They are similar, but for different use cases.

But at my first work (begining of 2000s) there was one person that made a fun email, using From of head of company (or was it head of that particular division) to his coworker with congratulations for pay increase and promotion. It would be all great, but that coworker didn't catch the joke and replied to it (person in the From wasn't amused). Author of the joke was fired (which is not easy thing to do in Europe), some people don't catch jokes.

But I always thought NPM was what the author describes - just a random set of packages with git sources, which I thought was the main issue (leftpad etc.). Isn't that the case?

What about one system that just works and is there for "ages": maven repository?

Technical people are rather good at learning new things, and ollama situation is a good learning experience.

llama.cpp gets you more tokens/s even if you ignore ollama team bad behavior.

But why make an app when websites is enough? And I don't need to run n web browsers for that.

Also Ollama has other issues (like forgetting what it really is - a wrapper).

Basically one has two real choices for local LLMs: llama.cpp (if single user) or vLLM (if multi-user/enterprise).

For me local models is all about quality, and how to achieve that - e.g. by providing guardrails that test the job done.

Also there are smaller, still usefull models that can run on 8GB or less.

As for oprncode, doesn't the system prompt eat too much of the context? Local models are really constraint in regards contex, and opencode AFAIR uses a 10k of it or some thing close.

As long as there are just few "normies" using Linux, it is safe from corporations adding their "security", "safety" etc.

And FedRamp has some issues with data being sent out.

Our corp doesn't allow usage of local models because of concern about potential "agent sends out code to the net" issues.

But they don't, they have the "30 days", but just after that they add "unless ....". So the time period is vague.

AFAIR it is not clear, because they write it is "30 days, but ...":

> After 30 days, the data is deleted automatically, except in the rare cases where it's part of a safety investigation or we're legally required to keep it.

So you have a vague clause saying "when" and vague clause saying for "how long". If it will fly I would be surprised.

It is a different thing when they say they don't store your data.

And when they say they store your data for 30 days and review it for "issues", it makes your "spider sense" tingle. Who and how will review it, what are the "issues" they are looking for, etc. It is to vague and they can keep it this "dangerous" model for themselves.

Now all it needs is send some letter to github and they take down content, no questions asked, how is that better? It is for court to decide.

And Apple Intelligence supports just a fraction of languages: English, Danish, Dutch, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish, Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese, Chinese (simplified), Chinese (traditional), Japanese, and Korean.

Danish, Dutch, Norwegian and Swedish have quite small populations compared Poland, while I don't see Polish there (37M). I also don't see Romanian, it is slightly bigger amount of people than Netherlands, and the rest from that list are ~< 10M.

Oh, well, at least I don't see Russian in that list.

With ChatGPT, or Claude.ai (or Deepseek, or local models) I can speak with languages that are outside of (traditionally) limited set of Apple. Because it all depends on what is on the web and web has magnitude larger set of languages compared to what Apple provides.