My teams currently using it for:
- SDR research and drafting
- Proposal generation
- Staging ops work
- Landing page generation
- Building the company processes into an internal CRM
- Daily reporting
- Time checks
- Yesterday I put together proposal from a previous proposal and meeting notes, (40k worth)
All your use cases are fairly well handled by conventional LLM's. OpenClaw is a security nightmare, so it's probably worth switching away.
Method 2: send natural language instructions to OpenClaw to use Claude Code to do the same thing
Sorry my tiny brain says to me method 2 is doing the same thing with extra steps
One channel - reminders for medications, and recording my dosage. Another - "research this fancy new tech thing for me". Another - "let's continue work on that side project we started last week". And then in another - "create a dashboard of my meds dosage using that fancy new tech thing we were talking about yesterday". And of course finally "any urgent emails this morning?".
All without finding, creating, or setting up multiple apps or scripts for each individual task. If I have another idea, I just tell it what I want it to do, or ask it how we can make it happen.
OpenClaw was never meant to be a tool that could do things you couldn't do without it.
Also, whenever someone points out you could accomplish something without it, he underestimates the effort needed. In the examples I'm thinking of, someone simply asked OpenClaw to do something, had a few back and forths with it, and it was done. I have yet to see someone say "Oh, I can do that without OpenClaw" and go ahead and do it within 10 minutes.
Not once.
OpenClaw is flawed, but the convenience is an order of magnitude higher than anything else.
You offered nothing to support this. My openclaw is realistically just an agent in discord versus the CLI. That's not an "order of magnitude" more convenient. Anthropic already has a tool for it https://code.claude.com/docs/en/remote-control
You've got it inverted. My point is the people saying "You could have done that just as easily with ..." are the ones not supporting it. The commenter has already built that thing with OpenClaw. If someone is saying it could easily have done without it - well, demonstrate it!
Hint: the status quo is not that openclaw is a tech that is magnitudes better than using LLMs without it.
Listing a bunch of things that are just normal LLM things as reasons why openclaw is great is not making that case.
Regardless, their claim was "OpenClaw is flawed, but the convenience is an order of magnitude higher than anything else."
And they attempted to shift the burden when I asked for substantiation.
And then it ends with that sudden left turn into denouncing atheists as inherently irrational and evil. WTF?
Congratulations on bringing an argument so terrible that I’m actually more convinced of my position after having read it than I was before.
10% done by an assistant that’s been trained on the task (or a dev or me)
80% heavy lifting done by claw
10% review and corrections
Nothing of what my agents do, we didn’t previously do. But now I can get moderate to good results with a lot less effort. Allowing the business to expand whilst keeping costs controlled.