Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Claude Code

Anthropic is back and cementing its place as the creator of the best coding models—bravo!

With Claude Code, the goal is clearly to take a slice of Cursor and its competitors' market share. I expected this to happen eventually.

The app layer has barely any moat, so any successful app with the potential to generate significant revenue will eventually be absorbed by foundation model companies in their quest for growth and profits.

I think an argument could be reasonably made that the app layer is the only moat. It’s more likely Anthropic eventually has to acquire Cursor to cement a position here than they out-compete it. Where, why, what brand and what product customers swipe their credit cards for matters — a lot.

hi! I've been using Claude Code in a very complementary way to my IDE, and one of the reasons we chose the terminal is because you can open it up inside whichever IDE you want!

if Claude Code offers a better experience, users will rapidly move from cursor to Claude Code.

Claude is for Code: https://medium.com/thoughts-on-machine-learning/claude-is-fo...

(1) That's a big if. It requires building a team specialized in delivering what Cursor has already delivered which is no small task. There are probably only a handful of engineers on the planet that have or can be incentivized to develop the product intuition the Cursor founders have developed in the market already. And even then; I'm an aspiring engineer / PM at Anthropic. Why would I choose to spend all of my creative energy copying what somebody else is doing for the same pay I'd get working on something greenfield, or more interesting to me, or more likely to get me a promotion?

(2) It's not clear to me that users (or developers) actually behave this way in practice. Engineering is a bit of a cargo cult. Cursor got popular because it was good but it also got popular because it got popular.

> It requires building a team specialized in delivering what Cursor has already delivered which is no small task.

There are several AIDEs out there, and based on working with Cursor, VS Code, and Windsurf there doesn't seem to be much of a difference (although I like Windsurf best). What moat does Cursor have?

Just chiming in to say that AIDEs (Artificial Intelligence Development Environments, I suppose) is such a good term for these new tools imo.

It's one thing to retrofit LLMs into existing tools but I'm more curious how this new space will develop as time goes on. Already stuff like the Warp terminal is pretty useful in day to day use.

Who knows, maybe this time next year we'll see more people programming by voice input instead of typing. Something akin to Talon Voice supercharged by a local LLM hopefully.

I wonder if they will offer competitive request counts against Cursor. Right now, at least for me, the biggest downside to Claude is how fast I blow through the limits (Pro) and hit a wall.

At least with Cursor, I can use all "premium" 500 completions and either buy more, or be patient for throttled responses.

In my opinion you're vastly overestimating how much of a moat Cursor has. In broad strokes, in builds an index of your repo for easier referencing and then adds some handy UI hooks so you can talk to the model, there really isn't that much more going on. Yes, the autocomplete is nice at times, but it's at best like pair programming with a new hire. Every big player in the AI space could replicate what they've done, it's only a matter of whether they consider it worth the investment or not given how fast the whole field is moving.

Conversely, I think you're overestimating the impact of the value (or lack thereof) of technology over distribution and market timing.

If Zed gets its agentice editing mode in I’m moving away from Cursor again. I’m only with them because they currently have the best experience there. Their moat is zero, and I’d much rather use purely API models than a Cursor subscription.

Reread the blog post, and I suspect Cursor will remain much more competitive on pricing! No specifics, but likely far exceeding typical Cursor costs for a typical developer. Maybe it's worth it, though? Look forward to trying.

>Claude Code consumes tokens for each interaction. Typical usage costs range from $5-10 per developer per day, but can exceed $100 per hour during intensive use.

Cursor has no models, they dont even have an editor its just vscode

> Reread the blog post, and I suspect Cursor will remain much more competitive on pricing!

Until Cursor burns through their funding and gives up or increases their price.

And Typescript simply doesn't work for me. I have tried uninstalling extensions. It is always "Initializing". I reload windows, etc. It eventually might get there, I can't tell what's going on. At the moment, AI is not worth the trade-off of no Typescript support.

They do actually have custom models for autocomplete (which requires very low latency) and applying edits from the LLM (which turns out to require another LLM step, as they can’t reliably output perfect diffs)

My entire company of 100+ engineers is using cursor on multiple large typescript repos with zero issues. Must be some kind of local setup issue on your end, it definitely works just fine. In fact I've seen consistently more useful / less junky results from using LLMs for code with typescript than any other language, particularly when cursor's "shadow workspace" option is enabled.