Google Antigravity - Build the new way
For a very long time I had all these ideas that I couldn't act on. Antigravity has allowed me to just explore and create again, which is a wonderful feeling. The recent addition of skills has exploded my workflow productivity, it literally handles my inbox and calendar for me now. I've been a Google fanboy for a long time and I love what they're doing here.
Still has some minor UI quirks and small bugs as expected with a new tool, but nothing that stops the workflow. I’m excited to see more built-in skills added.
I’ve used Cursor and Claude Code extensively, but they always felt like advanced autocomplete. I chose Antigravity because it bridges the gap between "writing code" and "getting things done." The autonomous skills, handling my real-world emails, calendar, and project setup, along with the deep planning it applies to project architecture, make it the only tool that actually feels like a teammate instead of just a text editor.
Incredibly well. It’s the only tool I’ve found that actually researches the dependencies across the whole codebase before proposing a change, rather than just guessing.
It has completely replaced my previous setup. The transition was smooth, and it handles my local environment much better than typical cloud-based AI tools
As a solo dev, it has significantly reduced my "self-review" time. The implementation plans it generates allow me to catch design flaws before the code is even written
The agent workflow seemed like a meaningful improvement over Cursor. It was easy to follow the agent's code exploration and "though process". The review workflow made it feel very natural to iterate on the agent's proposed solution.
The onboarding/trial felt weak somehow. I ran out of free-usage fairly quickly, and it fell over onto weaker models. I wasn't prompted to upgrade. For a new product, I'd expect to be able to trial it fully-featured, and then decide whether to upgrade.
There were some UI bugs, but nothing I couldn't live with for a new product.
The most important thing is going to be model accuracy. It's worth giving up on UX for better code generation.
In that sense, I actually stalled. Antigravity had momentum, but then stalled and failed over to weaker models. I had to get back to work, so I switched back to Cursor + Claude Code.
Extremely. And, the agent "thought process" is very discoverable.
It seemed to grok our moderate Rails monorepo pretty smoothly.
There's a planning mode (default) that I think did a standard job at. I didn't notice any guardrails
It felt very fast until I ran out of credits and decided to just stop working.
The agent workflow seemed like a meaningful improvement over Cursor. It was easy to follow the agent's code exploration and "though process". The review workflow made it feel very natural to iterate on the agent's proposed solution.
The onboarding/trial felt weak somehow. I ran out of free-usage fairly quickly, and it fell over onto weaker models. I wasn't prompted to upgrade. For a new product, I'd expect to be able to trial it fully-featured, and then decide whether to upgrade.
There were some UI bugs, but nothing I couldn't live with for a new product.
The most important thing is going to be model accuracy. It's worth giving up on UX for better code generation.
In that sense, I actually stalled. Antigravity had momentum, but then stalled and failed over to weaker models. I had to get back to work, so I switched back to Cursor + Claude Code.
Extremely. And, the agent "thought process" is very discoverable.
It seemed to grok our moderate Rails monorepo pretty smoothly.
There's a planning mode (default) that I think did a standard job at. I didn't notice any guardrails
It felt very fast until I ran out of credits and decided to just stop working.
Cursor
Claude Code