3 ms·

I really hope it is. I don't really find VS Code to be any slower than VS. Of course, this depends on what you're using each for. I find I prefer VS Code bec

by lsadam0 10y ago

I really hope it is. I don't really find VS Code to be any slower than VS. Of course, this depends on what you're using each for. I find I prefer VS Code because it has so few default features. The default install does not contain GB of bloat that I will never need. I'm able to build the experience I want, rather than fight one thrust upon me.

ovao 10y ago
I don't know precisely what the default install size is for Visual Studio 2017, but with the new installer, a Visual Studio install can be svelte relative to previous releases. It's still large relative to VS Code and other editors of course. But the "gigabytes of bloat" problem with Visual Studio isn't so much the case now.
jasonkostempski 10y ago
"I don't really find VS Code to be any slower than VS." Given VS Code has a fraction of the features VS has, it should be noticeably faster. It will eventually be GB of bloat and slower than VS. What I'd like to see instead is features being broken out into separate components that can be used by any other editor/tool. Of course, if every component is going to required it's own dot file in my home directory to (maybe) turn off telemetry, I won't touch it, so I'd rather see those things developed by someone other than MS.
- lsadam0 10y ago
  VS Code does break off features into separate components. This is what I'm referring to when I say "build the experience I want".
- MichaelGG 10y ago
  The editor is noticeably laggy on my Xubuntu VM. Emacs/vim are speedy, as is VS on the host.
- tracker1 10y ago
  You have a very different experience with VS than I have... right now, I'm waiting half an hour, so I can check out a branch from vsts, so I can wait another 6-8 minutes to build my solution, etc... it's painfully slow... VS Code, edit, next... I've only seen VS Code run slow if you're running on 2gb of ram, or have hundreds of competing plugins installed, and even then. VS Code is way better than VS proper from my own subjective experience.

by lsadam0 10y ago

ovao 10y ago

I don't know precisely what the default install size is for Visual Studio 2017, but with the new installer, a Visual Studio install can be svelte relative to previous releases. It's still large relative to VS Code and other editors of course. But the "gigabytes of bloat" problem with Visual Studio isn't so much the case now.

jasonkostempski 10y ago

"I don't really find VS Code to be any slower than VS." Given VS Code has a fraction of the features VS has, it should be noticeably faster. It will eventually be GB of bloat and slower than VS. What I'd like to see instead is features being broken out into separate components that can be used by any other editor/tool. Of course, if every component is going to required it's own dot file in my home directory to (maybe) turn off telemetry, I won't touch it, so I'd rather see those things developed by someone other than MS.

lsadam0 10y ago
VS Code does break off features into separate components. This is what I'm referring to when I say "build the experience I want".
MichaelGG 10y ago
The editor is noticeably laggy on my Xubuntu VM. Emacs/vim are speedy, as is VS on the host.
tracker1 10y ago
You have a very different experience with VS than I have... right now, I'm waiting half an hour, so I can check out a branch from vsts, so I can wait another 6-8 minutes to build my solution, etc... it's painfully slow... VS Code, edit, next... I've only seen VS Code run slow if you're running on 2gb of ram, or have hundreds of competing plugins installed, and even then. VS Code is way better than VS proper from my own subjective experience.