Live data from Hacker News

Sequoia backs Zed

zed.dev

151–160 of 346 posts

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#151
post #106

Is IntelliJ "bad"? Aren't the reactions here overly negative? This means the company is funded, development will continue, zed will continue to improve. An IntelliJ style license (for example) is an acceptable trade-off from my point-of-view

Not many people are willing to pay ~$300/year for an IDE. And Intellij didn't take any VC funding.

So at some point Zed will likely need to pursue monetization more aggressively than IntelliJ does now.

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#152
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha yes I wrote that, thank you for sharing. We're approaching the problem by drawing from browser design. We want to see an editor with a DOM API for code documents. BABLR is a parser framework meant as a direct answer to Tree-sitter.

Myself and most people I know that switch to Zed (many from Sublime) did it because we DON'T want a DOM in our text editor. Webtech makes for crappy text editors.

Sorry, I didn't make that very clear. I'm not talking about the HTML DOM, which exists as an API to control the 2D pixel rendering layer.

A standardized DOM for code would provide a universal way of changing code documents using scripts and would allow many different code-oriented tools to interoperate naturally where they never could before.

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#153
post #20

I love the spirit of Zed. From the principles to the low-level implementation details, it all screams "good taste". It's immensely interesting as an object of study (the code is great, from GPUI all the way up). Having said that, I don't think an editor should be VC backed. It's the obvious pragmatic choice to get a team together to support a thing, but I'm concerned by it.

It was a cool idea while it lasted, I hope other editors embrace the learnings once zed is gone.

I doubt anyone will follow this.

1. Everyone else is building on Electron.

2. People still sleep on or dunk on Rust. There's a great deal of negativity here on HN for the language.

3. There's only so much Rust talent out there.

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#154
post #98

I love working in Zed. It really is a delight to use, and I think the Agentic coding integration is really well done. I'm excited to see them investing in this space more. I understand people's concerns about VC funding, but I think building quality products takes capital. The funding is still relatively small, especially when you compare it to players like Cursor, etc. And I think Zed is a much, much better product!…

[flagged]

I think a lot of people are missing the sarcasm here. that said, I agree that its absolutely horrific. yesterday I saw a video where a girl who couldn't have been more than 9 or 10 years old carrying water was hit by an idf strike. Poor kid was basically rendered into chum. The fact taht this stuff is going on right in front of our eyes and our government is complicit in is horrific.

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#155
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with accepting VC money is they will eventually demand a return on their investment, which means that the forces that drive enshitification will eventually come for Zed in some form. I suspect that we'll see more and more features locked behind a paid subscription and the open core of the editor will become neglected over time. Here I am on my free-as-in-freedom operating system, making commits with my fr…

Note to Zed: I prefer paid products to enshittened ones. Please please please, get paid rather than holding on too tightly to making things free forcing future enshittening.

you don't have to choose. paid things get enshittified just as easily as free things

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a time around ST2 when it felt like everyone was using it and it could've become The Editor, then something happened and it's been left in the dust. I wasn't even aware but apparently even fourth version of ST was released, and that was in 2021. I lost track of what happened there (moved to Vim back then), was it VSCode that killed it?

Yeah, as others already mentioned, I think they sat on their laurels for a bit too long and let VSCode overtake it. For what it's worth, I went from ST3 -> VSCode -> ST4, and have been happy since. I've found that I prefer my text editor with minimal extensions, and with Sublime Text's LSP Plugin, I'm pretty content. The performance and customizable UI make it more worth it to me than VSCode.

Agreed, LSP has replaced Linter extensions and the TabNine LLM which is nice (and snappy). Even if some of the lsp servers are clunky to use.

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you haven't checked neovim out, the Lua based config is really nice and easy to grok these days. 10x better than classic vimscript!

A year or two ago I moved away from one of the neovim distros when they randomly changed all the keybinds on an upgrade (such things really anger me) and set up my own config. Funnily enough, I preferred vimscript. I still do use lua of course for various things, but those just go in lua EOF blocks in the vimscript. Vimscript is really terse and convenient for many things, I love it.

I’ve always maintained my own configs for (neo)vim. The only area where I prefer vimscript is with certain incantations for which there are no lua-based alternatives. And those are increasingly rare.

Authoring plugins is a lot more attractive in lua, imho.

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a time around ST2 when it felt like everyone was using it and it could've become The Editor, then something happened and it's been left in the dust. I wasn't even aware but apparently even fourth version of ST was released, and that was in 2021. I lost track of what happened there (moved to Vim back then), was it VSCode that killed it?

Plugins were kind of it's selling point, yet it was pretty easy to mess it up with Plugins to the point of it being unusable - and not knowing what plug-in caused that.

The same curse emacs suffers from. What is the best sweet spot an editor/IDE has achieved to date?

I remember the extremes of the utter unconstrained chaos of Emacs and the rigid ultra-high-boilerplate approach of the Eclipse IDE. Emacs was fun to hack on, but impractical to use as an IDE, because if you installed enough plugins to make it useful as an IDE, it was broken half the time (my experience, many years ago.) Eclipse had a robust architecture, but writing plugins for it was a dispiriting slog, even when I got paid for it (again, my experience, many years ago.)

Re: Sequoia backs Zed

#160
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with accepting VC money is they will eventually demand a return on their investment, which means that the forces that drive enshitification will eventually come for Zed in some form. I suspect that we'll see more and more features locked behind a paid subscription and the open core of the editor will become neglected over time. Here I am on my free-as-in-freedom operating system, making commits with my fr…

Please, tell me what it's like living in your free-as-in-freedom house, feeding your free-as-in-freedom offspring? Eventually demanding a return on your investment? The audacity!

[dead]
Post reply on HN