I’d argue Anthropic’s successs comes down to first mover advantage with Claude Code, which itself was a bit of a fluke.
When it came to OpenAI: Codex initially tried to be an autonomous / web based product where you were more hands off.
Claude Code on the other hand was local with iterative developer feedback (augment, not replace), contrary to where a lot of folks thought A.I. was going.
Funnily enough however, Anthropic did shortly after release Claude Code Web, which was similar to the first form of Codex.
Claude Code Web I believe was somewhat of a flap and I don’t know of anyone who actually uses it, cementing the fact that augmentation, not replacement, is the future of A.I.
As it turns out, the way to have a successful A.I. product is to consider the fact that humans still need to use it!
Jamie Turner@jamwt
Anthropic's success could be attributed to the fact that they have better product design. They understood the actual business use cases, tweaked accordingly, and built something that works well for the kinds of jobs people are actually trying to do rather than chasing a platonic ideal of "smart" that nobody can agree on how to define.
English
