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

Cursor 3

cursor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 438 posts

Re: Cursor 3

#271

Post by dakolli »

muratsu wrote: post #262
athoscouto wrote: post #246

Cursor has been my main AI tool for over a year now. I've been trying to use Claude Code seriously for over a month, but every time I do it, I get the impression that it would take me less work to do with Cursor. I'm on the enterprise plan, so it can get pricey. This is why I used to stick mostly to auto mode. Now Composer 2 has taken over as my default model. It is not as intelligent as OpenAI's or Anthropic's flags…

I find it interesting that you are on the enterprise plan and are not default willing to pay more for more intelligence. Most people I know who are on the enterprise plan are wishing there existed a 2x intelligent model with 2x price.

Because they are twice as stupid.

Re: Cursor 3

#272

Post by athoscouto »

muratsu wrote: post #262
athoscouto wrote: post #246

Cursor has been my main AI tool for over a year now. I've been trying to use Claude Code seriously for over a month, but every time I do it, I get the impression that it would take me less work to do with Cursor. I'm on the enterprise plan, so it can get pricey. This is why I used to stick mostly to auto mode. Now Composer 2 has taken over as my default model. It is not as intelligent as OpenAI's or Anthropic's flags…

I find it interesting that you are on the enterprise plan and are not default willing to pay more for more intelligence. Most people I know who are on the enterprise plan are wishing there existed a 2x intelligent model with 2x price.

2x intelligence != 2x results

most tasks I can do better and faster with composer 2

a fellow engineer reported a bug on a code I had written a few months back. I used his report as prompt for composer 2, gpt-5.4-high and claude-4.6-opus-max-thinking. composer found the issue spot on. gpt found another possible vector a couple of minutes later, but a way less likely one and one that would eventually self heal (thus not actually reproducing what we observed on production). claude had barely started when the other two had finished

also, i don't have a budget per se. but it is expected that i over deliver if i'm over spending

Re: Cursor 3

#274

Post by dakolli »

owlstuffing wrote: post #259
nradclif wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What role do you play in creating software? If you don't need to see any code, should your employer consider cutting your position? I'm very much pro-humans-in-the-workforce, but I can't understand how someone could be ok with doing so little at their job.

There is a large and growing segment of executives in the software world that is pushing this model hard, like betting their career on it. To them the “dark factory” is an inevitability. As a consequence, not only are developers choosing this path, but the companies they work for are in varying degrees selecting this path for them.

Most, if not all of them, are shooting themselves in the foot. I've been saying this for a long time. The only thing LLMs actually are useful for is automating labor and reducing the amount a worker can demand for their work. Don't fall for this trap.

Re: Cursor 3

#275

Post by athoscouto »

sbysb wrote: post #268
dirtbag__dad wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was a Cursor loyal until I was spending around $2k a week with premium models and my team had a discussion about whether we’d want to use more Cursor over hire another engineer. We unanimously agreed we’d rather hire another team member. I’m more productive than ever but I’m burning out. Anyway, as a result, I switched to Claude Code Max and I am equally as prolific and paying 1/10th the price. I get my cake and to…

> Anyway, you’re right Claude Code is less ergonomic; generally slower. The secret in my experience is parallelization - Cursor might be faster or have better ergo for a single task, but Claude Code really shines when you have 6 tasks that are fairly independent. If you treat CC as just another terminal tool and heavily use git worktrees, the overall productivity shoots through the window. I've been using a tool call…

Cursor can do that well too. Their code review feature usually gives a handful of independent feedbacks. I just trigger agents independently for all of those. Other integrations with Linear and Slack are also very handy to getting into this workflow. Seems like the 3.0 version is aiming at getting better at this use case.

Re: Cursor 3

#276

Post by sbysb »

athoscouto wrote: post #275
sbysb wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyway, you’re right Claude Code is less ergonomic; generally slower. The secret in my experience is parallelization - Cursor might be faster or have better ergo for a single task, but Claude Code really shines when you have 6 tasks that are fairly independent. If you treat CC as just another terminal tool and heavily use git worktrees, the overall productivity shoots through the window. I've been using a tool call…

Cursor can do that well too. Their code review feature usually gives a handful of independent feedbacks. I just trigger agents independently for all of those. Other integrations with Linear and Slack are also very handy to getting into this workflow. Seems like the 3.0 version is aiming at getting better at this use case.

FWIW I'm not saying Cursor is not capable of this, but that all of the 'Cursor' bits are superfluous, and using tools that bring you closer to the 'bare metal' of the terminal actually give you both more flexibility (I can run Claude Code, Crush, Codex, OpenCode, etc) and remove an entire layer of abstraction that I believe hinders a devs ability to really go all in on agentic engineering.

I started using Cursor and it was my daily driver for a year or two, but I haven't looked back once in regret moving more towards a terminal focused workflow. (Not to mention the pricing of Cursor being absolutely abysmal as well, although often comped by employers)

Re: Cursor 3

#278

Post by jiggunjer »

mgambati wrote: post #148

Is composer 2 any good? Can it be compared to opus ou gpt 5.4?

I ran parallel prompt with composer 2 and gpt5.3 codex. Composer did slightly better, in terms of variable naming and extra tweaks to loosely related files to keep the codeb consistent.

Re: Cursor 3

#279

Post by recursive »

scottyah wrote: post #211
dugidugout wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are still speaking in the lower abstraction in terms of zwaps' provided understanding. "Tagging specific code" or "files" is likely the type of interfacing most Claude Code users are _not_ doing. Instead they are defining architecture through specs and verification-loops and attempting to one-shot solutions fitting clear tests. On reflection, I personally don't have many prompts with CC referencing files…

It's always funny to see people's reactions to AI because it's the same they would treat junior engineers if nobody was around to raise an eyebrow. I've had a super micromanager who was absolutely insistent on naming variables and whether the open brackets were on the same line or a new line. I've also had people who just gave me the desired functionality and let me figure out the in-between and put in my own creativ…

I treat people with respect because they are people. Absolutely not the case for machines.
Post reply on HN