Campus Puts Developer Work on One Shared Canvas

A coding session rarely stays in one place. The repository is in an editor, the running process is in a terminal, decisions are in chat, project notes are somewhere else, and an AI agent has its own conversation. Returning to the work can mean reconstructing what happened before the next useful change can begin.

Campus is built around that problem. It puts the tools and people involved in a project onto a shared canvas, with the aim of keeping their working context visible and persistent.

The workspace is organised around a canvas

Campus is a macOS app where tools appear as tiles on an infinite canvas. The landing page shows terminals, web views, notes, files, repositories, and embedded app surfaces arranged beside one another. You can pan, zoom, and reposition those tiles rather than treating each tool as a separate window or destination.

That spatial model is the product's main idea. A project might have a terminal beside a local web app, a note containing the current task, and a worktree or design file nearby. The canvas is meant to remember that arrangement, so reopening a project does not require rebuilding the same workbench from scratch.

The description also says that terminal tiles are live PTYs. In practical terms, Campus presents them as persistent terminals that keep running and retain scrollback across restarts. That could be useful for long-running development tasks, although the submission does not explain how process recovery works in every failure case or what happens when a machine is offline.

It is more than a terminal collection

The distinction between a canvas and a collection of shortcuts matters. Campus is not only placing links to tools on a surface. Its pitch is that the tools remain active there. Notes can be edited, web pages can be used, and an embedded app can sit next to the terminal that controls it.

This makes Campus closer to a project cockpit than a conventional notes app. The benefit depends on whether a developer thinks spatially and wants a project to have a stable visual layout. Someone who prefers a minimal editor, a few shell tabs, and a separate task system may find the canvas adds another place to maintain.

Campus also claims to keep project knowledge, conversations, and AI agent work together. That addresses a common source of friction: an agent may have performed useful work, but its reasoning and the files it changed are separated from the developer's own notes and current screen. Campus's proposed answer is to make the agent another participant in the same project space.

Teammates and agents share the same surface

The collaboration model extends the canvas beyond a personal desktop. The landing page says users can invite colleagues through a link, with live cursors and shared tiles. It also describes cursor chat and a shared view of the same context.

AI agents are presented in a similar way. Campus specifically names Claude and Codex as agents that can run as tiles. The developer says an agent can work through a terminal and use Campus actions to create or move tiles, type prompts, and click inside a web view. Those actions are described as real operations rather than a simulated animation.

That could make agent activity easier to observe. Instead of reading a separate transcript and checking the result later, a teammate could see the terminal, the affected web view, and the agent's work in one place. It could also make mistakes more visible, though the material provided does not establish what permissions, safeguards, or approval steps are available before an agent changes the workspace or interacts with an app.

The important limits are visible

Campus runs on macOS. That is a meaningful constraint for teams with mixed operating systems, and the exhaustive platform listing does not include Windows or Linux. The landing page mentions an iPad view, but the supplied platform information identifies macOS as the platform it runs on, so this should not be treated as an available iPad client.

The product also assumes that users are comfortable with an unusual workspace model. It does not appear to be a focused replacement for source control, issue tracking, documentation, or team chat. Rather, it gathers working surfaces from those kinds of tools into one project canvas. Teams still need to decide where the authoritative record for code, tasks, and decisions lives.

For builders who want a persistent shared workspace with their AI agents, that focus is coherent. Campus is free and is aimed at developer teams that want terminals, project material, collaborators, and agents visible together. It is a poor fit for teams that need broad platform support, a conventional project-management system, or a simple tool with little workspace structure to maintain.