docs(site): add Opus 4.7, update star count to 105k+, fix stale 2025→2026 meta, refresh April 20

- index.html: star badge 100k+ → 105k+ (NousResearch/hermes-agent at 105k)
- models/index.html: bump meta description year 2025 → 2026
- models/index.html: update date to April 20, 2026
- models/index.html: Opus 4.6 → Opus 4.7 across all 4 sections (Overall, Coding, Writing, Research)
  - New stats: 70% CursorBench, 98.5% XBOW visual-acuity, 3.75MP image resolution
  - Picker card 'Complex coding' updated to Opus 4.7
  - Anthropic setup box: add claude-opus-4-7 as first model name
- compare/claude-code.html: update Opus 4.6 reference to 4.7
- compare/perplexity-computer.html: update Opus 4.6 reference to 4.7
This commit is contained in:
nesquena-hermes
2026-04-20 19:45:00 +00:00
parent 87315afb19
commit cfb48eaab4
4 changed files with 32 additions and 32 deletions
+1 -1
View File
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@
<h3>The provider lock-in question</h3>
<p>Claude Code supports <strong>Anthropic's API, AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex AI, and Anthropic Foundry</strong>. These are meaningful options for enterprise deployment, but they share one constraint: every inference uses a Claude model. If Claude pricing changes, if a competitor releases a model significantly better for a specific task, or if you simply want to use a local open-source model for cost or privacy reasons, you cannot do that within Claude Code. The tool is by design Claude-native.</p>
<p>Hermes is provider-agnostic. You configure which provider and model to use, and can change it at any time — or route different tasks to different providers. GPT-5.4 for one thing, Claude Opus 4.6 for another, a local Ollama model for private data. This flexibility is especially valuable when the model landscape is moving as fast as it currently is: you're not locked into today's best option when something better ships.</p>
<p>Hermes is provider-agnostic. You configure which provider and model to use, and can change it at any time — or route different tasks to different providers. GPT-5.4 for one thing, Claude Opus 4.7 for another, a local Ollama model for private data. This flexibility is especially valuable when the model landscape is moving as fast as it currently is: you're not locked into today's best option when something better ships.</p>
<p>For most users evaluating these two tools for coding work, provider flexibility is a secondary concern — Claude is genuinely excellent at coding tasks, and Claude Code's tight integration is an advantage. But for users with strong privacy requirements, cost sensitivity, or a preference to hedge model risk, Hermes's open provider model is a concrete benefit.</p>
<h3>Using them together</h3>