4 ms·

>Anthropic has the obviously the better product According to what metrics does Anthropic have the better product?

• SpicyLemonZest 5mo ago
  Reported number of business users, although as with all these metrics I feel obligated to emphasize the caveat that most analysis of the AI labs' finances is speculative. OpenAI remains dominant in the consumer chatbot space, but that's so obviously going to be commoditized that I don't think it matters.
  • phil21 5mo ago
    Since the source code leak of Claud Code, is there an actual believable moat whatsoever any longer? I’m not nearly an expert at any level, but it seems to me the models themselves are converging on “good enough” for coding, with the real differentiator being the harness and tooling. From a bystander and casual user perspective it all seems running as fast as it can to commoditization to me. I’m certainly the dumb money here so won’t be investing short or long for any of these. But I do find it interesting!
    • bjt 5mo ago
      The Claude Code client source was never their moat. There are plenty of other companies with equivalent tools (gemini cli, cursor cli, augment, codex, etc.) The models that it talks to are far more important. Not to say you're wrong about commoditization. I don't think these companies will be able to raise their prices and keep them there to make enough money to keep building models like they've been doing.
      • orwin 5mo ago
        I disagree, Claude harness is the majority of its added value imho. I still use old Claude models over free models for the chain of thought and execution capacity, when free models have largely reached Sonnet 4.5 level and even surpassed it.