I completely disagree.

Frankly, I find the description "VC funding a FOSS" offensive. They aren't funding the engine. I've been messing with LLM inference engines since 2022, and Ollama is the worst I've seen in the community.

They misname models for SEO. They leech off llama.cpp while deliberately hiding attribution yet redirecting GH support requests there. They sometimes make their own GGUFs+forked releases which are broken and incompatibile with upstream llama.cpp, just so they can get a release out a day ahead for hype, even though it doesn't really work and they'll never upstream one line. They set a default context size thats basically unusable, they screw up chat templates and deep internal code with no obvious indicators, they release suboptimal quants without iMatrix, they gate you into their internal quantization repo and model card format, they hide model downloads on your hard drive, they mess with standard APIs for no good reason other than to mess up other backends. I could go on and on.

And if that's all fine, they're enshittifying the app with closed code, and pointers to cloud models.

They GIVE LLM inference a bad name, by making it a terrible quality engine that happens to show up in search as the "default." Hence the comments below of people being unimpressed with local inference. And they sap attention from actual llama.cpp devs, without contributing a single dime. Everyone in the localllama communtity hates their guts, and that's not even getting into the interpersonal drama they've stirred.

They are a leech that's a net drag to the whole community, that we can't get rid of because they're attention grifters. And they've gotten worse and worse over time.

It's more morale to use any cloud API over Ollama, in my eyes. They're a grift.

EDIT: And, to be clear, I’m not against VC funded downstream stuff.

LM Studio is good! Even though it’s closed source.

Tons of downstream projects are great.