There's so many cool models to try but they're all in different places. In Chorus you can chat with a bunch of models all at once, and add your own system prompts.
Like 4o with a CBT overview, or a succinct Claude. Excited to hear your thoughts!
Just tried this with an interpersonal situation I'm going through. The default seems to be Claude 3.5 Sonnet and ChatGPT-4o. I got the results I've come to expect from those two, with the latter better at non-programming kinds of prompts.
The app presented the option of prompting additional models, including Gemini Flash 2.0, one I'd never used before. It gave the best response and was surprisingly good.
Curious to know how Chorus is paying for the compute, as I was expecting to have to use my own API keys.
Some throttling plus having a limited number of users by it being a desktop app perhaps.
I just checked to see if it was signed, without running it. It is. I don't care to take the risk of running it even if it's signed. If it were a web app I'd check it out.
I don't know if there's any sort of login. With a login, they could throttle based on that. Without a login, it looks like they could use this to check if it's being used by an Apple computer. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/devicecheck/valida...
I see. I had checked attestKey and it says "Mac Catalyst 14.0+ | macOS 11.0+" among others, but that just means the API is present. developer.apple.com/documentation/devicecheck/dcappattestservice/attestkey(_:clientdatahash:completionhandler:)
Hi! One of the creators of Chorus here. Really cool to hear how everyone is using it. We made this as an experiment because it felt silly to constantly be switching between the ChatGPT, Claude, and LMStudio desktop app. It's also nice to be able to run models with custom system prompts in one place (I have Claude with a summary of how CBT works that I find pretty helpful).
It's a Tauri 2.0 desktop app (not Electron!), so it is using the Mac's native browser view and a Rust backend. It also makes DMG size relatively small (~25mb but we can get it much smaller once we get rid of some bloat).
Right now Chorus is proxying API calls to our server, so it's free to use. We didn't add bring-your-own-api key to this version because it was a bit quicker to ship. This was kind of an experimental winter break project, so didn't think too hard about it. Likely will have to fix that (and add bring your own key? or a paid version?) as more of you use it :)
Definitely planning on adding support for local models too. Happy to answer any other questions, and any feedback is super helpful (and motivating!) for us.
UPDATE: Just added the option to bring your own API keys! It should be rolling out over the next hour or so.
Curious to check it out but a quick question — does it have autocomplete (GitHub copilot-style) in the chat window. IMO one of the biggest missing feature in most chat apps is autocomplete. Typing messages in these chat apps quickly becomes tedious and autocompletions help a lot with this. I’m regularly shocked that it’s almost year 3 of LLMs (depending on how you count) and none of the big vendors have thought of adding this feature.
Another mind-numbingly obvious feature — hitting enter should just create a new-line. And cmd-enter should submit. Or at least have it configurable for this.
I don't think this would be good UX. Maybe when you've already typed ~20 chars or so. If it was so good at prediction from first keystroke, it'd had that info you're asking in the previous response. It could also work for short commands like "expand", "make it concise", but I can also see it being distracting for incorrect prediction.
> Typing messages in these chat apps quickly becomes tedious and autocompletions help a lot with this.
If you're on Mac, you can use dictation. focus text-input, double-tap control key and just speak.
In the editor there’s GitHub copilot autocomplete enabled in the chat assistant and it’s incredibly useful when I’m iterating with code generations.
The autocomplete is so good that even for non-coding interactions I tend to just use the zed chat assistant panel (which can be configured to use different LLM via a drop down)
More generally in multi-turn conversations with an LLM you’re often refining things that were said before, and a context-aware autocomplete is very useful. It should at least be configurable.
Mac default Dictation is ok for non technical things but for anything code related it would suck, e.g if I’m referring to things like MyCustomClass etc
I agree, but only personally. I would assume most people are on the “Enter to submit” train nowadays.
Most of my messaging happens on Discord or Element/matrix, and sometimes slack, where this is the norm. I don’t even think about Shift+Enter nowadays to do a carriage return.
There are a lot of basic features missing from the flagship llm services/apps.
Two or so years ago I built a localhost web app that lets me trivially fork convos, edit upstream messages (even bot messages), and generate an audio companion for each bot message so I can listen to it while on the move.
I figured these features would quickly appear in ChatGPT’s interface but nope. Why can’t you fork or star/pin convos?
imo even more useful would be to have a single answer that represents a mix of all the other answers (with an option to see each individual answer etc)
It provides a summary of all the responses and if you click on "Conversation" in the user message bubble, you can view all the LLM responses to the question of "How many r's in strawberry".
You can fork the message as well and say create a single response based on all responses.
Edit: The chatting capability has been disabled as I don't want to incur an unwanted bill.
Thanks for the feedback! I haven't tried to do this yet, but it's built on Tauri 2.0 and it looks not too hard (https://tauri.app/distribute/app-store/). Will take a look at this
Because they're big enough so they can afford not to, and they want to do things that the sandbox/review process/monetisation rules wouldn't let them. I assume the sandbox is exactly why parent wants the app to be there
I would have thought the exact opposite to your statement, they are big enough that they should afford it. Seems like the ability to forgo the app store on mac allows apple to get away with stuff like high friction review process and monetization rules. Without the big players pushing back, why would they change?
Doesn't apple charge app store apps 30% all their transactions/subscriptions? What company in their right mind would want to opt into that if they don't have to?
A smaller to a medium sized company. Due to several reasons:
- Setting up payment with a third party provider isn't that simple, and their fees are far from zero.
- Getting users. Popular queries in Google are full of existing results, and getting into there isn't easy and isn't cheap. Also, search engines aren't the most popular way to get apps to your devices, usually people search directly in app stores. Apple takes care of it, i.e. I guess that popular app with good ratings get to higher position in search results.
- Trust. I install apps on the computer without Apple only if I trust the supplier of the software (or have to have it there). Apple solves it with their sandboxing.
Yep, 30% are a lot, but for these kinds of businesses it might be well worth it (especially with reduced commission of 15% for smaller revenue).
Love the idea. I frequently use ChatGPT (out of habit) and while it's generating, copy/paste the same prompt into claude and grok. This seems like a good way to save time.
Thanks! Right now Chorus is proxying API calls to our server so it's free. This was kind of an experimental winter break project that we were using internally, and it was quicker to ship this way.
Likely going to add bring your own API keys (or a paid version) soon.
Update: just added option to bring your own keys! Should be available within an hour.
ahah true, but in this case, we're (melty) just paying right now. I wanted to make it really easy to try and didn't implement bring your own keys yet. I probably should ask O1 to fix that
This reminds me of the search engine aggregators in the old days that used to somehow install themselves on internet explorer and then collected search results from multiple providers and sometimes compared them. I wonder if this time these tools will persist.
But the actual amount of effort to get to the level of dropbox in a multiple device context is a number of magnitude higher than the triviality of autoloading a handful of cli tool in different panes and synchronizing them in tmux.
I maintain that “2 ‘r’s” is a semi-valid answer. If a human is writing, pauses and looks up to ask that question they almost certainly want to hear “2”.
A few days ago I was playing a trivia-ish game in which I was asked to spell "unlabeled", which I did. The questioner said I was wrong, that it "has two l's" (the U.K. spelling being "unlabelled"). I jokingly countered that I had spelled it with two l's, which she took to mean that I was claiming to have spelled it "unlabelled".
The left window contains all the models that were asked and the right window contains a summary of the LLM responses. GPT-4o mini got it right but the super majority got it wrong, which is scary.
It wasn't until the LLM was asked to count out the R's that it acknowledges that GPT-4o mini was the only one that got it right.
Edit: I've disabled chatting in the app, since I don't want to rack up a bill. Should have mentioned that.
Gell-Mann amnesia is powerful. Hope you extrapolate from that experience!
At a technical level, they don't know because LLMs "think" (I'd really call it something more like "quickly associate" for any pre-o1 model and maybe beyond) in tokens, not letters, so unless their training data contains a representation of each token split into its constituent letters, they are literally incapable of "looking at a word". (I wouldn't be surprised if they'd fare better looking at a screenshot of the word!)
I will not be surprised if Open AI, Claude, Meta and others use the feedback system to drive corrections. Basically, if we use the API, we may never get the best answer, but it could also be true that all feedback will be applied to future models.
lmarena.ai is also pretty good. It's not mac exclusive, works from the browser and has a bunch of different AIs to choose from. It doesn't keep a history when you close the tab though
The app presented the option of prompting additional models, including Gemini Flash 2.0, one I'd never used before. It gave the best response and was surprisingly good.
Curious to know how Chorus is paying for the compute, as I was expecting to have to use my own API keys.