Live data from Hacker News

Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

cursor.com

71–80 of 238 posts

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#71
post #62

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

Good point.

One of the things I've came to appreciate about the cli tools like Codex or Claude is that the interface is so limited that every feature they release is still limited and constrained to the same UX limitations, whereas those "funkier" IDEs change from month to month giving me further fatigue.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago. Impressive, yes. But they still don't have a moat...

And its still just a vscode fork

Cursor 3 is a complete rewrite, its no longer a fork.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#73

If these benches from their site hold up (they likely wont) Wouldn't this compress ai revenue like 15x quickly If they really have a 4.7 opus high equivalent at 1/16 the cost wouldn't this significantly effect all the current capex and planing Maybe they are getting elon to cover cost

I'm not sure that to be the case, it seems like bringing capabilities up and costs down merely serves to induce more demand.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#74

If these benches from their site hold up (they likely wont) Wouldn't this compress ai revenue like 15x quickly If they really have a 4.7 opus high equivalent at 1/16 the cost wouldn't this significantly effect all the current capex and planing Maybe they are getting elon to cover cost

AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling. The Jevons paradox applies here. The cheaper software is, the more software is written. There is not a finite demand for software.

> AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling

Every model release now has been straight price increases since what GPT 4 ? When was the last time a new flagship model decreased prices compared to the previous one ?

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#75
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 not X. That's Y.

Been a bit out of the loop.

What's wrong with using very short sentences like 'That's not X. That's Y.'?

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#76
post #62

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

Isn't there a cli version of cursor by now?

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#77
post #62

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

Damn do I feel the UI changes being a pain point.

It’s a near constant regression in my workflows. “Multiple agents” got destroyed recently, and the new interface for it some sort of command isn’t as good or reliable. Then you’ve got modals everywhere[1] and truncated bits (like long branch names) that make it insanely frustrating to use.

They’re constantly changing the UI without actually improving it at all. I’ll likely cancel it and use opencode for personal stuff with Deepseek and only use it at work because I have to. There was a time when I appreciated the harness but it’s becoming less useful, or at least noticeable, over time… all the while the actual UI becomes substantially more painful and awkward to use (like @ in the “agents” window being completely unable to find a file because it’s some sort of “global” scope).

One thing that surprises me about this whole segment is that JetBrains haven’t eaten these folks lunch. Their IDEs are leagues better than VSCode but their AI integration is awful by comparison (and the bar is low). I can’t even see how much of the context window I have left.

[1] it’s insane I have to answer questions in a tiny input box I cannot resize or adjust the size of. Let alone the fact the text area I input prompts into cannot be resized. Truly feels like the UI/UX is done by people without any experience.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#78
> Composer 2.5 is built on the same open-source checkpoint as Composer 2, Moonshot's Kimi K2.5.

Really nice to see they're giving credit to the company and I am optimistic Kimi K open models soon will outperform Opus models

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#79

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.

We moved off Cursor and onto Codex + Claude Code. Cost went from multiple thousand per engineer per month to about $500

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling. The Jevons paradox applies here. The cheaper software is, the more software is written. There is not a finite demand for software.

> AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling Every model release now has been straight price increases since what GPT 4 ? When was the last time a new flagship model decreased prices compared to the previous one ?

token efficiency
Post reply on HN