You have to understand that Atom is repurposed webkit, with all the flaws and benefits that come with a browser engine.
I liked it, the dealbreaker (to say the least) for me was broken support for non-US keyboard layouts, it can't differentiate alt from alt-gr making it impossible for me to type most brackets and pipe.
This has been an open issue for months, with a couple of community contributed "solutions" that don't quite cut it.
Considering they are pretty much ignoring the problem I won't be checking out Atom again soon.
I just downloaded the latest version (on ubuntu 14.04 with Atom 0.177.0) and was able to type "|" and "@" and "\" no without problems on a Spanish-layout keyboard.
Edit: in latest release notes it says "Atom now runs on top of Chrome 40 and io.js".
Hopefully Github will come to their senses and instead start using Skia directly, like ST3 does. Proper 2D library bindings would be super valuable to any community.
I wouldn't really consider the site 'atomtips.com' to be an unbiased source on this issue!
All you need to know is that you can easily use both for free and decide if you like both, either, or neither. So basically, pick whatever one (or none of them!) that you prefer after using it for a bit.
Atom has the upside of being open-source, and being easier for people familiar with the web stack to modify. Sublime has the benefit of being much faster. You'll be able to achieve roughly the same with both, and it'll come down to individual use cases and preferences.
(Although I will say that I don't consider the replacement of a lovely JSON-formatted settings file with a GUI to be a benefit at all!)
I don't think you should rely on other's opinions when picking an editor. Just try each one (really try) for a week or two and decide after that.
Everyone uses editors differently (hence the big vim/emacs/etc flame war) and it is where you'll spend time coding. A lot of time. I don't think reading someone else's opinion really helps.
When I chose my editor everyone was crazy about TextMate. I tried it out and didn't like it. I was completely afraid of Vim (and all of the jokes about how hard it was) and after I tried it I couldn't stop using it. It's a very personal choice.
So much this, and it applies to things other than editors too. I used to constantly look for people's opinions on all kinds of software to decide which one was best for me due to a belief that if I used something that I didn't end up liking then that time would have been wasted. I've now mostly reversed that habit because trying something out for yourself is the only way you'll know if you will like it, and the time invested isn't a waste so long as you come out with a better idea of what you prefer.
I've used both for a considerable amount of time and these are my unbiased thoughts about it.
1. I don't think Atom is more of a web-editor. Think of dreamweaver, but completely stripped down, and dare I say, faster. I used to it write few of my NodeJs apps and was quite happy with it. But, compared to Submile, it is incredibly slow.
2. Also, I'm not sure how others work, but I'm more of a one editor for everything person. Atom is not that editor. Vim, Emacs and to an extent, because of being native and having huge number of plugins, Sublime is quite one-ring-to-rule-them-all editor. I feel that Atom won't ever be that, nor does it want to be that.
3. Time spent in learning the shortcuts of both these editors are negligent and both provide enough ways to tailor it to your needs. But I feel that Atom has better project management capabilities than Sublime. Github is a major help here.
That's about it. I'm a Sublime fan, and just don't feel to need to switch anything. I would rather spend that time building something fun than invest myself in learning another editor.
Indeed, it seems like wishful thinking that Atom will magically become quicker. One presumes that the easy optimisations have already been made. What else can be done, other than a complete rewrite using a different technology stack?
Atom just feels weird and broken. Make a new document - why is Edit -> Undo enabled when there's nothing to Undo? Press Command-Z - why doesn't the menubar flash to indicate that I typed a key equivalent? Control-click on an item in the tree view on the right - why does it only highlight after the menu is dismissed? Make the window bigger - why is there a flicker, as the content repaints after the window resizes?
Atom exists in an uncanny valley, and re-introduces tons of problems that the design of OS X has worked hard to avoid. I hope Atom doesn't succeed for that reason: it's a big regression in UI.
Atom has an ambitious concept and is generally engineered well, but the performance is crippling it so far. I'm not sure whether it's possible in the current web-to-native implementation to actually reach native performance, especially for large files, but so far it's just not ready for the primetime.
The biggest issue for me is startup speed. Atom simply takes too long for me. I'm often quickly having a look at large numerical csv files and Atom startup times plus csv load times are always large enough to immediately switch back to sublime. Still want to like Atom though.
I've settled on using Atom for my longer-term work, where I can just leave it open and am not too bothered by sluggishness here or there.
Then I use Sublime Text for big files, quick edits, and the occasional stuff that Atom can't do yet.
But after avoiding Atom initially, trying it again about a week a go was a nice surprise. It has almost any plugin that I used Sublime Text for, and a bunch more. It's good enough for me, and I'm pretty picky.
I don't know. If it's a big enough edit to warrant waiting for start up time, then why not just use an appropriate IDE which also has lots of additional convenience features in addition to just being an editor.
Atom takes about the same amount of time to start up as RubyMine but it only provides a fraction of the functionality.
The one thing a pure editor has over an IDE is start up time and Atom is not even having that.
> The one thing a pure editor has over an IDE is start up time and Atom is not even having that.
Well, Atom does start significantly faster than WebStorm (and it's siblings). On top of that, actually using Atom is much less sluggish than WebStorm or other full-blown IDE's. This is on a MacBook Air though, with tons of apps and at least two browsers open.
That said, I'd probably use an IDE if I do more complex work. For my current web-development needs Atom is fine, and since I mostly work within one project, the startup time is not an issue.
Furthermore, since most of the keyboard shortcuts and interface is similar to Sublime, it's not a big deal to open ST every once in a while for bigger files.
The main reason I'm switching to Atom for now, though, is that I feel it has a stronger future than ST, and I might finally scratch some of my own itches by writing plugins. That's harder for me to do for ST.
Those of you who use Sublime or Atom exclusively for (code) work, does that mean you don't use an IDE?
There seems to be devs coming from at least three camps: the ones that came from the emacs/vi side that never really took to IDEs, those that once used (say) Eclipse and were burned by IDEs and now like the less-is-more of editors, and those that started developing in IDE's and can't imagine NOT having an integrated debugger and so on (Yes I know several text editors can be set up to have most IDE features, but for the sake of argument lets count IDEs as those that were built from the ground up as full IDEs).
Not sure what divides devs this way but the 2 main reasons should be platform: if you are used to linux of course you have huge benefits of having a console based editor, perhaps so much that you can forego a lot of the bells and whistles of a desktop based one, especially of you don't use graphical designers UI elements and such. The second reason I can think of would be language: If you are work on niche languages you are likely to find editor support in text editors, but not likely a good IDE. Likewise if you work in dynamic/weakly typed languages, the benefits of refactorings and navigation are much smaller than they are in a static/strongly typed langues.
So I'm curious: if you aren't a Haskell or js developer, are you using a non-IDE as your "main" editor? If so, why?
For me personally I want a full IDE for my dev work and can't imagine coding without full project support, integrated debugger, refactorings and so on, and I can't be bothered with configuring editor plugins for basic things such as auto-indentation, auto-complete or syntax highlighting, and I haven't seen any really good dev environents based on editors in neither Sublime, vi or emacs. I do use editors for viewing random files/logs, editing resources, making documentation and so on, but not as my main dev tool. As such, the requirements are very different from an editor that is a main dev environment from 8 to 5.
To me, an IDE basically just means "an editor with a built-in debugger". I really don't know where else you'd draw the line. However, for many languages, there's no such thing as a built-in debugger (most interpreted languages, for example).
I've used Visual Studio for C# and C++, and Eclipse for Java.
For Python, Javascript, Go, and editing random files, I prefer Sublime Text. It loads and runs way faster than VS or Eclipse. Setting up plugins is usually a one-time thing that only takes a few minutes to follow some directions off the web. There usually zero "configuration". Just install and you're done.
My guess is that your day job is using Java, C++, or a .Net language, and that's why you feel tied to an IDE (probably VS or Eclipse). Other languages don't really need that much integration into an IDE (unlike others, I don't think needing an IDE is really a bad thing, generally it means there's just a lot of stuff you can do with the language besides writing logic).
I mainly write Go at work, and Sublime is great for that. There's not really a Go debugger yet (there's a couple bad choices, but not ones I'd want to use on any kind of a regular basis), and there's not really a way to write GUIs either... so what's left is "write code, format code, run tests, run program". The last two are purely command line, and the first two are what my editor does.
> To me, an IDE basically just means "an editor with a built-in debugger"
Yes, at least an integrated project support, debugger and compiler (but could be more, such as profiler, testing, designer). You are correct I use the large OO langs, and I agree that IDEs are only really useful for languages with strict types, large class libraries and large projects (so for example C++, and the JVM and .NET languages).
> write code, format code, run tests, run program
But isn't there a frustrating number of unnecessary roundtrips involved here? At least in go, which is strictly typed, if you misspell a type or function name, when will you notice? Can you configure Sublime so that you at least get compiler support (so a typo will be noticed when you make it rather than later?).
And can you make sublime help you with displaying documentation hints or with completing statements? If you have a compiler error, how do you navigate to where it is? Do you have to read the line number in the compiler output and then open the offending file/tab in Sublime and navigate manually to the line? At least for most langs in Emacs you get compiler message parsing so you can jump straight to the problem.
Coming from the IDE world, I'd just never get off the ground with a new language if I had to go from autocompletion and squigglies under typos, to having to remember type names and function names in my head (yes IDEs have basically done that to my head, I can no longer remember even the smallest bit of language trivia).
Sorry for the late reply. Yes, the plugin for Go for Sublime will tell you when you type something that won't compile. It has autocomplete for functions and types etc. It has go to definition. Some plugins will let you compile straight from sublime, though I don't use that, generally I just use the command line for that, I don't really find it to be a problem...
Integrated project support is not really needed for Go, at least. There's no project file that defines what's in a project, it's just the directory layout, and everything is embedded in the .go files themselves, so there's no need to parse something to know what's "in" or "not in" the project.
From a website called "atomtips", it seems kind of biased !
Anyway the dealbreaker for me was the very slow start of Atom (and I've got a very good machine). When every app loads instantly, I'm not going to wait 5 seconds for each new window of Atom I launch.
I know it's "linux only" (not really, I'm using an old version from windows.kde.org), but, seriously, I always found kate[0] better suited as a "programmer editor". I recenlty at work switched to sublime, but it's inferior to kate in almost everything (the only thing I see it handle better - and it handle very better - is the opening of very big (>30Mb) text files)
Both are very good editors. The choice might well depend on which source language you're going to edit, and your average file as well as project size (how many files?). If any of the two is large enough, you just can't use Atom for that - it's noticeably slower, for obvious reasons. Though, I don't use a single editor for everything. You could just go with Sublime, and switch to Atom whenever you need some feature/plugin that you find more convenient there.
OT: does anybody know PSPad? It has a very interesting feature set, though it lacks more advanced things like collapsing, refactoring tools; I find it very useful sometimes - especially its columnar editing feature.
UI inspired by Sublime? It practically copied most functionality, behaviour and UI style from Sublime. Atom wouldn't have existed without Sublime. Or at least wouldn't be as good.
Having said that, Atom's got my bet as the text editor of the near future.
The startup speed is incredibly painful. That said, I absolutely love working in Atom, and I use it whenever I'm doing a substantial session of coding.
For minor edits and quick referencing, I'll typically use Emacs. Then some Jetbrains IDE for work/specific school projects. I definitely think I've found a balance that works well for me, but the fact that I'm switching so much makes me unsure if it is best.
They're both good, powerful and accessible editors (alongside a pile of other editors that people will swear on their children's lives are the best)...
However, nobody else on this planet is you. None of us shares your exact likes, requirements and thoughts. What I like in Atom might really piss you off. What you need from ST might not even be on my radar.
If you want to pick, try both and decide for yourself.
No. Your previous comment is simply irelevant as a HN comment. Look at the other comments in a similar style to yours. All downvoted as well. Editor wars are so damn dull without any factual exchanges.
You are right, I had a lot of downvotes until I realized that I am not in reddit and that comments should be made to anrich the conversation, not to express a single word like 'notepad++' that means nothing.
The editor imho, should not be that big of a choice. The more important thing is, you choose one and you stick with it so that you will master it and enjoy all the advantages there are for that editor.
I strongly doubt that there is much different (perhaps some limitations of the app itself which are described below in other comments), that a person that worked with atom editor for a long time and mastered it vs a sublime text user that mastered the editor will work at a different speed.
I liked it, the dealbreaker (to say the least) for me was broken support for non-US keyboard layouts, it can't differentiate alt from alt-gr making it impossible for me to type most brackets and pipe.
This has been an open issue for months, with a couple of community contributed "solutions" that don't quite cut it. Considering they are pretty much ignoring the problem I won't be checking out Atom again soon.