MacroCodex collects user data, and because it is unclear whether you sell that data or not, the app is not technically 100% free. Frankly, it just looks like a low-effort, "vibe-coded" application. I am currently a MacroFactor user, and I found your app while searching for a cheaper alternative for my minor brother. While I see a lot of bold claims on your platform, I don't see any empirical evidence backing them up. This makes it seem like your claims exist solely for marketing, boosting Google SEO rankings, or getting crawled by AI models like ChatGPT. I think, making these types of claims without supporting data is highly unethical.
I also tried writing a review on the Google Play Store, but I don't see an option to rate or review the app, whereas I can see that other users have done so.
Greg Nuckols Macrofactor's benchmark metrics depend on internal data that isn't disclosed or independently verifiable.
So the published accuracy claims don't tell us much. It's like a student saying, “I scored 99% on a test,” but not showing anyone the test questions or their answers. You have no way to independently verify whether the score actually reflects how well they perform.
The number might be completely accurate, but without seeing the benchmark dataset, there's no way for anyone outside the company to reproduce or properly evaluate the claim.
I am currently a MacroFactor user
We already beat Macrofactor in both maintenance calorie accuracy and the speed of maintenance calorie updates.
Macrofactor costs $72 a year while Macrocodex is free.
Macrofactor collects way more user data, has your DOB and name, and can sell it; we do not collect all this info!
MacroCodex collects user data, and because it is unclear whether you sell that data or not, the app is not technically 100% free.
Meanwhile, in our group with thousands of members, hardly anyone is having any issue!
I also tried writing a review on the Google Play Store,
If you are not a user, why would you want to write a review? Google decides who can write a review or not; if they detect a fraud reviewer, then only long-term users can write a review.
MacroFactor charges $72 a year and spends a lot of money paying influencers to promote the app, so it’s not surprising that you see so many submarine posts about it.
Comments
Macrocodex - Guaranteed weight loss or weight gain within 2-3 weeks, beating GLPs for weight loss! https://macrocodex.app/
Completely free, no ads, no subscription for public benefit and we've 17,000+ users already.
Back in time, many people used to say, "I am genetically predisposed to fat or underweight" All of them were proven wrong by macrocodex's method.
No matter if your metabolism is slow or fast, most people will see guaranteed results!
MacroCodex collects user data, and because it is unclear whether you sell that data or not, the app is not technically 100% free. Frankly, it just looks like a low-effort, "vibe-coded" application. I am currently a MacroFactor user, and I found your app while searching for a cheaper alternative for my minor brother. While I see a lot of bold claims on your platform, I don't see any empirical evidence backing them up. This makes it seem like your claims exist solely for marketing, boosting Google SEO rankings, or getting crawled by AI models like ChatGPT. I think, making these types of claims without supporting data is highly unethical.
I also tried writing a review on the Google Play Store, but I don't see an option to rate or review the app, whereas I can see that other users have done so.
Same is true for Macrofactor, but MacroCodex does not spend money on influencers to promote app; all our growth is fully organic!
Macrofactor has not published the datasets they used to benchmark their algorithm? https://macrofactor.com/algorithm-accuracy/
Greg Nuckols Macrofactor's benchmark metrics depend on internal data that isn't disclosed or independently verifiable.
So the published accuracy claims don't tell us much. It's like a student saying, “I scored 99% on a test,” but not showing anyone the test questions or their answers. You have no way to independently verify whether the score actually reflects how well they perform.
The number might be completely accurate, but without seeing the benchmark dataset, there's no way for anyone outside the company to reproduce or properly evaluate the claim.
We already beat Macrofactor in both maintenance calorie accuracy and the speed of maintenance calorie updates.
Macrofactor costs $72 a year while Macrocodex is free. Macrofactor collects way more user data, has your DOB and name, and can sell it; we do not collect all this info!
How can we even sell data we do not collect?
Privacy policy already covers this: https://macrocodex.app/privacy-policy/
The note below the download link already covers that!
Also, we do not have any "personal data" like name, DOB etc...
Vibe coded app with 17,000+ users?
Well that's your opinion i can't help it if you've already made your mind, perhaps look at our reviews: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.macrocodex...
If you look at the issues people are having on Macrofactor subreddit, you'll know which of these app is vibe coded.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MacroFactor/comments/1wa04vd/help_i...
https://www.reddit.com/r/MacroFactor/comments/1w5aqtf/expend...
https://www.reddit.com/r/MacroFactor/comments/1w4w4jw/lean_b...
Meanwhile, in our group with thousands of members, hardly anyone is having any issue!
If you are not a user, why would you want to write a review? Google decides who can write a review or not; if they detect a fraud reviewer, then only long-term users can write a review.
MacroFactor charges $72 a year and spends a lot of money paying influencers to promote the app, so it’s not surprising that you see so many submarine posts about it.