pi.dev stays flexible, but its DIY setup can become a burden
Claude, Codex, and were all tried before pi.dev became the preferred tool a few months ago. At first, pi.dev felt fast, uncluttered, and flexible enough to build exactly the setup needed.
Two months later, its CLI still worked well, and the freedom to create custom parts remained valuable. The drawback was that the setup kept becoming a do-it-yourself project, creating a steady mental burden over which changes were worth making.
Larger, verified are wanted for common complex that are possible but inefficient to alone. Ad hoc teams also tend to configure pi.dev differently, leaving little shared experience or reusable benefit.
Key points
- Claude, Codex, and were tried before settling on pi.dev.
- Speed, a clean design, and deep customization were the main advantages.
- After two months, deciding how to keep adjusting the setup became mentally tiring.
- Larger, verified could prevent people from ing complex common .
- Different setups across ad hoc teams make shared learning and reuse difficult.