by przemub on 4/30/25, 8:36 PM with 141 comments
by ziddoap on 4/30/25, 8:59 PM
That shouldn't be considered a valid reason to remove a review. I could maybe understand down-weighting reviews as they age and as issues are resolved, but as a potential buyer of some product/service/whatever, knowing that something was released with a bunch of issues (even if now solved) is a valuable signal. Preferably, they would reply to reviews and say "XYZ was addressed in update ABC" or something.
Nuking reviews is a valuable signal as well, I guess. Just not in the way that they hope. Knowing that they've done that has (further) lowered my impression of them.
by JumpCrisscross on 4/30/25, 9:01 PM
“ I previously submitted a review critiquing this plugin, but it was removed by JetBrains moderation — an unfortunate decision that, in my view, undermines trust in open feedback. I have now tested the latest AI plugin (v243.23654.270.16). The plugin does offer limited support for third-party providers like Ollama and LM Studio (the latter being a better fit for most local LLM users). However, this support is restricted to chat interactions only — not to autocomplete, inline suggestions, or in-editor refactoring tools. In practice, this limitation significantly reduces the plugin’s value for users who already maintain ChatGPT Pro accounts or local LLM workflows. Rather than fully enabling local model integration, the design seems oriented toward promoting JetBrains’ proprietary cloud models and subscription services. Specific ratings: • Integration with IDE: 5 stars — Excellent UI integration into JetBrains products, smooth setup. • Performance: 1 star — Noticeable latency compared to local models; frequent delays. • Available Features: 1 star — Limited flexibility for serious LLM users; core features locked to cloud services. • User Interface: 1 star — Chat feels bolted-on rather than deeply native; inconsistent UX across project types. • Documentation Quality: 1 star — The documentation exists but feels sparse, with limited guidance on third-party setup and unclear disclosures about feature limitations. While some users may find the plugin sufficient for lightweight AI chat, in my assessment, it falls short both in technical flexibility and in respecting user choice. Thank you to JetBrains for providing the opportunity to share my neutral and unbiased observations with fellow developers” [1].
[1] https://plugins.jetbrains.com/plugin/22282-jetbrains-ai-assi...
by terminalbraid on 4/30/25, 8:50 PM
They seem to have to say that a lot about this product, yet they don't really seem to learn any lessons. When the original flood of bad reviews came it it was because they made that plugin bundled with the IDE and then had a "bug" where it couldn't be effectively removed. There was no precedent for bundled a paid plugin nor need for it to be bundled with the IDE. Just their desperation to cash in. They then walked that back with the same "we could have done better".
This is more of the same. The "AI Assistant" still lives on the default side bar regardless if you have that plugin installed or not.
At this point, they know they could do better yet are choosing not to.
by buybackoff on 4/30/25, 9:22 PM
by terminalbraid on 4/30/25, 10:05 PM
by buremba on 4/30/25, 9:33 PM
Not sure why it’s so hard for them to catch up with Cursor. They have everything they need but somehow they focus on just something that they don’t have much expertise, building models instead of better integration. It’s a shame seeing such good product going downhill considering AI is becoming fundamental for dev productivity.
by endofreach on 4/30/25, 9:03 PM
I also believe they should really stay calm and not get sucked into the AI hype. Worst case they will be the heroes to the people who like to program for the joy of it, in case these AI IDEs should really take over (which i highly doubt).
by zer0-c00l on 4/30/25, 9:07 PM
by cadamsdotcom on 4/30/25, 8:56 PM
“Hi, we’ve updated and these issues should be addressed now. Please take a look and let us know what you think!”
by unfunco on 4/30/25, 9:58 PM
by xyst on 4/30/25, 9:09 PM
Have switched to my very old workflow of using nvim and customizing it with NvChad.
by reactordev on 4/30/25, 9:16 PM
by qiu3344 on 5/1/25, 12:16 PM
> AI services are expensive to provide, because they tend to be processor-intensive, but competition between vendors is a likely reason for JetBrains introducing a free tier earlier this month
If it's so expensive, why do they force it on everyone? Sure, a lot of folks want support for this, but enabling it by default is just annoying for their long-time users. Not to mention the costs of full AI-completion, I hope they don't get the idea of also enabling that by default.
by mrlonglong on 4/30/25, 9:54 PM
by pandemic_region on 4/30/25, 8:59 PM
by steve-atx-7600 on 5/1/25, 3:54 AM
by tacker2000 on 4/30/25, 10:10 PM
by chuckadams on 4/30/25, 9:03 PM
by Pesthuf on 5/1/25, 10:51 PM
by ingvar77 on 5/1/25, 2:10 PM
by wolvesechoes on 5/1/25, 8:23 AM
by gitroom on 4/30/25, 9:51 PM
by tdiff on 5/2/25, 6:31 PM
by cnbeining on 5/1/25, 12:20 PM
[0] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/08/...
by good-luck86523 on 5/1/25, 10:51 AM
by ilrwbwrkhv on 4/30/25, 10:57 PM