ChatGPT Work

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Rebranding and Product Changes

  • Codex desktop app is being rebranded into the new “ChatGPT” app; the old ChatGPT desktop app is renamed “ChatGPT Classic” and appears deprecated.
  • Downloads and bundle IDs are inconsistent (ChatGPT dmg that installs Codex, etc.), creating confusion about what is actually installed.
  • Web UI now has separate “Chat” and “Work” tabs; desktop app has “ChatGPT Work” vs “ChatGPT Codex” modes.

User Experience & Usability

  • Many users find the new UX “a mess”: hard to discover the mode switcher, and switching modes often appears to do almost nothing visually.
  • Core chat is now in a small nested window/pop‑up; full-screen, searchable chat history and simple chat lists are effectively gone or deeply buried.
  • Some report missing or removed features in the new desktop app (e.g., voice mode, Deep Research, search toggle, meeting recorder, custom GPTs, temporary chats).
  • A minority like the unification because previous ChatGPT chats were slow/unusable for large threads; they now use Codex for almost everything anyway.

Work vs Codex vs Chat: Capabilities & Quotas

  • The difference between “Work” and “Codex” is widely viewed as unclear; visible changes are minor (different default plugins, slightly different prompts, diffs vs. Office tools).
  • Some think it’s mostly marketing/positioning (developers vs office workers, MBAs).
  • There is concern that Work/Codex usage draws from stricter credit/effort limits than standard Chat, nudging users into metered usage. Exact quota behavior is unclear.

Data, Projects, and Account Separation

  • Many initially thought they had “lost” chats and projects; they’re still present in ChatGPT Classic or hidden behind “recent chats” / search in the new app.
  • Some dislike Codex creating per-thread folders under Documents and mixing work agents/instructions into casual chats; they want clearer separation of personal vs work contexts and accounts.

Comparisons, Strategy & Trust

  • Several compare this to Anthropic’s Claude Chat vs Cowork split and criticize both companies for poor cohesion and UX.
  • Branding/naming is widely criticized as confusing (Chat vs Codex vs Work vs Classic; parallels drawn to Microsoft’s naming).
  • Some see this as a push toward “superapp”/OS-like positioning and more agentic, long‑running workflows; others see it as premature, breaking a popular chat product.
  • A subset of users remain wary of giving these tools broad computer or email access, preferring sandboxed or VM-based use.