JetBrains Fleet drops support for Kotlin Multiplatform

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Reaction to Fleet Dropping KMP

  • Many are relieved JetBrains is refocusing on IntelliJ/Android Studio instead of a separate Fleet-based KMP IDE that was announced only months ago and now reversed.
  • Several see this as evidence that Fleet as a strategy hasn’t worked: too incomplete to replace IntelliJ, not compelling enough to draw VS Code users, and now losing its primary differentiator for Kotlin devs.
  • Some interpret this as the beginning of the end for Fleet, or at least strong deprioritization.

Kotlin Multiplatform: Promise and Pain Points

  • KMP is praised for real-world success in shared codebases across Android, iOS, desktop; some users report surprisingly smooth experiences compared to older cross‑platform tools.
  • Many consider KMP best suited for shared non-UI code (models, networking, persistence, business logic) with platform‑native UIs on top.
  • iOS interop is a major complaint: KMP exposes Objective‑C interfaces, leading to poor Swift ergonomics (weak typing on enums, reference semantics, threading caveats, Kotlin exceptions not catchable from Swift).
  • These issues create many edge cases and erode the benefits of code sharing for some teams.

Fleet’s Strategy and Positioning

  • Commenters are confused about Fleet’s purpose: VS Code competitor, experimental UI, collaboration platform, or eventual IntelliJ replacement.
  • It reuses IntelliJ backends through a “smart mode”, but that also brings along the complexity and performance concerns.
  • Some note JetBrains is juggling three UI stacks (Swing, Fleet’s custom UI on Skiko, Compose Multiplatform), which seems unsustainable.
  • A widely shared view is that keeping Fleet closed-source doomed it: no plugin ecosystem, no community momentum, and no clear path to match IntelliJ or VS Code capabilities.

JetBrains Product Line & Single-IDE Frustration

  • Long‑time users dislike having to juggle many separate IDEs (IntelliJ, CLion, Rider, GoLand, RustRover, etc.) and want “one IDE with all plugins.”
  • Some languages (Python, Go) can be added to IntelliJ via plugins, but C++ and C# remain locked to separate IDEs, complicating mixed-language projects and devcontainer/remote setups.
  • Comparison is drawn to Eclipse/NetBeans’ long‑standing mixed‑language support and JNI debugging, which JetBrains still doesn’t unify cleanly.

IntelliJ vs VS Code: UX, Performance, Philosophy

  • Strong split:
    • Pro‑JetBrains: powerful refactoring, deep code understanding, stable workflows, batteries‑included experience, project‑wide insight, superior debugging/merge/diff, especially for Java, Python, Rust, SQL, etc.
    • Pro‑VS Code: snappier UI, simpler mental model, rich LSP ecosystem, lighter resource usage, better JSON‑based config, easier to run in containers and varied environments.
  • UI debates:
    • Some consider IntelliJ’s “classic” dense UI a huge productivity win; others see it as cluttered, dated, and intimidating to newer devs.
    • The new simplified UI and icon‑only sidebars are polarizing; “classic UI” plugin is viewed by some as temporary and its eventual removal a deal‑breaker.
    • Accessibility issues (low contrast, font rendering) and “hieroglyphic” icons in JetBrains IDEs are specifically criticized by some.
  • Performance is contentious: some find IntelliJ unbearably sluggish and memory‑hungry; others report it’s fine after indexing and prefer it over VS Code’s LSP flakiness. Suggestions include switching to newer JVM GCs (e.g., ZGC) and GPU rendering for big gains.

AI Features and Competitive Gap

  • Many feel JetBrains is far behind VS Code and AI-focused forks (e.g., Cursor, Windsurf) in AI-assisted development.
  • JetBrains AI Assistant is criticized as weak and paywalled on top of existing licenses; GitHub Copilot’s IntelliJ plugin is seen as less capable than the VS Code version.
  • Some blame JetBrains’ plugin APIs and closed components for limiting advanced AI agents; others point to early, underwhelming internal efforts like “Junie”.
  • A minority is glad JetBrains hasn’t gone “all‑in on AI,” preferring minimal, non-intrusive assistance or external tools (Aider, Continue.dev, Ollama) wired in manually.

Collaboration & Real-Time Editing

  • Fleet’s real-time collaboration pitch doesn’t resonate widely; most developers rarely need simultaneous editing.
  • When used, it’s mainly for mentoring, pair programming, or remote guidance, and many find screen sharing or JetBrains’ existing “Code With Me” plugin sufficient.

Perceived Quality Trends at JetBrains

  • Some long‑term users report more memory leaks, regressions, and long‑standing bugs in recent years, especially in WebStorm and JS/TS tooling; this has pushed a subset to VS Code.
  • Others report the opposite: noticeable performance improvements vs 5–6 years ago and still regard PyCharm, CLion, Rider, RustRover, and DataGrip as market-leading.
  • Overall, there’s consensus that JetBrains still delivers uniquely powerful “power tools,” but growing disagreement over whether the tradeoffs in bloat, UX changes, and slow AI response are worth it.