BorlandTalk.com Borland discussion newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next          BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> Delphi Non-Technical View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Mike Vance Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 6:34 pm    Post subject: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed I am doing another comparison of .NET vs Win32 when it comes to photo manipulation such as what Paintshop Pro performs (e.g., using a brush to change the brightness or color of a photo as the brush moves fluidly along the photograph). If there is a .NET application out there that can perform this as performantly as Win32 on a 3GHZ 1Gb computer then perhaps .NET has matured to the level that I can use it for my applications. I tend to write applications that deal with photographic manipulation. Can anyone here comment on if they know of an existing ..NET application that shows off its pixel-pushing muscle, to a degree that it might make me a convert? Perhaps things have improved with .NET 2.0. I'm just trying to get past the hype to view the current reality, so any comments are appreciated. Thank you. Back to top Will DeWitt Jr. Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 7:05 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Mike Vance wrote: Quote: I am doing another comparison of .NET vs Win32 when it comes to photo manipulation such as what Paintshop Pro performs (e.g., using a brush to change the brightness or color of a photo as the brush moves fluidly along the photograph). I saw an article on this on Slashdot yesterday, seems like it might be useful to you-- Arno contributes a link to Paint.NET, a free-of-charge raster-graphics program for Windows XP machines. "Quote: 'Paint.NET is image and photo manipulation software designed to be used on computers that run Windows XP. Paint.NET is jointly developed at Washington State University with additional help from Microsoft, and is meant to be a free replacement for the MS Paint software that comes with all Windows operating systems. The programming language used to create Paint.NET is C#, with GDI+ extensions.' It really seems like a nice tool. I definitely prefer its UI to GIMP's." ---- Here's the URL for Paint.NET-- http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/ Here's the URL for the Slashdot article-- http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/22/1620248 I've only used it a little bit on this Pentium III 800 of mine and it seemed reasonably speedy, but heh, the UI flickered a lot in places and it still felt slow doing some basic things. I still suspect that native code has the edge for graphic manipulation, but you may find this interesting for comparison purposes. (Note: The WSU site appears to be hammered, but the Slashdot article had links to mirrors of the download and the screen shots of the app). Will -- Want a 64-bit Delphi compiler for AMD64 / IA-32e? Vote here-- http://qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details?reportid=7324 Back to top Marc Rohloff [TeamB] Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 7:18 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:34:56 -0800, Mike Vance wrote: Quote: n a 3GHZ 1Gb computer then perhaps .NET has matured to the level that I can use it for my applications. I tend to write applications that deal with photographic manipulation. Can anyone here comment on if they know of an ex You can try Paint.NET although the server seems to be down currently: http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/index.html -- Marc Rohloff [TeamB] marc rohloff -at- myrealbox -dot- com Back to top David Farrell-Garcia Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 7:37 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Mike Vance wrote: Quote: Can anyone here comment on if they know of an existing .NET application that shows off its pixel-pushing muscle, to a degree that it might make me a convert? These guys make a good image suite for Delphi which I can attest is very good. They also make a .Net version which I have not tried. Perhaps that can give you an idea of the capabilities. They do have a trial http://www.hicomponents.com -- David Farrell-Garcia Whidbey Island Software LLC Posted with XanaNews 1.17.1.2 Back to top Mike Vance Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 8:47 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed That is an awesome link. I am installing Paint.Net right now, and running it through its paces. I have determined that if I can get adequate performance out of a 3GHz 1Gb desktop then I will begin targeting DotNet for my future work. I will post my final results here in a few days. Back to top Mike Vance Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 8:48 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Another great link. Thank you. In a few days I will come to a conclusion and post my findings here. Quote: These guys make a good image suite for Delphi which I can attest is very good. They also make a .Net version which I have not tried. Perhaps that can give you an idea of the capabilities. They do have a trial http://www.hicomponents.com Back to top Mike Vance Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 9:13 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed It took me but a few minutes using Paint.NET to form a conclusion: DotNet is adequate for the image manipulation capabilities my applications require. I have not used many DotNet applications in the past, but back when I had a 1GHz 1GB desktop I was throughly disappointed by the performance of both the SharpDevelop and the C#Builder IDEs -- Delphi 7 ran like a rocket by comparison. Those experiences formed my initial impressions of DotNet. On a 3GHz 1GB desktop everything works tolerably now. I hated the idea of having to resort to garbage collection, and IL -- they seem so wasteful compared to the compilers of the past -- but it is more and more apparent that Win32's days are numbered to being a future emulation layer, so DotNet it is. Microsoft is going to do everything in its power to make Win32 inferior -- after all, it is too easily emulated by Lindows and WINE and could of ended up being a universal generic API a few years hence -- so Microsoft has to kill it, and they will succeed as they always do, so why should I continue to fight the inevitable. Back to top Alisdair Meredith Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 10:12 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Mike Vance wrote: Quote: I hated the idea of having to resort to garbage collection... What is so bad about garbage collection? As a memory management strategy it has its advantages and its penalties, but so long as it is supported well by your language it should not be too much of an issue. The main problem I see with garbage collection is accumulating 'dead' temporary objects. In 'deterministic' environments it is quite common to create temporary objects for many reasons, and this is no problem as they are instantly cleaned up. With GC, you start investigating all sorts of clever caching tricks just to beat the system that was put there to help you... .... or find other ways to solve problems that do not involve temporaries. Quote: Microsoft is going to do everything in its power to make Win32 inferior -- Why would MS do that with their flagship, proprietory product? Quote: after all, it is too easily emulated by Lindows and WINE and could of ended up being a universal generic API a few years hence Whereas the .NET API is now an ECMA and ISO standard, thanks largely to MS efforts to get the standard published, and there are at least 2 other implementations out there beyond the MS reference platform (mono and rotor) I beleive other vendors may be looking into .NET runtimes of their own too, just as they implemented their own JVMs... Go with .NET when you see it brings you advantages. If you see those advantages today, maybe in terms of market acceptance(?) then now is the time to move. If you expect that to be the case by the time your product ships, then it is probably time to investigate migrating. Otherwise, I would wait until there is a proven advantage in what the ..NET framework offers you. I'm hoping to hold out till 2.0 is available myself and do all my learning in one shot. Then again, I am deliberately holding out for generics too <g> AlisdairM(TeamB) Back to top Alexander Adam Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 11:23 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed [..] Quote: The main problem I see with garbage collection is accumulating 'dead' temporary objects. In 'deterministic' environments it is quite common to create temporary objects for many reasons, and this is no problem as they are instantly cleaned up. With GC, you start investigating all sorts of clever caching tricks just to beat the system that was put there to help you... ... or find other ways to solve problems that do not involve temporaries. erm... delete command? Alex Back to top Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] Guest Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 11:50 pm    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Alisdair Meredith wrote: Quote: Mike Vance wrote: I hated the idea of having to resort to garbage collection... What is so bad about garbage collection? As a memory management strategy it has its advantages and its penalties, but so long as it is supported well by your language it should not be too much of an issue. The main problem I see with garbage collection is accumulating 'dead' temporary objects. In 'deterministic' environments it is quite common to create temporary objects for many reasons, and this is no problem as they are instantly cleaned up. With GC, you start investigating all sorts of clever caching tricks just to beat the system that was put there to help you... ... or find other ways to solve problems that do not involve temporaries. AFAIK, garbage collected systems have generally very fast allocation of items, so here you win (OK, stack-based temporaries in C can also be very fast, but this is IMO not different in a GC based system). Also, in theory, and optimally, GC is done in times when the system is not so busy, so here you win again. Deterministic deallocation must be done at the time it is started, and can't usually be deferred to later. At compile time, you usually don't know about the necessity of the deallocation *at that time* yet. So I'd say that GCed systems with sufficient memory should be faster than or just as fast as non-GCed systems. Yet .NET appears sluggish. Most of this is due to the fact that at startup, IL code is jitted, and later on, newly used code must be jitted as well. Here you lose. But where you lose most is the currently non-hardware-accelerated GDI+. I'm sure that can be solved. -- Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://rvelthuis.bei.t-online.de "You have to stay in shape. My grandmother, she started walking five miles a day when she was 60. She's 97 today and we don't know where she is!" - Ellen DeGeneres. Back to top Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] Guest Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 12:19 am    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Will DeWitt Jr. wrote: Quote: Mike Vance wrote: I am doing another comparison of .NET vs Win32 when it comes to photo manipulation such as what Paintshop Pro performs (e.g., using a brush to change the brightness or color of a photo as the brush moves fluidly along the photograph). I saw an article on this on Slashdot yesterday, seems like it might be useful to you-- Arno contributes a link to Paint.NET, a free-of-charge raster-graphics program for Windows XP machines. "Quote: 'Paint.NET is image and photo manipulation software designed to be used on computers that run Windows XP. Paint.NET is jointly developed at Washington State University with additional help from Microsoft, and is meant to be a free replacement for the MS Paint software that comes with all Windows operating systems. The programming language used to create Paint.NET is C#, with GDI+ extensions.' It really seems like a nice tool. I definitely prefer its UI to GIMP's." ---- Here's the URL for Paint.NET-- http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/ Interesting, but www.eecs.wsu.edu refuses to connect. Is there a mirror of it somewhere? -- Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://rvelthuis.bei.t-online.de "All I need to make a comedy is a park, a policeman and a pretty girl." -- Charlie Chaplin (1889-1977), in My Autobiography (1964) Back to top Will DeWitt Jr. Guest Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 3:32 am    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote: Quote: Interesting, but www.eecs.wsu.edu refuses to connect. Is there a mirror of it somewhere? As I said in the original post, the Slashdot article (in the comments section) had a few mirrors. I wasn't in any hurry so I just ran wget with it setup to mirror the site locally (since I figured if I'd actually gone to the site myself I'd probably look at just about every page). YMMV, of course. But just searching for "mirror" on the comments from Slashdot should yield a hit or two. Will -- Want a 64-bit Delphi compiler for AMD64 / IA-32e? Vote here-- http://qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details?reportid=7324 Back to top Carlos Fandango Guest Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 7:16 am    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Doesn't do anything near as much as Paint.Net but a fun, different app none the less: http://www.windowsforms.net/Applications/application.aspx?PageID=50&tabindex=8 -Euan "Mike Vance" <nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote Quote: I am doing another comparison of .NET vs Win32 when it comes to photo manipulation such as what Paintshop Pro performs (e.g., using a brush to change the brightness or color of a photo as the brush moves fluidly along the photograph). If there is a .NET application out there that can perform this as performantly as Win32 on a 3GHZ 1Gb computer then perhaps .NET has matured to the level that I can use it for my applications. I tend to write applications that deal with photographic manipulation. Can anyone here comment on if they know of an existing .NET application that shows off its pixel-pushing muscle, to a degree that it might make me a convert? Perhaps things have improved with .NET 2.0. I'm just trying to get past the hype to view the current reality, so any comments are appreciated. Thank you. Back to top Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] Guest Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 8:25 am    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed Will DeWitt Jr. wrote: Quote: Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote: Interesting, but www.eecs.wsu.edu refuses to connect. Is there a mirror of it somewhere? As I said in the original post, the Slashdot article (in the comments section) had a few mirrors. I could find mirrors for the main page, but he download links in the mirrors all point to that one site, though. -- Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://rvelthuis.bei.t-online.de "When his life was ruined, his family killed, his farm destroyed, Job knelt down on the ground and yelled up to the heavens, "Why god? Why me?" and the thundering voice of God answered, "There's just something about you that pisses me off." -- Stephen King. Back to top Andre Kaufmann Guest Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 8:46 am    Post subject: Re: .NET Vs Win32 Photo Manipulation Speed "Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]" <velthuis (AT) gmail (DOT) com> ... news:xn0drf1wb8xr5um00rrudys-toshiba (AT) www (DOT) teamb.com... Quote: [...] Yet .NET appears sluggish. Most of this is due to the fact that at startup, IL code is jitted, and later on, newly used code must be jitted as well. Here you lose. But where you lose most is the currently non-hardware-accelerated GDI+. I'm sure that can be solved. What about the option to precompile the applications during installation using ngen so they don?t have to be jiited - as it?s done with the .NET libraries during the installation of the ..NET framework ? Surely i would use that option only if the JIT compilation has a significant impact on the startup time. My experience with the most applications which have long startup times is, that they would startup much faster, if they would initialize their components asynchronously after startup. At work i?ve changed our server (native code) to upload the firmware to the hardware asynchronously, which gave us a boost of 20 seconds. That doesn?t sound to be much, but it?s a huge difference if you have to startup your application many times during debugging / developing and it needs < 1 second or 20 seconds. Andre Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> Delphi Non-Technical All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next Page 1 of 4   Jump to: Select a forum C++ Builder Newsgroups----------------C++ BuilderC++ Builder (ActiveX)C++ Builder (Announcements)C++ Builder (Command Line Tools)C++ Builder DatabasesC++ Builder Databases (ADO)C++ Builder Databases (Desktop)C++ Builder Databases (InterBase Express)C++ Builder Databases (Multi-Tier)C++ Builder Databases (SQL Servers)C++ Builder (Graphics)C++ Builder (IDE)C++ Builder (Internet)C++ Builder (Internet Socket)C++ Builder (Internet Web)C++ Builder (Jobs)C++ Builder (Language)C++ Builder (Language C++)C++ Builder (Compatibility with MFC)C++ Builder (Native API)C++ Builder (Non-Technical)C++ Builder (Students)C++ Builder (Third Party Tools)C++ Builder (Upgrade)C++ Builder (VCL)C++ Builder (VCL Components Usage)C++ Builder (VCL Components Development)C++ Builder (VCL Usage)C++ Builder (WinAPI)C++ Builder Installation Delphi Newsgroups----------------Delphi (General)Delphi ActiveX Controls UsageDelphi ActiveX Controls DevelopmentDelphi As400Delphi DatabasesDelphi Databases (ADO)Delphi Databases (dbExpress)Delphi Databases (Desktop)Delphi Databases (InterBase Express)Delphi Databases (Multi-Tier)Delphi Databases (SQL Servers)Delphi DeploymentDelphi GraphicsDelphi IDEDelphi InternationalizationDelphi InternetDelphi Internet Isapi-WebBrokerDelphi Internet WebSnapDelphi Internet WinsockDelphi JobsDelphi Language BASMDelphi Language ObjectPascalDelphi Model Driven Architecture (General)Delphi Model Driven Architecture (Third Party)Delphi MultimediaDelphi Native APIDelphi Non-TechnicalDelphi ObjectPascalDelphi OLE AutomationDelphi OO designDelphi OpenToolsAPIDelphi Reporting-ChartingDelphi RTLDelphi StudentsDelphi TeamSourceDelphi Thirdparty ToolsDelphi Thirdparty Tools (General)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (IntraWeb)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (RaveReports)Delphi UpgradeDelphi VCLDelphi VCL ComponentsDelphi VCL Components UsingDelphi VCL Components WritingDelphi WebServices SOAPDelphi WinAPIDelphi XMLDelphi Installationcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.misccomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.usagecomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.writingcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.databasescomp.lang.pascal.delphi.misccomp.sources.delphi JBuilder Newsgroups----------------JBuilderJBuilder AnnouncementsJBuilder Applet IssuesJBuilder As400JBuilder CompilerJBuilder CORBA/RMIJBuilder DatabasesJBuilder DB SwingJBuilder DebuggerJBuilder DeploymentJBuilder DocumentationJBuilder EnterpriseJBuilder HandheldJBuilder IDEJBuilder JavaJBuilder JavaAPIJBuilder Java LanguageJBuilder Java SwingJBuilder Java BeansJBuilder Java Beans UsageJBuilder Java Beans DevelopmentJBuilder JBCLJBuilder JDataStoreJBuilder JobsJBuilder LinuxJBuilder MacintoshJBuilder & MobileSetJBuilder MultiLingual AppsJBuilder Non-TechnicalJBuilder OpenToolsJBuilder Servlets (JSP)JBuilder StudentsJBuilder Team DevelopmentJBuilder Thirdparty ToolsJBuilder UpgradeJBuilder Installation InterBase Newsgroups----------------InterBaseInterBase Bug DiscussionInterBase GeneralInterBase IBConsoleInterBase OpenSourceInterBase ReplicationInterBase SQLInterBase ThirdpartyInterBase Installation Miscellaneous Borland Newsgroups----------------AppCenterAppServerEnteraVisiBroker  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.