I see this with the disproportionate amount of hype around "Claude Code" specifically vs. AI coding in general. Eventually people realized that there was AI chat beyond the brand-name "Chat GPT" and that Gemini was just as good (and often better).
Get ready folks, another breathless hype wave incoming!
Don't get me wrong, I somewhat agree that there's been a sea change with Opus 4.5 in the usefulness of Claude Code, but it stills goes off the rails at the drop of a hat in the dumbest and most frustrating ways. Actually trying to use it to develop even a nontrivial greenfield project from scratch requires carefully reviewing its code to make sure it stays on track.
Perhaps journalists are just trying to make fetch^^^^^Claude happen, but I've noticed it popping up a bit more (The Atlantic): https://archive.is/6YvPh
This is really odd. They are incomparable in terms of the scope that these companies have.
I have used all major tools: OpenAI (chat, api), Google Gemini (ai studio, api, cli, antigravity) and Claude (chat, code and api). Mostly for coding issues to solve.
Claude Code gives usable results almost instantly for small scripts and it can go live. Gemini CLI tells me that it doesn't have this and that - and I have tried pushing Gemini to deliver production-quality code. No chance.
I use the same style of coding instructions for all tools.
But difference is in hours. I had a Claude session - result was in minutes, Gemini - hour and in many rounds.
On the other side, Gemini Canvas is really powerful as it makes usable app/tool inside Gemini so you don’t have to know how to run Python or PHP.
And OpenAI has very powerful chat.
So all of them seem to have different focus groups…
So I’m not proud to admit that for my recent work (which has been 90% data science stuff in Julia) I’ve been still just using Gemini via the webpage for coding and it’s pretty effective for me, what is the most user friendly way to get started with Claude Code? Is there a nice VSCode integration out there?
12 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 25.2 ms ] threadDon't get me wrong, I somewhat agree that there's been a sea change with Opus 4.5 in the usefulness of Claude Code, but it stills goes off the rails at the drop of a hat in the dumbest and most frustrating ways. Actually trying to use it to develop even a nontrivial greenfield project from scratch requires carefully reviewing its code to make sure it stays on track.
Genuinely confused here.
I have used all major tools: OpenAI (chat, api), Google Gemini (ai studio, api, cli, antigravity) and Claude (chat, code and api). Mostly for coding issues to solve.
Claude Code gives usable results almost instantly for small scripts and it can go live. Gemini CLI tells me that it doesn't have this and that - and I have tried pushing Gemini to deliver production-quality code. No chance.
I use the same style of coding instructions for all tools.
But difference is in hours. I had a Claude session - result was in minutes, Gemini - hour and in many rounds.
On the other side, Gemini Canvas is really powerful as it makes usable app/tool inside Gemini so you don’t have to know how to run Python or PHP.
And OpenAI has very powerful chat.
So all of them seem to have different focus groups…
I would like to direct the author to a high school statistics class.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_cau...