3 ms·
> The value in Claude Code is its harness If this was the case then Anthropic would be in a very bad spot. It's not, which is why people got so mad about bein
by deaux 6mo ago
> The value in Claude Code is its harness
If this was the case then Anthropic would be in a very bad spot.
It's not, which is why people got so mad about being forced to use it rather than better third party harnesses.
Pi is better than CC as a harness in almost every respect.
- enochthered 6mo agoAnthropic limiting Claude subs to Claude code is what pushed me away in the end because I wanted to keep using Pi.
- strel0k1 6mo agoJust sign up for an AWS account and use the Anthropic models through Bedrock which Pi can use.
- adrianN 6mo agoWhy use tricks to support a company that is hostile to your use case?
- seunosewa 6mo agoAPI costs are really high compared to subs.
- solenoid0937 6mo agoThen you aren't the target market.
- deaux 6mo agoWhat advantage are you saying this has compared to just directly going through the Anthropic provider? They are the same price.
- bizzletk 6mo agoCan you enumerate why?
- deaux 6mo ago- Claude Code has repeatedly had enormous token wastage bugs. Its agent interactions are also inefficient. These are the cause of many of the reports of "single prompt blew through 5-hour quota" even though it's a reasonable prompt. - It still lacks support for industry standards such as AGENTS.md - Extremely limited customization - Lots of bugs including often making it impossible to view pre-compaction messages inside Claude Code. - Obvious one: can't easily switch between Claude and non-Claude models - Resource usage More than anything, I haven't found a single thing that Pi does worse. All of it is just straight up better or the same.