Is Google Antigravity Better Than Cursor 2.0?

Is Google Antigravity Better Than Cursor 2.0?

🔗 Link do vídeo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9g0FWoT49s
🆔 ID do vídeo: D9g0FWoT49s

📅 Publicado em: 2025-11-19T21:30:02Z
📺 Canal: Build Great Products

⏱️ Duração (ISO): PT34M50S
⏱️ Duração formatada: 00:34:50

📊 Estatísticas:
– Views: 495
– Likes: 16
– Comentários: 8

🏷️ Tags:

🚀 Join my community and start building your AI app today @ https://www.skool.com/aiapps
💡 Get 100s of validated app ideas and the prompts to build FREE @ https://readytobuild.app/

Google just dropped Gemini 3 Pro and with it a new AI IDE that could kill Cursor. In this video I put Antigravity to the test with 3 different prompts to build apps, and compare it to Cursor so you can see Antigravity in action and whether you need to switch from Cursor or not.

I break down Antigravity in detail so you can get a view of every feature compared to Cursor 2.0, and break down Google's vision for the future of AI coding tools.

Chapters:

00:00 — Intro: Gemini 3 Pro and Antigravity overview.
00:35 — First look at Antigravity UI; VS Code/Cursor similarities.
01:16 — Agent Manager vision: managing multiple coding agents/workspaces.
02:47 — Plan: build three apps from single prompts.
03:04 — Picking prompts from ReadyToBuild.app.
05:14 — Prompting the quiz web app; plan mode in Antigravity.
6:21 — Prompting the micro‑thrift lister app.
9:04 — Prompting the AI writing app; plans begin generating.
13:28 — Browser testing via Chrome icon; inbox UX quirks.
14:03 — Agents terminate due to errors; retry flow.
18:05 — First design output review; UX/design feedback.
19:16 — Design improvement prompt with reference image.
20:03 — Repeated agent terminations; usage limits frustration.
21:11 — Improved writing app UI; still basic/front‑end only.
22:33 — Hitting Gemini 3 usage quotas; switch to AI Studio.
23:11 — Why AI Studio is painful for real app workflows.
25:23 — Build quiz app in Cursor with Gemini 3 Pro; plan mode Q&A.
27:33 — AI Studio thrift app output review.
28:05 — Cursor executes nine‑step plan; Antigravity as POC vs Cursor maturity.
30:01 — Cursor completes plan; local run and error handling.
31:34 — Debugging loop; GPT‑5.1 Codex fixes in one shot.
32:19 — App output quality still basic; prompt/design expectations.
33:23 — Final verdict: Antigravity immature; recommend Cursor for now.

Key points:

– I break down Antigravity and the agent manager user interface for coding agents

– I test 3 prompts with Gemini 3 Pro High to build apps from scratch

– I test Gemini 3 Pro in Google AI Studio to see the output

– I create an app from scratch in Cursor using Gemini 3 Pro

– I finish building my app and get it running by bug fixing with GPT 5.1 Codex High after Gemini 3 Pro fails to fix the issue

Follow me on social:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashbychris/
https://x.com/chris_telescope