| ▲ | throw444420394 5 hours ago | |
Cursor is fine, the example is about how things go out of hype in very little time. However I believe Cursor will not survive much. It is designed around a model that will not survive: that the AI "helps you writing code", and you review, and need an IDE like that. There are many developers that want an IDE and can't stand the terminal experience of Claude Code and Codex, but I don't believe most developers in the future will inspect closely the code written by the AIs, and things like Cursor will look like products designed for a transition step that is no longer here (already). | ||
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
| [deleted] | ||
| ▲ | flyinglizard 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
I'd venture a guess that most of the software in the world is not written from scratch but painstakingly maintained and as such, Cursor is a good fit while CC is not. Besides, if agentic coding does go off, Cursor has the customer relationship and can just offer it as an additional mode. Whoever stands in front of the customer ultimately wins. The rest are just cost centers. | ||