iTerm2

Pros of Alacritty

• Faster performance due to GPU acceleration
• Cross-platform compatibility (Windows, macOS, Linux)
• Minimal resource usage and lightweight design

Cons of Alacritty

• Fewer built-in features and customization options
• Less user-friendly for beginners
• Limited support for complex terminal operations

Code Comparison

iTerm2 (Objective-C):

- (void)setBackgroundColor:(NSColor *)color {
    _backgroundColor = color;
    [self setNeedsDisplay:YES];
}

Alacritty (Rust):

pub fn set_background_color(&mut self, color: Rgb) {
    self.colors.background = color;
    self.dirty = true;
}

Both examples show methods for setting the background color, but iTerm2 uses Objective-C and Cocoa frameworks, while Alacritty employs Rust for better performance and cross-platform compatibility.

iTerm2 offers a more feature-rich experience with extensive customization options, ideal for power users on macOS. Alacritty, on the other hand, prioritizes speed and efficiency across multiple platforms, making it suitable for users who prefer a minimalist, high-performance terminal emulator.

Pros of Terminal

• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux)
• Deeper Windows integration and customization options
• Active development with frequent updates from Microsoft

Cons of Terminal

• Less extensive plugin ecosystem compared to iTerm2
• Fewer advanced features like split panes and search functionality
• Limited theming options compared to iTerm2's robust customization

Code Comparison

iTerm2 (Objective-C):

- (void)setSessionTitle:(NSString *)title
{
    [_delegate sessionDidUpdateTitle:self];
    [_screen setWindowTitle:title];
}

Terminal (C++):

void TerminalCore::SetWindowTitle(const std::wstring_view newTitle)
{
    _title = newTitle;
    _pfnTitleChanged(_title);
}

Both projects implement similar functionality for setting window titles, but use different programming languages and slightly different approaches. iTerm2 uses Objective-C and relies on delegate methods, while Terminal uses C++ and employs a callback function.

iTerm2 offers a more mature and feature-rich experience on macOS, with extensive customization options and a large plugin ecosystem. Terminal, on the other hand, provides a solid cross-platform solution with strong Windows integration, making it an excellent choice for users working across different operating systems.

Pros of kitty

• Faster rendering due to GPU acceleration
• More customizable and extensible through configuration files
• Supports ligatures and advanced font features

Cons of kitty

• Steeper learning curve for configuration
• Less intuitive GUI for settings compared to iTerm2
• May have compatibility issues with some terminal applications

Code Comparison

kitty configuration example:

font_family      Fira Code
font_size        12.0
cursor_shape     beam
background_opacity 0.9

iTerm2 configuration example (via preferences plist):

<key>Normal Font</key>
<string>FiraCode-Regular 12</string>
<key>Cursor Type</key>
<integer>2</integer>
<key>Transparency</key>
<real>0.10000000000000001</real>

Both terminals offer extensive customization options, but kitty's configuration is more human-readable and easier to version control. iTerm2's settings are primarily managed through a GUI, which can be more user-friendly for beginners but less flexible for advanced users.

Pros of WezTerm

• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux)
• Written in Rust, offering better performance and memory safety
• Extensive configuration options via Lua scripting

Cons of WezTerm

• Smaller community and ecosystem compared to iTerm2
• Less mature project with potentially more bugs and instability
• Steeper learning curve for configuration due to Lua scripting

Code Comparison

WezTerm configuration (Lua):

return {
  font = wezterm.font("JetBrains Mono"),
  color_scheme = "Dracula",
  default_prog = {"zsh"},
  window_background_opacity = 0.95,
}

iTerm2 configuration (JSON):

{
  "Normal Font" : "JetBrainsMono-Regular 12",
  "Foreground Color" : {
    "Red Component" : 0.90000000000000002,
    "Color Space" : "sRGB",
    "Blue Component" : 0.90000000000000002,
    "Green Component" : 0.90000000000000002
  }
}

WezTerm offers more flexibility in configuration through Lua scripting, while iTerm2 uses a more straightforward JSON format. WezTerm's cross-platform nature and performance benefits make it an attractive option, but iTerm2's maturity and larger ecosystem may be preferable for macOS users seeking stability and extensive plugin support.

Pros of Hyper

• Built with web technologies (HTML, CSS, JavaScript), making it highly customizable and extensible
• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux) with a consistent experience
• Active community with a large ecosystem of plugins and themes

Cons of Hyper

• Performance can be slower compared to native terminal emulators like iTerm2
• Less mature and may have fewer advanced features out of the box
• Higher resource usage due to Electron framework

Code Comparison

iTerm2 (Objective-C):

- (void)setBackgroundColor:(NSColor *)color {
    _backgroundColor = color;
    [self setNeedsDisplay:YES];
}

Hyper (JavaScript):

setBackgroundColor(color) {
  this.backgroundColor = color;
  this.forceUpdate();
}

Both examples show methods for setting the background color, but iTerm2 uses Objective-C while Hyper uses JavaScript, reflecting their different underlying technologies.

Pros of tmux

• Cross-platform compatibility (Linux, macOS, BSD)
• Lightweight and runs in terminal, no GUI overhead
• Persistent sessions survive network disconnects

Cons of tmux

• Steeper learning curve for new users
• Less intuitive mouse support and graphical features
• Limited built-in customization options without plugins

Code Comparison

tmux configuration example:

# ~/.tmux.conf
set -g mouse on
set -g status-bg black
set -g status-fg white
bind-key v split-window -h
bind-key s split-window -v

iTerm2 doesn't have a direct configuration file, but uses a GUI for preferences. However, it supports custom scripts:

# Custom iTerm2 Python script
import iterm2

async def main(connection):
    app = await iterm2.async_get_app(connection)
    window = app.current_terminal_window
    await window.async_create_tab()

iterm2.run_until_complete(main)

Both tmux and iTerm2 offer powerful terminal multiplexing capabilities, but cater to different user preferences. tmux excels in lightweight, cross-platform functionality and session persistence, while iTerm2 provides a more user-friendly GUI experience with extensive customization options for macOS users.