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

Cursor 1.0

cursor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 492 posts

Re: Cursor 1.0

#291

Post by i_have_an_idea »

gazagoal wrote: post #154

As someone who has two annual subs of Cursor Pro (one from student account and another from Lenny's newsletter), I just spent $100 on Claude Code and I haven't touched Cursor AI for any coding tasks since. If you already spend anything near or over $100 on Cursor, it's no brainer. The agent experience is night and day. No more wrong tool-calling, premature ending of conversation, failure to apply changes or overwriti…

Yes, this is a paid comment, in the sense that it's probably a bot. 22 day old account, with 1 post, praising Claude.

For more than a year, Anthropic has engaged in an extensive guerrilla marketing effort on Reddit and similar developer-oriented platforms, aiming to persuade users that Claude significantly outperforms competitors in programming tasks, even though nearly all benchmarks indicate otherwise.

Re: Cursor 1.0

#292

Post by sandos »

adastra22 wrote: post #191
anktor wrote: post #172

Does anyone have experience with using this or another agent on local files? No company I know of will approve this for their owned repositories. What about Gitlab instead of GitHub, is there an equivalent to cursor 1.0 product?

All of these agents work on local files... do you mean local LLMs?

No, he basically means thay companies will not allow LLMs on their own code, I think.

I work in a multinational conglomerate, and we got AI allowed ... 2-3 weeks ago. Before that it was basically banned unless you had gotten permission. We did have another gpt4 based AI in the browser available for a few months before that as well.

Re: Cursor 1.0

#293

Post by Aeolun »

travbrack wrote: post #97
Aeolun wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until Claude Code becomes manageable price wise, I don’t think Cursor really sees them as their competition. I can burn the whole cursor subscription price in a single day with Claude Code.

I'm surprised nobody is mentioning how cheap copilot pro is. $20 and you get all you can eat inference without using your own api key for the models on vs code agent mode.

All copilot models feel lobotomized. It’s like they’re deliberately running them at low performance or something.

Re: Cursor 1.0

#294

Post by admiralrohan »

gazagoal wrote: post #154

As someone who has two annual subs of Cursor Pro (one from student account and another from Lenny's newsletter), I just spent $100 on Claude Code and I haven't touched Cursor AI for any coding tasks since. If you already spend anything near or over $100 on Cursor, it's no brainer. The agent experience is night and day. No more wrong tool-calling, premature ending of conversation, failure to apply changes or overwriti…

What about the Cursor tab? You can't get that from Claude code which is terminal based. For small changes tab is much faster than asking the agent + it's free.

Re: Cursor 1.0

#295

Post by survirtual »

dkersten wrote: post #240

I stopped using Cursor once Zed released their agent mode. Cursor consistently leaks memory for me even with all extensions removed, Zed is much lighter weight and in my personal opinion just a better editor. Also, Trae being $10 for more requests makes Cursor far less appealing to me.

The other day, I was repairing a raidz2 cluster. Power instability during a heavy / long term write operation caused problems resembling defective drives and corrupted metadata all over the drives. I came up with a strategy to repair it but I needed some code which was pretty straightforward.

Rust is easier for me than shell scripting so I started writing what I needed and remembered Zed added agent mode. I decided to give it a shot. I had it use Claude 4 with my api tokens.

It wrote the entire program, tested it, debugged it. It made some bad assumptions and I just steered it towards what I needed. By the end of about an hour, I had my complete fix plus an entire ZFS management layer in Rust.

It did cost $11, but that is a drop in the bucket for time saved. I was impressed.

Just sharing this because I got real and measured value recently that is way beyond the widely shared experience.

Re: Cursor 1.0

#296

Post by EnPissant »

gazagoal wrote: post #154

As someone who has two annual subs of Cursor Pro (one from student account and another from Lenny's newsletter), I just spent $100 on Claude Code and I haven't touched Cursor AI for any coding tasks since. If you already spend anything near or over $100 on Cursor, it's no brainer. The agent experience is night and day. No more wrong tool-calling, premature ending of conversation, failure to apply changes or overwriti…

counterpoint: I burned through $20 in a couple hours of claude code

Re: Cursor 1.0

#297

Post by cardanome »

weird-eye-issue wrote: post #246
yard2010 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He has a point, that's quite depressing that a work you had to think and act in order to solve hard problems now became almost the same as scanning barcodes in any supermarket, and it's outright sad that most people are happy about it and being snarky towards anyone that points the hardships that come with it. Philosophically speaking (not practically) it's like living the industrial revolution again. It's lit! But i…

If these tools make your job as easy as scanning barcodes then you really weren't working on anything interesting anyways.

Thank you for rubbing extra salt into the wound.

I mean most software engineering jobs are not especially exciting. I have done web dev for smaller companies that never had more than a few hundred concurrent users. It is boring CRUD apps all day every day.

Still at least you could have a bit of fun with the technical challenges. Now with AI it becomes completely mind numbing.

Re: Cursor 1.0

#298

Post by wrsh07 »

ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 wrote: post #270
rmonvfer wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was spending around $800 in Cursor and I’ve switched to Claude Code with a $200 subscription and I couldn’t be happier. The experience is way better (although tbh Claude Code is missing some critical features like being able to rollback changes (or, as Cursor calls them “checkpoints”)) but for 99% of my “Vibe Coding”, it’s just great. I usually run 2 to 4 parallel sessions using git worktrees and the speed is absol…

> I was spending around $800 in Cursor What are you doing that costs that much? I refactored a whole code base in cursor for 200k lines of code). I don't use completions though. Is that where the costs add up?

I think if you use premium models you can run up a bill depending on your plan

You can configure it so that you use your API keys, which means you just pay cost but o3 is expensive

Re: Cursor 1.0

#299

Post by adidoit »

ai_assisted_dev wrote: post #116

I still don't understand how cursor is making any money at all. I spend so much time inside cursor, that I am spending 10-20$ per day on additional requests. Now if I connect model provider APIs to windsurf, I'd be spending upwards of 100$ due to amount of tokens I use through the API per day. And if I connect my own API key to Cursor, I immediately get rate limited for any request, because I go well above 50 per min…

The play is probably - Expand and get lock in - Custom fine-tuned models (much cheaper) for increasing # of completions - Enterprise contracts

Re: Cursor 1.0

#300

Post by davedx »

yard2010 wrote: post #248
davedx wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The winners will be those that climb the abstraction ladder. The more sophisticated and useful the abstractions, the more lockin/sticky it will be

That's a really smart observation. It's hard to add sophisticated abstractions though, because they are all selling text by the pounds (kilos?). So it feels the same as vendor lock for a cucumber seller, doesn't it? The seller can sell you an experience that would lock you in, but aside from it there is no moat since anyone can sell cucumbers.

To try and give examples: an autonomous agent that can integrate with github, read issues, then make pull requests against those issues is a step (or maybe two) above an LLM API (cucumber seller).

It doesn't take much more of a stretch to imagine teams of agents, coordinated by a "programme manager" agent, with "QA agents" working to defined quality metrics, "architect" agents that take initial requirements and break them down into system designs and github issues, and of course the super important "product owner" agent who talks to actual humans and writes initial requirements. Such a "software team system" would be another abstraction level above individual agents like Codex.

Post reply on HN