← Back to context

Comment by dbmnt

14 hours ago

I disagree. I've tried Codex, and two of the provider-agnostic harnesses (Pi and OMP), and I strongly prefer Claude Code.

9 comments

dbmnt

Reply
alexfortin  8 hours ago

I disagree. I've tried Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode and Pi, and I _strongly_ prefer Pi.

I suppose it truly boils down to personal taste? My take[0] on AI including harnesses.

[0]: https://a.l3x.in/ai

  • ffsm8  8 hours ago

    piagent vs Claude code are completely different target audiences...

    If you drew a venn diagram of their prospective users, the overlap ain't gonna be big. I get that they're both harnesses, but claude is clearly trying to optimize for the agentic development loop, while piagent is more about hand holding - unless you add the agentic features yourself (which is pretty easy, but again completely different target audience to cc).

Degorath  8 hours ago

That's quite surprising, of the set {Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OMP} I must say I find CC to be the worst.

They all have some annoying downsides and I use CC the most, but it's gotten to the point where I'm for sure actively shopping around for better harnesses.

dizhn  7 hours ago

I tried the Claude $20 plan for two weeks and burned the rest of it due to how much token anxiety it gave me. And I'm not ready to keep throwing money at it for it to become usable. Gemini models are actually fine for me as an amateur+ I found especially since they have regional pricing and a very generous side items package.

I use the models but not the "harness" though. Not directly anyway. I am still handicapped by the CLI when running in Paseo. Both antigravity and agy are toys compared to what has been available for at least two years.