Thanks for the reply! I gave it a solid week at the start of this month, about 3 weeks ago.
The only other thing I didn't like (and this is subtle, but I had not realised that I took it for granted): In Cursor, you can close and reopen a tab, and the undo history is kept. Working on a large repo, this comes up surprisingly often.
Save -> Close -> Assume everything is fine -> Do something more -> Oh no! That was a mistake! -> Cmd+Shift+T -> Undo. Cursor will comply; Zed says there's nothing to undo. So you're back to reverting chunks of code in git.
I will try Zeta again shortly. The biggest thing I'm looking for is that I can move between files and the context of recent changes persists, and the assistant treats it has highly relevant. Comes up a lot when refactoring.
List here: https://zed.dev/docs/ai/models. Thanks for the feedback, we'll make sure this is linked from the pricing page. Think it got lost in the launch shuffle.
It’s hard for me to conceptualise what a million tokens actually looks like, but I don’t think there’s a way around that aside from making proving some concrete examples of inputs, outputs, and the number of tokens that actually is. I guess it would become clearer after using it a bit.
Yeah, Cursor tab completion is basically in the realm of magical mind reading and might still be the most insane productivity demonstration of LLM tech in software.
It obsoleted making Vim macros and multiline editing for example. Now you just make one change and the LLM can derive the rest; you just press tab.
It's interesting that the Cursor team's first iteration is still better than anything I've seen in their competitors. It's been an amazing moat for a year(?) now.
I agree. I wish they focused more on it. I'd love to be able to give it a few sentences of instructions to make it even more effective for me. It's so much more of a productivity boon than all the coding agent stuff ever was.
(I work at Zed)
No, you aren't. We care about you using Zed the editor, and we provide Zed Pro for folks who decide they'd like to support Zed or our billing model works for them. But it's simply an option, not our core business plan, and this pricing is in place to make that option financially viable for us. As long as we don't bear the cost, we don't feel the need (or the right) to put ourselves in the revenue path with LLM spend.
Will you consider providing a feature to protect me from accidentally using my Zed account after the $5 is exhausted (or else a plan that only includes edit predictions)? I can't justify to myself continuing my subscription if there's a risk I will click the wrong button with identical text to the right button, and get charged an additional 10% for it. I get you need to be compensated for risk if you pay up front on my behalf, but I don't need you to do that.
I understand that there's nothing you could do to protect me if I make a prompt that ends up using >$5 of usage but after that I would like Zed to reject anything except my personal API keys.
reply