Alternatives to VS Code now span everything from AI-native editors that can refactor across a repo, to heavyweight IDE suites built for deep language tooling, to ultra-fast text editors that stay out of your way. The right pick usually comes down to how much you want the editor to “drive” (agents, automation) versus how much you want it to simply amplify your existing workflow.
Cursor
Cursor stands out as an AI-first editor that still feels familiar if you’re coming from a VS Code-centric setup. Because it’s a VS Code fork, teams that rely on extensions and custom keybindings can often move over with minimal friction—one developer highlights keeping their extensions/shortcuts via a
migration assistant. The core loop is agent-driven but review-heavy: describe a feature, inspect the diff, then polish—ideal if you like AI acceleration without giving up ownership.
Cursor also earns loyalty for its practical ergonomics: users call out a workflow where they
review every line of code an agent outputs, keeping quality control while still getting speedups on multi-file changes.
Best for
- Developers who want a familiar VS Code-like environment with stronger AI assistance
- Builders who prefer “AI + diffs + human review” over fully hands-off generation
Where it can fall short
Windsurf
Windsurf differentiates itself with an agentic, diff-forward approach that emphasizes control and context. In practice, it wins fans by making changes legible: users say they trust it because it
shows me why and how it’s making changes as a diff, rather than burying edits behind chat outputs.
The other recurring “why Windsurf” theme is context: multiple developers describe it as better at automatically pulling the right files into the prompt. One daily user highlights how it
just figures out what it needs and includes it as context, especially valuable in larger, messier codebases.
Best for
- Teams working in complex repos where context gathering is the bottleneck
- Developers who want agentic edits but insist on a diff-based review experience
Where it can fall short
JetBrains
JetBrains is the “full IDE suite” alternative: deep language intelligence, project-wide tooling, and an ecosystem built around end-to-end workflows. It’s often the choice when you want more than an editor loop—especially when a stack benefits from strong static analysis, refactoring, and framework-aware tooling.
Best for
- Java/Go-heavy teams and backend shops that benefit from deep language/toolchain integration
- Developers who want an IDE that feels like a complete workbench (not a “mix and match” editor)
Where it can fall short
- It’s a bigger surface area than minimalist editors, and many teams still pair it with lighter tools for quick edits or scripts
Sublime Text
Sublime Text remains the speed-and-simplicity pick: a responsive editor that’s happy to open anything instantly and let you manipulate text at scale. It’s a favorite for developers who value “always fast” behavior over piles of integrated tooling.
Longtime users emphasize reliability and huge-file performance—one notes they’ve
edited files with hundreds of thousands of lines and still keep it as a daily workhorse. In practice, Sublime often becomes the complement to heavier environments: use it for quick edits, massive logs, and frictionless navigation.
Best for
- Performance-focused developers who prioritize fast startup and low overhead
- Anyone who regularly works with very large files (logs, generated code, big datasets)
Where it can fall short
- If you want a single, fully integrated debug/test/database experience, Sublime’s ecosystem approach can feel more “assemble it yourself”
Xcode
Xcode is the non-negotiable alternative whenever Apple platforms are the target. It’s purpose-built for the Apple toolchain and the workflows that come with it: SDK alignment, simulators, signing/provisioning, and shipping to Apple distribution channels.
In real-world setups, it commonly lives alongside a general editor: developers will write plenty of code in other environments, but still reach for Xcode when doing platform-specific work—one community member sums it up plainly: they
end up using Xcode for swift programming.
Best for
- iOS/macOS/watchOS/tvOS/visionOS developers who need the official build + simulator + signing pipeline
- Teams shipping Apple-native apps where toolchain compatibility and distribution matter more than editor preference
Where it can fall short
- Outside Apple ecosystems, it’s the wrong tool; even many Apple developers keep a second editor around for non-Apple stacks and quick cross-platform work
