JetBrains addresses criticism over AI Assistant review removals

JetBrains faces a trust crisis as its controversial review removal policy for its unpopular AI Assistant plugin comes under fire. With over 22 million downloads but a dismal 2.3/5 rating, the company’s decision to delete negative feedback has sparked skepticism among developers who already complain about the tool’s performance issues and intrusive behavior. This incident highlights the growing tensions between AI tool providers and their users as companies struggle to balance honest feedback with product reputation management.

The controversy: JetBrains has defended removing negative reviews of its AI Assistant plugin, claiming the deletions were policy-compliant or addressed outdated content.

• Users noticed their critical reviews disappearing, with one commenting: “My previous comment was deleted without any specific reason… I still give it 1 star, because it installed automatically and is slow and buggy.”
• The company admitted it could have handled the situation better, acknowledging that “Nuking several reviews at once without a heads-up looked shady.”

Behind the complaints: Despite its widespread adoption with over 22 million downloads, JetBrains AI Assistant maintains a poor 2.3 out of 5 rating due to persistent issues.

• Users cite limited third-party model support, noticeable latency, frequent delays, and features locked to JetBrains cloud services among their primary concerns.
• The plugin’s tendency to install itself without permission has particularly frustrated developers, with one Reddit user describing it as “the annoying self-healing/reinstalling phoenix of a plug-in.”

Market pressures: JetBrains appears to be responding to competitive forces in the AI development tools space.

• The company recently introduced a free tier for its AI Assistant and launched a new AI agent called Junie.
• Cost considerations play a significant role in these decisions, as AI services tend to be processor-intensive and expensive to provide.

Why this matters: This incident exposes the tension between managing public perception and maintaining user trust for companies offering AI development tools, suggesting that suppressing negative feedback might damage credibility more than the original complaints themselves.