I’ve been using VS Code for as long as I can remember, but more recently, I started experimenting with other tools. I spent a considerable amount of time with Cursor, especially after Anysphere rolled out V2. VS Code has remained solid as a rock, and I don’t recall a single instance where it got in my way. That said, it’s also not keeping up with how modern code editors are evolving. Cursor, for instance, is packed with AI features, and they’re not just there for show. I’ve found them genuinely useful, something VS Code still lacks at a deeper level of integration.

However, after trying Google’s Antigravity, even Cursor no longer feels like the best possible experience. VS Code is still the safest and most stable editor you can use. Cursor is excellent if you want an AI pair programmer that understands your entire repo. Antigravity, though, is playing a different game. It isn’t trying to be a smarter autocomplete — it can actually get things done on your behalf. I ended up ditching both to see what Antigravity was all about, and now I don’t want to go back.

Antigravity has some genuinely helpful agentic features

AI is not just a buzzword here

Google Antigravity IDE differs at an architectural level rather than a feature level. It does not center interaction around a single conversational agent. Instead, it exposes a multi-agent execution model where discrete tasks can be planned, assigned, and executed concurrently. Each agent operates with a defined scope and produces intermediate artifacts, such as task plans or change summaries, before applying modifications. This gives me an explicit review surface that does not exist in Cursor or VS Code.

This also shifts responsibility boundaries. In VS Code and Cursor, responsibility for correctness sits primarily with me during and after generation. In Antigravity, responsibility is distributed across planning, execution, and verification stages, with each stage producing inspectable output. This does not guarantee correctness, but it increases traceability. I can evaluate intent before evaluating implementation, which is closer to how formal software workflows operate.

Antigravity’s multi-agent system also changes throughput characteristics. Tasks such as refactoring, test generation, documentation updates, and static analysis can be executed in parallel rather than sequentially. In Cursor, these tasks must be requested and completed one at a time, even if the model has a full repository context. Antigravity reduces idle time between dependent activities by allowing independent tasks to proceed simultaneously.

Another material distinction is Antigravity’s native integration with Google Cloud services. Agents can access live schemas, datasets, and infrastructure metadata through supported connectors rather than through manual context injection. This enables code generation and validation against real system state rather than inferred or copied context. Neither VS Code nor Cursor provides first-class support for this kind of grounded reasoning. Any similar workflow in those tools requires manual mediation through terminals, dashboards, or pasted prompts.

Antigravity is fairly good from a performance standpoint, too. The tool avoids aggressive local indexing by relying on cloud-side inference and task execution. This reduces local memory pressure compared to Cursor, which maintains persistent project-wide context locally and has documented issues on large repositories. I have noticed Antigravity’s local performance profile to be closer to VS Code while supporting more complex AI-driven workflows.

You get all the VS Code features too

But there are a few limitations

Google Antigravity is built directly on the VS Code codebase, and that means all the core editor behavior is identical. The file explorer, integrated terminal, source control panel, debugger UI, task runner, and settings system behave exactly the way they do in Visual Studio Code. Keybindings carry over cleanly, including custom ones. Themes, layout preferences, split views, multi-root workspaces, and the command palette all work the same way.

Language support is also unchanged. Anything that relies on the Language Server Protocol behaves as expected, which means syntax highlighting, IntelliSense, go-to-definition, refactoring tools, and diagnostics are identical to VS Code for the same extensions. Debugging workflows are the same as well. Breakpoints, variable inspection, watch expressions, and debug consoles work exactly as they would in a standard VS Code setup, assuming the same language extensions are installed.

Most widely used VS Code extensions install and function normally, including formatters, linters, Git tooling, container support, and testing frameworks. Migrating an existing setup is mostly a matter of copying settings and reinstalling extensions.

There are, however, some practical limitations worth noting. Because Antigravity is a fork rather than the official Microsoft distribution, access to the VS Code Marketplace may not be fully equivalent in all regions or configurations. In cases where direct marketplace access is restricted, extensions need to be installed via alternative registries or VSIX files.

Another limitation is that some extensions implicitly assume Microsoft services, particularly around Live Share, account integration, or telemetry. While many of these still work, they are not always guaranteed to behave identically in a forked environment. Antigravity places no emphasis on human-to-human collaboration features, so workflows that rely heavily on Live Share will be better off on VS Code.

Switch to a better IDE

While VS Code is perfectly usable and good for most people, you can get a lot more out of your IDE if you choose the right one now. Even VS Code can be made significantly more productive with the right extensions. And if you’re open to it, Antigravity is a strong alternative to VS Code. If you don’t want anything to do with Google, Zed is a great open-source editor to consider.