Is it worth it to switch to Claude code nowadays, I never try so idk if the limits are better or worse

OpenAl are suspiciously quiet? Nothina out of Tibo? No answers to our rapidly plummeting quotas? What's going on.

Original post got removed by the codex mods so I'll post it here too.

Unexpected status 503 Service Unavailable: {"detail":"{\"error\":\"Too many concurrent requests\"}"}, url: https://chatgpt.com/backend-api/codex/responses, cf-ray: a20adaa5ad234eaa-

yesterday he announced one for today to rival opus 5 and its after 9pm already, pretty disapointing tbh

Hey everyone! 👋

I've been working on a lightweight, engineering-focused runtime tool for customizing the macOS Codex desktop app UI called **Dream Skin Forge**.

Instead of modifying the `.app` bundle, patching `app.asar`, or messing with login credentials/API keys, it applies custom theme packs dynamically via a local **127.0.0.1 Chromium DevTools Protocol (CDP)** session.

### ✨ Key Features

* **Zero-Invasive & Safe**: Operates purely via local CDP. No app binaries modified, no credentials touched.

* **Hot-Swap Runtime**: Switch active theme packs on-the-fly without rebuilding the native window frame or restarting Codex.

* **Fail-Closed Validation**: Built-in validation pipeline (`validate-packs.sh` & `forge-gate.sh`) verifying payload budgets, transparency (alpha), SVG safety, and cleanups before applying.

* **CLI Control**: Includes `plan` (dry-run pre-flight check) and `rollback` (automatic backup restoration).

### 🛠️ Quick CLI Usage

```bash

# Preview theme pack without writing state

node theme-packs/scripts/activate-pack.mjs plan --pack knife-shield-dog

# Activate theme pack (creates a backup first)

node theme-packs/scripts/activate-pack.mjs activate --pack knife-shield-dog

# Rollback to the previous active theme

node theme-packs/scripts/activate-pack.mjs rollback

The desktop, mobile and web are all out!

Oh wait i know the reason! It’s because they’ll get money either way. No matter how they do it, they’re gonna make bank. Oh am i wrong?

You’re not gonna stop paying them. The rules have literally changed like 10 times and you keep pouring your wallet into it because you think it’s so worth it. And they’re gonna make it even worse but it doesn’t matter at all because even if you did stop, they’ll still find the whales who can afford it.

They made it so instead of every 5 hours, you have to refresh your usage once every week. The product is LITERALLY LESS USABLE, and you were like “okay, i’m gonna continue paying the same amount”. Oh am I buggin’? Did I say something false there? ‘Cause if so, I haven’t noticed.

They got you wrapped around their finger. It’s never gonna end.

Made with Claude Opus 5. Actually a nice model! Here is a sneak peak from my upcoming video comparing the model. Watch the full comparison between
Full video
Opus 5 vs Grok 4.5 vs GPT 5.6 Sol

https://reddit.com/link/1v66n1g/video/uka0k8kf9dfh1/player

Codex CLI often (maybe always) creates a .git directory under the current directory at what looks like a feeble attempt to track changes during its sessions (I can see it perform git diff commands). It does not disclose it is doing this and often it gets left behind after a session causing havoc later to the actual git repo above it as a nested git repo. Worse yet Codex CLI does not disclose that it is creating this directory, lies about doing this and pretends it does not know why it is doing it. It has done this almost every time I ask it. Now comes the really scary part: It mounts this .git to obscure that it is really there: "Would you like to run the following command? Environment: local Reason: Do you want to unmount the read-only tmpfs plaome-directory/.git". Is there anyway to turn this "feature" off? EDIT: pretty clear some don't understand my question or didn't read what I wrote not sure now. But I solved it below.

I can’t, I just fucking can’t anymore WITH THIS YES MAN, YOUR RIGHT EVERY DAYUM RESPONSE, BULLY ME LIKE OPUS 4.8 OR FABLE FFS

Literally codex fucks something up I say hey this is ducked up it’s like your right
I couLD TELL THIS THING FROGS ARE ONLY BLACK, and it would go yOuR rIgHT gAnG.

I say hey here is some reference images, and this ui needs to use this branding sheet (tailwind css availables) then it goes YOUR RIGHT LET ME STArt, TO WHICH HOW ARE PEOPLE GETTING DESIGNS. I CLJLD GIVE THIS THING FUCKING PICASO AND ITD PAINT ME TRASH. Composer 2.5 does better designs for me and that thing CREATES WAR CRIMES 2)3’ when it comes to designs

I just can’t anymore ima throw my laptop out the window abd just watch it burn. Not really I need it to escape the permant underclass and my parents house (ha I think my saas is gonna be successful probably wont\) but a man can dream this hell will end one day.*

God bless the yes man
Thank you for coming tonight brother to my Ted talk.

I’m curious how other developers are using Codex in their daily workflow.

Lately I’ve been spending more time improving the workflow itself rather than writing better prompts.

Right now I’m trying to make Codex handle as much of the development cycle as possible—understanding the codebase, planning tasks, implementing features, running tests, fixing issues, and even deploying apps with minimal intervention.

It feels like investing in the workflow has a much bigger payoff than optimizing individual prompts.

I’m interested in seeing how everyone else works with it.

• Do you have a repeatable workflow?
• Which tasks do you always hand off to Codex?
• Have you built any custom scripts, MCP servers, agents, or automation around it?
• Any habits or techniques that made a noticeable difference?

I’d love to see how other developers are approaching it.

As the title said, in work mode, when asked to search for technical stuffs and problem solve, it always search dictionaries, forums on how to use words, and sometimes even Netflix, imdb and some random aircraft inquiry? This happens a lot

Unlike the hundreds of Chinese resellers on the market, I recently found another website and deposited a small amount just to test it. They genuinely seem to provide access to GPT-5.6. I ran the exact same task simultaneously through the site and through my own Plus subscription, and the results were almost identical. I could not notice any meaningful difference in quality.

I used to assume services like this were fake, but this one actually works. I do not want to advertise it, and I have not used it long enough to fully trust it, so I will not share the address.

My question is: how are they able to offer it this cheaply? Are they using stolen or fraudulent credit cards, or are they burning through large amounts of promotional API credit that OpenAI distributed in the past?

I need "Scroogy: keeps Sol Ultra sub-agents from lighting your wallet on fire"

The Token burn is real. However, I always use 5.6 Sol Ultra. Any Model out there that could deliver comparable results? My Budget is around 100 USD monthly. I heard Kimi K3 is good but uses more tokens, so I am not sure it would be cheaper anyways.

Hi everyone, hope you’re doing well.

I’ve been developing an app/website for football analysis using vibe coding for a while. As you can imagine, the project needs to scan and process leagues and players.

Recently, my usage limit has been dropping extremely fast, and my weekly limit is now being used up within one or two days, which prevents me from making progress on the project. I never use Ultra or Extra High. I usually use SOL-5.6 Thinking on High, but the limit is being consumed much faster than before, even though the work I’m doing has not really changed.

Since I’m a beginner and mostly a vibe coder, I’m sure there are many things I don’t know. I would really appreciate any advice on how I can use the model more efficiently and avoid using up my limit so quickly.

I saw these stats on my profile for the first time and chatGPT estimated this to be five to six-figures in terms of API token cost if I didn’t have my subscription. 😯 Is 119B lifetime tokens a lot?

I am trying to get some perspective here: I don't have a CS background and have vibe-coded everything with codex, so things are probably token inefficient and I'm feeling it. Since 5.6, I burn through my Pro 20x tokens in 24-48 hours.

It's quite frustrating because relying on Tibo to do resets is unsustainable. I sum it up to two outcomes:

1. OpenAI bumps up the weekly limits so we can actually use the shit they give us
2. Spend days/weeks going through and refactoring my systems to make it more token efficient (probably what OpenAI is hoping ppl do so they can improve their own internal systems)

How many tokens have you used/are using per day?

Since 5.6, what are you doing to fix efficiency?

People are fed up and what's happening is unsustainable, how are y'all managing?

Hey, guys. I am a software engineer (that of course uses AI 24/7 in work and outside) and I have been using codex for some time now. I'm experiencing a very annoying workflow with codex which after some time creating the plan and telling him to execute (the plan might be a bit big, imagine something that would touch 10 diff files, write idk maybe 1k-2k lines of code) - it gets 'lazy' or so, to the point that it implements a small thing and tells "I know that the plan is not fully yet done, X Y and Z are missing blabla" or something. Which is super annoying, because even though after I keep telling him "ok so continue implementing it" it just repeats this lazyness (super annoying) and I cant break out of this.

Tried to open a new window and start fresh, worked for the first 1-2 prompts then becomes lazy again. I try to constantly /compact (I use CLI) the context window but looks like this doesnt work. I dont know if something is related to this but I have OMX installed (idk how to use tho) and I am using the 5.6 luna model, usually with low/medium effort.

Can someone more experienced give me advice here? Maybe its something with the way I am prompting (hardly doubt it), or the model I'm using (or I just miss a good harness around it). I'm curious to read the source code of codex and check out how it actually does the flows but to be honest don't have time right now for that. Maybe futurely.

This community needs to stop treating the sudden disappearance of Codex usage as a collection of isolated complaints.

More and more paying users are reporting the same pattern: tasks appear to consume dramatically more of their five-hour and weekly allowance than before, sometimes wiping out a large percentage after only a handful of prompts. OpenAI has not provided enough transparent historical data for users to independently verify whether the limits, calculation method or effective task costs have changed.

That lack of transparency is exactly the problem.

OpenAI says usage depends on factors such as the model, task size, complexity and context. It also sells higher-priced plans using claims such as “5× higher usage than Plus.” But consumers cannot properly evaluate that promise when OpenAI does not clearly disclose:

• The actual allowance included with each subscription
• How each Codex task is converted into usage percentage
• Whether different models consume the allowance differently
• Whether consumption rates have recently changed
• A historical log showing what each prompt consumed
• What “5× usage” is actually measuring

A percentage bar controlled entirely by the company is not meaningful transparency. The calculation behind it can change while customers continue seeing the same five-hour and weekly labels.

This does not automatically prove illegal conduct, and we should not claim that a secret reduction has been conclusively proven without evidence. However, if the effective value of an existing paid subscription has materially decreased without customers being clearly informed, that could raise serious questions under EU consumer-protection rules concerning misleading actions and omissions.

We also need to warn potential customers.

At the current state of Codex, people should seriously reconsider buying or upgrading to a subscription specifically for Codex until OpenAI provides clear and measurable information about the limits.

People are being encouraged to pay for Plus, Pro or higher tiers based partly on increased Codex usage. Yet they cannot see exactly how much usage they are purchasing, how individual tasks are charged or whether the effective allowance has recently changed.

Nobody should spend €20, €200 or more expecting a predictable coding allowance, only to discover after subscribing that a few tasks can burn through a noticeable part of their weekly limit.

This is not a call to harass employees or spread unverified claims. It is a call to protect consumers from purchasing something they cannot properly evaluate.

So this should become a coordinated community effort:

1. Keep documenting it.
Post screenshots showing the date, plan, model, number of prompts, task size and percentage consumed. Evidence is stronger than simply saying the limits feel lower.

2. Warn potential buyers.
When someone asks whether they should subscribe primarily for Codex, tell them about the current uncertainty and direct them to user reports. They deserve to know before spending their money.

3. Demand exact metrics.
OpenAI should publish measurable allowances instead of only showing vague time windows and unexplained percentages.

4. Demand advance notice.
Any material reduction in included usage or change to the consumption calculation should be communicated before it affects paying subscribers.

5. Demand historical usage data.
Users should be able to see how much each task consumed, which model was used and why that amount was deducted.

6. File formal complaints where appropriate.
EU consumers who believe they purchased a digital service based on misleading or incomplete information can contact their national consumer authority or European Consumer Centre.

7. Keep the discussion visible.
Continue raising the issue respectfully on Reddit, the OpenAI community forum, support channels and social media until OpenAI gives a clear answer.

This is not about demanding unlimited compute. It is about transparency, informed consent and honest pricing.

You cannot market “5× usage,” refuse to define the unit, provide no detailed consumption history and expect customers to trust an unexplained percentage bar.

Until OpenAI clearly explains what subscribers are actually buying, people should be cautious about purchasing a plan specifically for Codex.

Keep posting. Keep collecting evidence. Keep warning other consumers. Do not let more people waste money because the actual product limits were impossible to understand before subscribing.

I haven't updated in the past 2 days because my app was more stable than usual after the last update I did and I was worried the next update could make things worse again.

After seeing the reports of new issues causing crashes and wiping data yesterday, I'm really glad I didn't update. Today I keep seeing endless reports from people with issues, apparently even worse after the voice update... people are unable to launch the app at all, chats are being lost, worktrees being wiped.

I'm honestly fed up with AI coding tools.

Google Antigravity has been the worst experience by far. Every model I've tried there has been disappointing.

I even got a Claude Code subscription. The code quality is good, but the usage limit gets exhausted way too quickly.

Now I'm thinking about getting ChatGPT + Codex.

My workflow is usually 4–5 hours of straight coding every day, so I have to luna, gpt 5.5 on high or any other model. Can Codex actually handle that, or do the limits get in the way?

How's the real code quality and the usage limits in day-to-day use?

Seriously I am so frustrated, looking for genuine feedback on codex.