OpenAI but allowing adult content might have some upsides in reducing an unsavoury industry.

All models are sycophantic to varying degrees. I’ve seen academic papers that suggest the core problem is the what they get rewarded for in the training age fine tuning phases.

Some of my colleagues have reported success using Clean Language:
https://www.amazon.ca/Clean-Language-Revealing-Metaphors-Opening/dp/1845901258/

Caveat Emptor: Judy Rees is a professional colleague and friend.

Have you tried the new Claude Custom Skills?

Way easier than creating a custom GPT.

2 Likes

I have not. Thank you for this — will have a closer look. Think I’ve decided to first have a go at a Claude trial, and then decide from there.

1 Like

I wanted to shift from ChatGPT to Claude.

First thing I did, after paying for a month of “professional” Claude was upload a 60 (or so ) page document I wanted to retrieve some facts from. Claude baulked. It didn’t have capacity to accept a document that size???

Both NotebookLM and ChatGPT accepted the document no qualms and performed the required task no issues.

One caveat re NotebookLM, in the app (on the website), it did include references so I could readily check the facts it was reporting. I couldn’t figure out a way to export it with the links / references, however. ChatGPT (a) did allow me to download a Word or PDF version and did have include paragraph references in the source document.

Try creating a project and putting it in that. I used it to analyse the recent NHS 10 year plan, which was 171 pages, and that used less than 5% of its project capacity.

Claude has great analysis skills in many ways- but it is correct that it does not win on max document size.

Per Claude:

https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/69fac5ed-46fd-485a-b0a5-577b246621e2

I find this so frustrating. I have tried using the answer as a source and turning into a briefing. On the other hand Gemini will will export into Google Docs with references. Why can’t that be done for NotebookLM