| 1 |
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:13:41PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 25 May 2011 08:46:48 Indi wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> and have you ever heard of 'code reuse' or 'modularity'? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> It seems - no. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Because KDE itself might be huge. But once loaded the apps are pretty small - |
| 9 |
> because they reuse code. kmail does not have its own html engine. It does not |
| 10 |
> matter where you type your text etc pp. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Sorta like Internet Explorer in Windows. It "loads" a lot faster and |
| 13 |
lighter than Firefox or Opera. That's because ie.exe is merely a "front |
| 14 |
end" to a bunch of libraries that are loaded at boot time, which |
| 15 |
contributes to the boot process taking do long. Starting ie.exe takes |
| 16 |
hardly any time, because 90% of the app is already loaded. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Overall KDE uses LESS ram then most 'lightweight' solutions. Because |
| 19 |
> xterm&abiword&some odd pager&thunderbird don't look so good anymore. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> This gem is a couple of years old, but still a worthy read: |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Read it. Seriously. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I don't know how good "exmap" is, but my personal experience is quite |
| 29 |
different. Between Fall 1999 and Summer 2007 I had a Dell Dimension |
| 30 |
with a 450 mhz PIII and 128 megs of *SYSTEM RAM* (no not the video card). |
| 31 |
It was actually quite usable to the very end, with Blackbox WM, and |
| 32 |
running a few apps. Meanwhile, KDE (and GNOME for that matter) would |
| 33 |
take forever to load and make the system crawl after that, even with 1 |
| 34 |
or 2 apps loaded. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> |
Archives