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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.