I still am mind blown at how bad CC is as software. It’s just not that hard of a problem. I get that harnesses aren’t trivial, but they’re not insane either. And the fact that it’s running on a JS runtime (that they bought!) is also crazy. Why not Go/BubbleTea? Why not literally anything native? It makes no sense
I don’t want to be a jackass, but it’s hard to take anything Boris says seriously when he’s headed up such weird software. And it’s not like resourcing or money is an issue for them. If Claude was so damn good, why does CC suck?
I'm surprised you think Claude Code is good software. I find it so hard to use because it is fundamentally constrained as a TUI. It is buggy, clunky and slow. It is sooo slow.
One example of what is particularly bad with it: tool calls and progress. Codex UI does it so much better. The way in which CC waits for a task to complete etc is really poorly done compared to Codex.
Another thing that's missing: no way to continue a side chat in Claude Code - this is easy in Codex with /side and it is super usefu.
Claude Code has /btw which I think is the equivalent of /side in Codex.
I don't think Claude Code is perfect software, but I don't think fact that Codex has a slightly nicer implementation of certain patterns makes Claude Code bad software.
Harnesses try to solve a wide range of complex, open-ended UX problems, so there isn't a perfect one.
CC might be the best one I've used if I give each major UX aspect a rating 1-5 and then average them. For example, it has a decent subagent viewer.
Meanwhile, Codex doesn't even have one, and its subagent tool call is so buggy that the parent agent sometimes doesn't even know why the child died.
Being a TUI is very limiting, yes, though that limitation isn't the harness' fault.
weakfish · · focus · HN ↗
I don’t want to be a jackass, but it’s hard to take anything Boris says seriously when he’s headed up such weird software. And it’s not like resourcing or money is an issue for them. If Claude was so damn good, why does CC suck?
simonw · · focus · HN ↗
Seems pretty good to me. Presumably this is about the TUI version?
simianwords · · focus · HN ↗
One example of what is particularly bad with it: tool calls and progress. Codex UI does it so much better. The way in which CC waits for a task to complete etc is really poorly done compared to Codex.
Another thing that's missing: no way to continue a side chat in Claude Code - this is easy in Codex with /side and it is super usefu.
simonw · · focus · HN ↗
I don't think Claude Code is perfect software, but I don't think fact that Codex has a slightly nicer implementation of certain patterns makes Claude Code bad software.
simianwords · · focus · HN ↗
it tries but /btw can't be invoked at any time. it is blocked until the reasoning is done. you also can't continue the chat with it
you also can't have tool calls inside it
hombre_fatal · · focus · HN ↗
CC might be the best one I've used if I give each major UX aspect a rating 1-5 and then average them. For example, it has a decent subagent viewer.
Meanwhile, Codex doesn't even have one, and its subagent tool call is so buggy that the parent agent sometimes doesn't even know why the child died.
Being a TUI is very limiting, yes, though that limitation isn't the harness' fault.