Re: VS.NET is 10 times slower than VB6

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

> technology that is 10 years advanced SHOULD run slower, not faster

Technology that is 10 years advanced has 100's of times the functionality of
Technology that is 10 years behind it. Functionality requires more computer
resources. Therefore, the technology, run on the same hardware as the older
technology, certainly will run slower. However, as Moore's law points out,
machine hardware doubles in capacity every 5 years, so, comparing apples to
apples, it runs at an acceptable pace with the correct (current) hardware.
Of course, the older technology will run faster on the more current
hardware, but will do 100's of times less than the new technology. That is,
as they say, the way things work.

> that is progress right?

You are a programmer, right? You should know these things.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Paranoia is just a state of mind.

"John Rivers" <first10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1124892186.022790.11640@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ok you are right

technology that is 10 years advanced SHOULD run slower, not faster

that is progress right?

that's right

well done


Juan T. Llibre wrote:
> re:
> > in my experience if a computer is at 100% cpu for 6 seconds just to
> > output "hello world" to a browser something is very wrong indeed
>
> So, now you weren't "debugging" ? You were outputting "hello world" ?
>
> Your original post stated that :
>
> > It takes around 6 seconds to start debugging a very simple ASPX page
> > with VS.NET whereas VB6 takes under 0.5 seconds, even with
> > very large and complex projects.
>
> Which one was it ?
> Were you "debugging" or were you outputting "hello world" ?
>
> Liars need to have a good memory, if their lies are going to be believed.
>
> Here's a page that demonstrates that you are lying through your teeth :
>
> http://asp.net.do/test/helloworld.aspx
>
> That page has a button, a label, a textbox and one click event procedure.
>
> I added two Trace.Write statements at "Begin PreInit" and "End Render".
>
> Click on the link above, and see how long it took
> for ASP.NET to process and render helloworld.aspx.
>
> Hint : it's about 1.5 milliseconds, not 6 seconds as you claim.
>
> You are a lying troll!
>
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre
> ASP.NET MVP
> http://asp.net.do/foros/
> Foros de ASP.NET en Español
> Ven, y hablemos de ASP.NET...
> ======================
>
> "John Rivers" <first10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1124842485.123817.171430@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > interesting logic
> > i should be paid less if i question
> > the bad performance of vs.net ide?
> >
> > so if you pick up your new car
> > and it does 0-60mph in 45 seconds
> > whilst red lining at 7000rpm
> > you wouldn't question that?
> >
> > in my experience if a computer is
> > at 100% cpu for 6 seconds just to
> > output "hello world" to a browser
> > something is very wrong indeed
> >
> > i wouldn't be confident to use
> > such a system if my living depended on it
> > would you?
> >
> > especially when you have a vb6 based system
> > that has run quickly and bug free for 3 years
> > why would you switch to such a system?
> >
> > as most experienced developers will agree
> > there is more value in easy to maintain
> > code (and that includes a good ide) than
> > raw performance
> >
> > especially when the bottleneck in most
> > applications isn't the runtime - it is
> > usually something else
> >


.

Quantcast