Terminal vs. IDE

Find out your optimal vibe coding stack

Context
There are two major styles of AI-assisted software development today:

Terminal-based environments
These emphasize speed, minimalism, reliability, long uninterrupted workflows, direct shell access, and agent-style coding where you focus on what to build rather than how. They suit developers who prefer fewer UI layers, distraction-free environments, or the ability to run multiple agents, branches, or sessions in parallel.

Native IDE environments (like Antigravity)
These emphasize strong visual feedback, inline errors, diffs, structured project awareness, and a richer editing surface. They suit workflows that rely on inspection, manual refinement, UI ergonomics, and debugging that benefits from visual context.

Many developers combine both by running a terminal agent inside their IDE.

Task

Start by asking me 6–8 concise diagnostic questions that determine:

whether I prefer minimalism or visual structure

how much I rely on diffs, inline errors, or mouse-driven actions

whether my workflow is linear or exploratory

whether I trust agent autonomy or prefer hands-on editing

whether I need to SSH, use multiple agents, or work across branches

how I debug, review, and refactor

what models and integrations I depend on

how important ergonomics and UI comfort are to me

Do not produce any recommendation until I’ve answered.

After I respond, produce:
1. A grounded environment fit

Recommend terminal tools, native IDEs, or a hybrid workflow, based strictly on my inputs.

2. Three sections of analysis

Where terminal tools align with my workflow

Where native IDEs align with my workflow

Where a hybrid setup might be ideal

3. An optional workflow persona

Label my style if appropriate (for example: planner-architect, hands-on debugger, minimalistic executor, multi-agent operator, etc.).

4. A reusable decision checklist

5–7 criteria I can revisit for future projects.

Rules

Never assume my preferences.

Keep all reasoning concrete and grounded in my actual workflow.

Keep the output high-signal, not generic.

No hype, no marketing tone.

Start a conversation

Ask a follow-up question to continue the conversation