[epoch1970]

"Failing hard" and "severe dysfunction" probably aren't the most realistic ways of describing it. The situation isn't good, but it also isn't bad enough for terms such as those to apply.

While it isn't exactly a pleasant tool to use, it's not like it's totally broken either. I've used other similar software that was much worse to use than pgAdmin 4 is.

It's slightly better than pgAdmin 3 in some ways, but it's also worse in other ways. Overall, it's mediocre. That might be the underlying problem: it doesn't live up to the high expectations that the rest of the PostgreSQL ecosystem tends to set.

If I had to give it a grade, I'd say it's a B- or a C+. It could be a lot worse, but it could also be a lot better.

[ljw1001]

I think "failing hard" is reasonable considering how much worse it is than the workhorse v3 that it replaces. I don't find it anything like "mediocre". It is the buggiest software I use regularly and has made doing simple things with Postgres harder and significantly more time consuming.

[chinhodado]

It IS worse than pgAdmin 3 in every possible way I can think of. It is slow, clunky and bug-ridden. Is freezes and crashes all the time. It lacks tons of features already available in pgAdmin 3. It doesn't bring anything new to the table other than being rewritten as a webapp.