VS Code is still the safe choice, but it no longer feels like the most exciting one. But 2026 feels like the first time its alternatives are not just trying to copy it, they are trying to replace the way I think about writing code.
So I decided to test three of the most talked-about options right now: Devin Desktop (previously known as Windsurf), Google Antigravity, and Cursor.
All three promise a smarter, more agentic coding experience where I can describe what I want and hand over bigger tasks. After spending time with all three, one of them changed how I approach coding.
4 VS Code forks built for specific tasks
The classic VS Code is great and all, but these specialized forks are better for certain programming tasks
Devin Desktop
Agent board feels promising, but its output is somewhat average
Devin Desktop was the most interesting one for me because it isn’t exactly a brand-new tool. It is Windsurf with a new identity, a new interface, and a much bigger ambition.
Cognition has basically turned Windsurf into Devin Desktop, and the idea is clear: this is no longer just an AI coding editor with a smart assistant on the side. It wants to become a command center where I can manage multiple coding agents in one place.
The new design does come with a learning curve though. The Kanban-style board is my favorite part of the redesign. I can actually see agents running tasks across different stages, track what they are doing, and review progress without digging through endless chat threads.
The feature set is strong too. Devin Desktop still behaves like a proper IDE, supports familiar extensions and workflows, and adds agent-focused features like spaces, Devin Cloud, Devin Local, and more.
That said, the default SWE-1.6 model felt average in my testing. I gave it a complex task to build a residential builder website, and the result was fine, but not amazing.
The overall layout, images, and copy were usable, but it lacked the polish and sharper product thinking I expected from such a hyped tool.
Google Antigravity 2.0
Gemini 3.5 carries the experience
Google Antigravity 2.0 was the biggest surprise in this test, mainly because I wasn’t a huge fan of the first version. Antigravity 1.0 had the right idea, but the agent manager felt badly implemented to me.
It looked ambitious, but in actual use, it didn’t feel as natural or dependable as I expected from a Google-backed coding tool. That changed with version 2.0.
At Google I/O, the company basically split the experience into two parts: a proper IDE for traditional coding and the main Antigravity app for agent-focused work.
On paper, that makes sense. If I want to hand off a larger task, I can stay inside the agent-first Antigravity experience. If I want to inspect files, make manual edits, or treat it like a regular editor, I can move to the IDE side.
However, I am not a fan of jumping into a separate IDE just to make small changes. I just want to tweak a button, adjust a section, rename a component, or clean up a line of copy.
In those moments, Antigravity 2.0 still feels less seamless than Cursor. The stability could have been better too. I ran into moments where the app didn’t feel as smooth or predictable as it should.
Still, Gemini 3.5 is a massive improvement in the coding department compared to Gemini 3.1. I tested it against SWE-1.6 and Cursor’s Composer 2.5, and Gemini 3.5 felt clearly ahead.
It made smarter decisions, and it was also better at preserving the bigger picture of the project instead of just completing one isolated task.
Antigravity 2.0 is packed with useful features too. Slash commands make it easy to trigger specific actions, scheduled tasks give it a more automation-friendly page, and the agent-focused interface feels much more serious than the first version.
I tried VS Code, Google Antigravity, and Claude Code for a month and one clearly dominated
The AI coding war has intensified.
Cursor 3.0
Best balance of AI and control
Cursor was already the safest recommendation among VS Code alternatives, but version 3.0 made it feel like a much more serious product. The foundation is still there, but the app now feels much more agent-centric.
Instead of hiding the AI experience inside a sidebar, Cursor puts agents much closer to the center of the workflow. I can run tasks, inspect what the agent is doing, jump into the code, make quick manual edits, and then hand control back to AI without feeling like I am switching between two different products.
That is where Cursor really hit it out of the park for me. It understands that AI still needs human taste, judgment, and control.
Devin Desktop leans heavily into the command-centric approach, and Antigravity is more ambitious with its separate agent-focused experience, but Cursor feels like the perfect middle ground.
For my workflow, that matters a lot because not every task needs a full agentic loop. Sometimes I just want to tweak a layout, rename a function, fix a small bug, or clean up a component without burning my tokens.
Automations are a useful addition because they let agents run on schedules or triggers. It supports all my VS Code extensions, too. Composer 2.5 is solid too, but it’s not as impressive as Gemini 3.5 in my testing.
When I need stronger reasoning or better output, I can always bring in Claude Code 4.8 and avoid that limitation altogether. It felt fast, predictable, and polished throughout my testing.
Found my new coding home
It’s clear that VS Code alternatives are no longer just polished clones. Devin Desktop has the right agent-first idea, but its output still needs refinement. Antigravity surprised me the most because Gemini 3.5 is actually excellent at coding, even if the app itself needs more polish.
But Cursor 3.0 felt like the most complete package. It gave me the perfect mix of manual control, agentic workflows, automations, extensions, stability, and speed.
