It's me again, fellow PLUGgers,
After that object response from Olivier Fourdan, here's something a little
more subjective, but still for the benefit of Xfce. It's got less facts
and more first hand experience. For those of you who need to know how
those who've tried feel about things. :)
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 12:33:45 -0800
From: Anthony Ewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Memory use when running GNOME and KDE apps
"Hi Federico,
"A little of my experience may be helpful. Most of my Linux clients are
using it as servers. I use XFce exclusively on them because of the small
footprint and the reliability. I do not even install GNOME or KDE.
"In tests I ran before I discovered XFce, GNOME's and KDE's footprint and
CPU usage were so high that they would knock out various network functions
while they loaded or ran. I also had to reboot the server after using
them or the server would kernel crash within 24 hours of firing up GNOME
or KDE. I have no such problems with XFce.
"If the desktop "is" your application, then GNOME and KDE are more fun
than a barrel of monkeys. (WOOOW! See the pretty menu! See the kernel
freeze!)
"If you have serious work to accomplish, in my opinion, XFce is your only
option. To put it in another manner, my wife has stated that since I have
switched to XFce, I no longer swear when I work in LINUX. (This is not an
admission that I swear!)
"I hope this helps. --Tony
--> Jijo
---
Linux, MS-DOS, and Windows NT ...
... also known as the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
