There's not so much as a screenshot of MC on their official page. Hard to say.
Did the author say their product was better?
I think it's fair to ask of any new program why to use it rather than an existing option. And there can be lots of reasons - more active development, new features, less buggy, smaller program (uses less disk/memory, easier to be less buggy), easier to install, easier to use, whatever. And the author of a program doesn't necessarily need to have an answer, especially not early on; programming is sometimes its own reward, and sometimes advantages only become obvious later. But as a user, yeah it's useful to know what advantage this thing has over all the other things that do the ~same stuff.
> why to use it
Of course. But that's not what he asked.
I won't say that mc is really buggy, nor that it's large. But even if it were, it's weird to not even mention it, let alone compare with it, while likely most of the target audience has been using mc for years (or decades, like me).
> or decades, like me
Heh, I ported mc to Apple's A/UX back in the early 90's!
Thank you! My first experience was building it from source under Digital Unix (on an Alpha 264) in 1995.