111–120 of 245 posts
Not sure what problem it solves on top of Claude Code. I tried it a while back when this was posted but didn't find it very useful. This being a desktop app didn't make sense to me.
I tried it some weeks ago, but I went back to the CLI. Honestly, I've been a GUI app for most of my life, preferring proper GUI tools to Terminal tools, including running the GUI versions of VIM and Emacs (during my brief emacs stint). However, over the past 2 weeks I've slowly transitioned to a full cli development setup with wezterm, neovim, lazygit, fzf, fish & Claude Code. I enjoy working like this so much.
Don't worry, someday you'll grow wiser and maybe you'll spend some time living as a CLI executable.
On the one hand, it's good that we're seeing a lot of exploration in this space. On the other, the trend seems to be everyone developing a million disparate tools that largely replicate the same functionality with the primary variation being greater-or-lesser lock-in to a particular set of services. This is about the third tool this week I've taken a quick look at and thought "I don't see what this offers me that I d…
And then the providers ship a landmark feature or overhaul themselves. Especially as their models advance. Wrappers constantly live in the support and feature parity of today. Anthropic’s Claude Code will look a hell of a lot different a year from now, probably more like an OS for developers and Claude Agent non-tech. Regardless they are eating the stack. Pricing/usage will be very simple - a fixed subscription and w…
Personally, I think it's far more likely that a year from now either SotA models will have shifted elsewhere or Anthropic will have changed their pricing model to something less favorable than the current MAX plans. Either of those scenarios could suddenly result in the current Claude subscription models either not existing or no longer being the screaming deal they are now. I think it's exceedingly unlikely we see any major provider go to an unmetered business model any time soon.
And if you've built your entire workflow around tooling specific to Anthropic's services, suddenly you have an even bigger problem than just switching to a more cost effective provider. That's one of the bigger reasons I'm very skeptical of these wrappers around CC generally.
Even Claude Code itself isn't doing anything that couldn't and hasn't been done by other tools other than being tied to a really cheap way to use Claude.
Doesn’t make any sense to me. GUIs are discoverability tools. LLMs are essentially a runtime with a natural language interface. Why would it need a GUI wrapper? By definition its discoverability is already 100%.
LLMs are that, but claude code is not.
for info: "Claudia" as a name happens to be already in use by another open source project: Claudia the audio session management tool (for the JACK/LADISH APIs i.e. typically on Linux), part of the KxStudio audio tools suite by Filipe Coelho (falkTX) and the KxStudio community: https://kx.studio/Applications:Claudia
Nobody cares dude. It's a totally different thing. Names can overlap if the difference is obvious. What people do care about is where names imply some relationship that isn't true. In this case the name Claudia strongly implies that this is an official Claude-related product. They'll get a cease and desist soon enough if this actually becomes popular.
Thanks, OP!
> Claudia's Features: Everything You Need, Beautifully Designed I’d really love to know what specifically about this is beautiful. Steve Jobs says it and for 20+ years every tech bro parrots it mindlessly. “Oh do I think I did a good job on this? It must be beautifully designed.”
On the one hand, it's good that we're seeing a lot of exploration in this space. On the other, the trend seems to be everyone developing a million disparate tools that largely replicate the same functionality with the primary variation being greater-or-lesser lock-in to a particular set of services. This is about the third tool this week I've taken a quick look at and thought "I don't see what this offers me that I d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And then the providers ship a landmark feature or overhaul themselves. Especially as their models advance. Wrappers constantly live in the support and feature parity of today. Anthropic’s Claude Code will look a hell of a lot different a year from now, probably more like an OS for developers and Claude Agent non-tech. Regardless they are eating the stack. Pricing/usage will be very simple - a fixed subscription and w…
I'm more optimistic. Open source and open weights will eat this whole space. Training is capital-intensive, yes, but so far it appears that there will always be some entities willing to train models and release them for free. All it takes is a slowdown at the frontier for the open models to catch up. The money is in the hardware, not the software.
On the one hand, it's good that we're seeing a lot of exploration in this space. On the other, the trend seems to be everyone developing a million disparate tools that largely replicate the same functionality with the primary variation being greater-or-lesser lock-in to a particular set of services. This is about the third tool this week I've taken a quick look at and thought "I don't see what this offers me that I d…
Does this sandbox the agents? All I want is a way to keep the agents from writing to and reading from arbitrary places on the filesystem. I want that enforced using operating system primitives rather than a pinky promise with an LLM. It already worries me that the Cursor agents occasionally try to perform operations with full absolute paths, which they wouldn't be able to know if they were properly sandboxed to the c…