PyCharm Reviews

My main use case for PyCharm is for machine learning operations.

In PyCharm, I find several components and libraries to be the most valuable. The support that Jupyter Notebook offers is essential, as we work through Jupyter regularly. Scientific libraries such as NumPy, Pandas, Matplotlib, and Plotly are integral to our work. Machine learning libraries including scikit-learn, PyTorch, and TensorFlow are used extensively. Hugging Face integration is particularly valuable because it is easily findable, the documentation is comprehensive, and it can be directly integrated with the IDEs we work with.

The intelligent code editor in PyCharm definitely helps me manage code quality and efficiency in my projects. When using these libraries, it makes parallelization of data very efficient, allowing me to use multi-thread programming architecture. The code can work for multiple datasets rather than one at a time. With native Python code, a machine learning deployment taking 45 to 50 minutes to calculate can be efficiently reduced to a minute or half a second using these libraries.

A potential area of improvement in PyCharm at this point would be memory efficiency. PyCharm is based on its IntelliJ platform, which is Java-based, meaning it can be very memory-intensive, especially when indexing large machine learning datasets or complex virtual environments. If the memory usage could be more efficient, that would be beneficial. Additionally, there is the startup speed. Compared to lightweight editors such as VS Code or Sublime Text, PyCharm's initial load time and project indexing can feel slower on older hardware.

I have been working with PyCharm for approximately four to five years.

I would rate the stability of PyCharm a seven.

Positive

I would rate the scalability of PyCharm a six at this point.

Positive

I would rate the technical support from JetBrains eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup for PyCharm can be cumbersome when setting up remote interpreters via SSH or Docker compared to the experience I generally have using VS Code's remote development extension. However, I have been seeing significant development for JetBrains' Gateway, which aims to address this issue. This is a work in progress, and I see this as something they are improving over time.

I find the pricing for PyCharm to be decent. I would rate it a seven.

Positive

PyCharm's main competitors are VS Code and Edge. Edge is completely free, even for commercial use, starts up faster, and consumes significantly less RAM.

I use PyCharm's debugging tools on a case-by-case basis. The libraries are generally documented well enough that in most cases when I am debugging, half of the errors are found by the IDE initially. Given that I have been working for a very long time, there is very little debugging that I need to address. However, JetBrains has good support, which I prefer. Whenever it is required, I use the debugging tools.

I have integrated PyCharm with GitHub for version control. Version control is an essential part of managing an entire infrastructure, from code to software or applications. I have integrated VCS support with a visual workflow, allowing me to manage commits, branching, and the guided user interface rather than relying solely on the command line. I also have merge conflict resolutions. Additionally, when I do machine learning versioning, I have data version control integration. For Hugging Face, I have tracking where I manage and version the pre-trained models downloaded via Hugging Face, identifying and deleting unused models to save space. This is one of the efficiencies I gain from using PyCharm.

I have worked on cases with PyCharm's support for Python web frameworks, though this is not extensively my primary focus. In my team, the UI team uses supported frameworks such as Django for the structure tool window, navigating views and admins. They also use FastAPI. For my own personal lab experiments to test new things and develop my skills, I use Flask. I do use these frameworks, but at this point, I see there are areas where we could expand. However, for the projects I have encountered until now, I have not had extensive use of the supported libraries.

I would recommend PyCharm to other users, and I would rate this review a seven overall.

My use case for PyCharm code usually involves rapid prototyping, especially related to GenAI.

The flexibility in deployment options including cloud-based or on-premises is very good. The integration with Docker and containers is particularly beneficial, allowing me to deploy code and control containers straight from the IDE, which is a time saver.

It helps with collaboration in my development team. While I don't use JetBrains' collaboration tool, I utilize GitHub, and the integration through PyCharm or IntelliJ is seamless.

PyCharm is saving me time and money in general.

PyCharm's utility supports various Python frameworks such as Django and Flask for development projects. Uvicorn is well supported in project creation. Users can choose which framework to create and it handles all the code scaffolding automatically.

I use PyCharm Intelligent Code Editor for context-aware code completion, and I also use the new AI extensions that JetBrains provided recently. I find it particularly useful in code refactoring.

It saves me time on boilerplate code, such as interaction with the database. I can ask the AI facility in PyCharm to create all the boilerplate code for various databases. I don't write boilerplate code for mundane tasks anymore and focus on the business logic rather than the usual ancillary functions such as collecting records from the database or making network calls. This type of work is all done by AI.

The refactor facility in PyCharm is not on par with the refactor facility in IntelliJ. It could be improved since IntelliJ offers many more options for refactoring.

I have been using PyCharm for about three to four years now.

I have never had to contact JetBrains support for any issues as I have never encountered any problems.

The product is very stable and never crashes. While some developers may find it slow, I have a powerful laptop, and I don't find the product to be slow at all.

The capability to streamline workflow in scientific computing is available, but I haven't used it so far.

I have never had to contact JetBrains support for any issues as I have never encountered any problems.

Positive

PyCharm is saving me time and money in general.

The solution is affordable for me as an independent contractor. I pay for the license myself, which costs approximately $30 per month, but I have access to all the IDEs provided by JetBrains.

I am satisfied with the pricing. It is not too expensive because I have access to all the IDEs including DataGrip, which is a very good database front-end. For $30 a month, I use three IDEs daily, including DataGrip, PyCharm, and IntelliJ, plus I can experiment with environments such as Rust Rover and Go. I have access to a wide range of top-of-the-range IDEs for various languages.

I'm still working with these products intermittently as a consultant. Currently, I'm dealing with different cloud technologies, not really AWS.

I'm currently working with legacy systems. The solutions from Oracle that I'm dealing with include just the database, as I'm doing some performance tuning on Oracle, both on-premises and on cloud.

Regarding Oracle Database, I'm working with on-premise and an Oracle instance running on Azure, Microsoft, not Oracle Cloud Services.

I use IntelliJ from JetBrains as my Java IDE almost daily. IntelliJ is my main product, and I use PyCharm when programming in Python.

The best features in the product are its integrated nature. Understanding IntelliJ for Java makes switching to PyCharm seamless due to the familiar IDE facilities. I have integrated PyCharm with version control systems such as Git and GitHub.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate PyCharm a 9.

I use PyCharm for work, specifically for coding.

I got used to PyCharm and it is quite comfortable to use it.

The latest AI features and tab completion features are good.

I use the debugger too. It is good, though sometimes it is not that quick, but it remains a good debugger.

The breakpoints could be improved as they are not that intuitive to use.

I have been using PyCharm for five to six years.

I never had issues, so I never contacted technical support.

It is very easy to install.

I have the free version and don't pay anything.

Actually any IDE is as good as another. It is a good product that I use, but Visual Studio is good too. There are other tools that are good too. It is not a matter of a specific IDE or specific software, it is a matter of how you use it.

At the moment I am doing penetration testing.

I manage many software applications including PyCharm, VirtualBox, and SQLAlchemy. I manage many technologies.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate PyCharm a nine.

PyCharm is mainly used by our team for Python development. We engage in tasks such as converting Perl to Python or developing Python software from scratch. Although a couple of people use PyCharm, most of us prefer using Visual Studio for our development work.

PyCharm is not integrated with other systems. Developers create Python scripts using PyCharm and then use tools such as Grafana to integrate those scripts into dashboards, working independently with them.

Some of our developers appreciate the unique features of PyCharm because they already had a license and were familiar with using IntelliJ platforms. PyCharm, being from JetBrains, fits into their ecosystem. Despite its advantages, we have not expanded its use among developers due to its high cost, approximately 200 pounds per workstation, which we find prohibitive.

Exchange usage has dropped in favor of cloud-based solutions such as Microsoft 365, indicating a shift in how tools are adopted by organizations. PyCharm offers a desktop, on-premises deployment model, which might suit specific organizational needs.

The pricing model for PyCharm is a significant area for improvement. It is currently too high, with a per-seat cost of approximately 200 pounds. A community edition, similar to IntelliJ Community Edition, could serve as a stepping stone for users. A community edition would allow potential users to familiarize themselves with the product before opting for more powerful features in a subscribed model.

Users have expressed that the cost is a barrier to broad adoption, especially when compared to alternatives such as Visual Studio, which is free. Implementing a community edition could make PyCharm more accessible and lead to wider adoption.

The initial setup of PyCharm was pretty straightforward. I did not see any difficulty when people were implementing it.

From my experience, PyCharm stability on a scale from 1 to 10 deserves at least a nine. I have not seen any issues with it or any issues reported by it. From what I can tell, it was as stable as IntelliJ. IntelliJ never had any problems, so I would assume it maintains the same level of stability, though I have not used it extensively enough to identify all potential problems.

Regarding scalability for PyCharm, it is not easy to expand licenses. With a per-seat license of 200 pounds, expansion becomes challenging. The enterprise license cost remains unknown but would presumably be quite expensive.

I have not used PyCharm extensively because of its cost. One or two people have PyCharm licenses, so I interact with it occasionally. Generally, when dealing with Python, we use Visual Source for most of our developers because it is more economical.

The room for improvement for PyCharm is its pricing model, which is too high. A community edition would be beneficial, similar to what is available for IntelliJ. The community edition would serve as a stepping stone, allowing users to try the basic features before subscribing to more powerful ones. Most of our team uses the IntelliJ community edition for Java development, and a similar option for PyCharm would be valuable.

The initial setup of PyCharm was pretty straightforward. I did not see any difficulty when people were implementing it.

Our platform operates independently of Azure, but it can be ported to Azure. We work with Terraform to deploy in Azure, and once deployed, it functions with standard integrations. However, I am not personally involved in the Azure or cloud aspects.

Currently, PyCharm is not integrated. Developers create Python scripts and implement them in dashboards using tools such as Grafana, then work with them independently. I have not personally explored the debugging capabilities of PyCharm.

For my review about PyCharm, anonymous is better because I am not professionally known to be a PyCharm user.

Overall, I would rate PyCharm an eight out of ten based on my experience. It is a very mature product, very stable, and I appreciate its interface. However, this assessment comes with limited intensive usage.

My review rating for PyCharm is 8 out of 10.

Positive

I use the solution to run, test, and debug codes. 

We have integrated the tool with GitHub. PyCharm provides easy integration with GitHub, allowing us to push changes directly. Many plugins are available on PyCharm for GitHub integration, including GitHub Copilot for auto code completion and GitHub Copilot Chat for assistance with code-related queries.

The solution has significantly improved my coding efficiency with its feature that shows documentation when I hover over code. This feature, which was recently introduced, is especially useful when using an inbuilt function from a Python package because it gives me immediate access to documentation and references, helping me understand how to use the function properly.

The solution is heavy because running it on laptops consumes a lot of memory and power. Typically, a laptop battery might last about eight to nine hours, but with the tool running, it reduces to two hours or one and a half hours at most. It is designed to handle large projects and heavy tasks, making it resource-intensive. For smaller projects, use IDEs like Visual Studio Code. 

There are many versions of PyCharm, and I prefer using the stable version for all my production-level development. For testing purposes, I might upgrade to the latest version. Bugs are usually resolved quickly, so it's not a big deal to encounter one since there's often an immediate fix available.

I contacted JetBrains support to verify my student certificate three years ago. After three years, they deactivated it, and I had to email their support team to reactivate my account. They responded quickly and reactivated it for me.

I downloaded the application from the JetBrains website, installed the .exe file, and then logged in with my GitHub account to save and sync all my settings. This includes team preferences and other user and system settings, making the onboarding process simple and easy.

If you're interested in using PyCharm, I'd advise you to watch a video tutorial to learn how to fully take advantage of its features. I recently discovered many useful features I wish I had known about earlier, which could have enhanced my productivity. JetBrains also sends newsletters with updates, which can be helpful. While it can be time-consuming to explore all the features, it's often worth it because some features are incredibly useful.

I'd rate PyCharm an eight out of ten. Two points are deducted because it's quite heavy on system resources, which can be a drawback for regular use. Second, many useful features are hidden, requiring users to be curious to explore them.

I use it for software development. I use it for Python development. I use it for a variety of things. I've worked with Jango, Flask, and even AWS deployments. It's pretty versatile when it comes to frameworks.

It's just a great all-around IDE with good language support, solid integration with source control, and helpful features like virtual environment and requirements management. 

It even tells you if your code is compatible with different Python versions, which is awesome. Plus, their recent AI-powered code completion is pretty cool, even if it's not perfect.

We use the debugger in the lab, but not really for advanced analysis. We do the basic stuff in PyCharm, but nothing fancy. But the debugger itself is very good.

So, PyCharm's debugging is helpful for our development process.

There is room for improvement in memory usage. It uses too much memory. It can get a bit heavy, especially when you have too many open files and the system becomes very slow.

I have been using it for eight years. 

It's very stable. No problems there. I've used Docker with PyCharm. It has some pretty cool features like building and debugging inside containers, which I haven't used much yet but seem promising.

Scalability is really relevant here. It's a developer tool, and everyone on the team has their own copy. It's not like a scaling tool.

I use it with version control, and it works great. It actually makes things much easier.

There are around ten users using PyCharm in my company. 

I've contacted  customer service and support, and they were pretty helpful.

Positive

For Python development, I always use PyCharm. Visual Studio works better for Windows development, especially anything .NET. Visual Studio is amazing for C++. 

Generally, PyCharm is better for Python, and Visual Studio might be better for other languages, but it's more expensive.

Setup is easy, but I haven't used the cloud deployment option. I only use it on-premises.

The community edition is free, which is good. There's a free version available. As for the commercial license that I use, the pricing is fair.

It's a good product. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution for software projects with robotic operating systems. Software that we build is very complex in usage. 

The solution has a nice environment and extensions that make it easy to develop software. A good repository of packages can be installed easily and used quickly.

It is easy to integrate and work on the virtual environment for development. The solution is very intuitive, so it is simple to figure out as you go. 

The solution supports robotics-related software tools. Not many IDEs offer that support. 

The solution does not support some features of OpenCV even though it is part of a PyCharm package. Open CV is used to develop software that involves computer vision tasks. It seems the solution is not fully updated to use the latest PyCharm packages. 

I would like even more support toward robotics-related software tools. For example, support of ROS, ROS 1, and ROS 2 development would ensure that I continue to use the solution. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable so I rate it a ten out of ten. 

The solution is scalable with no performance issues for large projects. 

I  reached out to support for one project where I had issues with configurations and setting up the environment, but I did not hear back. 

When I was a student, I used the solution's free community edition that included many professional development and software tools. 

The setup is very easy. If you watch a video tutorial, then you can be up an running in five minutes. 

I implemented the solution in-house. 

The community edition is free and the professional edition has a licensing fee. Many add-ons or packages are available. 

The solution has a good reputation in the development community because it is very easy to use for creating software. College students who want to build quickly should use the solution. Many tutorials and online resources are available for ongoing learning. 

I rate the solution a ten out of ten because it has always been very convenient to use, is easy to understand, and surely increases the effectiveness of software development. 

It's very easy to use. First of all, I have a professional account, not a community, free account. It's very good for high-level use, as well as for those who are just starting out. It makes it easy for developers to access databases.

Good syntax highlighting and it's very customizable.

The navigation can be better.

I have been using PyCharm for two years. 

The solution is highly stable. 

It is a scalable solution. Presently, fifteen people are using the solution. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The price is reasonable. 

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We are using PyCharm as our IDE and user interface for Python code development. Along with PyCharm, we also use other software including Coverity and Pylint, and some of my colleagues are also using QAC.

The best feature of PyCharm is that it gives you hints whenever it detects any issues while you are coding. This is important because it helps us code faster and without any errors.

PyCharm's use of system resources can get pretty heavy. Loading, in particular, takes longer than I would like and I think they should optimize it so that it's a bit lighter on the system.

Another way they could improve PyCharm is if they made it possible to connect directly with various workflow products such as GitLab or Git. Direct connection integrations with these products would add a lot of value.

I have been using PyCharm for three years.

Although it can be heavy on resources, I would rate the stability of PyCharm a seven out of ten.

My team has around 15 members who use PyCharm daily.

Until now, I haven't had any interaction with PyCharm support.

The setup process is easy. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I don't have much info on the pricing, but I would say it is somewhat competitive.

The main difference between PyCharm and competitor products lies in their features. PyCharm's features are specifically designed for Python programming, while its competitor products are typically more generic since they are designed for multiple languages.

Rafael:

I would rate PyCharm an eight out of ten.