It works off the Claude Code SDK, which mean it doesn't support many of the built in slash commands - it doesn't support /compact, which is 100% necessary because when you use this implementation enough, you'll eventually get a "Prompt too long" error message with no ability to do anything about it. Since you can't see how far you are in the context window, it's a deal breaker, since you have to start a fresh chat and might run out of room before you can ask it to create a summary prompt for continuing.
There is no way to switch models that I can tell - I think it just picks up on your default model - and there is no way to switch to Plan mode, which has become absolutely crucial to my workflow.
I didn't see Zed picking up on problems reported in the IDE, it was defaulting to running 'tsc -b' in my directories.
At this point it's better to run a terminal inside Zed and work from there. The official response in the Zed Discord has been "talk to your local Anthropic rep" to get them to support Zed's Agent Client Protocol (ACP).
I set up my directives to maintain a work log for all work that I do. I instruct Claude Code to maintain a full log of the conversation, all commands executed including results, all failures as well as successes, all learnings and discoveries, as well as a plan/task list including details of what's next. When context is getting full, I do a /clear and start the new session by re-reading the work log and it is able to jump right back into action without confusion.
Work logs are great because the context becomes portable - you can share it between different tools or engineers and can persist the context for reuse later if needed.
That makes the compaction summary a lot more focused and useful.
edit: But a work log/PRD is essential regardless!
I think both /compact and /clear are valuable / have their own use cases.
my small mental mode: - really quick fix / need to go over board with context -> just /compact + continue pushing - next phase -> ask for handover document or update worklog, and then send fresh one to new phase.
This is probably very similar to /compact except I have a lot of control over the resulting context and can edit it and /clear again and retry if I run into an issue.
I found the interface very nice but quickly ran up against limitations on prompt length (it wasn't that long) for example. I am used to being able to give detailed instructions, or even paste in errors/tracebacks.
I'll check back in in a few months.
One thing that still suffers is AI autocomplete. While I tried Zed's own solution and supermaven (now part of Cursor), I still find Cursor's AI autocomplete and predictions much more accurate (even pulling up a file via search is more accurate in Cursor).
I am glad to hear that Zed got a round of funding. https://zed.dev/blog/sequoia-backs-zed This will go a long way to creating real competition to Cursor in the form of a quality IDE not built on VSCode
I'd also like to see a company like Zed allow me to buy a license of their autocomplete AI model to run locally rather than renting and running it on their servers.
I'd also pay for something in the 10-15b parameter range that used more limited training data focused almost entirely on programming documentation and books along with professional business writing. Something with the coding knowledge of Qwen Coder combined with the professionalism and predictability of IBM Granite 3. I'd pay quite a lot for such an agent (especially if it got updates every couple of months that worked in new documentation, bugfixes, github threads, etc to keep the answers up-to-date).
It is indeed a fine tuned Qwen2.5-Coder-7B
Unfortunately, pretraining on a lot of data (~everything they can get their hands on) is needed to give current LLMs their "intelligence" (for whatever definition of intelligence). Using less training data doesn't work as well for now. There definitely not enough programming and business writing to train a good model only on that.
Maybe it also needs some amount of other training data for basic speech patterns, but I’d again show IBM Granite as an example that professional and to-the-point LLMs are possible.
You mean an locally run OpenAI API compatible server?
I genuinely don't understand why one would want to AI autocomplete. Deterministic autocomplete is amazing but AI autocomplete completely breaks my flow. Even just the few seconds of lag absolutely drive me nuts and then it often it is close to what I wanted but not exactly what I wanted. Either I am in control or the generative AI but mixing both feels so wrong.
I am happy people find use for the autocomplete but ugh I really don't get how they can stomach it. Maybe it is for people that are not good at typing or something.
If performance were equal, I’d strongly consider going back to GH Copilot just because I don’t love my main IDE being a fork. I occasionally encounter IDE-level bugs in Cursor that are unrelated to the AI features. Perhaps they’re in the upstream as well, but I always wonder if a. there will be a delay in merging fixes or b. whether the fork is introducing new bugs. Just an inherent tradeoff I guess of forking a complex codebase.
I heard Windsurf is quite good and the closest to Cursor magic, available on Windsurf free plan (unlimited autocomplete). I should give that a try.
For me my aha moment came with Claude Code and Sonnet 4. Before that AI coding was more of a novelty than actually useful.
Zed is hitting all the checkboxes when it comes to performance and user experience (yeah, I care about that in my editor).
I'm not a hardcore user of AI, but I do make use of Zed's inline suggestions and occasional use of Opus 4.1 through my Zed subscription.
Not quite there with emacs/vim but it's a much more accessible environment and more convenient for typical workloads.
That said, vscode's UX sucks ass to me. I believe it's the best UX for people that want a "good enough and just works" editor, but I'm an emacs/vim (yes both) guy and I don't like taking my hands off the keyboard ever. Vscode just doesn't have a good keyboard only workflow with vim bindings like emacs and nvim do.
With the advent of coding agents, I really hope we see devs move away - back to the traditional approach of using native frameworks/languages as now, you can write for 1 platform and easily task AI to handle other platforms.
This is literally their whole distinguishing feature and people are switching because of it and just it.
Zed seems to have been hugely succesful recently and their only real distinguishing feature is "fast from the ground up". It has less features than vscode. Worse AI features than Cursor. but people seem to love it nonetheless.
Turns out there is a market for people fed up with VScode-derivatives.
> My experience in Atom always felt like bending over backwards to try to achieve something that in principle should have been simple. Lay out some lines and read the position of the cursor at this spot in between these two characters. That seems fundamentally doable and yet it always felt like the tools were not at our disposal. They were very far away from what we wanted to do.
> Nathan: It was a nightmare. I mean, the ironic thing is that we created Electron to create Atom, but I can't imagine a worse application for Electron than a code editor, I don't know. For something simpler, it's probably fine, the memory footprint sucks, but it's fine. But for a code editor you just don't have the level of control I think you need to do these things in a straightforward way at the very least. It's always some... backflip.
Electron has been a powerful tool for quickly iterating UIs and plugin architectures in VSCode, Brackets, Atom, etc, now the window is open for a modern editor to deliver that experience without the massive memory footprint and UI stalls.
then it's basically just a proxy for node/npm afaik.
https://zed.dev/blog/videogame https://zed.dev/blog/we-have-to-start-over
I've been using Augment for more than a year in Jetbrains IDEs, and been very impressed by it, both the autocomplete and the Cursor-style agent. I've looked at Cursor and couldn't figure out why anyone needed to use a dedicated IDE when Augment exists as a plugin. Colleagues who have used Cursor have switched to Augment and say it's better.
Seems to me like Augment is an AI tool flying under most people's radar; not sure why it's not all over Hacker News.
Give the agent as much context as possible and let it go, review and correct the implementation, let it go again, finish it off…
The I just find the autocomplete a little annoying in my workflow, especially with the local self-hosted models I need to use at work.
Claude Code on corporate approved AWS Bedrock account.
Right now it's borderline impossible to write code, the autocompletion results are loaded ultra fast and Cursor maps different buttons to autocompleting functionality.
It's no longer usable for me.
I'm fine getting autocompletes, but I decide when to trigger it, ideally after reading it, like this I can't even type.
It's not only the autocomplete. I've never had any issue with Cursor while Zed panicked, crashed and behaved inconsistently often (the login indicator would flicker between states while you were logged in and vice versa, clicking some menus would crash it and similar annoyances). Another strange thing I've observed is the reminder in the UI that rating an AI prompt would send your _entire chat history_ to Zed, which might be a major red flag for many people. One could accidentally rate it without being aware of that and then Zed has access to large and potentially sensitive parts of your company's code - I can't imagine any company being happy with that.
>I am glad to hear that Zed got a round of funding. https://zed.dev/blog/sequoia-backs-zed
There are plenty of great VCs out there, going with Sequoia will definitely come with some unpleasant late consequences.
>This will go a long way to creating real competition to Cursor in the form of a quality IDE not built on VSCode
There are many "real competitors" to Cursor, like Windsurf, (Neo-)Vim, Helix, Emacs, Jetbrains. It's also worth being aware that not everybody is too excited about letting AI slop be the dominant part of their work. Some people prefer sprinkling a little AI here and there, instead of letting it do pretty much everything.
Glad it's working for you but I think you might be the only one!
I’ll keep an eye on this ‘proper’ Zed support for sure, although the current setup is working just fine so I might wait for v0.2.
Huh? it takes it sometimes like 40s to find some file with the fuzzy search for me. In that time im going to the terminal running a "find" command with lots of * before I get some result in cursor
My difficulty in finding editors that fit my desired input scheme kinda reminds me of the old pre-LSP days. Where you'd chose an editor based on it's language features. I wonder if we need some sort of common editor interface to allow these sort of text editing primitives to work in new editors, as it seems to be considerable friction.
Yi was kind of designed like this, I believe. You could compile in an emacs-like model, a vim-like model, or presumably make your own model.
I've used Helix and Kakoune in addition to Emacs and Vim, but dealing with the limitations/featureset/plugin treadmill gets a little tiring.
I have been following Zed, and it seems that they have rearchitected things to enable adding Helix mode and making the editing model a bit more modular, but it's still fairly new. They are fixing bugs pretty quickly. I will have to try it again.
They have a nice discussion here:
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/discussions/6447
They reference Ki, which also looks cool, and they out some of Helix's inconsistencies in their comparison: https://ki-editor.github.io/ki-editor/docs/comparisons/
I prefered Kakoune to Helix (it was more consistent). But to your point, being able to swap these things out more easily would let you choose an editor based on features, and not tradeoff between features and an ergonomic editing model.
Ironically you can use Ki inside of VSCode (and I know you can use Vim that way too), but VSCode is so darn bloated and slow...
But emacs. Emacs is the one that can truly become anything you like. And with lsp and treesitter being finally in it. I've finally came to my senses and started building my helix in it.
It's definitely easier with LLMs now, but still considerably hard.
But the team is out there ; )
Last time I tried it, though, I immediately ran into parts of the keymap that hadn’t been translated yet. I’m already at my limit of tools in beta mode/built from my own fork, so I switched back to Vim mode – where the team is on record explaining their thorough testing methodology.
As a Helix user of two years, I sometimes wonder if I actually like the Helix keymap (certainly some parts are nicer than Vim’s) or if I simply tolerate it because of how nice it is to get a polished TUI IDE out of the box. Either way, my muscle memory expects Helix mode now, rather than Vim.
If you want to try something similar to Helix in emacs, there's meow-mode. While I'm not a helix user myself, it shouldn't be too difficult to get meow to work like helix.
commit b400449a58507cca1fa007197929c2cfd6beabbe
Author: Nathan Sobo <nathan@zed.dev>
Date: Sat Feb 20 10:02:34 2021 -0700
Start rebuilding with a cleanly-separated UI framework
Been wanting to learn Helix more and using it for small edits but never saw a Helix mode in any editor yet
But, I find Zed challenging to adopt due to random nuances. First, settings management is a mixed bag and sometimes I just want a quick way to open the "settings.json" from the settings pane without fussing around. Then I'd like the "settings.json" to stay open (reopen) on a restart of Zed. Then I'd like the ability to use an LLM that doesn't have native tool calling support, which Zed seems to be the only app I've used that doesn't have a workaround. Then I'd like the UI to be a little easier to navigate as a new user, it feels a bit scattered and overwhelming at times.
I haven't used Zed much and I may give it another shot (soon), but it very much feels like a tool built by engineers for engineers... Which is great for power users, but seems not so great for new adopters.
I don't think the shortcomings are a blocker, but they are the reason I haven't adopted Zed. The shortcomings are just enough for me to take a step back and say "maybe I'll try again later".
I assume that keybind is also configurable?
The keybinding system is also nuts if you turn on Vim mode, but I think I'd eventually get used to that. But functions need to be a different color than arguments, which need to be a different color than local variables... Just non-negotiable.
I look forward to trying it again sometime soon! The AI features seem rad, this included.
I couldn't seem to get any message through without tool calling instructions in the payload. What you're describing sounds exactly like what I attempted.
I tried something like over 6 different variations of model configs with restarts of Zed in-between. The documentation and what Zed tries to configure are different as well. The fields don't match up with the built in type checking. I tried "openai" with the endpoint configured, "openai_compatible", and even "openrouter" hoping the REST signatures would be match well enough. Each configured with various fields to turn tool calling off and every single request that hit the REST server had tool calling.
"New text thread" should also have no tools I believe.
- I don't want to constantly auto-accept. The point of auto-accept is that it auto-accepts. Seems like a bug.
- It'd be great if I could go back to a specific message and delete the ones I don't want, similar to the CLI version.
- Where is Plan Mode? Maybe I just couldn't figure out how to get to it.
- I can't easily see Background Tasks.
- How do I change models?
- How do I create new sessions (via /new for instance)? Why is `/clear` not supported?
- I don't want to see the entirety of the edits in the terminal. Can they be collapsed by default? Or maybe show a preview?
At first I was very dismissive of it due to being Apple-first but they've turned it around with really good Linux support and it seems like Windows soon as well!
I just hope I'm wrong about the medium term impact of the VC funding but rushing AI AI AI out seems to be a sign of that rather than fixing fundamental issues that remain such as the ugly font rendering.
- Zed: VC funded open source
- Sublime Text: indie closed source
None is ideal, but I guess we all know why.
I have a $200/month Anthropic Max subscription that I use for help in exploring and coding my math research. As of now no AI model can compete with Opus 4.1 for helping me with my most challenging tasks. I try every one I can. Gemini 2.5 Pro is great for code review and a second opinion, but drives off the road when it takes the wheel.
I tried a $100/monthly plan and spent $20 in an hour the first time I went over; an API key is not a practical way to use Opus 4.1.
There are plenty of concerns using Clause Code in a terminal, that Zed could address. Mainly, I can't "see over AI's shoulder" so I need to also test. The most careful extension I coded was terminal sessions we could share as equal participants. Nevertheless, as a rule I'd attribute my relative success to just living with shortcomings, as if a "partner that snores". AI loses track of the current directory all the time, or forgets my variable naming and comment conventions? Just keep going, fix it later.
How can I get equivalent value to my Max plan, using Claude Code Opus 4.1 with Zed?
Yes Opus has been good with instruction following and same with Gemini for 2nd opinions and brainstorming.
They're not perfect but definitely I see plenty of value in both tools as far as they are reliable services.
I don't like the cloud based functioning of the models as the experience is extremely flaky and not reliable. I've gound OpenAI Codex and the models in codex too be more reliable in responses and consistency of the quality service.
I would still prefer to have a fully locally hosted equivalent of what ever the state of the art coding assisstant models to speed up work.
That will take time though as in with every technological evolution. We will be stuck with time sharing for sometime haha. Until the resource aspect of this technology scales and economizes to become ubiquitous.
I'm guessing claude code works roughly the same way?
I switched to gemini 2.5 pro, after some prompt tweaking nothing really beats in actual coding tasks imho.
I don't know, it feels like Zed popularity is just people chasing the latest editor hotness, a time-honored traditional programmer ritual to be sure, but still, just a ritual. And now it seems zed devs have to put AI in front of all other initiatives, probably because of the VC funding they took.
I could see not wanting to use VSCode for other reasons, like MS pivoting back to "be evil", but at least in my little bubble, performance is not one of them.
I tried Zed several times and I just don't see the point.
The main issues with VScode over something like the Jetbrains IDEs is that language servers are just not as powerful or as integrated to the IDE as the Jetbrains solution can be and Zed does nothing to solve it.
I don't think it being a native app offers much added value.
VSCodium starts up faster for me than Zed which I compiled yesterday with release mode. Here I am referring to the time spent just on waiting for the window to start up, not the extensions and all that I am using with VSCodium, that takes time. I wonder why this is, that VSCodium shows the window quicker than Zed.
Regardless, I will give Zed a try with Go development. I assume Zed has extensions, too? Are there any extensions for Go? If so, I might replace VSCodium with Zed but only if it has similar features to VSCodium. If not, I will stick to VSCodium as there is no reason for me to change.
I wonder why the startup time is slow though, may have to debug that one.
That doesn't mean Zed will have all the other extensions that VS Code has... Recently added the new SQL Server extension(s) and it's been at least interesting, in a way slightly better than using SMMS. It's pretty much burrowing the UI from Azure Data Studio (or whatever it was called). Haven't tried similar for PG/SQLite etc yet.
Memory usage of the IDE doesn't matter much when your language servers can eat 10s of gigs of RAM.
But the comparison here is broader than electron apps...
In this demographics, hype rarely is connected to technical qualities, they are used more as a post-hoc rationalization.
They built it from scratch and not on electron bloat so it is a much better foundation. It will take a long time to reach parity with vscode but when it does it will smoke it.
It is an editor made for people who are used to double-clicking individual files rather than opening a folder in VS Code, so they close and open their editor dozens or even hundreds of times per day.
Let's say VS Code takes 5 seconds to boot.
Some programmers may argue: "yes, I spend 3 hours on a project or just leave it open overnight, so 5 seconds per week is nothing"
But here is not the case, it is for programmers who come from Notepad/Sublime/Notepad++/emacs/vi, and who opens a single file and closes the editor right after.
If you work 2 hours, maybe 4 files per minute, this means 120 * 4 openings = 480 openings.
It means you would have wasted 2400 seconds (40 minutes per day!) waiting for VS Code to open (about 33% of the 2-hour work session spent waiting)
Yes, like with Notepad or Zed, you lose some features like Colors or Syntax checking, but still, time is the most precious thing in life.
For users who come from very advanced but slow text editors like Microsoft Word (used in coding exams: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/76102874/single-and-doub... or programming courses: https://youtu.be/0TVugOJtAiU?t=162 ), this is truly revolutionary and life-changing.
No one ever closes emacs.
How can any software developer work when they need to open and close 4 files per minute? I have never met or heard of anyone working like this.
Instead of learning from what worked and fixing what didn't, they just threw everything away and wandered off in some totally different direction. They did the reactionary kind of learning instead of the theory-building kind: https://xkcd.com/242/
Meanwhile on Linux and Windows, they still implement subpixel rendering so fonts look great on 1440p.
I know some people have bad experiences with 1440p and macos for some reason, but I haven't had any such experience that I could not fix. So all these are not universal. Some people act as if any monitor below 200dpi will look terrible on macsos. This is definitely not the case.
1) How much font hinting to apply. More hinting changes the shape to make glyphs line up better with pixels so that less antialiasing is required. macOS prefers very light hinting to preserve shapes at the cost of blurriness. This is what you are talking about.
2) Subpixel rendering. This effectively triples the horizontal resolution when rendering fonts, and does not affect the shape at all. Fonts look dramatically better on normal dpi displays when using it. macOS removed support for this many years ago. This is what I'm talking about.
If they'd used Skia (which is what Electron and Chromium use), they would've got this for free. Instead they tried to reinvent the world and didn't realise how big the world was.
MacOS native apps have had great sub-pixel rendering all along, but I guess since we have to develop everything in Electron now it's time to reimplement all the exiting functionality.
- Zed is not an electron app
- In the linked issue you can see that this issue does not exist in Electron.
Apple removed subpixel anti-aliasing in Mojave, seven years ago, because it's not necessary on the HiDPI/Retina displays they ship as standard. They still do greyscale anti-aliasing but that's not the same thing as subpixel.
Discussion from the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17476873
I disagree. Subpixel anti-aliasing triples the available horizontal resolution, and makes text crisper. The algorithms are known and regardless of the density it should always be applied to text and vector graphics elements.
The RGB stripe layout is so useful that OLED manufacturers are moving to it in 2026, away from the long-derided PenTile where magenta/green fringing is seen even on the densest displays.
In fact rendering on macOS is completely broken, and I don't know how people stand by it. At any scaling factor selected that is not a perfect factor of the actual hardware resolution (the 'looks like' value in Settings), the final framebuffer is scaled and interpolated to the display resolution, and everything is noticeably more blurry.
Windows has had some form of hardware-independent rendering since Windows 7, and proper pixel density control arrived in Windows 8.
That said, for something like a text editor where fonts are central the entire application and the worst subpixel edge cases like animation are unlikely to come up, it's maybe not unreasonable to ask them to go the extra mile. It's going to be a sticking point on Windows and Linux for a long time if they don't.
- Git UI is extremely barebones with no support for other VCS
- No merge tool or side-by-side diffs
- Configuration is all JSON
- Would be nice having a full file tree for the search editor instead of just the list; having the functionality split between a tab and the outline panel is quite clunky.
- Ability to move panels (files/git/console/debugger/etc) into standalone windows or other configurations (multiple docks per side, multiple copies of the same panel linked to a specific tab).
Zed is basically a slightly more featured text editor, so it does a good job when I just want to open something quickly and do small edits. So it's really replacing Sublime Text.
But I find myself hopping out to other tools when I'm using Zed which wasn't really common with IntelliJ. So I still want to use a proper IDE for proper development work.
Have Claude Code resolve merge conflicts, problem solved.
Curious as someone dabbling with building an editor: what do you prefer? A different configuration language? A GUI? How do you save and sync settings? Just with JetBrains account sync?
> Ability to move panels (files/git/console/debugger/etc) into standalone windows
Is Zed's "zoom in" feature (shift-escape) that quickly maximises the active pane (excluding the file browser/git pane) enough? Or are you looking for the separate window experience of IntelliJ? (e.g. JetBrains lets you pop-out the commit window, I believe, which can be nice since once you close it you're back in the editor with nothing to switch or rearrange.)
Really just a GUI for editing, the storage format can still be JSON and synced/backed up however you handle text files.
It just really nice having settings grouped by categories, with dropdowns for possible values, indicators for changes from default values or values overridden by project settings, search/hide/filters, and tooltips for what it does.
Right now the experience with Zed is: open the settings file, open the default settings file for documentation, and basically use search and copy-paste magic value strings/int/float/nulls into the right nested object/key.
> Is Zed's "zoom in" feature (shift-escape) that quickly maximises the active pane (excluding the file browser/git pane) enough? Or are you looking for the separate window experience of IntelliJ? (e.g. JetBrains lets you pop-out the commit window, I believe, which can be nice since once you close it you're back in the editor with nothing to switch or rearrange.)
Really the separate window experience (including the file browser/git pane). Really nice having the git panel just open on a window so you can quickly glance at changed files and quickly jump back to them for more editing. Or having search results able to spawn tabs in another pane/window so you don't have to keep switching back to search or rearranging the tab after opening the file from it.
Or even just expanding the workspace across monitors. Right now you can't even move tabs into its own window or across windows.
I don't care about the configuration language so much personally (though JSON is of course pretty lame in a lot of ways for that task.)
Here you go: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
> I found Copilot tab completion completion to be VERY slow in Zed, for some reason.
> Zed still takes a relatively long time to start on my old desktop. I thought something was wrong but no, it is just THAT slow
> I have tried it out and by default it was so slow as to be unusable. After discovering it required some customization in /etc (because it's the only GUI application that fails to recognize my GPU on a very popular distro with next to zero customization, because I game a lot on Linux - weird how that's a me problem and not a Zed problem) it got better, but still noticeably slower than VS Code.
> I mean, good AI tab completion feels like a super power. Zed’s is not that good. It’s slow and normally not at all what I want.
> Zed tab is a lot worse in comparison (partly because it’s slow)
> In my personal experience I couldn't use Zed for editing python. Firstly, when navigating in a large python repository, looking up references was extremely slow (sometimes on the order of minutes).
> All I'm saying is that contrary to what someone else said about the software being "fast" I tried it and at startup, it was unusably slow.
> Tried using zed on Linux (pop os, Nvidia) several months ago, was terribly slow, ~1s to open right click context window.
> Zed is as close as it gets, I also use it, but it is still slow and cumbersome sometimes.
I'll stop here. There are other 4 pages of comments to pick anecdotes from, in this simple search alone.
That is a list of search results of people complaining that VS Code is slow compared to Zed.
Do you think messages like this are talking about VSCode performance?
> In my personal experience I couldn't use Zed for editing python. Firstly, when navigating in a large python repository, looking up references was extremely slow (sometimes on the order of minutes).
For me the extension ecosystems is something I really like about VSCode, but that is an entirely different matter.
...and now they lose to a web app?
Tests:. Zed is bare bones compared to IntelliJ (rerun failed tests, export list of failures, go to failed lines easily etc
The AI stuff is cool but it won’t get me to switch from PyCharm.