A Cursor Alternative: A Local AI Agent Instead of an AI Code Editor
What to use instead of Cursor if you want the code to stay off the cloud entirely. An honest comparison of the two formats — an AI code editor with inline autocomplete versus a desktop agent that does the whole task.
Cursor is a popular AI code editor, but it comes with one structural trade-off: your code goes to the cloud. Let's look honestly at what to use instead — no "we're better than everyone" claims.
First, honestly: these are different formats
Cursor is a code editor (a fork of VS Code) with AI built in: inline autocomplete as you type, a chat over the project. Doka is a desktop agent: it doesn't replace an editor, it works alongside one, as a task executor. It has no inline autocomplete inside someone else's editor.
But for a lot of tasks, the agent format is actually more convenient: you describe the task in words, and it reads files, edits code, and runs tests in the terminal on its own. If what you need is "do it," not "suggest something as I type," this is the format for you.
Where Doka addresses Cursor's pain points
- No cloud dependency. Local models run for free, as much as you want.
- Code doesn't leave the machine. Privacy by default — matters for work projects.
- Your choice of model. A built-in local model, your own
.gguf, or a cloud model over an API — pick per task.
Simple rule: need an AI editor with inline autocomplete? That's Cursor and its direct competitors. Need an agent that does the whole task on its own and doesn't send code to the cloud? That's Doka.
How to try it
- Download Doka — free, Windows or Mac.
- On first launch, a model installs automatically.
- Open your project's working folder and describe tasks in plain language.
The honest bottom line
There's no exact one-to-one substitute for Cursor — they're genuinely different tools. But if what's pushing you away from Cursor is wanting code to stay off the cloud, a local agent addresses exactly that: free, private, and on your own hardware.