Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 5th Nov 2006 17:40 UTC, submitted by bmeurer
Xfce The Xfce development team is pleased to announce that the second and hopefully last release candidate of the upcoming Xfce 4.4 desktop is available for download now. The release focuses primarily on bug fixes and optimizations; see the release notes for a complete list of changes. The source tarballs and the graphical installer are available from the download page.
Thread beginning with comment 179124
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Hope
by situation on Sun 5th Nov 2006 21:34 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Hope"
situation
Member since:
2006-01-10

Just because you keep saying the same thing doesn't make it the proper definition cyclops. Bloat to you may be exactly what you said, bloat to me may be adding a new default theme, see what I'm saying? It's like I said before, we just have different definitions of bloat, so you don't have to keep forcing _your_ definition down my throat like it is the absolute be all end all what the word means. No where in any of my posts did I say feature bloat specifically, I just said bloat. Which to me can be memory usage, file size, number of applications, etc.

That's cool if you want to keep going in circles and all, but I've already said my hope for 4.4, so good luck with that.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Hope
by dylansmrjones on Sun 5th Nov 2006 21:55 in reply to "RE[6]: Hope"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

What kind of bloat are we talking about?

Functionality Bloat or Code Bloat. It's two different things and Functionality Bloat does not equal Code Bloat.

You can easily write an application with little functionality in a lot of code, and you can just as easily write an application with a lot of functionality in a lot less of code.

I don't mind Functionality Bloat as long as it doesn't result in Code Bloat. Code Bloat is what makes applications start slower, react slower etc.

Functionality Bloat "just" means you can't find the functionality you need - unless you search within the application for 30 minutes ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Hope
by dylansmrjones on Sun 5th Nov 2006 21:58 in reply to "RE[6]: Hope"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

No where in any of my posts did I say feature bloat specifically, I just said bloat. Which to me can be memory usage, file size, number of applications, etc.

And that's the problem. It's several different kind of "bloat".

Memory usage and file size are related to Code Bloat. Number of applications relates to Functionality Bloat (if a modular approach has been taken). Many small modules are better than one big module.

When talking about bloat you have to specify what you're talking about, unless you want to be dragged through a flame war on the definition on "bloat".

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Hope
by cyclops on Sun 5th Nov 2006 22:26 in reply to "RE[6]: Hope"
cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

Shakes head. I am not going around in circles. Your statement is faulty. I have stuck to one kind of bloat. Feature bloat.

A new theme is not bloat. I can't even think where you are coming from with that.

There are many types of bloat, you mix and match them at will. Thats my problem.

Feature Bloat example Netscape too many features detract from the purpose of file browsing.

Code Bloat example Vista so much code to manage, unstable. BTW in your first example you talk about dependences. Dependences mean less code bloat

File Size you picked it apart from compiler optimization binaries make up a tiny fraction of a system and often contain debug information that you can strip. It can be an indication of code bloat, but really its not a good one.

Memory footprint. This in itself is a strange one, because it plays against your other mention start-up time. XFCE allows you to load into memory KDE/Gnome Libs to allow those programs to load faster. There is all kinds of caching for speed. It often comes down to Total Memory Size vs Hard Drive speed. The only real problems are memory leaks, and duplicate items in memory, look at how Gnome is trying to reduce it memory footprint.

Application Bloat. Give it a name Windows intergrated explorer, WMP into Windows...they are always there and cannot be removed. This is your problem XFCE does not integrate them you can pick your own media player or browser, you can even pick your own calender application, file browser and replace the old one completely, and they need not be loaded into memory at startup.

your throwing different definitions of bloat around to justify your statement, and hoping one sticks, the harsh reality is often these things are at odds with each other CPU Usage vs Functionality vs Code Bloat vs Memory footprint etc etc. Its complex.

Which is why I like the simple statement.
"All the features you need and none you don't".

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Hope
by shapeshifter on Mon 6th Nov 2006 10:13 in reply to "RE[7]: Hope"
shapeshifter Member since:
2006-09-19

Shakes head. I am not going around in circles. Your statement is faulty. I have stuck to one kind of bloat. Feature bloat.
Hehe, looks to me like you just came around full circle.
And yes, you keep mumbling the same thing over and over, post after post.

A new theme is not bloat. I can't even think where you are coming from with that.

There are many types of bloat, you mix and match them at will. Thats my problem.

Feature Bloat example Netscape too many features detract from the purpose of file browsing.


Gee, are you ever dense cyclops.
He already said his piece, and you keep going on and on about the same thing.
Bloat is bloat, plain and simple. It's ONE word with ONE meaning. It only means one thing, that something is bigger than it should be.
Do you need to be drawn a picture?

BTW in your first example you talk about dependences. Dependences mean less code bloat
Oh yeah? How do you figure that? Aren't dependencies code too?

And the sad fact, which you're resisting like your life depended on it, is that XFCE has grown larger and has progressed slower than many would like.

XFCE was supposed to be a WM+maybe a light desktop.
Did they need to waste time on all those apps, the calendar, file manager etc. instead of finishing the WM first and maybe then adding some apps once the main objective was accomplished?
Just doesn't make sense to me.
And it's starting to look to me like XFCE is getting to a very awkward size. Too big for old machines and too underfeatured for new, fast machines.
Personaly, at this point I'd run something like IceWM or Flux on an old machine and just jump straight to KDE on a new machine.
Maybe use XFCE on machines in a range somewhere in between. But that's only approximately 1/3 of the market.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[7]: Hope
by hal2k1 on Sun 5th Nov 2006 22:30 in reply to "RE[6]: Hope"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//Just because you keep saying the same thing doesn't make it the proper definition cyclops. Bloat to you may be exactly what you said, bloat to me may be adding a new default theme, see what I'm saying? It's like I said before, we just have different definitions of bloat, so you don't have to keep forcing _your_ definition down my throat like it is the absolute be all end all what the word means. No where in any of my posts did I say feature bloat specifically, I just said bloat. Which to me can be memory usage, file size, number of applications, etc.

That's cool if you want to keep going in circles and all, but I've already said my hope for 4.4, so good luck with that.//

You keep using that word bloat. I do not think it means what you think it means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bloat

I don't think you understand the concept of bloat.

Adding loosely-coupled applications that do not reside in RAM but are only loaded off disk & into RAM as needed is not bloat.

XFCE does not exhibit the undesirable features that are associated with bloat. About the only resource that this new version of XFCE would consume more of is hard disk space, and we are talking only a few megabytes of that.

Reply Parent Score: 2