I don't think it's that early tbh, agentic coding has ~90% adoption in the US.

Claude Code has largely won individual developer mindshare and has been on top ever since it came out. The benchmarks change, but almost nobody opts to use anything other than Claude IME when I ask them. Enterprise is more competitive since they care about costs and other things, but developers leaning towards Claude puts a thumb on the scales there.

The product doesn't have much lock in, so it is possible to dislodge Claude, and Anthropic could (and some may argue is likely to) just shoot themselves in the foot again and again and again, but Google has never been particularly good at enterprise sales, and they have never actually been at the frontier of intelligence.

I think Google's incentives have mostly about building models for their products, which makes them focus more on the cheap end, and while they need that, it feels like the Innovator's Dilemma is biting them here.

I own a lot of Google stock from working there in the past and have been quite happy about their trajectory up until the last 6 months, but I am getting pretty antsy about their AI story these days.

▲

sdesol 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Claude Code has largely won individual developer mindshare and has been on top ever since it came out.

Claude Code's success is not due to the agent but because the model is considered the best for programming and is very heavily subsidized, compared to pay as you go API prices. Consumers and Enterprise are not really locked in and will go where it makes the most sense.

I think they have almost no loyalty by actual developers.

▲

Foobar8568 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There is no reason to be loyal....There is no moat.

Basically you may choose to drink brand A water bottle, brand B water bottle or tap water. Oh and you might choose the glass water bottle if you use API/Fable.

	▲	gehsty 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There’s no reason to be loyal, but I guess it’s a bit like any tool, once you get used to how one works why would you change to another? There is some stickiness with an LLM + harness.

▲

lerchmo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly developers can switch to another coding cli and the learning curve is close to zero. Mindshare without switching costs is just a popsicle in the sun.

▲

baq 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Every model has its strengths and weaknesses, being loyal is suboptimal unless you mean being loyal to all of them, which is why cursor would have been well positioned before it got acquired. Now you have to jump through hoops to call Gemini from Claude from codex. Yuck.

▲

kelvinjps10 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Claude code was one of the first agentic code tool and when openai release models similar in performance they didn't do as well in their tools (now codex)

▲

reinitctxoffset 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Claude Code (or any other model/infra/harness co-design) is not subsidized in any normal use of that word. It's trough filling (I've written this up in lurid detail so I'm only going to do it again if anyone cares).

It's not true, it's just a play for margin.

▲

draebek 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I don't think it's that early tbh, agentic coding has ~90% adoption in the US.

Where does that 90% figure come from?