Maybe Cursor already includes features similar to Claude code.
different tools for different workflows honestly.
claude code is a terminal-first tool. you’re working in your shell, giving it commands, and it operates on files directly. it’s great if you’re comfortable in the terminal and want something lightweight that doesn’t need a full IDE.
cursor is more of a full IDE experience. you get the visual editor, tab completions, inline edits, the agent mode with file creation, and things like .cursorrules that let you shape how it generates code for your specific project. if you’re already in vscode all day, cursor feels natural.
where cursor has an edge for me is the rules system. you can set up project-specific patterns (like “always use branded types for IDs” or “create error.tsx alongside every page.tsx”) and cursor actually follows them. claude code doesn’t have an equivalent to that yet.
where claude code has an edge is if you want to script things or chain commands together. it plays nicely with unix pipelines and automation.
i use both depending on what i’m doing, but for day-to-day project work cursor is my default.
4 Likes
I agree with you!
1 Like
Our dev team gets to pick their tool of choice. Most of us use Cursor, but one uses Claude Code and the other uses Codex. I don’t think any is “best”, just depends on use case and preferences. I recommend trying them both out and see which you like best.
For me, coming from Visual Studio Code, the transition to Cursor was easy and I like the integrated Editor + Chat interface a lot. I think the ability to use any LLM is another huge vote in Cursor’s favor; with Claude Code you can only use their models, same for Codex regarding OpenAI models.
Claude code (even cursor-cli) if you like terminals, Cursor if you like IDEs.
Do you want to be a craftsman or a factory owner?
Let’s start with a seemingly unrelated question…
Which is best, a motorbike or a truck?
The answer, obviously, is that both have unique strengths. If you want to travel alone at speed, a motorbike is faster and uses less fuel. If you want to haul a “project load” of building materials, then a truck will do it in one trip.
So, with vehicles, it’s about the right tool for the right job.
So it is with radically different tools like Cursor and Claude code.
Cursor is great when you want to keep control (especially if you’re coming from somewhere like VSCode or Atom). It will work in the way you’re used to, but over time, you’ll move beyond simply accepting its autocompletion suggestions and move to getting “an agent” to write blocks of code for you…
… next, you’ll move into using “Planning Mode”, giving it bigger tasks, and tweaking what it intends to do. Then you supervise it.
It’s like having a decent Junior programmer. (Over the years, I’ve employed lots of Junior programmers… in Feb 2026, Cursor is better than most of them when they started work.)
And I’m being a little unfair - this was probably a good summary of Cursor’s ability in Q4 2025, but it’s geeting progressively better, and “Agent mode” is capable of more… but it still asks for guidance / reassurance more than I’d like.
Claude Code is aimed at someone with a different objective. If you want to “outsource your development” by setting relatively high-level goals, maybe review its plan, and then let it get on with stuff while you (for instance) go for a run, or sleep.
It’s more like having a senior programmer / team leader.
The danger, of course, is that it can go off a long way, confidently, in the wrong direction before you notice.
The more autonomy and the higher level set of instructions you want to give to a team member (whether human or AI), the more you either have to give them detailed understanding of the way you want things done… or just trust in their judgement.