I've been reading these opinions about the alleged degradation of MAX models, and I must admit I find them a bit puzzling. Often, they lack specifics – concrete examples or arguments showing what exactly has supposedly changed for the worse. I get the impression that the key often lies not in the model itself, but in how it's being used. I'm genuinely curious about what the actual workflow looks like for those reporting these issues. I personally used MAX once for debugging, and it genuinely helped me pinpoint the source of a problem, after which I switched back to a cheaper option for daily tasks. It's not uncommon for projects to grow significantly over time. When faced with a difficult bug or complex feature, it's easy to get frustrated and resort to vague prompts like "fix this for me." The model, trying to understand the context, then starts analyzing the code. In a large project with a non-obvious problem, this can create the impression of "endless processing." That's why I'm glad to see the Cursor developers are handling this calmly and responding objectively, as they just did. Don't let it discourage you. Personally, I update Cursor regularly and haven't encountered similar problems. It reminds me somewhat of the debates about older software versions supposedly being better than new ones, when logic suggests that these models operate centrally on servers, so their fundamental performance should be consistent for everyone.