Side by side

open-computer-use vs Screenbox

Both stand on ai computer use agents. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.

open-computer-use

Free plan APILinuxMac+2

Open Computer Use provides a broad set of local desktop controls for AI agents. Review platform permissions and the current Windows-only window-level tools before adopting it.

Visit open-computer-use

Screenbox combines agent-controlled desktops with live oversight, snapshots, and reusable session knowledge. Its maker explicitly warns that Docker isolation is not a hardened sandbox, so deployment and API access require care.

Visit Screenbox

The facts

	open-computer-use	Screenbox
Free plan	Yes	Yes
Open source	Not published	Not published
Runs on	API, Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Windows	API, Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Web, Windows
Lowest paid plan	Free or on request	Free or on request
Plans published	1	1
Maker	Not published	Not published
Website	github.com	screenbox.dev
On ai computer use agents	#5 of 24	#9 of 24

open-computer-use: what it does well

Runs locally on the user's machine.
Core tools cover app discovery and desktop actions.
Setup guidance names four MCP clients.
Free software under the MIT license.

What to know first

macOS 14 or later requires two permissions.
Linux requires AT-SPI2 and a signed-in desktop session.
Additional window-level tools are currently Windows-only.

Screenbox: what it does well

Includes Chromium with DevTools and extensions.
Provides 21 MCP tools across more than 100 actions.
Users can watch agents and take mouse and keyboard control.
Snapshots preserve files and browser sessions.
The maker says deployment data stays on user infrastructure.

What to know first

Docker containers are not hardened sandboxes.
Each desktop uses about 2 GB RAM.
The maker advises against publicly exposing the MCP API.

Alternatives to open-computer-use Alternatives to Screenbox The whole list