Three AI Coding Tools, Six Months, One Brutally Honest Review

Cursor: VS Code But Smart

Cursor is basically VS Code with AI built right in. Instead of switching between your editor and ChatGPT, you just highlight code and press Cmd+K to ask questions or request changes.

I started with Cursor because Twitter wouldn't shut up about it. Took maybe a week to stop accidentally hitting Cmd+K every time I wanted to search. But once you get used to it, the autocomplete is genuinely fast. Like, suggestions appear before you finish typing fast.

Agent mode is where it gets weird - you can tell it "refactor this entire component to use Zustand instead of Redux" and it'll actually attempt it across multiple files. When it works, you feel like a wizard. When it doesn't, you spend two hours untangling import hell because it moved three things and forgot to update the fourth. The Cursor community on Reddit is basically people going "did this work for anyone else?" constantly.

The official Cursor documentation covers the basics well, though their Agent Mode guide glosses over how often it breaks things. You can configure it with .cursorrules files to avoid some common mistakes, and the VS Code migration guide makes switching pretty painless.

Windsurf: The Pretty One That Tries Too Hard

Windsurf looks nice. Really nice. If Cursor is VS Code's practical older brother, Windsurf is the design-obsessed cousin who cares about fonts and spacing. Codeium built this as their flagship AI IDE after years of making VS Code extensions.

The big selling point is this Cascade feature where it automatically figures out what files are relevant to your request. Sounds cool in theory, but in practice it's like having a well-meaning intern who keeps bringing you files you didn't ask for. The Windsurf documentation explains how it works, though their getting started guide doesn't mention how overwhelming it can be for large projects.

It writes changes directly to disk without asking, which freaked me out at first but actually works pretty well if you're good about using git commits. The UI is definitely the cleanest of the three. Check out their feature comparison for their take on how they stack up against Cursor, though take it with a grain of salt since they wrote it.

Claude Code: For Terminal People

Claude Code lives in your terminal. If you're one of those developers who does everything from the command line, this is probably your jam. Instead of copying and pasting error messages into ChatGPT, you can just pipe them directly to Claude.

It's Claude 3.5 Sonnet but designed for code. The context window is huge and actually works - no bullshit 200K claims that turn into 15K reality like some other tools. The official Claude Code docs walk you through setup, and their CLI reference covers all the commands you'll actually use.

But it costs whatever Anthropic charges, and that shit adds up fast. I hit $83.47 one month because I got lazy and started piping everything to it. Commit messages, deployment scripts, even "explain this error" for stuff I could've just checked the docs for. Their quickstart guide shows you the basics, though it doesn't warn you how expensive it gets when you use it for everything.

Why I Even Bothered Testing All Three

I was perfectly happy with Copilot until everyone on Twitter started claiming these were "game-changers." Spent a weekend trying all three on some side project - Next.js frontend with Stripe, Python FastAPI backend, the usual stuff.

Each one has weird personality quirks. Cursor feels like VS Code's smarter cousin. Windsurf thinks it knows better than you do. Claude Code is like having a really expensive senior dev who only talks through the terminal.

Couldn't figure out which one to actually pay for without testing them on real work, not toy examples.

Anyway, here's what happened when I actually used them day-to-day for a few months.

Cursor: Fast but Flaky Context

Cursor feels the most like a regular code editor with superpowers. The autocomplete is genuinely fast - suggestions pop up almost instantly as you type. When it works, it's magical. You highlight some code, press Cmd+K, and ask "make this more efficient" and it just does it.

But then the context window thing started driving me insane. They claim 200K tokens but I swear it's more like 80K on a good day, maybe 100K if you sacrifice a goat. I'm refactoring this UserProfile component that's maybe 300 lines, and halfway through it goes "What component are you referring to?"

Motherfucker, we've been talking about UserProfile for the past 20 minutes. I had to start over three times before I figured out the context was getting trashed. This GitHub issue has like 500 people bitching about the same thing, and Cursor's response is basically "try restarting the conversation."

The Cursor pricing page doesn't mention this limitation clearly, and their features documentation makes it sound like unlimited context works perfectly. Check the Stack Overflow cursor-editor tag for more people running into the same issues.

The Agent Mode is hit or miss. Sometimes it'll perfectly refactor an entire feature across 6 files. Other times it'll break your imports and leave you with a non-functional app. Always commit before running Agent Mode. The Cursor Agent Mode documentation has examples, though it's missing warnings about when it goes wrong.

One thing that actually works well is the .cursorrules file. You can tell it your preferences once ("always use Tailwind, prefer function components, don't use any/unknown types") and it remembers across projects. There's a good community repository of .cursorrules examples that shows what other developers are using.

Windsurf: Pretty but Presumptuous

Windsurf has the nicest UI by far. Everything is clean, well-spaced, and visually pleasant. If you're coming from VS Code, it feels like someone hired a designer to make it actually look good.

The Cascade feature is their big selling point - it automatically figures out which files are relevant to your request. In theory this sounds amazing. In practice, it's like having an overeager intern who keeps adding files to your workspace that you didn't ask for.

I'm trying to fix one bug in a useAuth hook, and Cascade decides to include my entire routing config, three components that have nothing to do with auth, and some random utility file from like six months ago. Sometimes it finds that perfect helper function you forgot existed. Usually it's just throwing random shit at the wall and seeing what sticks.

The Windsurf Cascade documentation explains the feature, though it doesn't mention how to control the scope when it gets out of hand. Their troubleshooting guide has some tips for when it includes too many files.

The weirdest thing is that it writes changes directly to disk. No preview, no confirmation - it just does it. This freaked me out at first, but if you're disciplined about git commits, it actually speeds up the workflow. You can see changes immediately in your dev server. The Windsurf workflow documentation explains this design choice, though they could've made it optional.

Claude Code: Expensive but Excellent

Claude Code lives in your terminal, which means it's either perfect for your workflow or completely useless. There's no middle ground.

If you're a terminal person, it's incredible. You can pipe error logs directly to it: npm run build 2>&1 | claude "fix this build error". You can ask it to write deployment scripts, analyze log files, or debug server configurations. It understands your entire environment, not just the code files. The Claude Code terminal integration guide shows you all the ways to pipe data to it.

The context window is the one that actually works as advertised. I fed it an entire 50,000-line codebase and it maintained context throughout a 2-hour refactoring session. Cursor would have given up after 20 minutes. Their context handling documentation explains how it manages large codebases without losing track.

But holy shit it's expensive. Anthropic changes their pricing like every month - I think it's $20 now for Pro? But that's just the base. Started using it for everything - bug fixes, code reviews, deployment scripts, asking it to write commit messages because I'm lazy. Hit $87.33 that month. Next month was even worse, got a bill for $134.67 because I started doing tail -f /var/log/nginx/error.log | claude "explain these errors" every time something broke. Pro tip: those nginx logs are 90% timestamp garbage that costs tokens.

The Context Window Situation Is Fucked

This is the most important thing to understand: only Claude Code actually delivers the context window it promises.

• Cursor: Claims 200K, delivers maybe 100K on a good day
• Windsurf: Doesn't give you numbers, but the automatic selection usually works
• Claude Code: Actually gives you 200K and maintains it

This matters a lot more than you think. If you work on big codebases or need to refactor complex systems, context is everything. I learned this the hard way when Cursor lost track of what I was doing mid-refactor and I had to start over.

Real Problems I Hit

Cursor kept timing out on my Next.js 14 project and I couldn't figure out why for the longest time. Turns out it was indexing node_modules every fucking startup - 43,847 files to be exact because someone added three different date libraries. Error message just said "Request timeout" which helped exactly zero. Spent three and a half hours watching Activity Monitor before I realized it was pegging my CPU at 95% scanning dependencies. Fixed it by adding node_modules to .cursorignore like a normal person would've done from the start.

Windsurf decided to rewrite my entire auth system when I asked it to add one field to user validation. I just wanted to add email verification, it rewrote the middleware, the route handlers, even touched the database schema. Of course I didn't notice until I got Error: Cannot set headers after they are sent because it had duplicate middleware running. Thank god for obsessive git commits.

Claude Code burned through $134.67 in one month because I got lazy and started piping everything to it. The billing is per-token and I didn't realize those nginx error logs are like 80% timestamp garbage. One debugging session cost me $23.82 because I did cat /var/log/access.log | claude "find the problem" and that bastard file was 127MB of mostly useless timestamped crap like 2025-09-11T14:32:01.847Z GET /health-check 200 0.003s.

The bottom line: they all have quirks and none of them are perfect. Pick the one whose quirks you can live with.

After months of real-world usage, I've gotten tons of questions from other developers about which tool to choose. Here are the most common concerns people have, along with honest answers based on actual experience.

Cursor Is Probably Your Best Bet (But It's Not Perfect)

Look, I spent way too much time testing all three and here's what I think: Cursor wins for most people who just want to get shit done. It feels like VS Code because it basically is VS Code, the autocomplete is genuinely fast, and it doesn't try to outsmart you constantly.

Yeah, the context window lies. Yeah, Agent Mode occasionally breaks your imports and leaves you cursing at your screen. But it's still the most practical for normal development work. Minimal learning curve, gets out of your way when you want to code normally. Their getting started guide makes onboarding painless, and the VS Code migration literally imports all your extensions and settings.

If you're doing standard web dev - React, Node APIs, whatever - Cursor is probably worth the $20/month. Just don't believe their marketing about the context window limits. Check out the Cursor community forum to see what real users are saying about day-to-day usage.

When Cursor Isn't Enough

Use Claude Code if you live in the terminal anyway. If you're deploying with shell scripts, managing infrastructure through CLI tools, or just prefer vim over VS Code, Claude Code is genuinely incredible. Piping error logs directly to Claude or having it write deployment scripts feels like magic. Their CLI reference covers all the commands, and the terminal integration examples show you real workflows.

Just be ready for the billing shock. I hit $134.67 one month because I got addicted and started using it for everything. Now I'm pickier about when I fire it up - complex debugging and automation only. Learned to avoid piping massive log files after that $23.82 nginx incident. Check Anthropic's current pricing since they update it constantly.

Use Windsurf if you want something pretty that works out of the box. It has the nicest UI and requires zero configuration. The automatic context selection works well enough most of the time, and $15/month is the cheapest entry point. Their getting started guide is actually well-written, and the Windsurf vs Cursor comparison shows their perspective on the differences.

But be careful with the "write directly to disk" behavior. It will change files you didn't expect it to touch. Commit early, commit often. The Windsurf workflow documentation explains this behavior, though they should've made it optional.

What I Actually Use Day-to-Day

I keep going back to Cursor even though the context window thing makes me want to throw my MacBook Pro out the fucking window. It's just the most predictable for normal coding stuff. When production breaks at 2am or I need deployment scripts, I'll fire up Claude Code for an hour or two, curse at the $47.23 bill later, then go back to Cursor for the day-to-day shit.

Tried making Windsurf my main editor for like a week because the UI is actually beautiful. But the automatic file selection thing drove me insane - kept including random files from three months ago and I'd lose track of what the hell we were supposed to be working on.

If You're Just Getting Started

Download Cursor, use the free trial for a couple weeks, and see if it clicks with your workflow. Don't overthink it. All three tools are way better than not using AI for coding.

If Cursor doesn't feel right after two weeks, try Windsurf next. It's different enough that you might prefer the approach. Only consider Claude Code if you're already comfortable with terminal-heavy workflows.

Stop Overthinking It

Look, these tools aren't magic, but they're legitimately useful. Think of them as really smart autocomplete that somehow understands your entire codebase. They'll make you faster at boring refactoring tasks and occasionally suggest something clever you wouldn't have thought of.

But they're not going to build your startup for you. You still need to know how to code, debug when shit breaks, and make architectural decisions. They're assistants, not replacements.

Pick whichever one annoys you the least and get back to actually building something. I spent way too much time comparing these things instead of just shipping that Next.js project that's been sitting unfinished for three months.

If you need help setting up any of these tools, troubleshooting issues, or finding alternatives, here are the resources that have actually been useful in my experience.