But it's not like Fable is so substantially better than the other two that I would be seriously impacted if I didn't have access to it anymore. All three are amazing models, and of the three, Fable is the only one that regularly triggers refusals.
If you couple Fable's idea factory with Sol's rigor, you get a real game-changer. It puts the emphasis on top-level ideas, and nearly trivialises the intermediate layers.
Coordinating agents though? Fable any day.
[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48965243
[2] - https://huggingface.co/blog/security-incident-july-2026
"When we started the log analysis, we first used frontier models behind commercial APIs. This did not work [...] We ran the forensic analysis instead on GLM 5.2, an open-weight model, on our own infrastructure. [...] The practical lesson for defenders: have a capable model you can run on your own infrastructure vetted and ready before an incident, both to avoid guardrail lockout [...]"
had mythos been just Opus 5, with the same size and price as the previous opuses, then yeah, that would be a tie-breaker. but it's not.
What's more interesting is that Anthropic moat shrunk to just that model. There's zero reason to use any other model from Anthropic right now. And once they take Fable off subscription there will be zero reason to have Anthropic subscription.
An example: It just suggested that I shouldn't raise the price of my saas because it'd complicate the arithmetic if I did 0 -> $100k YT channel instead of sticking to $20 p/m.
It's just a complete moron, like all of them.
I don't think yours and my definition of moat is the same, when I can switch from Fable to competing models and have similar results.
I'll switch to OpenAI soon because of this. I also can't wait for the day it becomes feasible to run these awesome open weight models on my own hardware.