Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Sep 2011 22:31 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 488222
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.
RE[2]: people's linux desktops
by Valhalla on Sat 3rd Sep 2011 05:47
in reply to "RE: people's linux desktops"
You do realize that there are other reasons for using xmonad, openbox etc than resource usage, right
Indeed, I have a Core i5, 4gb ram but I use Openbox because I find it fast and comfortable and would use it even if it was heavier on resources.
That said it's certainly not a bad thing when the system does all you want of it and is also very lean, as it means you have alot or ram available to that which you really boot into the system for: applications. (and I regularly use alot of memory hungry apps)
My Arch 64-bit system uses 129mb ram when fully booted into x, that's less than XP used on this machine and that was 32-bit (64-bit code is ~30% larger).
In short, I find it doubtful that with the hardware standards of today people are using lean window managers because of resource usage, but the small memory footprint is still a nice side-effect.
RE[2]: people's linux desktops
by Icaria on Sat 3rd Sep 2011 05:48
in reply to "RE: people's linux desktops"
Running my i7 930 at the default 2.93ghz and running it at 3.21ghz is the difference between having to close my *nix VM before emulating the PS2/GCN and not having to close my VM before emulating the PS2/GCN.
It's not that ridiculous, it's not as if web browsing and email are the only use case.




Member since:
2005-08-18
You do realize that there are other reasons for using xmonad, openbox etc than resource usage, right?
Personally I find it more funny when people with quadcore and heaps of ram overlock and watercool their systems "to make them faster".