@fitchmultz Same here. I had subscribed to the max plan and It was one of the good purchases I have made. GLM 5.2 and 5.1 have been really good so far.
Every time you create a new Laravel application, the installer asks a series of questions:
- Which starter kit would you like to use?
- Which database are you using? SQLite, MySQL, or PostgreSQL?
- Would you like to install Boost?
- Would you like to use Pest?
- Would you like to install and build NPM dependencies?
- Would you like to initialize a Git repository?
These questions are useful, but if you're creating Laravel projects regularly, answering them repeatedly becomes tedious.
If your preferred setup includes:
- SQLite
- Pest
- Boost
- NPM dependencies installed and built
- Git initialized
You can skip all the prompts and create a new project with a single command:
laravel new --database=sqlite --boost --npm --pest --silent --git my-project
Prefer MySQL or PostgreSQL? Just replace sqlite with mysql or pgsql.
You can make it even more convenient by creating an alias:
alias laravelx="laravel new --database=sqlite --boost --npm --pest --silent --git"
Then create a new project like this:
laravelx my-project
One command. No questions. Your project is ready.
Small productivity improvements may not seem important individually, but they save a surprising amount of time when repeated every day.
Keep this one handy. It can make your Laravel workflow a little smoother.
#Laravel #PHP #WebDevelopment #Programming #DeveloperProductivity #SoftwareDevelopment
I prefer using @CommandCodeAI because
- The team is highly responsive and genuinely listens to user feedback.
- Excellent value for money.
- Their Harness CMD implementation is genuinely impressive.
- The $1 Go Plan is hard to beat.
- They consistently ship new features and updates.
@DeepTechTR Do you even read your own post? Just check how absurd you sound here.
Just because Pewdiepie released it, it does not need to be exaggerated
Here's a sample request bill from CommandCode using DeepSeek V4 Pro just two days ago.
Input: 75,045 tokens
Cache Read: 74,368 tokens
Output: 3,000 tokens
Total Charged: $0.0032
Since the reported input already includes cache-read tokens, the actual cache-miss input is:
75,045 - 74,368 = 677 tokens
Applying the current DeepSeek V4 Pro pricing:
Input: 677 × $0.435/M = $0.000294
Cache Read: 74,368 × $0.003625/M = $0.000269
Output: 3,000 × $0.87/M = $0.002610
Total:
$0.000294 + $0.000269 + $0.002610 = $0.003173
Rounded to 4 decimal places: $0.0032
So unless I'm missing something, this invoice reconstructs almost perfectly using DeepSeek's current published rates. The claim that requests are being billed below the current DeepSeek V4 Pro rate doesn't seem to match the numbers. The usage breakdown itself shows you're charging at the model's standard rate.
And for $1, users are getting upto $10 usage of DS4, not $40.
I am not wrong, sir. Your product is genuinely good and provides real value to developers. I have no disagreement there. My concern is with the marketing. The way DS4 and Mimo usage is being presented gives users an impression that doesn't match the current pricing reality.
Peace.
@skeletor_ong@CommandCodeAI No, it doesn't. If you want proof, check your usage dashboard. Charged at the current DS4 pricing. Your $1 effectively stretches to about $10 of usage, and you can consume up to $10. That's it.
CommandCode is great, but the marketing around DS4 and Mimo is misleading.
Yes, when the pricing was higher, that statement was accurate. But the provider has since permanently reduced the price, so it no longer reflects reality. Continuing to advertise the old value gives users the impression they're receiving far more usage than they actually are at today's rates.