Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
KDE 3.3 released
Aloone_Jonez:
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn / BOB:
Your opinion. KDE is a lot faster than that of XP. Its skinnable and has a more friendly user face.
to clear up the FUD.
http://kdemyths.urbanlizard.com/
--- End quote ---
Not FUD but as you have already stated it's my opinion.
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn / BOB:
Bull! I'm running KDE on 24mb ram! Works fine! XP can't even install on that machine.
--- End quote ---
How the fuck did you manage that?
KDE is slow for me on 256MB.
What distro you use?
And what version of KDE?
You didn't do anything clever like recompile it after removing all the bloat, did you?
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn / BOB:
LOL!
--- End quote ---
My personal experiance is differant to yours, Viper has also said that he finds XP faster than KDE: http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=000758&p=3
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn / BOB:
Of course Flux Box is a lighter GUI. Its a lot lighter than even XP!
--- End quote ---
Flux Box is also just as easy to use because it's faster and more stable than KDE.
ICEWM is also very easy to use, and it is also lot faster than KDE.
quote:Originally posted by kn0wn / BOB:
I agree. Why should anyone pay for more ram to run windows when KDE can even run on 24 mb's of ram with no problem!
KDE. stable, fast and user friendly!
--- End quote ---
Windows XP is pretty snappy on my 256MB system, KDE is fucktardedly slow, but that's just my personal experiance.
[ August 19, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
skyman8081:
Meh. KDE is overrated.
I like GNOME better. (even if it is as bloated at KDE)
KDE runs sluggish on my box
[*]Athlon XP 2200+[*]512 MB RAM[*]1 GB Swap[*]Geforce FX 5200[*]Gentoo Linux 1.4[/list]
and I like the GNOME UI better.
but I usually have an XFCE sesh open just for XMMS/Juk
EDIT: added distro
[ August 19, 2004: Message edited by: Sauron / B0B ]
Aloone_Jonez:
quote:Originally posted by WMD:
KDE certainly isn't slow, as long as you let it use that huge chunk of RAM it likes. Usually 150MB assuming no swap and including disk cache.
You can run it on a 24/32MB machine, but it's slow and needs lots of disk churning. I should get my Slack 9.1 drive back into my 32MB machine and upgrade it to 3.2.3 from 3.1.4, see if that machine speeds up. (I doubt it will)
--- End quote ---
Why don't you use Flux Box, XFE, or ICEWM?
KDE is probably OK on 512MB, but if you only have 32MB Flux Box is good.
I you find KDE easier to use, then you could just use it to run small programs and do your system administration in, and just use Flux Box to run the larger applications.
The ICEWM or Fluxbox are easy enough for a newb like me.
Aloone_Jonez:
quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
Meh. KDE is overrated.
--- End quote ---
I agree.
quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
I like GNOME better. (even if it is as bloated at KDE)
--- End quote ---
I've not used GNOME much the version I last used on Redhat 9 was faster than KDE for some things but slower for others.
quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
KDE runs sluggish on my box
--- End quote ---
Is GNOME any faster for you?
quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
[*]Athlon XP 2200+[*]512 MB RAM[*]1 GB Swap[*]Geforce FX 5200[*]Gentoo Linux 1.4[/list][/b]
--- End quote ---
Bloody hell, no wonder its slow for me on my 256MB 1800MHz machine.
quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
and I like the GNOME UI better.
--- End quote ---
I prefer some this in KDEs UI and other thing in GNOME's UI.
quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
but I usually have an XFCE sesh open just for XMMS/Juk
EDIT: added distro
--- End quote ---
XFCE is a lot more stable and it's faster too.
[ August 19, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
skyman8081:
yesh, XFCE brings up a desktop instantly.
If I could find a command-line only app that could play m3u playlists, and support looping, I wouldn't even need the XFCE sesh
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version