Windsurf Reviews

I most often use Windsurf for backend development because I appreciate how the autocomplete tab functions and how the agent integrations are embedded within the IDE.

I recently created a module that integrated complex backend logic while using Windsurf. With the help of the integrated IDE agents, I was able to complete it quickly rather than spending several hours or days. I finished it within thirty to forty minutes, which was really helpful.

I also use Windsurf to plan new projects when I'm working on side projects. During those times, I use Windsurf to create a proper plan in the planning mode.

Windsurf's autocomplete is good, and the agent modes are really effective.

During the agent modes, the cascade feature is particularly cool. What I most appreciate, and what could be improved, is the context awareness, specifically how much context is consumed within Windsurf chat. Including visibility into context usage would be really helpful. When in a single chat, being able to easily identify how much context the LLM uses would allow me to clear the chat or make other adjustments as needed.

Windsurf has improved the productivity speed in my organization. Previously, I would spend hours developing a task or fixing a bug, which could take one or two days. With the help of these agents, I have been able to work much more quickly, which has improved my productivity. This has also helped my organization deliver fixes or address customer issues much faster.

I have saved considerable time since using Windsurf. For example, I recently planned a module development project that was expected to take two weeks. Using Windsurf, I completed it within a week because I could run multiple agents in the background, which was really helpful.

I would appreciate having context usage visibility, such as a bar or indicator showing how much context is used by the chat in a single conversation. That would be helpful.

I have been using Windsurf for approximately a year.

Windsurf is stable for the most part.

Windsurf's scalability is quite good.

The customer support for Windsurf is good.

I was using VS Code with integrated Copilot before Windsurf. I switched because of how well the LLMs and the agentic workflow are integrated within the IDE, which was really helpful. Compared to VS Code, Windsurf is really good, so I'm using it now.

I was only using VS Code before, so I switched from VS Code to Windsurf.

As I mentioned previously, I recently completed a project task module with Windsurf which was planned to be completed within two weeks with three developers. However, I was able to complete it within a single week, and I was the only person who worked on it. This means we saved two developers' efforts.

The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Windsurf are good.

I would suggest that others try other IDEs such as VS Code. Once they try that and come to Windsurf, they will surely know how good Windsurf is compared to the others.

All the features that I have used in Windsurf are quite good. The aspects I have mentioned regarding improvements for Windsurf are the main areas I have considered. My overall rating for Windsurf is eight out of ten.

My main use case with Windsurf is having the ability to support different models while writing content and while using the cascade window. Whenever I ask questions on the cascade window, it has the privilege to use different models such as Gemini AI, Claude, Claude Sonnet, and ChatGPT. This is one of the best use cases.

If I am not satisfied with the current result, I can change the model to another one. This has enhanced my workflow and error resolution in a couple of seconds.

Windsurf provides next word prediction when I write content for the first time and am drafting an article. The side cascade window helps me to dive deeper. I have been using Docusaurus as a platform for publishing our product documentation and API documentation. When I configured Docusaurus from scratch, Windsurf helped me solve errors I encountered while developing the Docusaurus platform, particularly with CSS and config parameters. It also helps me write content in a more impressive form.

The prediction feature of Windsurf saves my time. For repetitive tasks, such as deleting sentences and adding exclamation marks, quotes, or code blocks, it provides assistance. Windsurf is an interactive IDE with different kinds of themes that I can change based on my preferences, and it has a right side cascade.

Since I am the only writer in my current company, Windsurf helps me improve my productivity and write first drafts using the predictive answers and GenAI features. My productivity has improved significantly because I can have a first draft ready within thirty minutes when I start using the prediction features from Windsurf. Once the first draft is ready, it goes for review, gets refined, and is published on the website after reviewers approve it.

Windsurf sometimes exhibits hallucination behavior. I encountered a use case recently where I wanted my code blocks in black color. When I asked a question, Windsurf did not identify the exact problem but directly edited the CSS file to implement the black color feature. However, I discovered that the black color could be applied through the theme feature instead.

From an accuracy perspective, Windsurf sometimes hallucinates and deviates from the expected results. If there are improvements needed for Windsurf, one possibility would be to connect Windsurf to Slack channels so the context can be improved.

I have been using Windsurf for around one year.

Windsurf is stable.

Windsurf's scalability is good. On a scale of one to ten, it is around eight.

I have not used Windsurf's customer support yet. However, if I get stuck on anything, I will definitely go for it.

Before choosing Windsurf, I evaluated other options such as Cursor and Microsoft Copilot. Cursor has a pricing model that hits a limit after completing some questions.

The advice I would give to others looking into using Windsurf is that if they are developers, I would help them with the initial setup.

I rate Windsurf a nine out of ten. Sometimes it exhibits hallucination, so it gives ninety percent accuracy when it provides a correct answer, but sometimes it is less than fifty percent. I chose nine out of ten for Windsurf because of the hallucination it sometimes produces when asking questions. That one point is deducted because of the accuracy point of view. The advice I would give to others looking into using Windsurf is that if they are developers, I would help them with the initial setup.

My main use case for Windsurf is coding. I do a lot of coding with Windsurf; for example, the first was an application for telephones in React Native, and more recently, I built a full transaction engine with Azure. I'm building new software every week. More recently, I've tackled a lot of MCP servers with Windsurf.

In my opinion, the best feature Windsurf offers is the adequation between price and quality, meaning I can switch from expensive AI engines for difficult tasks to cheaper ones for easier ones, allowing me to manage my invoices effectively.

Windsurf helps me manage invoices and switch between AI engines easily; when we ask the AI to work, we can just select the AI model we want to use at that time, and that's very cool.

Windsurf has positively impacted my organization by helping me start projects on technologies I wasn't mastering; for example, when I initiated the project in React Native for telephones, I didn't know the technology, just had a YouTube video, and I believe that without Windsurf, I couldn't manage this kind of project and coding activities, so the main idea for me is that Windsurf allows me to work on technologies that I don't master.

Windsurf helped me learn and adapt to new technologies and saved me time; especially for React Native, I wouldn't have started the project without the help of AI and the possibility of using Windsurf to do it, and it's the same for other projects where I worked, such as a recent project with Electron and other technologies I didn't use and wouldn't have tackled without Windsurf.

I think that recently there is some form of long-term memory based on folders, which is good, but I prefer the product as it is now; I'm used to working with the old way of the visual source code interface, and I'm comfortable with it, so I'm not waiting for something very new. My main point is perhaps having more models available for free or inexpensive, and perhaps reducing the price of Opus 4.6, which I use a lot, but otherwise, I feel good with the features of the product as of now.

I've started using Windsurf, and my first invoice is dated more than one year ago, something like February 25.

Windsurf is stable.

Windsurf's scalability is good, but as I am a one-person company, I don't have any serious scalability issues.

I didn't have to contact customer support.

I was using Claude Desktop, the ancestor of Claude Code, but I switched to Windsurf because I was limited to Anthropic models, and Windsurf is more agile with AI models.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is good; I prefer the price of Windsurf, but it would be better if there were more free or low-budget models offered.

I am just a regular customer of Windsurf's solution; I am not a partner or reseller.

I've seen a return on investment because the best return is that I can work on technologies I didn't use before, making it difficult to set a figure for it, but definitely, I can work on projects I wouldn't have done before.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is good; I prefer the price of Windsurf, but it would be better if there were more free or low-budget models offered.

Before choosing Windsurf, I evaluated Claude Desktop.

I would rate Windsurf a nine on a scale of one to ten. I choose a nine because it's always perhaps the offering in low-budget models that prevents a perfect score. I recommend Windsurf to others looking into it; I tell my friends they can start using it with the free models such as SWE 1.5, which is quite good, even if it's free, and later switch to a more expensive model when they have a real project. My overall review rating for Windsurf is nine.

My main use case for Windsurf is writing code with AI solutions and refactoring existing code.

A quick specific example of a task or project where I have used Windsurf for writing or refactoring code is for stability. It has very stable cloud-based deployment, and the best feature is that it can modify multiple related files intelligently, plus inline edits where I can chat with AI or directly edit inside code.

The AI chat and in-line editing help my workflow because whenever I am writing a few lines of code, Windsurf provides the ability to generate and modify specific portions of the code that I can type by natural language. I can highlight a block of code and then give it a prompt, and it automatically generates the new code at the cursor location.

The best features that Windsurf offers include inline coding, code editing, and AI features such as the deep context-aware agent, which understands my whole codebase, not just the current file, and it can propose correct edits along with inline editing with natural language and integrated terminal and CLI command generation.

Out of those features, the one I find myself using the most day-to-day is the context-aware code, because Windsurf has the ability to understand my whole codebase, allowing it to check if changes in one file will affect other files.

Windsurf has positively impacted my organization in that writing code is very fast and easy. It made writing code faster and easier for my organization because we have a mid-sized team that benefits from shared context, conventions, and team plans, with Windsurf understanding the team norms and coding styles to accurately use shared helper files or common files for overall development.

Windsurf can be improved in several ways, such as enhancing response times and better handling of massive codebases when dealing with over 100K plus files, along with improved security controls.

AI accuracy can be improved.

I have been using Windsurf for the past two or three years.

My advice to others looking into using Windsurf is that for mid-sized firms and individual developers, it is very good because it reads your whole codebase and provides perfect solutions whenever you ask for them. My overall rating for this product is 10.

My main use case for Windsurf is coding, unit test case creations, and debugging for front-end Angular. For debugging in Angular, if I need to check the code with issues, template issues, or any lint issues, I can ask Windsurf to check the specific file or related things, and it analyzes and provides me the solution. For unit test cases, I will ask Windsurf to create that test case for a specific file or function.

I find that Windsurf is a good tool to use, as it automates many things in coding, development, and analysis. Windsurf offers features such as auto suggestions. When comparing Windsurf's auto-suggestions to other tools I've tried, I notice that a few suggest irrelevant content or don't match the syntax, while Windsurf analyzes the code and provides suggestions that match the code or functionality accurately.

Windsurf is a good tool that everyone can use, as it has many features that reduce the time required for coding. Windsurf positively impacts my organization by reducing the efforts required to depend on more critical technologies, as it provides everything within itself and offers many latest technologies. Both time and productivity are saved by using Windsurf, making it a recommended tool.

Windsurf can improve its analytical solutions and inbuilt features, as I currently have a dependency on external third-party tools that could be introduced into Windsurf itself to reduce that time or dependency. The only improvement needed for Windsurf is to reduce dependency on third-party tools.

I have used the solution for around ten months.

Windsurf is almost stable.

Windsurf's scalability is almost good.

I hear that Windsurf's customer support is good, but I haven't reached out to customer support since I haven't faced many issues.

Before Windsurf, I used GitHub Copilot as another solution.

I see a return on investment with Windsurf, as it reduces effort and allows for a decrease in the number of developers needed.

The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Windsurf depend on the customer only and are not specific to developers, as this is decided by management and upper teams.

I evaluated other options such as GitHub Copilot before choosing Windsurf.

Windsurf is already in development and is almost fully developed, and it keeps improving. For those looking into using Windsurf, I advise them to understand all the features that can be utilized in Windsurf, which reduces their effort and time. Everything is good with this interview, and all questions are relevant to the feedback. I would rate this review experience a 9 out of 10.

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.

Positive

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.

My main use case for Windsurf is code correction. I use the multiple AI options available to create tests, review code, check photos on my computer, and address issues in Jira. I use Windsurf with MCP frequently.

I use Windsurf for code correction and task creation in cascading workflows. I have established rules and skills within the platform. One of my key skills is checking whether developers who create cases for issues write high-quality code. I request ratings and evaluate specific topics such as Hexagonal Architecture and Domain-driven Design.

Windsurf offers many AI options, feels intelligent, is stable, and appears to be growing as a company in a positive direction.

The best features Windsurf offers are that the IDE is built on a VS Code base, which I appreciate for its structure. I also use IntelliJ frequently because there is a Windsurf plugin available for it. I am not certain what is specifically unique to Windsurf because I do not have extensive experience with different IDEs to compare, but I feel comfortable with both the plugin and the AI.

Windsurf has definitely improved code quality and speed. However, it creates a situation where we have an excellent tool, but the real world is not yet prepared to receive this potential. There is much work to be done to bridge that gap.

I see the difference with Windsurf when I ask Claude, Opus, or GPT to evaluate code quality. Sometimes I see code rated six out of ten, and then I adjust it to a better rating. I still use my own judgment to verify this assessment and continue in that direction. I have to guide the AI in this process, but I see tangible results in reality.

Windsurf offers many AI options, feels intelligent, is stable, and appears to be growing as a company in a positive direction.

I noticed that on two occasions, the AI with Windsurf was not performing well. The AI seemed to malfunction for two days or even an entire week, and it was difficult to work through that period. I would say that Windsurf should improve its stability.

I remember having issues with Gemini, and sometimes I cannot use MCPs. I appreciate Windsurf, but I cannot use it sometimes because of MCP limitations, and I do not understand much about them. I choose a different option instead, but I should use it more frequently.

Graphics or something similar might be useful additions to Windsurf.

I have used Windsurf since June of last year, approximately ten months now.

I noticed that on two occasions, the AI with Windsurf was not performing well. The AI seemed to malfunction for two days or even an entire week, and it was difficult to work through that period. Windsurf should improve its stability.

I give Windsurf a rating of eight out of ten.

I rate it an eight because I feel there is room for growth, and I do not believe any tool deserves a perfect ten rating.

I would recommend that you try Windsurf because once you do, you will see that working with it is completely different from working without it. My overall review rating for Windsurf is eight.

I am using Windsurf for generating unit test cases for my code and to improve my code, improve functionality in that code, and mostly I'm using it for coding purposes to generate new code.

For generating unit test cases, I am working on an MVC application, so there were many action methods in my application, and I generated the unit test cases for those action methods using Windsurf. I asked Windsurf to generate the unit test cases for those methods.

In my main use case for Windsurf, I sometimes ask it to optimize my code, as there were some performance-related glitches in the code, so I asked Windsurf to improve those.

In my opinion, the best features Windsurf offers are limited, as I have not used much apart from generating the code, but I found it less intelligent than the other AI tools in the market.

Windsurf has positively impacted my organization by improving our code quality and reducing our development time.

I feel that Windsurf can be improved, as sometimes it keeps giving the same answer again and again, which makes me feel stuck at those points in time, because it is giving the same answer in a loop.

I think they should definitely improve Windsurf. My advice to others looking into using Windsurf is to work on your prompt skills, and if it gives the same answer again and again, try a new chat.

I have never had a chance to talk to Windsurf's customer support, as I never had any complaint about that.

I have been using Windsurf for one and a half years.

I would say that Windsurf is somewhat stable.

Windsurf's scalability could be better, but we need more engines to select.

I have never had a chance to talk to Windsurf's customer support, as I never had any complaint about that.

Currently, I see only two AI engines I can select for Windsurf: one is the base model and the other is Claude 3.7.

My advice to others looking into using Windsurf is to work on your prompt skills, and if it gives the same answer again and again, try a new chat.

I would rate this product a 6 overall.