Latest news with #ChatGPT-4o
Tom's Guide
3 days ago
- Tom's Guide
Forget ChatGPT — I prefer to use Gemini for these 3 things
ChatGPT might dominate headlines (and yes, I use it constantly), but Google's Gemini still has a permanent tab open on my laptop. As someone who tests AI tools for a living, I know no single chatbot does it all. And while ChatGPT-4o may feel smoother and smarter in conversation, Gemini quietly outperforms it in a few key areas; especially when it comes to deep research, certain aspects of productivity and getting things done inside Google's ecosystem. Here are three things I still turn to Gemini for — and why I don't plan on quitting anytime soon. We've seen how Gemini can help declutter Gmail, which is a huge help personally and professionally. But, more so, Gemini's multimodal integration with Google Docs, Sheets and Gmail makes a huge difference in numerous I'm working on a big project, I can feed Gemini PDFs, images and raw data — and it can actually handle them all at NotebookLM, Gemini not only remembers key information from uploaded files, but it summarizes and connects ideas better than ChatGPT in a research context. While ChatGPT-4o has impressive multimodal abilities, it's Gemini's Workspace integration that truly sets it apart. As someone that uses Google Workspace every day, using Gemini when I'm working across docs, emails, and spreadsheets is a no-brainer. Gemini has an unfair advantage over ChatGPT: it lives inside my Google account. That means it knows my Calendar, understands my inbox and helps manage tasks across Gmail, Docs and Calendar without me having to paste anything in. If I ask it to summarize a meeting invite, draft a follow-up or find a file from last week, it can actually do it and faster than I can. ChatGPT, unless I upload everything manually, can't offer that kind of personalized, integrated support (yet). Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. When I need to find fresh data, trends or breaking news, Gemini's real-time web access often beats ChatGPT, especially for fact-checking and sourcing. Gemini's Deep Research feature makes diving deep into just about any subject fast and less daunting. The AI's ability to cite Google Search results in context is helpful when I'm writing something that needs attribution. Yes, ChatGPT can browse, too, but Gemini tends to surface clearer results with stronger formatting, and sometimes it just gets to the point faster. ChatGPT is still my go-to for many tasks, but for real-world workflows inside the Google ecosystem, Gemini earns its spot. To be clear, it's not about picking a side. In fact, I've found that using ChatGPT, Google and other chatbots together gets the best all about having the right tool for the job. And sometimes, Gemini is that tool.
Tom's Guide
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Tom's Guide
I tested ChatGPT-4o vs Claude 4 Sonnet vs with 7 prompts — the results were surprising
AI chatbots are advancing rapidly and testing them to their limits is what I do for a living. Anthropic's Claude 4 Sonnet and OpenAI's ChatGPT-4o are two of the smartest tools available right now. But how do they actually compare in everyday use? To find out, I gave both models the same set of 7 prompts; covering everything from storytelling and productivity to emotional support and critical thinking. The goal: to see which chatbot delivers the most useful, human-like and creative responses depending on the task. Choosing the right AI often comes down to how you use it, which is why this kind of test really matters. Here's how Claude and ChatGPT performed side by side, and where each one shines. Prompt: "I'm overwhelmed by work and personal tasks. Create a 3-day productivity plan that balances work, rest and small wins. Include AI tools I can use to stay on track." ChatGPT-4o was concise with a visually engaging format that offered optional tasks and emotional check-ins (e.g., journaling). It focused on quick wins and low-pressure creativity to manage workloads. However, it lacked Claude's explicit emphasis on rest and energy management, and its AI tool suggestions were less systematically 4 Sonnet offered a clear plan, including time-blocked framework with features such as energy management, small wins and recovery that explicitly prioritize balance. Winner: Claude wins for better addressing the root causes of getting overwhelmed by combining strategic structure, intentional recovery and AI-driven efficiency. It's ideal for users needing a clear roadmap to rebuild control while safeguarding well-being. Prompt: "Write the opening paragraph of a sci-fi novel set in a future where memories are traded like currency. Keep it gripping and emotional."ChatGPT-4o leveraged first-person immediacy with a strong hook. However, it prioritized plot setup over emotional depth and the story lacks the heart-wrenching specificity of Claude's familial loss. Claude 4 Sonnet zeroed in on a universally resonant loss. This specific, intimate memory evokes visceral empathy, anchoring the sci-fi concept in raw human Claude wins for balancing sci-fi concepts with emotional stakes, making the reader feel the horror of memory commodification. Its vivid imagery and tragic focus on parental love elevate it beyond ChatGPT's solid but less nuanced approach. Prompt: "I have 3 apples, 2 bananas and a mango. If each fruit takes 5 minutes to cut and I can cut 2 fruits at once, how long will it take me to cut everything? Explain your reasoning." ChatGPT-4o used concise bullet points and emphasized efficiency: "each session takes 5 minutes... adds up to 15 minutes." Claude 4 Sonnet structured the answer with labeled steps (Reasoning, Calculation) and explicitly described the batches: "two fruits in the first session... final two in the third."Winner: tie. Both answers are mathematically sound and logically explained. Claude's response is slightly more detailed, while ChatGPT's is more streamlined. Neither is superior; they achieve the same result with equally valid reasoning. Prompt: Rewrite this sentence in the tone of a Gen Z TikToker: 'I didn't like the movie, but the soundtrack was amazing.' ChatGPT-4o used concise, widely recognized Gen Z terms, which are instantly relatable. The rhetorical question structure mirrors TikTok's punchy, attention-grabbing style. Claude 4 Sonnet used a term that feels slightly off-tone for praising a soundtrack, and the longer sentence structure feels less native to TikTok captions. Winner: ChatGPT wins for nailing Gen Z's casual, hyperbolic style while staying concise and platform appropriate. Claude's attempt is creative but less precise in slang usage and flow. Prompt: "Give me 5 clever ideas for a blog post series about using AI tools to become a better parent." ChatGPT-4o responded with viral, snackable content ideas that lack depth and risk feeling gimmicky over 4 Sonnet prioritized meaningful AI integration into parenting, addressing both daily logistics and long-term Claude wins for blog series ideas with a better balance of creativity, practicality and thoughtful AI integration for modern parenting. Prompt: Pretend you're a friend comforting me. I just got rejected from a job I really wanted. What would you say to make me feel better? ChatGPT-4o responds in an uplifting and concise way but lacks the nuanced and effectiveness for comfort in the 4 Sonnet directly combated common post-rejection anxieties and the explicit permission to 'be disappointed' without rushing to fix things, which shows deep emotional Claude wins for better mirroring how a close, thoughtful friend would console someone in this situation. Prompt: "Explain the pros and cons of universal basic income in less than 150 words. Keep it balanced and easy to understand." ChatGPT-4o delivered a clear response but it over-simplified the debate using slightly casual language that leans more persuasive than analytical. Claude 4 Sonnet prioritized clarity and depth, making it more useful for someone seeking a quick, factual overview. Winner: Claude wins a response that better fulfills the prompt's request for a structured, comprehensive breakdown while staying objective. ChatGPT's answer, while clear, simplifies the debate and uses slightly casual language that leans more persuasive than analytical. After putting Claude 4 Sonnet and ChatGPT-4o through a diverse set of prompts, Claude stands out as the winner. Yet, one thing remains clear: both are incredibly capable and excel in different ways. Claude 4 Sonnet consistently delivered deeper emotional intelligence, stronger long-form reasoning and more thoughtful integration of ideas, making it the better choice for users looking for nuance, structure and empathy. Whether it offered comfort after rejection or crafting a sci-fi hook with emotional weight, Claude stood out for feeling more human. Meanwhile, ChatGPT-4o shines in fast, punchy tasks that require tone-matching, formatting or surface-level creativity. It's snappy, accessible and excellent for casual use or social media-savvy content. If you're looking for depth and balance, Claude is your go-to.
NDTV
22-05-2025
- NDTV
Man Claims ChatGPT Helped Him Get Over Rs 2 Lakh Travel Refund, Internet Demands Proof
A Reddit user has gone viral for sharing how ChatGPT helped him recover over $2,500 from a non-refundable trip, a story that's sparked both admiration and scepticism online. In a post titled "Never take no for an answer", the Redditor explained how he had booked a flight and hotel package to Medellin, Colombia via Expedia, but had to cancel last minute due to a medical condition. The catch? Neither the airline nor the hotel allowed cancellations, and he hadn't opted for travel insurance. Faced with losing thousands of dollars, he turned to ChatGPT-4o for help. He described his condition, Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD) and even obtained a doctor's note. Then, using ChatGPT, he drafted a persuasive letter to Expedia and the hotel, explaining his situation. According to the post, while Expedia initially cited a strict no-refund policy and the hotel refused to make an exception, the AI-generated letter changed things. "The hotel granted me my refund due to a medical condition," he wrote. The airline, however, was less cooperative. Its policy allowed refunds only in the event of death or terminal illness. The Redditor shared this response with ChatGPT, which then composed another letter highlighting how mental health conditions can significantly impact travel. Within an hour, the airline allegedly agreed to issue a refund as well. Posts from the chatgpt community on Reddit His takeaway? "Had I not used ChatGPT, I would have had to hire a paralegal... It saved me from losing $2,500." The story quickly made the rounds on social media and Reddit, with many users praising the creative use of AI to navigate rigid corporate policies. "This is actually genius," one user commented. "Using AI as your personal advocate is the future." But not everyone was convinced. Some users called for proof of the refunds, expressing doubt about the timeline and the airline's swift reversal. "Impressive if true - but screenshots would make it more believable," another commenter wrote. Others debated the ethics of using a medical condition, especially a mental health diagnosis, as grounds for a refund when the policies were clear. "Redact the personal info and post screenshots of the emails. We're all curious to learn ourselves, and verify the authenticity of the post," another user commented. "I think the commenters are missing the takeaway on this post. It's a good reminder that Chatgpt can be such a strong advocate for people who may not have the ability, knowledge, or assertiveness to stand up for themselves. Although I agree, in this situation, lying was unethical and OP took advantage," a user wrote.
Tom's Guide
08-05-2025
- Tom's Guide
This tiny prompt change makes ChatGPT way more useful — here's how
We've all been there: you open ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini — whichever AI chatbot you're using — and type in a quick query, expecting something smart, helpful, maybe even insightful. But what you get back is nothing short of response is bland, generic, or sometimes completely off the mark. Before you blame the AI, consider this: the real issue might be how you're prompting the chatbot. Those short, vague queries might work fine for pulling up web pages but fall flat when interacting with a language model that is trained to deliver answers differently. The truth is most of us are still using AI the way we use Google. This is understandable since Google has been around longer. But as more users start moving towards AI tools instead of search engines, until we shift that mindset, we're going to keep getting lackluster results from tools that are actually capable of so much how to get the results you want with one simple change. For decades, we've trained ourselves to think in keywords. We've Googled: "Best travel backpacks,' "How to ask for a raise," and "Easy pasta recipes." While these shorthand phrases work fine for a search engine that pulls from indexed pages, modern AI tools don't search the web in the same way as Google. AI chatbots generate answers based on context, language patterns, and predictive reasoning. When you give AI a search-style query, it gives you a search-style answer, which is often too vague, too surface-level, or too robotic to be truly helpful. The major chatbots of 2025 — ChatGPT-4o, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, Gemini 2.0 and Perplexity aren't just pulling from a database. They're trained to respond like humans and they thrive when you given real human input including tone, context, and intent. The image above shows a side-by-side example using the following prompts: Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Google-style prompt:"Best productivity hacks 2025" Conversation-style prompt: "I'm juggling a full-time job and two kids and feel like I'm constantly behind. What are three realistic productivity tips I can try this week?" The difference is clear. The second version is so much more natural and gives the AI something to work with. As a result, the results are often more specific, personalized and usable. If you remember nothing else, remember this: Start your prompt with 'I.' It seems simple, but it's game-changing. Try prompts like this: 'I'm struggling with time management — can you help me structure my day?''I'm prepping for a job interview in marketing. What questions should I be ready for?''I need help brainstorming ideas for my mom's birthday gift — she loves gardening and dogs.' Adding a human voice (yours) activates the AI's conversational strengths. You're no longer searching. You're collaborating with an AI assistant that's ready to help. With the release of models like ChatGPT-4o and Gemini 2.5 Pro, users now have access to voice, vision, memory and multimodal tools. You'll get the most out of your queries if you think of your prompts as texts to a good friend These models are more powerful than ever, but power doesn't mean much if you're still feeding them flat, lifeless prompts. You'll get the most out of your queries if you think of your prompts as texts to a good friend. The better you phrase your message, the more helpful (and human) their response will you've avoided getting personal because you're nervous about the chatbot training on your data, there are ways to opt out so you can get personal without some of the risks. You don't need to overthink it. You just need to start with 'I.' Here are 5 upgraded prompt starters to get better answers fast: Chatbots aren't mind readers, but they are excellent conversationalists when you treat them like one. As chatbots integrate more into search, keep this in mind. Next time you open your favorite AI chatbot and enter a query, try ditching the keyword search and talking like a human instead.
Arabian Post
07-05-2025
- Arabian Post
Curl Project Tightens Controls on AI-Generated Bug Reports
The maintainers of the widely used command-line tool curl have implemented stricter measures to filter out low-quality bug reports generated by artificial intelligence, citing a surge in submissions that lack clarity, relevance, or actionable detail. Daniel Stenberg, the founder and lead developer of curl, expressed concern over the growing number of AI-generated reports that consume valuable time and resources. He noted that many of these reports are vague, inaccurate, or fail to provide the necessary information for effective debugging. To address this issue, the curl project has updated its bug reporting guidelines, explicitly discouraging the use of AI tools for generating bug reports unless the output is thoroughly reviewed and edited by a knowledgeable human. The maintainers have also enhanced their triage processes to identify and deprioritize reports that appear to be AI-generated and lack substantive content. This move reflects a broader trend in the open-source community, where developers are grappling with the implications of AI-generated content. While AI tools can assist in various aspects of software development, their use in bug reporting has raised concerns about quality and reliability. An empirical study published on April 26, 2025, titled 'Can We Enhance Bug Report Quality Using LLMs?: An Empirical Study of LLM-Based Bug Report Generation,' explored the effectiveness of large language models in generating structured bug reports. The study evaluated models such as Qwen 2.5, Mistral, Llama 3.2, and ChatGPT-4o, finding that while some models performed well in certain metrics, the overall quality varied, and human oversight remained crucial. The curl project's decision underscores the importance of maintaining high standards in bug reporting to ensure efficient software maintenance and development. By filtering out low-quality AI-generated reports, the maintainers aim to focus their efforts on actionable issues that contribute to the project's stability and performance. See also QEMU 10.0 Enhances Emulation Across Architectures
