Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Jun 2009 14:10 UTC, submitted by
Window Managers We're all pretty much versed in the worlds of GNOME, KDE, and to a lesser degree, Xfce, and while there are lots of alternatives, none of the smaller ones really seem to gain much traction beyond their fans. An exception is LXDE, a small and resource efficient desktop environment.
Thread beginning with comment 370096
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by flynn
by FooBarWidget on Wed 24th Jun 2009 20:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by flynn"
Member since:

"I think is this kind of tolerance of the user that leads to developer care less to develop more efficient application. Saying go to get a more powerful cpu and more ram and you would get smooth experience is not the right way to solve problem. And that is why after so many years of hardware improvement, we still experience more or less the same speed feeling on desktop usage."

Which totally makes sense considering how expensive development time is compared to hardware costs. I can write an app in C in 200 hours and spend another 100 optimizing it to death. But why should I if I can also spend $40 on a hardware upgrade, and write the app in Python in 60 hours, which still performs acceptably?

A lot of people complain about this increase in "bloat", but I call it lowering development costs at the expense of increase resource usage. Considering that computers are meant to serve humans it makes total sense.

You may argue that open source software is free, so there's no "development costs". This is not true: the developer of said software may have invested tremendous amounts of time, which are also costs.

Reply Parent Score: 3