Codex is now in the ChatGPT mobile app

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Access, Pricing, and Limits

  • Many note Codex is available on the free ChatGPT plan, but experiences vary: some hit limits after only a couple of “useful” requests, others say they rarely see caps even on high-effort 5.5.
  • Confusion over model access: some insist free users get 5.5 Extra High, others say free is “definitely worse” and lacks the full model set.
  • Several compare costs with Claude: Codex is often perceived as cheaper and with higher usable limits, while Claude’s $20 plan is described as restrictive and opaque in usage accounting.

Codex vs Claude and Other Tools

  • Multiple commenters say 5.5 (Extra High) is at least comparable to, or better than, Claude Opus 4.7 for code, especially for backends and complex web apps.
  • Codex is praised as faster, less “lazy,” better at context management and compaction, and cheaper per unit of work.
  • Claude is still preferred by some for tone, “human” writing, and front-end/UX suggestions; a hybrid workflow emerges: Claude for UI mockups, Codex for implementation.
  • Some remain unimpressed by all LLMs or by Codex Cloud in particular, calling it underpowered and too locked down (no model choice).

Remote Control & Mobile Experience

  • New mobile integration is widely seen as useful for:
    • Steering or approving plans while away from a keyboard.
    • Unblocking or redirecting long-running agent tasks.
  • Reliability is mixed: some say it “just works” and is far better than Claude’s Remote Control; others report flaky connections, missing messages, or failure to connect, especially across devices or on Windows/Linux.
  • Several already achieve similar workflows with Tailscale/SSH/tmux/terminal apps and see this as a more convenient, single-tool alternative.

Workflows, “Vibe Coding,” and Productivity

  • A recurring pattern: “vibe coding” from a phone—guiding agents on a known codebase without constantly inspecting code—then doing serious review and testing later at a desktop.
  • Some find mobile coding ergonomically and cognitively worse (shorter prompts, more ambiguity, more tech debt); others lean on long prompts, voice-to-text, or custom workflows to mitigate this.
  • There is tension between enthusiasm for “work from anywhere” and concern that this encourages 24/7 availability and erodes boundaries.

Platforms, Tooling, and Integration

  • macOS Codex app is first-class; Windows support is “coming soon”; Linux users rely on CLI, repackaged desktop builds, or third-party wrappers.
  • CLI/desktop integration details (e.g., codex remote-control, SSH to Linux boxes, compilation times, LTO configuration) are discussed but remain somewhat fragmented and, for Windows especially, described as “buggy” or unclear.

Concerns and Skepticism

  • Some worry about code review quality on phones and an industry-wide “de-skilling” via blind trust in agent-generated changes.
  • Others dislike giving a mobile app (plus an LLM) the ability to execute arbitrary commands on their machines, preferring repo-based diff workflows instead.
  • A minority question OpenAI’s overall product strategy, while acknowledging its software polish relative to competitors.