From owner-freebsd-java Sat Feb 20 16:55:13 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (sri-gw.MT.net [206.127.105.141]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A17CC10E05 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 16:55:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@mt.sri.com) Received: from mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA26444; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 17:55:03 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com) Received: by mt.sri.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA26092; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 17:54:55 -0700 Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 17:54:55 -0700 Message-Id: <199902210054.RAA26092@mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: alk@pobox.com Cc: Mike Jeays , Nate Williams , freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: somewhat new to java questions In-Reply-To: <14031.19698.515280.475528@saphire> References: <36CDB479.65A0EFC6@chdev.com> <199902200138.SAA22208@mt.sri.com> <36CE170E.3F11D82D@statcan.ca> <199902200241.TAA22415@mt.sri.com> <36CE39E4.7221ED5F@statcan.ca> <14031.19698.515280.475528@saphire> X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > I haven't tried writing any code for Swing yet. I got discouraged > > by the performance of the demos - although I was very impressed > > with the general appearance and style of the various widgets. > > In general, swing apps perform better than awt apps. Bwah, hah, hah, hah, hah hah. *tears running down my face* You're joking, right? I don't know where you get your results, but we *certainly* don't see this with a number of very real (commercial) applications. The most heavily used Swing components (Dialog boxes, JPanels, JLabel, JMenus, etc...) extend the standard AWT components, making them 'heavier' than the corresponding AWT components both in terms of memory and CPU use. It wasn't always the case, but for performance and internationalization reasons, many of the early 'light-weight' components became heavy-weight. This is not to say that we at SRI don't love Swing and all the features and functionality it provides, but to say that it performs better than AWT applications is humorous to me. Recent JFC/Swing releases have performed *much* better than earlier versions, but they certainly aren't faster than stock AWT versions, mostly for the reasons outlined above. Note, I can create toy applications that perform better, but anything significantly complex and usable will be *much* slower using Swing. Note however that creating these complex applications will be *MUCH* *MUCH* *MUCH* harder to create w/out Swing, since you as a programmer will end up re-creating much of the functionality that already exists in the Swing toolkit (although there are many 3rd party beans that provide many of the more useful features of Swing). Nate ps. We've used *every* version of Swing released publically, including the newest JDK1.1.1-Beta release. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message