| 1 |
Am 30.07.2014 21:48, schrieb Dale: |
| 2 |
> Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Small software can be bloated, large software can be bloat-free. It's all |
| 4 |
>> about what is useful. "functional" != "bloated", but all too often |
| 5 |
>> "lightweight", "bloat free" software can also be described as "limited" |
| 6 |
>> or "functionally challenged". |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
> That is true. Some code can be really small and do a lot. Same can be |
| 10 |
> said for the opposite. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Maybe this comparison will work. Small and gets the job done. |
| 13 |
> Bicycle. Bloated. 18 wheeler truck. If all you want to do is ride a |
| 14 |
> relatively short distance with no load, bicycle will get the job done. |
| 15 |
> It won't do well if you want to move 20 tons somewhere tho. The 18 |
| 16 |
> wheeler truck is good if you need to pull 20 tons somewhere but is a bit |
| 17 |
> bloated if you are just going to ride up the street to see a neighbor. |
| 18 |
> It's also a bit harder to park too. ;-) |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> While to me KDE is bloated, I just try to disable what I can and carry |
| 21 |
> on. If my system was limited on resources, then I may use something else. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
and maybe you did exactly the wrong thing. KDE is very modular and |
| 24 |
reuses its modules as much as it can. Which also means: memory is only |
| 25 |
used once. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
There were once a very good (in my not so humble opinion. It think very |
| 28 |
highly of myself) comparism here: |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/ |
| 31 |
(url is dead btw) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
and if you actually use kde apps in kde - memory consumption is lower |
| 34 |
than in either gnome or 'leightweight' solutions like xfce or |
| 35 |
windowmaker+stuff. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
http://web.archive.org/web/20071229030604/http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html |
Archives