MG Siegler: ‘OpenAI Makes ChatGPT ChatGPT Again’

MG Siegler, writing at Spyglass:

In that light, we can see the dilemma. But there were also probably about a dozen better ways to do this roll-out — as highlighted by how fast they’re fixing these things — and they just missed the mark. While they undoubtedly knew there would be some backlash, they probably didn’t realize there would be this much. Again. All that points to perhaps a disturbing trend where OpenAI doesn’t really understand their user base. Which you almost can understand given how they clearly stumbled into ChatGPT in the first place. Still, here they are with those billion users. A problem that all of their competitors would love to have. But still a problem if you want to fundamentally change what you are as a product..

But those are bigger, existential issues. All I wanted was chat back in the ChatGPT app. Front and center. And I got it. It’s not perfect. It’s still bloated. But at least it’s usable again now and not a confusing mess of ideas out of the box.

MG is pretty scathing, but I still think he’s taking it too easy on OpenAI for a what a colossal fuck-up this remains. There was nothing wrong with the way things were, with two apps — the simple ChatGPT and the complex Codex. (Well, the Codex Mac app being an Electron turd was wrong, but that complaint seems quaint at this point.)

Adding “ChatGPT” as a tab to Codex is fine. Renaming Codex to “ChatGPT” is stupid. They have not made ChatGPT “ChatGPT” again.

There is nothing — not one single tiny feature — in the new ChatGPT app that makes me want to use it instead of ChatGPT Classic. And there is so much in ChatGPT Classic that works better or just isn’t available in the new ChatGPT. You can’t even just delete a chat in the new app — you have to “archive” it first, then fish around to find the archive and delete it there.

I don’t think the problem is that OpenAI “doesn’t really understand their user base”. I think it’s that decisions are now being made by AI research eggheads who don’t understand their own products. They think this makes sense. So of course they don’t understand their user base — who uses the ChatGPT product — either. I mean what sense does it make that the ChatGPT app for iOS and Android is still the old ChatGPT, which on the Mac is now “ChatGPT Classic”, but there’s a totally different app that is an entire order of magnitude more complicated on the Mac now named “ChatGPT”?

The only good solution is to pretend this last week didn’t happen and go back to calling ChatGPT “ChatGPT” and Codex “Codex”. If they want to give one of them a new name, don’t call ChatGPT “ChatGPT Classic” — instead rename Codex “ChatGPT Codex”. There, done. All problems solved.

The Codex app is clearly capable of amazing things. But the reason that there are a billion users of ChatGPT but only a few million users of Codex — by OpenAI’s own accounting — is because ChatGPT is simple and focused and based on a single coherent concept: chat. The frustration of the eggheads now running product at OpenAI is obvious: how come these hundreds of millions of morons using ChatGPT aren’t running Codex instead? Somehow they thought they could fix this by giving Codex the ChatGPT name. This is like if Apple had gotten rid of the Messages app on the Mac and replaced it with Xcode, which they renamed to “Messages”. Now they’ve put an “iMessage” tab in the Xcode sidebar and re-released the Messages app everyone knew and loved as “Messages Classic”.

OpenAI separated itself from its competition — especially Anthropic — by being good at product. Now their product decisions are being made by people who don’t understand why Apple makes both iMovie and Final Cut Pro, or GarageBand and Logic Pro.

★ Friday, 17 July 2026