4 ms·

We always have to have somebody remind us how wonderful VSCode is compared to Atom every time there's a post about Atom. I'm wondering—if you prefer VSCode, w

We always have to have somebody remind us how wonderful VSCode is compared to Atom every time there's a post about Atom. I'm wondering—if you prefer VSCode, why even comment a post about Atom? I doubt your care that much..? Atom is built on Electron. That means that it includes a whole version of Chromium (OMG!), and it isn't even optimized, so its size is 5 times that of VSCode. Is that really a problem? Are you trying to tell me that as a developer you don't have 400MB to spare on your hard disk for one of—if not the most—important tool to work your job, and the size is really a reason to pick one editor over another? Atom is about 100 times slower than Sublime Text, and like you pointed out 5 times bigger than the insuperable VSCode. Now, I use Atom as my main editor, because I find it simpler than others for certain things, and it saves be a lot of time because GitHub integration is done very well. Also, I like the name (can't say the same thing about VSCode). Some people like Atom because they're more productive, and don't care about its size, super-crappy speed, and whatever else you think Atom is worse than VSCode at. Can we put this thing to rest..?

eridius 9y ago
> Atom is built on Electron. So is VSCode. > Can we put this thing to rest..? Where's the harm in having an actual discussion about this? If you're comfortable with your choice of Atom, you can just ignore anyone comparing Atom to VSCode.
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  The harm is that every time there's an Atom post, most comments are about how much it sucks compared to VSCode, and always from the point of view of memory footprint, and size. I have both GB of memory, and GB of HD space. I don't get the point.
  - krisdol 9y ago
    I'm guessing they are trying to run atom on an embedded android smartwatch OS backported to 2006 hardware? I've never found the argument compelling. My memory is there to be used by apps I use.
    - nkkollaw 9y ago
      Yes, I have no idea. It seems more like discussion just for the sake of it, then because of actual, real-life problems. My laptop isn't even amazingly powerful, and I constantly have 3GB to spare despite the fact that I run many random apps and almost never restart it. As a developer, I don't see what the problem would be if my main tool occupied even 2GB of memory (and we're talking about 500MB-1GB in most cases). I never heard any graphic designer complaining about Photoshop occupying 10GB of memory for a logo (which happened to me a few hours ago).
jdormit 9y ago
> Atom is built on Electron So is VSCode! Hence the constant comparisons.
laken 9y ago
Atom also happens to be built on Electron; I think that commenter was genuinely curious as to how Atom was that much smaller than VSCode when both are built with similar technologies.
hibbelig 9y ago
It's actually a valid question: Both Atom and VSCode are built on Electron, both provide similar functionality, and one is a lot faster than the other. (Or _was_ a lot faster than the other?) So it's valid to ask what did the VSCode people do to come to the different result? On a related note, I wonder about the speed difference now, after Atom has done a lot of optimizations.
- krisdol 9y ago
  I'm guessing a lot of cruft built up on atom as it was iteratively built on top of developing front-end frameworks and transpilers over the years, compared to vscode which came on the scene much later when a lot of this had already settled. My guess it's just an older project with many times more contributions that accumulated legacy cruft that takes time to fully expunge. I'm also not convinced the feature set is identical. Atom comes with a lot of language support, customization options, and extensibility out of the box.
MisterKent 9y ago
VSCode is also built with electron[1], so that doesn't excuse it. Atom's defenders always bring up that it was made with electron as the reason for it's slowness. Then, VSCode came along and invalidated that. Now, that leaves only one conclusion: Atom is slow because it was not engineered well. And no, I don't think anyone is ready to stop pointing out that Atom is slow. Atom can implement a thousand killer features, but until they fix their performance problem nobody is going to switch back to it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Studio_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Studio_Code
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  Meh. I tried many editors when I decided which one to use—including VSCode—and Atom was the one where I was the most productive by a long shot. Speed isn't everything. Atom is quick enough for the code I work on, and in other, much faster editors like Sublime Text I would be less productive and therefore slower. For instance, editing settings/packages in Sublime Text in unnecessarily nightmarish. Changing settings and installing plugins in Atom is a breeze. Who cares if the editor is a few milliseconds faster when you're many minutes slower..? Just because of its excellent GitHub integration Atom is worth 100 times more than Sublime Text to me (even if it wasn't free).
  - castis 9y ago
    > Who cares if the editor is a few milliseconds faster when you're many minutes slower Me. I care. That little hang Atom does after saving a file gets annoying after a while.
    - nkkollaw 9y ago
      Then you might give Sublime Text a try. I get annoyed about having to switch to GitHub, for instance. It's fine to have opinions, I'm just annoyed by the fact that every time there's a post about Atom the conversation gets hijacked by "VSCode vs. Atom" comments. That's why I'm bitching. I shall go update Atom instead.
holtalanm 9y ago
Atom is built on Electron -- So is VSCode GitHub integration is done very well -- Not nearly as well as the Git integration in VSCode Also, Atom has in the past been much slower than VSCode in nearly every aspect. VSCode has a built-in debugger which takes it dangerously close to being called a full-fledged IDE rather than just a text editor with plugins cough Atom cough The reason they keep getting compared is really simple: they both aim to achieve the same goals, and both use a very similar approach. One editor I haven't seen mentioned in a LONG while, though, that can probably be considered the 'grandfather' of both of these is Brackets. If I remember right, it had a lot of performance issues, as well.
- wcummings 9y ago
  >VSCode has a built-in debugger which takes it dangerously close to being called a full-fledged IDE rather than just a text editor with plugins cough Atom cough Is that a bad thing? I like debuggers.
  - holtalanm 9y ago
    That was meant as a positive point. The debugger in VSCode is phenomenal, while there isn't one for Atom. VSCode ranges closer and closer to a full-fledged IDE, which is awesome.
ythn 9y ago
People are just incredulous that Microsoft is able to make an Electron app of superior quality than GitHub (who develops and maintains Electron). It would be like if Honda made a better car utilizing a Mazda engine than Mazda itself.
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  Steve Jobs said "iTunes on Windows is like giving a glass of water to somebody in hell", what you're saying might be less rare that we think :-) (I hate iTunes, and have no idea if the Windows version was a better Windows programs than others, I just thought I'd leave this here)
  - spiralx 9y ago
    No, iTunes on Windows was at least as shit as it was on OS X, both in terms of awful UI and the sheer bloat of it and all the extra crap it installed.
Volt 9y ago
The parent asked a legitimate question. Do you have an answer?
Ezhik 9y ago
>it includes a whole version of Chromium (OMG!) OMG! is right, imagine trying to make sure the zoo of various Node and Chromium versions on your computer do not have any unlatched vulnerabilities. And you know? I have 400 MB for one Electron app. I even have 8000 MB for 20 Electron apps. I just do not want to give them because you'll eventually tell me that your containerized Electron-on-Docker-on-Electron virtual machine requires 64GB of RAM to run. Now, I'm not saying that you should not use Electron ever. But if using a TEXT EDITOR on a laptop with 2GB of RAM requires sacrificing a quarter of its resources, that text editor is not a good piece of software. And if you say I should buy an OP max-spec computer to write freaking HTML, you are creating an unnecessary barrier to CS.

eridius 9y ago

> Atom is built on Electron. So is VSCode. > Can we put this thing to rest..? Where's the harm in having an actual discussion about this? If you're comfortable with your choice of Atom, you can just ignore anyone comparing Atom to VSCode.

nkkollaw 9y ago
The harm is that every time there's an Atom post, most comments are about how much it sucks compared to VSCode, and always from the point of view of memory footprint, and size. I have both GB of memory, and GB of HD space. I don't get the point.
- krisdol 9y ago
  I'm guessing they are trying to run atom on an embedded android smartwatch OS backported to 2006 hardware? I've never found the argument compelling. My memory is there to be used by apps I use.
  - nkkollaw 9y ago
    Yes, I have no idea. It seems more like discussion just for the sake of it, then because of actual, real-life problems. My laptop isn't even amazingly powerful, and I constantly have 3GB to spare despite the fact that I run many random apps and almost never restart it. As a developer, I don't see what the problem would be if my main tool occupied even 2GB of memory (and we're talking about 500MB-1GB in most cases). I never heard any graphic designer complaining about Photoshop occupying 10GB of memory for a logo (which happened to me a few hours ago).

jdormit 9y ago

> Atom is built on Electron So is VSCode! Hence the constant comparisons.

laken 9y ago

Atom also happens to be built on Electron; I think that commenter was genuinely curious as to how Atom was that much smaller than VSCode when both are built with similar technologies.

hibbelig 9y ago

It's actually a valid question: Both Atom and VSCode are built on Electron, both provide similar functionality, and one is a lot faster than the other. (Or _was_ a lot faster than the other?) So it's valid to ask what did the VSCode people do to come to the different result? On a related note, I wonder about the speed difference now, after Atom has done a lot of optimizations.

krisdol 9y ago
I'm guessing a lot of cruft built up on atom as it was iteratively built on top of developing front-end frameworks and transpilers over the years, compared to vscode which came on the scene much later when a lot of this had already settled. My guess it's just an older project with many times more contributions that accumulated legacy cruft that takes time to fully expunge. I'm also not convinced the feature set is identical. Atom comes with a lot of language support, customization options, and extensibility out of the box.

MisterKent 9y ago

VSCode is also built with electron[1], so that doesn't excuse it. Atom's defenders always bring up that it was made with electron as the reason for it's slowness. Then, VSCode came along and invalidated that. Now, that leaves only one conclusion: Atom is slow because it was not engineered well. And no, I don't think anyone is ready to stop pointing out that Atom is slow. Atom can implement a thousand killer features, but until they fix their performance problem nobody is going to switch back to it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Studio_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Studio_Code

nkkollaw 9y ago
Meh. I tried many editors when I decided which one to use—including VSCode—and Atom was the one where I was the most productive by a long shot. Speed isn't everything. Atom is quick enough for the code I work on, and in other, much faster editors like Sublime Text I would be less productive and therefore slower. For instance, editing settings/packages in Sublime Text in unnecessarily nightmarish. Changing settings and installing plugins in Atom is a breeze. Who cares if the editor is a few milliseconds faster when you're many minutes slower..? Just because of its excellent GitHub integration Atom is worth 100 times more than Sublime Text to me (even if it wasn't free).
- castis 9y ago
  > Who cares if the editor is a few milliseconds faster when you're many minutes slower Me. I care. That little hang Atom does after saving a file gets annoying after a while.
  - nkkollaw 9y ago
    Then you might give Sublime Text a try. I get annoyed about having to switch to GitHub, for instance. It's fine to have opinions, I'm just annoyed by the fact that every time there's a post about Atom the conversation gets hijacked by "VSCode vs. Atom" comments. That's why I'm bitching. I shall go update Atom instead.

holtalanm 9y ago

Atom is built on Electron -- So is VSCode GitHub integration is done very well -- Not nearly as well as the Git integration in VSCode Also, Atom has in the past been much slower than VSCode in nearly every aspect. VSCode has a built-in debugger which takes it dangerously close to being called a full-fledged IDE rather than just a text editor with plugins cough Atom cough The reason they keep getting compared is really simple: they both aim to achieve the same goals, and both use a very similar approach. One editor I haven't seen mentioned in a LONG while, though, that can probably be considered the 'grandfather' of both of these is Brackets. If I remember right, it had a lot of performance issues, as well.

wcummings 9y ago
>VSCode has a built-in debugger which takes it dangerously close to being called a full-fledged IDE rather than just a text editor with plugins cough Atom cough Is that a bad thing? I like debuggers.
- holtalanm 9y ago
  That was meant as a positive point. The debugger in VSCode is phenomenal, while there isn't one for Atom. VSCode ranges closer and closer to a full-fledged IDE, which is awesome.

ythn 9y ago

People are just incredulous that Microsoft is able to make an Electron app of superior quality than GitHub (who develops and maintains Electron). It would be like if Honda made a better car utilizing a Mazda engine than Mazda itself.

nkkollaw 9y ago
Steve Jobs said "iTunes on Windows is like giving a glass of water to somebody in hell", what you're saying might be less rare that we think :-) (I hate iTunes, and have no idea if the Windows version was a better Windows programs than others, I just thought I'd leave this here)
- spiralx 9y ago
  No, iTunes on Windows was at least as shit as it was on OS X, both in terms of awful UI and the sheer bloat of it and all the extra crap it installed.

Volt 9y ago

The parent asked a legitimate question. Do you have an answer?

Ezhik 9y ago

>it includes a whole version of Chromium (OMG!) OMG! is right, imagine trying to make sure the zoo of various Node and Chromium versions on your computer do not have any unlatched vulnerabilities. And you know? I have 400 MB for one Electron app. I even have 8000 MB for 20 Electron apps. I just do not want to give them because you'll eventually tell me that your containerized Electron-on-Docker-on-Electron virtual machine requires 64GB of RAM to run. Now, I'm not saying that you should not use Electron ever. But if using a TEXT EDITOR on a laptop with 2GB of RAM requires sacrificing a quarter of its resources, that text editor is not a good piece of software. And if you say I should buy an OP max-spec computer to write freaking HTML, you are creating an unnecessary barrier to CS.