I tried OpenClaw 2.0, and it’s a total disaster. Peter Steinberger has basically unlimited support from OpenAI, infinite tokens, backing from giants like NVIDIA, tailored model optimizations, and an incredibly talented team. Yet after all this time, OpenClaw still just doesn't work. You have to step in and fix things at almost every turn. The UX is so bad that if I asked my own agent to design the interface, it’d probably do a better job. I’m 100% convinced GPT designed it, which explains the quality. A flaw I’ve dealt with since the early Clawdbot days is still there, and the agent gets stuck in loops, repeats itself, and wanders off-task. It’s honestly bizarre how bad it is. Vision alone isn't enough. You need consistency and reliability to last. I’m definitely sticking with the smarter choice: Hermes Agent.

Doctors follow rigid protocols their institutions impose. AI has the same mindset. Ask a simple medical question and you get 10 confusing possibilities instead of a clear answer. That’s why so many people turn to alternative medicine. It feels more direct, honest, and useful.

Think about it: 99% of people don’t want setup, plugins, skills, or a bunch of extra shit. They just want to open a chat, say what they need, and have their agent handle it. Simple, but powerful. We’re so deep in the AI bubble that we forget how crazy that sounds to someone coming from a chatbot. To them, it’s basically magic.

this guy is seriously one of the most genuine people in the AI space, so if he’s telling you grok bot is the future, I would pay attention.. I think once you actually give grok bot a proper try, you will realize how good it already is for something this early it’s obviously not perfect yet, but you start noticing all these small details that make you see how huge the potential is I’ve already been able to automate a bunch of stuff with it from tracking my payments and scanning news / markets etc to handling simple everyday tasks I would normally have to do myself.. in short, what will stand out the most is the user experience.. you will probably enjoy using it more than anything else.

Think about it: 99% of people don’t want setup, plugins, skills, or a bunch of extra shit. They just want to open a chat, say what they need, and have their agent handle it. Simple, but powerful. We’re so deep in the AI bubble that we forget how crazy that sounds to someone coming from a chatbot. To them, it’s basically magic.

Devin vs Cursor on the $200 plan: Want simplicity? Cursor. Want control and customization? Devin. If you mostly stick to first-party models, Cursor is the better deal. Grok 4.6 runs circles around SWE-1.7, and the monthly limit is generous enough that you won’t think about it. If you lean on third-party models like Fable, Sol, and Kimi, go with Devin. The weekly limits there are far more forgiving, and a few of those models cost you nothing. You can run Fable and Sol all week on Devin. On Cursor that’s simply not happening. Me personally? I’m going with Devin.

After two weeks of heavy use, I can finally give Devin a full review and tell you exactly where I stand on the subscription. I was on Devin Max, the $200/month plan. This review is not paid and not sponsored. It is my honest opinion from my own use, the way I always do it. I will cover the good and the bad, with nothing held back. Let me start with the part most of you are waiting for: usage limits. Before you pay for any subscription, you ask yourself one question. Will this actually last me the week? Will the allowance stay with me until the next reset, or will it burn out in two or three days and leave me stuck, paying for more usage or falling back on another subscription? With Devin, the answer is yes. At one point I had more than 17 Sol Max agents running at the same time on a huge task built on 500,000 words of material, and it burned only 4% of my usage. You know how much Sol thinks and works, especially on Max effort, so that number surprised me completely. Fable surprised me even more. Devin is the only subscription where using Fable actually feels reasonable. Everywhere else, outside Claude's own subscription, you are paying for those tokens directly. Here it feels subsidized. I ran Fable on a task that took around half an hour and my usage went up by 1%. So we are talking about real working conditions where you can use models like Fable and Sol for planning, drop to lower effort or a cheaper model for execution, then come back to the expensive model when you actually need it. That is practical, because the models here do not burn your account in an insane way. The pricing is another highlight. I will mention numbers, but I do not want you to focus on them, because I do not know when you will read this review and I want it to stay useful for a long time. As I write this, Sol is available at around $6 per million tokens inside Devin. That is Sol at the price of open models, and open models were supposed to be the cheap alternative. You also get genuinely strong models for free. Right now GLM is free, and their own SWE model is free too, and it is very good. Since we are on SWE, their model deserves its own line. It is a lot like Composer in Cursor. you can lean on it, and you get good results out of it, especially since it is built on Kimi K2.7 Code. Put all of that together, free models plus excellent pricing plus a generous subsidized allowance, and you finish the week comfortably. I have reached the point where almost every $200 subscription feels like it runs out in two or three days. Devin is the exception, and it is a big exception. You can work on it, use it heavily, get a lot done, and sometimes feel you are getting far more than you pay for. I hope they keep this the way it is, because it is a real competitive advantage and it matters to most people. Caching matters at this scale, so I watched it closely. Across roughly a billion tokens of real work, the share of tokens served from cache reached about 95%, which is excellent. In my experience a lot of harnesses come in well below that. One task looked like this: 20 million input tokens 3 million output tokens 422 million cached tokens 445 million tokens in total That is 94.8% of the total volume cached. Devin is not the highest I have seen. There are harnesses that reach 98% and 99%. But around 95%, inside a subscription that hands you this mix of subsidized models, gives you a very comfortable margin. When you are working with massive contexts and thousands of agent messages, weak caching eats your allowance fast. The harness is the real reason I recommend Devin Usage limits are not what makes me recommend Devin. The bigger point is that Devin as a harness, as an environment, improves what the models give you. Take Sol. In Codex, at lower effort, it gets lazier and somehow turns into a chat model. At higher effort it suffers badly from overengineering, exaggerating and doing things you never asked for. In Devin this never happened at all. I do not know exactly what they did, but I tested Sol at every level and it genuinely gives you the GPT-5.5 feeling in discipline and instruction following. It gets you to the result without dragging you into detours, without becoming a burden, and without needing constant supervision. I found the same thing with every model I tried. Still, an opinion is just an opinion, so I tested it properly. I built a complex task of about 300,000 words in multiple languages, the kind that demands intelligence, breadth, comprehension and long stamina from the agent, and I ran it in Claude Code, Zcode, Codex and Devin. The result was striking. Devin always had the fewest errors. This was not a one-off. I repeated it more than once, on different databases, on tasks of that size, and it was consistently the lowest in errors and the one needing the fewest final corrections and finishing touches. It holds context impressively well. There is another pattern worth mentioning. In Claude Code, Codex and Zcode, models below the Sol and Fable tier usually need a goal mode to keep going to the end. Devin does not have a goal mode, and I wish it did. Even so, the same models that stall elsewhere finish the task in Devin. That one impressed me. Overall, by my own measurements, instruction following and output quality improved by around 22% compared to the other harnesses. That is a big difference, and it is real and noticeable. It just does the work I gave one task to Claude and Codex as well. Claude got busy asking itself whether it could legally carry out parts of the task and kept stopping, when there was nothing illegal in it. Codex dropped part of what I asked for and started building a whole section I never requested. Devin executed the task directly and with far more discipline. That is worth keeping in mind. Devin does not lose half the task in objections, does not reinvent the requirement from its own head, does not stop every other minute. It understands the context, reads its environment extremely well, and knows how to act inside it. It is independence mixed with discipline. It also sticks to the rules I give it, strongly, and that is something I do not compromise on. Devin Cloud The cloud agent is one of the best features here. It is like Grok Bot in the sense that your agent has its own machine. I use it constantly because my Mac has 24 GB of RAM, and launching a large number of agents locally alongside everything else usually chokes the machine and drags the performance down. With a cloud agent, it takes the whole task, works on its own machine on Linux or Windows, and comes back to me with the final result. My machine does not fill up with temporary files and random leftovers. I just receive the result. The nice part is that you can have the agent use whatever Linux distribution you want. You can ask it for a specific distro, have it spin that up as a virtual machine, and it works normally and does the job there. Other subscriptions usually do not offer this at all, and when they do it comes with a separate meter and a separate bill. Here it is simply part of the subscription you already have. And because it lives in the cloud, you can log in from any device at any time and find your conversation and your work exactly where you left it. It is smooth. Slack and automation The way Devin works with Slack is excellent. You can automate tasks and have it talk to you like a developer and engineer sitting inside your own team. That part is better than it first looks. Testing Devin is one of the best harnesses I have used for running tests and making the whole testing process easier. The results come back accurate and clearly free of the randomness I get elsewhere. That matters even more when several agents are running at once. If I have to verify everything manually after every agent, the value of running them in parallel disappears. It is not limited to coding Devin is not locked to programming. You can use it for programming, for creative work, for building websites, for writing, for anything you need without exception. We all know there are harnesses that specialize in coding and get noticeably worse outside their lane. That is not the case here. Whatever kind of work you do, you will enjoy it. A different view on a few things Now for the other side. I would not call it negative. It is more that some people will experience a few things differently, and almost all of it sits in the desktop GUI, not in the agent. I understand these decisions from their side, since this subscription is built first for advanced users and professional developers. Still, it would be great to have a choice between the current mode and a simpler one, with a lighter interface and an agent that talks to you more simply. That single move could win them a large market of vibe coders and people who want to enjoy working with an agent without all the engineering detail. A few smaller things sit in the same area. On the Mac app, closing Settings sometimes drops me on the main screen instead of back in my conversation, and I have to open it again, which does not happen on Linux. Twice after an update the app misbehaved and I had to close it fully and reopen it, which felt like a passing thing rather than a permanent one, but I am mentioning it for transparency. I would also like to see my usage in the same interface I am working in, how much I used this week and what is left, without going into Settings. And I would rather the app give me everything itself instead of sending me to the browser every time I click into certain settings. Editing the agent instruction file from the GUI would help too, rather than opening files and editing them by hand. On that last point, when I started with Devin it was reading a CLAUDE.md file, then I asked it to create and adopt its own file. In new conversations it sometimes leaned on the imported Claude instructions and sometimes on the file I told it to use. It is a small thing, but it creates some ambiguity. Voice input is another small one. I was recording a long instruction with voice to text and it stopped by itself after a short while. I do not know if that is a bug or a limit, but I would love a ten-minute window so I can take my time explaining a task without being cut off in the middle. The one I care most about is steering and subagents. When I send a steering message to the parent agent while subagents are running, that message sometimes cancels them. I tried it more than once and it happened again. I would rather be able to talk to the parent agent without disturbing the agents working underneath it. Related to that, if the parent opens five subagents and I do not like how it divided the work, it cannot stop them itself. Cancelling exists in the protocol but has to come from the user, so the parent can resume its agents but cannot stop or replace them. And I still want a proper goal mode. Ironically Devin needs it less than other harnesses because its agents already keep going, but for long tasks I want to define an outcome and tell it not to stop until that outcome is reached. The encouraging part is that all of this is about the desktop app. In the terminal your experience is clean. The CLI is fast, easy to control, very stable and genuinely enjoyable, and I find it among the best and most reliable out there. If you are subscribing to run Devin from the terminal, you will enjoy it a hundred percent with none of the above. If you prefer the GUI, there are a few trade-offs you may need to adapt to, and that comes down to taste. In my estimation most people will adapt to them easily, and experts certainly will. The community and the team I put serious effort into Devin for a reason, and to be honest with you, part of it is the community. The Devin community is outstanding. People contribute constantly, creators share ideas and real experiences, and it feels genuine and far from marketing and noise. I am learning and improving from that community faster than I was before. Their growth is impressive too, and they listen to people, to their experiences and their opinions. I am confident the notes I have raised here, and the notes other people raise, are read and taken seriously, because I watch their growth daily and I see how the team interacts with people and stays close to them. They make you feel like part of the system. When you want to feel that your voice and your problems are actually heard, Devin gives you that. Honestly, only two or three companies in this space give me that feeling. Devin is one of them. Final thoughts The most important thing I can tell you at the end of this review is that because of Devin I cancelled Claude and Codex, and my conscience is clear, because I trust it completely and I trust that Devin is enough. I think plenty of people will feel the same. None of us wants four, five or six different subscriptions with separate monthly budgets. If one subscription covers most of it, solves most of the problems and gives me something excellent, then why not. My advice is that Devin is worth trying. Try one month, take the Max plan, focus on it properly, and you will not lose anything. Give it real work, run several agents, try the models, use the cloud agents and the CLI. If it doesn’t give you what you’re looking for, then never take my word for it again. But after two weeks of very heavy use, I know exactly where I stand. Devin Max is one of the very few $200 subscriptions where I feel I am getting more than I paid for.

After heavy testing Gemini 3.7 Flash, people are sleeping on Google. It’s now excellent at design, writing, taste, and speed, much better than launch. If Pro keeps this quality with more depth and long-task ability, Google is back in the race.

I don’t know if Devin has a referral program, but I deliberately didn’t include any kind of referral link. I wanted the review to feel completely neutral and honest. Money comes second to transparency and integrity for me.

I’d never ask any company for something like that. If a company sees value in what I do and wants me involved, I want them to approach me. Asking usually puts you in a weaker position, and companies may try to influence your reviews, opinions, or direction. And I’m not talking about Devin here. They’ve been great with me. I mean companies in general. I’ve worked as a consultant for several companies, including AI companies, and I have solid experience evaluating products. As for Zai, I chose to stop working with them. I prefer keeping my work transparent and honest.

The two skills that matter most right now, especially with AI and how competitive everything got: reading and writing. Look around. Almost nobody reads. Put a long piece in front of them with ideas, a narrative, some soul, a lived experience, and they immediately want the summary. They ask Grok to crush it. They don’t want the human experience. They want the lifeless extract that leaves no mark. I looked into this myself. It’s a marker of mental decline. Attention is already wrecked by short clips, addictive apps, doomscrolling. If you can’t absorb a human experience, you can’t generate one. You can’t give what you don’t have. You won’t speak well. You won’t write well. You won’t direct agents well, deal with people well, say what you actually think, or make anything that stands out. Copy a method for using agents and you copied a method. Understand something from an actual life and you can invent. That’s the difference. Read whatever you want. Literature, history, philosophy, anything. The more range your mind has, the more imagination you have. The more imagination, the more you can actually make something great with agents instead of running someone else’s workflow. Read. Learn. Talk. Write. Share. That’s the sweetness of the human experience. No AI replaces that.