st
Fewer than 5 people recommend it so far, so there's no written verdict. Here is what commenters said.
4recommend
0warn against
Nov 3, 2025first mention
Oct 28, 2026latest mention
Why people recommend it
“I always end up back at "st" though. It is fast enough for my purposes and does just about exactly what I want and not more.”
X11 useron “Ghostty 1.4”
“I use suckless tools and made so many modifications to st, dwm and such it feels like home.”
Show 3 more
“I 100% agree `st` is pretty great and comparing bare bones is unfair.”
“`st` is a pretty great terminal.”
“I use an old version all the time to do gnuplots in terminals with nice scrollback.”
Caveats and dissent
No one in these comments warned against it.
Often compared with
Who recommends it in their own words
Threads where it came up
- State of Terminal Emulators in 2025: The Errant Champions 3 mentions
- Ghostty 1.4 1 mention
- Show HN: Shitty – fast terminal. Memory-unsafe and faster than yours 1 mention
- A Desktop Made for One 1 mention
Data: st.json. Quotes are verbatim; the verdict and theme labels are written by a model from these comments, and every clause links to its sources.
All comments 6
“I always end up back at "st" though. It is fast enough for my purposes and does just about exactly what I want and not more.”
“foot and st felt as fast when I was using them.”
“I use suckless tools and made so many modifications to st, dwm and such it feels like home.”
“I 100% agree `st` is pretty great and comparing bare bones is unfair.”
“`st` is a pretty great terminal.”
“I use an old version all the time to do gnuplots in terminals with nice scrollback.”