To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Windows versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are faster. On Linux they are so slow.
On Windows I think they are using the native widgets.
On Linux the widgets are drawn by GTK, I think. It is just weird because other GTK apps are faster (e.g. epiphany).
I would like to know why they are so slow on Linux. Does anybody know?
Actually, all Mozilla apps use XUL as their toolkit. This is even true on windows. The reason why you don't notice any substantial difference between the native widget and the XUL version is because of their use of the native theme APIs to render parts of the XUL widgets.
As for performance, Gecko 1.9 (the rendering engine used by Fx and Tb for HTML and XUL) is set to revamp the underlying graphics layer and use Cairo instead for all rendering. Gecko 1.9 will also feature reflow re-architecture which will speed up the rendering engine further.
If you are interested, you might want to test some of the experimental nightlies (at the moment only available for windows and linux)




Member since:
2005-07-24
It is my opinion that much of X's perceived slowness and much of Gnome's perceived slowness is really Firefox and Thunderbird drawing performace on X. (I can't speak for the Windows version since I don't have a Windows machine.)
Firefox and Thunderbird are *very* popular applications and run on many people's desktops.
Try this experiment:
1. Open up 2 Gnome apps.
2. Move one window around while overlapping the other and observe the performance.
3. Now open up a Gnome app and move it around on top of a Firefox session. Observe the major difference in performance.
4. Substitute Thunderbird in the same experiment, if you like.
My intent is not to criticize the Mozilla guys; I'm sure they have good reasons for doing things the way that they do.
Anyway, I imagine there is room for performance improvements in Gnome. (Can't speak for KDE as I'm not as familiar with using it on a day to day basis.) I've been hearing very good things about Gnome 2.13/2.14 performance.
Anyway, I run a lot of my users on xdmcp Gnome desktop sessions into a central server at 100mbit. The hardware I use is usually either old or very inexpensive. For reasons of standardization, I leave the X driver set to vesa, which means no hardware acceleration. And interestingly (to me anyway) I have never gotten a complaint about redraw speed from anyone. It's just not an issue for my users.
When I hear people complaining about X's slowness, I sometimes wonder if it's like people who trash transistor amplifiers because vacuum tube amplifiers are so superior. Maybe they are superior and maybe they aren't, but how many non-audiophiles people are going to notice or care?
Edited 2006-02-20 19:50