Re: [TCLUG:4588] Gnome

[brady <bradyh@bitstream.net>]

I was having things crash right and left with 32 MB...but then I found out I had no swap partition.  <oops>  It seems like Gnome isn't a speed demon yet but then I've seen it on a Pentium 300 and a 100 and it seemed to be about the same speed.  I'm not sure what the deal is but just because it's not real fast on a faster machine doesn't necessarily mean it'll be a dog on a slower machine.  Maybe the slowness has more to do with disk access than processor speed.

One thing that happened recently - for some reason GMC (the file manager) suddenly started taking 10 times as long to start up.  I don't notice anything else different and I can't figure out what it's doing but I'm sure it will be fixed so it pops right up again in future releases.

>> It helps to have plenty of memory (I have 64MB, and it looks like it's
>> getting a bit tight... *sigh*), and a decent speed processor (I ran
>> Gnome 0.99.x on a P166 without complaints..  Now I have an K6-2 333, so
>> it's better than it was..
>
>I've got 128MB, and a K6-2/300, and it took 2 minutes, during which the
>CPU was not heavily loaded, and memory consumption did not go up wildly.
>It was running and releasing things.. I'll look at it again when I get
>home. 
>
>My friend's got an old Pentium/133. Guess Gnome's not going to be working
>for her, is it (:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"...the film is every bit as dauntingly abstract in its spasmodic hyperrealism..."
- Howard Hampton describing the movie "The Blade"