Claude Cowork and chat are now one Claude

Posted by vertigoruntime 1 hour ago

Counter68Comment81OpenOriginal

Comments

Comment by Sherveen 50 minutes ago

People keep asking for this w/ Codex, too, and I really regret that both labs seem inclined to listen.

If you ask a thinking/research type question in 'Chat' versus 'Work' mode in these products -- say, something complex about politics, or do a multiturn business strategy, or want to work thru a new concept, you get very different answers.

The harness, steering, etc. in the chat/reasoning products is so much better for this type of question (that doesn't require code as a primary substrate).

Even as someone who mainlines like, 7 coding agents at all times, I regret that productivity fever will mean the regression of think-first-act-later AI UX.

Comment by Sn0wCoder 20 minutes ago

I hope not Chat is still all you can eat and Work uses Codex tokens. I can see why they would want people to think they wanted this without thinking about how it currently works. If Chat starts eating tokens then there is not much reason to use Chat other than most people don't live in the command line like developers. Claude Chat / Cowork already eats tokens either way so not much of a change really. I have never used Work since if I want access to local files the CLI is a much better interface combined with an IDE, but can see the appeal to non-developers.

Comment by no_no_no_yes 7 minutes ago

This is my main reason for not using Work. I was tempted to use a few "scheduled tasks" in ChatGPT, but once I found out they used Codex tokens I stopped creating new ones.

I already burn through Codex too fast.

Comment by drivebyhooting 17 minutes ago

GPT Chat seems smarter for business questions or planning that does not require iteration or wrangling data sources.

But Work gives the model a computer instance it can use for programmatic data access, API munging, etc.

Success cases I’ve had: chat - read the reports in my Gmail and put a counter proposal together.

Work - cross reference all the options with commute time using traffic aware map data. Ground it on drop off / pick up times from each option’s stated rules and hours. Create a table with commute and idle time break downs.

Comment by Tactical45 44 minutes ago

The fact that it doesn't work well today doesn't invalidate the user need. Not everyone wants a terminal style interface. Traditional UX makes more sense especially if say you are accessing existing plugins and say kicking off a scheduling task - no way would I want to do that via a chat interface if I have the option.

Comment by sudo_cowsay 30 minutes ago

Agree, and it allows ordinary users to have a taste of both worlds, instead of being like: "eww, what is this black box and why doesn't my mouse work"

Comment by steve1977 41 minutes ago

I sometimes get very different answers if I ask the chat product the same question multiple times.

Comment by firmretention 30 minutes ago

Isn't that expected since LLMs are inherently non-deterministic?

Comment by sudo_cowsay 29 minutes ago

The fact that people asked for it means that there is a demand for it. Maybe you aren't the target audience? One size can't fit all. People just have to adjust and go.

Comment by altmanaltman 26 minutes ago

Yes the point is that they wouldn't have to adjust unless they are merged into one. Precisely because one size can't fit all, yet they insit on one size now.

Comment by royal__ 50 minutes ago

These kinds of updates always have this romantic scenario of someone having Claude develop a presentation or something on their way to work between multiple devices, which actually feels a little sad and does not align with what happens in my life at all.

Comment by idle_zealot 32 minutes ago

This is a nightmare scenario to me.

"Claude, prepare me a presentation on XYZ."

I get to work, go straight to the meeting room, and pull up what it made to present.

It's barely coherent nonsense. Lots of irrelevant details, buzz words, wrong charts or confusing phrasing. Obviously LLM output.

I read it out.

When I'm done, I get a question about one of Claude's incorrectly inferred details.

The shame instantly kills me.

This is a scenario I've seen play out with coworkers. Except that last part, instead of dying or owning up to the mistake of trusting LLM output they waffle. Their shame circuit is broken.

Comment by Cyan488 3 minutes ago

Someone I know does this, and seems to think it's a flex, because he bragged about it being "the first time I've actually seen this presentation" a few times during the presentation.

It was all awful.

Comment by TutleCpt 28 minutes ago

Why on earth would you present a presentation that you haven't reviewed ahead of time?

Comment by ceejayoz 22 minutes ago

I wish I knew, but I've definitely seen it happen.

"What does this bit mean?" "I dunno."

Comment by kylecazar 37 minutes ago

"Plan a trip to Italy next month and book the flights"

I see a version of that all the time and would never, ever do it.

Comment by gffrd 16 minutes ago

These are modern infomercials. Concrete pains ("planning a vacation is hard!"), shallow solutions that don't stand up to real-world use, and, in the end, a promise left unfilfilled. (And a thing in your drawer that takes up space.)

Comment by sudo_cowsay 27 minutes ago

Exactly! Imagine if it booked like a 3000 dollar 1st class flight because it thought it was providing you with "the most comfortable and hospitable experience as possible."

Comment by tipsytoad 24 minutes ago

idk I thought the same until I got personal amex support at work, now it’s my roofline on how useful/trusted an agent could be. Now I book all my travel through them, and it’s an absolute blessing

Comment by temp_praneshp 42 minutes ago

weirdly enough, that aligns exactly with my life.

Two years ago, I had no commute, and presentations were tedious ( i was NOT a good google slides user ), I kinda prefer this world for now

Comment by browningstreet 35 minutes ago

I use Claude/opencode and Orca and Hermes across my vpses, Macbook, Linux, and iOS devices. This is exactly how I want to keep working.

Comment by hobofan 33 minutes ago

You are not the typical office worker.

Comment by solarkraft 37 minutes ago

It aligns with me pretty well. Not exactly presentations, but it’s great to be able to do stuff on the go when an idea or motivation strikes.

Comment by felixrieseberg 33 minutes ago

Hi, this is my team! Happy to answer any questions.

There's a lot in this launch, but the core idea is to simplify the product while giving users access to more capabilities. You no longer need to know ahead of time how much work a conversation might involve. If you're at your computer, Claude can use your local files and apps. If you close your laptop, Claude can keep working on its own computer.

This launch also lets you use Claude Design, Claude Docs, and Claude Slides directly from conversations. That's possible because we made Artifacts much more powerful: whenever Claude makes you an app, website, design system, or anything else, it can deploy an artifact with multiplayer features and databases.

As many of you probably know from your own work, giving users more power while making the experience simpler is really, really hard. It took many iterations to get to this version. We're far from done, but I expect people will be able to do much more while having to think about it less.

Comment by JoshTriplett 13 minutes ago

Why is Claude Code still proprietary, while Codex is Open Source? What would it take to fix that? This is a major reason to pick OAI models over Anthropic (because while you can use an open agent with any model, the AI labs charge much more for that interaction style).

Comment by ecliptik 30 minutes ago

Will there be a Claude Sheets too? I find myself using Claude to work with spreadsheets more than almost any other document type. It does okay now, but feel like it could be even better, especially with visualizations and formulas.

Comment by LoganDark 29 minutes ago

I liked the ability to explicitly only chat, without the possibility of Cowork activating since I have never wanted that. It's unclear how I can still guarantee that now.

Comment by petcat 48 minutes ago

Nobody really knows how to product-ize any of these LLM interfaces beyond just chat.

They don't want a traditional UI with buttons and forms and labels because they want the interface to be "chat". The problem is that "chat" is tedious. And the turn-based, linear nature of the chat interaction model makes it even more tedious and unproductive.

Comment by jonathanberger 39 minutes ago

I don't think it's that anyone wants the interface to be chat. I think it's that the underlying technology is inherently words in and words out. It's similar to how devices with capacitive screens are most naturally going to support tapping, dragging, and pinching.

Comment by sroerick 36 minutes ago

It's funny to me that instead of moving existing tech to a word in word out paradigm, people are dropping millions getting the chat to work with the existing paradigm.

Probably inevitable, but seems like a lot of disruption could happen there.

Comment by nonethewiser 11 minutes ago

Text based workflows are king

Comment by dvt 29 minutes ago

My personal hot take is that the product people (engineers too probably) at these companies are just straight up lazy. Yes, a new UI paradigm is hard, but it's been painfully obvious that chat just absolutely sucks. It's also obvious that some DSL-ish thing is possible, something that just does token juggling and the end-user sees some UI behavior.

I know this all sounds abstract. I've been mulling over it for the past year and it's very hard; and LLMs are super janky and inconsistent so it's 100% not trivial. So in some sense I understand why a lazy bottom-of-the-barrel "chat interface" has become the de facto standard.

Comment by nonethewiser 10 minutes ago

Can you elaborate? How in the world would I interface with claude other than sending it messages?

Comment by fidotron 40 minutes ago

The great confusion for Anthropic and OAI is how to break out from pure chat without signalling you in fact intend to eat all of your customer's business too.

Comment by emadabdulrahim 35 minutes ago

IMO no one knows what LLMs are capable of yet and the goal post keeping moving every few months that building any specific UIs right now risks rendering them obsolete or too slow.

e.g. We went from somewhat smarter code autocomplete, to asking chatgpt copy paste, to cli agent running inside your project, managing session, to GUI to manage that, to projects where you talk to a "Chief of Staff" agent that manages other sessions, to who knows what's next.

I think the right interfaces for LLMs right now need to be very simple and easy to change/evolve. And chat still seems to be the best default solution.

Comment by jeromechoo 43 minutes ago

This has been my ongoing gripe. Someone put chat in front of a transformer model. It exploded like all prior versions of “AI chat” did. Now what?

The moment someone figures out a new modality for LLMs is when we’ll see the next hockey stick.

Comment by dsign 28 minutes ago

> The moment someone figures out a new modality for LLMs is when we’ll see the next hockey stick.

Honestly, that fills me with fear. LLMs exist to make money to their companies, and said companies are not gonna turn around and say, "you know what, go are going to make an android for each elderly person, that can not only help them with their medications, but that can actually make their medications, tailored to their biologies." Instead, they are going to go for the low-handing fruit of "you know Bob, the guy who makes jokes in meetings but who is grumpy about delivery timelines? Well, we are going to make an android to replace Bob. MetalBob will make even better jokes. The blue model will be able to explain in excruciating level of detail why timelines aren't reasonable. The red model will walk through the cubicles with a whip to ensure everybody keeps working all the time, and nobody goes to pee."

Comment by dpkirchner 22 minutes ago

Perhaps we could see a Yahoo Pipes style interface and feature set, handled by LLM (when simple transforms aren't an option).

Comment by drivebyhooting 14 minutes ago

Chat is only tedious because it’s slow. If models responded in 300ms it would be the ideal interface.

Comment by eieiei1 31 minutes ago

It’s not surprising.

Technology folks don’t really understand people and what they need.

This always happens. This is why woz needed Steve.

Steve Jobs is sorely missed tbh. For all the shit he got - he was a true visionary. He lived at the intersection of technology and the humanities… he kept preaching this. And now we are seeing why.

Comment by clumsysmurf 40 minutes ago

One thing I would like is a tree-like chat structure like reddit / HN. Many times I abandon the direction things have gone but would like to resume at some ancestor or sibling response.

Comment by drivebyhooting 11 minutes ago

Yes this would be very useful. Or at least being able to selectively compact a linear part and continue from before.

Often times I just sort of wish to undo.

Comment by BikiniPrince 31 minutes ago

I solved this with task management and got work trees.

The downside of course is branching in got, but I usually don’t go of course more then a handful of tasks.

I had to engineer my own ticket management to keep opus on target. It’s been great for managing work, history, audit trails and commits are tagged with the task id.

I implemented subtasks to deal with the way Claude likes to stage its own objectives.

Then I made enforcement logic in the task manager so tasks can’t be closed out until reviewers have consensus on the same sha.

The adhd that is Anthropic demanded I build it and now I’m knocking out issues faster than Batman.

Comment by yieldcrv 36 minutes ago

Before OpenAI dropped ChatGPT, nobody knew chat would be such a hit. Several labs had versions of these things, Google engineers were getting finessed by a rudimentary model just like in the movie Ex Machina that came out 10 years prior which was satirizing Google

But I don't agree that they aren't product-ized. There are many applications doing calls to LLMs behind the scenes and are hits, leveraging structured data very heavily and not having conversations with users at all. I would say that there is a predictable scope creep from executives to surface a conversational aspect though. We need to bring representation to that so we can point to some other best practice to push back

Comment by drivebyhooting 6 minutes ago

Can you give examples of wrapped LLM logic?

API calls are expensive and slow, so I’ve shied away from integrating them into my personal projects. And of course there’s always the risk of hallucination.

Comment by varispeed 41 minutes ago

Do you know that you can have multiple chats at the same time?

Comment by petcat 40 minutes ago

Doubling the tediousness does not solve the interface problem.

Comment by threwaway555999 43 minutes ago

[dead]

Comment by adrithmetiqa 41 minutes ago

Most normal users have no idea whether to choose chat or cowork. This makes sense for 95% of customers.

Comment by leohonexus 53 minutes ago

To Anthropic: I hope you don't merge Claude Code and chat, I like keeping their memory separate.

Comment by bakies 44 minutes ago

I very intentionally have all memory turned off for chat. The amount of times I want to discuss an approach for it to pull memory out and have that steer the decision making is so obnoxious

Comment by johen8 38 minutes ago

Chat, create a new landing page for the company!

"Sure! And since you were asking me about lobsters yesterday, I'll make it red and seafood themed!"

Comment by varispeed 39 minutes ago

> I like keeping their memory separate.

When casually a friend asks you to ask your Claude something about topic you chatted about earlier and then Claude brings back a secret you didn't want anyone to know yet.

Yes you can set up a project and then ask a question, but this is tedious.

Comment by throwaway2027 52 minutes ago

I'm starting to explore alternative options because Claude has become an awful value proposition. Any suggestions?

Comment by fidotron 50 minutes ago

I turned off Anthropic properly and switched all of that over to OpenAI yesterday. (I use other models for other things too, especially DeepSeek in Pi).

Honestly aside from the voice it uses you wouldn't notice a difference. Switching costs are low, vote with your wallet.

Comment by KronisLV 21 minutes ago

> I turned off Anthropic properly and switched all of that over to OpenAI yesterday.

Same, just a while longer ago.

I much prefer how OpenAI models write to Anthropic's, will probably revisit Anthropic in a generation or two. Context size is more limited, but no critical forgetfulness due to compaction so far, though I also like having plan files around both for future reference and improving chances of success at long form work.

Also tried out Kimi K3, was nice but slow (and apparently routed some requests to Claude anyways), GLM 5.3 was faster and still pretty good but the token allowances were kinda limited.

Comment by rfgplk 8 minutes ago

OpenAI is a better value proposition too because they give you effectively infinite image generation + chat usage, which is separate from work/codex.

Comment by georgeburdell 47 minutes ago

So you voted for Kodos instead of Kang [1]. Local models are the way out of the rug pulling

[1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BUAnyVAanac&ra=m

Comment by fidotron 44 minutes ago

I don't actually disagree, and advocate that for now the thing to do is use both.

You need to use frontier models to understand where the puck is going, but also to use local ones for anything remotely sensitive.

Comment by rfgplk 9 minutes ago

Of the major providers, Codex/Astra. By far the highest quality model, especially for cross-discipline work.

Comment by gizmodo59 30 minutes ago

codex (their app) is pretty good and lots of banked resets, luna is cost effective and Astra seems better than Fable for many tasks. Most important one is less refusals and I can use it the way I want without the fear of getting banned. I do like Claude Code a lot when it comes to pure coding use cases but the work often touches outside code and I don't want to keep switching

Comment by myaccountonhn 48 minutes ago

Opencode Go.

Comment by irregularbowels 13 minutes ago

[dead]

Comment by chenster 12 minutes ago

That's the natural outcome. AI will eventually collapse into a single, universal entry point, much like Google Search became the default gateway for the web.

Comment by bearjaws 30 minutes ago

Basically DOA in healthcare, even with a BAA I don't want Claude Cowork enabled in our workstations, ever.

Comment by ceroxylon 35 minutes ago

I really appreciated that the users that I administrate had an option where Claude was not going to get carried away and orchestrate workslop, I will have to completely re-write my usage guides after testing how prompts are routed now.

Feels like the same "let us do _all_ of the thinking for you" messaging that Microsoft has with Copilot.

Comment by snug 39 minutes ago

Really excited to try the gsuite replacements, which seems like the bigger announcement than the title suggest

Comment by VonLuderitz 6 minutes ago

Less is more. Thanks.

Comment by tiffanyh 52 minutes ago

I hope this doesn’t get confusing like ChatGPT made it.

I feel like Claude has some of the best UX, and hope this doesn’t dilute the experience.

Comment by MarkMarine 33 minutes ago

Claude has a jagged UX if you support non-devs. The surfaces before today in the desktop app were: Chat, cowork, Claude code.

Inside Claude code you’ve got cloud environments and local.

Let’s say as a normal desktop user you wanted to just automate something normal in your work, going to a website (maybe some internal app at your company) getting some data. Depending on what surface you used this will either not work, not work well (cowork), or work quite well but possibly be blocked because of bot controls (local Claude code) or again not work (cloud Claude code)

It was nuts. You can clearly tell these were different teams and products mashed into the same app. Super confusing for non technical users. Hopefully it’s a little better today

Comment by tiffanyh 30 minutes ago

Do you think ChatGPT UX is better (after they merged everything recently)?

Genuinely curious.

Comment by erik_levitch 33 minutes ago

They could have figured that out before launching Cowork to everyone.

Comment by irregularbowels 12 minutes ago

[dead]

Comment by tamimio 49 minutes ago

Is there a mature centralized platform, self hosted, that sync all your “AI stuff” across multiple devices? So regardless of the harness, it sync the api keys, providers, skills, and seasons for starters with other authenticated machines? Say you used codex on macos_1 through this platform, and later you used opencode on linux_3, it syncs everything to the new machine, no ssh to centralized machine, no git, none of that duct tape solutions, which they work but cumbersome.

Comment by mirashii 42 minutes ago

The mistake here is thinking or treating AI tools as special or different in any way. We’ve had tooling that does this for decades. Ansible, puppet, saltstack, NixOS/home-manager, and dozens of other solutions. Even better, writing the configuration is extra simple now, since you can just ask your agent to do it.

Comment by tamimio 34 minutes ago

True but that’s not the same, think of it like a git but for AI related, I just open whatever harness, I authenticate to that centralized server, and it pulls everything and continue from where I was done last time, seamless and secure. Right now personally I have multiple machines, and I use key managers for the secret API, git for the skills, and sessions? Manually imported/exported. The alternative is using ssh (or herdr or others) and remotely accessing a specific machine where it has everything you need, but it’s not always reliable and better to avoid single point of failure too if anything goes wrong.

Comment by epistasis 38 minutes ago

I haven't found this yet but want to.

There are several projects that injest coding sessions from lots of agents, but for the chat side I haven't found much, except replacements for Claude Desktop. Jan, for example.

Comment by mjorgers 50 minutes ago

A change for the better. The distinction made it unnecessarily complex for users. The ChatGPT desktop app inherited the same separation. Having to change between ChatGPT for day to day questions, to Codex for everything else always seemed too cumbersome.

Comment by popzxc 47 minutes ago

I guess this is a feature worth announcing

Comment by dude250711 39 minutes ago

One Claude one damn.

Comment by micromacrofoot 37 minutes ago

It's funny how they keep trying to add more interfaces and everything keeps coming back to chat. And of course it would, natural language is the simplest interface there is. Anything they add beyond chat, that isn't placed within chat, that isn't some artifact of chat, is friction.

Comment by yieldcrv 46 minutes ago

I love this

Claude's mobile app wouldn't show any Cowork initiated conversations, even if those conversations didn't leverage cowork specific features

Comment by 30 minutes ago

Comment by hmokiguess 46 minutes ago

[flagged]

Comment by dang 34 minutes ago

"Don't be snarky."

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html