On Wednesday 12 March 2003 21:42, Frank Van Damme wrote: > Second, It may not be the design goal to run on the lowest end stuff > (like a system built out of Linux, Dietlibc, TinyX and twm or > something :-) ), but I hope it isn't the goal of the kde project to > become as big as Windows Xp or something (exageration for the sake of > demonstration).
Current KDE works pretty well on machines that are more than 3 years old. If anything, they'd need more -- and cheap -- memory. What more do you want? Those are machines you can't even buy anymore. I admit it freely, I easily accept more bloat if the additional functionality I get in turn outweighs it. This may not be aesthetically pleasing, but I take it there's a significant group of people who factually agree with me in the way they choose. Now, how large is this later group? And, in comparison, how many people are there who absolutely need low resource use on a level of say 5 year old hardware. In my book, it would be tendentious to ask people whether they would prefer KDE using less resources. Everyone does. IMHO, one of the few valid questions in this regard is, How many people are exluded from using KDE because of its resource requirements. Possibly taking into account affordable hardware upgrades. Michael -- Michael Schuerig Most people would rather die than think. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] In fact, they do. http://www.schuerig.de/michael/ --Bertrand Russell
