2 ms·
Its indicative of a pattern of behavior where they want to upsell you into their ecosystem and keep you there. They don't even allow alternative harnesses on t
by athrowaway3z 16d ago
Its indicative of a pattern of behavior where they want to upsell you into their ecosystem and keep you there.
They don't even allow alternative harnesses on their subscription model. (But they do allow a agent-sdk that can pretend to be a generic compatible endpoint the alternative harnesses can use).
If you like your stuff overengineered, gated, and over-priced then by all means.
Its not even wrong from Anthropic because it's the path to most profit.
I'll take the opinion of people who have strong opinions about mild inconveniences.
Between my goals and Anthropic's bottom line, i want my goal to win out without needless inconveniences.
- thiht 16d agoThese arguments have nothing to do with Claude supporting or not supporting AGENTS.md.
- athrowaway3z 15d ago> Its indicative of a pattern of behavior If you think I'm wrong, and these arguments have nothing to do with it, just tell us what explains Claude not supporting AGENTS.md. Was it such a grand engineering challenge? Too many 'legacy' projects relying on both AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md and that has recently changed? I've made clear my belief on the reason behind it - branding decisions outweighing utility. Add something to the thread by sharing your version of a 'more likely' decision process that led to the choice to only now support it.
- thiht 15d agoDon’t forget the initial context, my point was that saying Anthropic is a disgrace for not supporting AGENTS.md was an overreaction, because it’s solved with a symlink. I don’t disagree with anything you say, I just don’t think AGENTS.md ever was a big deal, just a small annoyance
- jluysvi 15d agoBad take. You should feel bad.
- kelseyfrog 15d agoThis kind of comment doesn't belong on hacker news.