- stop using ollama

- https://sleepingrobots.com/dreams/stop-using-ollama/

I wasn't aware of the politics behind Ollama but I have noticed the lack of variety in quant versions, the lag between availability on Ollama, and their push to get you to use their cloud versions.

I'm going to uninstall Ollama.

▲

Grombobulous 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This article is really helpful for finding alternatives. I was already using LMStudio but I love that I now know about a couple of true open source alternatives I can try out.

▲

aceazzameen a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't use local models often enough, but this convinced me to uninstall ollama. Now I need to figure out which of the options at the end of that post is the best alternative for me.

▲

el_io a day ago | parent [-]

llama.cpp?

Ollama is/was based on that.

	▲	sillystuff 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Just adding to your suggestion. For those new to llama.cpp, the llama-server component running in "router mode" is fantastic; you place your common configuration in a defaults section of an ini file, and then model specific configuration in separate sections of the ini file. You can switch between models, on the fly, using the API, and the built-in web front-end for llama-server supports model switching as a drop down menu. Llama-server can just always be running, in the background (you can set an idle time for it to automatically unload weights to free vram/ram, and a maximum simultaneously running model count which will evict models on an LRU basis before loading new ones, if the count is exceeded). llama-bench is another great tool included in llama.cpp, where you can provide ranges of options to test, and just let it run through all the variations that you requested, then take the best performing and add those settings to the ini file above. There are a lot of optional tunables that can really improve performance with llama-server. E.g., typical average tok/sec generation speed improved over 7X for Gemma4 31B, on my laptop, with tuned batch-size / ubatch-size and enabling both spec-type draft-mtp and ngram-mod (with some custom settings on both). I.e., even though you don't need to do this for llama-server to be useful, it can be worth your while to spend a little time optimizing settings for your favorite models especially if your hardware is marginal.

▲

thot_experiment a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Came here to post an anti-ollama rant, real glad this is already the top comment. Nature is healing.

It's not my favorite but we do have to be aggressive in fighting these gross attempts for vc-backed silicon valley non-contributors to exploit open source labor.

▲

electroglyph 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

i handed out so many upvotes here, good work everybody!

▲

arikrahman a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Immediately thought of this article.

▲

fragmede a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If that's what I'd have to do to get $88 million, I don't want $88 million.

▲

verdverm a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I've been very happy with vLLM as an alternative on the serving side, and OpenCode Go on the subscription side

▲

senectus1 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I had no idea about any of this. thanks. Might give some of the alts a go.

▲

moralestapia a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah, they're trash.

Looks like it's their second time, as Kitematic was a very thin wrapper over the Docker CLI.

▲

kypro a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I see a lot of these "don't use [insert product]" posts and it's normally always BS about how some exec at the company has the wrong political views or upset some community who was the product by taking it in a different direction from what they wanted.

I think this is probably first time ever I read one of these and was convinced immediately that I should probably look into using something else.

	▲	inigyou a day ago \| parent [-]
		This isn't different in kind from any of the other ones you disagreed with, so maybe ponder why you agree with this one.

▲

halJordan a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Or, you know. Don't tell me what to do. One dirty hand washes another and many of llama.cpp's new features are straight copies of ollama functionality. You do you of course. But stop denying them their contribution to this ecosystem and stop denying me my agency to salve your politics.

▲

abtinf 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have no opinion or knowledge of the claims in that link, nor will I research them. The entire thing is obviously claudeslop.

▲

zishha1b0njq a day ago | parent | prev [-]

This post is empty of any relevant content.

I wish HN would stop sharing drama-seeking posts, especially by anonymous authors, attacking the hard work of people.

Are ollama's authors perfect? No, they are just humans. But many people find their work valuable and we should support Open Source.

I can assure you that you won't like the world where nobody release Open Source projects anymore because of the constant negativity.

▲

pyaamb a day ago | parent | next [-]

Do you see any negativity towards llama.cpp? This isnt drama-seeking. The author makes very valid points.

▲

pierotofy a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Taking credit for other people's work while raising millions? Yeah, pretty bad and relevant.

▲

inigyou a day ago | parent [-]

See also: why friends don't let friends use permissive software licenses.

The llama.cpp authorized ollama to do this... Unintentionally.

▲

msm_ 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Literally the main point of this blog post:

>The project’s binary distributions didn’t include the required MIT license notice for the llama.cpp code they were shipping. This isn’t a matter of open-source etiquette, the MIT license has exactly one major requirement: include the copyright notice. Ollama didn’t.

	▲	inigyou 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		How sure are we that it didn't include the notice? There isn't any prescribed form or location for the notice, so you're trying to prove a negative.

▲

Krasnol a day ago | parent | prev [-]

This anonymous author made some good points, supported by good sources.

It looks more like you're the anonymous author attacking the hard work of the author of this blog post.

The blog post alone has more relevance then the ad-post.