[adrian_b]

Have you read my entire comment?

I have already said that sometimes time-to-market is the most important, so that should be the priority, but the advantage of delivering immediately the application is only temporary, so you must improve quickly your first possibly vibe-coded implementation, otherwise better alternatives will be delivered by others.

Claude Code is an obvious example of this, because it has practically opened a new market, but because it has remained a mess now there are better alternatives.

What is wrong is not generating instantly a proof-of-concept application that barely works and using it in the beginning, but continuing to build upon that even after you had enough time to rewrite it.

[all_factz]

They would have to trade off building new features for refactoring. It seems they consider shipping more important, and that as long as the existing features mostly work, that’s good enough. As customers, we have to ask: do we agree? Do we want features over stability? I think the answer is yes, at least for me (and the market seems to agree). But it’s certainly a risk Anthropic is taking.

I will note that this strategy only really makes sense because Anthropic controls the compute. If open-source harnesses could also use Claude max plans, then they’d have to focus much more on stability and quality, or just build an open-source harness themselves, or probably better yet, get out of the harness-building business altogether. So they’re gambling on staying ahead of open-source models, which seems like it’s been a good bet so far, but we’ll see.

[simianwords]

The advantage is definitely not temporary as can be seen by how many people use codex vs Claude code. Claude code works just fine and I have zero issues at usability level. Could they have more features? Yes but I see that they are shipping quick. It is obvious to me that they took the right balance between time to market and clan code

[nonameiguess]

These discussions are insane. No agentic coding product, including Claude Code, has existed for a full year yet, but people are stating with extreme confidence who has "won" the competition to be the leading or even only provider of this kind of product and having heated arguments over whether or not we can consider the current state of the market to be temporary or not. Imagine having this same argument about Lycos versus Yahoo! in 1995.

[motbus3]

I understand your thoughts, but I don't think they will ever make that existing code good. Not sure if they want to and not sure if they can.