←back to thread

820 points rcchen | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.623s | source
Show context
extr ◴[] No.44537358[source]
IMO other than the Microsoft IP issue, I think the biggest thing that has shifted since this acquisition was first in the works is Claude Code has absolutely exploded. Forking an IDE and all the expense that comes with that feels like a waste of effort, considering the number of free/open source CLI agentic tools that are out there.

Let's review the current state of things:

- Terminal CLI agents are several orders of magnitude less $$$ to develop than forking an entire IDE.

- CC is dead simple to onboard (use whatever IDE you're using now, with a simple extension for some UX improvements).

- Anthropic is free to aggressively undercut their own API margins (and middlemen like Cursor) in exchange for more predictable subscription revenue + training data access.

What does Cursor/Windsurf offer over VS Code + CC?

- Tab completion model (Cursor's remaining moat)

- Some UI niceties like "add selection to chat", and etc.

Personally I think this is a harbinger of where things are going. Cursor was fastest to $900M ARR and IMO will be fastest back down again.

replies(41): >>44537388 #>>44537433 #>>44537440 #>>44537454 #>>44537465 #>>44537526 #>>44537594 #>>44537613 #>>44537619 #>>44537711 #>>44537749 #>>44537830 #>>44537848 #>>44537853 #>>44537964 #>>44538026 #>>44538053 #>>44538066 #>>44538259 #>>44538272 #>>44538316 #>>44538366 #>>44538384 #>>44538404 #>>44538553 #>>44538681 #>>44538894 #>>44538939 #>>44539043 #>>44539254 #>>44539528 #>>44540250 #>>44540304 #>>44540339 #>>44540409 #>>44541020 #>>44541176 #>>44541551 #>>44541786 #>>44542617 #>>44542673 #
adamoshadjivas ◴[] No.44537454[source]
Agreed on everything. Just to add, not only anthropic is offering CC at like a 500% loss, they restricted sonnet/opus 4 access to windsurf, and jacked up their enterprise deal to Cursor. The increase in price was so big that it forced cursor to make that disastrous downgrade to their plans.

I think only way Cursor and other UX wrappers still win is if on device models or at least open source models catch up in the next 2 years. Then i can see a big push for UX if models are truly a commodity. But as long as claude is much better then yes they hold all the cards. (And don't have a bigger company to have a civil war with like openai)

replies(8): >>44537599 #>>44537888 #>>44537928 #>>44540530 #>>44541463 #>>44541798 #>>44541868 #>>44542573 #
teruakohatu ◴[] No.44537888[source]
> CC at like a 500% loss

Do you have a citation for this?

It might be at a loss, but I don’t think it is that extravagant.

replies(3): >>44537924 #>>44539073 #>>44539146 #
resonious ◴[] No.44537924[source]
I'm also curious about this. Claude Code feels very expensive to me, but at the same time I don't have much perspective (nothing to compare it to, really, other than Codex or other agent editors I guess. And CC is way better so likely worth the extra money anyway)
replies(1): >>44538007 #
harikb ◴[] No.44538007[source]
I think GP is talking about Claude Code Max 100 & 200 plans. They are very reasonable compared to anything else that has per-use token usage.

I am on Max and I can work 5 hrs+ a day easily. It does fall back to Sonnet pretty fast, but I don't seem to notice any big differece.

replies(2): >>44538048 #>>44538683 #
e1g ◴[] No.44538048[source]
Yes, my CC usage is regularly $50-$100 per day, so their Max plan is absolutely great value that I don’t expect to last.
replies(4): >>44538359 #>>44538423 #>>44538898 #>>44542316 #
jhickok ◴[] No.44538359[source]
Can you give me an idea of how much interaction would be $50-$100 per day? Like are you pretty constantly in a back and forth with CC? And if you wouldn’t mind, any chance you can give me an idea of productivity gains pre/post LLM?
replies(3): >>44538451 #>>44538463 #>>44539883 #
e1g ◴[] No.44538463[source]
Yes, a lot of usage, I’d guess top 10% among my peers. I do 6-10hrs of constant iterating across mid-size codebases of 750k tokens. CC is set to use Opus by default, which further drives up costs.

Estimating productivity gains is a flame war I don’t want to start, but as a signal: if the CC Max plan goes up 10x in price, I’m still keeping my subscription.

I maintain top-tier subscription to every frontier service (~$1k/mo) and throughout the week spend multiple hours with each of Cursor, Amp, Augment, Windsurf, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, but keep on defaulting to Claude Code.

replies(4): >>44538573 #>>44538575 #>>44538910 #>>44541859 #
foolishgame ◴[] No.44538573[source]
I am curious what kind of code development you are doing with so many subscriptions?

Are you doing front end backend full stack or model development itself?

Are you destilling models for training your own?

I have never heard someone using so much subscription?

Is this for your full time job or startup?

Why not use qwen or deep seek and host it yourself?

I am impressed with what you are doing.

replies(1): >>44539445 #
e1g ◴[] No.44539445[source]
I’m a founder/CTO of an enterprise SaaS, and I code everything from data modeling, to algos, backend integrations, frontend architecture, UI widgets, etc. All in TypeScript, which is perfectly suited to LLMs because we can fit the types and repo map into context without loading all code.

As to “why”: I’ve been coding for 25 years, and LLMs is the first technology that has a non-linear impact on my output. It’s simultaneously moronic and jaw-dropping. I’m good at what I do (eg, merged fixes into Node) and Claude/o3 regularly finds material edge cases in my code that I was confident in. Then they add a test case (as per our style), write a fix, and update docs/examples within two minutes.

I love coding and the art&craft of software development. I’ve written millions of lines of revenue generating code, and made millions doing it. If someone forced me to stop using LLMs in my production process, I’d quit on the spot.

Why not self host: open source models are a generation behind SOTA. R1 is just not in the same league as the pro commercial models.

replies(4): >>44539609 #>>44539686 #>>44540495 #>>44541076 #
1. throwaway2037 ◴[] No.44541076[source]

    > I’ve written millions of lines of revenue generating code
This is a wild claim.

Approx 250 working days in a year. 25 years coding. Just one million lines would be phenom output, at 160 lines per day forever. Now you are claiming multiple millions? Come on.

replies(2): >>44541322 #>>44541390 #
2. codedokode ◴[] No.44541322[source]
100-200 lines per day, written, debugged, tested and deployed, is normal performance, isn't it? I think I could do it if worked for 8 hours.
3. ohdeargodno ◴[] No.44541390[source]
Uh... Totaling +1000 at the end of a work week is an easy thing to do, especially if working on a new/evolving product.