Windsurf Reviews

My main use case for Windsurf is to speed up code generation and improve development efficiency. I use it as an AI-assisted tool to generate code faster, especially for backend APIs, data ingestion pipelines, and AI workflow agents. This has allowed me to reduce manual coding effort and accelerate development by 25%.

A specific example of one of the best use cases was when building an automated CSV ingestion service. Windsurf helped me generate boilerplate code and data validation logic quickly to onboard new vendors and product categories, reducing manual coding time and improving development velocity by more than 25%, which is critical in meeting tight deadlines for product catalog updates.

One of the best features Windsurf offers is AI-assisted code generation to write boilerplate and repetitive code, along with support for multiple programming languages and frameworks. Integration with development environments provides real-time code suggestions and completions, enhancing productivity by allowing developers to focus on complex problem-solving rather than repetitive coding.

Windsurf integration with my development environment helps my workflow by providing real-time code suggestions and completions directly within the IDE, reducing context switching and speeding up coding by offering relevant code snippets and boilerplate as I type. For example, I use it mainly with Visual Studio Code, supporting multiple languages such as JavaScript, Python, and TypeScript, allowing me to generate backend API code and AI workflow agents quickly without leaving the editor.

Customization options allow tailoring of the generated code to fit specific project standards and architecture. Integration with various frameworks and libraries ensures consistency across all application parts. Windsurf has a significant impact on my organization by improving development and code quality, contributing to smoother, faster, and more reliable software delivery.

Windsurf can be improved by enhancing support for more languages and frameworks. Improving context awareness to better understand complex project structures and generate more accurate code suggestions would be beneficial. Adding advanced debugging and testing assistance, including unit tests and integration cases, would enhance its effectiveness.

Optimizing performance to reduce latency and adding more intelligent error detection suggestions during code generation would also be beneficial. There is room for improvement in context awareness, better debugging capabilities, and reducing latency issues.

I have been using Windsurf for approximately two years.

Windsurf is stable approximately 95% of the time, but there are occasional latency issues that occur.

Windsurf can be scaled in a better way at the organization level.

Windsurf customer support, from my experience, is good. It compares favorably to community forums and other direct support channels. Technical issues are handled very well when they arise.

Previously, we used direct LLMs such as ChatGPT and Claude. With Windsurf, we use an AI-assisted tool that automatically generates code and helps significantly. We evaluated options between Cursor and Windsurf, and we found Windsurf to be better than Cursor.

Time saving is one of the significant benefits with Windsurf. It has saved a substantial amount of time compared to previous methods, with a 25% time reduction in code generation and completion of projects.

Pricing and setup costs are handled at the higher organization levels. We use Windsurf provided to us.

We evaluated options between Cursor and Windsurf, and we found Windsurf to be better than Cursor.

From my experience, I would advise taking time to explore AI-assisted code generation features to boost development speed. Use it alongside traditional coding practices to ensure code quality and maintainability. Leverage community forums and support channels for debugging and best practices. I would rate this product an 8 out of 10.

Our main use case for Windsurf is accelerating the development for all the client projects that we handle, especially when we are building websites, AI agents, and automations.

For example, when we need to create a landing page or a workflow for a client, we use Windsurf to quickly generate and refine the code, test ideas faster, and then reduce the time spent on repetitive development tasks.

We majorly use Windsurf to speed up the coding for client work and especially for all the websites that we design day in and day out. For the AI agents and automation projects, we use it extensively.

Windsurf has positively impacted our organization by helping us work faster and more efficiently.

Since we started using it, we have been able to move from an idea to implementation more quickly, reduce the repetitive coding, and spend more time on higher-value work such as refining client solutions and testing different approaches.

This has helped our small team stay productive across multiple projects.

The main improvement has been time savings, and we can move faster on websites, automations, and AI agent workflows so that we can take on more work and spend less time on repetitive development.

In terms of metrics, we are an eight-person team, and we were earlier handling a couple of projects because we had to do a lot of coding from scratch.

Now that Windsurf is in place, we are able to handle 14 different projects.

The prototyping has been remarkably quick.

When it comes to time-saving, it has saved a significant amount of time for us, and the initial effort has been substantially reduced.

The best features Windsurf offers for us are the fast code generation and intelligent suggestions.

They help us build faster, reduce repetitive work, and keep momentum.

The code it generates is of high quality.

With fast code generation and intelligent suggestions, I find the suggestions generally accurate enough to be useful and the code it generates usually gets us most of the way there.

We still refine it, but it reduces a lot of time and a lot of initial effort that we had to do previously.

What I appreciate the most about the features is that it keeps us moving.

For agency work, where we juggle multiple projects, that smooth workflow is really valuable because it reduces context switching and helps us stay productive.

The main improvements I would suggest for Windsurf are stronger context handling for bigger projects and a bit more control over the code it generates.

This would make it even smoother and faster for our agency work.

I would also appreciate a cleaner UI for larger projects, especially when there are many files and moving parts.

That would be a valuable addition.

Better integrations with our existing tools would help too, so we can move between coding, testing, and deployment more smoothly.

Overall, these improvements would make it even better for agency-style work where speed and clarity matter the most.

Regarding Windsurf's AI capabilities, it seems solid for general use, but because we work on client projects, we stay cautious with sensitive information.

More visibility into security controls, permissions, and data handling would make it even better for us.

It is adequate for our current needs, but stronger governance controls and clearer security options would be beneficial.

Beyond what we have discussed, a small improvement would be more consistency in the output on complex prompts and better context retention across longer tasks.

I have been using Windsurf for about 15 months now, mainly for development and AI-related workflows.

Windsurf has been stable for our agency work overall, with no major reliability issues.

In our experience, Windsurf has been scalable for day-to-day use cases and larger tasks.

It should support growth reasonably well, though performance and consistency would need to be monitored as usage increases.

It has scaled well for our current needs and appears suitable for large projects as well, with some attention needed as usage grows.

We have not needed to reach out to support very often, but when we did, the experience was generally positive and responsive.

We did use other tools before Windsurf, but we switched because Windsurf fit our workflow better and felt more efficient for day-to-day use cases.

The onboarding process was smooth overall.

New team members usually became very comfortable with Windsurf very quickly, and we only needed a brief introduction to get them started.

Windsurf integrated reasonably well with our existing tools and workflows.

It fit into our development process without much disruption, and we were able to use it alongside our normal setup.

It has improved collaboration by making work more consistent and reducing back and forth during the development.

We have seen a lot of positive return on investment, mainly through the time savings and improved productivity.

Earlier we were handling two projects, but now we can handle 14 projects.

It helped us reduce a lot of manual effort and speed up the development and support of multiple projects.

It reduced the initial effort, improved our productivity, and helped us save a significant amount of time.

In our case, Windsurf's pricing and licensing were reasonable and straightforward to work with, so we did not face any major setup complexity and the process was smooth from a procurement standpoint.

We evaluated other tools as part of the selection process, but Windsurf gave us the best balance of usability, integration, and productivity.

We went with Windsurf because of these advantages.

My advice would be to start with a small pilot project first so that the team can get comfortable with the workflow before rolling it out more broadly.

It is also worth setting clear guidelines on when to use it and having someone review outputs for more complex tasks.

Start small, define usage guidelines, and review outputs clearly at the beginning and you will see significant improvements.

I would rate this review 8 out of 10.

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.

I typically use Windsurf for solving bugs, such as UI-related bugs, or developing user stories and planning any particular user stories before implementing them.

With Windsurf, I have created certain workflows to help with my day-to-day tasks, particularly tasks that are repeated. In one of my projects, I am migrating a project from a monorepo to micro frontends. We have to add translations, pick them from our old project, build up some keys, and add them to our new project. We use those keys in our new project, and their values we have to add in another repo. This was a time-consuming process that required copying code, searching for specific keys, retrieving values, and increasing them in the config repo or main repo. What used to take about one day can now be achieved in ten minutes with a workflow I implemented. Similarly, I have created workflows for repeated steps in micro frontends such as adding plugins, running commands, deleting files, or modifying code. Creating workflows has significantly reduced the time from hours to minutes. I also created a workflow for user stories, enabling triggering, fetching related code changes, writing unit tests, running tests, and achieving a ninety percent coverage. These workflows are just examples of the efficiencies I have gained.

There was one user story that I had to implement. The user story point that I got for that particular task was a week's time, around seven days. I used Windsurf to explain everything about that particular task, create a plan, and then implemented it. I completed that particular user story within one day.

Most often I use Windsurf Workflows, and then I have a Rule created, basically a global rule. There are certain rules I have created that are ordinarily applied. I have Memory, its memory-related feature. When I am trying to do something and I think this particular thing might be repeated in the future, I try to save it into memory for future reference. We have Code Maps also. The project I work on is a big project with many modules and libraries. If I have to work on a certain new library or module, I take the help of Code Map to understand how the code flows, what functions exist, and the responsibilities of libraries. Deep Wiki assists if I want to know about any specific function or functionality. Code Map enables the addition of different contexts to prompts, including Code Maps as context, terminal outputs, and file attachments.

The framework that we created using Windsurf involves certain coding patterns for grid creation. I interacted with Windsurf in chat sessions to understand grid building, libraries, implementation, and missing aspects such as imports. Once completed, I asked it to remember it for future reference. In day-to-day tasks, a rule I created ensures that AI agents do not assume things independently. When there is a lack of context or clarity, Windsurf will ask questions and provide options, allowing me to give my own inputs.

Windsurf has actually boosted my productivity significantly. Earlier, it boosted my productivity around ten times. I am using it for my day-to-day tasks. If I am implementing any user story or maybe working on a bug, ninety percent of my task is completed by Windsurf. I just guide it how to do it, and it completes most of my work.

Windsurf has certain features that do not work properly. The inline completion feature is not very accurate as it does not account for project context. It should allow adding context for inline suggestions. This is a requested feature.

I face problems with starting the cascade mode. If multiple windows of Windsurf are open, the cascade crashes and takes a long time to start. If opened for the first time after turning on your computer, it takes two to three minutes to start the cascade mode and interact with the agents.

Performance could be improved, and the inline suggestion could be improved, or perhaps context could be provided about it.

It has been around four months since I have been using Windsurf.

Windsurf has been stable, but there is a little bit of a performance issue if your project is quite big. It is kind of slow.

The customer support for Windsurf is good. The customer support provided by the Windsurf team is pretty good.

Earlier I had been using GitHub Copilot for my day-to-day user story implementation or day-to-day tasks. But later on, Windsurf was introduced throughout our organization. I actually used its features, such as Workflow, Rules, and Memory. All these features were not present in GitHub Copilot back then. That is what actually made me interested in Windsurf. I have used other code editors also, such as we have Google Santigravy and we have VS Code. Windsurf is the best, and I prefer it.

This is handled by my organization. Usually, we have a twenty dollar or thirty dollar plan for Windsurf that we can use. Basically, all the credits and everything is provided by my organization. I never bothered about it.

Take your time. Whenever you are using any of the agents, be sure of the model you are using. Try to optimize your model selection based on the task you are doing. Also, try to get familiar with all of the features that it offers as they are pretty helpful. Try to get habituated with it slowly, and you will become familiar. There are very helpful features.

People in my organization or my team are basically making Windsurf write thousands of lines of code. Within the last three months of usage, one of my teammates made Windsurf write ninety thousand lines of code. This has basically saved a lot of time for us.

I would rate this product an eight overall.