How is Atom different from Sublime? Atom is an open source text editor/IDE, built on JavaScript/HTML/CSS. Sublime Text is a commercial product, built on C/C++ and Python. Comparable to Atom is Adobe Brackets, another open source text editor/IDE built on JavaScript/HTML/CSS. Be minded that this makes Brackets more oriented towards Web development, specially in the front end. Advantages of open source projects are faster rate of development and, of course, price. Does it include IDE features like build tools, function definition jumps, documentations, etc.? The short answer is yes, yes, and yes. The app is completely modular. Open source will give people the freedom to fill the gaps on several of these features. Has anyone using Sublime got a Beta invitation to point out the differences? Advantages of Atom is entry-level hackability, since it's built on the same code that powers Web sites. Advantages of Sublime Text is performance, as it doesn't need to run on top of Node.js, and it's a more mature product, about to reach a stable version 3. There are a long list of minor differences that can be included in the comments (I wish this markdown could be able to draw a table for comparisons, but that's another issue). Because of Atom's rapid turnout, I am afraid some of differences I list here will become outdated over time. Per example, at the time of this writing, Atom is only available on the Macintosh while Sublime Text is already multiplatform. Can I use the themes, schemes and packages from Sublime as is, like Sublime could do with text mate. The short answer is no, but because of Atom's hackability, it will be easy to retool packages from other editors to Atom.

到目前为止还没有人指出的一个主要区别是(至少在Windows上)Atom不完全支持除US之外的其他键盘布局，这对一些人来说可能很重要。有一份关于这个漏洞的报告，几百个帖子已经开放了一年多(https://github.com/atom/atom-keymap/issues/35)。

可能与选择编辑有关。

除了前面的回答之外，还有必要从开发过程中所做的选择的角度来澄清这两种产品之间的差异。

Sublime is binary compiled for the platform. Its core is written in C/C++ and a number of its features are implemented in Python, which is also the language used for extending it. Atom is written in Node.js/Coffeescript and runs under webkit, with Coffeescript being the extension language. Though similar in UI and UX, Sublime performs significantly better than Atom especially in "heavy lifting" like working with large files, complex SnR or plugins that do heavy processing on files/buffers. Though I expect improvements in Atom as it matures, design & platform choices limit performance.

The "closed" part of Sublime includes the API and UI. Apart from skins/themes and colourisers, the API currently makes it difficult to modify other aspects of the UI. For example, Sublime plugins can't interact with the sidebar, control or draw on the editing area (except in some limited ways eg. in the gutter) or manipulate the statusbar beyond basic text. Atom's "closed" part is unknown at the moment, but I get the sense it's smaller. Atom has a richer API (though poorly documented at present) with the design goal of allowing greater control of its UI. Being closely coupled with webkit offers numerous capabilities for UI feature enhancements not presently possible with Sublime. However, Sublime's extensions perform closer to native, so those that perform compute-intensive, highly repetitive or complex text manipulations in large buffers are feasible in Sublime.

Since more of Atom will be open, Github open-sourced Atom on May 6th. As a result it's likely that support and pace of development will be rapid. By contrast, Sublime's development has slowed significantly of late - but it's not dead. In particular there are a number of bugs, many quite trivial, that haven't been fixed by the developer. None are showstopping imo, but if you want something in rapid development with regular bugfixing and enhancements, Sublime will frustrate. That said, installable Atom packages for Windows and Linux are yet to be released and activity on the codebase seems to have cooled in the weeks before and since the announcement, according to Github's stats.

In terms of IDE functions, from a webdev perspective Atom will allow extensions to the point of approaching products like Webstorm, though none have appeared yet. It remains to be seen how Atom will perform with such "heavy" extensions, since the editor natively feels sluggish. Due to restrictions in the API and lack of underlying webkit, Sublime won't allow this level of UI customisation although the developer may extend the API to support such features in future. Again, Sublime's underlying performance allows for things that involve computational grunt; ST3's symbol indexing being an example that performs well even with big projects. And though Atom's UI is certainly modelled upon Sublime, some refinements are noticeably missing, such as Sublime's learning panels and tab-complete popups which weight the defaults in accordance with those you most use.

我认为这些产品是互补的。事实上，他们分享相似的视觉效果和按键只是增加了这一事实。在某些情况下，使用任何一种都有优势。目前，Sublime是一个成熟的产品，在所有三个平台上都具有相同的功能，并拥有丰富的插件集。Atom是新出生的孩子，他的五官会迅速长出来;它感觉还没有准备好生产，在性能方面有一些担忧。

[更新/编辑:2015年5月18日]

关于这两个编辑器自撰写上述文章以来的改进说明。

In addition to bugfixes and improvements to its core, Atom has experienced a rapid growth in third-party extensions, with autocomplete-plus becoming part of the standard Atom distribution. Extension quality varies widely and a particular irritation is the frequency by which unstable third party packages can crash the editor. Within the last year, Atom has moved to using React by way of shifting reflow/repaint activity to the GPU for performance reasons, significantly improving the responsiveness of the UI for typical editing actions (scrolling, cursor movement etc.). While this has markedly improved the feel of the editor, it still feels cumbersome for CPU intensive tasks as described above, and is still slow in startup. Apart from performance improvements, Atom feels significantly more stable across the board.

Development of Sublime has picked up again since Jan 2015, with bugfixes, some minor new features (tooltip API, build system improvements) and a major development in the form of a new yaml-based .sublime-syntax definition (to eventually replace the old xml .tmLanguage). Together with a custom regex engine which replaces Onigurama, the new system offers more potential for precise regex matching, is significantly faster (up to 4x) and can perform multiple matches in parallel. Apart from colouring syntax, Sublime uses these components for symbol indexing (goto definition etc.) and other language-aware features. In addition to further speeding up Sublime, particularly for large files, this feature should open up the potential for performant language-specific features such as code-refactoring etc.. Further 'big developments' are promised, though the author remains, as ever, tight lipped about them.

Atom是使用Node.js, CoffeeScript和LESS编写的。然后它被包装在WebKit包装器中，该包装器最初只适用于OSX，尽管现在也有Windows版本可用。(Linux版本必须从源代码构建，但Ubuntu用户有一个PPA。)

很多架构和功能都复制自Sublime Text，因为它们都经过了尝试和测试。插件系统的工作原理几乎是一样的，但是通过公开新的api也打开了许多新特性和潜力。

我相信，由于肌肉记忆，快捷键基本上保持不变——人们会记住它们，并能够立即点击Atom。

首选项可以通过GUI来控制，而不是直接编辑JSON，这可能会降低人们开始使用Atom的入门门槛。我自己发现很难导航所有这些，因为在首选项中没有搜索功能。

你可以在##atom- invitation IRC频道上注册一个邀请，或者注册到他们的网站并添加你的电子邮件。第一轮邀请很快就来了。

另一个区别是Sublime文本是一个闭源项目，而Atom源代码是/将是公开可用的——尽管Github不打算将其作为一个真正的开源项目发布。他们想要提供对代码的访问权限，而不是向贡献者开放代码。

Github公开了代码:http://blog.atom.io/2014/05/06/atom-is-now-open-source.html

我在一个极端的环境下工作;编辑远程文件系统上的文件(外部网络，当然)，是安装在我的笔记本电脑通过ssh(aka。sshfs)。不管我为什么要这样做，尽管它的响应很麻烦，但当我使用Sublime Text 2时，它是相当可以接受的。

读了这篇文章后，我尝试了Atom，但结果对我来说有点痛苦;Atom似乎不能有效地缓存目录结构。每当我在树视图中展开一个文件夹时，UI会冻结一小段时间，2~3秒，可能是获取文件系统信息。是的，这是因为我正在使用远程文件系统。但是Sublime的处理效率更高，至少它不会在我每次展开文件夹时冻结，所以不那么痛苦。

我认为免费的Atom非常棒，我的故事很琐碎，有一天可能会被增强，但在这个时候它会对某些人有所帮助。

--

2014年8月26日添加

Recently, I changed my laptop from Macbook Air 2010 late to Macbook Pro 13" 2013 late. It has likely 4 times faster CPU and much enhancements in performance. I want to mention my opinion is about in the case WHEN YOU MOUNT REMOTE FILE SYSTEM. (using OS X Mavericks, most recent version of Atom, FUSE 2.7.3 / OSXFUSE 2.6.4 / sshfs 2.5.0, and remote system is Ubuntu server) Eventually, UI freeze gets pretty shorter, but it is still there. Specifically, to open a folder with many folder/files in it and index it is requires certain amount of time. Also, if you expand a folder full of files, it just falters. (when collapsing the folder, it doesn't)

根据@EliDuenisch的说法，这似乎不会发生在Linux Mint上。我不确定，但可能是因为操作系统之间的差异。当然，如果您在本地文件系统上工作，则完全不必关心这个问题。