←back to thread

What makes Claude Code so damn good

(minusx.ai)
469 points samuelstros | 6 comments | 23 Aug 25 19:07 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
syntaxing ◴[23 Aug 25 20:00 UTC] No.44998675[source]▶
I don’t know if I’m doing something wrong. I was using Sonnet 4 with GitHub Copilot. Recently a week ago switched to Claude Code. I find GitHub Copilot solves problem and bugs way better than Claude Code. For some reason, Claude Code seems very lazy. Has anyone experience something similar?
replies(5): >>44998728 #>>44998732 #>>44998821 #>>44998958 #>>45001414 #
1. riazrizvi ◴[24 Aug 25 04:31 UTC] No.45001414[source]▶
I use ChatGPT, and I have used Claude several times. I’ve not found Claude to be better. I’ve come to the conclusion that all these posts asking why Claude is so good at coding, are all part of some marketing approach. I think it’s tied to how Claude prefers to hook into repos, I think maybe it’s tied to a business strategy of acquiring a mega code dataset. So they are especially motivated to push this narrative vs say OpenAI or other players.

(I don’t use any clients that answer coding questions by using the context of my repos).

replies(1): >>45001727 #
2. tcoff91 ◴[24 Aug 25 05:49 UTC] No.45001727[source]▶
If you aren’t using a client that automatically uses the context of your repos then you don’t understand why people like Claude. You need to use the Claude Code CLI in order to really get the best results.
replies(2): >>45004744 #>>45004750 #
3. ◴[24 Aug 25 15:02 UTC] No.45004744[source]▶
4. riazrizvi ◴[24 Aug 25 15:03 UTC] No.45004750[source]▶
I’m not in the market for a solution where I need to trust some company with my IP. I understand that Claude also wants to serve my use case, so I take these headlines at face value as also applying to me, since they don’t qualify themselves with ‘Claude Code CLI’.
replies(1): >>45014030 #
5. tcoff91 ◴[25 Aug 25 14:08 UTC] No.45014030{3}[source]▶
‘Claude Code’ refers to the CLI.
replies(1): >>45019378 #
6. riazrizvi ◴[25 Aug 25 21:41 UTC] No.45019378{4}[source]▶
Oh. I stand corrected.