Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: Agent007 on 24 April 2003, 21:30
-
Hi all,
I find Konqueror and Nautilus too heavy on the 600MHZ Athlon system. Are there any other better alternatives u guys use?
Apart from MC..
thanks,
007
-
Ummmm.... 600Mhz is too little for them?
Wow, OSX on a g4 400Mhz runs great.... is Gnome and KDE that much of resource hogs? Just wondring.
My only experience with them are on very decked out systems.
-
Maybe the guy has a crappy video card, or 64 megs of RAM.
I use red hat linux 8 on an athlon 700 and it runs *almost* as fast as my athlon XP 2100+ machine. An athlon 700 is crap, I mean, it's probably slower than a 400 mhz G4.
-
i too am currently looking for the perfect file manager.
i am currently using DFM with (http://www.kaisersite.de/dfm/) XFce, which you can see here (http://calumnine.cjb.net/dfm.jpg), somebody said it was like the OS/2 file manager but i wouldn't know. also i have been using ROX Filer (http://rox.sourceforge.net/) which looks nicer but isn't as good as DFM. Chuck's page (http://chuck.burkins.net/linuxfile.html) has some interesting file managers, but most of them are commander clones except the ones already mentioned. here's a list of likely looking utilities from ibiblio (http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/utils/file/managers/!INDEX.short.html), i saw a much longer list last night when i was downloading some likely candidates for 'best' file manager (only one i got to work was fileshell, which i don't like yet) and if i find that list again, i'll post it here.
in my opinion distros should provide a few alternative file managers and integrate them into Enlightenment, XFce, IceWM, whatever the nonKDE/GNOME choices for desktop are on that system (hmmph, only windowmaker on redhat...)
depending on what system you are using, you might already have xfm installed. it's a bit like dfm, but a lot worse. also, i tried gentoo for a while which is a really nice file manager, but is still a norton commander clone (actually it's a clone of an old amiga file manager, but it's like the other commanders).
and i have a celery 700 which is butt-slow, and konqueror runs fine on it, as does all of kde 3.1 with all the eye candy. however since i dual boot between slack 9 and peanut linux (which has no GNOME or KDE) i can see the merit of not having a shitload of clutter on your drive simply in order to run konqueror. i was looking into installing konqueror in peanut linux, but i realised it would be necessary really to install the whole KDE/Qt package, which would break the record for a stupid diskspace hog of a file manager (especially since dfm takes up about 600k or something).
I did actually start a similar thread at http://forum.fuckmicrosoft.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=001307 (http://forum.fuckmicrosoft.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=001307) so let me know if you find a file manager you like.
edit: here we go! here's (http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/X11/desktop/!INDEX.html) that longer list on ibiblio that i mentioned.
[ April 24, 2003: Message edited by: Calum: crusader for peace & freedom ]
-
Try going w/ an earlier distro that uses KDE 2 or 3.0. If that doesn't work you can always get familiar w/ the command line and run Window Maker and then use konqueror or nautilus. Window Maker runs a bit faster.
-
Well, I've always been a Konqueror fan, since version 1.0 of KDE, when it was buggy as hell. :D I've never thought about changing it with anything else, eventhough I also like Nautilus, especially in GNOME 2. As for the speed or lack thereof, it is propably due to a cheap graphics card or adapter.