TCLUG Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [TCLUG:4588] Gnome

I don't want to start a KDE vs. gnome battle (PLEASE, don't!), but in the
interest of your friend, you might try KDE. I'm running KDE on a P-120 on
the desk behind me with 16Mb of RAM with no problems. Just timed it with my
watch: ~80 seconds from "startx" to full desktop with a kterm, though when
you start running a big app like Netscape, it starts disk-swapping a lot. My
120 with 48Mb is a little faster with almost no disk swapping, and my
K6-2/350 with 128Mb...well, you get the picture!

It's still not a speed-demon, but probably a LOT better than the trouble
you're having. It has also been quite stable, with no KDE-related crashes
since 1.0 came out. Our previous discussion also indicates that you can
still have gnome/GTK libs installed to run those apps too. I have to say I'm
reasonably impressed with most of the K apps. I haven't found anything SUPER
cool, but the basics are very solid and compatible. It's also super-friendly
for people with Win95 experience (they ripped it off), and I even just read
an article where (*gasp*) a Mac user found it acceptable! Over-all, it isn't
the coolest or most fashionable thing like Enlightenment on gnome, but it's
very solid and usable. That's probably more important for a newbie who wants
something simple to setup/use.

Good luck!


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yaron []
> Sent: Monday, March 08, 1999 4:14 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [TCLUG:4588] Gnome
>   Hi,
> On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Michael Hicks wrote:
> > Unfortunately, Gnome isn't the greatest speed demon on the planet..  I
> > think the 1.0 release takes longer to start than some other recent
> > versions, but I might just be imagining things..
> Not the fasters is an understatement.
> The reason I'm looking at it is I've got to setup Linux for a friend who
> lives kinda far away (Chicago), and I'm trying to make it as simple as
> possible for her... waiting over 2 minutes for Gnome to start is not a
> good thing.
> > 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 (:
> > Heh..  if that happens, you may want to whack your ~/.gnome directory,
> > or maybe only some of the files in there.
> Yeah, except I don't know which. I assumed that's where Gnome hides all
> it's config files, like what's on the panel.
> > Window Maker is not fully Gnome compliant (although I think they said
> > they were..)
> Yup, they most certainly did.
> > I run Enlightenment, which is definitely improved from earlier versions,
> > but still has it's problems..
> I remember trying to run Enlightenment on a 486 (: Anyway, I'm not really
> an E fan.. maybe when they get to a lean, stable version. Still, it LOOKS
> great.
> > I know that gmc is highly unstable, but I haven't had many problems with
> > gnome-session.  I have heard that gnome-session doesn't talk well with
> > apps running as root, so if you were just testing as root, I'd recommend
> > testing as a user.
> The only thing I do as root is compile/install things. I don't really know
> what gmc is - it crashed while trying to play... uh... one of the games, I
> forget which. And while moving things around. And when the cat sneezed in
> the other room...
> -Yaron
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> Try our website: