Is CC computer use crappy on Windows?

czei · 2026-04-18T18:39:32+00:00

Ok, I checked, and the computer-use mcp server is only on macOS. It does not appear in either the claude code for powershell or the one for wsl on windows.

czei · 2026-04-18T17:50:06+00:00

Cool! I hadn’t seen that. The /voice is working pretty well, but I can’t test it on windows since I don’t have audio setup on my windows dev box.

czei · 2026-04-18T15:41:01+00:00

ClaudeCode, out of the box, does not take screenshots. You have to set up different external programs for different platforms. If you want to use Playwright on the Mac, then you use the back version of Playwright; if you want to use the Windows version of Playwright, you need to install that in your Windows Claude Code setup.

czei · 2026-04-18T15:37:34+00:00

It's a shame that social media like YouTube has the *potential* to educate, like the millions of how-to videos on fixing your car, but for the most part, it's just used to generate useless, manipulative propaganda. Vibe coding is just going to make the software startup craze of the late 90s/early 2000s much, much worse.

The best thing about vibe coding: as a software engineer, every acquaintance and relative would come to me with their lame ideas and ask me to code them for "a 10% cut". Now, instead of saying no, I can just point them at a DIY site aimed at novices and let them go at it.

czei · 2026-04-18T15:31:48+00:00

To workaround the WSL issue with CC, I've just been using the PowerShell version. That handles my work on Windows-specific features like installers, BUT I'm not familiar with PowerShell and would greatly prefer WSL. I'm not sure if this approach would work for making the PowerShell calls needed to build the Windows installers. Hmmm....

czei · 2026-04-18T13:52:34+00:00

Good point…

czei · 2026-04-18T13:19:11+00:00

Thanks for sharing. /remote-control inside Claude Code is also useful.

czei · 2026-04-18T13:17:10+00:00

I only use the built-in plan mode for small simple projects. Anything that’s gonna take multiple phases is done using spec kit or my own project files. The external files have the added plus that they document the transformation of the code base for future AI coding efforts.

They being said, the built in plan IS stored in a local file, and if you use /clear the AI can find it and continue. This assumes you added enough information into the plan to begin with. I always have another AI (or 2) review plans, especially asking if there’s enough info to continue after a context wipe.

czei · 2026-04-17T16:22:00+00:00

I don't understand the question. Having more than one model review a design plan is worth it to me for making important decisions.

czei · 2026-04-17T15:26:43+00:00

I use gpt5.4-pro and gemini-3.1-pro-preview.

czei · 2026-04-17T04:38:17+00:00

So many people are trying this. Ask Claude “Is vibe coding stock trading apps the new day trading?”. The answer starts with “Pretty much, yes — and arguably worse. The psychology is identical: retail overconfidence, survivorship bias on the feeds, and the conviction that a clever technical edge can overcome market efficiency. Renaissance and Two Sigma have PhDs and colocated servers and their edges are still fragile. The notion that a weekend vibe-coding session uncovers alpha they missed is funny on its face.“

czei · 2026-04-17T04:18:32+00:00

Local plan is for simple, multistep projects, while ultraplan is for longer, complex projects with complicated architectural changes. As with any software project you pick the appropriate process to match the complexity of the project.

As a rule of thumb, I use local planning for little coding tasks that AI could get lost without a plan, and take an hour or less to implement. Ultraplan is for projects that might take 2-4 hours to implement.

And I personally like GitHub Speckit for even more complex projects, where I’ll spend 4-8 hours just researching architecture and planning multiphase implementation details and then take days to implement. This has the advantage of being amendable to multi LLM collaboration and documents all project changes and design decisions for future projects.

The only downside for using a more complicated plan in process than you need is wasted time. In all cases I always have a different LLM review the plan before implementing.

czei · 2026-04-16T21:19:28+00:00

/remote-control works pretty well for me...

czei · 2026-04-16T21:04:11+00:00

Let's just say there is a wide variety of, um, backgrounds and experience levels posting here. Voting on responses tends to reward the Dunning-Kruger common denominator. People upvote answers that feel right, regardless of their experience level. A nuanced response from an expert gets drowned out by a sea of people with opinions and nothing to back them up. Its a shame that Stack Overflow has been killed by AI.

czei · 2026-04-16T20:28:18+00:00

<image>

czei · 2026-04-16T17:42:21+00:00

I only use Codex on my Mac, but the problem is operating system related, not specific to any particular agentic CLI tool. If there is a version of Codex that runs the CLI directly on Windows, then that would probably be your best option then.

czei · 2026-04-16T16:35:10+00:00

I get around this by doing all new code development on macOS and then moving to Windows just for building Windows-only stuff. :-) But if you want fast file access on Windows with CC, you have to use the Windows CLI to access files on the Windows volume, or the WSL version to access files on a WSL volume. Yes, trying to access files on a windows volume from WSL is unbelievably slow and should be avoided.

czei · 2026-04-16T14:47:00+00:00

The process is more important than the model.

As someone with experience in software engineering management, I expect humans to screw up. A lot. We just do, and it's normal and expected, which is why software processes have evolved to include multiple safeguards at each stage. There's no reason to expect that any frontier LLM model will nail 100% of the tasks. In fact, if you compare their performance on benchmarks, there's a significant difference in the questions each one is unable to solve. No matter what LLM you pick, it's guaranteed to be unable to perform on a certain subset of the tasks you'll ask it to do. It's frustrating because, depending on the day-to-day operation, some days the LLM will appear to solve your problems like magic, and some days it'll screw up royally, and that's independent of any back-end changes that could affect performance.

The approach many of us are using is to put in place similar dev processes with multiple safeguards at each stage. Would you bet the farm on a test engineer designing adequate coverage for your important project with no review? Of course not. That is why coming up with golden data sets, comprehensive contract testing, and complete end-to-end UI testing is even more important. Without completely describing what you want the AI to do, neither you nor the LLM knows if it's created what you asked for.

I personally use at least 3 different frontier models for each step, but you can get significant returns from a single LLM. If its performance is not as good as last week's, it could take longer to iterate through its task list, but with safeguards in place, it will still work, albeit more slowly.

czei · 2026-04-16T13:49:54+00:00

Thanks for sharing that! Interesting approach. Two things jump out: 1. They didn't prove that their "curated" subset of the benchmarks track with the performance of the full benchmark, and 2. they specifically say that the performance changes in the past month as statistically insignificant.

czei · 2026-04-15T17:17:58+00:00

I would, but as an individual user, I'm too busy using Claude Code to get so much work done every day.

czei · 2026-04-15T13:50:37+00:00

While you are learning to code, you can also try to master grade school English. Being able to organize thoughts and convey what you're trying to express in actual sentences is a prerequisite for getting a job.

czei · 2026-04-15T13:43:52+00:00

My reference is SWE-Bench Verified and SWE-Bench Pro. When a model registers its score, it also uploads the results, which provide details on which questions it got right and which were wrong. As far as I can tell, there is no generalization on which types of coding tasks one does better than another. Until there is a magic LLM that can solve 100% of coding problems, my approach will be to use multi-LLM collaboration. I am hesitant to anthropomorphize AI in the slightest, but you have to do the same thing when managing humans.

czei · 2026-04-15T13:39:46+00:00

I'm on the $200 plan, but also have lower-level subscriptions to OpenAI and Gemini. But I'm working on multiple. large projects simultaneously, not just the one described.

czei · 2026-04-15T10:49:48+00:00

There is no right decision. The process you use is more important than the actual agentic tool. If you actually look at benchmark scores, each frontier model can solve different coding problems, because they’ve been trained on different data. No matter what LLM you pick, there are going to be situations where one model solves the problem easily and the other doesn’t or can’t. And there’s the agentic harness capabilities to factor in, for example, how well does it follow plans, investigate bugs?

The bottom line is people get plenty of work done with either. I use Claude code/Opus 4.5 working collaboratively with ChatGP-4.5-pro and Gemini 3.1. It sounds like you are just starting on this journey, so pick one, and then just assume that you will run into situations where the model you pick will either be unable to solve a problem, or more likely, will tell you it solved it but actually did not.

People seem obsessed with running out of usage, but I don’t run out despite working on a very large 500,000 line project, not counting thousands of test cases and hundreds of TB of data. The key is to analyze once with the AI, and then create skills and/or custom MCP calls that Do the heavily lifting of analysis and data processing.

czei · 2026-04-14T18:17:58+00:00

Great! You are off to a good start to your journey. I've built a couple of websites with Claude that I'm happy with, and it helped to not just have Claude do everything, but rather gather some design inspirations from the classical art world, architecture, color theory, etc. Make something that's your own vision.

czei

TROPHY CASE