Slashdot Mirror
KDE 4 Uses 40% Less Memory Than 3 Despite Eye-Candy
An anonymous reader writes "Pro-Linux reports that KDE 4, scheduled to be released in January 2008, consumes almost 40% less memory than KDE 3.5, despite the fact that version 4 of the Free and Open Source desktop system includes a composited window manager and a revamped menu and applet interface. KDE developer Will Stephenson showcased KDE 4's 3D eye-candy on a 256Mb laptop with 1Ghz CPU and run-of-the-mill integrated graphics, pointing out that mini-optimizations haven't even yet been started." Update: 12/14 22:40 GMT by Z : Or, not so much. An anonymous reader writes "The author of the original KDE 3.5 vs KDE 4.0 memory comparison has come out with a more accurate benchmark. In reality, KDE 4.0 uses 110 MB more memory than KDE 3.5.8.
Someone call Bill Gates and tell him to read this.
Seek and ye shall find.
GNOME running WITHOUT Compiz requires a good 256MB.
That's WITHOUT the eyecandy.
Good job KDE! It's yet another reason to stop using GNOME, if all the Microsoft pandering wasn't enough.
Isn't that communist or something?
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Between this and Miguel de Icaza, it looks like I'll finally be switching to KDE.
Now I can just leave my extra few gigs of ram nice an empty, they need a rest! Once we get it down to 640k we can move back to dos.
I just downloaded and ran the Debian live version using KDE4 in vBox. It was pretty. However, I couldn't figure out how to disable the "Lancelot" applet thing, which was annoying since anytime the mouse cursor got near it, it'd launch a 1/4-screen-covering window with lists of recent applications, documents, etc. Couldn't even right-click on it to disable.
Still, covering 1/4 of the screen sure didn't take much memory!
This is going to be interesting to see go down... what will Microsoft's response be??
www.isoHunt.com
The laptop was recent, but he limited the memory use and throttled down the CPU to 1GHz. So it still had fancy instructions and a much bigger cache, bus, etc.
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
... with careful work. And a primary focus on excellence, instead of making money. And people that do care about their product.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Um, the KDE4 release candidate is a fully functional desktop environment.
My new blog
A RC is not non-functioning. It works. As you could have seen from the article.
However it is slower and bigger in the version demonstated, since a lot of debug code is in there.
MS is just looking more and more incompetent all the time.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
A non-functioning "release-candidate" uses 40% less memory than it's predecessor. Impressive.
If it's a release candidate, it's functioning.
One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
"KDE 3.5 Was A Major Memory Hog"
Indeed. XFCE is nifty. Having switched to it, I don't think I'm missing anything.
Deleted
GEOS only uses 128kb and that is including eye candy, mind you 640*200 resolution.
A release candidate is a "candidate for release" and, barring whatever bugs users find, could be released as it is.
Thus, I would sure hope their RC does not contain any debug code.
bash FTW !!!!!!
WAY too much bloat for features most never use. Real men use dash (if you *must* have a program that's a shell and only a shell) or if you don't mind something a bit more versatile to save disk space at potentially the risk of slightly higher memory consumption when all you have is a shell, you use a symlink to busybox for your shell. But not with that glibc cruft mind you, uClibc is the only path to efficiency.
Also, you don't use init, you have the kernel run the aforementioned shell directly instead. Who needs all the cruft of startup services and a well set up tty, after all.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
No, seriously, I was curious how it was shaping up, design-wise, and I check out the site and find stuff like this:
http://www.kde.org/announcements/announce_4.0-rc2/krunner.jpg
And this:
http://www.kde.org/announcements/announce_4.0-rc2/dolphin.jpg
Colours, fonts, and icons are all over the place. Insane and useless borders and gradients cluttering up the interface, and an overall lack of clarity of any kind. It's like a big joke.
I mean, just look at that krunner screenshot again. What is that thing? Black, white, black, white, then suddenly grey and shaded and colourful icons, and fonts right out of a VGA BIOS.
Good news, though I would think that even KDE4 will run better with IceWM as memory manager.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
just to speed things up a bit:
"The fact that a new version of an application does not always ressourcenhungriger must prove the KDE project with the next generation of the environment."
I think I just found my new word-of-the-week
It just shows the varity of user tastes there are. I didn't look at the dolphin screenshot, but the krunner one had a sharp looking desktop.
Ah, the second time I've said this today: a release candidate is JUST THAT: A FUCKING CANDIDATE FOR RELEASE.
They are not non-functioning. They are feature complete. Release candidates become releases. Sure, they're not perfect but they're supposed to be basically "we think this is ready for production use, but we're just giving it one last test to be sure".
Really, Microsoft really couldn't give a flying crap.
Ask anyone other than your core geek friends about this and they'll say "Wuh?"
No-one cares outside of geekdom, really they don't.
And it doesn't help that all the screenshots I'm seeing of this are of an interface that really does look pretty average.
You give this news far to much import compared to what it actually has.
It's called a theme. You can change the theme layout to anything you want. I do agree with you though, that is one very ugly theme.
Not sure about KDE specifically, but for a project of this scale the sensible thing to do would be to enable/disable full debugging at compile time. That way those who want debugging get debugging, and those who don't get a lean mean KDE machine, both from exactly the same source. Assuming KDE does this, what is wrong with having debugging code in the RC source? Hell, it even makes sense to leave it in the final release - just disabled by default.
Forget world peace, bring on -1 pointless
I'll subscribe to Slashdot when I see a month without a dupe, a typo, or an article the "editors" didn't read.
Yeah, I've been using KDE for a while now. Almost forgot that I'm in it sometimes. I hate the quirkiness but there is a lot more functionality than gnome. I still want to use gnome as a primary but I've gotten used to KDE so much it's kind of annoying. The last thing is that KDE does put up faster than gnome. It's more stable and refined than it used to be a couple of years ago. I've had less app crashes overall and like I said before, I like gnome but KDE is starting to creep up into my primary desktop.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
What!? Whatever happened to the "GUIs are for infants and grandmas. if you can't do it on the command line you shouldn't be allowed to use a computer in the first place" flame?
It's a sad day in Linuxland. What became of the holier than thou, I program in assembly, certifiable *nix prick?
Oh, and don't forget, "Desktop environment x is so bloated."
You young whippersnappers and your fancy shell this and tty that. Real men feed their programs into a time share systems as big as a barn using punch cards, you young hooligan! Why, when I was a lad, all we had were toggles and lights, and we were grateful! Now get off my lawn before I shake my cane at you a second time!
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
The summary incorrectly states that KDE 4 is demonstrated on a "56Mb laptop with 1Ghz CPU and run-of-the-mill integrated graphics."
Actually, the article states that it was run on an X60. I have an X61 (almost identical) and let me tell you, those are not the specs. It has a core 2 duo with an embedded graphics card capable of playing halflife 2 and portal (although not at excellent frame rate).
The article states that he used CPU scaling and some kernel arguments to reduce the system settings. This is actually very misleading and isn't equivalent to a system that ran at 1GHZ, as some commenters on his site point out.
The CPU may be running at a lower clock rate and have one core disabled, but clock rate isn't the only thing that determines CPU speed. The core 2 duo comes with SSE3, which any real 1GHZ machine will not have, and is majorly impactful for graphics operations. Also, the core 2 duo is designed for energy efficiency much more than prior intel and AMD CPU's. So, it likely has significantly more instructions per clock than a real 1GHZ machine. Finally, the graphics card is actually pretty decent (vista aero runs on it fine...) so there's nothing surprising about the computer being able to offload a lot of work to it.
So to summarize this computer has: SSE3, more clocks per cycle, and a nice graphics card that real machines of the 1GHZ era will not have. I'd be surprised if a machine with a lot higher MHZ but lacking SSE3 and the grpahics card could compete.
Also, all he ran on it was an instant messenger... which he said started slow. If he'd down any significant work with that amount of ram given KDE apps, it would have started swapping endlessly. This is not much of an endorsement for KDE.
Also, even if the claims of this article were true, which they aren't, it wouldn't be that impressive. I used to run OSX on a 333MHZ PPC with 32MB of ram, and it had all of the graphical glitzy crap that KDE and Gnome barely make work on high end machines. That a 1GHZ machine would seem impressive just shows how bloated and horribly slow modern desktops like vista, KDE, and Gnome have become.
As a side note, if Gnome or KDE work on your hardware (good luck) then go with it. I know that at least Gnome is pretty well supported, and that makes using linux a bit easier. If not, I highly recommend XFCE. It lacks some features, but has a much lighter weight design, is more compatable with various hardware, and has a window manager that isn't a total piece of shit like metacity and friends. It is especially handy for a laptop with an external monitor. Since xinerama actually works in XFCE (it has major bugs in metacity) you can run both your external monitor at full resolution and your laptop at a lower one, and stick all of the small windows you want to monitor on it (instant messenger, email, etc).
I thought this was RC2? Why would the appearance not be finalized?
This release candidate marks the last mile on the road to KDE 4.0. Some work is still being done to put the icing on the KDE 4.0 cake. This includes fixing some major and minor bugs, finishing off artwork and smoothening out the user experience.I can only hope they make rather drastic changes. The worst part is that in general the KDE team always puts out great sets of icons. Trully very nice looking stuff. It is the rest of the appearance, such as the starting(k) menu, large screen space use for apps at the bottom, large clock, ugly file browser and so forth that looks so wrong right now by default. This looks a little better but is a larger screen size than the ars technica shots.
"but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
Would it be 60% without the ocular sweetums?
And this is coming from a defender of the free market and devout believer in its virtues, but since Microsoft has largely benefited from partnering up with other large manufacturers of hardware and assemblers of said parts into systems to be sold, it would not be that hard to believe that they designed to a certain market level.
I.E.... "here you go gentlemen, the standard system you are able to use is X Ghz, and X Gigabytes of DDR 1600, anything less than that will be obsolete by the first service pack anyways, so get crackin'!!"
Linux people and most of the OSS folks (Unix as well) have been server dedicated systems for a long time, and built on a robust or rather "efficient" (perhaps a better term is "effective"?) platform. As a result, they've been building to extract as many cycles and memory space as possible for use by client applications, not the Host Operating System.
As a result, Microsoft has it in its best interests to PUSH the upgrade cycle. If they can be depended to push the upgrade cycle to keep selling new boxes, the retail computer builders will continue to give Microsoft the plugs and keep shipping their OS as the "default" or "preferred" or "Supported" Operating System for their Big Bad Ass Kicking Rigs (tm).
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
seriously, one day 640k of memory will be enough for everyone.
Typically you an even compile the debug code into a final version. It is your option to leave it out or put it in. In binary releases the debug code is usually not included. But, remember this is the Unix world. For a lot of software you can get a source code release and compile it yourself, with whatever options you like.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
That is one butt-ugly and distracting wallpaper, but why should I care? I always customize that away with digital photos. Oh wait, you were referring to something else that can also be customized away?
I do reconfigure a lot of this -- but I do it exactly once per machine.
If/when I decide to actually share my home directory somehow, I will do it exactly once, and it will stay configured for all time.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
If by "fully functional" you mean "it works but only if you use it the same way as the developers and don't want to configure anything." Since a key functionality of of KDE is its configuriblity, indeed it's why many people use it, you can't really call it "fully functional" if you're stuck with the godawful default desktop that nobody who uses their computer for anything serious would tolerate for longer than it takes to change it. I really hope the Serenity style gets fully ported. It's the first original KDE style that hasn't looked like somebody put Deviant Art in a blender. I'll take a blocky win9x style over the monstrosity that was Keramik any day. Plastic was tolerable but there were no decent light but low contrast color schemes that worked well with it. Polyester is just frightening and has so many rendering errors it's unusable.
I'm not sure why, but screenshots don't do it justice. I just installed it, and there is something about the oxygen theme/interface that just works.
... rich. It looks a bit like a video game, but unlike a video game, is quite functional. The configuration nightmare that was KDE3.5 seems to have been seriously paired down, and there are new, subtle touches to the design (subtle fade in/out at various dialogues, Apple like use of transparency). In sum, I like it.
About 10 minutes after I started using it it grew on me. My issues with KDE4 are bugs, not the interface choices; as far as I can tell, Oxygen/Plasma/Phenon seems like excellent pieces of work, and everything they were cracked up to be.
If network browsing in Dolphin worked properly, (no more malformed URL errors), I'd be using it as my primary desktop.
The interface is very
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
In KDE land RC means "Pw0ned! We just tricked you into beta testing on your work machine!"
That's the thing. This isn't a serious release candidate. If they released the current version, it would be THE WORST THING THEY COULD DO. It's very feature incomplete. It's a release candidate, but only in name, not in usability.
It's not so much fixing as improving. QT4 (which the KDE team doesn't have much involvement with) is what KDE4 is based on, whereas KDE3 uses QT3, which is a lot more monolithic. They trimmed fat. We should definitely pat them on the back for doing more with less. That's what's called development. Which is the opposite of what Microsoft does, which is to make something less functional while still demanding more resources.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
IIRC the Qt3 -> Qt4 move brought about explicit double buffering of all surfaces by Qt itself.
Does anyone here know how much of the 40% save (however it is measured) comes as a result of applications no longer needing to do their own explicit buffering, in places where double buffering is desirable?
And whether there is a corresponding increase in memory used elsewhere, eg within the X server or in video memory itself?
Could have fooled me... I just wanted to perpetuate the four yorkshiremen-style thread going on.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I'm sorry, but just adding up the memory usage columns from something like 'top' is a horrible way to measure actual memory usage. Why? Well, shared libraries is one big reason. Most of those applications are likely to use a similar set of shared libraries, which the operating system only loads once in memory and then uses for all of the applications. However, things like 'top' include the memory usage of those libraries in every application that uses them. Thus, if 'libkdeprint' is 1 MB and is used by 10 KDE programs, the ACTUAL memory usage of that library would be 1 MB, but top would report 10 MB of memory used (1 MB for each app).
This effect is very noticeable with desktop environments like KDE and GNOME, where there are a ton of programs that all use the same set of shared libraries. If you reduced the size of a few very basic libraries (e.g. 'libkdecore') by a sizable amount, then you could show a fake "huge savings" across the ~30 KDE/GNOME apps that were running.
It isn't that I doubt that KDE 4 uses less memory -- it undoubtedly does -- it's just that using overly simplistic methods to measure the difference in usage is misleading and somewhat pointless.
See a longer discussion of the issue at: http://virtualthreads.blogspot.com/2006/02/understanding-memory-usage-on-linux.html
Places like Ars Technica and others are going to deliberately change the theme to use huge icons and fonts so that when they reduce the image for embedding in the article, it's still legible.
If they'd shrunk a 1600x1200 screen with normal size icons/fonts down to the size they're using on the web page, you'd be complaining that the thing was too tiny to be usable.
And the battery "widget" looks more like an applet window to me, and probably resizable.
(Myself, I like the idea of window buttons on the side rather than along the top, makes better use of screen real estate especially on widescreens. Although I'd put it on the right, not the left. I put my main menu bar up against the right edge of my desktop rather than on the bottom, too.)
-- Alastair
Maybe, but who are they releasing it to?
In this case, it looks like a candidate for releasing to testers. Now, if they'd said "production release candidate", you'd have a solid case.
-- Alastair
Are people seriously bragging about composited graphics? I mean, Vista shipped with them a year ago.. VISTA. Are people supposed to be impressed with a feature set that has been available for years? Can we please get past this and move on to things that really matter?
Too bad GOD (Stallman) does not approve of KDE as free software, so this is useless. All hail Stallman. O/
I'm not a big fan of KDE and I don't use it, but you need to give KDE4 a break. Nobody's working on themes or icons sets at this point. They're trying to get the core functionality into KDE4 right now. In fact, when KDE4 is released as 4.0, the developers even say that you shouldn't consider it a DE, but more of a development platform. IT probably won't be a full DE until 4.1. Then you can bitch and moan about how ugly it looks. (My opinion is that it'll have the same blockiness that KDE3, KDE2, and KDE1 had, but I hope I'm wrong).
I think that QT makes an incredible development platform for a lot of people, and I even tried it back in QT2 days. Development in KDE destroyed development in Gnome until Mono came along. Now I think that Gnome may have the advantage, but we'll see what KDE4 bings to the table.
Put identity in the browser.
I think Gnome is a bit like Apple in this respect. Strange for beginners and nice to long time users. Oh thinking of it, that must be true for KDE and Windows XP and Vista, too... No, I don't believe in oranges here.
KDE 4 looks ugly. I hope I can use Plastik theme again. But anyway, I feel that we're not going to see KDE 4 in Slackware to soon, so I can hapilly use KDE 3 until then :)
Strange, considering everything I read about Vista, and my current experiences (problems installing Adobe Reader, impossible to run PDFCreator, some hardware that didn't work well), Vista broke much of backwards compatibility. So as XP broke it too, by not running DOS programs anymore. Therefore, the idea that Vista is bloated because of backwards compatibility sounds strange to me.
On the other hand, I recall reading something about network traffic problems on Vista when copying files, and IIRC it was related to it doing some fiddling on the network stack to make it more difficult to copy media files, that is, DRM related.
I actually tend to believe that more of Vista's bloat is due to DRM than it's due to backwards compatibility, of which it actually has very few.
If you have to use that fancy new X11 stuff, I prefer uwm. It wastes no precious screen estate on useless "decorations".
I'm more curious in learning how it gets from the "author" to Slashdot. More entertaining than ctrlC and ctrlv I presume.
I wouldn't admit to having actually read it 10 times.
I did in fact use the setup I described... and you can check that imacs were sold with 32 megs on wikipedia. Please check your facts before calling me a lier.
Sorry but you are completely full of shit. OS X does not run for any reasonable definition of "run" on 32mb of RAM.
Have a look at the minimum requirements for OS X 10.1 which you say was the most efficient OS X.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.1#System_Requirements
Notably: RAM required 128 megabytes
And you're saying you did OpenGL development on a quarter of the minimum requirements. Riiight.
Troll. Nice one though. The moderators believed you at least.
Has no one pointed out that the numbers are actually completely, utterly wrong? See Lubos and Thiagos (two high-ranking KDE and Qt devs) comments here:
http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/3138
See the original authors retraction, here:
http://www.jarzebski.pl/read/kde-3-5-vs-4-0-round-two.so
So really, it should be "KDE4 uses 75% more memory", which is actually incredibly lame, but doesn't make for as good a title. I'm absolutely amazed that usually cynical slashdot readers have accepted this so uncritically.
> just look at that krunner screenshot again. What is that thing?
.. a composited ARGB window using an svg not designed for that since i'm waiting on the artists to finish.
;)
uh
that's right, you just commented on the look of a test svg and overlooked every bit of interesting tech that actually makes it possible have krunner look better than pretty much anything out there. what an idiot. oh, wait, i'm on slashdot, i forgot
That's why I love being part of the Linux community. Say what you will about us, but we've got some creative thinking!
Quack, quack.
I only care if the powertop rating is down.
It's indicative of an overall philosophy in the OSS community. A philosophy that in the long run *will* impact companies like Microsoft if they continue their current course. Consumers might not be aware of the details regarding software performance, but they aren't stupid.
Quack, quack.
Not that exact scenario, but obviously people do care about the general crappiness of Vista. PC makers are not reinstating XP for shits and giggles. They're doing it because a significant chunk of the population protested against Vista.
Is your peers and potential employers can see your work.
Quack, quack.
Yes because there's still no drivers for some stuff like printers (printer manufacturers wants you to buy a new one) or they are pretty shitty ones. I was in luck when I bought my Vista. My PC had all the right parts with pretty nicely working drivers and Vista runs like a charm, better than the XP setup which I had earlier. On the other hand my co-worker's Vista doesn't work so well on his setup. Maybe hardware vendors need to drag MS to court in order to fix their crab like AV vendors did?
You don't know what you don't know.
As with 99.9% of all memory benchmarking, it was done by someone who didn't totally understand how to measure memory use (and how Linux doesn't allow accurate measurements without a patched kernel). Just read the comments in the post which pointed at the original story.
http://www.illusionary.com/GNOMEvKDE.html
I was about to say 13256278887989457651018865901401704640, but it appears this number is private property.
...OSX?
I can boot Damn Small Linux to a full gui with 8 megs of ram put on a nice wallpaper and you're at ~10.
How are those security patches for your NT machine holding up?
Let me guess: your day job is writing copy for porn sites. :-)
I don't know what Vista uses all its memory for, but KDE using less memory means Linux can use the left over memory as file system cache, as it has done for quite a few years.
Meep.
2 gigs of ram is now $50
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231121
That 200MB of ram you are saving costs $5. I think $5 is worth it for an easier to use desktop.
You are a liar. OS X doesn't boot on 64 MB, and its virtual memory, while better than in OS 9, isn't very good. Certainly not nearly as good as in Linux. Also, OS X pre Panther was dead slow on any computer.
Are the GUI designers taking a nap while the programmers work? What's with all the empty space and huge nonessential widgets? Every single window in the screenshot (except maybe Konquerer) needs heavy redesigning:
- System monitor: Huge tabs, huge menu Compare it to Windows's Task manager or OSX Activity monitor - they pack much more data in a more readable way.
- Kopete: That toolbar is enormous! And the status bar at the bottom of the window looks mostly useless. The icons inside it are not only badly distributed spatially and of uneven / visually unadjusted size, they are also ugly and uninformative. The whole window looks like it's been designed by a novice VB programmer in a hurry.
- That window in the background: It looks like it's some sort of configuration application, and from what I see, the "main thing" in the application, probably the reasin the application exists, takes only about *half* of the window space. I'm talking about the list of effects. The rest of the window is taken by the menu, probably some kind of toolbar, probably a search bar, some kind of help label, tabs, a "hint", and a space at the bottom of the window which probably contains "ok/cancel/reset" buttons.
I'm not saying that all window elements should be close together - I appreciate the aesthetic space around the widgets, but this particular UI on this particular screenshot is heavily underdesigned.-- Sig down
Remember Mozilla 1.0 was targeted to fit on a single floppy disk. Indeed a few revisions were down to the 1.6 and 1.7 MB range never once actually fitting on a single floppy. What did we find with this? Not enough support for an entire internet suite, and stability issues. Now Firefox which is not a suite is bigger than those really small Mozilla releases.
So, is KDE 4 going to be a sleek carbon fibre shell on a titanium frame like Damn Small Linux, or is it going to be rice paper stretched over balsa wood like some of those Mozilla versions were?
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Isn't anyone going to explain why 3.5 was using so much memory in the first instance? Bad programming?
GNOME running WITHOUT Compiz requires a good 256MB.
...you must be a newbie, 'cause everyone knows that if you want Gnome to really fly, you have to switch over to evil 256mb.
Customizataion is never an excuse for a horrible default. The sooner Linux programmers (and fanboys) learn this, the better for the platform.
I commented on what I can see and not on what I can't see? Yeah, I'm a real idiot. The rational thing is obviously to make up things in my head and comment of that!
Silly me for thinking a "Release Candidate" is something that is actually finished for release.
Customizataion is never an excuse for a horrible default. The sooner Linux programmers (and fanboys) learn this, the better for the platform.
"At this point"? And they're at "Release Candidate 2"? What if I just switch my complaint to the one that they have their priorities absolutely screwed up?
It would be interesting to see your source about this. The claim on OpenOffice.org Writer may be credible, but KWord (I suppose you meant that by KWrite, since KWrite is a very basic text editor) is way faster and snappier than MS Word (fine, it has also less features and all, but it is faster to load), and I am not going to believe your claim without data to support it.
Not sure about GEdit, but Notepad is almost featureless and has not changed in a decade or so. It has no code highlighting, no handling of different line endings, no support for different encodings, no tab handling, no plugin framework, no multi-file mode, and in fact its only feature is a search feature without regular expressions. Of course it's going to be fast. For that sake "Hello world" is even faster. I do most of my programming in Kate and I am very happy with that. Notepad may be faster, but it does not do what a text editor is supposed to do in order to be useful.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
How does the number of dynamic libraries affect it? Linux running on a desktop is made up of thousands of smaller projects and libraries. Microsoft is able to consolidate these into fewer, larger, libraries. Does that have any advantage? In other words, could Linux benefit from combining lots of the smaller dynamic libraries into more monolithic libraries?
If you can't say something nice, make sure you have something heavy to throw.
*Sound of nuclear attack siren in background*
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
It uses CPU Cycles, not Memory for most cases. With faster CPU's expected you can use less memory for more eye candy
Lets take the bouncing Icon. There are two normal ways to program this. Get the icon render each frame for each bounce and save it in memory. And just load the memory and play it. That way it plays smooth and quick every time, because it is in memory all pre-rendered. Now with a faster CPU which spend most of its time idle it can render the icon on the fly between each frame and still keep it smooth so all it needs to do is store the main image the next image to be displayed and perhaps what is currently on the screen. So with a 16x16x8 icon that is around 2k of ram using the CPU method it will only take 6k of ram. vs around 40k of ram for the bouncing icon. But if the CPU couldn't do the work in the time needed to get it done using the memory is the only good option. Memory vs. CPU has always been a balance.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
OK. I'll repeat. RC2 for the development platform. It's just like screaming that the building whose foundation has been laid and whose girders have been put in place really looks like shit on the inside. Nobody really cares. Why am I responding? I don't even like KDE.
Put identity in the browser.
If the config is anything like KDE3, that's easy to fix: most of the UI is failry customisable.
But yeah, the UI would take a lot more tweaking than KDE3 to look acceptable IMO.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
OK... I just have to ask - which apps do you use this memory for? I have gkrellm up all the time, and the only time I have used more than 60% of my memory was when Firefox flipped out and needed to be restarted. And I have less than 1 gig (768). I can have OpenOffice.org, Firefox with 5+ tabs open, 5+ konsoles, Amarok, Gaim, GIMP, all running on a dual-display system.... and still have plenty of memory left. What do people use to eat their memory? (I did submit as an Ask Slashdot, but it was rejected)
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
If KDE stays true to form, the size of all of those things will be independently settable. No GNOME devs, being able get things just the way you like them without using a registry editor is a good thing.
uClibc ? You gotta be kidding me. Thats one of the more bloated C libs that i have worked with, only eclipsed by the at-least-half-a-megabyte-for-any-simplest-thingy glibc.
Try looking into avr-libc sources and see what i mean.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
Measuring real memory consumption is notoriously hard, without some evidence of systematic and careful measurement (unavailable in English), I would anticipate that this is great advocacy, but almost certainly totally bogus.
You should try using "strip" when you're done linking.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
My pet peeve: KDE does not include print selection in the 3.3.x series!
Now the 4.x series uses trolltech's (QT?) printing backend there's STILL no print selection.
I've been flipping between the e17 that ships with the everex/walmart pc, which is buggy as hell and has a number of big-time gotchas and XFCE4 on Debian Etch. I enabled compositing on XFCE4 and it is an excellent balance of speed, eye candy and functionality. The default XFCE4 in Etch doesn't do it justice.
Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
I think you're being a bit harsh.
He said 10.0 not 10.1. Even so, I think folks are entitled to be a little hazy on machine specs from yesteryear. OS X 10.0 "ran" quite well on 64MB of RAM. (And 333 MHz is actually a pretty liberal estimate. I had 10.2 work quite nicely on an aging G3 Powerbook.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.0
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
KDE using less memory than XFCE?
;')
...
Well, all I can say is that dreams are important, so never give up your dreams no matter how far from reality they get. Like KDE ever using less memory than XFCE. ROFL.
On the KDE front, all I can say is : "Yeaaa! It's about FREAKIN' time!" Now all I have to do is wait 5 years for it to make it's way into a debian based release.
Now if we can only do something about this honking huge kernel and that king of memory hogs OOo.
I might be able to finally dust off my old 8088 @ 10MHz w/ 1MB RAM, and use it again. Oh those were the days
when hardware was made to last longer than the warranty.
Woz didn't create the Y2K problem! WTF are you smoking!!!
The *real* Y2K issue was on big iron -- mainframes. Programmed in COBOL.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Are you talking about ringing a bell, or ringing a bell? Because if you mean ringing, the passed tense is rang, unless you meant ringing, in which case the passed tense is ringed.
A bell is rang, Saturn is ringed. Of course the bell could have rings in which case it could be ringed and rang at the same time.
English is easy. There's no excuse for these mistakes.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
I prefer GNUStep (with WildMenus plug-in of course).
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
With fairness, they have rewritten the equation editor from scratch for Office 2007, and it is a *vast* improvement over the old one. You can enter the equation linearly and it'll format it properly for you (e.g. (a_0 + b^2)/2 ), and special characters are done using the autocorrect engine with a LaTeX-like syntax (e.g. \forall is replaced as you type with the upside-down A).
Of course, you can still point & click you if like, so engineers don't need to worry. (Just kidding...).
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
Crap.
Nothing will draw users to Linux like hand editing an xorg.conf 50 times until they get it right.
I didn't realize those pictures with Ruben Studdard were saved in the cache...
I had another sig before, but this one is better
So in your example, the burden of proving that there is a link between Iraq and 9/11 lies on the person who claimed there was a link (GWB), who failed to do so.
But in the case of Gates, the burden of proving that he did says such a thing lies at the feet of those who claim that he did, and so far, no-one has provided even a hint of a source for the quote. A quick Google & Wikiquote suggest that no-one has ever managed to trace where the quote came from, not even to something as vague as "anonymous sources in Microsoft". Thus, the assumption must be that it is apocryphal.
The closest traceable comment resembling the 640 remark was in a 1989 interview, where he said "I have to say that in 1981, making those decisions, I felt like I was providing enough freedom for 10 years. That is, a move from 64k to 640k felt like something that would last a great deal of time. Well, it didn't - it took about only 6 years before people started to see that as a real problem." (Source).
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
,, wash, rinse, repeat.
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
with all the vitriol in this thread you'd think this was another vista release. I'm personally pumped for this; Between KDE4 and CFS I haven't been this excited for a new release of all the linux distros in awhile. Don't like it? Don't use it. Why slam everyone's hard work though? To the developers: Thank you very much.
"Tricked"?
Betas on my work machine give me 100% bullet-proof coffee-break alibis!
Then again, so does Vista...
"I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
... I didn't INHALE..."?
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
No kidding ? Have you tried it ? With uClibc minimum static binary will be a few tens of kilobytes on ARM9, with glibc the number is just shy of half a meg. x86 code is somewhat more compact, but not terribly so. And no, dynamic linking cant be used everywhere, and even if it could, that 500kb of C library wont fit on my 128KB on-chip flash.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
Please don't take that personally. It was really intended to poke fun at the English language which can often be anything but easy.
I find that many, for whom English is a second language, actually write better than many native English speakers. At least they make some effort.
Have a great day, man.
He's not "evil" because of what he says. Evil is also a matter of what one does, so one ought to look at actions as well as words. People frequently do evil with good intentions; I dare say that people do evil that way more often than they do evil for its own sake. Callousness and indifference also seem to outweigh those who would revel in cruelty for no reason, for that matter.
He did evil due to his methods of competition, destroying competitors by underhanded legal, quasi-legal and illegal means (breaking contracts, lying, and hiring lawyers to bail them out of trouble, etc.). He's done evil in forcing people to do things that are good for Microsoft, but harmful to themselves and to their businesses.
He's also done good, though, using his wealth to help the poor. Thus, he's doing better than he could be doing, but not as good as he should be doing. But that describes a lot of people, myself included.
I never claimed an iMac didn't ship with any specific minimum on ram, just that you can't run OS X on 32MB ram. Early iMacs did NOT ship with OS X as you noted. My first Mac was an iMac DV 400mhz that i believe shipped with 64MB ram and OS 9.0.4. (i'm sure about the OS) I went to 512MB ram so that I could run everything I needed on it. I had to buy the ram to run netscape so that's why I brought it up. IE would run, but I didn't like IE on the Mac that much.
I ran 10.1 on that iMac. I'm quite familiar with it. 10.2 was faster. Each OS release up to tiger was faster but consumed more RAM. Leopard is the first release that seems slower, but I have close to the bare minimum in CPU and it seems to use 40% cpu when idle most of the time. (dual 867mhz)
I wish you'd check your facts before saying someone else is wrong. You didn't even read my post correctly. As I recall, (not 100% certain) 10.1-10.3 "required" 128MB ram. I know my iBook G4 800mhz (academic) shipped with 128MB and I had to buy some more right away to run mail.app and safari concurrently. That had 10.3.x on it. That machine was sold recently due to leopards requirements. A iBook G3 300mhz 160MB RAM system could run 10.3 but with only 4GB of disk space there was no room left for apps or data.
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
The fact that you might not please absolutely everyone is no excuse to not try and please as many as possible, either.
While I concur that he is indeed full of shit, OS X (I've seen 10.1 and 10.3) did/does run surprisingly well on my iMac G3 333Mhz w/ 512Mb. it initially had 64Mb, and the system indeed installed; compared to, say, WXP or Enlightenment E17 at the time (or what there was of it), the -visual- performance was stellar. Yes, it was grindy and slow to do anything with that much RAM, but short of disk access, 512Mb appears more than sufficient.
(I should note that I'm an IBM Thinkpad/Linux/Debian/XFCE4 user myself, though I used E16 exclusively up until KDE3 came out, tried it, and then found XFCE)
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
I think you sum it up very nicely.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Yeah I only quoted 10.1 because the OP said that was the best version of OS X. 10.0 had minimum reqs of 64MB, and I don't doubt it ran on that, but that's still twice of the claimed 32MB.
Good point ... no clue where he got the idea 10.1 had lesser requirements than 10.0.
I might add that when 10.0 came out, Apple was selling quite a few machines that could barely run it, and iMacs came out before OS X, so quoting iMac specs is also beside the point.
... In the computer lab at the school I work at. * I've got the license. * It runs ok on a 700 MHz machine with 256M ram. So far I've seen nothing of XP that makes me want to upgrade. (I know, I should be running linux. But these computers have to support several ed packages, somehow running a an application under Wine under linux on machines that aready are low on memory just doesn't hack it.)
Third Career: Tree Farmer Second Career: Computer Geek First Career: Teacher, Outdoor Instructor, Photographer.
Relax, it's a joke :p
Agnostic-theism is saying that we don't have enough evidence to make an informed decision about a creator God that listens to prayers and perform miracles. In general, agnosticism is just refusing to take a stand in something we do not have enough knowledge about. In the first sense, I think that the agnostics are nuts ( :p ), in the second, many people are agnostic including nearly all atheists.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.