Agents UI
The terminal has traditionally been a passive interface—a window into your system where you type commands and read output. But in 2026, the terminal is increasingly where AI agents live and work. Whether you're running Claude Opus 4.7 through the Anthropic CLI, using Cursor's agent mode, or orchestrating multiple AI assistants across different projects, your terminal choice now directly impacts your productivity.
This shift raises an important question: which terminal is actually built for this new workflow? Let's compare three leading macOS options: the battle-tested iTerm2, the modern and AI-enhanced Warp, and Agents UI, a purpose-built terminal for multi-agent development.
Three Different Philosophies
iTerm2 is the de facto standard for Mac developers who need more than Terminal.app. First released in 2009, it's accumulated nearly two decades of features: split panes, extensive customization, solid tmux integration, and rock-solid stability. It doesn't try to reinvent the terminal—it perfects the traditional model. If you're running AI agents through iTerm2, you're using the same workflows that have served Unix developers for decades.
Warp launched in 2022 with a fundamentally different vision: the terminal should be a modern application, not a 1970s throwback. Built in Rust with a GPU-accelerated UI, Warp treats command input as editable blocks, offers built-in AI command suggestions through Warp AI, and provides team collaboration features. It's polished, fast, and designed for developers who want their terminal to feel like a 2020s product.
Agents UI takes a third approach. It assumes you're not just running one AI agent occasionally—you're orchestrating multiple agents across different projects simultaneously. You need to switch between a local development agent, an SSH session running analysis on a remote server, and a third agent working on a different codebase. Agents UI is built around multi-session orchestration, persistent state, and eliminating the friction of context-switching between agent workflows.
Multi-Session Management
This is where philosophies diverge most sharply.
iTerm2 gives you tabs and split panes. You can tile multiple sessions in a window, save window arrangements, and script complex layouts. It's powerful but manual—you're responsible for organizing your workspace. If you're running three different AI agent sessions, you'll create three splits or tabs and manage them yourself. The flexibility is there, but so is the cognitive overhead.
Warp improves on this with a more modern tab interface and better visual organization. Its command blocks make it easier to distinguish between different sessions at a glance. However, the fundamental model is still tab-based. You can group tabs and use keyboard shortcuts to navigate, but managing five or six concurrent agent sessions still means juggling tabs and remembering which is which.
Agents UI is designed for this exact scenario. It provides project-based session management where each "workspace" can contain multiple persistent sessions—local shells, SSH connections, and separate agent contexts. You're not managing terminal windows; you're managing agent workflows. Switch between projects, and all your relevant sessions come with you. The bundled zellij integration means each session can have its own layouts and panes that survive crashes and reboots.
AI Agent Support
Given that we're comparing terminals in an AI-first context, how well does each actually work with AI agents?
iTerm2 is agent-agnostic in the best sense. It's a stable, predictable POSIX terminal that works with any CLI tool, including every AI coding agent available today. The Anthropic CLI, Aider, Cursor's CLI mode, GitHub Copilot CLI—they all work perfectly. iTerm2's Python API even lets you script interactions if you want to build custom agent integrations. The downside? Zero built-in AI features. You're bringing your own agents and managing them manually.
Warp includes Warp AI, which can suggest commands, explain errors, and help debug issues directly in the terminal. For routine development tasks, this is genuinely useful—you can ask "how do I find large files" and get a working command. However, Warp AI is focused on command-line assistance rather than long-running agent workflows. It's great for one-off questions, less optimized for "run this agent for 30 minutes while it refactors my codebase." The terminal also requires an account and internet connectivity for AI features, which some developers find intrusive.
Agents UI doesn't include its own AI model, but it's designed around the assumption that you're running external agents constantly. The multi-session architecture means you can have Claude running in one pane, Gemini 3 in another, and a GPT-5.2-powered agent in a third, all visible simultaneously. The built-in Monaco editor means agents can make file changes that you review without leaving the terminal. There's no command suggestion feature like Warp, but the entire interface is optimized for the "multiple agents working in parallel" workflow.
SSH Workflows
Remote development is where architectural differences become very apparent.
iTerm2 handles SSH the traditional way: you SSH into a box, and now that tab is your remote session. File transfers require scp, rsync, or a separate SFTP client. Port forwarding works through SSH flags. It's all manual but completely standard. For developers comfortable with Unix tooling, this is fine. For those juggling multiple remote sessions with local agents, it's tedious.
Warp doesn't fundamentally change the SSH model—you still connect manually and manage forwarding yourself. However, its command blocks and better session labeling make it easier to keep track of multiple remote connections. The visual polish helps, but the workflow is essentially the same as iTerm2.
Agents UI includes integrated SSH file transfer via SCP and built-in port forwarding management. You can drag files between local and remote systems through the UI, set up persistent port forwards without remembering SSH flags, and see which connections are active at a glance. If you're running an AI agent locally but need it to interact with code on a remote server, Agents UI removes several steps from that workflow. This is particularly valuable when you're context-switching between multiple projects that each have their own remote environments.
Session Persistence
What happens when your terminal crashes? Or you restart your Mac? Or you accidentally close a window where an AI agent has been running for 20 minutes?
iTerm2 sessions die when the terminal closes, unless you're running tmux or screen. Many iTerm2 power users do exactly that—they run everything inside tmux and reattach after restarts. This works well but requires setup and tmux knowledge. iTerm2's own window restoration can bring back layouts but not shell state or running processes.
Warp similarly doesn't persist shell state by default. You can use tmux or screen with Warp, but this somewhat undermines the "modern terminal" premise—you're wrapping a 2020s interface around a 1980s multiplexer because the terminal itself doesn't solve persistence.
Agents UI bundles zellij, a modern terminal multiplexer written in Rust. Every session runs inside zellij by default, which means session state persists across terminal restarts, crashes, and even OS updates. If an AI agent is mid-task and Agents UI crashes, you reopen the app and the agent is still running, exactly where it was. For long-running agent workflows, this is the difference between "losing 30 minutes of work" and "I didn't even notice the crash."
Performance and Architecture
The implementation details matter when you're running multiple intensive processes.
iTerm2 is written in Objective-C and is fully native to macOS. It's fast, resource-efficient, and doesn't rely on web technologies. Even with many splits and heavy output, it remains responsive. The main limitation is that its UI toolkit is showing age—scrollback performance with very large buffers can degrade, and GPU acceleration is limited.
Warp is built in Rust with a Metal-based GPU-accelerated renderer. This makes it extremely fast for rendering and scrolling, even with huge amounts of output. The tradeoff is higher baseline memory usage—Warp's modern architecture costs more RAM than iTerm2. In practice, this rarely matters on modern Macs, but it's noticeable if you're running dozens of terminals or working on a less powerful machine.
Agents UI uses Tauri, which combines a Rust backend with a web-based UI rendered through native WebKit. This is heavier than a pure native app like iTerm2 but lighter than Electron. Resource usage is reasonable, though not as lean as iTerm2. The architectural benefit is rapid development of complex UI features—the Monaco editor integration and multi-session management would be much harder to implement in pure native code.
Code Editing
AI agents frequently need to make file changes. How well does each terminal integrate with editing?
iTerm2 doesn't include an editor—it's a terminal emulator, not an IDE. You use whatever editor you prefer: vim, Emacs, nano, or you open files in VSCode or another GUI editor. This is maximally flexible but also maximally manual. If an AI agent suggests a change, you're copy-pasting or switching to another application.
Warp similarly doesn't include an integrated editor. It's focused on being an excellent terminal, not a code editor. The command block interface makes it easier to copy suggested code, but you're still switching contexts to actually edit files.
Agents UI includes a built-in Monaco editor (the same editor that powers VSCode). When an agent generates code or suggests file changes, you can review and edit directly within the terminal interface. This isn't meant to replace your primary editor, but it eliminates friction for quick edits and agent-generated changes. You can see the agent's terminal output and the code it's modifying side-by-side without switching applications.
Open Source and Pricing
iTerm2 is open source (GPLv2), completely free, and accepts donations. It's developed primarily by one maintainer with community contributions. There are no paid features, no account requirements, and no telemetry.
Warp is proprietary and uses a freemium model. The base terminal is free for individual use, but AI features require a Warp account and may have usage limits. Team collaboration features are paid. Warp collects telemetry by default, though you can opt out. The company raised $73M in funding and is building a sustainable business around the terminal.
Agents UI is currently in early access with plans to open source components. Pricing and licensing models are still being finalized. The app is macOS-only due to its use of native frameworks.
Feature Comparison Table
| Feature | iTerm2 | Warp | Agents UI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platform | macOS | macOS, Linux | macOS |
| Architecture | Native (Objective-C) | Native (Rust + Metal) | Tauri (Rust + WebKit) |
| Multi-session management | Tabs and splits | Modern tabs and splits | Project-based workspaces |
| Built-in AI features | None | Warp AI (command help) | None (optimized for external agents) |
| Session persistence | Manual (tmux/screen) | Manual (tmux/screen) | Built-in (zellij) |
| SSH file transfer | Manual (scp/rsync) | Manual | Integrated UI |
| Port forwarding | SSH flags | SSH flags | Integrated management |
| Code editor | External | External | Built-in (Monaco) |
| GPU acceleration | Limited | Full (Metal) | WebKit rendering |
| Open source | Yes (GPLv2) | No | Planned (partial) |
| Pricing | Free | Free + paid tiers | TBD |
| Account required | No | Yes (for AI) | No |
Which Terminal Should You Choose?
There's no universal answer—it depends on your workflow.
Choose iTerm2 if: You want stability, proven reliability, and maximum flexibility. You're comfortable with traditional Unix tools and don't need hand-holding. You value open source software and zero dependencies on cloud services. You occasionally run AI agents but aren't restructuring your entire workflow around them. iTerm2 has been refined for 17 years and it shows.
Choose Warp if: You want a modern, polished terminal with AI assistance for everyday commands. You appreciate good design and are willing to trade some traditional Unix flexibility for better UX. You're fine with creating an account and using a proprietary tool. You run AI agents but mostly work with traditional development tools and want occasional AI help with commands.
Choose Agents UI if: Your primary workflow involves running multiple AI coding agents simultaneously. You're frequently switching between different projects, each with its own agent contexts and remote environments. You value session persistence because you're running long-running agent tasks. You want SSH file transfers and port forwarding to be frictionless. You need to review agent-generated code without leaving the terminal. Agents UI is less mature than the others, but it's the only terminal actually designed for multi-agent development workflows.
The terminal landscape has changed. AI agents aren't a novelty anymore—they're core development tools. Whether you choose the traditional reliability of iTerm2, the modern polish of Warp, or the agent-first architecture of Agents UI, make sure your terminal choice supports the way you actually work in 2026.