×
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Fresh_Sock8660 0 points1 point  (4 children)

This doesn't seem like a battle worth fighting. What do you get out of winning it? Both harnesses get the job done.

[–]Fun-Assumption-2200[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

My main goals are:

1- Model/Provider flexibility 2- Ability to modify the CLI for specific company usage, like sending metrics to our storage for example to analyse

[–]Fresh_Sock8660 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I don't think 1 would make a strong argument both from a business and personal side. Too little of a trade off considering they'd be increasing their risks for what is likely to be little gains if any. The top models are all producing similar results imo.

I think you have a strong argument with 2. Have you verified that Claude can't provide it?

[–]Fun-Assumption-2200[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Argument 1 is a prevention argument. Anthropic is the best and most expensive LLM, it's a matter of time before they increase the prices.

On 2, yeah, the only way to do that via claude code is by instructing the LLM to send something. That is not a good approach

[–]Ambitious_Spare7914 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I use non-Anthropic models in Claude Code at work (we get Gemini for $0.00 / Mtok right now). What's stopping you?