Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Aug 2012 22:29 UTC
Gnome The future of GNOME - an interesting subject. GNOME 3 has been out and about for a while, and it hasn't exactly been a smashing success. One of the efforts to take GNOME to the next level is what the team refers to as GNOME OS - but in reality, it's a set of improvements to GNOME that are just as interesting to GNOME-the-desktop-environment.
Thread beginning with comment 530564
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

Ever tried KDE 4 on a Pentium II machine?


No, why would anyone? The P2 is a 15 year old CPU, it's not reasonable to expect today's desktop OS to work well, or even at all, on it.

It seems to me like some developers are coding as if there's no such thing as limited processing power


I don't think that's a conclusion you can come to based on the usability on a P2.
Today's programmers code for today's computers, not for 15 year old tech. That's how it has always been.

the environmental cost of upgrades,


I'm not sure running 15 year old technology is more environmentally friendly.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Gullible Jones Member since:
2006-05-23

No, why would anyone? The P2 is a 15 year old CPU, it's not reasonable to expect today's desktop OS to work well, or even at all, on it.

Why is it not reasonable? As far as I can tell, the only things that have significantly changed about normal desktop functionality are
a) what's expected of multimedia applications
b) what's expected of browsers
c) what applications are expected to look like

Multimedia is optional (or doesn't have to be high definition). Eyecandy should be possible to turn off. The only really significant one IMO is browsing, thanks to all the JS-intensive websites out there.

Word processing? Printing? Rendering plain old HTML? How has that stuff changed? (Other than better language support, which even ancient machines have quite enough memory for.)


I don't think that's a conclusion you can come to based on the usability on a P2.
Today's programmers code for today's computers, not for 15 year old tech. That's how it has always been.


Point taken, but I'm not entirely sure this is a good state of affairs. The rapid "progress" of computer technology is currently driving an environmental and humanitarian catastrophe.


I'm not sure running 15 year old technology is more environmentally friendly.


Not in terms of power usage, but as I understand it it's more friendly in terms of avoiding general pollution, due to how PCs are recycled. I could be wrong though.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Yoko_T Member since:
2011-08-18

"Ever tried KDE 4 on a Pentium II machine?


No, why would anyone? The P2 is a 15 year old CPU, it's not reasonable to expect today's desktop OS to work well, or even at all, on it.

It seems to me like some developers are coding as if there's no such thing as limited processing power


I don't think that's a conclusion you can come to based on the usability on a P2.
Today's programmers code for today's computers, not for 15 year old tech. That's how it has always been.

the environmental cost of upgrades,


I'm not sure running 15 year old technology is more environmentally friendly.
"

And what pray tell,do idoits like yourself consider to be environmentally friendly?

The crap hardware Crapple is churning out these days with non-replaceable things like batteries and other such stuff?

The Gnome Cowards refusal to allow people to actually shut off computers they are not actually using?


Stuff like this?

Reply Parent Score: 1

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

> Ever tried KDE 4 on a Pentium II machine?
No, why would anyone? The P2 is a 15 year old CPU, it's not reasonable to expect today's desktop OS to work well, or even at all, on it.
> It seems to me like some developers are coding as if there's no such thing as limited processing power
I don't think that's a conclusion you can come to based on the usability on a P2.
Today's programmers code for today's computers, not for 15 year old tech. That's how it has always been.

What runs fine on P2, will do well on some fairly low-powered nimble ARM machine (such "underpowered" gear seems to be in the mission statement of LXDE, for example; and BTW, it runs decently on a PII 266 that I keep around - dual, but still).

Also, consider that there are (last I checked) ~1.3 billion PCs in the world for ~2 billion users - but there are over 5 billion mobile subscribers. I guess costs, unwieldiness, energy requirements of PCs have partly something to do with that.

> the environmental cost of upgrades,
I'm not sure running 15 year old technology is more environmentally friendly.

And there's lots more to "environmentally friendly" than end-user electricity usage ...generally, considering how PCs are made (how many resources they use in the process) and disposed, it tends to be more friendly to keep running older ones as long as feasible (not talking about some always-on servers - just the usual end-user machines seeing intermittent usage)

Reply Parent Score: 2