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.