GitHub CoPilot Reviews

I use the solution in my company for information about the user story. It also helps to know how many tests or flows we need to test.

The most valuable skill and characteristic of GitHub CoPilot is that you can find any information in seconds.

The technology offered by the product in the retail industry and banking processes has certain shortcomings, making them areas that can be improved.

I have been using GitHub CoPilot for five months.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I think the use, setup, or maybe how we can use the tool depends on how much of your tasks can be done with it. For example, if you can use the tool every day for less than an hour, you can improve your tasks and skills with the tool on a daily basis. In my case, for example, I use Postman every day so I can improve my job and my tasks every day.

I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with ChatGPT and Vertex AI from Google. I think they are all the same tools coming from different providers. The principal difference between all the tools is the updates. Vertex AI has information from the last year, but GitHub CoPilot may have information for the current year. It all depends on how many updates one can have on a product.

The product's initial setup phase is easy.

The solution can be deployed in a matter of minutes.

The tool saves 25 percent of the time for me.

Speaking about the tool's ability to handle complex coding tasks compared to simpler ones, I would say that you can take care of the flows in Postman and translate them using Selenium or Python, and you can add it to your automation test.

GitHub CoPilot has adapted to the specific languages and frameworks I use, and it offers great assistance. I can say this because if I have one question, I can go to GitHub CoPilot to ask my question, and I find the information I need. I think GitHub Copilot is of great assistance as it can add more information about your work, your job, your task, and your flows, and you can find better answers and better examples day by day.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

For example, I participate in a radio show on IT topics. I use OpenAI to prepare the script I will use in the program. So, I need some queries and questions or topics for discussion. I use OpenAI to create AI business scripts tailored to how I want to address the topics. I have used OpenAI to improve my English skills. For example, I have asked for recommendations to enhance this text.

I have used OpenAI to learn how to engage with my clients, daughters, and nephews. For example, they gave me a challenge where we discussed a topic and started asking OpenAI questions to see what responses it generated. On the professional side, I have primarily used it for improving emails, resumes, or other situations. Also, in coding, I remember using it when encountering issues implementing code for an application. I usually start by asking OpenAI before turning to Google or other platforms because it helps me identify the problem faster in specific situations.

In certain instances, OpenAI didn't respond in the expected way. It was in the Power Automate. The responses were more general and didn't address the specific point. There were significant limitations. Typically, the queries I've used it for are relatively small in scope.

I prefer OpenAI over Copilot, which is integrated with coding tools like GitHub, because Copilot seems difficult to use. Copilot's responses are different from what I need to understand the problem. OpenAI has helped me a lot. It hasn't provided direct solutions, but it aids in pinpointing the issue.

Initially, OpenAI is free, but you'll need to pay for it later.

Overall, I rate the solution a 9 out of 10.

We use GitHub CoPilot to have ideas on how to code things and then bring them back to context.

GitHub CoPilot has good stability and performance.

GitHub CoPilot’s integration with other solutions could be improved.

I have been using GitHub CoPilot for a long time.

I rate GitHub CoPilot ten out of ten for stability.

GitHub CoPilot is a scalable solution.

We have seen a return on investment with GitHub CoPilot.

I am using the latest version of GitHub CoPilot. GitHub CoPilot is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend GitHub CoPilot to other users.

Overall, I rate GitHub CoPilot ten out of ten.

The product's most valuable feature is vulnerability management features.

GitHub CoPilot's alerting features need improvement.

We have been using GitHub CoPilot for 3 years.

The product has high stability.

We haven't encountered scalability issues as we are still in the process of onboarding more applications. However, it might be beneficial once we transition to the cloud.

Around 50 developers from our organization use GitHub CoPilot daily. However, most developers still use Azure DevOps.

We used Azure DevOps. We decided to switch to CoPilot for advanced security features.

The initial setup is easy. It takes a few days to complete. I rate the process a 9 out of 10.

Our in-house team of developers implemented the platform. At the moment, a team of 30 developers is maintaining it.

GitHub CoPilot has greatly enhanced coding efficiency for new projects, particularly through its advanced security features.

The platform offers a comprehensive package, including firewall capabilities. You don't need to download additional applications or purchase separate solutions for security testing and vulnerability management.

I rate it a 9 out of 10.

We use GitHub CoPilot for syntax purposes. It helps me a lot when I forget my mistakes.

The solution's most valuable features are context awareness, multi language support, integration with popular IDs like Visual Studio Code or JetBrains, and reduced coding time.

The solution provides good code completion and code generation. We have a learning aid in the framework for learning purposes. For prototyping, the tool has prototyping ideas in the core structures, which is very helpful. The solution helps me with testing and debugging.

Multi-language support is also available in GitHub CoPilot. Visual Studio Code or JetBrains can be seamlessly integrated to work with CoPilot, which is helpful. The code quality of the solution will help me reduce my coding time when we do complex things. Overall reliance on GitHub CoPilot reduced the manual coding skills. All those things will help me a lot while using GitHub CoPilot.

The solution's accuracy and relevance could be improved. My application may not be very accurate, but that is one reason we should carefully review and modify the code. If you take the code generated by the tool bluntly, it will give you a different kind of error. The solution's dependency on AI reduces manual coding skills.

Regarding licensing and copyright issues, we should be cautious about the solution's potential to embed code snippets that are very similar to our copyrighted code. We cannot take any chances with copyright issues.

I have been using GitHub CoPilot for the last one year.

I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

The solution's installation may take around 20 minutes.

GitHub CoPilot is less expensive than other solutions.

GitHub CoPilot does not require much maintenance. The solution has reduced our coding time and manual work by 10% to 30%.

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

The solution is quite useful for simple tasks. The document generation features are valuable.

The suggestions provided by the product must be improved.

I have been using the product for two months.

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is quite simple.

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

I'm using GitHub Copilot as a plugin for IntelliJ IDE. Specifically, I'm using the Community Edition of IntelliJ, not the commercial version. However, our organization provides us with a commercial license for GitHub Copilot.

I can upload code snippets or class files and ask for solutions to improve them, which works well. It's a great productivity tool that saves me time searching websites. While there are alternatives like ChatGPT and other AI tools, the advantage of the tool is that it is built into the IDE.

One drawback is that the solution sometimes suggests unwanted code, especially if I accidentally press the tab. This doesn't happen often. Sometimes it seems to understand my code, but other times it doesn't. This inconsistency is confusing.

I suggest adding a feature to write code directly in the IDE from chat responses instead of copying and pasting. GitHub Copilot can generate code based on method comments in the IDE, but chat responses require manual copying. A feature flag to allow direct writing from chat to IDE would streamline the process.

The product should also reduce its price so that it can improve the community engagement. 

I have been using the product for three months. 

As for performance and usage, I've only encountered connectivity issues once or twice. It responds well about 99 percent of the time. 

Regarding stability, there have been a couple of instances where the chat plugin got stuck. However, I don't see this as a major concern. It might improve over time, but it's not a significant issue.

The tool's deployment is mostly straightforward. The plugin installation is simple. However, there's one confusing part during the login process. When you log into your GitHub Copilot account, it redirects you to a website that asks for a device ID or something similar. I can't remember exactly what it asks for, but this ID is shown in the IDE popup. It's a bit confusing and takes a few minutes to understand this workflow. It would be helpful if they added a message saying you can find the device ID in your IDE popup. Adding more instructions to that screen could improve the login flow since it redirects you to a website to log in.

The ROI decreases if questions are too long. If it automatically accessed the content or context, questions could be asked easily with a few lines of code or statements. Currently, providing all details takes a long time, reducing productivity. Since it resides in the IDE, it should ideally have access to the codebase and know more about the context where questions are asked rather than starting from scratch.

Each user needs their license, whether it's a big team or a small team.

It's a helpful tool, but you need strong programming knowledge to use it effectively. If you don't understand Java or your objectives, GitHub Copilot might give wrong answers.

It is good at what it's designed for when handling complex coding scenarios or languages. However, there are limitations. The main issue is similar to other AI agents - requiring skilful prompting to get relevant answers. If GitHub Copilot had access to the entire codebase we're working on, it could provide more relevant and productive outcomes. But I'm not sure how security and privacy aspects would be handled in that situation.

The tool tends to give atomic answers rather than addressing very complex, multi-class-spanning questions. If it had access to more context, it might be able to provide better answers for complex scenarios involving multiple classes or large code structures.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. I can recommend it, given it's affordable, because there are many free alternatives. They may need to introduce a community edition or similar option to compete and remain relevant.

GitHub CoPilot accelerates productivity. It is an easy-to-use solution that is also helpful in saving the team's time. 

The solution is expensive. It should also support other programming languages. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

My company has five to 10 users for GitHub CoPilot. 

The product's installation is straightforward. 

GitHub CoPilot can be deployed in-house. 

GitHub CoPilot's pricing is reasonable. Our licensing costs were initially monthly, but then we switched to yearly payments. I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.