HyperTeamsHyperTeams vs Make
Make runs scenarios of modules you wire together on a canvas, in its cloud. HyperTeams takes work whose steps cannot be drawn in advance, in a sentence, and has the agent on your computer carry it out inside your folders.
Why HyperTeams over Make
The biggest split is whether the flow has to be drawn. Make builds even its AI agents on the same canvas, and a person draws the flow around them. HyperTeams takes the intent as a sentence, and an agent such as Claude Code or ChatGPT Codex decides the order and does the work inside a folder on your machine. HyperTeams does not replace Make: we decided not to build boxes and arrows, and for a procedure you can draw, Make is the more reliable tool. The two sit side by side.
A sentence, not a diagram
A scenario exists once you wire modules and draw routes. AI agents are built on that canvas too, with rules and approval points you set.
Give the intent in a sentence and the agent decides the order. You read the result, plus approvals where you want them.
It works on the files in your folders
It runs in Make's cloud and works through connected apps and the HTTP module. The working folders on your computer sit outside the scenario.
The agent opens and edits files inside the folders you registered. What changed and when is kept in the change history.
It runs on the subscription you have
Every module action spends a credit. AI agents run on Make's AI provider or an LLM key you obtain.
It uses the Claude subscription, ChatGPT subscription or Google account you already have. Cost per job and what is left sit on one screen.
When others assign work to your machine
From the Teams plan, team roles split access to scenarios and connections. It is not built for assigning work to someone's computer.
HyperTeams Connect sets policy per folder and command, with pre-approval per item. Who approved what, and when, is kept as a policy audit trail.
HyperTeams vs Make
- MakeIn Make's cloud. An on-prem agent for reaching local networks is on Enterprise.
- HyperTeams SystemExecution stays on that machine — the control room sits on top rather than taking it over.
- HyperTeams ConnectIt does not touch execution; it receives what the control room reports.
- MakeSeveral scenarios run at once.
- HyperTeams SystemOne card per job — hand it five and five run side by side, in five folders.
- HyperTeams ConnectThe control room does this
- MakePer-module output and logs in scenario history.
- HyperTeams SystemStatus, a summary of the answer, and an unread marker, all in one list.
- HyperTeams ConnectThe control room does this
- MakeIt runs in the cloud, so windows do not matter.
- HyperTeams SystemResident, and it records progress: it continues after you close the window, and a tunnel shows it on your phone.
- HyperTeams ConnectThe control room does this
- MakeEach scenario has its own run interval; the minimum depends on the plan.
- HyperTeams SystemYou pick a time on screen, and a failure notifies you.
- HyperTeams ConnectThe control room does this
- MakeThere are no machines; you see one Make organization and its teams.
- HyperTeams SystemIt stops at that one machine. It does not know what runs on the next one.
- HyperTeams ConnectA control room per machine, all of them in one list — including which machine is awake.
- MakeTeams and team roles from the Teams plan; custom roles on Enterprise.
- HyperTeams SystemIt assumes the owner of the machine. The screen is behind one password.
- HyperTeams ConnectAccounts and roles, policy per folder and command, and pre-approval per item.
- MakeRun history plus edits and activations; retention depends on the plan.
- HyperTeams SystemIt keeps that machine's run history. There is no notion of an approval.
- HyperTeams ConnectWho approved what, and when, kept as a policy audit trail.
- MakeEach module action counts as one credit.
- HyperTeams SystemIt shows cost per job on that machine, with no owner attached.
- HyperTeams ConnectAttributed to a person and a team, with ceilings.
- MakeA free plan, then subscriptions priced by credits. Enterprise is a contract.
- HyperTeams SystemOne command to install, using the Claude or ChatGPT account you already have.
- HyperTeams ConnectOnly the features that cross into a team are metered in credits.
Checked against each product's official documentation as of 2026-09-23. Their products change, and when they do this table becomes wrong — tell us and we will fix it.
Make docsWhat the control room does, and what Connect does
HyperTeams is two products. Which of them answers each row above is exactly where the boundary sits.
HyperTeams System
Runs the work on your machine
A program you install with one command. It assigns work per folder, runs jobs in parallel, and keeps going after you close the window. While you work alone, this is all you need.
- Where it runs
- Several jobs at once
- How far along it is
- If you close the window
- At a set time
HyperTeams Connect
Makes it something others rely on, unattended
It starts paying the moment there is a second machine and a second person: pooling machines into one list, filtering work others assign through approval, keeping an audit trail of what happened, and splitting cost per person.
- Several machines in one place
- When someone else assigns work
- Retracing it later
- What it cost
When do you move up a rung?
- L1 · Observe
You watch several machines. The moment there is a second one.
- L2 · Share
The team sees what was asked for. The moment you start sharing one password.
- L3 · Delegate
Others assign work and see the results. This is where approval, policy, and audit earn their place.
Running both
You don't remove or migrate what you use today. Here is how to layer HyperTeams on top of it.
- 1
Leave your Make scenarios as they are
Keep the drawable procedures running in Make. There is nothing to migrate.
- 2
Install the control room with one command
Install it on the computer that has your working folders, register the system in the app, and paste the token to connect.
- 3
Hand over only the step a person used to sit in
The step left out of the scenario because "a person has to look at this" is where HyperTeams fits. HyperTeams Connect takes work through an API as well as chat, so an HTTP module can hand over one item and the two run side by side.
Which one should you pick?
When to just use Make
When you want to see the flow as you fix it
You refine a scenario on the canvas while checking each module's output. An AI agent's decisions show up step by step in the reasoning panel on the same canvas.
When the apps to connect are already decided
More than 3,000 apps are wired in, and the HTTP module calls any API that is missing. It suits procedures where the same input must give the same output.
When it must run regardless of any computer
It runs in Make's cloud, so no machine has to stay on. Paid plans can schedule down to one-minute intervals.
When HyperTeams is the answer
When the procedure cannot be drawn in advance
HyperTeams SystemWork that does not reduce to "when this, do that" (different material each time, a judgement each time) is where HyperTeams fits. You hand over the intent in a sentence.
When the work lives in folders on your computer
HyperTeams SystemIf the documents, code or data are on your machine, the agent opens and edits them in that folder. You open and fix the result right there, and the change history is kept.
When you want several of your agents running
HyperTeams SystemPick Claude Code, ChatGPT Codex or Antigravity per job, whichever you have installed. Hand over five and five run together, and they keep going after you close the window.
When a colleague assigns work to your machine
HyperTeams ConnectInstead of sharing an account, HyperTeams Connect takes it through policy and pre-approval. Who approved what, and whose cost it was, stays on record.
A layer, not a replacement
Put it on top of what you already run
One command to install. Nothing you use today gets removed or moved — you only add the command screen above it.
curl -fsSL https://hyperteams.net/install.sh | bashKeep reading
- HyperTeams vs Claude Code
- HyperTeams vs OpenAI Codex
- HyperTeams vs Gemini CLI
- HyperTeams vs Cline
- HyperTeams vs OpenHands
- HyperTeams vs Conductor
- HyperTeams vs Claude Squad
- HyperTeams vs Vibe Kanban
- HyperTeams vs Orca
- HyperTeams vs Paseo
- HyperTeams vs tmux
- HyperTeams vs Cursor
- HyperTeams vs GitHub Copilot
- HyperTeams vs Devin
- HyperTeams vs OpenClaw
- HyperTeams vs Hermes Agent
- HyperTeams vs Manus
- HyperTeams vs Lindy
- HyperTeams vs NotebookLM
- HyperTeams vs n8n
- HyperTeams vs Zapier
Common questions
Make is a cloud automation service where you build scenarios by wiring modules on a canvas. It connects to more than 3,000 apps, and you can build AI agents on the same canvas. Usage is counted in credits.
Not for drawn scenarios. HyperTeams deliberately does not build a no-code canvas, and Make is more reliable for procedures you can draw. For work you cannot draw in advance, or work an agent has to do inside folders on your computer, HyperTeams is the fit. Most people use the two side by side.
It does: you build them on the canvas, follow their decisions step by step in the reasoning panel, and set rules and manual approval points. HyperTeams is not a place to build a new agent; it is a control room that hands an entire job, in a sentence, to the Claude Code, ChatGPT Codex or Antigravity already on your computer.
No. Make counts module actions in credits. HyperTeams System runs on the Claude or ChatGPT subscription or Google account you already have, and only the HyperTeams Connect features that cross into a team are metered in credits.
HyperTeams runs on your own machine, so scheduled runs and outside access work only while that computer is awake. We suggest installing it on a machine you leave on. A procedure that must run regardless of any one computer belongs in Make.