it’s the “agentic harness” — they have shipped tons of great features for the DevEx, but it’s the combination of better models (Sonnet 4.5 1M, now Opus 4.5) and the “prompting”/harness that improves how it actually performs

again I’m not saying Codex is worse, they’re just different and claiming the only one you actively use is the best is a stretch

edit: also FWIW, I initially dismissed Claude Code at launch, then loved Codex when it released. never really liked Cursor. now I primarily use Claude Code given I found Codex slow and less “reliable” in a sense, but I try to try all 3 and keep up with the changes (it is hard)

▲

koakuma-chan 21 hours ago | parent [-]

> they have shipped tons of great features for the DevEx

Such as?

> again I’m not saying Codex is worse, they’re just different and claiming the only one you actively use is the best is a stretch

I am testing all models in Cursor.

> I initially dismissed Claude Code at launch, then loved Codex when it released. never really liked Cursor

I also don't actually like Cursor. It's a VSCode fork, and a mediocre harness. I am only using it because my company refuses to buy anything else, because Cursor has all models, and it appears to them that it's not worth having anything else.

▲

dkdcio 20 hours ago | parent [-]

you conveniently ignored the most important part of my comment :)

> Such as?

changelog is here: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/CHANGELO...

glhf

btw you started this thread with pure vibes, no evidence:

> I can confirm GPT 5.2 is better than Gemini and Claude. GPT 5.2 Codex is probably even better.

I’m saying you’re wrong. N=2, 1 against 1, one of us is making a much less bold claim

	▲	koakuma-chan 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You do not seem to be able to tell me anything substantial, i.e. specifically how Claude Code is a better harness than Cursor. > “prompting”/harness that improves how it actually performs Is an abstract statement without any meaningful details.