← Back to context

Comment by altmanaltman

19 hours ago

> the reality is that Claude Code is what makes Anthropic so relevant in the programming more, much more than the Claude models themselves

but Claude Code cannot run without Claude models? What do you mean?

7 comments

altmanaltman

Reply
boh  18 hours ago

Relative to their competitors who also have comparable models, Anthropic's design choices in effectively managing context with a very well thought out and coherent design, makes them stand out.

  • F7F7F7  10 hours ago

    If you enjoy working out of the terminal and CLI/TUI's then it's not even close. Gemini, Codex, CoPilot, and every other CLI I can think of are awful. Stumbling, bumbling and you'd be lucky to keep your file tree in tact even with tight permissions (short of a sandbox).

    Claude Code feels like my early days when pair programming was all the rage.

    If you have the time OpenCode comes the closest and lets you work across providers seamless.

  • dkdcio  18 hours ago

    (i.e. competitors can still use Claude models but haven’t achieved the same DevEx as CC so far, at least in my opinion and many others)

    also while I was initially on the “they should open source” boat, and I’m happy Codex CLI did, there are a ton of benefits to keeping to closed source. just look at how much spam and dumb community drama OpenAI employees now have to deal with on GitHub. I increasingly think it’s a smart moved to keep it closed source and iterate without as direct community involvement on the codebase for now