Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

qazinform.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 512 posts

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#91

Post by Leynos »

jnovek wrote: post #50
rjh29 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy hearing devs on this site claim Claude is 10x better than all other AI solutions. I think it is fomo. Claude $LATEST_VERSION is perceived as the best and anything else is "missing out". New version comes out? Suddenly the old version is worthless, how on earth did anyone get work done with that? Same reason people buy the RTX 4090 and 5090 cards - overpriced but they must have the "best". Never mind the di…

I’ve been using DeepSeek V4 in OpenCode exclusively for about a month. I think it’s great, but coming from Claude Code it did feel like going back in time by ~6 months in model capabilities. This isn’t a big deal to me for what I do, but the difference is definitely there.

Deepseek v4 Pro is like Opus 4.5 or GPT 5.2, but costs pennies on the pound for API. Which is to say, I should definitely be using it more to let my Codex and Claude subs go further.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#93

Post by tornikeo »

bikelang wrote: post #68

OpenAI’s models could be materially better than Anthropic’s and I still wouldn’t use them because I don’t want to support Altman.

Do you hold any amount of power in the world? A project that people care about, or a deliverable that someone depends on?

Just curious how you can afford to care about the guy 7 levels above the men that built and support the API that you buy.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#94

Post by lunar_mycroft »

echelon wrote: post #20
amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

> Couldn’t tell. I can tell. It's night and day. Last year I used a bunch of models to try to generate Rust code. They all sucked. This February I tried again and used Claude to generate Rust code. I have never been more stunned in my life. It's just as good as I am, and 30x faster. No fluff, the code is verbatim just as I would have written. I then tried other models. Total disappointment. I've continued to repeat t…

> This February I tried again and used Claude to generate Rust code. I have never been more stunned in my life. It's just as good as I am, and 30x faster. No fluff, the code is verbatim just as I would have written.

Having looked at a bunch of known or suspected (based on the intent of the code and/or what I know about the developer(s)) LLM generated rust, there's only a few explanations here:

1. You're way better at prompting than (virtually) anyone else.

2. You're vastly overestimating how good the rust code it produced is.

3. You handheld the model throughout and made lots of edits.

4. Your hand written rust code is very bad.

Because from every example I've seen, these models write horrible rust. Sure, it may technically pass all the tests, but it's horribly pessimized, badly organized, doesn't even attempt to use the type system, if there aren't bugs now there will be the second it tries to refactor or add a new feature, etc. etc.

(I also strongly suspect that the same would be true for other languages, but I can detect it in rust more easily because it's my main language)

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#95

Post by wongarsu »

basilgohar wrote: post #55
wongarsu wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude was the best for the longest time. GPT5.5 challenges that, but inertia is real

You're comparing apples to oranges. Claude is a frontend overall product name, GPT5.5 is a specific model. Which model within Claude's offerings are you referring to? Opus 4.7, Sonnet 4.6, or something else?

I am not refering to one specific model, I mean the entire Claude Opus line starting from about 4.5, vs the at the time equivalent OpenAI model

Google came pretty close at times

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#97

Post by spider-mario »

neosat wrote: post #70
jnovek wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t tell the difference between code written in vim or vs code but it matters substantially to the person writing the code. There’s stuff beyond just the output that goes into tool choice.

Your argument is fine but different from the claim the OP is making. You cannot simply make a claim that (model + harness) X is better than Y, but then have no discernible difference in the output. Subjectively, people might still prefer one over due to anything from design to marketing, but that's very different from the claim that X is better than Y for coding (see: "A colleague was convinced Claude is better"). Ba…

> You cannot simply make a claim that (model + harness) X is better than Y, but then have no discernible difference in the output.

You definitely can in principle; that’s the entire point of the comment you are responding to. If one tool completes it in 10 minutes with little hand holding, and the other does it in one hour at 4× the cost and while needing a lot of steering, the former is arguably better even if the end result is the same.

Whether that’s specifically true and demonstrable of GPT and Claude is another question, but your blanket statement doesn’t hold as a general rule.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#98

Post by epistasis »

amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

Calling this a "tupper ware" seems a bit emotional, you're intentionally disregarding many things that matter for devs in order to try to claim equivalence, rather than paying attention to the actual process of software creation.

For example in your "test" you're only looking at output and ignoring the entire process of creation.

In addition to that process, you're ignoring that Claude Code was first and better for a long time, why would people switch for something that produces the same output? Claude Code has been way ahead in the process of agentic software creation for a long time, I still prefer its features. Even though I think that Opus 4.7 was a big step backwards, and I've been getting worse results seemingly every day with the churn of features at Claude Code, some of that may also be me testing the bounds of how little I can specify and still get acceptable results, so it's hard to know.

Calling all these concrete realities "marketing" is itself you trying to market Codex as "good enough" instead of paying attention to how we got where we are and where we will go in the future.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#99

Post by vr46 »

amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

a) everyone is "susceptible" to marketing - so what

b) therefore a preference for Claude is marketing - complete bollocks

Either the tasks you chose were well below the capabilities of top models, or meaningful differences for preference are elsewhere, or both.

Your comment is probably energy-efficient and sustainable, however, because you could use it again and again when another comparison comes up, like Vim vs Emacs, or tea vs coffee

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#100

Post by amazingamazing »

vr46 wrote: post #99
amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

a) everyone is "susceptible" to marketing - so what b) therefore a preference for Claude is marketing - complete bollocks Either the tasks you chose were well below the capabilities of top models, or meaningful differences for preference are elsewhere, or both. Your comment is probably energy-efficient and sustainable, however, because you could use it again and again when another comparison comes up, like Vim vs Ema…

I can tell the difference between tea and coffee 100% of the time.
Post reply on HN