| 1 |
On Donnerstag 11 Februar 2010, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 11 February 2010 13:50:54 Walter Dnes wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 01:31:26AM +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > > On Donnerstag 11 Februar 2010, Roy Wright wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > > IMO, mandatory semantic-desktop is a very good reason to find another |
| 7 |
> > > > desktop manager (even after being my primary desktop for 7 years). |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > yeah good luck with that. Because gnome is moving in that direction |
| 10 |
> > > too. |
| 11 |
> > > |
| 12 |
> > There are other desktops besides GNOME and KDE. Actually I prefer the |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > ICEWM window manager. I was running a 1999 Dell 450mhz PIII with 128 |
| 15 |
> > megs of *SYSTEM* ram until the summer of 2007. Let's just say that |
| 16 |
> > GNOME and KDE were out of the question for me. On my current desktop, |
| 17 |
> > ICEWM flies. But I also have a netbook, and again GNOME and KDE are not |
| 18 |
> > usable. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > > Seriously guys, you start sounding like luddites. Is new, must be bad. |
| 21 |
> > > |
| 22 |
> > Correction, is fat, bloated, and slow, must be bad. I wonder if |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> > Microsoft's anti-linux strategy is to have its agents infiltrate the |
| 25 |
> > linux developer community, and turn linux into bloatware. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> You have been corrected on this point so many times I now think you are |
| 28 |
> just a stupid ass. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> It is not slow. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> You are the only one saying that. People who do use Nepomuk say that it is |
| 33 |
> not slow and does not hog resources (initial scan excepted). |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
you can even tell nepomuk how much memory it is allowed to use ... |
Archives