by rideontime
19 subcomments
- Anthropic’s “Head of Growth” claims this is a “test”: https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830
This does not explain the changes to documentation.
by 2001zhaozhao
6 subcomments
- Apparently it's just an A/B test. Legit LMAO moment, speedrunning reputation destruction to your entire userbase just to test a question whose answer you can probably already guess.
---
> For clarity, we're running a small test on ~2% of new prosumer signups. Existing Pro and Max subscribers aren't affected.
> When we launched Max a year ago, it didn't include Claude Code, Cowork didn't exist, and agents that run for hours weren't a thing. Max was designed for heavy chat usage, that's it.
> Since then, we bundled Claude Code into Max and it took off after Opus 4. Cowork landed. Long-running async agents are now everyday workflows. The way people actually use a Claude subscription has changed fundamentally.
> Engagement per subscriber is way up. We've made small adjustments along the way (weekly caps, tighter limits at peak), but usage has changed a lot and our current plans weren't built for this.
> So we're looking at different options to keep delivering a great experience for users. We don't know exactly what those look like yet - that's what we're testing and getting feedback on right now.
> When we do land on something, if it affects existing subscribers you'll get plenty of notice before anything changes. Will hear it from us, not a screenshot on X or Reddit.
https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830
---
Personally I love how they have increased everyone's quotas to counteract the Opus 4.7 tokenizer change a few days ago, but are immediately regretting it and trying to cut off subscription users.
If the subscriptions are unprofitable, then just communicate honestly, raise the price or lower limits for new subscribers transparently, and grandfather in existing users. That's what GLM coding plan is doing and it works fine for them. Don't ruin your reputation with opaque messaging and hidden changes. Lol
by robertkarl
9 subcomments
- I don't think I've ever been on such a rollercoaster with a company's reputation in the developer space. I started in January on the $20 plan, essentially my first agentic AI programming. I quickly started hitting limits developing several apps at the same time. I went up to the $200 plan after seeing the value.
After seeing my own issues with 4.6 and the mega-post on Github about declining metrics in a decent dataset of claude chats by Stella Laurenzo at AMD (https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/42796), I downgraded to the $100 plan. Hallucinations. Laziness. Lack of thinking. The responses on those mega-threads from Anthropic rubbed me the wrong way in a "you're holding it wrong" kinda way.
In the past week, I downgraded back to the $20 plan because the Codex $20 plan on 5.4 was working so well for me.
Then throw in other oddball events like the source code leak, and the super positive Anthropic events like their interactions with the current administration. It's a wild ride.
I can't understand removing Claude Code from $20. I'm interested to see whether this is confirmed or not.
I'm a career engineer and I went from being one of their most outspoken proponents (at least within my circle) and now.... I'm not.
by IgorPartola
9 subcomments
- What a way to ruin goodwill with the very community they are trying to court. I am on a Pro subscription to use with Claude Code, but it sounds like the days of using it are numbered. I guess I will be trying the latest offering from OpenAI and Google tomorrow and if they are satisfactory I might just switch. Moreover, I have been recommending Anthropic's API solutions up to now to friends and clients. Based on this dumb move I will be now starting with this anecdote and then giving a very hedged recommendation.
Realistically the future of all this is that open models become good enough that LLM as a service becomes a commodity with a race to the bottom in terms of cost. Given where we are today I can easily see open weight models in 2-3 years making Anthropic and OpenAI irrelevant for everyday development work (I justify this like so: if my coding agent is 10x smarter than I am, how would I understand if it did all the right things? I want someone of roughly my intelligence for coding. I can see use cases for like independent pharma work or some such where supergenius level intelligence is justified, but for coding ability for mere mortals to reason about the code is probably more important).
- It would signal quite a fundamental pivot if their "Pro" plan excludes coding but supports personal productivity (Cowork). Quite surprising given most people attribute Anthropic's success to their elevation of coding above everything else. To have casual users locked out of that would be a major hit you would think.
Makes me curious about the internal thinking. One theory being they are in a capacity crisis and knocking Pro users off Claude Code is an emergency brake getting pulled. But an opposite theory is it's a revenue move and they think they have the lock in to pull it off. Especially if they are building up to IPO.
Interestingly the Team subscription which is still $20/month/seat still includes Claude Code. But you need minimum 5 seats. So it could be a way to force people off individual plans and into enterprise plans where possibly things scale better for them, especially IPO/wise. When one user wants it in a company, probably they go buy 5 seats.
- Why would you even want a Claude subscription if not for Claude Code? Anthropic is obviously the best for programming, but probably nowhere else. Seems like a good way to onboard people to the Claude Code experience...everyone who's working seriously with it needs Opus, anyway. But, maybe that's the rub, if the Pro plan includes no Opus usage (which I think has always been the case), you might have a worse impression of Claude Code. Codex 5.4 is better than Sonnet, but not better than Opus.
I dunno, I'm no business genius, but I think we're starting to see these companies try to find ways to make money instead of losing it.
- Next they’ll slowly reduce how much CC usage you can get out of the $100 Max plan, then introduce a new $300 “Max Plus” plan with “40x” usage.
“You asked, and we listened: Introducing Max Plus, our biggest plan yet, designed for those…” blah blah
- I have a Claude Pro tier subscription; Claude Code, as of right now, is still functional for me. If Anthropic does boot Pro-tier users off Claude Code, I will be cancelling my subscription.
by JamesMcMinn
4 subcomments
- I can't find an announcement yet, however the pricing page now shows it's not included, and various support articles have removed any mention of the the Pro plan including access to claude code.
See [1] and [2] for an example of a support article that's had claude code removed as a Pro feature.
I guess this is the beginning of the end for subsidised model access, at least from Anthropic.
[1] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/8325606-what-is-the-p...
[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20260420065828/https://support.c...
- This is a risky move. I might have paid $20/month for my personal projects but the Max subscription is a bit steep.
Now I'm going to learn more about local models. I don't need to be as good as a frontier model. Good enough and free from all this drama is a win for me
- I would love someone to play devil's advocate against this perspective:
While these tools stand to enable the democratization of productive capability in software engineering and other tasks (creating a renaissance for solopreneurs, let's say), what seems more likely to actually happen is that entrenched capital will become the only player with real access to this "knowledge as a utility" (was it Altman who called it that?).
We already see this playing out in two fronts: 1) the gradual reduction of services and 2) the DRAM market, where local-first tools (i.e., potential disruptors of the emerging "knowledge monopoly" created by the big AI firms) are being stifled by supply shortages. How many promising small-to-medium-sized competitors are being snuffed out of existence (or never starting) due to the insanity of the DRAM/storage/CPU (soon) markets?
The currently-subsidized access that we have to the big Opus-like models will, in parallel, be gradually be taken away until only the big players can afford it. And in the end what we will have is hyper-productive skeleton crews at a few consolidated firms performing (or selling expensive access to) basically all of the knowledge labor for society, with very little potential for disruption due to the hardware and "knowledge" scarcity engineered (in part, maybe) by this monopoly.
Not necessarily a closely held belief – just a hunch – which is why I want to see what parts of the picture I might be missing.
by danielspace23
3 subcomments
- With GLM and Kimi getting better and better, with both still providing low-cost coding plans with higher quotas, and with how trivial it is to switch to them even within Claude CLI, I'm not sure what makes Anthropic think their users would rather pay 5x than switch to the competition.
- Why is management at Anthropic trying so hard to ruin their reputation with developers? I missed the OpenClaw hype but it was something that kept me excited about my yearly subscription.
It makes no sense to do one of the higher tier plans unless they are directly generating you money.
- https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724846604963924
(Head of Growth @AnthropicAI)
> When we launched Max a year ago, it didn't include Claude Code, Cowork didn't exist, and agents that run for hours weren't a thing. Max was designed for heavy chat usage, that's it.
Is there a wager that this is 100% foreshadowing Claude Code will be removed from the $100-200/month Max plans soon and go to something like API-only? Or only available on like a new $500-1,000/month plan? Restrict the $100-200/month ones to Claude.ai (website) or Claude desktop app only?
Either way, doesn't seem good to say it's a small test and then start justifying it in this direction.
- Makes sense.
It is over for the little guy - home enthusiasts and vibe coders. Too many of them saturating resources for Max users.
IF you cannot afford few hundred dollars subscription go out and breathe fresh air. But if you can, watch where the ball is rolling - few thousand dollars subscriptions and even less programmers.
- Most commercial websites, especially tech, run multiple A/B experiments in parallel to optimize signup funnels and tier conversions. Even so, there should always be a source of truth for people. We should have some way of verifying what we get for what we pay. There are laws about this as well.
This guy's casual and crass response is a sign of disrespect for customers. Unfortunately, that is pervasive in the industry. The bubbles these teams work in are corrosive to empathy and real world impact.
- Claude has become practically unusable for Pro users in the past few days. The Opus 4.7 blew through an entire 5 hour limit in one question and didn’t even finish answering it. Zero value delivered.
Opus 4.6 is giving 2, maybe 3 questions before blowing through the Pro 5 hour limit as well. We are forced to use Sonnet which makes the same mistakes over and over and then to start trying with other companies. To make matters worse, it reuses old code as we try to survive between credit expiry so it re-introduced issues into the code with the limited credits, that we had already fixed on our own and with other models.
Anthropic in just a few days has gotten me to try GLM 5.1, the new Kimi, and back to OpenAI. OpenAI also seems to introduce new bugs without being carefully micromanaged. The advantage Claude has is that the models are more careful and can refactor code instead of leading to bloat as they go. But the throttling happening now is breaking things and making the entire subscription unusable. I really hope they fix it soon.
by gbalduzzi
1 subcomments
- I think that Anthropic has capacity problems. They went all in on acquiring new customers but now they don't have enough capacity to both serve users and train new models, so they are trying to limit user usages.
It is pure speculation of course, but I don't have any other explanations on the stuff they are pulling in the last 2 months.
- So their minimum workable offer for devs just went from $17 to $100.
Also, I don't see how the Pro subscription is relevant anymore. Nobody pays $17 a month just to chat.
I just unsubscribed. :)
Time to try Chat GPT Codex, which even works with the free subscription (don't expect crazy token allowance, of course).
- If true, very strange change when Codex (at both 20 & 100) is a much, much better deal for a model much better at most coding tasks, with way more usage even with the /fast mode enabled. Is losing most non-enterprise customers the right move for them?
by akucharczyk
0 subcomment
- It cracks me up when I hear takes like - 'if you're not using more than $20, the product isn't for you because you're not a real user.' If you use CC as an assistant rather than a replacement for your own thinking, follow SDD, and use the tool thoughtfully, you deliver a lot more and you don't need the 5x or 20x limit. It's a different story if you're vibe coding, but then we're not really talking about AI-assisted work - your three prompts barely count as doing any work. I've been on Pro for 2 years, but if this is how things are going, I'll look for an alternative. Luckily, there's plenty to choose from.
- Seems like a pretty bad business move if it's really what they're doing. They should want devs using the product on a cheaper subscription to see the value with profitable limits on usage.
I think the only reason to do this would be that they just can't scale up to service the volume they have and need to cut down significantly on the total number of users. Seems also like a rough business proposition. Most of the pro plan users would probably migrate to a competitor at a similar price point (I know I will).
The only other possibility would be if they are losing too much money on the compute power and just can't offer it at that price anymore. But then upgrading the plan gives you more compute per dollar, so maybe they're just banking on people not actually using all of what they pay for?
I had previously thought that the inference cost of using a trained model was relatively low and that most costs went into training new models, but maybe that is less true with the more powerful newer models.
If it costs a ton more to serve Opus vs serving something like Kimi or Qwen, then I think most people just won't use the more expensive version for most things.
by evil-olive
0 subcomment
- if this is accurate, and not some "oops we made a vibe-coding mistake updating our website" I am going to hit the "cancel subscription" button so hard that my desk will break in half.
I have an unlimited-usage API billing plan through my dayjob, but for obvious reasons they don't allow piggybacking personal usage onto that. so I paid for the $20/mo personal plan as an easy and relatively cheap method of professional development / keeping my skills current. I don't particularly mind paying $20/mo, but I'm absolutely not paying $100/mo.
also, part of the reason I didn't mind paying for the personal subscription is that I liked having consistency between the tools I use for my dayjob and the ones I use for side projects. if that goes away, then I might as well switch away from Claude usage at work as well. I very much doubt Anthropic's revenue predictions for this change are taking things like that into account.
making a change like this without an announcement, just sneaky updates to product pages, is also an absolutely unforgivable thing to do, in terms of me trusting them as a company.
by rock_artist
1 subcomments
- The age of AI seems to forget some lessons from Google (and history in general).
- Rapid changes hurts the trust of your brand and product. In Google case, using a new service product became something you’ll think multiple times as you are more likely to axe it than rivals or specialized equivalents.
- While models currently has no clear winner. Anthropic’s core product is coding. But just as Skype, IE, Netscape their can always be another game changer you cannot count.
- The Pro plan is already limited for true agentinc workflows. The limits now are so bad that a business that relies on it would need bigger plans.
- Anthropic is already in a delicate situation where many devs are frustrated. Dropping or crippling the use even more just means this sector (which I can only assume is a big chunk) would switch to competitors tool that already try to compete.
- Local models, whether as Google sees it “edge” or even further would also take bigger part in the future.
by hannahstrawbrry
2 subcomments
- Claude Code page still shows it included with Pro/Max. https://claude.com/product/claude-code
- All I want is a reasonably priced subscription combining both coding AI and general AI in a single bill for non professional use that allows me to opt out of my data being used for training.
Google limits history to 72 hours if you opt out of training even if you pay them $20 a month which rules them out for me. I guess I'm going to try the $20 chat gpt plan.
At this point I am wondering if I need to accept that were moving to a token based model and get comfortable with opencode and manually switching models.
- It's still included here
https://claude.com/product/claude-code
- Well, if there's one way to show that you're not profitable on inference, this would be it.
- Either they baited people with code and flexible usage limits until march and this was planned or they realized that they did too good of an product and it costs them too much.
One thing is clear, Anthropics communications and leadership is horrible. You don't launch or remove features like this. How this is communicated and handle is something like mom+pop shop would do.
- I’ve got nearly 10 months left on my yearly subscription, I wonder what that means for my access.
- If it was removed from the pro plan, then the max plan should list claude code as one of its extras, and it doesn't.
I would not jump to conclusions yet.
by thebiblelover7
1 subcomments
- Previous page, when Claude Code was included:
https://web.archive.org/web/20260421141017/https://claude.co...
Edit: fixed the url thanks to scq
by colechristensen
1 subcomments
- I assume this has to do with the $20 tier now running out of provisioned tokens so quickly as to be not particularly useful, giving users a bad experience.
The million token context + reduced caching period + new models using more tokens made this a probably unpopular but perhaps unavoidable development.
There's a hard problem here balancing costs and experience. I'm afraid despite the bad experience for people that this is necessary and $20/month was just too big a loss to sustain.
- Next they’ll slowly reduce how much CC usage you can get out of the $100 Max plan, then introduce a new $300 “Max Plus” plan with “40x” usage.
“You asked, and we listened: Introducing Max Plus, our biggest plan yet, designed for those…” blah blah
by spprashant
0 subcomment
- I can't believe they are yanking tool access instead of just reducing the token quota or simply pulling Opus 4.7 access. To be fair even that would be poorly received, but at least people would have a choice of working within limits. Claude Code is their real winner, and a great ramp for newcomers coming into AI assisted development. They are playing straight into OpenAIs hands.
by brandonmarkus
0 subcomment
- Anthropic NEED to get better at communicating with their customers. The most meaningful updates we get on changes come from employees on X. It's unprofessional and unsustainable.
by johnduhart
1 subcomments
- Pricing page reflects this: https://claude.com/pricing#individual-features
- Just tried Claude Code on my Pro plan. It worked. So no, it's not removed
- The $20 plan showed me how good Claude Code was, and now I'm paying $100/month. I never would have paid $100 just to try out Claude Code.
by mmcconnell1618
2 subcomments
- Anthropic clearly doesn't understand that customers see their brand as "Claude", Google's brand as "Gemini" and OpenAI's brand as "ChatGPT." They have so many plans and exclusions that they risk customer confusion. I was surprised when I was pay $200/month for Claude Code, finding it super helpful, and then I had to pay separately to get API access for an experiment. Why are so many parts of "Claude" separate from each other, especially on a $200/month subscription.
Anthropic better get this sorted out with a proper product manager and marketing or they risk customers jumping to easier to understand platforms that are good enough.
by KarlMertin
1 subcomments
- https://claude.com/product/claude-code - scroll to "Get started with Claude Code" and it's still lsited in the pro plan.
by whythismatters
0 subcomment
- Hey, I'm a pro, and I feel genuinely insulted. I could consider going back to Claude Desktop + MCP, but I'm getting tired of this telenovela, and will probably cancel my sub and take my business elsewhere.
by syntaxing
1 subcomments
- With GitHub and Anthropic reducing subscription features, Chinese providers are looking more and more tempting.
by zaptheimpaler
1 subcomments
- This just made me gamble on a yearly subscription for Pro, hoping they will grandfather in existing customers..
- Sooner or later, Anthropic will probably have to take this step if they want to actually make money.
Either way, they're going to lose a huge chunk of their user base because of it. I currently have a private Pro subscription for $20; I can just barely justify that amount for my personal hobby projects. Work-wise, my employer provides all of that for me, so I don't really care - this is just for my personal needs. But at $100, I'm out. The subscription isn't worth it to me just to run a few prompts in Claude Code once a week (yes, I'm still one of those people who is actually capable of, and enjoys, writing code by hand). I do use Claude Chat as well, but the free plan is more than sufficient for my needs (never ran into any limit until now). I simply have zero interest in Cowork and any products other than Claude Code.
In short: if Claude Code is removed from the Pro plan, Claude in general will no longer be interesting for people like me.
- Hmm, we just bought my wife an annual subscription at the Pro tier, largely to use Claude Code. Wonder if she'd be grandfathered in or if we'll need to get a refund.
- I hope they really botch Claude Code to give all the developers a wakeup call about making a hard dependency to a for-profit entity that's essentially in it's startup phase. Like, we wouldn't adopt some newfangled framework just because it was on the front page of Hacker News. Why did we all jump on the new unproven technology here?
- I predict this may get reversed as it would be a huge opening for glm, kimi, and qwen offerings. I'd switch instead of upgrading to Max
- This is a joke, right... right??
by quietsegfault
1 subcomments
- Trying to chat with "fin" is like trying to argue with a bowl of congealed oatmeal.
Me:
Why is your website saying Claude Code is not included in Claude Pro subscriptions?
"Fin", the slow, dopey AI agent:
That’s confusing, but it usually comes down to what “Claude Code” means in that context. Claude Pro does include Claude Code (the Code tab in the desktop app, and Claude Code access for individuals).
What Pro does not include is API access via the Claude Console. Those are separate products: Pro is for chat, and the Console is for building apps with the API.
So if the website is saying “not included,” it’s likely referring to Console/API access, not the Claude Code feature itself.
Did that clear up the confusion?
Me:
No. It clearly states on the pricing page that Claude Code is not included.
Fin:
That’s frustrating, <NAME>. The key detail is that Claude Code is included in Claude Pro, but API access via the Claude Console is not.
So if the page you’re looking at says “Claude Code is not included,” it’s almost certainly referring to Console/API access (the developer platform), not the Claude Code feature itself.
If you tell me the exact URL or screenshot of the page that says that, I can confirm which “Code” it’s talking about.
Was that explanation helpful?
Me:
https://claude.com/pricing
Fin:
On https://claude.com/pricing, Pro does include Claude Code. It’s listed right there under Pro’s “Everything in Free, plus” bullets: “Includes Claude Code.”
So if you’re seeing “not included” somewhere else on that page, it’s likely referring to something different than the Claude Code feature. The one thing Pro does not include is API access via the Claude Console (that’s a separate product).
Also, the Code tab in the desktop app requires a Pro (or Max/Team/Enterprise) subscription, and it may not show for everyone yet since it’s still rolling out.
Does that clear things up for you?
Me:
there is clearly an "x" at this page. escalate to a human immediately.
and then the cycle continues. I'm cancelling my Anthropic subscription, sick of worrying about limits and getting banned and simply awful experience.
- At least for me Claude Code is still working on my Pro plan. I don't know if that's because the change simply hasn't propagated all the way through their systems yet (the change is now up on the main Claude pricing page and on their support pages, but not on the Claude Code landing page yet), or if it's because existing plans are grandfathered in, or what.
In general Anthropic seems to be pretty bad at clearly communicating what is going on. I have both Claude Pro for Claude Code and ChatGPT Plus for Codex, and lately I've been reaching for Codex first more and more often... at least for the hobby stuff I'm using Claude/Codex on, they seem pretty much equivalent in terms of practical capability/usefulness.
- This is more ethical than what they've been doing, trying to keep those subscribers but limiting them to the point it's become unusable. But it's also kneecaping themselves because they'll miss out on any innovation and hype coming out of the hobbyist community.
- I'm curious about their expectations and how they will interpret the results.
On the one hand, the people there are supposedly among the smartest on the planet. On the other hand, they consistently forget that they're dealing with LOYAL humans, and these humans prefer respectful communication beforehand instead of being messed with every other day.
My hope for reasonable behavior is to not handle it this way. Decrease limits and increase prices if you can't handle it and be _honest_ about it.
Are they just looking for a way to rationalize another hostile act? And already have expectations like:
- "minus 10% in pro signups" -> oh, let's drop those coders who won't pay anyway
- "minus X% in pro signups and plus X% in max" -> awesome, PAY UP!
- Simultaneous with GitHub copilot dropping support for the Opus models in their $10/month plan...
- https://www.wheresyoured.at/news-anthropic-removes-pro-cc/ wrote it up. And relatively dry too!
- The rug pull is coming
- ANthropic never wanted my money anyway... they don't allow work + personal accounts to have the same phone number. I had to close my personal account otherwise I could not complete onboarding at work.
So I pay for Codex instead.
- It is perhaps better for Anthropic to do a price hike e.g. $25 or $30 for Pro with a clear/honest messaging e.g. "Running costs are high, price hike is unavoidable" than resorting to these tactics.
These shenanigans are earning them no respect. The market is already annoyed on model serving QA issues, and now (recently) Opus limits. They don't want to lose to OpenAI - understandable - but these shortcuts won't earn them anything either.
- The last couple of weeks using Claude has been…interesting to say the least.
Additionally I run a constant hacking contest between GPT and Claude. It’s a toy project and it simulates an attack/defense of a small corporate network.
Claude used to win pretty handily. Suddenly it’s started to lose 90% of the time. I thought GPT had gotten better but no, looking at the logs it seems that Claude is slower and more prone to running in circles. This is still the case when switching to Opus 4.7.
I don’t know what that means but it’s undoubtedly worse.
- https://claude.com/product/claude-code seems to say it is included in Pro plan.
- They should allow existing Pro plan users to keep using Claude Code.
by ryanmcgarvey
2 subcomments
- Everyone that is upset about this should take note: you are not a (coding) customer at $20/mo. Their coding customers spend thousands per month (week!) on claude and it's growing faster than they can keep up with (source: I'm one of them, and I know many other like me. We're budgeting 10-20% of engineering salary spend on tokens). It sucks to no longer be able to code on the cheap anymore, but don't fool yourself into thinking you have any leverage here.
- Note that some companies, like Amazon, purchased and ran the Claude on their own hardware. They didn't change the model parameters during the Claude Opus 4.6 karma.
If Anthropic continues to getting worse, try Amazon Kiro and other companies that run Claude on their own hardware.
It might be expensive and have a worse experience compared to Claude's code, but at least the model itself is the "original flavor."
These days, it's hard to ask for much.
- Anthropic should be increasing the value and services they offer not reducing it.
It’s the Apple model. Yes you pay a ton more. But my 2013 MacBook Pro 15 I got in college lasted 10 years and was still fine even when it was stolen. That’s what you pay for. You pay for a ton of built in apps and functionality and quality.
Arbitrarily removing things is customer and more importantantly good will hostile.
by UncleOxidant
0 subcomment
- I don't see it mentioned in the Max plan there either.
by jauntywundrkind
0 subcomment
- Feels like a very strong chance that this is related to trying to find a way to navigate letting OpenClaw users on. https://docs.openclaw.ai/providers/anthropic https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47844269
by xkcd-sucks
1 subcomments
- Oh FFS claude code is the only reason I have a pro claude subscription. I don't even use my personal subscription all that much after spending all day with claude/bedrock at work. I will absolutely cancel my pro subscription and continue to use local / Codex if claude code stops working.
I realize this duplicates a lot of sentiment already in this thread but anyone here with pull at Anthropic please understand it will undo a lot of the goodwill that made Claude so successful in the first place.
- And this is why local AI is going to be the future.
by makingstuffs
0 subcomment
- It’s seems like there are a lot fishy smells coming from the timing of the mythos announcement and the reports of issues with casual users. Combine that with the mass rejection of 4.7 it kinda seems like they are burning their ‘non research’ users in order to keep the Mythos users warm.
I could be connecting unrelated dots here, but it sure as hell seems quite coincidental to me.
- To help you decide if you should keep your Claude subscription, you can see how much of your code is written by Claude Code with my project (open source, local): https://github.com/gelatinousdevelopment/buildermark
by TacticalCoder
0 subcomment
- The clusterfuck about the various pages not being all upgraded to reflect the same story...
I thought we now had advanced tools to which we could ask to do things like: "Remove all mention of Claude Code in the Pro, but not in the Pro Max plan".
But apparently the CGI-days called and asked the webmaster to manually edit .html files one by one?
- From Amol, who is the Head of Growth:
> For clarity, we're running a small test on ~2% of new prosumer signups. Existing Pro and Max subscribers aren't affected.
https://x.com/TheAmolAvasare/status/2046724659039932830
- This makes sense given Anthropic’s recent downtime and resource constraints.
Opus 4.7 consumes tokens at a faster rate and folks were complaining that the Pro plan included too few credits for real work.
And Anthropic now allows `claude -p` (which invokes Claude code) for 3rd party agents like OpenClaw, which consume far more tokens by running autonomously, 24/7.
- This is exactly what happens with all agentic products in near future. Demand is way higher than supply right now. Also most programmers do not use agents yet so demand will grow even more. Building data centers is not easy and price of HW is skyrocketing.
- The only thing they'd need to do to enjoy the positive PR from the DoD spat is shut up and improve (or at least not worsen) product.
Even the downtime would've been fine (as GitHub shows). Instead they're pissing it all away by letting employees make random announcements on random platforms.
- I see lots of speculation that Anthropic needs to cut usage because they are compute constrained. If that's the case, will they be focusing on reducing compute costs for their models?
From what I can tell Opus 4.7 is more resource-intensive than Opus 4.6 is more resource-intensive than Opus 4.5.
- I was seriously considering investing in an RTX 6000 rig, and I think this is just enough to tip me over the edge. I know it's not as good as CC, but at least I know it'll be there tomorrow.
- Are compute resources so tight they’d want to make their products as unappealing as possible on purpose?
by tiberius_p
1 subcomments
- It works for me at the moment on the pro plan. Is there a grace period until they enforce the new pricing?
- Related perhaps to GitHub pausing signups for Copilot? https://github.blog/changelog/2026-04-20-changes-to-github-c...
by Wowfunhappy
3 subcomments
- Is Claude Code actually useful on the Pro plan?
I remember when they first added Claude Code to Pro — it was limited to Max initially — and my first thought was that it seemed kind of stupid, because at one fifth of my current limit, I would be hitting walls all the time...
- Vibe coded ui bug?
That sucks, I guess I'll cancel my Claude account. Not paying 100 dollars. That's crazy
by trashface
2 subcomments
- I use it on Pro and was just thinking today, there is no way $20 covers the cost of it. But I'm long term unemployed and can't afford any higher tier, so if they drop it guess I'll have to find a non-anthropic solution somehow.
by nozzlegear
0 subcomment
- Unrelated to the Claudge Code change, I'm fascinated by people on Twitter and Bluesky posting screenshots of the answers they get from AI like it's an original source of information. It's as if some users see the AI as an authority, and derive some kind of social capital from that authority. For example, in the OP's linked Bluesky thread, one person replies with "Fin says it’s included with Pro" and attached a screenshot from "Fin AI Agent" (which I haven't heard of) that claims Claude Code is still available on the Pro tier. Is that valuable? Personally I don't trust what any AI has to say, especially when the subject is currently in flux.
https://bsky.app/profile/mattgreenrocks.bsky.social/post/3mk...
Another example, I recently saw two people over on Twitter posting LLM responses at each other in a bitter argument about Vercel's security breach. They made no attempt to pretend they'd formulated the ripostes themselves, it was just screenshotting one-sided conversations... What's the point? They could've saved themselves the trouble by spawning two LLMs, naming them "John Doe" and "Fred Doe", then telling them to argue and post the name of the winner.
Disclaimer: I don't use Twitter, Bluesky, Mastodon, etc., so maybe it's not that deep.
- People really have to internalize that these things are expensive to run, and that there isn't enough compute to go around, like actually for real for real, which is likely the source of this. My guess is its a temporary new sign up pause.
- Can't you use Claude Code without a Claude model? E.g. can't you use this with a local model?
Folks are assuming that only the $100 plan will include Claude Code access. I think a more likely scenario is that everyone will be able to use CC.
by DeathArrow
1 subcomments
- I'm very happy with GLM 5.1, MiniMax M2.7 and Kimi K2.5. My wallet is happy, too.
by wewewedxfgdf
0 subcomment
- They'll remove it.
Then some genius intern will say "if we offer it to the lowest level plans, the users will get hooked on how awesome it is!"
Then Anthropic will put it back.
Or they could just ask Claude if it is a good idea to remove.
- The "5x" and "20x" no longer make sense for Max. It's supposed to be 5 times the Pro limits. But if only Max 5x has access, then they need to renamed to "Max 1x" and "Max 4x".
- How long until the $10 Github Copilot subscription goes away? That was a great deal for my limited personal programming. The only reason I switched from it to Claude was to get coding and general ai in a single bill.
- I know this would add to pricing/model/plan confusion but what about Claude Pro plan can only access Sonnet and Haiku Models via Claude Code?
Opus is fairly useless on Pro given the rate limits anyways.
- Tangent, all those people who are coding in extreme niches, like embedded development, is AI helpful? Can it learn enough from stealing FOSS code to help?
- And of course you never want the first tier it's included on because you need actual usage, so in reality you need Max 20x - the price of which I can't even see on the pricing page
by jerrygenser
0 subcomment
- so if you pick max-5x or mx-20x than pro... are you getting 0 now?
by jamalingo560
0 subcomment
- I was working in my biggest project in the last 3 years and i dont got mutch money and they go there and cut claude code from pro like wtf so why am i even paying for pro
- Claude Code still works on Pro plans as of right now.
The Anthropic website has become inconsistent. Some places say Claude Code is included in the Pro plan, other pages don't.
- Cool, first remove OpenCode support so I have to use their shitty TUI, then remove that too. What a loss. Good thing GLM 5.1 is good enough
- Are they trying to reduce cloud servers needed for AI because they're running out? I wish they'd be a little more honest in their response.
- New sign-ups only or affecting current subscriptions too?
- This makes me less likely to choose Claude Code, as this feels unreliable... Who says they will not change a few months down the line again.
- Practically speaking, the $20 plan is useless anyway given the limits and the way Claude Code consumes tokens with very little caching.
by throwaw12
1 subcomments
- We, as a society, need Open Source SOTA models and should be able to also train new models via distributed P2P network.
Otherwise companies will keep exploiting using their dominant position.
We were taught dictators are bad, monopolies are bad, but now allowing 2 companies control most of the software development
by rafael-lua
2 subcomments
- I'm out of the loop. Do you guys use Claude subscriptions for Claude Code rather than just pay-as-you-go API keys? Is it cost related?
by incognito124
0 subcomment
- Dup: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47854477
by quantum_state
0 subcomment
- Claude Code has become useless anyway in the last few weeks. I want my money back!
- They will lose the individual subscribers for sure. My day job can pay up to the roof for ai access in this climate but personally I cannot.
- Will definitely discontinue my Pro subscription if it's true. Claude Code is the only reason I signed up in the first place.
- Every person who signs up for a pro subscription on that advertising has cause to sue for being miss-sold the product.
by throwaway85825
0 subcomment
- Frontier LLMs are not going to be economically viable when the free money runs out and they're expected to turn a profit.
- Curious how this will play out (if true) for folks who signed up for that annual plan - expecting Claude Code to be included.
by cambaceres
0 subcomment
- That’s too bad, I just purchased a one year pro plan for my dad just for him to play around with CC when he retires next week.
- I'm not going on max. I barely hit 20% of my weekly limits on pro, to hell with Anthropic if they drop this plan.
- So this is why they allowed Claude code to be used for open claw again - cuz code is going to more expensive customers
by globular-toast
0 subcomment
- It's going to be interesting seeing the AI companies gouge people who are incapable without it.
- Does this mean that for enterprises using per-seat pricing, only the $100 premium seat gets access to claude code?
by nh43215rgb
0 subcomment
- How about team plan standard customer?($25) I suppose its only natural it would follow suit if not already
- They have till morning to clean up this giant PR mess. I think people will leave for codex
by netsec_burn
0 subcomment
- I can't even sign up for Max (last tried yesterday), their credit card processor has issues.
- I just bought my brother 6 months of pro so he could use Claude code. How do I request a refund
by altitudinous
0 subcomment
- Chickens have come home to roost. Someone had to pay for the servers and the debt, and its us!!
by KnuthIsGod
0 subcomment
- Run your LLM locally.
That is the only way to avoid being held captive by Anthropic / Meta / Google.
by quantum_state
0 subcomment
- Claude Code started to suck since a couple of weeks ago. I want my money back!
by solaire_oa
0 subcomment
- Bubble stress test, stage 1.
by kelsey98765431
1 subcomments
- i cancelled cursor about 10 minutes ago and i'll cancel claude too
by tacker2000
0 subcomment
- Funny, I just signed up for Pro a couple hours ago, to check how Claude Code works using this plan, instead of using my API keys.
I got rate limited after about 30mins of coding and was thinking, who the hell i going to work like this?
So they really seem to be running into extreme capacity issued now.
- Anthropic reverts the “prosumer” AB testing, but damage is done.
by werd_eithw
1 subcomments
- Their chat bot claims that pro users still have access to Claude Code.
- I just cancelled my plan, but still have access to Pro and Code apparently until my cycle would have renewed. Hopefully they get a clear signal from this, especially if more of us cancel with the intention to sign back up should they reverse this decision.
by skywhopper
0 subcomment
- See also https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1srzhd7/psa_claud...
- No particular opinion on this change, but generally pricing is a great way to separate dabblers from serious users. There isn’t a great deal of value in dabblers or what they produce, I imagine that training data isn’t worth much relative to the pro users. Similar pricing story with $100 yearly price for Apple developer accounts that people complain a lot about. The reality is if you’re serious about making something, these costs are pretty cheap.
The folks hurt most by this are serious people in developing countries and young people starting out. Occasionally a dabbler turns into a serious user but I imagine that’s far less likely than people wish it were.
The value to companies who make these changes is they don’t have low value users or low value contributions to worry about, which has its own not insignificant overhead. In the age of AI slop everywhere we’re likely to see a lot more attempts to separate the wheat from the chaff.
- Ahh couldn’t they vibe a solution to make CC cheaper?
- Is this confirmed?!
- Anthropic is vibe running the company.
- I'm asking for a full refund of my plan via amex if this actually happens. Fuck them.
- does anyone have recommendations on replacing CC with something else for around $20-30 / month?
- ;) - use the Chinese models ;,>
- This just lends more fuel to AI skeptics that this entire thing is a massive, unsustainable grift. The explanation only adds confusion and implicitly means that this was not a mistake. What is someone to take away from this?
That $20/month is not profitable? That Anthropic thinks that people are willing to pay a 400% markup without batting an eye? That Anthropic is desperately trying to clean up their burn rate? Why should we trust a company that can screw up basic PR this hard?
by inquisitive-me
0 subcomment
- Jesus Christ, it’s literally going to become too big of a risk to depend on Anthropic.
As someone who tries to manage usage for a small team they just added Claude Code to the Standard Team seat now they are removing it!?
Not to mention that they will ban your entire organization from a bot deciding you violated their TOS with no communication and no way to contact anyone to understand what happened.
If this is real we are switching to OpenAI or Gemini it is not worth all this non sense
- Annoying, signed up for a personal pro account a couple of weeks ago. No way I’m going to spend $200 just for a few personal projects.
by christophilus
0 subcomment
- I feel like Anthropic has managed to burn good will faster than anyone I’ve seen since Elon Musk.
by 2001zhaozhao
0 subcomment
- Huh? I just don't understand why they're doing this. Feels like shooting themselves in the foot, given that Claude's individual subscribers are a large part of who is introducing all their enterprise customers to them. Plus removing access is never good for public perception.
by code-things
0 subcomment
- You know you can just code by typing and thinking, right? Like you don’t need to use AI if you’re a software engineer.
I know, crazy idea. When we told you they’re getting you hooked and would rug pull you called us permanent underclass or something.
by emilyclark49
0 subcomment
- No way
by curtisblaine
0 subcomment
- They're trying to find every way to enshittify their partially unprofitable service. When they find a way that sticks, they'll go with it. This has become the preferred way of doing tech business in the US. Create a great thing, give it away for free, hook users in, try to squeeze them. In theory competition should limit this kind of behaviour, but for some reason they big companies all wait on another to start enshittification in unison. How this is legal still puzzles me but evidently that's how it goes.
Here's my hot take: Anthropic et al. are trying to make developing a subscription-only job, and they've done that by illegally pirating pretty much the whole Internet. If they were to go out of business tomorrow and serving models was to become a commoditized service like storage we'd be all better off. Sure, we would have less research on frontier models, but we don't need AGI, we need good local models, RAM and good open source / weight AI tools.
by amazingamazing
0 subcomment
- I was told Claude code was profitable on all subscriptions. Lol, turns out maybe you can be more profitable.
- Some top tier PR yet again... does Claude run their PR team on its own?
- “Let’s see how they react, and they will be ok and we will be rich.”
by estomagordo
0 subcomment
- Wait. What is Anthropic without Claude? Serious question.
- Meh, $20 Codex is better at this moment anyway.
- Nice. Bye.
- The enshitification stage came quick.
by wasabinator
0 subcomment
- The enshitification intensifies.
- [dead]
by techpulselab
0 subcomment
- [dead]
- [dead]
- [flagged]
- I posted this question two weeks ago: "What is your plan when the AI you have implemented throughout your company changes the results you've come to trust?" (https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/06/anthropic_claude_code...).
Since then, I had to add:
"or won't let you log in?": https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/44257
"or makes stuff up?": https://dwyer.co.za/static/claude-mixes-up-who-said-what-and...
"or when it's down?": https://status.claude.com/incidents/6jd2m42f8mld
"or when you get banned?": https://bannedbyanthropic.com/
"or installs spyware?": https://www.thatprivacyguy.com/blog/anthropic-spyware/
And this is all exclusively about Anthropic. It's insane. On any other tech, there would be a consensus to wait until it's stable, but not AI - we go full throttle when it's AI.
Genuinely curious how people who have implemented this in serious companies are answering these questions, because my answer is to keep it the fuck out.
by vicchenai
3 subcomments
- Saw this coming eventually. $20/month for autonomous agents running 24/7 was clearly not sustainable at API pricing. The part that's surprising is there's still no official announcement - just a quiet page edit.
- Wonder where this leaves folks who paid the annual rate? Here’s what Claude said:
https://claude.ai/share/1a4293bd-b2d4-41b7-a887-eb42b3ae8b6e
“ The standard answer here is no — Anthropic does not typically refund the unused portion of annual plans , and annual subscribers won’t see prorated refunds, retaining access for the full remaining period instead.
That said, your situation is a bit different — you’re not just canceling, you’re canceling because a feature you paid for was removed. That’s worth contacting Anthropic support directly about. Their support team can check your refund eligibility , and this kind of material change to the plan is exactly the case where a support escalation could go differently than a standard cancellation.
You can reach them through the in-app support messenger at support.claude.com or via the thumbs-down feedback button. I’d recommend explaining specifically that Claude Code was a factor in your annual plan purchase. ”
Hacker News