| > It is not worth switching to Pi except as a hobbyist. Permit me to paraphrase slightly. "It is not worth switching to Linux except as a hobbyist. Something that is overlooked: the mainstream OSs have a huge advantage ....". You are in good company. In 1999, Bill Gates confidently dismissed Linux as a threat, arguing it lacked the central control, features, and graphical interface needed to compete in the commercial market. Back to the article, quoting: > Pi might be built with Pi, but we’re quite far off today from where Bun and OpenClaw already are: fully detached, automated software engineering. Please don't call it software engineering. I've been programming for 40 years, and most of that time had to put up with the derision from the other engineering disciplines: "If civil engineering built things like software engineers, the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilisation". It hurt because it was true. It's still often true for things like web pages, but for the things I use like Linux and vim, it hasn't been true for a long, long while. We have finally mastered how to repeatedly build solid, reliable software. Which is why I'm an Anthropic refugee. Opus is definitely the best for coding, but claude-cli + bun is the most unreliable piece of crap I've had the misfortune to come across in a while. Sadly I can't afford their API pricing, so either my principles or Opus had to give. I went to pi and an open-source model. The difference between the top open-source models and Opus are noticeable, but not drastic, unlike the difference between pi and claude-cli. pi has proved to be solid, fast, have a transparent design, and be customisable in the old Linux way ("do one thing, and do it well"). I pray that will never change. |