←back to thread

GPT-5.2

(openai.com)
1019 points atgctg | 2 comments | 11 Dec 25 18:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.406s | source
Show context
tenpoundhammer ◴[11 Dec 25 20:39 UTC] No.46236826[source]▶
I have been using chatGPT a ton over the last months and paying the subscription. Used it for coding, news, stock analysis, daily problems, and a whatever I could think of. I decided to give Gemini a go when version three came out to great reviews. Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers. This is especially true for situations were searching the web for current information is important, makes sense that google would be better. Also OCR is phenomenal chatgpt can't read my bad hand writing but Gemini can easily. Only downsides are in the polish department, there are more app bugs and I usually have to leave the happen or the session terminates. There are bugs with uploading photos. The biggest complaint is that all links get inserted into google search and then I have to manipulate them when they should go directly to the chosen website, this has to be some kind of internal org KPI nonsense. Overall, my conclusion is that ChatGPT has lost and won't catch up because of the search integration strength.
replies(36): >>46236861 #>>46236896 #>>46236956 #>>46236971 #>>46236980 #>>46237123 #>>46237253 #>>46237258 #>>46237321 #>>46237407 #>>46237452 #>>46237531 #>>46237626 #>>46237654 #>>46237786 #>>46237888 #>>46237927 #>>46238237 #>>46238324 #>>46238527 #>>46238546 #>>46238828 #>>46239189 #>>46239400 #>>46239512 #>>46239719 #>>46239767 #>>46239999 #>>46240382 #>>46240656 #>>46240742 #>>46240760 #>>46240763 #>>46241303 #>>46241326 #>>46241523 #
solarkraft ◴[11 Dec 25 20:45 UTC] No.46236896[source]▶
> Only downsides are in the polish department

What an understatement. It has me thinking „man, fuck this“ on the daily.

Just today it spontaneously lost an entire 20-30 minutes long thread and it was far from the first time. It basically does it any time you interrupt it in any way. It’s straight up data loss.

It’s kind of a typical Google product in that it feels more like a tech demo than a product.

It has theoretically great tech. I particularly like the idea of voice mode, but it’s noticeably glitchy, breaks spontaneously often and keeps asking annoying questions which you can’t make it stop.

replies(10): >>46237173 #>>46237180 #>>46237398 #>>46237664 #>>46237832 #>>46238374 #>>46238810 #>>46239600 #>>46240229 #>>46240650 #
1. KronisLV ◴[11 Dec 25 22:44 UTC] No.46238374[source]▶
> It has me thinking „man, fuck this“ on the daily.

That's sometimes me with the CLI. I can't use the Gemini CLI right now on Windows (in the Terminal app), because trying to copy in multiple lines of text for some reason submits them separately and it just breaks the whole thing. OpenCode had the same issue but even worse, it quite after the first line or something and copied the text line by line into the shell, thank fuck I didn't have some text that mentions rm -rf or something.

More info: https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/issues/14735#iss...

At the same time, neither Codex CLI, nor Claude Code had that issue (and both even showed shortened representations of copied in text, instead of just dumping the whole thing into the input directly, so I could easily keep writing my prompt).

So right now if I want to use Gemini, I more or less have to use something like KiloCode/RooCode/Cline in VSC which are nice, but might miss out on some more specific tools. Which is a shame, because Gemini is a really nice model, especially when it comes to my language, Latvian, but also your run of the mill software dev tasks.

In comparison, Codex feels quite slow, whereas Claude Code is what I gravitate towards most of the time but even Sonnet 4.5 ends up being expensive when you shuffle around millions of tokens: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46216192 Cerebras Code is nice for quick stuff and the sheer amount of tokens, but in KiloCode/... regularly messes up applying diff based edits.

replies(1): >>46240654 #
2. ◴[12 Dec 25 03:43 UTC] No.46240654[source]▶