My company has banned the use of Jetbrains IDEs internally

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

A company’s ban on JetBrains IDEs over alleged Russian ties sparks broader questions about how much politics should influence developer tool choices and whether such risk assessments are even fact‑based. Commenters weigh the practicality of “just quit” as a response—given a weak job market and varying financial safety nets—and debate whether alternatives like VS Code, Vim, or Emacs can match JetBrains’ out‑of‑the‑box capabilities. Underneath is a recurring tension between security and ethics concerns on one side and productivity, consistency of tooling, and individual preference on the other.

Job market, “just quit” advice, and privilege

  • Some argue that if a company makes sweeping tool decisions you strongly oppose, you should leave and find an employer aligned with your preferences.
  • Others counter that this assumes financial and market privilege; many cannot safely quit given the harsh 2024 job market and long, exhausting job searches (hundreds of applications).
  • Suggested middle ground: look for a new job before resigning, or only quit on principle if you have substantial savings or another offer lined up.

Reasons for banning JetBrains and geopolitics

  • The ban is reportedly justified by JetBrains’ “Russian ties”; some see this as a valid risk-avoidance move (esp. for sensitive customers worried about Russian state pressure).
  • Others criticize such blanket boycotts as overreach or politically inconsistent, and question whether targeting a dev tool vendor meaningfully affects state policy.
  • Several commenters stress that it’s legitimate to boycott companies for ethical or political reasons, but that standards will inevitably be uneven.

JetBrains’ Russian origins and current status

  • JetBrains is widely remembered as founded by Russians and historically having substantial R&D in Russia.
  • Linked JetBrains blog post (2022) is cited: they shut Russian offices, stopped R&D in Russia, filed liquidation for the Russian entity, relocated many staff, blocked Russian customers, and cut cooperation with Russia.
  • Perception diverges:
    • Some in Russia see JetBrains as fully severed and effectively “pro‑Western,” even cancelling licenses seen from Russian IPs.
    • Others outside Russia still view it as “Russian” or allegedly tied to people close to Putin; evidence for these deeper ties in the thread is anecdotal and unclear.

IDE/editor choices: JetBrains vs VSCode vs Emacs/Vim/Neovim

  • Many note that JetBrains IDEs are feature‑rich out of the box, especially for Java and complex refactoring; moving back to VSCode can feel like a downgrade unless heavily extended.
  • VSCode is praised as a strong, flexible default, easy to standardize across teams and configure via shared JSON; some see it as “the one tool to rule them all,” others distrust it as a Microsoft, telemetry‑heavy product.
  • Large subthread debates Emacs/Vim/Neovim:
    • Proponents emphasize longevity, deep configurability, keyboard‑driven workflows, LSP-based language support, powerful Git integration (e.g., Magit-like tools), and avoiding dependence on proprietary IDEs.
    • Critics emphasize steep learning curves, esoteric configuration (especially Emacs Lisp), time sink of maintaining configs, and difficulty using them as a team‑wide standard compared to VSCode.
    • Some claim they “grew out” of needing heavyweight IDEs; others insist that debuggers, refactoring tools, and rich cross‑domain integrations (e.g., SQL inside Java) make modern IDEs clearly more productive.

Productivity, UX, and career strategy

  • There’s disagreement on whether mastering a programmable editor once (Emacs/Vim) yields long‑term productivity gains vs. simply learning new mainstream IDEs every few years.
  • Several stress that a developer should be comfortable learning new tools; others argue editing muscle memory is precious and switching editors frequently is wasteful.
  • Some report JetBrains tools feeling increasingly bloated or buggy, especially after staff relocations; others still consider them best‑in‑class for certain languages. Quality trend is disputed.