GitHub Copilot was the AI coding tool that started it all for most developers. When it launched, it felt like magic — type a comment, get a function. Type a function name, get the implementation.
But that was then. The AI coding tool landscape has exploded since. Cursor, Claude Code, Windsurf, Codeium, and others have all entered the ring. So the question I keep hearing from developers on my team is: “Should I still be paying for Copilot?”
After using Copilot alongside newer tools for the past year, here’s my honest assessment.
What Copilot Does Well in 2026
1. Inline Autocomplete — Still Fast, Still Good
Copilot’s core feature — ghost text suggestions as you type — remains solid. It’s fast, it understands common patterns, and for boilerplate-heavy work (API endpoints, data models, config files) it still saves real time.
The multi-line suggestions have gotten better. Type a function signature and Copilot often fills in a reasonable implementation. It’s not always right, but it’s right often enough that tab-accepting and tweaking is faster than writing from scratch.
2. Deep GitHub Integration
If your workflow lives in GitHub — pull requests, issues, Actions — Copilot’s integration is seamless. Copilot can summarize PRs, suggest PR descriptions, and even review code within the GitHub UI. For teams that live in the GitHub ecosystem, this integration has real value that standalone tools don’t offer.
3. Copilot Chat Has Improved
Copilot Chat in VS Code used to be mediocre compared to Claude or ChatGPT. It’s gotten better — the responses are more detailed, it handles multi-file context better, and it can now use both GPT-4o and Claude as backend models. It’s still not as good as dedicated chat tools, but the gap has narrowed.
4. Copilot Workspace (Preview)
GitHub is betting big on Copilot Workspace — an environment where you describe a feature or bug fix in natural language and Copilot plans, implements, and tests it. It’s still in preview and rough around the edges, but the vision is compelling. If it matures, it could justify the subscription by itself.
Where Copilot Falls Short
1. Cursor’s Autocomplete Is Better
This is the uncomfortable truth: Cursor’s tab completions are more contextually aware than Copilot’s. Cursor indexes your entire project and uses that context to make suggestions that fit your codebase’s patterns, naming conventions, and architecture. Copilot mostly uses the current file and nearby tabs.
For small projects, the difference is negligible. For larger codebases with established patterns, Cursor feels noticeably smarter.
2. No Multi-File Editing
Copilot suggests code inline. It doesn’t have a Composer (Cursor) or Cascade (Windsurf) equivalent — there’s no way to describe a change that spans multiple files and preview all the edits. For refactoring and coordinated changes, you’re on your own.
Copilot Workspace is trying to address this, but it’s not ready for daily use yet.
3. The Chat Is Good, But Not Best-in-Class
Copilot Chat is fine for quick questions about the current file. But for complex debugging, architecture discussions, or deep code review, you’ll get better results from Claude Code or even just pasting code into Claude/ChatGPT directly.
The issue isn’t that Copilot Chat is bad — it’s that the bar has been raised by tools that specialize in conversational coding.
4. No CLI Integration
If you work in the terminal (like I often do), Copilot doesn’t help you there. Claude Code lives in the terminal. You can pipe diffs, logs, and stack traces directly to it. Copilot is editor-only, which means switching context for anything that isn’t writing code in a file.
Copilot vs The Competition
| Copilot | Cursor | Claude Code | Codeium/Windsurf | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autocomplete | Good | Better | N/A | Good (free) |
| Chat | Good | Good | Best | Good |
| Multi-file edits | No | Yes (Composer) | Yes (CLI) | Yes (Cascade) |
| Terminal | No | No | Yes | Limited |
| Price | $19/mo | $20/mo | $20/mo | $15/mo |
| Free tier | Limited | Limited | Limited | Generous |
| Best for | GitHub users | Code writing | Review/planning | Budget |
Who Should Still Use Copilot
Keep Copilot if:
- Your company provides it (many do — it’s a common company-wide license)
- You’re deeply in the GitHub ecosystem and use the PR integration
- You want simple autocomplete and don’t need multi-file editing
- You’re waiting for Copilot Workspace to mature
Drop Copilot if:
- You’re paying out of pocket and want the best autocomplete → switch to Cursor
- You need multi-file editing or agentic flows → switch to Cursor or Windsurf
- You spend a lot of time reviewing code → add Claude Code
- You want free autocomplete → switch to Codeium
My Setup
I’ve reduced my Copilot usage significantly. My current stack:
- Cursor for writing and editing code (autocomplete + Composer)
- Claude Code for review, debugging, and generation
- Copilot disabled in my personal setup
On my team, several developers still use Copilot because our company provides licenses. For them, it’s free and good enough. I don’t push them to switch because the marginal improvement of Cursor over Copilot isn’t worth the context-switching cost unless they’re power users.
The Bottom Line
GitHub Copilot isn’t bad. It’s still a solid AI coding assistant that does the basics well. But “solid and basic” doesn’t justify $19/month when Cursor exists at $20/month with significantly better features, or when Codeium gives you free autocomplete that’s almost as good.
If you’re evaluating AI coding tools today — fresh, no existing subscriptions — I’d recommend Cursor over Copilot for paid, or Codeium for free. Copilot’s strongest case is the GitHub integration and the promise of Copilot Workspace. Whether that promise is worth $19/month today is a personal call.
Tools change fast. Copilot could ship a major update tomorrow that reshuffles this entire comparison. I’ll update this post when that happens.
You might also like
- Cursor vs Claude Code in 2026: Which AI Coding Tool Should You Use?
- Windsurf vs Cursor in 2026: Which AI IDE Should You Pick?
- 5 Free AI Coding Tools That Are Actually Worth Using in 2026
📦 Free: AI Code Review Prompt Pack — 10 prompts I use on 15+ PRs/week.
Newsletter: One practical AI workflow per week, plus templates I don’t publish here. Subscribe →