s4i

Thanks for sharing. I thought I was the only one with this problem. It’s very irritating and has made me question why I left iTerm.

OK that's the file I've been backing up and importing I believe. But it's in a binary format. There's `plutil -p ~/Library/Preferences/com.googlecode.iterm2.plist` but that doesn't help when looking at the git history.

While I'm not a hard core terminal emulator expert or tweaker, it was a bit of a learning curve to get into Ghostty after iTerm2. I hope this latest release makes it easier to edit the splits, haven't tested yet.

But the biggest thing that made me stay on Ghostty was that there's a freaking config file. With iTerm you had to export the profile and keybindings, and then import them on a new system which was clumsy, and easy to forget. Now ghostty.config is just one of my dotfiles, with a clear understandable git history, I love it.

An easy fix, just name it iPhone 18 and all the people will buy it because it’s the default. Have a Max for all the actual big screen addicts.

Reading long walls of unrendered markdown is where the TUI is not fun and the GUI can shine. Especially when illustrations come to play.

Also editing your own prompts with a normal text input is far better IMO (instead of whatever magical box Anthropic or OpenCode has shoehorned into the terminal).

Kodi does support playing DVD backups (.iso or VIDEO_TS) with menus and everything.

This, and the keep/undo flow, forking agent sessions (including renaming them)... The UX could be better at places but the core features of what Cursor has (for someone who came from VS Code) is an unbeatable mix. Really would like to find something else.

I did try Kiro which seems to have the same philosophy but it's just not there. Most of the features I like in Cursor are missing.

Some other commenters mentioned that VS Code + Copilot would be better these days. Dunno.

In my opinion, this kind of a benchmark doesn't tell much about the models' capabilities on normal software development tasks. It's fun to look at the differences in the output of course, but how often would anyone prompt with very brief instructions, without even hinting the model about caring about any of the details in the outcome nor the implementation?

When there are implicit boundaries, negotiable tradeoffs, taste, whatever, in the mix, then the differences in the model capabilities become way more interesting.

Isn’t that a huge simplification? Of course the way you phrase the prompt can carry semantic meaning, maybe subtly, but still. And sometimes that matters a little and sometimes a lot. I’ve stopped numerous agent sessions over the last few weeks to reword my initial prompt to get the agent off an unintended track.

This. I gather interesting posts this way in my browser tabs in the phone and everytime I finish reading something I click "Back" and there's usually a discussion there, unless I opened the link originally from somewhere else than HN.

> Help people when they explicitly ask for help. When someone asks, the cause and effect reverse. You’re no longer imposing your judgment on someone who never wanted it.

Maybe this is why pull request reviews can become contentious. The reviewer thinks the author is open for feedback while in fact it’s just the widely accepted practice and team/company enfored that you are supposed to give feedback.

I don’t understand this take. In my company a lot of the Claude Coders seem to be very uninterested or unaware of the code they are producing, while I in Cursor usually click ”Keep”/”Undo” on specific code blocks (with little edits) or sometimes the whole file at once if it’s a low risk part of the codebase. I fail to see how this workflow produces inferior code vs shooting in the blind and maybe skimming a huge diff in one go.