Re:someone has to sort out his priorities
on
GNOME 2.16 Released
·
· Score: 1
It is good to hear that, but I must admit they are not yet there.
It is fun to play with top and see how resource-greedy applications can be. gedit takes 13M ram right after the start against 9m of gvim and 11m of emacs-x11. Apparently there is not so much functionality in gedit that is not present in gvim , so what's the problem? Where did my 4M go? And gedit does not seem to have so much user interface, so it should consume *less* memory than gvim/emacs. But it does not! Why use it then?
Of course, a couple of megabytes does not really matter, but the pattern is common: with modern GUIs you get bigger resource consumption and less functionality, and often WITHOUT really getting a better user interface.
To consider also:
totem vs. mplayer
Eye of gnome vs. gqview
Ghostview vs. GNOME ghostview
evince vs. gv/xpdf
each time you have to pay speed and memory for not so much usability.
P.S.
It's a pity GNOME/GTK was created so late, computers are just too fast for developers to care about optimization:)
On a machine with 256 Mb RAM and GNOME loaded there is almost no free RAM left. Almost any application that you launch is going to use swap space. Amiga (whose Workbench would run OK on a 256 Kb machine) would turn in its grave!
Seriously, I think that user interfaces we have on Linux are sucking more and more resources in the course of time and I still don't see a real breakthrough in usability. And if there is no difference in usability I prefer a user interface that runs faster and consumes less memory. I think it is more important than eyecandy. Maybe the developers of widgetsets/window managers/... should stop running for eyecandy and launch a profiler?
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.videobomb.com/posts/show/3863
It is good to hear that, but I must admit they are not yet there. It is fun to play with top and see how resource-greedy applications can be. gedit takes 13M ram right after the start against 9m of gvim and 11m of emacs-x11. Apparently there is not so much functionality in gedit that is not present in gvim , so what's the problem? Where did my 4M go? And gedit does not seem to have so much user interface, so it should consume *less* memory than gvim/emacs. But it does not! Why use it then? Of course, a couple of megabytes does not really matter, but the pattern is common: with modern GUIs you get bigger resource consumption and less functionality, and often WITHOUT really getting a better user interface. To consider also: totem vs. mplayer Eye of gnome vs. gqview Ghostview vs. GNOME ghostview evince vs. gv/xpdf each time you have to pay speed and memory for not so much usability. P.S. It's a pity GNOME/GTK was created so late, computers are just too fast for developers to care about optimization :)
On a machine with 256 Mb RAM and GNOME loaded there is almost no free RAM left. Almost any application that you launch is going to use swap space. Amiga (whose Workbench would run OK on a 256 Kb machine) would turn in its grave! Seriously, I think that user interfaces we have on Linux are sucking more and more resources in the course of time and I still don't see a real breakthrough in usability. And if there is no difference in usability I prefer a user interface that runs faster and consumes less memory. I think it is more important than eyecandy. Maybe the developers of widgetsets/window managers/... should stop running for eyecandy and launch a profiler?
come on, it was not us who invented capitalism.