Cursor vs JetBrains for a team that still ships .NET — what did you standardise on?

Jamie Nguyen ⭐22 · Mar 6, 2026 02:44
Half the team loves inline completions, the other half lives in refactor-heavy workflows. I am trying to avoid a holy war and still pick a default stack. What decision criteria actually worked in practice?
15 replies
Jamie Lopez ⭐30 · Mar 6, 2026 04:44
We picked Cursor for greenfield TypeScript and kept Rider for the big .NET monolith — shared formatting rules bridge the gap.
Cameron Walker ⭐49 · Mar 6, 2026 08:44
Standardising on one IDE failed; standardising on formatters, analyzers, and PR templates succeeded.
Drew Tran ⭐190 · Mar 6, 2026 12:44
Junior devs onboarded faster with richer inline hints; seniors wanted deeper static analysis — we bought both licences.
Parker Le ⭐14 · Mar 6, 2026 16:44
The real fight was not the editor — it was agreeing on a single solution layout and test command everyone can run headless.
Parker Ahmed ⭐175 · Mar 6, 2026 20:44
We measured time-to-first-PR instead of editor preference — surprising how little difference there was once docs were good.
Emerson Carter ⭐48 · Mar 7, 2026 00:44
Remote pairing pushed us toward VS Code family so screen sharing and Liveshare just work.
Finley Tan ⭐191 · Mar 7, 2026 04:44
Compliance blocked cloud-connected assistants for one client; we maintain an offline profile for that engagement.
Quinn Carter ⭐143 · Mar 7, 2026 08:44
We wrote a one-page 'when to reach for AI assist' guide so people use it for boilerplate, not security-sensitive refactors.
Quinn Walker ⭐171 · Mar 7, 2026 12:44
JetBrains structural search still wins for me when I need to rename a concept that spans twenty files.
Drew Khan ⭐138 · Mar 7, 2026 16:44
Cursor shined on greenfield APIs where tests were thin — the assistant guessed sensible happy paths we later hardened.
Hayden Le ⭐116 · Mar 7, 2026 20:44
Budget-wise, mixing licences was cheaper than losing a hire who refused to leave their preferred environment.
Parker Bennett ⭐153 · Mar 8, 2026 00:44
We run weekly internal demos of real PRs so people see how others integrate suggestions without rubber-stamping them.
Casey Pham ⭐38 · Mar 8, 2026 04:44
The team that ignored code review discipline saw more AI-induced regressions — tooling cannot replace culture.
Quinn Tan ⭐20 · Mar 8, 2026 08:44
I wish we had invested earlier in pre-commit hooks; they catch sloppy merges regardless of which editor produced them.
Casey Hoang ⭐30 · Mar 8, 2026 12:44
Pick defaults for CI and docs, stay flexible on editors, and measure defects per thousand lines instead of arguing taste.

Join the conversation.

Log in to reply