Use AI Reviews

Summary: I have tried it on political campaign ideas and were mostly good ideas, with a blip or two requiring me to re-enter some prompts.

Positive: Fast generation and convenient switching between models make ideation easy. Having illustrations and text alternatives added within the same session makes it easier.

Negative: At times, a model might get stuck during a brainstorming session, and historical filters for chats might have been less clearer.

Summary: I use Use AI for freelance content projects. Once learned, the platform is truly powerful, but I've had to spend some time learning how to effectively switch between models and manage tasks.

Positive: Multi-LLM access and a unified assistant interface enhance flexibility in performing tasks. Voice commands improve workflow.

Negative: Initial setup can be confusing; navigation between models is not always intuitive.

Summary: I use Use AI for preparing study notes and summaries. Generally, it works well, though initially navigating between multi-LLM options and tasks was somewhat confusing. Once familiar, the productivity benefits are clear.

Positive: Centralized AI workspace helps in juggling document writing and research. Model selection by task helps in choosing the right engine for assignments more efficiently.

Negative: Dashboard can sometimes feel a bit cluttered when multiple sessions are open. The learning curve for new users is noticeable.

Summary: Extremely efficient and well-designed tool. It does exactly what it says on the label: fast, reliable access to many AIs all in one place. It has become a trusted part of my daily work routine.

Positive: It's an incredibly efficient and reliable platform. The speed of response and the stability of the service are commendable.

Negative: Sometimes, when you switch models in the middle of a chat, the persona or custom instructions settings don't always carry over perfectly, which can break the flow of a conversation.

Summary: Great tool for any developer. Being able to get a second opinion quickly from another AI model on code has already saved me from a few bugs. It has a clean, purpose-driven interface.

Positive: As a developer, the multi-LLM access is a godsend. I can get a coding solution from one model and then have another review it for security or efficiency. The centralized workspace keeps all my code snippets and discussions organized, which is a huge improvement over scattered chat histories.

Negative: Very niche or newer programming languages do not have as much support as mainstream programming languages. It's only a minor issue, but something to be aware of if you work on the cutting edge.

Summary: Overall, very impressive. The performance is top-notch, the speed's a highlight, and the core concept of this unified assistant is well thought out. The multimodal capabilities are good but need a bit more refinement to be truly great.

Positive: The speed is the first thing you notice; responses from even the larger models like Claude Opus are remarkably fast.

Negative: The visual support feature is kind of hit-or-miss. It works well for simple images but tends to struggle when it gets in detailed diagrams or screenshots.

Summary: A powerful and very useful platform that delivers as promised. My go-to for daily AI tasks: the foundation is so strong that I can barely wait to see how it will grow-very much looking forward to collaboration features.

Positive: The core offering is incredibly strong. The multi-LLM access and unified interface are executed nearly flawlessly. It's fast, reliable, and has become a critical part of my toolkit for everything from brainstorming to writing. The model availability indicators are a small but crucial detail.

Negative: I wish to see more advanced features related to team collaboration, such as shared workspaces or the possibility of commenting on threads. For a single user, it's great, but for teams, there's still a lot that can be improved.

Summary: A great platform for anyone working in multiple languages. The quality of translation is great, and the ability to switch models quickly is key. I just hope they improve the voice feature for other languages soon.

Positive: The support for 30+ languages is incredibly robust, making translations and content generation for a global audience effortless. The unified interface means I don't need separate tools for this, and the model selection by task feature often picks the perfect model for language work.

Negative: What a pity that the voice commands for every language other than English are practically unusable. It limits the utility of that particular feature when it comes to my international projects.

Summary: It is a great research companion. The ease with which I am able to compare outputs from different models, like Gemini and Claude OPUS, ensures a more rounded view. The export formatting could be neater, but it's a small price to pay.

Positive: This is my primary tool for compiling research digests. The multi-LLM access lets me cross-reference information from different AI perspectives quickly, and the centralized workspace keeps all my notes and sources organized. It's a huge time-saver and improves the depth of my research.

Negative: The formatting of exported text can sometimes be a little irregular and requires cleaning up in an external document editor. It is a small annoyance, but one I regularly encounter while working.

Summary: A powerful platform that rewards the time you invest in learning it. Once you get the hang of model selection, it's incredibly efficient. Just be prepared for a bit of a learning phase at the start to truly unlock its potential.

Positive: The sheer power of having all these models in one place is undeniable. The live model comparison feature is brilliant for understanding strengths and weaknesses, and the support for numerous languages is a huge asset for my translation work. The overall value is exceptional.

Negative: The learning curve initially is a bit steeper than expected. It takes time and experimentation to get comfortable with which model is best for coding assistance versus which for brainstorming, and the interface doesn't always guide one perfectly.

Summary: I love it. It has really streamlined my use of AIs, and the unified interface is a big win. There are just a few small quirks around feature limits that keep it from being perfect, but it's incredibly reliable.

Positive: The centralized workspace is exactly what I needed. Switching between providers like claude and gemini is instantaneous, and the model availability indicators prevent wasted time. It's made my research and document writing much more efficient, consolidating my workflow into one powerful application.

Negative: The advanced reasoning models are outstanding, but I periodically encounter usage limits at peak hours that have caused interruptions in a deep work session. A clearer indication of my quota would be helpful.

Summary: Strengths for heavy users, but I had to spend time figuring out which model worked for which task; once I did, productivity increased significantly. This also made follow-ups less of a chore and reduced the amount of time spent on manual edits, which also made our team progress faster overall.

Positive: The platform's state-of-the-art reasoning models and real-time comparison features are a godsend for hard problems, and model selection based on task allows you to pair the right engine with the task with less waste from bad prompts. Follow-ups were also made easier and reduced time spent on manual rewriting, which allowed our team to work more quickly overall.

Negative: The interface could be made more newbie-friendly — too many choices presented at the start make the first session slightly overwhelming unless you know what each model does. A more straightforward default workflow would be good.

Summary: Generally helpful still. Employed it for a literature review and achieved improved coverage compared to a single model.

Positive: I enjoyed being able to use several models to receive varied answers and views, which made testing ideas and comparing outputs much more insightful.

Negative: Sometimes answers seemed repetitive between models when I asked similar questions.

Summary: After the initial day, I used it consistently. It works well now, just wish the onboarding better explained features.

Positive: As soon as I learned the interface, the multi-LLM was great for research. Very useful in day to day operation.

Negative: First set up was slow because I didn't know where some of the features were.

Summary: All in all, I couldn't help but conclude that it's a decent product. Having used it for purposes of coding on different occasions, I really enjoyed the extremely seamless context handoff when I chose to experiment using another model.

Positive: The layout design is very practical, and I really enjoy the idea of the use of the single workspace. In regards to changing models during the middle of the conversation, it all runs smoothly without any problems at all.

Negative: Certain buttons sometimes feel just too small when navigating using a mobile device – it would be great if there could be just ever so marginally bigger touch targets applied.