Windsurf Reviews

I have been using Windsurf for two years. My main use case for Windsurf is code building. I use Windsurf for code building on a day-to-day basis. We started with Windsurf as the first platform we used for Agentic coding.

Windsurf offers an easy place to engage with LLMs inside an IDE. What I find most valuable about engaging with LLMs inside the IDE is both the speed and the integration.

Windsurf has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to experiment and adopt Agentic coding practices before major platforms such as VS Code, Bard, and Codex jumped on board. It was one of the first that allowed us to use whatever LLMs we wanted inside an IDE to write code, and so it was where we started our frontier two years ago. Since adopting Windsurf, I have been able to downsize my staff and increase my output by 5x.

Windsurf needs to be improved because the entire coding harness needs to be rethought. We need a bigger IDE that is outside of what just a VS Code fork is at this point in time. To do that, we need something different. What that is, I'm not certain, but things such as inboxing models and inboxing on different tasks are needed. One of the big things that I'm using right now is Conductor.build, which satisfies a lot of these boxes, but even that doesn't feel total because what Windsurf has now is just the table stakes of what it is to be in Agentic coding.

I wish Windsurf would break down things to using things that we're used to and take us away and abstract away from the codebase more. I don't review code; I don't look at code anymore. My team members don't look at code; I have agents that review code, and that needs to be part of the UI. Looking at code is now almost obsolete.

Windsurf is stable.

Windsurf's scalability is fine.

The customer support for Windsurf is good.

Prior to Windsurf, we were using GitHub Copilot because it was the only possible AI solution around coding at that point. However, that game has significantly changed over the last few years.

I have seen a return on investment; I was able to reduce my staff, and I've watched my shipping metrics increase by 5x.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is fine.

Before choosing Windsurf, we looked at Cursor and we looked at GitHub Copilot.

My advice to others looking into using Windsurf is to think big and dream big. I appreciate Windsurf and where it was before it was acquired by Droll and Antigravity came out. We just need to think bigger about the IDE and change the developer experience. I have rated this review an 8.

My main use case for Windsurf is creating scripts that move data from Python scripts to transfer data from Teradata to Snowflake. I also used it for automating all the data loading processes, which pull data from the landing area of the data warehouse and push it to the integration layer. From there, it schedules an email to create a report from those integrated data, creates a view on a different semantic layer, and generates a chart—either a pie chart or bar chart report—to send to required stakeholders.

I have two other cases with Windsurf. The first one is an AI chatbot that we are in the process of building with the help of Windsurf. Basically, that will connect to Tableau.

The best feature Windsurf offers is the ability to plan the job or task first and then create an executable model. This gives us a clear picture of what I am going to do, what I will receive, what the outcome will be, and how it can benefit the end user.

The planning and executable model feature helps my team day to day by saving a lot of rework. Most of the time when you ask a particular question to Windsurf, you miss bits and pieces of where to begin and what to end, and what to skip and what to add. However, during the planning phase, you can collaborate with Windsurf to make your plan accurate. When execution happens, you get the desired result without going through the rework of returning to planning after getting the result. It breaks that chain. If your planning is perfect, execution does not need a lot of rework.

Windsurf has positively impacted my organization by helping us achieve at least ten to twenty percent improvement for each individual working in the data warehouse to use Windsurf instead of looking for help from any other team. For example, if a business stakeholder wants to get data about any report or any updates about any report, instead of asking a resource for an update, a business user can ask Windsurf to look into the tables and provide the report. This reduces the dependency on the front-end reporting team.

Windsurf can improve by making sure to ask the user if they are talking about the same context where the request started. Request number one might be related to creating a report, and request number two might be related to writing an email. Usually, Windsurf mixes those two requests because it does not ask the user if they are talking about the email or the first request. Windsurf takes it by default that both requests are related and continues. This sometimes creates rework.

I have been using Windsurf since one and a half years ago.

Windsurf is stable.

Windsurf's scalability is quite good. I think we went from a few hundred users to maybe four to five hundred users in our organization. There was no glitch or any issues while scaling across two different time zones and two different organizations.

I do not have any insight on customer support. However, whenever licensing is required, we always got a quick response from them. I am not directly involved in the communication with Windsurf support.

We have not used any other solution before now. Windsurf is our first starting point for AI.

At this point, I am not in a position to share the metric on return of investment. However, I can tell you right now the return of investment is mostly based on time and some part of money saved. At the employee level, we have not yet reached the point where we can purely say that we have actually gotten returns from Windsurf instead of an employee.

I do not have a clear understanding of how Windsurf pricing is set up in my organization. I am not part of the committee which took care of licensing across the organization. Right now, I think Windsurf is costing our organization differently than it started. We initially went with a bulk buy where the entire organization was available to use. Now it is ADFS login related, so every user can see their own number of ACUs, hours used, resources used, or credits used by Windsurf.

I am not in a position to give this answer because I am not a leader who decided on Windsurf. There might be a team which went through many other tools and compared them with Windsurf. That was my organization's management decision.

I give Windsurf a nine out of ten because you get automation done by Windsurf all the time. Not only automation, but whether writing an email, writing a document, or creating detailed information, it gives you detailed insights. I deducted one point because of the rework and training that needs to be provided to the Windsurf agent to make sure it is useful for your job. I feel a nine is already a very high number.

I can advise that Windsurf has almost all the available agents, starting from Claude or any other AI tool or AI LLM model being used. We have the highest level of agent to the lowest level of agent which can help you in day to day activity, whether writing an email, looking into PDF files, looking into an Excel sheet, or creating a Python script. Windsurf has a vast variety of AI models available, and that gives a lot of flexibility and cost savings.

My overall rating for Windsurf is nine out of ten.

I have mainly used Windsurf for testing purposes. I started using it when it became popular, especially before it was called Windsurf, when it was called Codium. I have used both the editor and the autocomplete service.

I experimented with how they handle the topic and how they implement the AI flow in the same way as other AI-based editors. I mainly wanted to see what their different proposal was, and I developed a couple of projects specifically to test this.

The last project I developed was an editorial-style landing page using Astro, which did not have interactivity; however, they were components with a lot of dynamism and a lot of logic between animations and user-triggered flows.

For my main workflow, I do React Native development, and my main hurdle in using this editor, which is not strictly Windsurf's fault, is the performance issue. Since React Native, along with all the tools I need to keep running at the same time, consumes a lot of resources. The editor becomes one more competitor for my system resources, and this harms me a lot in performance, especially regarding RAM. I know this is not directly Windsurf's fault; it is the fault of what it is based on. But this is one of my major impediments when it comes to using an editor based on Visual Studio, which is Windsurf's case, and with which I had problems when developing in React Native.

The particular tool Windsurf has to differentiate the AI-generated code helped me. Even though nowadays most editors already have a very similar tool, Windsurf's was the first that impressed me and was useful for me.

I think Windsurf is the one that offers the most consistent experience. However, I have to admit that the competition is pretty stiff. For me personally, the biggest differentiator when using an AI editor is the available models, and in reality most editors already have the same models. There is not a feature for me that stands out in Windsurf over other text editors currently, mainly speaking of flows, which are what really matter.

Since the vast majority of editors are based on Visual Studio Code, many times, especially at the beginning, you could notice how certain flows were still the same as Visual Studio Code unintentionally, for example, names of windows or things of that nature. However, Windsurf was the first that changed the editor layout format a bit, but kept it consistent across all its tools and how you were redirected between them. For example, with the same chat window, which at the time Visual Studio did not have a chat window and Windsurf developed one, and it worked quite well, it felt quite integrated into the editor because it was dynamic. On the other hand, there were other editors that had chat at the time, and it was quite clunky and very manual.

Even though not mentioned as an improvement, the tool for seeing differences between the previous code and the new code generated by AI helped me a lot to debug possible errors before seeing them, especially for certain animations involving SVG vectors.

I like the model Windsurf implemented, Windsurf's own model, SWE. I think it is good for what it offers, especially on a free tier. However, again, you have to go to the advanced models to really get a big difference.

Windsurf is not a current daily work tool. It is a tool that has been used in an exploratory way, which has been satisfactory; however, as I mentioned, there has been no noticeable difference compared to other tools.

In terms of productivity, there has not been any notable improvement. It was more pleasant at a usage level, but in terms of pure productivity as such, there has not been improvement.

I think having a light mode to be able to just edit code with a minimum of services running could help, since especially nowadays when there is scarcity or problems regarding RAM, when you do not have enough capacity. For example, I have a machine with 16 GB of RAM, and even with that, developing in React Native, I experience slowdowns, lags, and I see how my system slows down when I have many services consuming my RAM. Currently, I use native editors that help me, and the difference is very noticeable; it is practically from 100 megabytes to 1 gigabyte. I think optimizing resource consumption would be a very key point.

A very large project becomes a bit complicated to manage, since you have to have a lot of control over how the model is executed, basically having directives. However, I am not sure if this is replicable in other editors, because I have not tried that many large projects.

I have not had to contact support.

Windsurf was the first AI editor I used, specifically in an exploratory way. After Windsurf was when I dared to try other tools to see what different things they offered.

I evaluated both Zed, the editor that is native, and terminal tools such as Cloud Code and Open Code using other APIs.

The last project I developed was an editorial-style landing page using Astro, which did not have interactivity; however, they were components with a lot of dynamism and a lot of logic between animations and user-triggered flows.

In terms of productivity, there has not been any notable improvement. It was more pleasant at a usage level, but in terms of pure productivity as such, there has not been improvement.

For my main workflow, I do React Native development, and my main hurdle in using this editor, which is not strictly Windsurf's fault, is the performance issue. Since React Native, along with all the tools I need to keep running at the same time, consumes a lot of resources. The editor becomes one more competitor for my system resources, and this harms me a lot in performance, especially regarding RAM. I know this is not directly Windsurf's fault; it is the fault of what it is based on. But this is one of my major impediments when it comes to using an editor based on Visual Studio, which is Windsurf's case, and with which I had problems when developing in React Native.

I think having a light mode to be able to just edit code with a minimum of services running could help, since especially nowadays when there is scarcity or problems regarding RAM, when you do not have enough capacity. For example, I have a machine with 16 GB of RAM, and even with that, developing in React Native, I experience slowdowns, lags, and I see how my system slows down when I have many services consuming my RAM. Currently, I use native editors that help me, and the difference is very noticeable; it is practically from 100 megabytes to 1 gigabyte. I think optimizing resource consumption would be a very key point.

A very large project becomes a bit complicated to manage, since you have to have a lot of control over how the model is executed, basically having directives. However, I am not sure if this is replicable in other editors, because I have not tried that many large projects.

I would rate this product a 7 out of 10.

I have been using Windsurf for two years, and it was my first AI tool for tab code completion and code suggestion.

My main use case for Windsurf is typically using it for Angular code refactor or repetitive code, and for my code, it is very good for RxJS pipeline. I use it mostly for tab completion, code suggestion, and if there is any error in my code, I can easily send it to Windsurf Chat, and it gives me the fix for the bugs and issues in my TypeScript and Angular code.

I can give a quick specific example of how Windsurf helped me; it assisted me when I was migrating my Angular app from NG modules to standalone modules. I had a really difficult time giving my code to ChatGPT, but with Windsurf, I easily provided the file references, and it helped me fix the architecture-wise and structure-wise issues in app.modules, allowing me to refactor it efficiently.

Windsurf has created a personal impact on my productivity, allowing me to typically meet deadlines in one week instead of two. It has specifically reduced the time I spend writing boilerplate code, especially the Angular services, DTO mappings, and form models, as well as when I integrate API code.

In terms of specific metrics, Windsurf has significantly helped me with my daily tasks, and for bug rates, the mismatch during runtime development has been very low. It has assisted me with null checks that I often overlook when writing conditions and has improved my code quality overall.

The best features Windsurf offers are that it is usually free and has a TabNine Super complete feature that is very useful, suggesting multi-line completion and understanding the surrounding code and project context. It helps with repetitive typing, especially the Angular boilerplate code, and is very helpful in RxJS. I particularly appreciate the accurate completion, reading my repo whether it follows a standalone pattern or an NGB module pattern.

Windsurf's understanding of my Angular project context is better than basic auto-complete and less IntelliSense options because it understands what version of Angular I am using and what features I require. It suggests code based on my current usage, such as using new built-in flow and signals, resulting in fewer mechanical keystrokes than manual coding and fewer wrong guesses compared to other tools I typically use for free.

I would like to add that Windsurf is very good and fits well into my workflow, but I would prefer if the cascade agent of Windsurf could be a little better. Recently, I used the agent for an Angular upgrade from version 14 to 21, but it got stuck and did not provide a good response. I want the Windsurf cascade agent to improve in solving complex problems that occur throughout my entire repository.

I have many points for improvement, particularly regarding the cascade agent. It often fails to understand the latest Angular repo, not interacting with files like my Angular JSON, tsconfig, or package.json unless prompted. I want the cascade to be more predictable and wish for improvements in the agent to handle complex tasks more effectively.

Enhancing the reliability of the cascade agent for large and complex codebases, ensuring it understands projects thoroughly, and providing safer multi-file edits would make Windsurf a significantly stronger tool.

I have been working in my current field for about three or four years.

Windsurf is currently stable for me; I have not experienced any crashes or issues, though there may be rare instances when chatting with it, but overall, it has been reliable.

Windsurf scales well for day-to-day coding and tab completion, but I think it may become less reliable as my projects grow with larger codebases, especially with the cascade agent on complex repositories.

I have never contacted Windsurf's customer support as I have not encountered any issues requiring assistance.

Negative

I previously used Cursor because its agent version was stronger than Windsurf, but I still prefer Windsurf for code completions and suggestions. I also tried Anti-gravity, which has a good free tier, but I favor Windsurf for deeper refactoring tasks.

I signed up for Windsurf directly through their website and used a trial version about one or two years ago for the pro version, installing it in my VS Code extension.

Windsurf has created a personal impact on my productivity, allowing me to typically meet deadlines in one week instead of two. It has specifically reduced the time I spend writing boilerplate code, especially the Angular services, DTO mappings, and form models, as well as when I integrate API code. In terms of specific metrics, Windsurf has significantly helped me with my daily tasks, and for bug rates, the mismatch during runtime development has been very low. It has assisted me with null checks that I often overlook when writing conditions and has improved my code quality overall.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was great as I usually use the free version, which has amazing features for tab completion and no significant limitations on context windows.

Before choosing Windsurf, I evaluated GitHub Copilot and Cursor. I utilized Cursor for agent-based refactoring and Copilot for in-line suggestions before deciding to use Windsurf for its free version and superior tab completion and coding flow.

I took off 1.5 points primarily because the cascade agent needs improvement for better performance, especially in complex tasks and project memory management. It should help reduce review churn and be more reliable in my regular repository.

I advise others considering using Windsurf to start with the free or trial version to leverage its value for tab completion and day-to-day coding, as it reduces boilerplate tasks and assists with code refactoring and null checking. If it boosts productivity significantly, it would be worth considering the paid version but should be used cautiously with the cascade for smaller tasks.

My overall review rating for Windsurf is 8.5 out of 10.

My main use case for Windsurf is building end-to-end automation frameworks from scratch, which I primarily use in my work environment. I also use it to build personal projects, create and debug test cases, particularly automated ones, and I am currently exploring agentic QA architectures with multi-agent systems, which I have really enjoyed.

I can give you a concrete example of how I have recently used Windsurf in one of my automation projects. I have used it in its different working modes, whether Chat, Code, or Plan. These modes have really allowed me to transform my workflow. For example, Plan mode helps me design the architecture of complex solutions before implementing any automation in either of my two work projects and also in my personal projects. Chat mode lets me ask questions about what is going on with the code and allows me to do quick debugging sessions, which I have really appreciated. At the Code level, the fact that it generates code for me much faster, so that I only have to review and orchestrate, has been one of the things I have liked the most. I also find it very beneficial that I can use MCP to enhance my automation flows, such as Maestro MCP and Playwright MCP, which I currently use.

I can use different AI models and I particularly appreciate the system called Adaptive, which has allowed me to save tokens and lets Windsurf choose which model it should use for whatever task I ask it for. I have found that quite beneficial.

I consider the best features that Windsurf offers to be what I already mentioned: the ability to use MCPs, the working modes which include Chat, Code, or Plan, and the capabilities it has to use agents, including custom ones within Windsurf, and the support for multiple LLMs or AI models. This means I can use both free models and the more professional ones, such as Anthropic's Claude models like Opus or Sonnet or the Codex ones.

I can go deeper into how MCPs have helped me in practice. For example, with Playwright, the ability to use MCPs such as Playwright Clean has allowed me to create better automation tests. I am currently facing a bigger challenge, which is automating the native app from my job, built with React Native. The ability to use Maestro MCP, which has recently come out, and that Windsurf now allows me to use locally to find better selectors or debug what I need for the automation has been very helpful.

Windsurf has positively impacted my work. While I don't know if my organization uses all of Windsurf, in my case it has had a positive impact and has allowed me to work much faster and create higher-quality tests. It has allowed me to cover areas, especially at the backend level, to run tests, which has been beneficial. So it has allowed me to meet deadlines, work faster, and more efficiently.

In the automation of the app, Windsurf has allowed me to save time and improve the quality of the tests. I know that today there are many tools with which you can automate, but the ability to use Windsurf's agents plus the MCPs to move forward with the app's automation was a very good advantage.

I think Windsurf could be improved. Honestly, I see it as super competitive today with the vast majority of AI IDEs out there. It would be great, even though it already has the models, to be able to include Claude Code at the console level, which I think would be really cool.

I have been using Windsurf for approximately seven or eight months.

Windsurf is very stable in my experience.

I cannot share any specific return on investment metrics with Windsurf because I do not manage that, but I can tell you that I have reduced my time and that compared to other IDEs, Windsurf is very efficient.

I evaluated other options before choosing Windsurf. I evaluated Anti-gravity, which I also appreciated, but today it is very heavy and I did not prefer that. I also evaluated Cursor and spent some time with it, but I did not prefer it that much either. What I appreciate about Windsurf at this moment is that I can give it autonomy, and I also appreciate being aware of what it is doing without it doing everything automatically. I appreciate being able to review everything, and I think that is an advantage. I do not have to be creating rules for Windsurf for it to do that, but I think it is kind of cautious.

My advice to others who are considering using Windsurf is that they should use it. Right now there is a mode where they provide 14 days free. I think in those 14 days you realize that it is a tremendous code editor and that you will appreciate Windsurf.

I have no additional comments about Windsurf before we finish, except that it is very good, I have made quite a lot of use of it, and I hope it continues to improve and keep pace with other code IDEs. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.

For any product development or proof of concept and minimum viable product development, I utilize Windsurf as my base IDE to create the projects, to establish version controlling mechanisms and tracking mechanisms, and to add extensions that I can use for building my whole product and for my ease of understanding the project as well.

I created one project named Kilt Kidney Health Care AI based assistant chatbot, and in this chatbot, I had to create three facets of the product. The first is report generation, which is an AI-assisted report in my regional language combined with English. This allowed me to create the whole AI aspect into the product where Windsurf provides me with the whole architecture based scenario in dark mode. Cascade itself gives an option of Sonnet model or Claude Sonnet model. This utilizes my whole power of what I want to build for kidney patients and for the doctor for whom I have taken this project. The second part was generating specific chatbot questions from the particular report, so FAQs could be asked as well. This second layer was orchestrated again inside Windsurf, and the third was to create their whole website. All of these things made Windsurf very useful and very smooth to integrate all of my views and my project architecture was perfectly balanced in what the backend, frontend, and DevOps architecture needs to be integrated. Everything was handled perfectly within my team and the version control mechanism was also perfect enough, behaving exactly as it should when relating different models integration with peer teams.

I have been utilizing Windsurf as my IDE for around one and a half years.

I am currently utilizing Cascade AI as well, which is integrated for users to integrate their code base and project structure folder to the AI agent, which can be a good option to integrate how the agentic mechanisms are evolving towards building the project structure in Windsurf.

Cascade is the best feature I have found currently within different models and their memory storage. I can also try to add voice conversation between the AI and the user, which gives the flexibility to convey my views instead of writing them out and wasting my time.

Whenever I have any kind of problem statement, bug fixing, or debugging that I want to do, I just ask Cascade to look at my particular file which includes all of my integration of code in different languages, whether it is front end or back end. I ask it to check out a bug, do the fix, or even if I want to look out for any terminal issues, I just paste the terminal issue and it will look out for the codes and try to rectify the solution. That is the best feature that Cascade is currently doing. With voice conversation, I can convey my thoughts of what I want to build or what I want to fix. If it is a hotfix, bugfix, or any kind of software development process that I want to integrate, Windsurf works effectively with it.

Another tool I have used is Antigravity. Antigravity is doing deep research with its own agentic based architecture. Currently I am not seeing Windsurf to have deep research capability for any of the products. Its web search capability is not as powerful as other tools are currently performing in the Cascade scenario. A third thing I want to look out for is that its coding capability is not as fast and high as Claude code works out with, and it does not have any kind of articulation of taking the whole output by linking your terminal with Cascade. Antigravity provides that feature. In Antigravity, I can just click on the at rate sign on the terminal that will approach your whole terminal towards your AI agent and I can check the responses of output, what needs to be fixed out, what issues came, or whatever problems need to be solved. If Windsurf can do all these things, it can be the best option as well, as it is very smooth and flexible compared to Antigravity, but these features are currently lacking.

Additional sub agentic mechanisms could be added if solutions could be integrated or if there is capability to work out with multi-agentic based mechanisms by chaining out the thoughts of process.

I have been using the solution for about one and a half years.

Windsurf is stable.

Windsurf has scalability capabilities.

Customer service has been very good.

I was using VS Code. At that moment, even with the growing power of VS Code, I was not utilizing good capability of Copilot itself there and the coding structure was not as perfect as what I checked out with Cascade's Claude Sonnet model and Opus model. So I jumped from that to Windsurf.

The setup was very good. All the features of pricing, setup, costing, and licensing were perfect. Better solutions can be tried for adding subscription features. If not, there is a support team available to work out with.

My team was able to implement Windsurf.

Money and time have both been saved because we were utilizing a lot of time for bug fixing and solving troubleshooting issues. That time has now been reduced and on that regard, employees' time has been reduced as well, which has saved a lot of money. A lot of time has also been saved.

Another tool that I have used is Antigravity. Antigravity is doing deep research with its own agentic based architecture. Currently I am not seeing Windsurf to have deep research capability for any of the products.

I would recommend others to utilize these features and I will try to compare it with other tools. Antigravity can jump out in more responses than Windsurf itself in some instances, but Windsurf works good enough normally for any project architecture.

My overall rating for Windsurf is eight out of ten.

My main use case for Windsurf is for development and writing boilerplate code. I have been writing code to integrate third-party APIs. I mainly use it for development purposes.

Windsurf's best feature is that it is agentic. It automatically changes the code and updates it. If there are any exceptions, it automatically finds out what the exact issue is and provides the solution and fixes it.

Windsurf has saved me time and improved my code quality. We had some errors where I saw the exceptions in the logs. I copied the logs and pasted them into Windsurf, so it found the issue, found the bug, and fixed it. Otherwise, I would have had to manually debug it and solve the issue.

Windsurf has saved us a lot of time and manpower. A task can be done by one person using Windsurf. For example, a task that would take a few days can be done in one day. If I had four tasks for a day, I could finish them using Windsurf in half a day.

Windsurf starts to hallucinate after some point, which is a memory problem and a general AI problem. For example, after some time, it will start forgetting what we were doing and it starts hallucinating and doing the same things.

The free version is very good. An improvement would be to have the agentic AI directly integrated into the computer or as an IDE-specific plugin, rather than being browser-based.

The answers from Windsurf are not always accurate, and it is also a bit slow. Comparing it to other solutions like GitHub Copilot and other competitors, they give better and more advanced responses.

I have been using Windsurf for the past four months.

Windsurf is about 80% stable. Sometimes, it hallucinates.

Customer support is good.

Negative

Previously, I used GitHub Copilot. It was not as user-friendly and not agentic like Windsurf; it was just giving solutions. However, they have now upgraded it, and it is similar to Windsurf.

Windsurf's pricing and setup cost are reasonable compared to other providers. The cost is almost the same as competitors, and I do not see much difference. However, if it were a bit less, it would be more useful for us to save money since we are a startup.

Windsurf is very helpful for day-to-day tasks and should be used freely as you wish. Windsurf could be a little bit faster. My overall rating for this review is 6.

I have been using Windsurf for quite a long time, approximately four to five months. In my prior company, Windsurf was used, and in my new company, we also implemented Windsurf. For my personal use, I was using Windsurf Personal. I have been a thorough user for three to four months completely.

For example, if you have any software development project or any product requirement for which you need to build a SaaS solution, app, or back-end services, and you need to generate the code and ship it off quickly, you can use the Windsurf agent and IDE to provide commands using natural language, in English, just as humans speak, to its own agent. It would generate, go through your existing codebase, make recommendations, modify the existing codebase, and enhance productivity.

Windsurf is used in a company-wide practice as a code editor or IDE. It functions as a productivity tool. If I am working on a project and need to build or ship out certain features super fast, I would use the AI agent in Windsurf to generate the code, make minor modifications or adjustments on it, iterate over it, and then quickly ship it off. That is how Windsurf makes the most value addition to the team.

Even if the team size is small, using a tool such as Windsurf gives you a productivity boost. It comes with the free model, which they call SWE-LITE, SWE-1. These models are free, which is a big advantage for smaller teams. You do not have to spend money on different models or provide API key accesses. It comes out of the shelf with the editor.

There are two angles where Windsurf is actually better than Cursor or other competitive tools. Firstly, its understanding of the codebase is much better. If you have an existing codebase and are using the Windsurf IDE to run its AI agents to go through the codebase, it can identify design patterns and exactly what it is trying to do. Secondly, the price point is a significant advantage as Windsurf is way cheaper and does not force you to use any LLM providers, such as OpenAI or Anthropic.

It is very effective. If I am opening a file and have scripts already written, when I move my mouse pointer or push a tab on the keyboard, it automatically suggests almost 10 lines of code ahead. It reads through and tries to predict the next steps I need to take. Apart from the basic data setter, it predicts additional functions that may be needed, providing boilerplate code already.

We mostly use Python. In the earlier organization, we used Python and Go, along with some shell scripts and YML configuration files. These are quite accurate and great. I would give it nine out of 10 for that.

What they can do further and venture into next is to provide a CLI environment, similar to the command-line interface environment that Cursor offers. It allows for running a cursor agent from the command line to make changes, review pull requests, or access certain other capabilities. These capabilities are currently not in Windsurf. Windsurf focuses on the productivity and the ID/editor part.

I would rather look for the inclusion of pull request reviews or a kind of a TRD or technical requirement general documentation generation, or system diagram generation directly from the codebase in Windsurf itself. These should be the next obvious features they launch for developers.

In our team, there are certain people who use Windsurf regularly and appreciate using it. However, it is not a collaborative tool where someone is going to use the same tool and interact in the same IDE. Everyone does their local development, pushes it to different Git branches, someone reviews the PR, and then merges the branch. It is very localized in that sense.

I have been using Windsurf for quite a long time, approximately four to five months.

I did not have to deal with any deployment issues. It is so good that it is DIY (do it yourself). You can directly go ahead and use an editor. You do not need much technical support for it.

It is quite reliable. I would rate it eight out of 10. It is highly reliable.

We are satisfied with the service. We do not need additional help.

Positive

When it comes to setup, it is very simple. It is just an editor. You visit the website, create your subscription, and download the ID or editor based on your system. For Mac, it is a DMG file, and for Windows, it is an EXE installer file. You click on it, and it gets installed on your system. It is that simple and not complicated.

I would rate it two out of 10 for cost. It is very cheap compared to other tools in the market because 80% of the time, we are happy with their free model capabilities. Only 20% of the time do we go for a more in-depth or meticulous analysis. During this time, we use the Anthropic Claude model or OpenAI GPT-4 to dig deeper. That accounts for only 20% of the time, meaning it is only 20% of the cost, leading to a non-significant bill per month. Thus, it is much cheaper.

Cursor was a competitor to Windsurf. They have similar capabilities, such as code completion and script generation. The main differing point is the price. Cursor has higher pricing and does not provide any model itself. It would automatically choose a model based on the LLM providers you have access to, leading to a higher price point. Cursor's capabilities are otherwise comparable to Windsurf. For instance, there was a scenario about the OpenAI SDK package. While Windsurf provided the latest stable version, Cursor was a month behind and has only recently updated. It is a competitive landscape where both tools are comparable and try to outdo each other.

It is quite good and much better than alternatives. In our team, there are certain people who use Windsurf regularly and they appreciate using it. However, it is not a collaboration tool where someone is going to use the same tool and virtually interact in the same IDE. Everyone does their local development and pushes it to different Git branches, then someone does the PR review and merges the branch. It is very localized in that sense. Overall rating: 8/10.