Zed vs GNU Emacs
Two of the top three code editors, compared rule by rule on published facts.
In short
- Zed has 92 points and GNU Emacs 87, 5 apart on our code editors rules.
- Zed earns more on code tools and upkeep; GNU Emacs earns more on systems.
- Price: Zed $0, GNU Emacs $0.
- Only Zed meets: multiple cursors, live collaboration and telemetry off or none.
- Only GNU Emacs meets: portable Windows build.
Zed92/100 #2 of 12
Best for: People who want a free editor with debugging and collaboration built in.
GNU Emacs87/100 #3 of 12
Best for: People who want a free editor they can reshape in Emacs Lisp, with many tools built in.
Points by group
| Group | Zed | GNU Emacs |
|---|---|---|
| Systems of 22 | 14 | 19 |
| Code tools of 37 | 37 | 31 |
| Extending of 11 | 11 | 11 |
| Licence and price of 18 | 18 | 18 |
| Upkeep of 12 | 12 | 8 |
| Total | 92 | 87 |
Rule by rule
What each vendor publishes, and the points it earns. Sources are on each product page.
| Rule (points) | Zed | GNU Emacs |
|---|---|---|
| Systems besides Windows (9) | macOS, Linux 6 | macOS, Linux 6 |
| Portable Windows build (5) | Not published 0 | Yes 5 |
| Remote editing (8) | Yes 8 | Yes 8 |
| Language Server Protocol (10) | Yes 10 | Yes 10 |
| Debugger (9) | Yes 9 | Yes 9 |
| Built-in terminal (6) | Yes 6 | Yes 6 |
| Git in the editor (6) | Yes 6 | Yes 6 |
| Multiple cursors (3) | Yes 3 | Not published 0 |
| Live collaboration (3) | Yes 3 | Not published 0 |
| Extension directory (8) | Yes 8 | Yes 8 |
| Custom key bindings (3) | Yes 3 | Yes 3 |
| Free for work use (6) | Yes 6 | Yes 6 |
| Price (6) | $0 6 | $0 6 |
| Open source (6) | Yes 6 | Yes 6 |
| Release in the past year (8) | Yes 8 | Yes 8 |
| Telemetry off or none (4) | Yes 4 | Not published 0 |
Zed
Zed suits people who want a free, open-source editor with a debugger, git panel, terminal and shared projects in one program. Extensions live in a public directory. The catch: its docs show no portable Windows build, and dev containers are still in development.
GNU Emacs
GNU Emacs suits people who want a free editor with a release in the past year with LSP, a debugger interface, git and remote editing all described in its own manuals. The package archive hosted by the GNU project provides extensions. The catch: its manuals show no multiple cursors, live collaboration or statement on usage data.
Both products are scored by the same rules: how we score code editors.