Man, I wish they'd keep the old philosophy of letting the developer drive and the agent assist.

I feel like this design direction is leaning more towards a chat interface as a first class citizen and the code itself as a secondary concern.

I really don't like that.

Even when I'm using AI agents to write code, I still find myself spending most of my time reading and reasoning about code. Showing me little snippets of my repo in a chat window and changes made by the agent in a PR type visual does not help with this. If anything, it makes it more confusing to keep the context of the code in my head.

It's why I use Cursor over Claude Code, I still want to _code_ not just vibe my way through tickets.

I've been running Claude Code in my Cursor IDE for a while now via extension. I like the setup, and I direct Claude on one task at a time, while still having full access to my code (and nice completions via Cursor). I still spend time tweaking, etc. before committing. I have zero interest in these new "swarms of agents" they are trying to force on us from every direction. I can barely keep straight my code working on one feature at a time. AI has greatly helped me speed that up, but working serially has resulted in the best quality for me. I'll likely drop Cursor for good now and switch back to vanilla VsCode with CC.

They're juggling on two ends. An IDE and bringing their own models. Kinda makes them "full stack".

Nerve wreaking race.

I think I'll switch over to cursor on trial basis.

What would all these companies do without Microsoft shipping VS Code as open source, probably still stuck with vi and Emacs.

Still curious which ones will survive when the AI gold diggers finally settle.

So it has converged to the same UI/UX as the Claude/Codex desktop apps. If that's the case, why use Cursor over those more canonical apps?

I love Cursor. As a Product Manager who's not really had coding experience, it's been very useful. I'm able to have a browser on the side and make changes easily, and click through exactly what I want to change rather than having the LLM guess which component I'm talking about. Having multiple models has also been great, as well as the MCP integration. Most times I don't need all the MCPs, but I like being able to turn them on or off based on what I'm doing, like JIRA or Grafana.

One of my favorite startups and I genuinely like to keep subscribing to them.

I like cursor and its workflow as a tool, but I do wonder whether moving to cloud (I mean for lots of the cool features) will work. Yes we all GET Cursor has to make money. No one is fooled what this is about. It's also fine, the video and screenshot thing is great.

However, is this really a moat?

Daily cursor user who's been previewing this a bit while it was in alpha.

I think it's a really solid release, and while cursor seems to have fallen out of the "cool kids club" in the past three months it remains the most practical tool for me doing AI-first work in a large production code base. The new UI works better in a world where agents are doing most of the work and I can hop back into the IDE interface to make changes.

We've set up a linear integration where I can delegate simpler tasks to cloud agents, and the ability to pick that work up in cursor if I need to go back in forth is a real productivity boost. The tighter integration with cloud agents is something I've been hoping for recently.

I appreciate not being tied at the hip to one model provider, and have never loved doing most of my work from the command line. I was on vs code + meta's internal fork of it for years prior to the current AI wave, so that was a pretty natural transition. I'm pretty optimistic on cursor's ability to win in the enterprise space, and think we're going to see open source models + dev tools win with indie devs over things like claude code as costs start getting passed down more and the gap between frontier models and open source gets tighter.

No per-agent auto-worktree? This is the killer feature of Conductor, having to type `/worktree` into every new chat isn't really a resolution. Not even sure what selecting 'Worktree' for a new chat does

I’m a Cursor user but I am not an agent maximalist. I just like having it work on code in an IDE with good inline diffs and a nice chat UI.

This change is possibly too big and unless all my existing usage patterns are maintained or improved, I’ll likely give CC a try now. Not optimistic.

Looks like they're now playing catchup.

What's the pitch for using Cursor now a days?

Funny how in this space, once a company feels dead, you don’t even check out their release if the video looks decent, it would have to be totally revolutionary.

I hope we can use it like non-agent developers where code is first class citizen.

Looking at the video cursor 3 UI looks very similar to the one I experience using OpenCode :D

This seems like a mix of Claude Code and Superset (https://superset.sh/). Interested to try it out and see how well it performs all the same.

so just like how every chat app has to look like slack, every ide has to look like vscode, now every agent workspace has to look like the codex app? codex app, antigravity, and now this all have the exact same UI design...

So funny , I remember their talk about re-imagining their editor for the future of agents. They end up copying codex gui lol.

These AI companies are running out of ideas, and are desperate. I can't imagine investing in companies that are 3 month behind open source alternatives, and their target audience being the most experimental kind there is.

Looks pretty though.

Cursor is so good for what I do is that I've cancelled my Cursor subscription and went back to VSCode (w/o Copilot) for the diff review and code navigation.

What is Cursor doing? They need to relax a little bit. Recently I saw they released "Glass" which WAS here: https://cursor.com/glass, now just redirects to /download.

Is "Cursor 3" == Glass? I get they feel like their identity means they need to constantly be pushing the envelope in terms of agent UX. But they could stand to have like an "experimental" track and a "This is VS Code but with better AI integration" track.

CLIs are 100000× better than this non-sense.

Maybe I'm old, but I only recently started using Gemini to assist me in coding. Now it seems everyone is heading to giving agents to do the full-blown coding. I guess if the result code is good, it doesn't matter who's coding (me or AI).

But are they affordable already for developers who don't earn a Silicon Valley salary? Developers in 3rd world countries?

Thought I'd give it a try and installed the latest version. Application crashes at startup on Linux (Wayland) with: "The window terminated unexpectedly (reason: 'crashed', code: '139')". Probably yet another instance of developers mostly testing and doing quality assurance on macOS/Windows.

I really dislike this push away from augmentation and towards agents. I get that people want to be lazy and just have the LLM do all of their work, but using the AI as an augmentation means you are the driver and can prevent it from making mistakes, and you still have knowledge of the codebase. I think there is so much more we could be doing in the editor with AI, but instead every company just builds a chatbot. Sigh.

Stop fucking my shit up please

So they are just turning into another vibe code slop app?

At least before they were tangentially still an actual developer tool, standard vsc windows, the code was the point etc.

Now they offer really nothing interesting for professionals.

[dead]