Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 5th Sep 2005 13:38 UTC, submitted by Erik Harrison
Xfce "Every major release of the 4.x series of Xfce has been pretty major. 4.0 was the result of over a years work, a major rewrite of the entire desktop. 4.2 saw the introduction of major features and enhancements that were incomplete for 4.0, and new developers as Xfce4 gained popularity. 4.4 is going to be a major upgrade to Xfce, with new components, major upgrades to old ones, and more tools for developers. So, without further ado, let's take a look at what's coming."
Thread beginning with comment 27757
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Xfce is what Gnome should be
by on Tue 6th Sep 2005 08:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Xfce is what Gnome should be"

Member since:

Yes, be careful indeed. Konqueror start at least twice as fast when running in a KDE environment, as Nautilus does when running in a Gnome desktop. At least thati is what happens on my old 500MHz PIII 512MB RAM.
Wrong I did the experiment on my system (an old Celeron 700 MHz) using the time command from a terminal(Gnome-Terminal under Gnome and Konsole under KDE). Here are the results:

Nautilus Gnome 2.6.1
1.03user 0.34system 0:04.54elapsed 30%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (41major+2765minor)pagefaults 0swaps
Konueror KDE 3.2.3
4.36user 0.62system 0:10.82elapsed 46%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+8722minor)pagefaults 0swaps

Total time (user + system):
Nautilus = 1.37 seconds
Konqueror = 4.98 seconds

That is Nautilus loads in less than one third the time of Konqueror.

I simply love people who present "benchmarks" that scream "flawed!" the second I see them as a fact. 30% and 46% CPU usage during startup? WTH? You just ran 'time konqueror', waited for the window to appear, then a random time (rather long, guessing from those 46%, you seem to have bad reaction time), so your benchmark also measures Konqueror doing nothing.

Guessing from those 30%CPU for the Nautilus benchmark that one is even worse, since you measured complete nonsense there. There's always just one nautilus instance running, so I guess you just measured how long it takes to tell the running instance to open another window instead of measuring a real startup.

FWIW the startup time of both seems to be about the same here. And measuring this actually doesn't make much sense anyway. GNOME users have Nautilus running all the time, KDE users usually have Konqueror preloaded.

Reply Parent Score: 0

Member since:

Well thats one of the advantages of nautilus, not only does it draw the desktop, it loads the actual filemanager quicker so it's not there doing nothing.

All three window managers have different fuctionallity and designed with different goals, xfce was designed with low memory in mind.

Reply Parent Score: 0