Zed 1.0

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overall reception

  • Many commenters are enthusiastic: fast, pleasant to use, “batteries-included” editor that has replaced VS Code or JetBrains for some.
  • Others tried it repeatedly but returned to Sublime, VS Code, Neovim, or JetBrains due to missing features, UX quirks, or AI focus.
  • Several see strong potential but consider 1.0 still not “feature complete” versus mature IDEs.

Performance & resource usage

  • Praised for snappy UI, low latency, and relatively low memory compared to VS Code/JetBrains on large projects.
  • Contrasting reports: some Linux and Mac users see high idle CPU/GPU usage and syscall “spamming,” especially with certain LSPs or AI features enabled.
  • A few note battery drain and GPU issues (e.g., Vulkan/AMD problems).

AI & agent integration

  • Deep integration with Claude Code, other ACP agents, local Ollama, and OpenRouter is a major selling point for some.
  • Others disable AI entirely and appreciate that this is possible.
  • Complaints: ACP/Claude integration missing commands and features compared to CLI/VS Code; parallel agents and agent-first layout feel confusing to some.
  • Zed’s own tab-completion is seen as weaker than Cursor’s by power users.

Language support & tooling

  • Strong out-of-the-box LSP integration (Rust, Python, TypeScript, etc.) is widely liked, but:
    • Users hit issues when working in “restricted mode” or with misconfigured servers.
    • PHP, Rails, Scala, and Java users report rough edges or slower/more opinionated diagnostics versus specialized IDEs.
  • Some dislike Zed auto-installing LSPs/node/go tooling without explicit consent.

UX, search, Git & layout

  • Highly divisive search: multibuffer search-in-tab is loved by some, hated by others who prefer modal/JetBrains-style search or quick “peek and close.”
  • Git integration is improving (graph, diffs), but diff UI and commit-message generation with agents are common complaints.
  • Panes, tabs, and terminal layout are praised by some, but others find pane management, tiny activity icons, and lack of certain view options frustrating.
  • Themes: defaults seen as bland/low-contrast; community themes and a theme builder help.

Remote dev & containers

  • Remote SSH and dev container support is a major plus; several switched from VS Code Remote-SSH.
  • However, some combinations (e.g., dev containers over SSH) are still rough.

Security, telemetry, ToS & trust

  • Serious concern about:
    • Automatic download/run of LSPs and other binaries (including npm and Go tools) without prompting.
    • Telemetry defaults and broad ToS language granting rights to process “Customer Data.”
    • Mandatory arbitration, short limitation periods, and low liability caps.
  • Some users prefer forks (e.g., Gram, “zedless”) or avoid Zed entirely over these issues.

Extensibility & ecosystem

  • Extension model is Rust- and WASM-based; solid for languages/themes but currently limited for custom UI and deep workflow tweaks.
  • Lack of rich GUI extension hooks and project-specific UX (e.g., Scala test runners, advanced search UIs) is a blocker for some.

Platform & accessibility issues

  • Reports of wrong/washed-out colors on Wayland and macOS, bitmap-font and ligature limitations, and non-Latin keyboard shortcut problems.
  • Accessibility criticized: still no screen reader support.
  • Windows: SmartScreen warnings and CLI flag issues reported.