Pros of Glances

• More comprehensive system monitoring with support for a wider range of metrics and plugins
• Cross-platform compatibility (Linux, macOS, Windows) and web-based interface
• Actively maintained with frequent updates and a larger community

Cons of Glances

• Higher resource usage due to its extensive feature set
• Steeper learning curve for configuration and customization
• More complex installation process, especially for non-Linux systems

Code Comparison

Glances (Python):

from glances_api import Glances

glances = Glances()
cpu_percent = glances.getCpu()
print(f"CPU Usage: {cpu_percent}%")

ytop (Rust):

use ytop::cpu::Cpu;

let cpu = Cpu::new();
let usage = cpu.get_usage();
println!("CPU Usage: {}%", usage);

Both projects aim to provide system monitoring capabilities, but they differ in their approach and target audience. Glances offers a more feature-rich and extensible solution, while ytop focuses on simplicity and performance. Glances is better suited for users who need detailed system information and are comfortable with more complex setups, whereas ytop is ideal for those who prefer a lightweight, easy-to-use tool with a clean interface.

Pros of btop

• More comprehensive system monitoring, including network and disk I/O
• Customizable interface with themes and layout options
• Actively maintained with regular updates and bug fixes

Cons of btop

• Higher resource usage due to more features and graphical elements
• Steeper learning curve for configuration and customization
• May be overkill for users seeking simple system monitoring

Code Comparison

ytop:

pub fn get_cpu_data() -> Result<Vec<f64>, std::io::Error> {
    let cpu = sys_info::cpu_num().unwrap();
    let load = sys_info::loadavg()?;
    Ok(vec![load.one, load.five, load.fifteen])
}

btop:

vector<float> Cpu::get_cpu_speeds(void) {
    vector<float> speeds;
    for (const auto& cpu : cpus) {
        speeds.push_back(cpu.current_freq);
    }
    return speeds;
}

Summary

btop offers a more feature-rich and customizable system monitoring experience compared to ytop. However, this comes at the cost of higher resource usage and complexity. ytop provides a simpler, lightweight alternative for basic system monitoring needs. The code comparison shows different approaches to retrieving CPU data, with btop using a more detailed, per-core method.

Pros of htop

• More mature and widely used project with a larger community
• Supports a broader range of Unix-like systems, including Linux, FreeBSD, and macOS
• Offers more detailed system information and process management capabilities

Cons of htop

• Written in C, which may be less approachable for some developers compared to Rust
• User interface is less modern and visually appealing
• Slower development cycle and less frequent updates

Code Comparison

htop (C):

void Process_writeCommand(Process* this, int writeCommons) {
   if (this->comm && (Process_isUserlandThread(this) || writeCommons)) {
      xSnprintf(this->cmdline, sizeof(this->cmdline), "%s", this->comm);
   } else if (this->st_exe && *this->st_exe) {
      xSnprintf(this->cmdline, sizeof(this->cmdline), "%s", this->st_exe);
   }
}

ytop (Rust):

pub fn new() -> Result<Self> {
    let mut cpu = Cpu::new()?;
    cpu.set_data_collector(Box::new(CpuDataCollector::new()?));
    Ok(Self { cpu })
}

While both projects serve similar purposes, htop is more established and feature-rich, whereas ytop offers a modern, Rust-based alternative with a sleeker interface but fewer advanced features.

Pros of bottom

• More actively maintained with frequent updates
• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux)
• Customizable UI with themes and color schemes

Cons of bottom

• Larger binary size and potentially higher resource usage
• Steeper learning curve due to more advanced features

Code comparison

ytop:

pub fn new() -> Result<Cpu, Error> {
    Ok(Cpu {
        cpu_count: num_cpus::get(),
        prev_idle: vec![0; num_cpus::get()],
        prev_non_idle: vec![0; num_cpus::get()],
    })
}

bottom:

pub fn init() -> Result<Self> {
    let sys = System::new_all();
    let num_cpus = sys.cpus().len();
    Ok(Cpu {
        sys,
        num_cpus,
        cpu_data: vec![CpuData::default(); num_cpus],
    })
}

Both projects are system monitoring tools written in Rust. ytop is simpler and more lightweight, while bottom offers more features and customization options. ytop's code focuses on basic CPU information, whereas bottom initializes a more comprehensive system monitoring structure. bottom's active development and cross-platform support make it a more versatile choice, but it may be overkill for users seeking a minimalist solution.

Pros of s-tui

• Written in Python, making it more accessible for contributions and modifications
• Provides more detailed CPU information, including frequency and temperature
• Offers a stress test feature for CPU performance evaluation

Cons of s-tui

• Less visually appealing interface compared to ytop's modern design
• Limited to CPU monitoring, while ytop covers multiple system resources
• Slower refresh rate and potentially higher resource usage due to Python implementation

Code Comparison

s-tui (Python):

def get_cpu_freq():
    cpu_freq = psutil.cpu_freq()
    return cpu_freq.current if cpu_freq else None

ytop (Rust):

fn get_cpu_usage() -> f64 {
    let cpu = sys.cpu_usage();
    cpu.round()
}

Summary

s-tui focuses on detailed CPU monitoring with stress testing capabilities, while ytop provides a more comprehensive system overview with a modern interface. s-tui's Python implementation makes it more accessible for modifications but may result in slower performance compared to ytop's Rust-based design. The choice between the two depends on specific monitoring needs and preference for either detailed CPU information or a broader system overview.

Pros of gtop

• Written in JavaScript, making it more accessible for web developers
• Supports custom color themes
• Includes a Docker stats view

Cons of gtop

• Generally slower performance compared to ytop
• Less detailed CPU and memory usage information
• Limited customization options for displayed metrics

Code Comparison

gtop (JavaScript):

const si = require('systeminformation');
const blessed = require('blessed');
const contrib = require('blessed-contrib');

// Main application logic

ytop (Rust):

use crossterm::event::{self, Event, KeyCode};
use std::io;
use std::time::Duration;

fn main() -> Result<(), Box<dyn std::error::Error>> {
    // Main application logic
}

Key Differences

• ytop is written in Rust, offering better performance and lower resource usage
• gtop provides a Docker stats view, which is not available in ytop
• ytop offers more detailed CPU and memory usage information
• gtop supports custom color themes, while ytop has limited theming options
• ytop has a more modern and polished user interface

Both tools serve as system monitors with real-time updates, but they cater to different user preferences and requirements. ytop is generally faster and more resource-efficient, while gtop offers some unique features like Docker stats and custom themes.