Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Aug 2009 00:12 UTC, submitted by rexstuff
Thread beginning with comment 377223
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"""
And how do I get to such a system? What parts? What drivers? I'm genuinely interested.
"""
Frankly, I have no idea.
And how do I get to such a system? What parts? What drivers? I'm genuinely interested.
"""
Frankly, I have no idea.
So.... Lemur2 does not actually *have* a system which performs well with KDE4. He's certainly never mentioned that before. All this time, he's only been going on what he's heard some other people claim.
Edited 2009-08-05 15:02 UTC
So.... Lemur2 does not actually *have* a system which performs well with KDE4. He's certainly never mentioned that before. He's only going on what he's heard other people claim then.
Why would you say this?
I have two desktop systems where KDE performs very well, one with ATI graphics and a dual-core AMD64 CPU and the other with legacy nvidia graphics and an Intel Pentium CPU. I have no idea exactly why these particular systems are fine with KDE4, but the fact is they are.
I also have a number of different netbooks with Intel GMA graphics where the performance is (currently) quite mundane (but not utterly unusable, after taking a bit of care in de-selecting certain desktop effects, but making sure to still enable compositing).
Edited 2009-08-05 15:11 UTC
The thing is ... this fact alone exonerates KDE4. You can have a situation where fast software is slowed down by something else on a particular system, but you cannot have a case where slow software is made fast on particular systems.
Ergo, KDE4 itself is not slow. If KDE4 itself was slow, it would be slow everywhere.
Ergo, KDE4 itself is not slow. If KDE4 itself was slow, it would be slow everywhere.
It's entirely possible for some quirk of a system to allow software that poorly suits the general case to out-perform software that is well-written for the general case. The fact that KDE4 may have, at some point, in time, for some very specific configuration, out-performed all other DE's (however you'd measure that), does not mean that, in general, KDE4 is never the performance problem.
I'm also assuming that "every other DE" means, say, XFCE, Gnome, maybe XP and Vista, maybe even OS X. If you're trying to get me to believe that KDE4 out-performed BlackBox (again, however you measure it) on the same hardware, well, I'll call BS on that particular claim.




Member since:
2007-02-17
And how do I get to such a system? What parts? What drivers? I'm genuinely interested. "
Frankly, I have no idea.
What I do know is that on some systems KDE4 absolutely flies. Faster than any other desktop.
By no means is this the case for all systems, but it is so for some.
The thing is ... this fact alone exonerates KDE4. You can have a situation where fast software is slowed down by something else on a particular system, but you cannot have a case where slow software is made fast on particular systems.
Ergo, KDE4 itself is not slow. If KDE4 itself was slow, it would be slow everywhere.