My main use case for Windsurf is software development. A quick specific example of what I mainly use Windsurf for is developing whatever needs to be built.

Windsurf offers several valuable features, including the browser, which I really appreciate, but the best feature is integration. The browser feature is valuable for me because it helps me program in development and gain an understanding of the code. Windsurf has positively impacted my organization because we accomplish more with fewer people. Since using Windsurf, I notice more errors, but we deliver approximately twice as fast.

Windsurf can be improved by bringing back the browser integration. When new models come out, there needs to be a better way to find them instead of going to the release notes; the model picker should highlight the newer beta or free models more prominently.

I have been using Windsurf for just about a year.

Windsurf is stable most of the time.

Windsurf's scalability is maintained very well; I think it is more a function of the models than Windsurf itself. I have used it for a fairly large project, and it scales fine.

The customer support for Windsurf is good, as the release notes are really helpful.

Windsurf was the first solution I used.

I have seen a return on investment with Windsurf because I have saved time and money and needed fewer resources since using it. My clients save time and money, and we are generally about twice as fast with AI-enabled software development.

My experience with Windsurf's pricing, setup cost, and licensing was positive. I received a discount because I joined early, so the license cost or monthly rental of Windsurf has been reasonably priced.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Windsurf; it was the first one I looked at, and I was satisfied with it.

Windsurf can be improved by bringing back the browser integration. When new models come out, there needs to be a better way to find them instead of going to the release notes; the model picker should highlight the newer beta or free models more prominently. My advice for others looking into using Windsurf is to stick with it for about three months; it will take approximately three months to reach a point where you are faster with it. I would rate Windsurf a nine out of ten, as what would make it a ten for me is if the newer models last longer when they come out.

I have been using Windsurf off and on for the last year. My main use case for Windsurf is for software development. Currently, we're working on an API, and Windsurf will help us develop a particular feature so we can enter a prompt and it executes.

As we're developing features, Windsurf fits into my workflow day to day.

Windsurf offers a nice alternative to the different AI IDEs out there right now.

What makes Windsurf stand out as an alternative to other AI IDEs I've tried is limited. As we're experimenting with different AI IDEs, Windsurf has positively impacted my organization by providing options.

Having more options has led to specific improvements or outcomes for my team.

I have no suggestions at the moment for how Windsurf can be improved. I would not add more about the needed improvements, even small things that could make my experience better.

I have been working in my current field for eight years.

Windsurf is stable.

Windsurf's scalability is fine.

I'm not sure how the customer support is.

I previously used Cursor, and we just wanted to try the different options out there. I evaluated Cursor before choosing Windsurf.

I don't have anything else to add about my use case with Windsurf. I don't have anything to add about the features. I gave Windsurf a rating of seven because I don't have any complaints about the product. I don't have any advice to give to others looking into using Windsurf. I don't have any additional thoughts about Windsurf before we wrap up.

My main use case for Windsurf is for development while coding. Whenever we have Jira stories or anything, such as a bug fix, we go and ask Windsurf to work on it.

The best features Windsurf offers are the agent and flow. The agent stands out because with Windsurf, we can connect to the different MCP servers, which is helpful. Windsurf has positively impacted my organization by increasing productivity. From my point of view, it has increased productivity because we are doing a one-week hackathon, and we were able to build a product from scratch, which would have taken at least two to three weeks. With Windsurf helping me build it in a week, the time savings are substantial.

I don't think of any improvements for Windsurf right now. If Windsurf could come and build with all these connections to different clean services, that would be helpful.

I have been using Windsurf for almost less than a year.

Windsurf is stable.

Windsurf's scalability is much better.

I didn't need customer support, so that's a good point. I would probably rate the customer support a 10.

I have used Copilot before, but I found Windsurf much faster and much easier.

I think we see a return on investment in terms of time saved. From my point of view, I see that within our team, we are doing a lot better.

Before choosing Windsurf, I evaluated Cursor.

It's easy to onboard a new engineer with Windsurf, helping them get onboarded much faster. I chose 7 out of 10 because I've used Cursor as well, and sometimes I feel Cursor hallucinates less compared to Windsurf. Windsurf is a one-stop shop to do live coding and fast coding. I found this interview pretty good and don't think anything should change for the future. My overall review rating for Windsurf is 7 out of 10.

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.

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.