Well, the other people basically covered everything already, but what I would like to say is that it just can't compete with the newest IDE's. It doesn't stand a chance. I mainly use C++ Builder XE6 for C++ programming and Delphi XE6 for Delphi Programming. I'm probably never going to use those old compilers and IDE's again.

You have to understand, Dev-C++ comes in three flavors Bloodshed Dev-C++ (not updated since February 2005), wxDev-C++ (outdated too I believe), and Orwell Dev-C++ (the latest and currently updated version). When people are hating on it, it is likely they are hating on Bloodshed's or possibly wxDev-C++ and most don't even know about Orwell's version.

And thus we see one of the big problems of forking a product but not changing the name.

I don't know about Orwell's version. I do know that the other two had many major bugs the developers would not fix, nor would they patch even though others submitted patches for them. They were not just major as in "this annoys the programmer", they were major as in "this uses a compiler that does not generate the intended functionality".

I do not know if the Orwell version is any better. Nor do I care, because there are so many other excellent products out there. There are free products with incredible track records that currently lead the pack in many different ways, but you are choosing to use something else.

That is your decision, but know that the "Dev-C++" name has more than a decade of stigma as everything was broken for some time and then the developers abandoned it; then another group forked it, made things worse, and abandoned their fork. Now a new group comes in to attempt to fix things, so it is unsurprising that people are at least wary of the product; more commonly the response will be an aggressive warning like "you are an idiot to use a known-broken tool". Sure, it is possible they have fixed everything and turned it into a best-of-class IDE. In that case they really ought to rename it and build a new brand.

Dev-C++ compared to MSVS is like a Ferrari compared to a Skoda. Lacking features.

I've been recommending against Dev-C++ since 2008 with this article, and my reasons (in line with those given by others in this topic) are outlined pretty clearly there. In 2012 I made a follow-up post on using updated (forked) versions, specifically looking at wxDev-C++ and Orwell Dev-C++ -- at the time I concluded that either option was acceptable if you really wanted to use it but that the more mature wxDev-C++ was probably the better of the two. If I were to look at them again I would probably now suggest that wxDev-C++ is unmaintained and out-of-date.

Want to avoid the hate? Just use the full title; mention up-front that you're using Orwell Dev-C++.

Advice against the other versions is good advice. Clarify that you're not using those versions and you'll avoid most of the problems -- and as an added bonus, you won't inadvertently lead beginners to the original Bloodshed version which still outranks Orwell for the term "Dev-C++" in searches.

Ok. So the general consensus is that even Orwell is lacking compared to modern IDEs... What I want to know is, what are the other features that I'm missing? I actively use Code::Blocks and VS and don't really notice anything missing in Dev compared to the other two...

Just adding to the chorus: it's not hate, it's pragmatism. If somebody's using a bad tool for the job, then you're actually doing them a favour by telling them so.

Ok. So the general consensus is that even Orwell is lacking compared to modern IDEs... What I want to know is, what are the other features that I'm missing? I actively use Code::Blocks and VS and don't really notice anything missing in Dev compared to the other two...

In my opinion, as long as the IDE has the basic features you need and you can upgrade to the latest version of your tool chain you should be okay. That was one of the chief problems with the original was that you were stuck with an ancient and buggy gcc toolchain.

Most of the circles I run in are full of OS X developers. I'm often the lone Linux or Windows user at the party. So whether I'm doing Node.js stuff on Linux or C# stuff on Windows, someone is complaining I'm not using Ruby on OS X. It doesn't even get as far as talking about IDEs.

So I just don't offer, because it's really not pertinent information, nor ever a worthwhile conversation. Either you get the work done or you don't, that's really all that matters. If you use something that most people don't use, unless you're Linux Tannenbaum himself, you're not going to make any converts by sharing. The *only* likely outcomes are A) most people will ignore you, or B) the people who don't ignore you will berate you. If there is literally no way for me to tell if you've used HTML++ with Variables as your programming language, then just don't bother offering that sort of information.

And when people start haranguing you to give them an answer on what you used, assess whether or not you think they are in the 0.1% of people who could be a contributor to your project, times the 0.1% of people who would be willing. The other 99.99% of people are just looking for an opening to ask you why you didn't use their darling language/framework/environment flavor of the month [1]. And again, that's just so not a worthwhile conversation.

[1] seriously, if I get another person asking me why I didn't use Angular or Bootstrap or whatever for a freaking Pong game, I'm going to walk away from them as rudely as I possibly can. Those people never make anything themselves anyway.

Ok. So the general consensus is that even Orwell is lacking compared to modern IDEs... What I want to know is, what are the other features that I'm missing? I actively use Code::Blocks and VS and don't really notice anything missing in Dev compared to the other two...

The main thing VS offers is a huge selection of plugins and good tools for static analysis, unit testing, refactoring and much more.

All the good stuff(including plugin support) is stripped out from the express edition though (Many professionals tend to recommend Visual Studio without realising that the free express edition really sucks quite hard)

You really want an IDE that supports plugins and has a decent selection of plugins available. (QTCreator and Code::Blocks are good, VS Express and Orwell-Dev-C++ are not)

The other major feature of VS is the huge superiority of Microsoft's debugger when compared to gdb.

gdb is like trying to explain electricity to a caveman. He just won't understand why he should use a superior tool, because "me caveman, me make fire, my fire all me need".