Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Ian Santopietro
Own up a large number roof different applications, and the load that
Unity/Compiz handles without a hitch brings the frame rates in Gnome
Shell/Mutter crashing down. Mutter will seem smoother at first, but this
tells me that it's inferior in terms of resource management.
On Jan 29, 2012 3:34 PM, "Josh Strawbridge" 
wrote:

> i know i can remove the global app menus that way but i don't really like
> to do that since the remaining app menus don't really match so great with
> the window decorations... or at least they didn't a few months ago.  also i
> kinda want to keep unity as full unity as i can so i can actually check out
> whatever updates may happen to it.  i keep hoping to eventually see an
> option to only have the menus in the top bar when a window is maximized
> since i think it's a nice use of the space in that situation.
>
> i actually tried setting the launcher to only come out when i mouse to the
> top left corner just before i sent that but for some reason it never would
> come out without moving down the left side of the screen some (about twice
> the top panel/bar's height) so it was actually worse than just leaving it
> left set for the left side.
>
> --
> Josh Strawbridge
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Josh Strawbridge
i know i can remove the global app menus that way but i don't really like
to do that since the remaining app menus don't really match so great with
the window decorations... or at least they didn't a few months ago.  also i
kinda want to keep unity as full unity as i can so i can actually check out
whatever updates may happen to it.  i keep hoping to eventually see an
option to only have the menus in the top bar when a window is maximized
since i think it's a nice use of the space in that situation.

i actually tried setting the launcher to only come out when i mouse to the
top left corner just before i sent that but for some reason it never would
come out without moving down the left side of the screen some (about twice
the top panel/bar's height) so it was actually worse than just leaving it
left set for the left side.

-- 
Josh Strawbridge
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Stefanos A.
2012/1/29 Chow Loong Jin 

> On 29/01/2012 23:53, supernova wrote:
> > maybe it is because I have intel graphics, but I find gnomeshell
> > faster then unity, at first and clean installation I mean. Let's hope
> > better for the future...
>
> I have two laptops, one of which runs on the Intel GMA 965/X3100, and
> another
> running on Sandy Bridge graphics. I can safely say that under both of these
> conditions, in no case is Mutter faster than Unity. It's probably an issue
> of
> perception and bad press floating around, which can possibly stem from
> Compiz
> being that much more customizable than Mutter.
>
>
Then, again, my E-350 APU (AMD 6310 graphics w/ R600g) is tremendously
faster in Gnome Shell than Unity. In Gnome Shell I can autoscroll a webpage
at a smooth 50-60fps; in Unity, I cannot break past 20-25fps at the same
page.

*Everything* is smoother in Gnome Shell: animations, scrolling, the dash
animation, the multi-desktop animation. The difference in performance is so
visible that I switched away from Unity just for that. Unity animations
were so stattery that I would start feeling physically ill after thirty
minutes or so.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Matthew Paul Thomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

supernova wrote on 29/01/12 08:22:
> 
> Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it
> works very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and more fat
> than the gnome-shell, as it happened for 11.10, 11.04, ... . I
> guess it is due to compiz, which is more heavy than mutter. Why
> don't use mutter then? Unity doesn't use effects as rotation and
> wobbly. So mutter could be sufficient.
> 
> ...


When Unity switched from Mutter to Compiz in 2010, one of the Unity
developers posted an explanation.


And so did one of the Compiz developers.


- -- 
mpt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk8luXMACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecrmhACePPq8c5rnyBfAjWUTYVhurS6L
wosAnilV8XXzFmxshM0TWDWlRPUhrAOa
=rBtG
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Carl Ansell

sudo apt-get remove appmenu-gtk3 appmenu-gtk appmenu-qt to remove global menu. 
And you can set the launcher to appear when the mouse hits the top left corner 
so it is more like gnome-shell.


Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 14:57:20 -0600
From: holyknightjos...@gmail.com
To: ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

i started using gnome shell on my desktop and unity 2d on my htpc the reason i 
stopped using unity 3d on my desktop is because every now and then while i was 
playing WoW in wine it would cause my framerates to drop to unplayable (i'm 
talking like .5 to 3 fps) levels. 


yea it seems gnome shell and mutter uses about twice as much cpu power as unity 
and compiz but less ram. how they affect performance changes depending on the 
situation. i can play WoW in gnome shell without running into any problems but 
i can't in unity (or couldn't i haven't tried in a few months).  my point is 
that simply looking at numbers is stupid. 

i didn't like either of them to start with but i don't have a problem with 
either of them now.  ok well i have a few problems... i hate global app menus, 
dislike left sided buttons and the way the launcher gets in the way in unity.   
 i don't like the lack of features to the app dock in gnome shell, having my 
app indicators at the bottom left corner and the way those sometimes get in the 
way of things in gnome shell.  i really liked where the dash button was in 
11.04 and i don't like the big ubuntu button on the dock now.  i hate how rigid 
and inflexible the top panel/bar is in both of them and the way i can't auto 
hide either of them.  i should probably mention global app menus again as a 
dislike because those things are annoying oh and it's a pain to get to my Wine 
applications in unity.


they both generally work well enough for me though i think i prefer gnome shell 
over unity because i hate global app menus and the unity launcher gets in my 
way more than gnome shell's app indicators.

i'm not saying i still don't miss my old gnome2 panel setup sometimes but i can 
handle using either unity or gnome shell now... i just wish i could mix and 
match features from both.

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Chow Loong Jin  wrote:



On 29/01/2012 23:53, supernova wrote:

> maybe it is because I have intel graphics, but I find gnomeshell

> faster then unity, at first and clean installation I mean. Let's hope

> better for the future...



I have two laptops, one of which runs on the Intel GMA 965/X3100, and another

running on Sandy Bridge graphics. I can safely say that under both of these

conditions, in no case is Mutter faster than Unity. It's probably an issue of

perception and bad press floating around, which can possibly stem from Compiz

being that much more customizable than Mutter.



--

Kind regards,

Loong Jin




___

Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana

Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net

Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana

More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp




-- 
Josh Strawbridge



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp   
  ___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Josh Strawbridge
i started using gnome shell on my desktop and unity 2d on my htpc
the reason i stopped using unity 3d on my desktop is because every now and
then while i was playing WoW in wine it would cause my framerates to drop
to unplayable (i'm talking like .5 to 3 fps) levels.
yea it seems gnome shell and mutter uses about twice as much cpu power as
unity and compiz but less ram. how they affect performance changes
depending on the situation. i can play WoW in gnome shell without running
into any problems but i can't in unity (or couldn't i haven't tried in a
few months).  my point is that simply looking at numbers is stupid.

i didn't like either of them to start with but i don't have a problem with
either of them now.  ok well i have a few problems... i hate global app
menus, dislike left sided buttons and the way the launcher gets in the way
in unity.i don't like the lack of features to the app dock in gnome
shell, having my app indicators at the bottom left corner and the way those
sometimes get in the way of things in gnome shell.  i really liked where
the dash button was in 11.04 and i don't like the big ubuntu button on the
dock now.  i hate how rigid and inflexible the top panel/bar is in both of
them and the way i can't auto hide either of them.  i should probably
mention global app menus again as a dislike because those things are
annoying oh and it's a pain to get to my Wine applications in unity.


they both generally work well enough for me though i think i prefer gnome
shell over unity because i hate global app menus and the unity launcher
gets in my way more than gnome shell's app indicators.
i'm not saying i still don't miss my old gnome2 panel setup sometimes but i
can handle using either unity or gnome shell now... i just wish i could mix
and match features from both.

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Chow Loong Jin wrote:

> On 29/01/2012 23:53, supernova wrote:
> > maybe it is because I have intel graphics, but I find gnomeshell
> > faster then unity, at first and clean installation I mean. Let's hope
> > better for the future...
>
> I have two laptops, one of which runs on the Intel GMA 965/X3100, and
> another
> running on Sandy Bridge graphics. I can safely say that under both of these
> conditions, in no case is Mutter faster than Unity. It's probably an issue
> of
> perception and bad press floating around, which can possibly stem from
> Compiz
> being that much more customizable than Mutter.
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Loong Jin
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


-- 
Josh Strawbridge
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Chow Loong Jin
On 29/01/2012 23:53, supernova wrote:
> maybe it is because I have intel graphics, but I find gnomeshell
> faster then unity, at first and clean installation I mean. Let's hope
> better for the future...

I have two laptops, one of which runs on the Intel GMA 965/X3100, and another
running on Sandy Bridge graphics. I can safely say that under both of these
conditions, in no case is Mutter faster than Unity. It's probably an issue of
perception and bad press floating around, which can possibly stem from Compiz
being that much more customizable than Mutter.

-- 
Kind regards,
Loong Jin



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread supernova
maybe it is because I have intel graphics, but I find gnomeshell
faster then unity, at first and clean installation I mean. Let's hope
better for the future...
Supernova

2012/1/29 balint...@gmail.com :
> You should check out these:
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_desktop_managers1&num=3
>
> Anyway i hope mutter will improve in the future. But i wouldnt stick with it
> desipte low memory usage.
>
>
> --
> Csonka Bálint @913
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> Post to     : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread frederik.nn...@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 15:37, balint...@gmail.com wrote:

> You can not be serious. Im not fan of moving away from the Gnome project
> at all, but sticking with compiz was one of the best descisions made in
> ubuntu so far.


For example the "Cube" was an outstanding feature. People used to come to
my house to watch me showcasing it.

Compiz is not yet as mature as Metacity was at it's finest times, but it
contains visionary ideas ans pioneering thought, already implemented well
beyond "proof of concept".


> Unity is noticeably MUCH faster even on my low-spec netbook. Mutter uses
> 20% of cpu with falf the frame rate on it, while Compiz eats about 5%. Who
> cares about memory consumption on a software where speed matters most?


 What matters is appliance, and Unity is taking Ubuntu there. With Compiz
under the hood, Unity is beginning to mature quite rapidly, imo.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread balint...@gmail.com
You should check out these:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_desktop_managers1&num=3

Anyway i hope mutter will improve in the future. But i wouldnt stick with
it desipte low memory usage.


-- 
*Csonka Bálint* @913
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread balint...@gmail.com
You can not be serious. Im not fan of moving away from the Gnome project at
all, but sticking with compiz was one of the best descisions made in ubuntu
so far. Unity is noticeably MUCH faster even on my low-spec netbook. Mutter
uses 20% of cpu with falf the frame rate on it, while Compiz eats about 5%.
Who cares about memory consumption on a software where speed matters most?

-- 
*Csonka Bálint* @913
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Conscious User

Em 29-01-2012 10:58, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:

On 29/01/2012 20:55, Conscious User wrote:


Em 29-01-2012 10:10, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:

On 29/01/2012 16:22, supernova wrote:

Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it works
very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and more fat than the
gnome-shell, as it happened for 11.10, 11.04, ... . I guess it is due
to compiz, which is more heavy than mutter. Why don't use mutter then?
Unity doesn't use effects as rotation and wobbly. So mutter could be
sufficient.


Before Unity came along, Compiz was much leaner than Mutter/GNOME Shell was,
using around 20MB of memory at any point of time, and not leaking any. After
Unity came along, Compiz's memory consumption jumped up to ~80-100MB.

If anything, Unity is why Compiz is running slower and "fatter" than previously.



If I remember correctly, Unity came along at the same time
Compiz 0.9.0 did, and 0.9.0 was the complete rewrite from
C to C++. So Unity is probably not the only reason.


Not quite. I was using a Compiz 0.9.0 compiled using the script from
git://anongit.compiz.org/users/soreau/scripts before Unity came along, and its
memory consumption was ~20MB. Unity made all the difference.



Ok, I stand corrected.

Wondering how much of this is improving in Unity 5...

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Chow Loong Jin
On 29/01/2012 20:55, Conscious User wrote:
> 
> Em 29-01-2012 10:10, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:
>> On 29/01/2012 16:22, supernova wrote:
>>> Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it works
>>> very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and more fat than the
>>> gnome-shell, as it happened for 11.10, 11.04, ... . I guess it is due
>>> to compiz, which is more heavy than mutter. Why don't use mutter then?
>>> Unity doesn't use effects as rotation and wobbly. So mutter could be
>>> sufficient.
>>
>> Before Unity came along, Compiz was much leaner than Mutter/GNOME Shell was,
>> using around 20MB of memory at any point of time, and not leaking any. After
>> Unity came along, Compiz's memory consumption jumped up to ~80-100MB.
>>
>> If anything, Unity is why Compiz is running slower and "fatter" than 
>> previously.
> 
> 
> If I remember correctly, Unity came along at the same time
> Compiz 0.9.0 did, and 0.9.0 was the complete rewrite from
> C to C++. So Unity is probably not the only reason.

Not quite. I was using a Compiz 0.9.0 compiled using the script from
git://anongit.compiz.org/users/soreau/scripts before Unity came along, and its
memory consumption was ~20MB. Unity made all the difference.

-- 
Kind regards,
Loong Jin



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Conscious User


Em 29-01-2012 10:10, Chow Loong Jin escreveu:

On 29/01/2012 16:22, supernova wrote:

Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it works
very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and more fat than the
gnome-shell, as it happened for 11.10, 11.04, ... . I guess it is due
to compiz, which is more heavy than mutter. Why don't use mutter then?
Unity doesn't use effects as rotation and wobbly. So mutter could be
sufficient.


Before Unity came along, Compiz was much leaner than Mutter/GNOME Shell was,
using around 20MB of memory at any point of time, and not leaking any. After
Unity came along, Compiz's memory consumption jumped up to ~80-100MB.

If anything, Unity is why Compiz is running slower and "fatter" than previously.



If I remember correctly, Unity came along at the same time
Compiz 0.9.0 did, and 0.9.0 was the complete rewrite from
C to C++. So Unity is probably not the only reason.


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Chow Loong Jin
On 29/01/2012 16:22, supernova wrote:
> Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it works
> very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and more fat than the
> gnome-shell, as it happened for 11.10, 11.04, ... . I guess it is due
> to compiz, which is more heavy than mutter. Why don't use mutter then?
> Unity doesn't use effects as rotation and wobbly. So mutter could be
> sufficient.

Before Unity came along, Compiz was much leaner than Mutter/GNOME Shell was,
using around 20MB of memory at any point of time, and not leaking any. After
Unity came along, Compiz's memory consumption jumped up to ~80-100MB.

If anything, Unity is why Compiz is running slower and "fatter" than previously.

-- 
Kind regards,
Loong Jin



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Re: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter

2012-01-29 Thread Carl Ansell

Unity is a Compiz plugin.

> Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 09:22:15 +0100
> From: supernova...@gmail.com
> To: ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: [Ayatana] why compiz in place of mutter
> 
> Goodmorning (GMT+1) to all. Yesterday I tried Precise, and it works
> very good. I have seen that it is a bit slower and more fat than the
> gnome-shell, as it happened for 11.10, 11.04, ... . I guess it is due
> to compiz, which is more heavy than mutter. Why don't use mutter then?
> Unity doesn't use effects as rotation and wobbly. So mutter could be
> sufficient.
> 
> Bests,
> Supernova
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
  ___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp