Slashdot Mirror
KDE 2.2.2
loopkin writes: "Seems that the last KDE 2 is out. KDE 2.2.2 is faster and more stable and secure than 2.2.1, as stated in the Changelog. You will appreciate the trick that makes the icons load 5% faster in particular. Announcement is here. Please use mirrors for download, but original FTP is here.
Note as well that maybe for the first time, there are _official_ RH packages for a _stable_ release (7.2)."
I doubt KDE 2.2.2 will be *that* much better than 2.2.1. Certainly not enough to bridge the gap between KDE and Win2K in terms of performance. Linux, however, does have faster things to offer than KDE. Right now, I'm running IceWM with mostly GTK+ (and the occasional GNOME) applications. GTK+/GNOME seems to be a whole lot faster (on my machine anyway, 300MHz 256MB GeForce2 MX) and more responsive (especially in load time and resizing) than Qt/KDE-2. For example, starting a new Galeon window takes much less time than starting a new Konqueror window. Also, I can resize Sylpheed and AbiWord and Gnumeric without excessive rubber-banding, while KMail, KWord, and KSpread are significantly "springier." None of it is quite Win2K yet, but its almost there. Maybe it's even better on a faster machine.
If you chose to go the Linux/GNOME route, here are several hints:
1) Stay away from GNOME like the plague. Apps that use gnome-libs (like Galeon or Eye of GNOME) are for the most part fine, but actually running gnome-session (with the toolbar and control panel and whatnot) and Sawfish slows everything down enormously. Instead, use a fast window manager (IceWM, Blackbox, Window Maker, or even XFce) and GNOME apps.
2) Choose the GTK+ apps over the gtk+gnome apps. GTK+ apps tend to be more mature and snappier than their gnome counterparts. Specifically, Sylpheed is (IMO) a better mail client than Balsa, and GQView works better than Eye of GNOME. Also, ROX-Filer is the fastest Linux GUI application I have ever seen and you should try it out instead of going with the usual gmc.
3) You really have to tweek your system. Linux doesn't come nearly as well optimized as Windows out of box. Mainly, it boils down to making fonts look nice, making sure that X runs at a priority of -10, and setting up the Linux kernel to use preemption and low-latency patches. I've decided to write a HOWTO for this, it should be up here in a few days.
4) Use a good distro. I like Mandrake 8.x because it lets you install the XFS filesystem from the beginning, its i586 optimized, and its good about keeping packages up to date. Also, its urpmi tool mitigates many (but not all!) of the advantages Debian/APT has over the RPM-based distros. No matter what the distro, go minimalist. Install only the software you need and don't choose the bloated default installs. Also make sure you trim your startup so stuff that you don't need (like sendmail) doesn't get run when you start the computer.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
But then Windows (which has just as many features BTW) will be faster too, so KDE will STILL be slow (comparatively). The "buy a faster system" arguement is total bullshit. If the applications are faster, you can do more complex things, no matter what kind of system you have. I buy a faster system to do more of the things I want to do, not feed some stupid desktop environment.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Remember kids, its spelt D-E-S-K-T-O-P, but pronounced Operating System... isn't that the message you folks are conveying to us?
Reality check, Win2K is plenty stable for general workstation use, my 2K box crashes maybe once every few months. And even then it's usualy because I did something stupid.
W2K and XP are more stable than earlier Windozes. But it doesn't change the fact that Linux + KDE are still more stable
Perhaps the OS itself has more features...
Thank you for acknowledging Linux'es superior features when compared to Windows. But I was talking about the desktop.
4. It looks better
XP kinda killed that argument
How come? With XP I can choose from ugly-as-hell candyland-look... Or the classic-look that looks just like every other MS-OS there is.
5. It's more customizable
Once again most people just don't care...
Hey, I care! I don't care what OTHER people think, I just care what I think.
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
For what it's worth, after a couple of hours with 2.2.2 it seems snappier than 2.2.1.
I don't know whether it's down to improvements in the code or because I cranked up the optimizations on this build, but it definitely feels smoother and quicker to me. A pleasure to use on a 450MHz PIII laptop, which isn't really the state of the art nowadays.
While I was building KDE yesterday (took all afternoon!) I switched back to GNOME, and I have to say that I think GNOME really has a lot of catching up to do. Galeon is cool, but it and Nautilus together can't compete with Konqueror for flexibility and ease of use.
I'm also yet to find a GNOME mail client as simple and stable as KMail.
Looking forward to GNOME 2.0 though. If they can jump back ahead of KDE then it will be a mighty cool desktop.