281–290 of 533 posts
https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/commit/5e0125b78c8da09...
This is an unusual L for Anthropic. The unfortunate truth is that the engineering in opencode is so far ahead of Claude Code. Obviously, CC is a great tool, but that's more about the magic of the model than the engineering of the CLI. The opencode team[^1][^2] built an entire custom TUI backend that supports a good subset of HTML/CSS and the TypeScript ecosystem (i.e. not tied to Opencode, a generic TUI renderer). Th…
> The unfortunate truth is that the engineering in opencode is so far ahead of Claude Code. If only Claude Code developers had access to a powerful LLM that would allow them to close the engineering gap. Oh, wait...
I believe this is because I am using claude code as a CLI for SDK purposes vs using it as a typescript library. Quite a fortunate choice at the time!
Engineer working on Amp here. I'm very surprised that it took them this long to crack down on it. It's been against the terms of service from the start. When I asked them back in March last year whether individuals can use the higher rate limits that come with the Claude Code subscription in other applications, that was also a no. Question is: what changed? New founding round coming up, end of fiscal year, planning f…
For folks not following the drama: Anthropic's $200/month subscription for Claude Code is much cheaper than Anthropic's pay-as-you-go API. In a month of Claude Code, it's easy to use so many LLM tokens that it would have cost you more than $1,000 if you'd paid via the API. Why is Anthropic offering such favorable pricing to subscribers? I dunno. But they really want you to use the Claude Code™ CLI with that subscript…
I guess one issue is that you pay $200/month whether you use it or not. Potentially this could be better for Anthropic. What was not necessarily foreseeable (ok maybe it was) back when that started was that users have invented all kinds of ways to supervise their agents to be as efficient as possible. If they control the client, you can't do that.
I think it is more likely that if you stick with Claude Code, then you are more likely to stick with Opus/Sonnet, whereas if you use a third party CLI you might be more likely to mix and match or switch away entirely. It's in their interest to get you invested in their tooling.
The fix has been merged in https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode-anthropic-auth/pull/11 , and PR https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/pull/7432 is open to bump the version. Until it's released, here's a workaround: 1. git clone https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode-anthropic-auth.git 2. Add to ~/.config/opencode/opencode.json: "plugin": ["file:///path/to/opencode-anthropic-auth/index.mjs"] 3. Run: OPENCODE_DISABLE_D…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not that hard to understand, they want to control how their users use their product. A CLI they built, even acquiring the framework it was built in, is a way to achieve that.
But to make a "gauche" analogy, that would be like Microsoft not letting you browse their websites without using their browser (Edge).
For folks not following the drama: Anthropic's $200/month subscription for Claude Code is much cheaper than Anthropic's pay-as-you-go API. In a month of Claude Code, it's easy to use so many LLM tokens that it would have cost you more than $1,000 if you'd paid via the API. Why is Anthropic offering such favorable pricing to subscribers? I dunno. But they really want you to use the Claude Code™ CLI with that subscript…
I guess one issue is that you pay $200/month whether you use it or not. Potentially this could be better for Anthropic. What was not necessarily foreseeable (ok maybe it was) back when that started was that users have invented all kinds of ways to supervise their agents to be as efficient as possible. If they control the client, you can't do that.
Hold on tight, the wild journey to enshittification has begun.