If I want to mostly direct 1 or more agents I go straight to claude code (codex at home.)

But I still want to have a IDE at the end of the day, I do look and review the code. I still need to direct it to fix some things it doesn't do properly and I dont feel like giving up my understanding of the system I work with (despite what the vibe people say) I don't think it will lead to good outcomes or any benefit in the name of speed.

So for me this direction goes against what I find useful in cursor, and entirely seems to look out for the the 10+ agents crowd. Which makes sense, these are the guys spending +200 $ subscriptions and so on. I'll go back to Zed + CC or Codex.

By the way their new interface looks just like the Codex App.

If you give up your hands-on interaction with a system, you will lose your insight about it.

When you build an application yourself, you know every part of it. When you vibe code, trying to debug something in there is a black box of code you've never seen before.

That is one of the concerns I have when people suggest that LLMs are great for learning. I think the opposite, they're great for skipping 'learning' and just get the results. Learning comes from doing the grunt work.

I use LLMs to find stuff often, when I'm researching or I need to write an ADR, but I do the writing myself, because otherwise it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking that you know what the 'LLM' is talking about, when in fact you are clueless about it. I find it harder to write about something I'm not familiar with, and then I know I have to look more into it.