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

61–70 of 512 posts

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#61

Post by kube-system »

bilekas wrote: post #17
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…

I think for developers the distinction is that ChatGPT is this commercial all in one solution for normies and Claude is specific for developers, in reality as you say the results for normal developers is indistinguishable.

Maybe some people think that but there’s not really any meaningful difference in their offerings

FWIW most of the normies I know are using Claude

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#62

Post by folkrav »

oofbey wrote: post #16
grodes wrote: post #3

codex gtp-5.5 is far superior to opus 4.7 working on large projects

GPT 5.5 still invents facts rather than looking them up, and manages to come across both as condescending and sycophantic. It feels like talking to a used car salesman.

Funny cause I'm quite literally having this exact issue with 4.8 as we speak. I've been going back and forth with Claude since yesterday afternoon on chopping up, stabilizing and facilitating recovery on a flaky mega-pipeline. Not 5 minutes ago, I had to remind it that two of the solutions it proposed were not possible because the target technology doesn't allow what it wanted to do, despite pointing it to the very docs that says it can't be done in the first place.

As far as its tone... Both feel like sycophantic as hell to me. To be honest, they just all feel so.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#63

Post by HlessClaudesman »

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…

Which model produced code that ran faster, with less bugs, etc?

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#64

Post by sebzim4500 »

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…

I don't think it's marketing, for quite a long time Claude was clearly better and not everyone has adapted to the new reality where they have similar capabilities.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#65

Post by datakan »

lysace wrote: post #12

The models aside, my impression is that Anthropic is winning in large part because of very pragmatic and high-velocity product development on top of them; like with Claude Code. Like actually iterating hard to make them useful. Many, many details matter here. I haven't tested the similar OpenAI/Google tools in detail lately though. Previously I found them way too generic and unpolished to be useful. Is there somethin…

I recently canceled my Claude subscription. The token costs are outrageous. I maxed my 5 hour limit with a single request. If they fix that I'll reconsider but as things sit today Claude is a pig that's just not worth the cost.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#66

Post by amazingamazing »

jnovek wrote: post #37
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…

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.

> There’s stuff beyond just the output that goes into tool choice.

Yup, like billions of capex. Unlike vim.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#70

Post by neosat »

jnovek wrote: post #37
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…

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"). Basically, I prefer Claude is a different claim than Claude is better and the latter has a higher bar of proof.
Post reply on HN