Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Pawel Jozefiak's avatar

The multi-agent architecture point really resonates with me. I've been running an AI agent called Wiz built on Claude Code that handles everything from email automation to job searching for clients, and the biggest lesson I've learned is that orchestration matters more than raw model capability. Having specialized agents for distinct tasks (one for web research, another for content creation, another for deployment) consistently outperforms trying to make one agent do everything.

What strikes me about Cursor 2.0's approach is the emphasis on sandboxed environments. When I first started building Wiz, I underestimated how much time would go into permission boundaries and making sure the agent couldn't accidentally wreck something important. The fact that they're baking this into the core product suggests they've learned from the same painful debugging sessions most of us have endured.

The "product engineering" framing is spot on. The gap I see opening up isn't between people who can code and people who can't - it's between people who understand what to build and those who just know how to build. AI handles the mechanical parts increasingly well, but knowing which features actually matter, what to cut, when to ship - that's still very much a human skill.

I wrote about my own journey through these tools recently, comparing Cursor, Google AI Studio, and a few others from the trenches of actually shipping with them: https://thoughts.jock.pl/p/cursor-vs-google-ai-studio-antigravity-ide-comparison-2025

No posts

Ready for more?