> The value in Claude Code is its harness
replyIf this was the case then Anthropic would be in a very bad spot.
It's not, which is why people got so mad about being forced to use it rather than better third party harnesses.
Pi is better than CC as a harness in almost every respect.
Anthropic limiting Claude subs to Claude code is what pushed me away in the end because I wanted to keep using Pi.
replyJust sign up for an AWS account and use the Anthropic models through Bedrock which Pi can use.
replyAPI costs are really high compared to subs.
replyThen you aren't the target market.
replyWhat advantage are you saying this has compared to just directly going through the Anthropic provider? They are the same price.
replyWhy use tricks to support a company that is hostile to your use case?
replyCan you enumerate why?
reply- Claude Code has repeatedly had enormous token wastage bugs. Its agent interactions are also inefficient. These are the cause of many of the reports of "single prompt blew through 5-hour quota" even though it's a reasonable prompt.
reply- It still lacks support for industry standards such as AGENTS.md
- Extremely limited customization
- Lots of bugs including often making it impossible to view pre-compaction messages inside Claude Code.
- Obvious one: can't easily switch between Claude and non-Claude models
- Resource usage
More than anything, I haven't found a single thing that Pi does worse. All of it is just straight up better or the same.
I thought the desktop app used the cli app in the background?
reply