Woah, cool! Having a phone connection to Claude code is something I’ve been looking for

This is awesome. I’ve tried several of the mobile setups and this worked like a charm without any fiddling.I’ve been using termius + tailscale but this is much better UX. Thanks!

This looks awesome, but I was surprised to see the relay server being necessary. Can I self-host that too?

To be clear: having a diversity of tools is a good thing! I like having options.

My complaint is more that right now it feels like everybody is rushing to fill the exact same space with the exact same feature sets.

It's resulting in a lot of superficial diversity that's functionally homogenous. I want to see more applications that are pushing the capabilities of current AI tooling in creative directions.

> Like during the dawn of web 2.0 we had lots of aggregators and forums instead of "Reddit and others."

So, in other words, this is the exact opposite? “Lost of aggregators and forums” meant diversity. Lots of small players doing their own thing. What we have now is a handful of big players, and then tons of small players accessing those services with a different coat of paint. It’s like if the web you mention consisted of lots of people doing alternative interfaces to access Facebook and Reddit.

Claude may be arguably the best model, but why decide unilaterally for your users that they _have_ to use it?

If there's no particular feature that only Claude offers, this is just needless vendor lock-in. And what happens if another lab releases a model that suddenly trounces Claude at coding? Your users will leave for an app that supports the new hotness, and you won't be able to keep them because of a short-sighted architecture that cannot swap model providers.

I wonder if LLMs are actually closer to programming languages, in the sense of how they'll proliferate amongst different companies/people/use cases. Like maybe OpenAI is considered the Java of LLMs, while Claude is more like Python etc.

This is true for now.

I built some workflows using Claude’s API and now wish I had used a wrapper so I could easily switch to try gpt-5 for the cost savings.

I've been using Codex in another tab in Terminal on Windows and it's my go to agent now. Just my two cents. I have a lot of hours with Claude Code, and do appreciate it, but Codex is quite good.

I'm finding GPT 5 (via Codex CLI on a pro subscription) is far better than Opus for my use cases. Much more than the small difference on swe-bench would suggest. However, the Codex CLI is so immature by comparison that I'm still mostly using Claude, and only escalating to Codex when Claude snookers itself.

Claude doesn't seem very good at translation to me compared to GPT*. It also can't understand video like Gemini.

>Pricing/usage will be very simple - a fixed subscription and we will no longer know the tokenomics because the provider will have greatly abstracted and optimized the cost per token, favoring a model that they can optimize margin against a fixed revenue floor.

Personally, I think it's far more likely that a year from now either SotA models will have shifted elsewhere or Anthropic will have changed their pricing model to something less favorable than the current MAX plans. Either of those scenarios could suddenly result in the current Claude subscription models either not existing or no longer being the screaming deal they are now. I think it's exceedingly unlikely we see any major provider go to an unmetered business model any time soon.

And if you've built your entire workflow around tooling specific to Anthropic's services, suddenly you have an even bigger problem than just switching to a more cost effective provider. That's one of the bigger reasons I'm very skeptical of these wrappers around CC generally.

Even Claude Code itself isn't doing anything that couldn't and hasn't been done by other tools other than being tied to a really cheap way to use Claude.

I'm more optimistic. Open source and open weights will eat this whole space.

Training is capital-intensive, yes, but so far it appears that there will always be some entities willing to train models and release them for free. All it takes is a slowdown at the frontier for the open models to catch up.

The money is in the hardware, not the software.

So I work at a company that sells a product that is part of a larger ecosystem. the parent company has spent 35 years NOT having a solution to our niche. There are others like us too in the space. Some do WMS, some do EDI, etc.

So depending on the parent company, they may prefer to have a - to be a little enterprisey - set of ISVs that are better in specifc domains.

> a fixed subscription and we will no longer know the tokenomics because the provider will have greatly abstracted

This is definitely not how most compute-constrained cloud services end up looking. Your cloud storage provider doesn't charge you a flat rate for 5tb/month of storage, and no amount of financier economics can get Claude there either.

Is a whole IDE really the solution though?

There are already a plugins to use claude code in other IDEs.

This “Ill write a whole IDE because you get the best UX” seems like its a bit of a fallacy.

There are lots of ways you could do that.

A standalone application is just convenient for your business/startup/cross sell/whatever.

That's kind of what I mean though.

Because I mentioned it and it's what I use daily: Roo is a VSCode extension. So you get the entire VSCode ecosystem for free. On the AI specific side, it has every feature this app highlights on its homepage and more. It works with just about any API provider and model you could ask for.

I could probably translate my existing workflow over to Claudia pretty easily, but what does that get me? A slightly different interface seems to be about it.

That's the question I keep hitting with these new tool announcements.

If you're opposed to using VSCode for whatever reason, that's reasonable. Though, for me personally, the fact that it only lets you use Claude Code strikes me as a much larger negative on net. It's not at all agnostic in terms of AI provider.

That said, VSCode is a popular platform for this for exactly the reason I think consolidation is eventually inevitable: it's got a huge preexisting ecosystem. There are extensions for practically anything you could ask for.

There's likely room for some standalone, focused apps in this space. I just don't see the current wave of "we put a wrapper around Claude Code and gave it some basic MCP and custom prompt management tools like a dozen other applications this week" being sustainable.

They're all going to end up on their own tiny islands unless there's a reason for an ecosystem to develop around them.

"agnostically gnostic".

you give up one side of freedom (the ide) for the other (the backend).

My (somewhat elderly) father only refers to it as ChatGBT and when I tried to get to the bottom of why he said it’s because “thats what it’s called in my phone”.

Seems pretty scammy to me, akin to typo squatting with potential to collect a lot more personal information but he can’t always be reasoned with.

Hopefully he heeds my advice to not provide anything personal.

If the "on the go" experience is important to you, i.e. you actually want some care and intention put into the phone experience. There are 4 apps I'm aware of:

- Happy Claude Code Client: open source (MIT) effort for a quality mobile app

- Omnara: closed source mobile app, $9/month

- CodeRemote: closed source mobile app, $49/month

- Kisuke: closed source mobile app, private beta, unknown price

If you know of others, I would appreciate a PR to update the table I put together, or just let me know and I'll add it.

https://happy.engineering/docs/comparisons/alternatives/#qui...

There are more more desktop apps, probably because those are easier to design.

OpenAI Codex is available on the mobile app.

Have you tried claude code router? Looking at all the options, trying to see what would be a good configuration example.