6 ms·

Personal opinion is that JetBrains products have gone down hill the last few years. Tons of memory leaks and performance issues. They are also way behind on the

Personal opinion is that JetBrains products have gone down hill the last few years. Tons of memory leaks and performance issues. They are also way behind on the AI front, borderline obsolete in some areas. This is coming from someone who has used jetbrains daily for over a decade

realityfactchex 2y ago
What would you suggested instead of JetBrains tools for AI-assisted development? (I don't just want to hear what everyone says; I specifically I want to hear what JetBrains lovers think about this.) I was about to go all in on JetBrains becaue I can't stand VSCode, and about to transition from ChatGPT only to trying out in-IDE integrations... but if there's a better thing to try first... all ears.
- surrTurr 2y ago
  JetBrains is WAY behind VS-Code and its forks (e.g. Cursor) in terms of AI features. Their own offering, "Jetbrains AI" absolutely SUCKS (just read the reviews, you'll see why). Third-party AI plugins are pretty basic. Most just offer inline completions and a chat sidebar. For example, GitHub Copilot for Intellij is a shell of itself: No agent capabilities, or even model switching (although that seems to be coming in a future update). Generally speaking, Jetbrains seems to have missed the AI code editor revolution, and are now trying to play catch-up. The problem is that their plugin API seems to offer less capabilities than VS-Code when it comes to implementing advanced AI features (think of cursor like features). This, combined with the fact that Intellij products are closed source and can't simply be forked by someone who requires additional capabilities, makes it hard for third parties to build advanced AI features. PS: I also tested their new "Agent" plugin called Junie (invite only beta). It's really basic (like 30% as good as cursors agent mode), but since it's still in invite only beta this should be taken with a grain of salt.
  - kuschku 2y ago
    > This, combined with the fact that Intellij products are closed source and can't simply be forked by someone who requires additional capabilities https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community is Apache 2.0 Only some of the language plugins are proprietary.
  - jeroenhd 2y ago
    > Most just offer inline completions and a chat sidebar As someone who doesn't use AI all that much: what else does an IDE need besides an inline prompt and a ChatGPT window to the side? I've played around with the continue.dev plugin and I can't think of anything else I'd want out of AI assistants with the quality they're at at the moment. > GitHub Copilot for Intellij is a shell of itself That's on Github, to be honest. And to be expected. It doesn't make much sense for Microsoft to fund a plugin for a competitor's IDE when they already have their own IDEs to sell. > Intellij products are closed source They follow the same protocol Microsoft uses: the core is open, but some language plugin features are proprietary. For Microsoft, the proprietary part is just the C# debugger at this point, whereas IntellJ has a whole bunch of paid-for plugins that are closed-source. Still, you can fork the community edition of IntelliJ should you wish.
- nprateem 2y ago
  Aider. Just add the files you need in the terminal, disable git autocommit and you're done. Tell it to do something then check the diff.
- vunderba 2y ago
  I would highly suggest using the jetbrains plug-in "continue". It's BYOK or you can connect it to Ollama. Supports refactoring, inline, RAG, chat, etc. https://github.com/continuedev/continue https://github.com/continuedev/continue
  - KronisLV 2y ago
    I rather like the idea behind Continue.dev, especially when I have Ollama with some larger models running on a server somewhere. However, I have to say that it's a bit buggy, some things like running together with the SonarQube plugin breaks it, other times UI elements for keyboard shortcuts just hang around on the screen when they shouldn't be visible/present. There's a good deal of stuff in their issue tracker: https://github.com/continuedev/continue/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20label%3Aide%3Ajetbrains%20 https://github.com/continuedev/continue/issues?q=is%3Aissue%... That said, I had a pretty good experience with the GitHub Copilot plugin, as long as you're willing to pay for it.
- timrichard 2y ago
  I've been using Jetbrains IDEs for quite some time. I currently use IntelliJ and Cursor together. Cursor is everything I hoped Jetbains AI would be. The TypeScript support in VSCode and derivatives (like Cursor) is great, unlike Jetbrains. As I already have a license, I switch to IntelliJ for the fantastic Git and DB plugins, as well as the great refactoring and find/replace features. Local History and diffing in Jetbrains is also far superior, so sometimes I use history labels as snapshots in between significant changes from Cursor. If you're transitioning from ChatGPT pastes to an IDE integration, I would recommend a trial of Cursor. They have acquired SuperMaven, and the autocomplete feature is mostly appropriate and useful. I think the chat-diff-review-apply workflow really tightens and accelerates the feedback loop, as well as the ability to submit an error from the terminal to the chat session with a single click. People say good things about the Compose and Agent features, but I haven't so far been drawn to them to explore.
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  I use the PyCharm CoPilot plugin. Works great. Can't comment on how good the CoPilot model is vs say Claude or ChatGPT, but it seems decent for what I use it for (autocomplete, small snippets, stuff that I'd look up in the docs or SO, etc.)
endofreach 2y ago
Interesting. I have had the opposite experience. And i am happy that they're behind on the AI front. Way too many tools force their shitty AI (API wrapper) upon me already. And i have yet to see any benefit.
- laerus 2y ago
  Agreed, RustRover is by far the best IDE for Rust atm. I also use the AI Assistant which is so toned down that it's actually useful and not full of spam.
  - lallysingh 2y ago
    RustRover and PyCharm keep my jetbrains subscription going. The AI assistant on pandas APIs is a godsend.
ta988 2y ago
I have the exact opposite experience same thing almost a decade. They were great then there was a phase of really bad performance around 5-6y ago and in the last 3 years it has been much better improving with each version. It is especially much more reactive when indexing large projects or just navigating them.
vunderba 2y ago
Hard disagree. Pycharm, Datagrip, and Rider are absolutely top notch applications. And I would vastly prefer that they focus on robust IDE features than yet another bunch of "Now with AI" crap duct taped to their products.
- ashu1461 2y ago
  Most of the young crowd is very biased towards vs code irrespective of the top notch features which intellij is providing, so to win the game against vs code fleet becomes critical.
  - dboreham 2y ago
    Very old here (used VC++ v1.0). VSCode user, exclusively for the last 4 years.
the__alchemist 2y ago
Agree on the performance, unfortunately. Even C+P operations in RustRover are "too complex".
vr46 2y ago
Yeah, agreed, long time user, just let my sub lapse. I don't like VSCode like I did IDEA but all the features are there, and more, much more. The AI integration and choices (Cursor, Trae, RooCode, Aide, Windsurf, PearAI, etc etc etc) are way better and honestly take the place of a lot of stuff Jetbrains had an advantage on. Also Jetbrains stuff is often not working or unreliable - developing within Docker containers, for one, and it keeps popping up with their shit AI assistant that you can't disable. Honestly, what is this, Clippy and MS Office?
switch007 2y ago
Agreed. Used to be excited about new versions now it's "great, what's going to be slow / broken" now
insane_dreamer 2y ago
PyCharm with CoPilot plugin works well for me
martinsnow 2y ago
I have the opposite experience. Intellij works well, fewer crashes and no ai crap that gets in my way. Too many developers rely on shitty ai crutches and you can easily snuff them out because their code is shit.
oweiler 2y ago
Performance is one problem, but much worse are the countless bugs which plague the last releases.

realityfactchex 2y ago

What would you suggested instead of JetBrains tools for AI-assisted development? (I don't just want to hear what everyone says; I specifically I want to hear what JetBrains lovers think about this.) I was about to go all in on JetBrains becaue I can't stand VSCode, and about to transition from ChatGPT only to trying out in-IDE integrations... but if there's a better thing to try first... all ears.

surrTurr 2y ago
JetBrains is WAY behind VS-Code and its forks (e.g. Cursor) in terms of AI features. Their own offering, "Jetbrains AI" absolutely SUCKS (just read the reviews, you'll see why). Third-party AI plugins are pretty basic. Most just offer inline completions and a chat sidebar. For example, GitHub Copilot for Intellij is a shell of itself: No agent capabilities, or even model switching (although that seems to be coming in a future update). Generally speaking, Jetbrains seems to have missed the AI code editor revolution, and are now trying to play catch-up. The problem is that their plugin API seems to offer less capabilities than VS-Code when it comes to implementing advanced AI features (think of cursor like features). This, combined with the fact that Intellij products are closed source and can't simply be forked by someone who requires additional capabilities, makes it hard for third parties to build advanced AI features. PS: I also tested their new "Agent" plugin called Junie (invite only beta). It's really basic (like 30% as good as cursors agent mode), but since it's still in invite only beta this should be taken with a grain of salt.
- kuschku 2y ago
  > This, combined with the fact that Intellij products are closed source and can't simply be forked by someone who requires additional capabilities https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community is Apache 2.0 Only some of the language plugins are proprietary.
- jeroenhd 2y ago
  > Most just offer inline completions and a chat sidebar As someone who doesn't use AI all that much: what else does an IDE need besides an inline prompt and a ChatGPT window to the side? I've played around with the continue.dev plugin and I can't think of anything else I'd want out of AI assistants with the quality they're at at the moment. > GitHub Copilot for Intellij is a shell of itself That's on Github, to be honest. And to be expected. It doesn't make much sense for Microsoft to fund a plugin for a competitor's IDE when they already have their own IDEs to sell. > Intellij products are closed source They follow the same protocol Microsoft uses: the core is open, but some language plugin features are proprietary. For Microsoft, the proprietary part is just the C# debugger at this point, whereas IntellJ has a whole bunch of paid-for plugins that are closed-source. Still, you can fork the community edition of IntelliJ should you wish.
nprateem 2y ago
Aider. Just add the files you need in the terminal, disable git autocommit and you're done. Tell it to do something then check the diff.
vunderba 2y ago
I would highly suggest using the jetbrains plug-in "continue". It's BYOK or you can connect it to Ollama. Supports refactoring, inline, RAG, chat, etc. https://github.com/continuedev/continue https://github.com/continuedev/continue
- KronisLV 2y ago
  I rather like the idea behind Continue.dev, especially when I have Ollama with some larger models running on a server somewhere. However, I have to say that it's a bit buggy, some things like running together with the SonarQube plugin breaks it, other times UI elements for keyboard shortcuts just hang around on the screen when they shouldn't be visible/present. There's a good deal of stuff in their issue tracker: https://github.com/continuedev/continue/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20label%3Aide%3Ajetbrains%20 https://github.com/continuedev/continue/issues?q=is%3Aissue%... That said, I had a pretty good experience with the GitHub Copilot plugin, as long as you're willing to pay for it.
timrichard 2y ago
I've been using Jetbrains IDEs for quite some time. I currently use IntelliJ and Cursor together. Cursor is everything I hoped Jetbains AI would be. The TypeScript support in VSCode and derivatives (like Cursor) is great, unlike Jetbrains. As I already have a license, I switch to IntelliJ for the fantastic Git and DB plugins, as well as the great refactoring and find/replace features. Local History and diffing in Jetbrains is also far superior, so sometimes I use history labels as snapshots in between significant changes from Cursor. If you're transitioning from ChatGPT pastes to an IDE integration, I would recommend a trial of Cursor. They have acquired SuperMaven, and the autocomplete feature is mostly appropriate and useful. I think the chat-diff-review-apply workflow really tightens and accelerates the feedback loop, as well as the ability to submit an error from the terminal to the chat session with a single click. People say good things about the Compose and Agent features, but I haven't so far been drawn to them to explore.
insane_dreamer 2y ago
I use the PyCharm CoPilot plugin. Works great. Can't comment on how good the CoPilot model is vs say Claude or ChatGPT, but it seems decent for what I use it for (autocomplete, small snippets, stuff that I'd look up in the docs or SO, etc.)

endofreach 2y ago

Interesting. I have had the opposite experience. And i am happy that they're behind on the AI front. Way too many tools force their shitty AI (API wrapper) upon me already. And i have yet to see any benefit.

laerus 2y ago
Agreed, RustRover is by far the best IDE for Rust atm. I also use the AI Assistant which is so toned down that it's actually useful and not full of spam.
- lallysingh 2y ago
  RustRover and PyCharm keep my jetbrains subscription going. The AI assistant on pandas APIs is a godsend.

ta988 2y ago

I have the exact opposite experience same thing almost a decade. They were great then there was a phase of really bad performance around 5-6y ago and in the last 3 years it has been much better improving with each version. It is especially much more reactive when indexing large projects or just navigating them.

vunderba 2y ago

Hard disagree. Pycharm, Datagrip, and Rider are absolutely top notch applications. And I would vastly prefer that they focus on robust IDE features than yet another bunch of "Now with AI" crap duct taped to their products.

ashu1461 2y ago
Most of the young crowd is very biased towards vs code irrespective of the top notch features which intellij is providing, so to win the game against vs code fleet becomes critical.
- dboreham 2y ago
  Very old here (used VC++ v1.0). VSCode user, exclusively for the last 4 years.

the__alchemist 2y ago

Agree on the performance, unfortunately. Even C+P operations in RustRover are "too complex".

vr46 2y ago

Yeah, agreed, long time user, just let my sub lapse. I don't like VSCode like I did IDEA but all the features are there, and more, much more. The AI integration and choices (Cursor, Trae, RooCode, Aide, Windsurf, PearAI, etc etc etc) are way better and honestly take the place of a lot of stuff Jetbrains had an advantage on. Also Jetbrains stuff is often not working or unreliable - developing within Docker containers, for one, and it keeps popping up with their shit AI assistant that you can't disable. Honestly, what is this, Clippy and MS Office?

switch007 2y ago

Agreed. Used to be excited about new versions now it's "great, what's going to be slow / broken" now

insane_dreamer 2y ago

PyCharm with CoPilot plugin works well for me

martinsnow 2y ago

I have the opposite experience. Intellij works well, fewer crashes and no ai crap that gets in my way. Too many developers rely on shitty ai crutches and you can easily snuff them out because their code is shit.

oweiler 2y ago

Performance is one problem, but much worse are the countless bugs which plague the last releases.