Trying to pick between GitHub Copilot and Cursor AI? That question’s been floating around for a while, especially with how fast AI tools for coding are growing. Let’s walk through the experience of using GitHub Copilot especially in its newer agent mode and see how it stacks up in real-world coding situations.
What’s the best way to get started with Copilot?
First off, make sure VS Code is installed. That’s the tool where everything happens. Once inside, logging in through GitHub is a breeze. A folder named copilot-demo gets created, and then the fun begins by enabling AI features for free.
But there’s a catch only one copilot extension should be active. Having multiple like Cursor or Llama Coder together just creates chaos. Pick one and stick with it for best results.
How does GitHub Copilot handle prompts?
So here’s where things get interesting. A super simple prompt like Create a to-do list in Next.js is thrown at the tool. It starts generating a project using the pages directory and works reasonably well.
Now, switching to Claude 3.5 Sonnet for coding tasks feels smoother. It’s fast, clean, and known for working better with structured tasks. It’s all about choosing the right model Claude 3.7 gives better results, but it’s part of the paid plan.
Can AI review code like a senior developer?
Absolutely. It’s possible to get the code reviewed just like a teammate or mentor would. Tools like CodeRabbit are helpful for AI-powered code reviews. But even Copilot can handle basic feedback and guidance.
Still, sometimes it gets clunky. For example, asking something like “How do I run the code?” gives a weird or incomplete response. And if that response looks legit but is off, it can mess things up big time. So yeah, double-check before running.
Does Copilot feel smooth to use?
Kind of. The workspace takes time to load. Simple issues like not showing confirmation after creating a workspace feel annoying. Cursor AI feels smoother and slightly more intuitive, especially for beginners.
That said, Copilot does build the structure like folders, files, and even components when asked. Just don’t expect it to always explain what it did.
Where does Copilot shine?
Well, generating full apps is something it handles decently. Take a basic to-do list app, for example. It builds one that runs on localhost:3000, includes components, and follows the prompt decently well.
It even listens when asked to add a navigation bar, using voice input! That’s a cool feature. Voice input plus command suggestions via `/` or `@` are powerful once you learn them.
What’s not so great?
There are hiccups. Switching between files feels less flexible than Cursor. Accepting or rejecting changes file-by-file isn’t as friendly, and there’s no clear next file button.
Also, free trials are limited. Claude 3.7 Sonnet isn’t available without upgrading. And sometimes the AI gets rate-limited slowing everything down.
So what’s this “Agent Mode” everyone’s talking about?
Agent mode is basically like having a smart assistant sit with you while coding. It can generate code, fix errors, and even explain what’s going on. But here’s the thing don’t give up full control to the agent.
Some developers relies on it too much and forget what their own code looks like. That’s dangerous. Keeping control ensures flexibility and deeper understanding of the project.
There’s a .github/prompts folder where markdown prompt files can live. These act like memory banks for your agent. Cursor AI doesn’t need this it indexes everything automatically, making it feel more intuitive.
How does pricing compare?
GitHub Copilot comes in at $10/month. Cursor AI? It’s $20/month. So yeah, Copilot is cheaper. But the value depends on use case. For auto-completion, both perform well. For full-on agent assistance? Cursor currently leads in speed and UI polish.
Can it build real apps?
Sure. Even something like a PDF merger using Flask and Python with a clean HTML/CSS template can be whipped up in minutes. Drag-and-drop support, component generation, comments on code it’s all there.
And when tested? It works. PDFs get merged. UI looks good. It’s the kind of project that could even be launched as a micro SaaS. Seriously.
Final thoughts
GitHub Copilot is solid. It’s improving constantly. Features like voice prompts, command suggestions, and markdown-based prompt systems show it’s heading in the right direction.
But compared to Cursor AI? Cursor still edges out in speed, UI, and beginner-friendliness. That doesn’t mean Copilot is bad it just has a different vibe. Plus, it’s backed by Microsoft, so improvements will keep coming.
