Considering you get a better integrated environment rather than something designed more heavily around plugins you also get unquestionably much better refactoring tools.
One thing to note that I just learned: You cannot opt out of anonymous data collection if you use the free non-commercial license. (I'd probably still trust Jetbrains over Microsoft, but that's me)
It started that way but wasn’t been for a while. In fact the last version was a rewrite using native macOS controls and optimized for Apple Silicon. Sad to see it go but heard great things about Rider for c# development.
The newer mac version was actually showing huge promise. It was a couple of versions away from being a great choice as primary IDE. That said, I do understand why they axed it. The market would have been tiny for all that investment.
Microsoft had continued to evolve it. And a few components from Visual Studio Windows were ported over to be common. But Visual Studio Mac was 100% rebranded Xamarin Studio which of course was just an evolution of MonoDevelop.
VS for Mac was junk. Better off trashing it and pushing people the VS Code route.
I use VS Code daily for .NET development. It's probably 70% of what VS on Windows is, but it works well and I don't need to run a VM for it (if I need some of the in-depth tracing and profiling stuff, I can still fire up the gold standard). VS on Mac was maybe 30%
I mean, yes, VS Code certainly is great and all, but…
> It's probably 70% of what VS on Windows is
no. From my perspective, it doesn’t even have 50% of VS features, and that’s probably a generous estimation. VS has lots and lots of features. Granted, many of them are irrelevant for most users most of the time.
Even Rider is lacking in comparison. It is very limited regarding debugging targets for example.
As a regulär Jetbrains products user, I was shocked when I first has to use VS. Until today, I haven't figured out how to open a class by name (from any assembly), other than writing they name in code ans strl-clicking it.
Ctrl-T (or depending on your mappings, maybe Ctrl-P). Honestly, you can't blame the IDE for you not spending time working out how to do the basic stuff.
Visual Studio has come a long way (I've been using it since the .net 1.1 days). Out of the box, it gives you most of what you got from Resharper 2 years ago.
All that said, I switched to Rider a year or so ago and haven't looked back. I used to use VS for C# and VSCode for html/typescript/css, but Rider happily handles both. It's really nice to have one IDE for everything. And unsurprisingly, it seems to perform better than Resharper + VS.
> Honestly, you can't blame the IDE for you not spending time working out how to do the basic stuff.
Wasn’t the whole premise of JetBrains making different IDEs for different stacks that you don’t need to learn how to do the basic stuff and can transfer your knowledge from <insert dominant IDE for said stack at the moment>?
FWIW, one of the cool parts about the JetBrains ecosystem is that, almost regardless of the language/IDE you're in, the keybondings are highly similar. When I have to work in VSCode, I happily use the JetBrains bindings.
> VS for Mac was junk. Better off trashing it and pushing people the VS Code route.
Sure but VS Code for C# is trash as well. All those years, both Microsoft products, and this the experience is subpar, especially in comparison to the real Visual Studio.
With 200K+ employees, at this point it is better to think of Microsoft as a city and different teams in it as independent companies in that city with employees that sometimes go out for coffee together :-P
> With 200K+ employees, at this point it is better to think of Microsoft as a city and different teams in it as independent companies in that city with employees that sometimes go out for coffee together :-P
As a former v dash, it was always amusing to see the proclamations come down from the mountain that basically said something like if you are using version x.y.z or below of so and so dependency you must correct it within n days. The people enforcing this seemingly didn't care what the application did or where you were in your software lifecycle, all they cared about was this dependency is raising a flag and we must fix it. :crylaugh:
Dealing with random compliance issues is literally 50% of the job for most SWEs at msft. Another 40% is spent fingering a yubikey and closing browser login tabs. Occasionally you can get some real work done on a slow Wednesday afternoon.
Actually you should take a look at Rider in that case. It’s about 120% of what VS on Windows is! I use it as my daily IDE for a production .NET back end. You won’t look back I promise.
To this day there is now Visual C++ developer experience that is comparable to C++ Builder for GUI development, there was C++/CX for a while (C++/CLI depends on C# for the GUI part), but then it was killed by an internal riot that pushed for the ways of ATL and IDL in the form of C++/WinRT.
C++/CX was deprecated and replaced by C++/WinRT in 2016.
To this day, to develop WinUI C++ applications, there is no built-in tooling in VS, you need to manually generate and merge C++ code out of IDL files, which have zero support on Visual Studio for syntax highlighting and code completion, unless you reach out to some third party plugins.
To top that, given the way things turned out, C++/WinRT is now in maintenance, no goals to ever move it past C++17, or improve Visual Studio developer experience.
I doubt that they feel embarassed by this outcome.
I haven't touched C++ Builder since mid 2000's. Does it still rely on the VCL? That was always the criticism I heard at the time. The VCL was written in Pascal and no C++ developer liked that it was not C++. It constantly got flack for it. The VCL was good at the time, but Pascal is more akin to C# in the way it does inheritance, so no multiple inheritance was able to be done with VCL components IIRC.
Yes and no, VCL is around, although it has been replaced by FireMonkey.
Multiple inheritance in C++ is a can of worms, unless you're prepared to deal with the related issues of virtual base classes, and diamond inheritance.
That is why after C++ all the languages that support multiple inheritance do so only at the interface level and not implementation code, or rather go with a mix-ins approach.
And in regards to Microsoft world, well the same developers that weren't happy with VCL and Pascal, and in for a treat given that the only modern way to do native Windows UIs in Microsoft world is via .NET consuming DLLs/COM/WinRT, unless they want to either stick with MFC, or the outdated tooling in C++/WinRT.
With regards to multiple inheritance, this was the C++ Builder criticism, not mine. That and the extra macros needed to support the VCL. I was a Delphi guy, so I appreciated that the Object Pascal version of using the VCL was cleaner to use than the C++ interface.
We no longer use C++ for UI. Any native code is wrapped up in to P/Invokes. I think all of our MFC apps are EOL now. Everything is WPF or Maui for cross platform.
It depends on the platform. For example, Rider on Mac will not open vscproj/vcxproj files, because it doesn't support C++ really on non Windows. But I think that is mostly because it would need to use a different C++ compiler and that is non trivial. I would imagine it would also struggle with project types that are not normal (VS extensions, installer projects etc) and C++/CLI as that is not supported outside of Windows too (and I think uses the standard vsc[x]proj file format anyway...)
The latest version can now even open SLNX files, which are the newest format that removes a lot of the stuff that makes VS Solution files painful to maintain in source control.
Don't forget Unreal as well - I've used Rider on multiple AAA Unreal titles that include custom engine edits and it is significantly faster than VS at loading massive projects. The integration is great and allows for seeing blueprint classes and references in the C++ project.
I say this as a big user of JetBrains - I have had SOME issues with their intellisense dropping some references in Rider when there are a lot of references, so I would occasionally switch to VS when there were a lot of references to search through, but other than extreme cases Rider is just so much more pleasant to use.
Yeah they originally had a separate branch "Rider Unreal" but now it's part of Rider, C++ support seems mostly the same across both, except for project support. If IIRC Rider doesn't support CMake projects, but it does support vsproj projects, so if you generate vs files from cmake it'll load fine, but probably better to use CLion for any non-UE projects if using C++. I guess they're seeing it as .NET/GameDev IDE.
Honestly I don't know why there are so many almost identical IDEs.
I use both Rider (for mixed c++/c#) projects and CLion for C++ only.
I feel that Rider is somehow better than CLion at c++, even after CLion Nova (Intellisense based on Resharper backend) became a thing.
One difference is that I write boost::asio in CLion, and just vanilla C++ in Rider, and before Nova it was completely unusable with async code, now it's usable with async code, but after a few days of running the editor I end up with fatal IDE errors for CLion, and never for Rider.
JetBrains IDEs are all the same program just bundled with different language plugins. It would be like if you called VSCode by a different code name depending on which combination of extensions you had installed.
Not entirely. E.g. IntelliJ has a "project environment" modal (not sure about the exact name rn), in pycharm its part of the settings and a bit different. There are a few more things like this between the IDEs.
To +1 this: yes, they clearly share a lot of code, and have mostly-identical plug-in interfaces, and many dedicated IDEs have plugins for the more-general Intellij IDE.
And they present them as "just" a dedicated UI around the plugins.
But no, they are not actually the same. Essentially ever. The dedicated IDEs often have features that never make it into their plugins, and a lot of the UX and project structure/preferences/etc are quite specialized and don't always have equivalents outside it. You get like 90-95% with the plug-in, but not 100%, and sometimes that's a critical difference.
The plugins do have the distinct benefit of allowing you to use multiple in a single project, though.
If you open, say Android Studio (or IntelliJ) and start a new project, then open Rider and start a new project - the UI is actually very different for how the projects are managed. PyCharm is different too in different ways.
I think the differences are more akin to the old Visual C# Express and Visual Basic Express IDEs vs Visual Studio. Visual Studio was always "everything", but you used to get the express versions that were "low cost" or free. They only had the single language in them. They were customised to just that language. This is what Rider is to IntelliJ Professional, except from what I understand, the plug-ins for IntelliJ are not always on a 1:1 feature parity. This can even be seen with Android Studio and IntelliJ Community. The Android tooling in IntelliJ Community is almost the same, but it does miss out some stuff in Android Studio. Because Android Studio is specifically for Android development, and IntelliJ Community is more general purpose Kotlin and Java development. I think the Kotlin Native support is slightly better in IntelliJ Community.
What does "noncommercial use" mean in this context though? These are tools for work - is the idea that students can use them for free and then will start paying once they finish school?
You need to apply once a year and you need to be a maintainer of an active oss project for the oss license. From my experience they're very lenient in regards to what they consider active, but I don't think I'd jump trough the hoops if I didn't start using Rider with the student license.
Free for non-commercial offers a easy way to get people to use it and hopefully advocate for it at their jobs.
I did jump through the hoops every year and it's mostly fine, a 20m form filling exercise. I only had to explain one time that my project was still ongoing despite having a lot of seemingly automated commits.
It means you can use them as a hobbiest or a student. For example, you can now use Rider as the IDE on an Open Source project.
If you are writing code that you are going to be paid for, you are supposed to pay.
Of course, they know a lot of small devs will use it that should not. But few of them would have paid anyway and this creates a much greater pool of buyers when those devs get jobs or achieve commercial success.
> For example, you can now use Rider as the IDE on an Open Source project
It's worth noting that even before this change, you can get the entire JB suite for free if you regularly contribute to a qualifying OSS project https://www.jetbrains.com/community/opensource/.
I think the issue used to be that proving that involved them vetting you and I know that my contributions were deemed too sporadic. Which is chicken and egg - I would do more with a good IDE, but I can't have a good IDE till I do more. At least now, I can just do what I can without worrying.
That's what I've opted for as well, and I have to say I prefer it. gdscript is a nice language for high level game scripting, and on the couple occasions I needed to bring in some high-performance code I found it super easy to build a gdextension in Rust.
Compile the engine from source and add your classes as a module. Cuts out all the gdextension glue code and then you don't need to ship a shared library.
No. Your game code is a new class, in whats called a module, which is fully supported by the engine. Your game code almost definetly relies on the same stable APIs that a GDExtension or GDScript itself uses. There will be no merge conflicts, no problems, almost certainly.
Note: We have a fork of godot that has some changes and fixes weve made and engine upgrades are still a breeze. Solving the odd merge conflict is not that hard, people do it all the time. Godot's code base isnt drastically changing from day to day. 3->4 only had significant impact if you were doing certain things with the 'visual server'... other than that even that was easy.
What does Rider add to the Godot dev experience? (I'm not familiar with either ecosystem, but I thought I recall Godot having an IDE when I last booted it up to play with it).
The Godot IDE is mainly around GDscript and is very basic. This gives you all the good tooling you'd get from a professional IDE, has best in class refactoring tools, integrates well with stuff like debugging, has a huge plugin ecosystem, better out-of-the-box suggestions and code completion, integrates with AI tooling, etc.
This is better than nothing, but I believe a Unreal type of license for their products would be much better. Like, if you do less than what 5000 euros/usd per month, you can use it for free, after that, you pay X per major version. That way I can start using it for free, and as soon as I reached some reasonable ammount of money I start to pay.
This is Unreal's license for those that don't know it:
* Game developers (royalties apply after $1 million USD gross product revenue) = Free
* Individuals and small businesses (with less than $1 million USD in annual gross revenue) = Free
Another thing they can do is what they do with YouTrack. 1~2 devs, free, after that X per major version or Y per year.
As a paying subscriber I love this move for the .NET community.
As a .NET dev for many years, I've noticed there have been periods of time where either Visual Studio or Rider was far better than the other. Currently, Rider is much better.
Hopefully this encourages more people to try out C# & F#. Both fantastic languages.
- Edit - Looks like Webstorm (JS/TS editor) is also free now.
I had a Rider license for a while but just let it lapse.
I've found myself totally satisfied with just VS Code on macOS (it's come a really long way).
I'm glad that this move will possibly make .NET more accessible, but I think VSC is in a really good place with C# at the moment and shouldn't be overlooked.
We have a mono-repo with 100k lines of C# in 8 projects, 40k lines of Vue SFCs in 2 workspaces, 39k lines of TypeScript, 23k lines of Astro. No issues at all running it on a 2021 14" MacBook Pro with only 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD while also running multiple Docker containers for Postgres, Neo4j, Memcached, and LocalStack.
My take is that folks should not underestimate VSC; there are certainly things that Rider does better, but VSC is totally viable for modern .NET backend work.
Just my experience, but at multiple companies, which are in the 50-70 employees range, their C# codebases were over 1 million LOC and I didn't get the feeling that they were exceptionally large or doing anything significantly different. I would put 1 million LOC as "medium enterprise . NET" which would place 100k in the small or possibly medium sized if there was significantly more LOC in another language that is part of the project that you aren't counting (eg. different web front-end).
It's not an all C# project; C# only comprises the backend.
All in, the mono-repo is somewhere over 250k SLOC with mixed languages (Vue SFC, TS, Astro, JSX, shell). So when VSC is loaded, it's not only handling C#, but also everything else.
Point is that VSC is more than capable of handling production scale, multi-language workspaces even on 2021 hardware with only 16GB of RAM.
It's not that VS Code can't load a large project, that is table stakes. It's that the tools it provides to work with those large code bases are like fisher price versions of the Jetbrains equivalents. If one take their tools seriously, and uses them to the maximum extent possible to increase productivity, reliability, and robustness of code then there is just no comparison between the two.
Don't get me wrong, I still use VS code for all front-end development and other ecosystems (such as Rust). But when it specifically comes to C#/.NET there is no substitute to Rider in my opinion.
VS Code starts out as a lightweight code editor & via extensions you can turn it into more of an IDE but it'll take a lot of customization & messing around.
Rider is an IDE with all the bells & whistles already included. It also has extensions but they've built it with the most popular things already.
Refactoring, debugging, code navigation, formatting & hinting/suggestions are far superior in Rider. They have a lot more advanced features. Check out some YouTube videos by JetBrains to see examples.
Don't get me wrong - VS Code is still a great tool & I use it daily. I do wish they would have named it something other than "Code" or "Visual Studio Code" but hey, it's Microsoft. They're famous for terrible bad name choices. Maybe they'll make a copilot to fix that.
my experience last time i tried it on a decent sized blazor project (about a year ago) was countless false errors and broken syntax highlighting to the point that i had to ignore everything and treat it like a dumb text editor like notepad if i wanted to actually get anything done instead of chasing shadows
I work on a almost 20 year old C# monolith, with 1000+ projects per solution. It doesn't even load in VS or VSC. Rider needs 16GB of ram, but manages to open it. I try to never close the IDE, as it takes 30mins to open.
What fan boy nonsense is this? The VSC support for c# is miles behind visual studio. Rider isn’t as good either, but it’s certainly better than VSC.
Are you heavily using typescript with a bit of c# or a really tiny code base?
This comment is incomprehensible to me. Do you never refactor code? There are a lot of sophisticated things you can’t do with VSC.
It’s a great editor; but not for c#.
The benefit of using it is absolutely zero unless you’re heavily leaning into the other parts of the VSC ecosystem (like a big typescript code base).
> it’s come a really long way
So has visual studio; and it started off better, and still is.
Rider is too.
I’m happy to die on this hill; if you’re using VSC for c#, it’s because it’s free, and perhaps good enough for some things; not because it’s better than the alternatives.
Even if you’re stuck on a Mac, I can't believe you honestly find VSC an acceptable editor after using rider.
My point isn't that "people shouldn't use Rider"; I myself had a Rider license and it's a GREAT IDE.
My point is "you shouldn't skip C# because you think you need a license for an IDE to be use it professionally".
Devs who are already using VSC for doing front-end and want to try full stack can absolutely do heavy lifting in VSC.
I let my license lapse not because Rider wasn't a great IDE, but because VSC is fully capable for backend and fullstack work.
> I think you're crazy
I'll take that as a compliment :D. Even back in 2021 when I was invited to present at the Azure Serverless Conf[0], I chose VSC for my session to showcase that anyone could start developing .NET without expensive licenses (a common myth).
If Visual Studio has better support for C# than Rider, why does Resharper exist?
Not trying to start an argument - I've never used Visual Studio with C# (I was a PyCharm user when I started learning Unity so Rider was an obvious choice) but I always assumed that Rider was better - because it was managing to survive as a paid product so it must have had an edge.
> If Visual Studio has better support for C# than Rider, why does Resharper exist?
I'm pretty sure Resharper existed before Rider. Also, the existence and utility of the plugin is a mystery to me. I tried it once and it adds so many attention disturbing behavior especially in the bottom bar that I disabled it immediately. None of its feature was every needed in the company I work, and the Rider crowd there don't seems to produce better code than those using VS.
I've wondered this for a long time. Last time I looked at the feature list, it seemed to consist mostly of stuff that was already in VS. The rest was stuff for which I could not fathom any practical utility.
Some people love it. When I've asked them why, they mention features that are in VS, but they just didn't know it.
i like resharper just because it has some nice suggestions for cleaning up code that visual studio doesn't have. i probably wouldn't pay for it on its own, but it comes with the package i have for rider so i do use it.
"What fan boy nonsense is this?" Good way to start a VS fanboy post.
Personally, I have written APIs in C# from scratch to production entirely in VSC; your assertion that "It’s a great editor; but not for c#" is literally false in my lived experience.
Rider is also good. And since I run Linux, VS took itself out of my consideration entirely.
The C# dev kit plug-in improved VSCode a lot, but it is still under the same licensing as Visual Studio Community. So, you need an account to use it, and it is pretty restricted for commercial use without an MSDN/Visual Studio subscription. If you are using it commercially outside of the terms of the Community license, you are probably using it illegally.
Not using the C# Dev kit, the old OmniSharp stuff is miles behind Rider. It is really poor in comparison.
I've been a previous subscriber, but I let my license lapse after this announcement. I don;t really need to be on the "latest and greatest" train, and I can get my company to buy me a license if a new feature comes in that I need commercially. I have got a perpetual fallback Rider license, but I will also use the non-commercial licenses to do any OS work in my spare time going forward (which is mostly on Mac and why I had a paid licence initially anyway.)
I recently upgraded my laptop and finally VS with Resharper is blazingly fast.
My old laptop was a an 8th gen i7 with SSD and 32GB of RAM.
New one is a 13th gen i7 with an NVMe and 64GB of RAM.
I suspect the biggest difference is the NVMe. It probably also helps that I’m using Windows 11’s Dev Drive where I’ve enabled all the policies mentioned in their docs to minimise the impact of Windows Defender.
And finally, so much RAM means Windows gets to keep a lot of my working files cached.
Certainly any poorly configure av scanners will turn even the best computers into a heaping pile of garbage. A lot of people abandoned windows development not because the platforms were bad, but because corporate av policy was always scan everything and the performance became unbelievably slow. Now, it's so extreme, you can't enev get a windows (or shocked, Linux) requisition in so many dev shops.
That's my exact workflow nowadays. The best text editing experience with GH copilot and lowest battery footprint makes using a VSC a no-brainer. It's especially nice since it also happens to be the choice for Rust, so I experience very little friction, not having to switch an editor and using capable CLI of .NET and Cargo.
For advanced scenarios Rider still rules, and this change is a very welcome one. I hope it will help with promoting .NET as the first choice where teams historically picked Go (which is worse).
With discipline, it is both more expressive by having a better and more powerful type system, and faster by allowing much finer control over code execution, data layout and allocations as well as offering actual GC tuning options. .NET's compiler is much more capable too, and the rate of improvement is not slowing down. It also has much richer package for writing line-of-business applications productively. The main advantage of Go used to be and still is "culture". But once you apply such minimalism mentality to C#, it gives a much better end result.
I think JetBrains is struggling a bit to land their next gen editor Fleet.
It came out swinging with a very early open beta and seemed to market itself as the coming replacement for all their IDEs, because all their IDEs would become plugins of sorts under the Fleet architecture, but have a dramatically easier API to develop against for plugin authors, be snappier, load quickly be less memory intensive etc.
From the looks of it now they changed the wording and messaging around Fleet as a longer term project and they seem to have gone back to mainly doubling down on pushing their bespoke IDEs, which ain’t a bad thing
Almost (or maybe even all) of what WebStorm does, you can do it in Rider or RustRover (which is also free). So it make no sense to not also make WebStorm free.
Sadly I cancelled my Rider subscription this year because AFAICT they've stopped supporting F#, it hasn't worked well for at least two years and has only gotten worse: crawling performance, lots of erroneous red squiggles, no IDE support for later .NET features. Maybe Visual Studio is better than it was a few years ago, but these days I just use emacs, and the MS F# team seems to prefer VSC over VS.
Do you actually use Rider for F#, or are you just repeating old wisdom? Your comment is rude and unhelpful, because I gave my direct experience as to why I stopped using Rider, and you responded with an empty platitude. Yet you did so in the most thoughtless, dismissive way imaginable, as if I was simply lying.
Rider was first-class a few years ago but has gone badly downhill, and it does not support F# on newer versions of .NET - or at least it didn't in June 2024 when I cancelled my subscription.
On a side note, if you code in JS/TS and you are a full-stack or backend dev, use PhpStorm instead. It is essentially Webstorm (+ PHP) + all the database tools. Those tools are one of the big reasons I bought their software with my own money.
What an amazing accomplishment JetBrains has done.
It's a bootstrapped, European company, doing $400M+ annually in revenue selling to developers (who are some of the most difficult buyers to convenience to pay).
That is exactly the point, those using the free tools expect to be paid, while feeling entitled about those free tools capabilities and zero monetary contributions.
I don't think so. If you're saying that in big projects (e.g. Linux) most developers are paid, sure, but those projects are a drop in the ocean of open source projects. I doubt very much that there are more paid than unpaid OSS developers but neither of us are bringing numbers.
The 2024 Tidelift state of the open source maintainer report (https://explore.tidelift.com/2024-survey) disagrees. And that is probably the most comprehensive one that actually favors large projects, because of Tidelift business model.
> The portion of respondents who reported they are unpaid hobbyists remains at 60 percent, the same as in last year's survey.
Only 12% checked "I'm a semi-professional maintainer, and earn most of my income from maintaining projects." 24% checked "some of my income from maintaining projects"
The site keeps shoving a data colleciton popup in my face so I can't read it - what's the sample/methodology for a "maintainer" here? Do they normalize against the usage of their output projects at all?
Are those projects the size of Jetbrains IDEs - e.g. Linux kernel, ffmpeg, VIM, Emacs, etc. ?
Doing charity work does not mean you don't expect to be paid for your regular work. Also, a lot of companies do pay devs to work on open source projects.
Open source isn't charity - just like playing non-professional sports isn't charity: the vast majority of participants see it as a hobby or social activity. A minority get paid, and a minority of the minority "break even", but vast majority are playing in self-organized leagues and pick up games, which are in no shape or form charities (even if the public can watch for free as a side-effect).
I dislike this implication that developers are greedy when the real tension is commercial interests vs mutually beneficial communal interests. Of course everyone expects to get paid, but developers love community projects and protect them fiercely because there's no natural force that can. It's all up to the people themselves.
Sure, some minority of people are just greedy and rude. I think most people aren't. As far as being stingy goes, I believe I have paid more for software so far than most people will in their entire life time by probably multiples and I'm happy to continue to do so, and I will also be on every thread about a CLA rug-pull as well, because BS is BS, no two ways about it.
They are two things but they are not vastly unrelated. In this context the rudeness would mostly come from entitlement which is definitely related to (and still distinct from) being "greedy".
As far as "most people are greedy" goes, that really comes down to how you quantify "greed" and I really think we're better off agreeing to disagree on this point.
> who are some of the most difficult buyers to convenience to pay
And who more often than not get their software imposed on by the orgs they work in, so it's doubly complicated - the developers have to be convinced themselves enough to be willing to convince their IT department/fellow developers to pay for.
Yeah, specifically it will frequently (1) violate employer policy to use it on emoloyer equipment if not approved and, providing licensing is required, licensed by the employer, and (2) violate the license of the software to use it when it is not licensed to the employer.
This is usually because the software you pay for yourself has licensing terms that don’t allow commercial use or reimbursement. See the JetBrains personal license terms itself. Understandably, the company will find it easier and cheaper to forbid use than hire a lawyer to check each license for each software that each employee wants to use.
It's not about having the means, it's about most companies having policies and processes structured around common software used by all employees in a similar position to allow for collaboration, and to ensure compliance with whatever governance and licenses apply. You don't see orgs where some devs can choose GitHub, others GitLab. IDEs are more interchangeable, of course, but each developer having to set up their own config from scratch (correct plugins, build config, testing framework, etc.) would be a colossal waste of time for no reason.
Some bigger orgs allow flexibility (devs can pick Mac or Linux-based laptops, VS Code or JetBrains as the IDE, etc.), but not bring your own with your own license.
This seems to be what JetBrains has been betting on for a long time. Don't need to build a competent text editor if you can give management the right buzzwords.
Since it's a tool for writing code and not prose, it does not have to be a competent text editor if it's a competent "AST editor", which it very much is. Much more so than any alternative, commercial or otherwise.
Are you implying that JetBrains ides are not competent?
Compared to their alternatives like Eclipse, Visual Studio etc I think they're a huge step up. If you're a fan of simpler tools like vim, emacs or vscode etc I can see that they may not be to your taste, but I think their products are great. They're easy to get started with, powerful when you learn to use them, relatively bug free and I'd say they significantly boost my productivity.
I don't really know anything about it. In my mind it's similar to vim or vscode, a text editor where you can add lots of functionality but without the customization it probably doesn't do that much useful stuff for you.
I have access to both an MSDN subscription paid through my employer and Rider that I pay for myself. I use Rider over VS2022. Why? VS2022 is slower and way more flaky with Android development. Rider has Resharper built in. I like that I can use 1 IDE vendor's products for everything I need (Pycharm, IntelliJ, Rider, RustRover and Android Studio.)
I'd love to pay for a lot of software and dev stuff. Convincing my job to do so is such a pain that I don't even try. I do pay for WebStorm and DataGrip myself though.
> who are some of the most difficult buyers to convenience to pay
Citation very much needed?
Unless you're talking about enterprise software specifically, developers are probably among the most willing to shell out cash for software, it's the general public who seems to be fine with ad-ridden spyware freemium nonsense as long as it's free.
No, non developers are more likely to buy software for what they need for their profession (that is why tons of terrible software exists everywhere for such tasks). Ad ridden spyware is mostly for consumption things like games and random websites. On HN every now and then you will see people saying you can do anything with nano and vim/emacs and only recently some of them have started using LSP. Anything that is not totally free and open source gets 100 denials on HN.
There's a long history of the likes of Redis, MongoDB, Grafana, Terraform etc first releasing their product as free and open source to get adoption, hoping to make money by some indirect means, then relicensing to closed source later on because nobody pays for something they can get for free.
And pretty much all major programming languages and libraries are given away for free too. Someone tries to introduce BitKeeper, a commercial version control system, for the Linux kernel? They won't stand for it, some's gotta clone it and give the clone away for free.
Hell, I've heard loads of people here on HN complaining when a SaaS company introduces features exclusively useful to large corporations - like single-sign-on integration - then wants to get paid for them.
There's a handful of exceptions. For example game developers will pay $$$ for "Unity" and store their assets in "Perforce" and suchlike. And I believe it's possible to pay for Visual Studio.
This is where remembering the free-costless and free-libre distinction is important. Linux is free-libre, so it's natural that it insists on its dependencies being free-libre.
Free-libre is necessarily also free-costless, but not the other way round.
> Visual Studio
It's interesting that everywhere I've worked as a Microsoft shop happily pays for MSDN, which gives you not just VS but a huge amount of other stuff.
Perforce handles large binary assets much better than git. There are also paid for closed version control systems that are really bad but get used anyway, such as in IC design.
Developers regularly underestimate the work required to build something and will spend a lot of time building something themselves vs buying someone else's tool for $5 / month.
Every single time someone posts about some commercial tool, in a website dedicated initially to startups, there is always a set of replies with half-baked open source alternatives to use instead.
It's hard because developers don't usually have spending authority or budget. Often, nor does their manager or their manager's manager. To get the company to buy something you have to escalate to an absurdly high place in the org chart and so devs will often try to cobble something together out of free stuff, even if it's far less efficient, because spending developer time doesn't require permission whereas spending credit card balance does.
Unrelatedly, there's also to some extent an expectation that everything is free, even for commercial users. The most common pricing question I get about my product is "can't you make it free for commercial projects that don't have revenue yet", i.e. effectively asking me to become investors in their own venture. Because often they want to make a product company, but not spend any money to do so.
Source: I run a small software company that sells to developers.
Now they are european. They started as fully Russian company. But they are a truly rare example of a company that actually left russian market. Unlike Apple or LG.
Yeah, it sucks that Putin decided to invade a sovereign nation that was home to a bunch of JetBrains employees.
His war has turned the world upside down in a lot of ways, and I really do feel for the Russians and Ukrainians who he's dragged down with him. I have coworkers who regularly have to take shelter from his bombing campaigns.
Many tech companies that had large dev teams in Russia have mostly relocated them. Acronis is another example of a company that was originally entirely Russian that is out of the market completely, and from what I heard, well over 90% of the devs relocated.
It will be very interesting to see the effects of that brain drain long term.
Before 2022, their de-facto headquarters and most of their employees were still located in St. Petersburg, even though the main company was registered in Prague.
> Now they are european. They started as fully Russian company.
The heavily populated parts of Russia, including the part where JetBrains was operating, are in Europe. (Russia’s not part of the EU, obviously, but “European” and “EU” don’t mean the same thing.)
This company has always impressed me from the get-go. I started my journey with IntelliJ, and it was the best IDE I ever put my hands on. And ever since then, I kept using their other IDEs as well.
Somehow VS Code tried to swing me away from it, but it just never ever came close to whatever JetBrains could offer. And it's only going to keep getting better. It's great that it's now free for non-commercial usage. And when I really work on projects that make money, I don't mind paying $100 a year anyway.
I suspect that JetBrains is trying to respond to the fact that Microsoft gives VSCode away for free and that's likely what is spurring the massive adoption of VSCode.
A colleague of mine at work, who is almost retirement age now and has 10+ years on me in the industry told me that the ONLY reason he uses VSCode is because it's free.
I'm with you, there are IntelliJ features (particularly the refactoring features that I use all the time and couldn't live without) that I just take for granted. And when I watch other devs do things the hard way in VSCode I wonder why it's is so popular. I think most devs just either don't know what they are missing, or it just comes down to cost.
I also often chuckle when people say "Oh there's a VSCode plugin that can do that." I'm not certain, but I don't think I've ever installed a single plugin in IntelliJ because it just does everything I need out of the box.
>> I suspect that JetBrains is trying to respond to the fact that Microsoft gives VSCode away for free and that's likely what is spurring the massive adoption of VSCode.
This is exactly the reason. When people use both VSCode and Jetbrains IDEs, a huge portion of them will end up becoming a Jetbrains user, and on someday, some of them can become paying customers
VSCode infrastructure is pretty broad and the community is pretty large. I only use it to make light code edits here and there but I would never put my whole project in it.
>>I've ever installed a single plugin in IntelliJ because it just does everything I need out of the box.
Same here, the only plugins I installed were themes :)
I prefer VSCode not mainly directly because it is free, but because a side effect of it being free is that it has support in its exosystem (often, but not always, also free) for everything I want to do, usually well before commercial IDEs. There are some things some commercial IDEs do better for some of the things I do... but none of them have the breadth of functionality in the VSCode ecosystem, and there is value to not switching IDEs for different tasks. And there are plenty of things where the best tool I’ve found is in the VSCode ecosystem, not a commercial IDE.
I respect your opinion and what you said makes sense.
That said, I find myself only ever using VSCode for "light" edits since it is somewhat faster to open and close from the terminal.
Thankfully, most developers aren't like the vocal minority on certain sites (cough) that allege they could write something in a weekend and thus they shouldn't pay for it.
Sadly developers don't have buying power. Microsoft is good example of company which understands it and lobbies its presence through channels that do make those cross company decisions.
I just pay for a license myself for both work and personal use [0].
I personally have enough buying power to afford it, and it's more than paid for itself over the years by giving me a leg up over coworkers who try to make do with free tools. People I work with think I have some superhuman ability to navigate, understand, and modify huge codebases and don't believe me when I tell them that it's just because I learned how to use JetBrains IDEs fluently.
Does your workplace explicitly allow you to use personal software on work equipment, or do you just not mention it and hope nobody notices? Just curious, as not all places would allow this.
This is not common, at least from my experience (in western companies). Even if devs have root (not a given), the policy is generally that employees cannot use paid software that the company hasn’t licensed
This isn’t a rebuttal, just my complementary $0.02 on top.
It’s more complicated than “developers are cheap”. They understand software complexity, and when paying is justified. They know what a clear online grift looks like. They have and make free software. I’m happy to pay the JetBrains subscription because it’s actually good enough to warrant the price. You can’t trick a carpenter into buying a poorly build and/or overpriced cabinet by putting a fancy handle on it.
they aren't a russian company. they were founded in the czech republic... they may have been a country that was aligned ideologically with the ussr during the cold war but that's not the same as being russian.
A country that was aligned ideologically with USSR is an understatement. They were under occupation as a satellite state. Those people did not sign up for communism in 1945 willingly.
If they want to grab market share they should include dotMemory to the free offer. Basically dotUltimate without ReSharper. Otherwise free Rider users will need to install free Visual Studio for enhanced profiling.
This is great! I found myself preferring the rider student license I had at home to Visual Studio we had at work when I was actively writing a lot of c# and some f# recently. It didn't feel fast outright, but at least faster than VS, and the memory profiler was much more immediately grokkable to me.
I'm a huge fan of the JetBrains IDEs - the way it understands code relieves so much mental overhead when tracing through my code, finding usages, refactoring, etc. It's one of the rare pieces of software I actually enjoy using. I just can't justify the cost for personal use for the amount I use it, and the fact that I've never really monetized a side project.
Super happy they're making this move. I think there's good logic to getting people hooked with free personal use so they can convince their company to buy licenses for everyone at work.
Hm... I'm not sure whether this is a good or bad sign.
I've been a Jetbrains user & proponent for many years, with most of my usage in WebStorm. But over the last ~2-3 years I've faced more and more bugs, some sitting open for weeks and months. Just for a short selection:
- The autocomplete popup sometimes froze the IDE completely (and killing the process caused minutes of data loss), open for close to a year[0]
- Since two months ago, the Typescript language server fails to start in Vue projects (due to a broken update by the Vue team). A fixed version of WebStorm was released yesterday, in the meantime you were apparently expected to search for the error message, stumble upon the YouTrack page, and apply a workaround[1]
- Performance is abysmal in a larger React MUI project, think 10-15 seconds for feedback on code changes, sometimes errors just stick around for a good minute or more[2]
- In some situations WebStorm makes autocomplete suggestions that aren't allowed - think effectively a type T with keys K | L, where Omit<T, K> leads to only suggesting K properties, while removing the Omit makes it suggest both K and L properties
- After updating from 2024.1.X to 2024.2.Y, the window had no buttons for minimizing/maximizing anymore. Now, this was partially caused by my environment, but after I found a workaround it was closed as "Third Party Problem". Still feels like a regression to me, since my environment did not change.
These are some of the more memorable ones from this year, but it feels like there's a new one every week. I'm pretty close to dropping my subscription, and this news doesn't fill me with confidence that the necessary investments in Q&A will be made.
That could be the long-term approach, but in the short-term it will only lead to fewer paying customers. It doesn't help me if the issues start getting resolved in 2-3 years - the editor is barely usable right now, and I won't wait another year.
And should they actually lose me, I won't be coming back unless they make amazing improvements that are years ahead of any other editors to win.
I'd been subscribed for the best part of a decade to their all products pack, liked the products, but they kept doing stuff that really rubbed me the wrong way in a paid product, e.g: shoving the AI offering down my throat and initially having no way to remove it, and then when I paid most recently, they sent me some spammy marketing for some third party product as a "thank you", and I cancelled my subscription there and then.
I don't mind paying for a good product, but I want the experience to be less irksome than the free offerings out there, I get enough annoying advertising from free stuff I use, if I'm paying good money, I don't want that.
I was a paying customer for a long time, and their spam campaigns were the reason for my cancellation last year. Now I am a happy Microsoft Visual Studio Pro subscriber again. (happy in quotes btw)
It's a shame, I like the tools generally, but so much stuff is just about bombarding you with ads now, paying for a good tool is, to me, meant to be the way to avoid that, that really soured me on it all.
At launch it'd pop open the UI every time you opened any of the tools, and you couldn't uninstall the plugin. I understand you can now disable it, but it was annoying at the time, and demonstrated the issue I had with feeling like I was being advertised to in invasive ways despite being a paying customer.
As a looooooooong term intellij user, it surprised me that Rider is the more performant IDE (IDEA was the primary product - i expected it to have the best experience). I've used Rider a fair bit over the past 18 months or so (all products licence) and it's still very noticeable every time i spend time in Rider.
No, they're feeling pressure from VSCode (which is primitive in comparison, but good enough for most people). Thus the new theme (which none of the old users asked for) — total clone of VSCode UI, and this announcement. It's the opposite of what you're thinking.
Not sure which version of VSCode you think the new UI is a clone of, but I don't really see it. The tool buttons? VS has always had those, thought they had text by default. Tabs? VS has those too. Bottom bar? VS also. In fact, Rider looks like all the other Jetbrains IDEs - except Fleet, which is actually their VS Code competitor.
Many developers have gratis JetBrains license on account of being involved in FOSS. I'm in that category - have to apply each year for a license by referring to (one of) my FOSS library(ies).
It's just too bad that their UI is going in the direction of VSCode and others, become more... I guess I could say smartphone-like.
No thanks. I do use VS Code when I just want an editor (i.e. I don't want my CMake & vcpkg files parsed). Otherwise I prefer CLion for CMake projects and use the real Visual Studio for C++ vsproj files.
There are a few privately owned companies that amaze me: JetBrains, Valve among the top. Somehow they have a much better value/user and make reasonable decisions: counter intuitive to investors/shareholders but insanely intuitive to their users.
I am sure the public market has made the general public reap the rewards of large companies (kudos!) but some of the privately owned companies are absolutely kicking ass to serve their customers instead.
Rider is a really great product - probably the next generation of coders will be split between VS Code and Rider with this change.
I go pretty heavy on Jetbrains products, but they have stirred up the dev community a few times chasing things seen as investor friendly. In particular when they shoved their AI plugin as a required plugin with carried an obnoxious upsell nag. In general they've also spread themselves out across a ridiculous number of products where I'd prefer if they just focused on making their current stuff work (and not discontinue useful things like AppCode). CLion was practically unusable with the Mac toolchain for refactoring for a long time until they released the Nova backend. Fleet has been in public preview forever as a direct contender to VSCode and they spent a lot of work on it, incomplete, and then just let it sit there with minor stuff like getting themes after three years.
They also pulled the plug on free support for their Rust plugin which really upset me. Jetbrains is intent on making you pay before you get IDE functionality; I'd rather use VS Code or Zed these days.
I liked the look of Zed when I first tried it out, but I read that it seems to have a strong cloud/AI focus which I don't want or need. I have started investing a bit of time in getting Vim working with all the bells and whistles and now it's a decent fallback when I can't use a JetBrains IDE for whatever reason.
I'll just be honest, I don't like Zed at all. I much preferred Atom when it was a thing, and I mostly use Zed begrudgingly because the other graphical editors tend to get sluggish.
My preferred IDE was what Jetbrains had before with IDEA - you could plug in basic support for the languages you want and edit as you go. I don't want to set up a superheavy environment with all the bells and whistles, I want Intellisense and tree-sitter in a relatively zippy interface. That was what Jetbrains offered before, and it's what I can't have anymore.
It's probably the most ridiculous nitpick in the history of ever, but I really hate the "sign in" button at the top right of Zed, particularly there's no way to hide it even through some configuration file. It's distracting to me and I want zero cloud connectivity associated with my text editor.
The Material redesign makes a lot more sense now. I still think it's a terrible decision and a huge waste of resources though.
Making Rider free to try is the correct strategy for them. Obviously they want to compete directly with VSCode, but they're burning a lot of good will in their existing customer base in the process.
I'm not too surprised. I hope they stay privately owned! It's a lot easier to focus on "make good product" when you don't have investors/accountants/management/etc badgering you about "stock price needs to go up, make something shiny and get it out this month".
I left my last company (pretty large, ~1500 employees at the time IIRC) for a variety of reasons, but that was the primary driver. I'd joined on when they were privately owned by the guy who founded it. Then they got some private equity investment group to buy out part of the company. Then they did an IPO. Everyone was SUPER excited about the IPO. I didn't pay too much attention, I was focused on the product my team was building. ESOP was nice. But within a year we were being pushed hard to cut corners and get a half-baked version of the product out to market instead of building it to do the job well like we'd planned from day 1. Ironically, if we hadn't been constantly badgered and having our priorities flipped back and forth, I bet we would have had a useful, functional version of the initial plan out the door by the time I left, with the proper foundation to keep building and expanding it to solve the problems our customers were experiencing with the old system. But now the old system's problems are deeply embedded in the new system, because it was quicker to shove out the door that way.
On the contrary, the place I'm at now is a much smaller company, and the founder/CEO has stated in no uncertain terms that we'll never be sold out to investors because it would mean that we'd be beholden to interests contrary to building the product our customers want and running the company in a long-term sustainable manner.
I agree that private companies can be good and I use Steam a lot, but Valve sucks in other ways. Their community is awful and developers can have posts openly calling for their death or calling them racial slurs and Valve support will tell them they won't remove the posts. I don't mean they deny the support request, I mean a person will respond and say "Yeah manage your community better." This is despite the fact they give no tools for community management.
But being a public company wouldn't make it any better.
I don't see the problem with that personally, since there's basically no restriction on how you distribute your games on the platform. It's not like iOS where you have 1 option.
People publishing games just have to do the math and see if the benefits justify the costs.
my point is that valve/steam takes 30% "because they can". they could charge 5% and im sure still make tons of money. it's still a cut throat business, and while yeah they could be doing shittier things to make more money, i think they also do risk assessments on disturbing the golden goose
They do offer many features for game developers, though. Multiplayer, Remote Play and the Workshop just for example. Those cost money to run and offer an amazing benefit basically "for free" (included in the cut) to game devs.
To each their own but I'm happy for them to pull a premium.
As a customer: They're making gaming on Linux awesome, and my SteamDeck has killed off my console usage (YMMV), I love it so much. I'm way happier to buy games on Steam where it funds cool initiatives like that than on Epic where a big chunk of the value is accrued by TenCent and Disney.
As a game dev Steam also brings a lot of value: A big customer base, to the point where a game with mid-tier popularity can still do brisk business (not nearly as true on Epic). Their backend is unintuitive but has loads more features than EOS. They also offer really cool tech like SDR (Steam Datagram Relay), etc. If you're selling a PC game, there's no better place to be and you get value for the premium.
Same. Discontinuing AppCode was genuinely disappointing to me. Not sure if you can still download it, but it definitely hasn't seen a new major release since the 2023 version.
Apparently, not enough people thought like you. [0]
> While we’ve had some growth in terms of adoption, we didn’t reach the market share we had hoped for. We believe that the time has come to sunset the product and focus our efforts in other directions.
Same, this has been a big struggle personally, as an engineer I try to be flexible with the tools I need to use, but I also want my tools to bring me joy, and Xcode brings me nothing but frustration
I'm thankful that I don't have to deal with Obj-C nor Swift in order to know if it would help your specific complaint but have you tried their Swift plugin for CLion? https://plugins.jetbrains.com/plugin/8240-swift
I do see the /!\ sunset /!\ warning but until they actually do nuke it, it could still be helpful
Beautiful. Rider is an awesome a much faster IDE and I use it whenever possible. It is not practical for all projects.
The only behaviour that annoys me a bit:
- Double clicking an identifier should select the full identifier. However, in Rider (as opposed to Visual Studio) it is connected to the CamelHump setting - which is useful by itself. In Visual Studio you can have both CamelHump enabled and “double clicking the identifier selects the whole identifier”.
- Any startup project tasks like maybe a “webpack watch task” is “in the way” when stopping run/debug of your current application. A separate task runner like in Visual Studio would be beneficial.
- If a solution has file templates defined, every user needs to activate/select them manually in the settings. Quite cumbersome.
Is Rider nerfed as much as the free version of IDEA is? And if not, then why isn't there a free noncommercial version of IDEA? This seems like a smack to the face for Java developers that want to use the full version of IDEA for noncommercial purposes.
However, be careful with the terms of non-commercial usage (Enforced heavy metrics)
"You agree that the product will send usage data to validate your compliance with the license terms and anonymous feature usage statistics..."
"The information collected under Sections 4.1. and 4.2. may include but is not limited to frameworks, file templates used in the Product, actions invoked, and other interactions with the Product’s features."
I wonder if construction workers also expect someone to give them free hammers and nails if they want to work on hobby projects. I doubt that. So maybe then software engineers shouldn't be so stuck up about not paying for their tools either?
That's fine, and yeah, perhaps my analogy isn't the greatest. But if you're ok with the free tools, why complain about the paid ones not being free as well? That's ridiculous to me at least. The paid ones offer value to clearly enough people to still be in business, and if you don't find that value useful to you, then don't .. use it?
The design of the yellow/black cells holding language/tech tripped me out for a sec, on my laptop they're all crooked at the top but align themselves after a certain amount of scroll. Thought I was seeing an optical illusion but a refresh shows that it's not. I don't think this was intentional.
I see specific classes on the page that specify a one degree angle, so it seems to be intentional. I would guess it's to call your attention to the cells.
The one degree angle, while a little unusual, isn't what blows my mind. It's the disappearance after a small scroll. That's enough to make you think you were imagining things, might need to go to the eye doctor, etc...
JetBrains licenses are one of the few software licenses that I pay for. Their IDEs have the features I need while keeping the UI from getting in the way.
I really, really wanted to like and use their IDEs (esp their Ruby 'intellisense' or w/e), but the lack of popular theme support kind of killed it for me. I wanted my IDE to look like my VSCode editor, but, at least a few years ago, that wasn't really possible since iirc there were only a handful of theme options.
Arguably the 2nd biggest: the biggest was when they made that shit mandatory, in that I can no longer go into Settings and uncheck "New UI". The breadcrumb placement[1] alone almost made me rage revert to 2023.something since it was so instrumental to my workflow. Maybe by next Oct I'll have retrained my brain to look in the new location, but goddamn was it that important to them?
1: yes, I am aware of the Setting that says "breadcrumb placement = top" and I am also aware it does absolutely nothing. I'm currently too burned out on their process to open a YouTrack about it
You can theme it yourself without too much hassle. I like my dark mode to be black rather than grey, and just made it do that, and it just works. It took an hour or three to understand the process because I'm not a Java person and am not familiar with any of the tooling, but then it was super easy.
This was a few ago, so they may have improved that part by now, I've just carried my theme over the updates.
434 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 274 ms ] threadOne thing to note that I just learned: You cannot opt out of anonymous data collection if you use the free non-commercial license. (I'd probably still trust Jetbrains over Microsoft, but that's me)
https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2024/10/24/webstorm-and-ride...
I'd definitely recommend trying it out now that it's free. Your taste may vary.
* you have mixed C#/F# projects in a solution (C# and F# support in VSCode can't communicate today)
* you use Rider for other technology
* you want paid support for your editor tools
* you prefer IDE-style experiences rather than editor/ extension-style experiences
* you want to take advantage of Rider features like their accelerated build caching
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/visualstudio/releases/2022...
I'd also like to note the great integration Rider has with Godot and Unity for game development.
Microsoft had continued to evolve it. And a few components from Visual Studio Windows were ported over to be common. But Visual Studio Mac was 100% rebranded Xamarin Studio which of course was just an evolution of MonoDevelop.
I use VS Code daily for .NET development. It's probably 70% of what VS on Windows is, but it works well and I don't need to run a VM for it (if I need some of the in-depth tracing and profiling stuff, I can still fire up the gold standard). VS on Mac was maybe 30%
> It's probably 70% of what VS on Windows is
no. From my perspective, it doesn’t even have 50% of VS features, and that’s probably a generous estimation. VS has lots and lots of features. Granted, many of them are irrelevant for most users most of the time.
Even Rider is lacking in comparison. It is very limited regarding debugging targets for example.
Visual Studio has come a long way (I've been using it since the .net 1.1 days). Out of the box, it gives you most of what you got from Resharper 2 years ago.
All that said, I switched to Rider a year or so ago and haven't looked back. I used to use VS for C# and VSCode for html/typescript/css, but Rider happily handles both. It's really nice to have one IDE for everything. And unsurprisingly, it seems to perform better than Resharper + VS.
Wasn’t the whole premise of JetBrains making different IDEs for different stacks that you don’t need to learn how to do the basic stuff and can transfer your knowledge from <insert dominant IDE for said stack at the moment>?
Sure but VS Code for C# is trash as well. All those years, both Microsoft products, and this the experience is subpar, especially in comparison to the real Visual Studio.
With 200K+ employees, at this point it is better to think of Microsoft as a city and different teams in it as independent companies in that city with employees that sometimes go out for coffee together :-P
As a former v dash, it was always amusing to see the proclamations come down from the mountain that basically said something like if you are using version x.y.z or below of so and so dependency you must correct it within n days. The people enforcing this seemingly didn't care what the application did or where you were in your software lifecycle, all they cared about was this dependency is raising a flag and we must fix it. :crylaugh:
https://i.extremetech.com/imagery/content-types/01b4upAMl7t9...
Yeah not even in the same room of competence imo. Just a cranked up notepad++ in electron and with add-ons imo.
C++/CX was deprecated and replaced by C++/WinRT in 2016.
To this day, to develop WinUI C++ applications, there is no built-in tooling in VS, you need to manually generate and merge C++ code out of IDL files, which have zero support on Visual Studio for syntax highlighting and code completion, unless you reach out to some third party plugins.
To top that, given the way things turned out, C++/WinRT is now in maintenance, no goals to ever move it past C++17, or improve Visual Studio developer experience.
I doubt that they feel embarassed by this outcome.
Multiple inheritance in C++ is a can of worms, unless you're prepared to deal with the related issues of virtual base classes, and diamond inheritance.
That is why after C++ all the languages that support multiple inheritance do so only at the interface level and not implementation code, or rather go with a mix-ins approach.
And in regards to Microsoft world, well the same developers that weren't happy with VCL and Pascal, and in for a treat given that the only modern way to do native Windows UIs in Microsoft world is via .NET consuming DLLs/COM/WinRT, unless they want to either stick with MFC, or the outdated tooling in C++/WinRT.
With regards to multiple inheritance, this was the C++ Builder criticism, not mine. That and the extra macros needed to support the VCL. I was a Delphi guy, so I appreciated that the Object Pascal version of using the VCL was cleaner to use than the C++ interface.
We no longer use C++ for UI. Any native code is wrapped up in to P/Invokes. I think all of our MFC apps are EOL now. Everything is WPF or Maui for cross platform.
I say this as a big user of JetBrains - I have had SOME issues with their intellisense dropping some references in Rider when there are a lot of references, so I would occasionally switch to VS when there were a lot of references to search through, but other than extreme cases Rider is just so much more pleasant to use.
Honestly I don't know why there are so many almost identical IDEs.
I feel that Rider is somehow better than CLion at c++, even after CLion Nova (Intellisense based on Resharper backend) became a thing.
One difference is that I write boost::asio in CLion, and just vanilla C++ in Rider, and before Nova it was completely unusable with async code, now it's usable with async code, but after a few days of running the editor I end up with fatal IDE errors for CLion, and never for Rider.
Probably a reflection of internal organization to avoid product teams stepping on each others' toes.
And they present them as "just" a dedicated UI around the plugins.
But no, they are not actually the same. Essentially ever. The dedicated IDEs often have features that never make it into their plugins, and a lot of the UX and project structure/preferences/etc are quite specialized and don't always have equivalents outside it. You get like 90-95% with the plug-in, but not 100%, and sometimes that's a critical difference.
The plugins do have the distinct benefit of allowing you to use multiple in a single project, though.
I think the differences are more akin to the old Visual C# Express and Visual Basic Express IDEs vs Visual Studio. Visual Studio was always "everything", but you used to get the express versions that were "low cost" or free. They only had the single language in them. They were customised to just that language. This is what Rider is to IntelliJ Professional, except from what I understand, the plug-ins for IntelliJ are not always on a 1:1 feature parity. This can even be seen with Android Studio and IntelliJ Community. The Android tooling in IntelliJ Community is almost the same, but it does miss out some stuff in Android Studio. Because Android Studio is specifically for Android development, and IntelliJ Community is more general purpose Kotlin and Java development. I think the Kotlin Native support is slightly better in IntelliJ Community.
Now you can just use it for free for any hobby/oss projects without all the red tape.
Free for non-commercial offers a easy way to get people to use it and hopefully advocate for it at their jobs.
Curious where the line is if you're using it during a YouTube video that you have a Patreon for etc.
I think most games built never make money.
If you are writing code that you are going to be paid for, you are supposed to pay.
Of course, they know a lot of small devs will use it that should not. But few of them would have paid anyway and this creates a much greater pool of buyers when those devs get jobs or achieve commercial success.
I am a Rider fan so this is exciting.
It's worth noting that even before this change, you can get the entire JB suite for free if you regularly contribute to a qualifying OSS project https://www.jetbrains.com/community/opensource/.
I wish Godot's syntax for .NET wasn't horrible though. Its so nasty looking that it just makes me want to use their native language instead.
Compile the engine from source and add your classes as a module. Cuts out all the gdextension glue code and then you don't need to ship a shared library.
Note: We have a fork of godot that has some changes and fixes weve made and engine upgrades are still a breeze. Solving the odd merge conflict is not that hard, people do it all the time. Godot's code base isnt drastically changing from day to day. 3->4 only had significant impact if you were doing certain things with the 'visual server'... other than that even that was easy.
I now have at least 50 GDScript files and not a single C# file, the language is good (with types).
My only issue is that I can't get Copilot in their integrated IDE and that Rider's GDScript plugin doesn't support anonymous functions right now
This is Unreal's license for those that don't know it:
* Game developers (royalties apply after $1 million USD gross product revenue) = Free
* Individuals and small businesses (with less than $1 million USD in annual gross revenue) = Free
Another thing they can do is what they do with YouTrack. 1~2 devs, free, after that X per major version or Y per year.
As a .NET dev for many years, I've noticed there have been periods of time where either Visual Studio or Rider was far better than the other. Currently, Rider is much better.
Hopefully this encourages more people to try out C# & F#. Both fantastic languages.
- Edit - Looks like Webstorm (JS/TS editor) is also free now.
I've found myself totally satisfied with just VS Code on macOS (it's come a really long way).
I'm glad that this move will possibly make .NET more accessible, but I think VSC is in a really good place with C# at the moment and shouldn't be overlooked.
It's a very good choice though for a lot of projects. It's also a great way to try out C#. It has some amazing extensions for certain tasks too.
We have a mono-repo with 100k lines of C# in 8 projects, 40k lines of Vue SFCs in 2 workspaces, 39k lines of TypeScript, 23k lines of Astro. No issues at all running it on a 2021 14" MacBook Pro with only 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD while also running multiple Docker containers for Postgres, Neo4j, Memcached, and LocalStack.
My take is that folks should not underestimate VSC; there are certainly things that Rider does better, but VSC is totally viable for modern .NET backend work.
I've commonly seen enterprise .NET projects that are in the millions of LOC. And one that was over 10 million.
All in, the mono-repo is somewhere over 250k SLOC with mixed languages (Vue SFC, TS, Astro, JSX, shell). So when VSC is loaded, it's not only handling C#, but also everything else.
Point is that VSC is more than capable of handling production scale, multi-language workspaces even on 2021 hardware with only 16GB of RAM.
Don't get me wrong, I still use VS code for all front-end development and other ecosystems (such as Rust). But when it specifically comes to C#/.NET there is no substitute to Rider in my opinion.
VS Code starts out as a lightweight code editor & via extensions you can turn it into more of an IDE but it'll take a lot of customization & messing around.
Rider is an IDE with all the bells & whistles already included. It also has extensions but they've built it with the most popular things already.
Refactoring, debugging, code navigation, formatting & hinting/suggestions are far superior in Rider. They have a lot more advanced features. Check out some YouTube videos by JetBrains to see examples.
Don't get me wrong - VS Code is still a great tool & I use it daily. I do wish they would have named it something other than "Code" or "Visual Studio Code" but hey, it's Microsoft. They're famous for terrible bad name choices. Maybe they'll make a copilot to fix that.
I have used it for angular and react and have had 0 complaints, it works great and the best is that I do not need to switch IDEs anymore
I haven’t tried cursor because I don’t want to “downgrade” to VS Code anymore.
Are you heavily using typescript with a bit of c# or a really tiny code base?
This comment is incomprehensible to me. Do you never refactor code? There are a lot of sophisticated things you can’t do with VSC.
It’s a great editor; but not for c#.
The benefit of using it is absolutely zero unless you’re heavily leaning into the other parts of the VSC ecosystem (like a big typescript code base).
> it’s come a really long way
So has visual studio; and it started off better, and still is.
Rider is too.
I’m happy to die on this hill; if you’re using VSC for c#, it’s because it’s free, and perhaps good enough for some things; not because it’s better than the alternatives.
Even if you’re stuck on a Mac, I can't believe you honestly find VSC an acceptable editor after using rider.
All I can say is I certainly do not agree.
I use it every day on a 2021 M1 MacBook Pro 16GB/512GB.
Works completely fine to the extent that I just let my Rider license lapse.
TLDR; it’s not just me.
I’m glad you like it and have found a workflow that works for you. I think you’re crazy.
My point is "you shouldn't skip C# because you think you need a license for an IDE to be use it professionally".
Devs who are already using VSC for doing front-end and want to try full stack can absolutely do heavy lifting in VSC.
I let my license lapse not because Rider wasn't a great IDE, but because VSC is fully capable for backend and fullstack work.
I'll take that as a compliment :D. Even back in 2021 when I was invited to present at the Azure Serverless Conf[0], I chose VSC for my session to showcase that anyone could start developing .NET without expensive licenses (a common myth).[0] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/shows/azure-serverless-con...
Not trying to start an argument - I've never used Visual Studio with C# (I was a PyCharm user when I started learning Unity so Rider was an obvious choice) but I always assumed that Rider was better - because it was managing to survive as a paid product so it must have had an edge.
I'm pretty sure Resharper existed before Rider. Also, the existence and utility of the plugin is a mystery to me. I tried it once and it adds so many attention disturbing behavior especially in the bottom bar that I disabled it immediately. None of its feature was every needed in the company I work, and the Rider crowd there don't seems to produce better code than those using VS.
I'm not sure that's a valid way to evaluate the utility of an IDE!
I've wondered this for a long time. Last time I looked at the feature list, it seemed to consist mostly of stuff that was already in VS. The rest was stuff for which I could not fathom any practical utility.
Some people love it. When I've asked them why, they mention features that are in VS, but they just didn't know it.
So if you figure it out, let me know.
Back in the days there werent free extensions like Roslynator
Personally, I have written APIs in C# from scratch to production entirely in VSC; your assertion that "It’s a great editor; but not for c#" is literally false in my lived experience.
Rider is also good. And since I run Linux, VS took itself out of my consideration entirely.
otherwise, they are bad engineers, period
keep your strong opinions to yourself and don't be judgemental
you can, however, criticize their workdone instead of their tools
Not using the C# Dev kit, the old OmniSharp stuff is miles behind Rider. It is really poor in comparison.
I've been a previous subscriber, but I let my license lapse after this announcement. I don;t really need to be on the "latest and greatest" train, and I can get my company to buy me a license if a new feature comes in that I need commercially. I have got a perpetual fallback Rider license, but I will also use the non-commercial licenses to do any OS work in my spare time going forward (which is mostly on Mac and why I had a paid licence initially anyway.)
Rider is the only comparable DX to VS outside Windows.
My old laptop was a an 8th gen i7 with SSD and 32GB of RAM.
New one is a 13th gen i7 with an NVMe and 64GB of RAM.
I suspect the biggest difference is the NVMe. It probably also helps that I’m using Windows 11’s Dev Drive where I’ve enabled all the policies mentioned in their docs to minimise the impact of Windows Defender.
And finally, so much RAM means Windows gets to keep a lot of my working files cached.
Resharper is a plug-in that is hosted by Visual Studio.
Resharper in Rider is pretty much the same as in VS, but in Rider it is native and always feels snappier to me.
For those developing commercial software on a budget, Visual Studio Code is an excellent option.
Although it lacks some features of JetBrains and Microsoft tools, pairing the .NET CLI with VS Code can still deliver impressive results.
if you can afford $10 monthly, integrating GitHub Copilot with VS Code can elevate it to a fancy, lightweight IDE
For advanced scenarios Rider still rules, and this change is a very welcome one. I hope it will help with promoting .NET as the first choice where teams historically picked Go (which is worse).
Do you develop outside?
Wow. VSCode finally got them, it seems.
It came out swinging with a very early open beta and seemed to market itself as the coming replacement for all their IDEs, because all their IDEs would become plugins of sorts under the Fleet architecture, but have a dramatically easier API to develop against for plugin authors, be snappier, load quickly be less memory intensive etc.
From the looks of it now they changed the wording and messaging around Fleet as a longer term project and they seem to have gone back to mainly doubling down on pushing their bespoke IDEs, which ain’t a bad thing
Rider was first-class a few years ago but has gone badly downhill, and it does not support F# on newer versions of .NET - or at least it didn't in June 2024 when I cancelled my subscription.
On a side note, if you code in JS/TS and you are a full-stack or backend dev, use PhpStorm instead. It is essentially Webstorm (+ PHP) + all the database tools. Those tools are one of the big reasons I bought their software with my own money.
It's a bootstrapped, European company, doing $400M+ annually in revenue selling to developers (who are some of the most difficult buyers to convenience to pay).
https://www.jetbrains.com/lp/annualreport-2023/
All of whom, strangely, expect to be paid for their work.
> The portion of respondents who reported they are unpaid hobbyists remains at 60 percent, the same as in last year's survey.
Only 12% checked "I'm a semi-professional maintainer, and earn most of my income from maintaining projects." 24% checked "some of my income from maintaining projects"
Are those projects the size of Jetbrains IDEs - e.g. Linux kernel, ffmpeg, VIM, Emacs, etc. ?
Sure, some minority of people are just greedy and rude. I think most people aren't. As far as being stingy goes, I believe I have paid more for software so far than most people will in their entire life time by probably multiples and I'm happy to continue to do so, and I will also be on every thread about a CLA rug-pull as well, because BS is BS, no two ways about it.
You're conflating 2 different things together. I don't think most people are rude. I think most people are greedy.
As far as "most people are greedy" goes, that really comes down to how you quantify "greed" and I really think we're better off agreeing to disagree on this point.
And who more often than not get their software imposed on by the orgs they work in, so it's doubly complicated - the developers have to be convinced themselves enough to be willing to convince their IT department/fellow developers to pay for.
Companies (depending on jurisdiction) are not allowed to make employees pay for items necessary for work.
And allowing employees to pay can easily be misinterpreted into subtly pressuring employees to pay.
Some bigger orgs allow flexibility (devs can pick Mac or Linux-based laptops, VS Code or JetBrains as the IDE, etc.), but not bring your own with your own license.
Compared to their alternatives like Eclipse, Visual Studio etc I think they're a huge step up. If you're a fan of simpler tools like vim, emacs or vscode etc I can see that they may not be to your taste, but I think their products are great. They're easy to get started with, powerful when you learn to use them, relatively bug free and I'd say they significantly boost my productivity.
Citation very much needed?
Unless you're talking about enterprise software specifically, developers are probably among the most willing to shell out cash for software, it's the general public who seems to be fine with ad-ridden spyware freemium nonsense as long as it's free.
And pretty much all major programming languages and libraries are given away for free too. Someone tries to introduce BitKeeper, a commercial version control system, for the Linux kernel? They won't stand for it, some's gotta clone it and give the clone away for free.
Hell, I've heard loads of people here on HN complaining when a SaaS company introduces features exclusively useful to large corporations - like single-sign-on integration - then wants to get paid for them.
There's a handful of exceptions. For example game developers will pay $$$ for "Unity" and store their assets in "Perforce" and suchlike. And I believe it's possible to pay for Visual Studio.
Free-libre is necessarily also free-costless, but not the other way round.
> Visual Studio
It's interesting that everywhere I've worked as a Microsoft shop happily pays for MSDN, which gives you not just VS but a huge amount of other stuff.
Perforce handles large binary assets much better than git. There are also paid for closed version control systems that are really bad but get used anyway, such as in IC design.
Source: Myself
Unrelatedly, there's also to some extent an expectation that everything is free, even for commercial users. The most common pricing question I get about my product is "can't you make it free for commercial projects that don't have revenue yet", i.e. effectively asking me to become investors in their own venture. Because often they want to make a product company, but not spend any money to do so.
Source: I run a small software company that sells to developers.
His war has turned the world upside down in a lot of ways, and I really do feel for the Russians and Ukrainians who he's dragged down with him. I have coworkers who regularly have to take shelter from his bombing campaigns.
What has NATO to do with Russian invasion of Ukraine?
It will be very interesting to see the effects of that brain drain long term.
I guess it depends on what you consider a "Russian Company".
As a British national living in the USA, does that mean if I start a company it'll be a "British Company" forevermore?
The heavily populated parts of Russia, including the part where JetBrains was operating, are in Europe. (Russia’s not part of the EU, obviously, but “European” and “EU” don’t mean the same thing.)
Somehow VS Code tried to swing me away from it, but it just never ever came close to whatever JetBrains could offer. And it's only going to keep getting better. It's great that it's now free for non-commercial usage. And when I really work on projects that make money, I don't mind paying $100 a year anyway.
A colleague of mine at work, who is almost retirement age now and has 10+ years on me in the industry told me that the ONLY reason he uses VSCode is because it's free.
I'm with you, there are IntelliJ features (particularly the refactoring features that I use all the time and couldn't live without) that I just take for granted. And when I watch other devs do things the hard way in VSCode I wonder why it's is so popular. I think most devs just either don't know what they are missing, or it just comes down to cost.
I also often chuckle when people say "Oh there's a VSCode plugin that can do that." I'm not certain, but I don't think I've ever installed a single plugin in IntelliJ because it just does everything I need out of the box.
This is exactly the reason. When people use both VSCode and Jetbrains IDEs, a huge portion of them will end up becoming a Jetbrains user, and on someday, some of them can become paying customers
VSCode infrastructure is pretty broad and the community is pretty large. I only use it to make light code edits here and there but I would never put my whole project in it.
>>I've ever installed a single plugin in IntelliJ because it just does everything I need out of the box. Same here, the only plugins I installed were themes :)
I personally have enough buying power to afford it, and it's more than paid for itself over the years by giving me a leg up over coworkers who try to make do with free tools. People I work with think I have some superhuman ability to navigate, understand, and modify huge codebases and don't believe me when I tell them that it's just because I learned how to use JetBrains IDEs fluently.
[0] This is explicitly allowed: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240855-Can-...
It’s more complicated than “developers are cheap”. They understand software complexity, and when paying is justified. They know what a clear online grift looks like. They have and make free software. I’m happy to pay the JetBrains subscription because it’s actually good enough to warrant the price. You can’t trick a carpenter into buying a poorly build and/or overpriced cabinet by putting a fancy handle on it.
I used to think I'd just use free open-source software until I became a developer myself.
Now, I believe people should be compensated for their work, even open-source developers who contribute their time and skills for free.
I think you meant Enterprise software that can cost a lot. a developer can't afford that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetBrains
https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2022/12/06/update-on-jetbrai...
> The Czech Republic is a member of the United Nations, NATO, the European Union, the OECD, the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the Visegrád Group.
https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2024/10/24/webstorm-and-ride...
https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2024/10/24/webstorm-and-ride...
I'm a huge fan of the JetBrains IDEs - the way it understands code relieves so much mental overhead when tracing through my code, finding usages, refactoring, etc. It's one of the rare pieces of software I actually enjoy using. I just can't justify the cost for personal use for the amount I use it, and the fact that I've never really monetized a side project.
Super happy they're making this move. I think there's good logic to getting people hooked with free personal use so they can convince their company to buy licenses for everyone at work.
I've been a Jetbrains user & proponent for many years, with most of my usage in WebStorm. But over the last ~2-3 years I've faced more and more bugs, some sitting open for weeks and months. Just for a short selection:
- The autocomplete popup sometimes froze the IDE completely (and killing the process caused minutes of data loss), open for close to a year[0]
- Since two months ago, the Typescript language server fails to start in Vue projects (due to a broken update by the Vue team). A fixed version of WebStorm was released yesterday, in the meantime you were apparently expected to search for the error message, stumble upon the YouTrack page, and apply a workaround[1]
- Performance is abysmal in a larger React MUI project, think 10-15 seconds for feedback on code changes, sometimes errors just stick around for a good minute or more[2]
- In some situations WebStorm makes autocomplete suggestions that aren't allowed - think effectively a type T with keys K | L, where Omit<T, K> leads to only suggesting K properties, while removing the Omit makes it suggest both K and L properties
- After updating from 2024.1.X to 2024.2.Y, the window had no buttons for minimizing/maximizing anymore. Now, this was partially caused by my environment, but after I found a workaround it was closed as "Third Party Problem". Still feels like a regression to me, since my environment did not change.
These are some of the more memorable ones from this year, but it feels like there's a new one every week. I'm pretty close to dropping my subscription, and this news doesn't fill me with confidence that the necessary investments in Q&A will be made.
[0]: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/JBR-6171/Random-freezes...
[1]: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/WEB-68756/Vue-LS-2.x-Co...
[2]: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/WEB-59766/Very-slow-cod...
And should they actually lose me, I won't be coming back unless they make amazing improvements that are years ahead of any other editors to win.
I don't mind paying for a good product, but I want the experience to be less irksome than the free offerings out there, I get enough annoying advertising from free stuff I use, if I'm paying good money, I don't want that.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41935128
It's just too bad that their UI is going in the direction of VSCode and others, become more... I guess I could say smartphone-like.
I am sure the public market has made the general public reap the rewards of large companies (kudos!) but some of the privately owned companies are absolutely kicking ass to serve their customers instead.
Rider is a really great product - probably the next generation of coders will be split between VS Code and Rider with this change.
I liked the look of Zed when I first tried it out, but I read that it seems to have a strong cloud/AI focus which I don't want or need. I have started investing a bit of time in getting Vim working with all the bells and whistles and now it's a decent fallback when I can't use a JetBrains IDE for whatever reason.
My preferred IDE was what Jetbrains had before with IDEA - you could plug in basic support for the languages you want and edit as you go. I don't want to set up a superheavy environment with all the bells and whistles, I want Intellisense and tree-sitter in a relatively zippy interface. That was what Jetbrains offered before, and it's what I can't have anymore.
Making Rider free to try is the correct strategy for them. Obviously they want to compete directly with VSCode, but they're burning a lot of good will in their existing customer base in the process.
I left my last company (pretty large, ~1500 employees at the time IIRC) for a variety of reasons, but that was the primary driver. I'd joined on when they were privately owned by the guy who founded it. Then they got some private equity investment group to buy out part of the company. Then they did an IPO. Everyone was SUPER excited about the IPO. I didn't pay too much attention, I was focused on the product my team was building. ESOP was nice. But within a year we were being pushed hard to cut corners and get a half-baked version of the product out to market instead of building it to do the job well like we'd planned from day 1. Ironically, if we hadn't been constantly badgered and having our priorities flipped back and forth, I bet we would have had a useful, functional version of the initial plan out the door by the time I left, with the proper foundation to keep building and expanding it to solve the problems our customers were experiencing with the old system. But now the old system's problems are deeply embedded in the new system, because it was quicker to shove out the door that way.
On the contrary, the place I'm at now is a much smaller company, and the founder/CEO has stated in no uncertain terms that we'll never be sold out to investors because it would mean that we'd be beholden to interests contrary to building the product our customers want and running the company in a long-term sustainable manner.
Ha! Heard that one before. Company was sold. Founder got filthy rich, bean counters came in, you know the rest.
But being a public company wouldn't make it any better.
People publishing games just have to do the math and see if the benefits justify the costs.
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features
As a customer: They're making gaming on Linux awesome, and my SteamDeck has killed off my console usage (YMMV), I love it so much. I'm way happier to buy games on Steam where it funds cool initiatives like that than on Epic where a big chunk of the value is accrued by TenCent and Disney.
As a game dev Steam also brings a lot of value: A big customer base, to the point where a game with mid-tier popularity can still do brisk business (not nearly as true on Epic). Their backend is unintuitive but has loads more features than EOS. They also offer really cool tech like SDR (Steam Datagram Relay), etc. If you're selling a PC game, there's no better place to be and you get value for the premium.
> While we’ve had some growth in terms of adoption, we didn’t reach the market share we had hoped for. We believe that the time has come to sunset the product and focus our efforts in other directions.
[0] https://blog.jetbrains.com/appcode/2022/12/appcode-2022-3-re...
I do see the /!\ sunset /!\ warning but until they actually do nuke it, it could still be helpful
The only behaviour that annoys me a bit:
- Double clicking an identifier should select the full identifier. However, in Rider (as opposed to Visual Studio) it is connected to the CamelHump setting - which is useful by itself. In Visual Studio you can have both CamelHump enabled and “double clicking the identifier selects the whole identifier”.
- Any startup project tasks like maybe a “webpack watch task” is “in the way” when stopping run/debug of your current application. A separate task runner like in Visual Studio would be beneficial.
- If a solution has file templates defined, every user needs to activate/select them manually in the settings. Quite cumbersome.
"You agree that the product will send usage data to validate your compliance with the license terms and anonymous feature usage statistics..."
"The information collected under Sections 4.1. and 4.2. may include but is not limited to frameworks, file templates used in the Product, actions invoked, and other interactions with the Product’s features."
Not just that, they will do some yucky things to exfiltrate data from your network to enforce this.
all the while you coulda probably just made it in VS code for free...
Theming has moved on a fair bit too...
biggest mistake they have made in a while.
1: yes, I am aware of the Setting that says "breadcrumb placement = top" and I am also aware it does absolutely nothing. I'm currently too burned out on their process to open a YouTrack about it
This was a few ago, so they may have improved that part by now, I've just carried my theme over the updates.