[vtail]

Prediction: the only remaining providers of AI-assisted tools in a few years will be the LLM companies themselves (think claude code, codex, gemini, future xai/Alibaba/etc.), via CLIs + integrations such as ASP.

There is very little value that a company that has to support multiple different providers, such as Cursor, can offer on top of tailored agents (and "unlimited" subscription models) by LLM providers.

[rudedogg]

If you look at even the Claude/OpenAI chat UIs, they kind of suck. Not sure why you think someone else can't/won't do it better. Yes, the big players will copy what they can, but they also need to chase insane growth and getting every human on earth paying for an LLM subscription.

A tool that is good for everyone is great for no one.

Also, I think we're seeing the limits on "value" of a chat interface already. Now they're all chasing developers since there's a real potential to improve productivity (or sadly cut-costs) there. But even that is proving difficult.

[serbuvlad]

I recently started using Codex (OpenAI's Claude Code) and it has a VSCode extension that works like a charm. I tried out Windsurf a while ago. And the Codex extension simply does everything that Windsurf did. I guess it doesn't show changes at well, (it shows diffs in it's own window instead of in the file), but I can just check a git diff graphically (current state vs. HEAD) if I really wanted that.

I am really tempted to buy ChatGPT Pro, and probably would have if I lived in a richer country (unfortunetley purchase power parity doesn't equalize for tech products). The problem with Windsurf (and presumably Cursor and others) is that you buy the IDE subscription and then still have to worry about usage costs. With Codex/Claude Code etc., yeah, it's expensive, but, as long as you're within the usage limits, which are hopefully reasonable for the most expensive prices, you don't have to worry about it. AND you get the web and phone apps with GPT 5 Pro, etc.

[computerex]

I don't know. Foundation models are very good, and you can get a surprising amount of mileage from them by using them with low level interfaces. But personally I think companies building development tools of the future will use LLMs to build systems with increasing capabilities. I think a lot of engineering challenges remain in scaling LLM's to take over day to day in programming, and the current tools are scratching the surface of what's possible when you combine LLMs with traditional systems engineering.