Comments:

Why do they compare Vista with 1.6.0_07 and Ubuntu with 1.6.0_10?

I am not pro windows or so, just wondering why a comparison uses so different settings:
It doesn't even mention if its 32bit or 62 bit Systems or am I blind?

With these circumstances I would not trust the conclusion this article gives us...

Posted by Werner on December 20, 2008 at 10:55 AM CET #

I changed from vista -> ubuntu recently and I can't believe the speed differences. I knew vista was crap, but didn't realise the scale of it.
Even my windows xp running in virtualbox using eclipse is faster than vista running on the bare metal doing the same thing.... unbelievable!

Posted by ben on December 20, 2008 at 12:34 PM CET #

Werner,

I had the chance to work with Netbeans 6.5 / GF v2 on Ubuntu with the same hardware as my vista machine. It was significanlty faster, my suspicion was the faster file access / caching under ubuntu. In another project Ubuntu ran on another hardware(so it was not comparable to my), and it was unbelievable fast,

but you are right, they should use u10 on Vista as well...

thanks,

adam

Posted by Adam Bien on December 20, 2008 at 01:07 PM CET #

I bet they have to publish a follow up article soon. I'm sure they've used the client vm on windows and the server vm on linux. I've run scimark often enough to know that there almost no difference for a cpu bound benchmark on windows and linux.

And as for Netbeans I'd say the opposite for the UI. Using the GTK look and feel makes the menu redraw much slower than on windows (it's pretty sluggish on linux). Metal L&F's performance is better, but it looks damned bad.
JDK 6u10 creates an amazing native look on vista.

Posted by Stefan on December 20, 2008 at 02:22 PM CET #

Ben,

I have the impression that, on my machine runs eclipse even faster in XP running on VMWare which itself runs on Vista, faster than on bare Vista :-),

regards,

adam

Posted by Adam Bien on December 20, 2008 at 02:29 PM CET #

Stefan,

why not with Nimbus? It performs well and looks good :-) -> should work on Ubuntu,

regards,

adam

Posted by Adam Bien on December 20, 2008 at 02:30 PM CET #

On my 3 years old laptop with single core 2.8 GHz CPU and 2 GB RAM I can compile our whole Maven 2 project in less than 8 minutes under Ubuntu.

On my 6 months old workstation with 6 GB RAM and two dual core CPUs under Windows 2003 server it takes more than 12 minutes to compile.

However I still do not believe that my numbers are representative and that there is somethings wrong with my workstation.

BTW: Adam, would be great to hear something about Maven in combination with Netbeans.

Posted by Carsten Schlipf on December 27, 2008 at 12:14 PM CET #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: NOT allowed
Online Workshops
realworldpatterns.com
...the last 150 posts
...the last 10 comments
License