i ve been using Objective Grid for a long time & its xtremely fast ... but since we our porting our app. to .Net we looking for an alternative to that as its method calls from .Net takes almost 3.5 times more time than in VB. so how do u compare essential grid against og grid for performance & new functionality. even ur showcase seems to take time to paint & takes a while before showing up any sample.
A general comment. Due to the JIT architecture of .NET applications, there is a performance penalty whenever .NET code is accessed for the first time. In this first access, the code is compiled to native code. Subsequent accesses to the same code behave much snappier. This behavior is due to the nature of .NET. It is likely as .NET matures, this performance hit will lessen.
With respect to Essential Grid, the architecture has been designed from scratch for the .NET environment with goal of a producing an efficient cell oriented grid. We think that we have succeeded. Care has been taken to handle performance problems that crop up in other grids. For example, if you are using your grid to actually hold data (as opposed to using a virtual grid), one bottleneck is the actual population of the grid. This can be time consuming. In Essential Grid, methods are available to allow for efficient population of the grid. These population methods that allow blocks of data to be added to the grid in an efficient manner are missing for some other grids.
As far as comparing the performance of Essentual Grid to other grids, for a dotnet grid with cell level formatting, I think it probably has no peers. If you are comparing it to an MFC grid running in native code, it probably is slower. But such an MFC grid is lacking the neat stuff that you will find in Essential Grid. Things like true GDI+ support, managed code, easy deployment and version management, etc. The things that .NET buys you that you would not have if you keep using an unmanaged MFC solution. These features come at the price of JIT which can affect initial performance.