I use Bun and I'm concerned too but it's still too early to tell.

Personally my experience with Bun has been 100% positive so far.

I'm aware full Node support is not there yet and may never happen but with dependencies that support Bun it's been a smooth ride for me.

> But from the outside, Claude Code looks like a tool moving in the wrong direction. More restrictions, billing weirdness, surprise behavior based on text in commits. That is textbook enshittification.

I've never used Claude Code, but this person doesn't understand what "textbook enshittification" means. "Enshittification" is a feature of certain kinds of business models, progressing through the following stages:

1. Giving away a product free to users, subsidized by venture capital, to gain a monopoly

2. Switching to advertising, then abusing users on behalf of the real customers, advertisers

3. Using monopoly power to abuse real customers (advertisers) to extract as much money as possible

Anthropic's business model doesn't have a "user / customer" dichotomy; their paid users are their customers. And they don't have a monopoly they can use to extract money yet.

ETA: In other words, "Enshittification" isn't just random; you're making the user experience worse in order to make advertiser experience better; and then making advertiser experience worse in order to extract maximum profit. The only complaint that could vaguely be related to profit is the OpenClaw stuff, and that's entirely due to trying to keep the "all-you-can-eat" model for non-OpenClaw users, rather than having to switch everything to metered.

Mostly in my day to day routine, where is use Claude Code maybe 90% of the time, I don’t see that it’s become that bad. Yes they’ve made some questionable decisions on API usage and OpenClaw but I feel like this post is making it out to be worse than it is.

That being said I’ve been worried about the future of Bun anyway. Especially if the AI bubble pops. Then again, it’s open source.

They know the problem. It's better than they don't.

> Will we see issues start popping up in Bun that make it seem like the team doesn't even dogfood their own product? I don't know, but I'm not sure I want to continue using it just in case.

I sympathize with the general premise. The reaction to move away seems pre-mature though.

It sounds like `bun` is still performing just as well as before, and this sentiment isn't based on concrete changes. I also wouldn't expect infrastructure like `bun` to evolve in the way a consumer-facing product, especially one scaling as quickly as Claude Code, can.

Are Bun and Deno in the room with us right now?

I’m confident that any unhappiness with Claude Code is at least 95% downstream of Anthropic seeing demand scale their revenue by ~3X in 6 months from a $multi-billion annual base.

Their product focus, roadmap, or execution is likely a rounding error in the face of that tsunami.

Frankly, it’s shocking they’re doing so well relative to, say, GitHub.

So who controls NodeJS? https://openjsf.org/governance has Microsoft as the chair. And Microsoft owns npm. It's kinda hard to avoid a corp controlling these tools.

The author seems more focused on the thing where Anthropic fights OpenClaw usage unless you have the right billing set up for that. Frankly I just don't care about those complaints, all the LLM services want you to set up a non-subsidized billing method to use OpenClaw because it uses lots of tokens. It doesn't mean they're going to crap on Bun.

The only reason I don't use Bun is I never ran into a situation where Node didn't cut it. Even though my least favorite tech corp controls Node.

+1 I'll stick with pnpm for now