Claude is genuinely impressive, but it doesn t remove the need to understand programming fundamentals. You still need to know how systems connect, where data lives, how state is managed, what environments are (dev vs staging vs production), how deployments work, and how things actually run (& fail) in the real world.
For developers, Claude is an incredible accelerator. For non-programmers, it can feel magical at first, but at some point, real engineering knowledge becomes unavoidable.
Claude Skills are folders of instructions and resources that make Claude a specialist at your specific tasks. Package your team's workflows, from brand guidelines to data analysis, and use them across Claude apps, Code, and the API.
I am not a developer. I am a sales/business guy who gets an obscene amount of value out of ChatGPT. It remembers who I am, seems to give me better answers than Claude, and I have the impression that it s a leading model, whereas Claude is top 10 maybe top five, but not top three. With that said, all I hear online is that Claude is better on all fronts. It s better for coding, more ethical, and will last longer than ChatGPT. I even hear it has better models. If that s the case, why do I feel like it pales in comparison to my ChatGPT experience? Why does my own experience not align with the broader appeal I see for Claude every day? Is it because I don't code or am I just using it poorly?
With the "think" tool, we're giving Claude the ability to include an additional thinking step—complete with its own designated space—as part of getting to its final answer.
This is the first release in Anthropic's 3.5 model family. Sonnet now outperforms competitor models on key evaluations, at twice the speed of Claude 3 Opus and one-fifth of the cost. The team pulled together something really special here.
It's the strongest model for building complex agents. It's the best model at using computers. And it shows substantial gains on tests of reasoning and math.
