| 1 |
Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 10/04/2017 00:58, Kai Krakow wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> Oh, and have a look at gkrellm and its plugins. It might have all you |
| 4 |
>>> want already and then some :) |
| 5 |
>> No, I hate that. See above. Too overwhelmin, too distracting, and |
| 6 |
>> either it steals screen real estate or isn't visible anyways and thus |
| 7 |
>> no need to run it altogether. As I said, I never understood why one |
| 8 |
>> would need such fancy monitor stuff. If I feel the need of monitoring |
| 9 |
>> some status, I usually do this in a console window using CLI tools. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> he :-) |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I actually /like/ gkrellm, been using it for years. On KDE too. See |
| 14 |
> screenshot. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I keep it narrow (60 pixels) and with 1920x1080 I can afford that. |
| 17 |
> I use virtualbox extensively and when I fire up all 12 VMs I have |
| 18 |
> currently, I find gkrellm is the only thing that really shows me |
| 19 |
> activity the way I want it. Horses for courses I guess :-) |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Never really groked CDE though. Lilac just ain't my hting |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Same here. I have Gkrellm on my parking desktop. That's the desktop |
| 25 |
I'm usually on when I'm not doing anything. At a glance, I can see what |
| 26 |
the CPUs are doing, memory, disks, fans and a whole host of other |
| 27 |
things. I can't see me going without Gkrellm. I'd be one sad puppy if |
| 28 |
it stopped working or being developed. :-( I'd want it up and running |
| 29 |
no matter what desktop I was using. As you showed, you can make it |
| 30 |
really small if one wants too. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Dale |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
:-) :-) |
Archives