Foot is way more my speed. Fast, extremely stable, and (most importantly) barely noticed. When it comes to terminals, the slightest flicker -- the merest bug -- and I'm gone. And that happened to me with both ghostty and alacritty.
Given features it's more comparable to Kitty than foot IMO.
But I'm using KDE anywa, and I don't care about kitty graphic protocol, I have better suited apps to watch images.
- It uses plain text configuration that is easy to modify and version control.
Edit: - At least on Linux, foot's support for windows and tabs is limited to starting an entirely new process.
It's not hype. Here's a comprehensive review of a lot of terminals and Ghostty did very well--"State of Terminal Emulators in 2025: The Errant Champions" [1]
[1]: https://www.jeffquast.com/post/state-of-terminal-emulation-2...
Foot feels fast, but I've not actually measured the latency. It also seems to use less CPU than GPU accelerated terminals (which it isn't) from just glancing at btop. So I'm not sold on GPU-acceleration as a feature unless I see benchmarks demonstrating the value in improved latency and reduced CPU use compared to foot
I love that foot's scrollback search, selection expansive, and copy can be entirely keyboard driven. Huge QoL feature for me that often seems neglected to me in other terminals.