Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 19th Sep 2005 22:17 UTC, submitted by SilentBob4
Permalink for comment 33781
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 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
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
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
I think you're missing something - his comments aren't about either GTK, Clearlooks, or Cairo as shipped with Ubuntu....
No, I got that.
I also got that the the version of Gnome they shipped was supposed to be built on Cairo, and that Cairo's hope of greater efficiency is supposed to come with hardware acceleration. The reviewer noticed that the theme shipped didn't use Cairo and the acceleration wasn't there, so the interface was slow, something at odds with how Cairo and Gnome 2.12 were being reputed.
So, he tried to fix this. This reaction and this result are not surprising given how the version of Ubuntu was configured as shipped.
I was trying to point out that this experience that the reviewer went through should serve as a valuable object lesson to those composing the eventual release of 5.10 - that a moderately informed (by Linux standards) user thought it was slower than expected and couldn't make it faster using the available methods.
If I was a developer of Ubuntu, I would want to know this.