451–460 of 533 posts
Cancelled my claude subscription over it. Opencode is miles ahead of any coding tools. Will stick to using it rather than claude. Other models / other ways to access claude exists.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The competitor is not "doing X better"; it's more complicated than that. CC isn't just the TUI tool. It's also the LLM behind it. OC may have built a better TUI tool, but it's useless without an LLM behind it. Anthropic is certainly within their rights to tell people they can only integrate their models certain ways. And as for why this isn't embarrassing, consider that OC can focus 100% of their efforts on their cod…
> CC isn't just the TUI tool. It's also the LLM behind it. No, Claude Code is literally the TUI tool. The LLMs behind are the models. You can use different models within the same TUI tool, even CC allows that, regardless of the restriction of only using their models (because they chose to do that). > consider that OC can focus 100% of their efforts on their coding tool. And they have billions of dollars to hire full…
Not strictly related, but since Copilot could be the next to violate the TOS, I've asked for an official response here: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/183809 . If someone can help raise this question, it's more than welcome.
The API is not banned only using the Claude Code subscription is I actually tried this several months back to do a regular API request using the CC subscription token and it gave the same error message So this software must have been pretending to be Claude Code in order to get around that A Claude Code subscription should not work with other software, I think this is totally fair
Why the hell not? What an L take - if I pay a subscription fee for an API, I should be able to use that API however I want. If they're forcing users to only consume their APIs with a proprietary piece of software, it really begs what's in that software that makes it valuable to them. Seems like there's something nefarious involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A Claude Code subscription should not work with other software. why not though? aren't you paying for the model usage regardless of the client you use?
No, you are paying to use Claude code… it uses the model underneath, but you aren’t paying for raw model usage. For whatever reason, Anthropic thinks this is the best way to divide up their market. They want to charge more for direct access to the model.
Why would anyone pay a subscription for barebones LLM agent?
You can beat that drum all you want, but you know it's bullshit. People pay the subscription for the AI, not the tool that consumes it. That tool being crap is why everyone started using third-party tools.
The reason they are blocking third-party usage is they want developers to use only their models and no competitors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenCode launched a couple of months ago so that makes sense that it's worse. It's much better than Claude Code now. Somehow for the same model, opencode completes the same work faster than claude code and the ux is much better.
You win by adoption. Here adoption is a combination on the tool and the model. If people can’t pay the model to use the tool, they might not use the tool even if it’s better. That’s what anthropic is doing. It might be faster, but it’s more expensive.
The only way remains to try and lock consumers into your ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They could open source and not take contributions fwiw. They could close the issues and only allow discussions. There was a project mentioned here recently that did just that. *Edit It was Ghostty, "Why users cannot create Issues directly" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460319
They could open source it and not even have a Github project associated. Just provide a read-only git repo on anthropic.com or drop a source tarball every release.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To extend your all you can eat analogy. It’s similar to how all you can eat restaurants allow you to eat all you can within the bounds of the restaurant, but you aren’t allowed to bring the food out with you.
Another analogy is that it’s a takeout but anthropic is insisting you only eat at home with the plastic utensils they’ve provided rather than the nice metal utensils you have at home. Another analogy is that it’s a restaurant that offers delivery and they’re insisting you use their own in house delivery service instead of placing a pickup order and asking your friendly neighbor to pick it up for you on their way back…
Claude Code, as a coding assistant, isn't even mediocre, it's kind of crap. The reason it's at all good is because of the model underneath - there's tons of free and open agent tools that are far better than Claude Code. Regardless of what they say you're paying the subscription for, the truth is the only thing of value to developers is the underlying AI and API.
I can only think of few reasons why they'd do this: 1. Their Claude Code tool is not simply an agent assistant - perhaps it's feeding data for model training purposes, or something of the sorts where they gain value from it. 2. They don't want developers to use competitor models in any capacity. 3. They're offloading processing or doing local context work to drive down the API usage locally, making the usage minimal. This is very unlikely.
I currently use Opus 4.5 for architecting, which then feeds into Gemini 3 Flash with medium reasoning for coding. It's only a matter of time before Google competes with Opus 4.5, and when they do, I won't have any loyalty to Anthropic.