51–60 of 238 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are still a vscode fork with no moat? Like they lost about 70% of users in half a year which goes to show how there is not even the tiniest of moat.
I feel like they've been targeting enterprise pretty hard. I know my company uses them, and the companies that hire us also use Cursor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't a large user base and the data collected from those users a moat of sorts?
A moat is when you have something other's can't easily get. Every MAG 7 / FAANG company already has more users and more data... That's not a moat. That's traction.
That's Y.
Ok this might be weird but I've moved everyone in my 4 person team to our team plan and costs seem to have sky rocketed compared to the individual plans. Where before most people spent 20-100 USD, now the total bill is more like 1k USD. I haven't gone into the details but it feels like I'm being scammed.
The model is (like Composer 2) based on Kimi K2.5 and they claim SOTA performance for 1/10th of the cost. The tweet also mentions that they've started a new model from scratch on Colossus 2 (xAI/SpaceX Cluster). Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago.
The model is (like Composer 2) based on Kimi K2.5 and they claim SOTA performance for 1/10th of the cost. The tweet also mentions that they've started a new model from scratch on Colossus 2 (xAI/SpaceX Cluster). Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago.
It's still a VsCode fork just now with a Kimi fine tune and still no moat... I won't debate that it turns out none of this mattered when it came to being as successful company though and kinda makes anyone who tried to roll their own instead of fork look a little silly.
How I see this is that its so important to bundle the model with the right tooling.
Like a racecar, having the best engine doesn't help if the rest of the car lacks other winning properties (reliability, aerodynics etc).
So for Cursor, which IMO, they put themself in a strong position by having both a solid IDE __and__ a solid+cost efficient model. Those two working great in combination for the task they are designed to solve (coding) is more important than benchmarks
I wonder why they didn’t train off Kimi 2.6, I hope is it because they already had a good base and not that they messed up that relationship.