3 ms·

There is a big "ugh, Electron apps" contingent of Mac users. Or at least, there's a loud one, and I guess they figured it's also a big-enough one...

paxys 6y ago
The vast majority of developers aren't hanging out on HN though. I'll wait till there are real benchmarks but I'd be very surprised if Nova is actually noticeably more performant than VS Code.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  Just the fact that Nova is ~36MB and VSCode is ~3x that at ~95MB should at least point you in the right direction. Also note that Nova already includes features that are only available via separate plugins on VSCode.
  - RussianCow 6y ago
    But 95MB is small enough that it doesn't matter—1/3 the size of basically nothing is still basically nothing. Even in terms of memory or CPU usage, VS Code is relatively efficient compared to some other products on the market such as the JetBrains IDEs. Say what you will about Electron apps in general, but Microsoft has done a great job in making VS Code not feel like a typical Electron app.
    - jmnicolas 6y ago
      If you have 4G of ram and 120G of disk and a slow internet connection all of this matter. Fwiw before getting internet fiber, a 95MB file resulted in about 20 min download (my reference was 300MB an hour).
      - yeahoo 6y ago
        It's more about "enough proportion of ..", and my 5 cents are that using mac hardware _always_ with a very tiny internet connection is kind of rare. So not enough to base an argument on, in my opinion. Kinda having expensive mac hardware most probably implies access to some time of a good internet connection to download/update tools needed.
    - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
      > VS Code is relatively efficient compared to some other products on the market such as the JetBrains IDEs. That's not really a fair comparison I think. JetBrains IDEs do a lot more than VS Code. You'd have to load it up with plugins to make something resembling a fair comparison, and in that case I'd be very interested in how efficient VS Code still is.
      - RussianCow 6y ago
        I completely agree, but I would wager that VS Code would still be noticeably faster even if it had all of the functionality that IntelliJ does. As a daily user of the latter, it seems like they have a lot more room for optimization, whereas VS Code seems to have been built from day 1 with performance in mind. But this is pure anecdote so I could be wrong.
OOPMan 6y ago
We're not just Mac users. Electron apps are bloated ick but I guess at least Electron is equally repulsive on all OSes.
SirHound 6y ago
VSC is more of a memory hog but in use it isn’t noticeably slower than Nova.
ulisesrmzroche 6y ago
Where? Here in HN, a little bit, but out IRL? Out in real life no one knows or cares about this

paxys 6y ago

The vast majority of developers aren't hanging out on HN though. I'll wait till there are real benchmarks but I'd be very surprised if Nova is actually noticeably more performant than VS Code.

Nextgrid 6y ago
Just the fact that Nova is ~36MB and VSCode is ~3x that at ~95MB should at least point you in the right direction. Also note that Nova already includes features that are only available via separate plugins on VSCode.
- RussianCow 6y ago
  But 95MB is small enough that it doesn't matter—1/3 the size of basically nothing is still basically nothing. Even in terms of memory or CPU usage, VS Code is relatively efficient compared to some other products on the market such as the JetBrains IDEs. Say what you will about Electron apps in general, but Microsoft has done a great job in making VS Code not feel like a typical Electron app.
  - jmnicolas 6y ago
    If you have 4G of ram and 120G of disk and a slow internet connection all of this matter. Fwiw before getting internet fiber, a 95MB file resulted in about 20 min download (my reference was 300MB an hour).
    - yeahoo 6y ago
      It's more about "enough proportion of ..", and my 5 cents are that using mac hardware _always_ with a very tiny internet connection is kind of rare. So not enough to base an argument on, in my opinion. Kinda having expensive mac hardware most probably implies access to some time of a good internet connection to download/update tools needed.
  - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
    > VS Code is relatively efficient compared to some other products on the market such as the JetBrains IDEs. That's not really a fair comparison I think. JetBrains IDEs do a lot more than VS Code. You'd have to load it up with plugins to make something resembling a fair comparison, and in that case I'd be very interested in how efficient VS Code still is.
    - RussianCow 6y ago
      I completely agree, but I would wager that VS Code would still be noticeably faster even if it had all of the functionality that IntelliJ does. As a daily user of the latter, it seems like they have a lot more room for optimization, whereas VS Code seems to have been built from day 1 with performance in mind. But this is pure anecdote so I could be wrong.

OOPMan 6y ago

We're not just Mac users. Electron apps are bloated ick but I guess at least Electron is equally repulsive on all OSes.

SirHound 6y ago

VSC is more of a memory hog but in use it isn’t noticeably slower than Nova.

ulisesrmzroche 6y ago

Where? Here in HN, a little bit, but out IRL? Out in real life no one knows or cares about this