Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Mar 2007 19:37 UTC, submitted by Hiev
Permalink for comment 222793
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-09-08
Performance was awful on my PC but I've no idea why. My specs are:
AMD64
1Gb
NEO2
GeForce 6600GTS
As an example, scrolling a web page containing pure text was like running any modern operating system on an 8086. I trawled through the setting and turned off those that I thought might hurt performance. I also read the documentation to look for other settings that might slow things down. But it was simply unusable and I had to uninstall it. I don't know if this is common or specific to certain graphics cards. Should I have been using a specific NVIDIA driver?
I was disappointed - I installed it expecting something resembling (however remotely) the smooth system used in OSX. What I got was the equivalent to X running in 64k of memory.
To be honest, I'd prefer someone produce a home desktop alternative to X that was designed to support the features in Compiz/Beryl. I'm not saying I know anything about X's performance, but surely a lighter system (more like OSX' Quartz) would be effort better spent? IMO
Edited 2007-03-20 12:36