Ok so first this is not exactly an empty Rails project. The Gemfile.lock has 221 lines, that amount of dependencies is not normal. To compare the application code for http://www.getharvest.com/ a +5 year old rails project with customers et all and it has 245 gem dependencies (including some that are our own). The +3 year old http://www.coopapp.com has 181 dependencies. Both of these start up within 3-4 seconds on my desktop and due to their age & size they have admitedly too many dependencies. Everytime one is removed I've rejoice.
Please don't call something with 221 dependencies a blank Rails project. More the amount of conflicting half baked gems you've added makes it an unfair complaint about Rails. I've assure you that there is no language / framework in the universe in which does not take a hit when adding too many dependencies. Either execution wise but more often it just breaks your spirit.
Anyway back to numbers, on 3 year old desktop under Linux, executing tests on the "blank" project yielded:
<pre>
real 0m8.698s
user 0m5.996s
sys 0m2.532s
</pre>
For some reason ruby is much slower on OSX than linux, that is an interesting project to investigate. I've think the platform difference shows the 10 second difference, spite the slower CPU. It would be quite interesting to understand why ruby is slow on OSX. Each to his own itch to scratch.
Why are you equating lines in Gemfile.lock with the number of dependencies?
There are 28 gems specified in the Gemfile. That's not an unreasonable amount of gems. With dependencies, the total amount of gems being required is 76.
Hell, only using Rails and sqlite-ruby will require 26 gems to be installed.
Please don't call something with 221 dependencies a blank Rails project. More the amount of conflicting half baked gems you've added makes it an unfair complaint about Rails. I've assure you that there is no language / framework in the universe in which does not take a hit when adding too many dependencies. Either execution wise but more often it just breaks your spirit.
Anyway back to numbers, on 3 year old desktop under Linux, executing tests on the "blank" project yielded:
<pre> real 0m8.698s user 0m5.996s sys 0m2.532s </pre>
For some reason ruby is much slower on OSX than linux, that is an interesting project to investigate. I've think the platform difference shows the 10 second difference, spite the slower CPU. It would be quite interesting to understand why ruby is slow on OSX. Each to his own itch to scratch.