Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
gofreddygo | on: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses
For months, Employees had the option to choose claude code or copilot. Now they dont.

Underlying model choice still has no restrictions. Opus 4.6 is by far the most popular. there's still big $$$ bills going anthropic's way.

comboy | parent | next
Curious if anyone around here stayed on 4.6 (having a choice to use 4.7)
EdwardDiego | root | parent | next
I went to 4.7, didn't have a choice, found it unsatisfactory, then Claude quietly added in the option to use 4.6, so I'm back on 4.6, and I'm not the only one in my company.

I had far more hallucinations with 4.7 than 4.6.

I'll try it again after a few more months for them to get it right, but 4.6 is what changed my mind on LLMs as a tool, and 4.7 felt like a step backwards, so for now I'm sticking with something that has delivered me value, instead of arguing with a model ostensibly better that was making shit up 1 - 2 times a day. It was really disappointing.

I can give examples if needed, I screenshotted the most aggravating ones, but what worries me is which ones I didn't recognise.

loading story #48247012
loading story #48248051
loading story #48249359
zmmmmm | root | parent | next
I have stuck with 4.6. I fully believe 4.7 can be smarter for truly complex and long running agentic use. But I prefer the more direct, literal mechanistic style and 4.6 seems to be peak Opus for that.
fendy3002 | root | parent | next
Stay with 4.6 if you can, it is disabled (afaik) on vscode claude code extension.

4.7 IMO is around 10-20% worse at understanding your prompt intention. You need more effort to explain your intention clearer so it doesn't divert.

loading story #48247307
loading story #48246206
loading story #48246297
pimeys | root | parent | next
I still use 4.6 if I need Opus. It's mostly GPT-5.5 for me. Only if I know it cannot do some thing like push without running the tests (because AGENTS.md said so), I switch to 4.6.

Although GPT's been acting weird since Thursday...

nijave | root | parent | next
Switched back when 4.7 had an issue last week and it was wayyy faster. I assume mostly because a lot of people have moved off but might consider using it more just for the speed boost.
lifthrasiir | root | parent | next
4.7 turned out to be a disaster in multilingual settings, so I sticked to 4.6 so far. 4.7 seemed to be optimized for (very specific slice of) coding at the expense of everything else.
loading story #48247703
SequoiaHope | root | parent | next
I’ve stayed on 4.6. Was thinking of trying 4.7 though just today. Still, I did not jump on it day one.
willtemperley | root | parent | next
I don't want to change from 4.6 because I'm finding it so good (I could change).

I've spent the last couple of days building Swift bindings to a monster CPP lib and I've actually had fun.

zuppy | root | parent
i use 4.6 and i've configured advisor to be on 4.7, so, when something's more complex the advisor can help. at least that's how i do with claude code, not sure of the others have implemented the concept of advisors.
fortran77 | parent | next
I use copilot cli and I can pick Anthropic models. The Microsoft interface seems fine to me, and equivalent. Not sure what the big deal is.
loading story #48247187
loading story #48247204
loading story #48248138
vasco | parent
Wouldn't they be forced into API pricing instead of per-seat like that though? That would potentially be a massive cost increase. But I've discovered through talking to colleagues some companies are already doing that. I can't understand why you'd ever do that when you can get VC subsidized pricing for now. At least for all initial in-plan usage. I doubt many developers go past the limit anyway and for those you switch just the extra usage to on demand anyway.
bdavbdav | root | parent
Teams is the only one with seat pricing. Teams has a user cap of 150. Enterprise is usage based pricing only now (with a £20/user service charge)