Cursor is an IDE and code editor built for programming with AI. Cursor includes an autocomplete that predicts the next edit. Once enabled, it is always on and will suggest edits to code across multiple lines.
$20
per month
Microsoft Visual Studio Code
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft offers Visual Studio Code, an open source text editor that supports code editing, debugging, IntelliSense syntax highlighting, and other features.
$0
Pricing
Cursor
Microsoft Visual Studio Code
Editions & Modules
Pro
$20
per month
Teams
$40
per month per user
Pro+
$60
per month
Ultra
$200
per month
Enterprise
Custom
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cursor
Microsoft Visual Studio Code
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Every plan includes a set amount of model usage. Additional usage is based on the models and features used. The Bugbot add-on is available at $40 per month, per user, or with Custom pricing for Enterprise customers. A discount is available for annual billing.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cursor
Microsoft Visual Studio Code
Considered Both Products
Cursor
Verified User
C-Level Executive
Chose Cursor
Cursor has built-in AI and is a fork based on Visual Studio Code. So the fact is, it is better than Visual Studio Code because of AI, and if you are a developer that uses more than notebooks, in my opinion, it surely beats Jupyter Notebook, too. It is my go-to for basically all …
Those are agentic IDEs, a fork of VSCode, but Visual Studio Code is used for inferior hardware and has fewer features, whereas others have more features but can't be used on those devices. So, it's the POV of the machine's config: which IDE should be used? If it has a good …
As mentioned before, IDE's can be excellent with one thing, and the company we do a lot of things, so it's kind of annoying to have multiple programs, heavy ones to open your work, so just use one, Microsoft Visual Studio Code, personalize thanks to extensions, and you are …
It is great for non-coders who have some technology knowledge and are comfortable following Cursor's instructions to build and deploy a webapp. Good prompting skills are needed. It is not for those who are not comfortable looking at raw codes. Cursor also is not very creative when it comes to user interface design.
As a general workhorse IDE, Microsoft Visual Studio Codee is unmatched. Building on the early success of applications such as Atom, it has long been the standard for electron based IDEs. It can be outshone using IDEs that are dedicated to particular platforms, such as Microsoft Visual Studio Code for .net and the Jetbrains IDEs for Java, Python and others. For remote collaborative development, something like Zed is ahead of VSCode live share, which can be quite flakey.
The customization of key combinations should be more accessible and easier to change
The auxiliary panels could be minimized or as floating tabs which are displayed when you click on them
A monitoring panel of resources used by Microsoft Visual Studio Code or plugins and extensions would help a lot to be able to detect any malfunction of these
Solid tool that provides everything you need to develop most types of applications. The only reason not a 10 is that if you are doing large distributed teams on Enterprise level, Professional does provide more tools to support that and would be worth the cost.
Really easy to use; we've been replacing all other IDEs for it now. As it is a fork of Visual Studio Code, we transitioned to it in a very smooth way, and now our development process is faster than ever. It supports a bunch of languages and we don't need to have a webpage with an LLM open now because it is all with Cursor.
Microsoft Visual Studio Code earns a 10 for its exceptional balance of power and simplicity. Its intuitive interface, robust extension ecosystem, and integrated terminal streamline development. With seamless Git integration and highly customizable settings, it adapts perfectly to any workflow, making complex coding tasks feel effortless for beginners and experts alike.
Overall, Microsoft Visual Studio Code is pretty reliable. Every so often, though, the app will experience an unexplained crash. Since it is a stand-alone app, connectivity or service issues don't occur in my experience. Restarting the app seems to always get around the problem, but I do make sure to save and backup current work.
Microsoft Visual Studio Code is pretty snappy in performance terms. It launches quickly, and tasks are performed quickly. I don't have a lot of integrations other than CoPilot, but I suspect that if the integration partner is provisioned appropriately that any performance impact would be pretty minimal. It doesn't have a lot of bells and whistles (unless you start adding plugins left and right).
Active development means filing a bug on the GitHub repo typically gets you a response within 4 days. There are plugins for almost everything you need, whether it be linting, Vim emulation, even language servers (which I use to code in Scala). There is well-maintained official documentation. The only thing missing is forums. The closest thing is GitHub issues, which typically has the answers but is hard to sift through -- there are currently 78k issues.
Softr's chat AI is less sophisticated. However, it is great for building simple database-driven webapps. I have used it together with Airtable to build a very simple webapp. It is drag and drop. Vercel V0's chatAI is faster and more friendly. The user interface is also more visually appealing and user friendly. It is comparable to Cursor though I have only used V0 briefly so have not gone through the learning curve.
Visual Studio Code stacks up nicely against Visual Studio because of the price and because it can be installed without admin rights. We don't exclusively use Visual Studio Code, but rather use Visual Studio and Visual Studio code depending on the project and which version of source control the given project is wired up to.
It is easily deployed with our Jamf Pro instance. There is actually very little setup involved in getting the app deployed, and it is fairly well self-contained and does not deploy a large amount of associated files. However, it is not particularly conducive to large project, multi-developer/department projects that involve some form of central integration.
