From: David Scheffel Date: 2008-05-03T18:17:13+09:00 Subject: Re: RMagick 2.3.0 > RMagick is a volunteer effort. I know that and I greatly appreciate it. > I suppose you're trying to say that your opinion is that GraphicsMagick > is faster and more reliable than ImageMagick. I'm sure there are many > people who would agree with you, and many that would disagree with you. > Personally I don't have an opinion, and I can honestly say that such > considerations never entered my mind. Well, I've had no opinion about this at the beginning. Then I've tried to collect some information about it and came to the conclusion that GraphicsMagick seems to be the better choice in terms of reliability and speed (correct me if I'm wrong): 1) GraphicsMagick aims to be reliable as well as efficient in terms of memory consumption and speed: http://www.graphicsmagick.org/www/mission.html 1.1) seems to be proved by: http://www.graphicsmagick.org/www/BENCHMARKS.html though it is an old benchmark. I've found no evidence on the ImageMagick site that performace improvements have been made by then. 1.2) and proved by: http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=libmagick&searchon=names&suite=testing§ion=all ImageMagick: several entries are marked as security patch. http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=libgraphicsmagick&searchon=names&suite=testing§ion=all GraphicsMagick: no such markers > However, it's not the case that I dropped all support for > GraphicsMagick. RMagick 1.15.13 supports all releases of GraphicsMagick, > as well as older releases of ImageMagick and older releases of Ruby, > although that support is bug-fixes only. This is ongoing. I downloaded > the GM 1.2 beta last night, and if any changes are necessary to support > 1.2, I hope to make them in a new RMagick 1.15 very soon. I've just switched to ImageMagick and RMagick 2 yesterday, and will see how it is going. I've just got my server by then. If I will experience problems I guess I'm troubled. Well, I will go back to RMagick 1 for sure. But I won't be able to move to Ruby 1.9 by the time the new Rails is out. I have to mention that I've started my own company at the beginning of this year with the aim to establish my own web 2.0 platform. Yes, I know, yet another;-) So Ruby 1.9 could cut down my hardware costs a little, while I'm not making any profit. It would also offer me to go with he mainstream in regards of Rails, and thus guarantees the better Rails support. So in case I'll experience problems with RMagick 2 in production I'll come back to you. Maybe I can contribute some work then. Although I would have to learn a lot, since I used to program C++ for the windows platform only (Borland/Microsoft). -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.