Voting Chart

Total votes : 14

Which do you prefer?

  •  
    GNOME
  •  
    KDE
  •  
    Other

GNOME vs KDE vs Others: Which do you prefer?

  • joebert
  • Sledgehammer
  • Genius
  • No Avatar
  • Joined: Feb 10, 2004
  • Posts: 13455
  • Loc: Florida
  • Status: Offline

Post July 28th, 2008, 9:58 am

AnarchY SI wrote:
KDE is known to be more of the resource hog.


Eeek. Looks like I'm steering clear of KDE for just awhile longer then.
Strong with this one, the sudo is.
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2008
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post July 28th, 2008, 9:58 am

  • AnarchY SI
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Oct 30, 2004
  • Posts: 2521
  • Loc: /usr/src/MI
  • Status: Offline

Post July 28th, 2008, 12:16 pm

different / less dependencies, less feature-rich, less code.


have a look: http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/deskt ... hmark.html
Image
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?"
  • joebert
  • Sledgehammer
  • Genius
  • No Avatar
  • Joined: Feb 10, 2004
  • Posts: 13455
  • Loc: Florida
  • Status: Offline

Post July 28th, 2008, 12:27 pm

Am I reading that right, Gnome is a bigger resource hog than KDE ? :scratchhead:
Strong with this one, the sudo is.
  • AnarchY SI
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Oct 30, 2004
  • Posts: 2521
  • Loc: /usr/src/MI
  • Status: Offline

Post July 28th, 2008, 6:26 pm

not sure, i didn't read it :-X but follow his process & see for yourself? if a couple of us do it, we could probably figure it out >.<

altho all those are like what, 10 versions ago? he also says KDE has his custom performance patches. it's also interesting to note that KDE with whatever K application (i.e. konqueror, kword, ..) "consumed" the least amount of memory in comparison, but when those applications were run in other desktop/wm's the K apps consumed the most memory.
Image
"In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?"
  • spork
  • Brewmaster
  • Silver Member
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Sep 22, 2003
  • Posts: 6128
  • Loc: Seattle, WA
  • Status: Offline

Post July 28th, 2008, 9:20 pm

In my experience with KDE, it seemed to crash far more often than Gnome or any other desktop environment. I like KDE's look and feel much more than I like Gnome's, but it just "feels unstable" to me. Kinda hard to explain.

All of this being said, my main experience is with KDE 3.x. I haven't played around with KDE 4 a lot.
The Beer Monocle. Classy.
  • spork
  • Brewmaster
  • Silver Member
  • User avatar
  • Joined: Sep 22, 2003
  • Posts: 6128
  • Loc: Seattle, WA
  • Status: Offline

Post July 29th, 2008, 10:24 am

gamekiller wrote:
may I know how xfce doesn't consume more memory? What kind technique they used?

It simply doesn't do as much. XFCE contains less features and bloat, and thus uses less resources.
The Beer Monocle. Classy.

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 21 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 66 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
 

© 2011 Unmelted, LLC. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.