Skip to content

README "16.4 MB vs 797.8 MB" comparison is misleading about actual memory usage Body #77

@aa12gq

Description

@aa12gq
Image

The README currently features a comparison image captioned "SideX 16.4 MB vs Visual Studio Code 797.8 MB", which strongly implies that SideX uses 16.4 MB of runtime memory. In practice, this is not the case.

On macOS (Apple Silicon), the tauri://localhost WKWebView process alone consumes ~600-700 MB with a typical workspace open (a few files + terminal). Adding the Rust backend process, total memory is well above 500 MB —
comparable to, and in some cases exceeding, VSCode itself.

I suspect the 16.4 MB figure refers to the compiled Rust binary size (disk), not runtime RAM — but the README frames it alongside "797.8 MB" (which appears to be VSCode's runtime memory), making it look like a 50× improvement.
That's misleading, especially given the project's pitch of "VSCode's workbench, without Electron" and the claim that "Tauri replaces that with the webview already on your system... costing almost nothing extra."

To be clear: Tauri does save disk space and backend memory vs. Electron. But the Monaco editor, xterm.js, and the entire VSCode workbench TypeScript code still runs inside a browser engine (WKWebView/WebView2), and that's
where most of the memory goes. The webview is not "free."

Suggestions:

  1. Clarify what the "16.4 MB" actually measures (binary size / disk footprint).
  2. Remove or update the comparison screenshot until it reflects runtime memory.
  3. Publish real runtime memory benchmarks as promised in the README ("under 200 MB at idle on macOS").

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type
    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions