On 12/02/2008, Harold Aling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:59:56 +0100, Vincent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've elaborated on the signigicant advantages of g-s-s before, and I > think > > they far outweight a marginal case as this. Realistically, how many > people > > have xfwm4 compositing enabled? It's not like it's that much lighter > than > > Compiz, while it's far less feature rich. It might be more stable but > most > > people enabling compositing are willing to compromise stability for > > features. > > > > Everyone I know that uses Xfce/Xubuntu has the compositor enabled. But > then > again, they all have fast, modern computers.
Really? And they (how many?) know about Compiz, have considered it and decided against it? I didn't expect that, actually. As soon as a novice Xfce user will discover the window shading option, the > user will turn it on because it is way more visually appealing and gives a > nice and helpful (fake) 3D representation of your stacked windows. Comparing Compiz' hardware rendering vs. Xfwm4' software rendering is a bit > weird though. You mean that turning on xfwm's effects are easier to enable? -H- > Thanks, -- Vincent
-- xubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
