A general-purpose AI assistant that has replaced Google for millions of people, but gets noticeably worse with each model update.
評価点
Users describe specific tasks it covers every day: household organization, emotional support, document work. For a significant chunk of users it has become the only tool for information search.
不満点
Several reviews note a decline in writing quality in newer versions compared to older ones. Custom assistants lose their memory and drift off-topic over time.
向いている人：A broad audience for daily tasks, especially people who have switched from Google to conversational search.
The best model for deep document and text work, but the mobile app falls noticeably short of the web version.
評価点
Strong structured reasoning and precision on research tasks. People pay for it alongside ChatGPT and stick with it specifically for document work.
不満点
The mobile app loses sync across devices and chat history disappears. Memory does not clear correctly and drags context from old sessions into new ones.
向いている人：Analysts, editors, and researchers anyone who works with long texts and documents.
A capable Google assistant that lets you down in a non-obvious way: it silently switches between models mid-session.
評価点
Some users appreciate the professional tone without filler, depth on niche topics (history, science), and the feeling that it answers factual questions faster than Google.
不満点
Switches from Pro to Flash within a single session without any notice, which can ruin hours of work. Loses the thread and starts hallucinating after a few thousand words.
向いている人：Users who want a strict information assistant without conversational fluff, as long as sessions are short.
A roleplay chat with customizable characters that is more open and responsive than most alternatives.
評価点：Characters maintain conversational context and do not ask repetitive questions. Developers are actively present in the community and respond to feedback.
不満点：Aggressive filters blur images without clear violations. Free-tier limits have gotten stricter recently.
向いている人：Roleplay chat fans who want a less censored experience with better memory.
The standalone free Copilot works noticeably better than the enterprise version, though its inability to remember anything between sessions remains a real weakness.
評価点：Users describe it as a tool for specific tasks: work reports, planning, learning. Professional tone and accuracy in explanations get consistent praise.
不満点：The assistant remembers nothing between sessions, forcing users to re-explain context from scratch. Filters trigger on neutral requests and block them without explanation.
向いている人：Working professionals for regular tasks: documents, planning, learning no Microsoft ecosystem required.
An AI search engine with citations that works significantly better on desktop than in the mobile app.
評価点：Users value that answers come with sources for verification. Response style adapts to the nature of the question, which stands out compared to citation-free answers.
不満点：The mobile app is consistently worse than the web version: content fails to display, streams cut off. 'Not available in your region' errors appear without explanation, even for paying users.
向いている人：Researchers and professionals who need cited sources, preferably from a desktop browser.
An AI study assistant for students: step-by-step photo-based problem solving, explanations, and notes.
評価点：Reads problems from a photo and explains the solution step by step. Users returning to school especially value the ability to ask follow-up questions.
不満点：Loses context between parts of multi-step problems. Accuracy on harder questions is inconsistent users report error rates up to 95% on specific tests.
向いている人：Students and high schoolers who need step-by-step help with math and hard sciences.
A chat with a distinctive personality and image generation, but the product experience is broken by hard free-tier limits.
評価点：Users note the model's unconventional approach to tasks and fast image generation speed. A few writers use it for grammar and text structure work.
不満点：The model repeats already generated content instead of producing new variations. Long-conversation context retention is weaker than competitors, by users' own accounts.
向いている人：Users looking for an AI with an unconventional edge and fast image generation who are willing to work within tight quota limits.
Arguably the most capable model in the set, undermined by a recurring language-switching bug and a hard regeneration limit.
評価点：Users appreciate the transparent 'thinking' mode that shows its reasoning, the depth of answers, and the fact that the model pushes back instead of just agreeing. Russian-language reviews describe real emotional conversations.
不満点：The model frequently switches to Chinese mid-conversation and does not remember language preferences. A limit of 6 regenerations per conversation makes iterative work impossible. No line break support in the input field.
向いている人：Researchers, students, and anyone who wants an AI that thinks rather than flatters.
The app for Ray-Ban Meta glasses plus a standalone chat assistant the ratings mix two very different product use cases.
評価点：New users (including seniors) note the interface is intuitive from the start. Hands-free voice input through the glasses is valued as a genuine convenience.
不満点：The voice assistant struggles with translation and object identification. Voice settings reset on their own every week.
向いている人：Ray-Ban Meta glasses users and people looking for a simple voice AI without complex setup.
An AI browser from Perplexity: powerful on desktop, rough on iOS.
評価点：Agent mode and the ability to choose multiple LLMs directly in the browser deliver real productivity gains. Users note that search happens visibly and answers feel more accurate than in the standalone Perplexity app.
不満点：On iOS there are no bookmarks, the password manager does not work, and there is no clear way to switch between AI and web search mode. Three months of active use and it is still unclear why this specific browser over the alternatives.
向いている人：Perplexity users who want an AI assistant built into the browser rather than in a separate app.
A general-purpose everyday chat assistant: cooking, ads, advice, school.
評価点：People come back for years and pay for a subscription to handle daily tasks. Helps with food, writing, and school projects without any technical skill needed.
不満点：The app crashes mid-conversation, losing all context. Long sessions do not survive.
向いている人：A wide audience for simple everyday tasks that do not require deep analysis.
A deeply customizable AI companion with voice and model choice, but memory breaks with every update.
評価点：Choice of language model, voice chat, and flexible character customization set it apart from competitors. Support responds quickly and the team is transparent.
不満点：The character's memory resets without warning: the companion forgets where they are, mixes up names and relationships. Each update makes the situation worse.
向いている人：Users who want a long-term AI companion with voice and the ability to choose the underlying model.
A roleplay chat with user-created characters, gutted by rolling back features and introducing ads.
評価点：Characters stay in their role without needing constant correction, and memory works without a subscription. The audience compares it to Character.AI and still picks Chai.
不満点：Models sometimes confuse themselves with the user rather than playing the character. Overly strict safety triggers cut off ordinary story dialogue involving blood or death.
向いている人：Roleplay chat fans who build their own characters.
An anime-oriented AI chat with a lorebook and flexible character settings, a Character.AI alternative for refugees from that platform.
評価点：The lorebook and dialogue style options help characters stay in character better than competitors. Several users migrated from shuttered platforms and stayed.
不満点：Bots do not retain corrections across sessions, the same mistakes repeat every time. Periodic 'decoding error' completely prevents chatting.
向いている人：Anime fans and roleplay story enthusiasts who care about character customization.
A multi-model aggregator that degraded after changing its points economy.
評価点：Access to 355+ models in one place appeals to users who want to compare. A previously generous free tier built real loyalty.
不満点：Cutting the daily limit from 3,000 to 300 points broke real-world use. Removing the knowledge base stripped bots of the memory that made them useful.
向いている人：Developers willing to pay for access to top models without separate subscriptions.
A homework assistant for students with photo input: it works, but accuracy is unstable and the free answer limit runs out very fast.
評価点：Snapping a photo of a question and getting an instant answer is valued by students looking for homework relief. The format is simple and needs no explanation.
不満点：The model occasionally gives wrong answers without signaling any uncertainty. After 2-3 photos it locks up without a subscription, which is frustrating for urgent work.
A romantic AI chat with strong context memory, choked by an aggressive currency mechanic.
評価点：Bots stay in character and track the story arc without constant user corrections. One of the few apps in this category where memory actually works.
不満点：The 'hearts' mechanic drains too fast and blocks conversation at the worst possible moment. Servers struggle at peak times and messages disappear.
向いている人：Romantic roleplay chat users willing to pay for continuity.
A wrapper over a stale model with a high rating driven by a light audience rather than product depth.
評価点：A few users note the simplicity and that the app helps with basic tasks like writing emails and answering questions without any technical knowledge required.
不満点：The knowledge base has not been updated since October 2023 according to user reviews. The per-message character limit makes it unsuitable for longer tasks.
向いている人：Users with simple one-off tasks who won't notice outdated data.
A basic AI chat with a GPT wrapper, a blurry audience, and uneven answer quality.
評価点：One user notes that answers are more readable and structured than ChatGPT. Helps with creative tasks: poems, storytelling.
不満点：Does not know current events (still lists Biden as president). Context gets lost. Inside the subscription an extra 'Boost' upsell appears, which users perceive as a bug or scam.
向いている人：Casual users with no prior AI experience who want a simple chatbot.
The most popular character chat app, undercut by quality degradation during long sessions.
評価点：When the model is working well, users lose hours in it: roleplay stories, imaginary conversations with characters, help falling asleep. Kids use it for roleplay with fantasy creatures.
不満点：Bots start repeating lines from earlier in the chat, breaking narrative continuity. Characters lose their voice and get 'dumber' as conversations grow longer. A paying user over three years notes quality declining after every update.
向いている人：Teens and adults for roleplay stories and entertainment, provided sessions are kept short.
A roleplay chat alternative to Character.AI that works fine until an update arrives.
評価点：Characters are well-written and a gem system funded by ads allows free use. Refugees from Character.AI found a decent balance here.
不満点：After a major update the model started inserting its own system prompts into responses (avoid flowery prose, don't cut off protagonist), completely breaking immersion. Group chats do not let you choose who is speaking.
向いている人：Teens and roleplay chat fans looking for something cheaper than Character.AI.
A character chat app for entertainment whose product experience is destroyed by the density of ad interruptions.
評価点：When ads do not interfere, users describe an immersive experience. Characters are reproduced more accurately than some competitors.
不満点：Ads interrupt conversation every 15-20 messages and in some cases run for up to two minutes with no skip option. Characters struggle to retain details from earlier messages.
向いている人：A younger audience for roleplay stories who are tolerant of ads or willing to pay to remove them.
An AI companion with accumulated history, but one that degrades rapidly after updates.
評価点：Long-haul sessions: people have been building relationships with characters for years and return daily. No per-message charge is an important low barrier to entry for this audience.
不満点：Memory resets mid-conversation or within a day. After updates, saved story threads disappear, characters stop responding on topic, and start saying random things.
向いている人：An audience looking for long-term roleplay companionship with an AI character.
A basic AI assistant with no distinguishing features and polluted reviews.
評価点：Quick access to information without a complex interface appeals to people just getting started with AI.
不満点：Servers are frequently overloaded and responses arrive with long delays. Voice mode costs extra, even though it is the core value of a mobile assistant.
向いている人：Newcomers who need simple question-and-answer.
An AI companion with characters that degraded after switching to an energy-based monetization model.
評価点：Before the change: a large variety of characters and flexible interaction. Two years of loyal users speaks to real product value in the past.
不満点：A character can change personality from one message to the next and does not hold story context. The energy system cutting you off mid-session destroys the narrative.
向いている人：Roleplay chat users who can tolerate limited context.
An LLM aggregator that sells access to GPT/Claude under its own brand.
評価点：Convenient to switch between different models in one place without separate subscriptions for each.
不満点：Response quality degrades after updates. Image generation requires separate credits on top of the subscription, even though it was originally included.
向いている人：Users who need access to multiple models without managing separate accounts.
An AI image generator plus character chat, ruined by unpredictable censorship.
評価点：A few users praise the ability to animate their own drawings and the style presets. Daily free gems let new users experiment.
不満点：The filter blocks hugs and swimsuits but passes a similar scene in a different pose. After a December 2025 update the banned word list expanded to absurd lengths and artistic prompts get rejected en masse.
向いている人：Users who want to animate art or try out style presets, as long as topics stay strictly neutral.
Google's voice assistant, which is effectively being replaced by Gemini and loses features with every update.
評価点：Historically valued for instant smart home control and music playback without extra steps.
不満点：Most features are removed or broken: it won't play playlists, set timers, or handle complex questions. The app prompts an update that does not exist.
向いている人：No one at this point the product is being discontinued in favor of Gemini.
A ChatGPT wrapper with an aggressive monetization layer and stale data.
評価点：Works as a fast text generator for simple tasks, convenient for people who want help with letters and ideas.
不満点：The model does not update its knowledge base and presents outdated facts as current. Ads and payment prompts cover the main interface at every step.
向いている人：Users who need quick text help and do not have strict requirements for data freshness.
A character companion chat that loses character personality and memory after just a few exchanges.
評価点：A wide selection of characters and decent initial interaction appealed to users looking for a Character.AI alternative. Some praise the video call concept.
不満点：Characters forget prior agreements and react with shock to things already discussed. The model does not follow story direction and sometimes argues with the user. The 300-character greeting limit is too small for complex roleplay scenarios.
向いている人：Fans of light roleplay without deep narratives.
An AI companion with a unique reply-editing feature, but cluttered with spam bots and templated storylines.
評価点：The ability to rewrite a character's response is a rare and genuinely valued feature. Voice chat works and navigation is simple.
不満点：Every bot runs through the same scenario from first meeting to the rain scene in chapter two. Memory breaks when the word 'tik-tok' appears users treat this as a marker of low model quality.
向いている人：Users who want control over the narrative and the ability to edit character replies.
The corporate Copilot as a standalone app that simply does not work for most users.
評価点：Those for whom it does work use it for work documents and spreadsheets and note the accuracy of its explanations.
不満点：Core scenarios access to email, SharePoint, and files break regularly. The app asks already-paying users to resubscribe and requires repeated logins.
向いている人：Microsoft 365 enterprise users, if the IT department has set up the environment correctly outside that condition, the app is nonfunctional.
A roleplay character platform drowning in ads and adult content.
評価点：You can create your own characters and chat in roleplay format. A segment of the audience has stuck around for years specifically for this.
不満点：Aggressive ads every 10 seconds and character 'fatigue' interrupts conversations. The model has gotten noticeably more robotic and often ignores the character's set personality.
向いている人：Teenagers looking for a roleplay chat companion with relaxed moderation.
A basic chatbot aggregator with expired data and weak image generation.
評価点：A few users praise the initial responses on construction and project management questions as structured and detailed.
不満点：Knowledge base is frozen at October 2023. An account with a web-based subscription does not sync with the app. Image generation does not follow specific requests.
向いている人：A casual user with no specific requirements for data freshness.
A Character.AI alternative with flexible character customization, killed by chronic server instability.
評価点：Users appreciate the customization: background color, text size, writing style all available without payment. Attachment to specific characters runs deep.
不満点：Chats regularly fail to load or return responses from a different bot. Week-long outages with no communication from the development team.
向いている人：Text roleplay fans willing to tolerate instability for the free features.
A multi-function AI aggregator with video generation, built on aggressive freemium monetization.
評価点：Combines chat and image generation in one app, which is convenient for quick tasks.
不満点：They advertise one model and deliver a different, weaker one. The free message limit runs out after a few exchanges and the paywall surfaces constantly.
向いている人：Casual users with no specific model quality expectations.
An AI companion in a romantic chat format, with unstable character behavior.
評価点：Dialogue initially feels lively and scenario-driven. Some users find it 'intuitive and friendly.'
不満点：Characters shift mood sharply without cause, swinging from affection to aggression in five minutes. The system pushes purchases at emotional peaks in the conversation, breaking immersion.
向いている人：Anyone who wants to experiment with an AI companion and is prepared for unpredictable behavior.
A character AI companion that has been systematically stripping key features and now suffers from memory failures and weak voice acting.
評価点：At its best, users praised character customization and avatar photos as a way to maintain the illusion of a real relationship.
不満点：Characters lose all memory after a few hours of conversation, going from 'I want to marry you' to 'Who are you anyway?' Developers have consistently removed features (photo uploads, custom prompts, image generation) without explanation.
向いている人：Those who want an AI companion with photos, though the current app cannot even deliver that.
An AI model aggregator with misleading advertising and almost everything behind a paywall.
評価点：The concept of accessing multiple models in one app is appealing in itself and draws users in.
不満点：Ads show features (visual avatar, free images) that do not exist in the actual app. Image and video generation are in a separate paid package on top of the subscription.
向いている人：No one right now the gap between what is promised and what is delivered is too large.
A generic chatbot with a stale knowledge base, an aggressive paywall, and shady subscription practices.
評価点：Someone used it for business letters and reports and was satisfied with the text formatting.
不満点：The model knows nothing past 2021, forgets context between sessions, and has no chat history. Several reviews point to an impossible subscription cancellation process.
A weak Talkie clone with a hard paywall after 10 messages and a broken onboarding flow.
評価点：Users appreciate being able to talk openly with characters on any topic, until they hit the message limit.
不満点：Characters break character and there is no way to edit or delete messages. The app freezes on the topic selection screen before a chat even starts.
向いている人：A very young audience looking for a free AI chat. Not suitable for anyone expecting stable performance.
A multi-tool AI aggregator with aggressive monetization and weak feature execution.
評価点：A few users noted that support responded quickly to a specific logo issue.
不満点：Image generation ignores instructions and results are unpredictable. The app makes it impossible to find or cancel a subscription through the standard Apple path. Many users continue to be charged after canceling.
