I am not sure we should dismiss what they have today. Nobody has yet to come close with a full package ide that works well for coding. Is that not a moat? It is easy for my to in my head discount it, thinking that I could build something myself but between autocomplete and their workflow for agent use, it feels like they have some tangible moat emerging.

▲

virgilp 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

If we ignore cost (which is kinda hard to ignore), I feel Codex kinda' does it for me. Sure it's not really an editor but I find I don't need that _that much_ and it's easy to launch an external editor (they actually have the feature).

The ironic thing is that half a year ago, after trying factory.ai I thought chat-first interface was a stupid idea that will never work.

▲

chillfox an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Have you tried Zed?

I haven’t tried Cursor, so don’t know how they compare, but I like Zed a lot.

Anyway, would love to see a comparison from someone who has used a recent version of each.

	▲	turastory an hour ago \| parent [-]
		A few years ago I tried Zed when it was still pretty early, but eventually settled on Cursor. I gave Zed another shot a few days ago because Cursor’s worktree support still feels pretty weak. In my setup I use multiple agents like Claude Code and Codex, and Zed’s ACP support makes it pretty nice to manage them all as “threads” in one place. Worktree switching also feels much smoother. Overall the experience was pretty good, but the way the agent and editor are integrated still feels a bit lacking, and tab completion is the big one for me. Cursor’s tab completion is still the best I’ve used. So now I’m using both. For work that needs a lot of focus and careful iteration, I use Cursor. For things that are easy to split into worktrees and hand off to agents, I use Zed with Claude/Codex.