Automations Without Code: Make.com vs. Cursor

Two paths to automation. One visual. One conversational.

Automation is where AI goes from interesting to indispensable. The question is: which tool do you use to set it up?

Make.com: The Visual Approach

Make.com (formerly Integromat) is essentially computer programming using a visual interface. You connect blocks together: trigger, action, action, output.

Want to listen for a tweet, process it through OpenAI, and create an Instagram post? That's three blocks connected by arrows. Drag, drop, configure, run.

Strengths: Visual and intuitive. Great for people who think in flowcharts. Hundreds of pre-built connectors to services like Slack, Google Sheets, and social media platforms.

Limitation: You can't vibe code it. The interface is fixed. If Make.com doesn't have a connector for what you need, you're stuck writing custom modules.

Cursor: The Conversational Approach

In Cursor, you describe what you want in plain English. "When a new signup comes in, send them a welcome email, add them to the subscriber spreadsheet, and create a calendar reminder for follow-up."

Cursor writes the automation code, connects to the services via MCP servers, and runs it.

Strengths: No interface limitations. If you can describe it, Cursor can build it. Full flexibility.

Limitation: Requires some technical setup (Node.js, project structure, MCP configuration).

Same automation. One is a flowchart. The other is a conversation.

What We Actually Do

We use Cursor for almost everything because the flexibility is worth the setup cost. Scraping investor relations documents, processing CSVs, sending bulk emails, generating content — all through conversational prompts in Cursor. It's why we say you don't need Mailchimp anymore.

No walls. If you can describe it, Cursor can build it.

Make.com still has a place for quick, simple automations that don't need custom logic. But for anything complex, Cursor wins because there are no walls.