Comments on: The Other Desktop: Running Xfce http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/ Open Source, Open Standards Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:31:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: pravatpc http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4843 pravatpc Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4843 Hai Roderick,<br /> <br /> It's not about "Xfce's 28 MB of RAM vs 30 MB for KDE Vs 41 MB for GNOME".<br /> <br /> We run it on Production Servers mainly because at a larger scale, when you have 50+ user using a XWindow over remote display, XFCE is too smooth and saves hell lot of memory...<br /> <br /> It might not be EyeCandy for common desktop dudes but our Developers love it... Hai Roderick,

It’s not about “Xfce’s 28 MB of RAM vs 30 MB for KDE Vs 41 MB for GNOME”.

We run it on Production Servers mainly because at a larger scale, when you have 50+ user using a XWindow over remote display, XFCE is too smooth and saves hell lot of memory…

It might not be EyeCandy for common desktop dudes but our Developers love it…

]]> By: kz73 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4844 kz73 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4844 Xfce is light because it needs less CPU power. My Duron 800 is too slow for GNOME but Xfce runs great! Even beter then Windowmaker. Xfce is light because it needs less CPU power. My Duron 800 is too slow for GNOME but Xfce runs great! Even beter then Windowmaker.

]]> By: registerhater http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4845 registerhater Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4845 Is it really that little? I'm running XFCE 4.4 right now and if feels a lot more memory intensive than ~30 MB. Is it really that little? I’m running XFCE 4.4 right now and if feels a lot more memory intensive than ~30 MB.

]]> By: dansomnea http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4846 dansomnea Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4846 Hello,<br /> I've appreciated this white paper.<br /> I send you this hyperlink:<br /> http://www.google.com/search?q=Running+XFce+Linux%27s+greatest+strengths+is+that+it%27s+easily+customized&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7IRFA<br /> <br /> As you can see, webinars can easily enter this Linux Magazine Connection's DB of white papers. <br /> Mr Martin Streicher, the former Linux Magazine Connection's editor-in-chief, gave me some login parameters to read a white paper.<br /> Sincerely yours,<br /> prof dr ing Dan Gheorghe Somnea,<br /> Bucharest ROMANIA<br /> http://dansomnea.tripod.com/whoami.html Hello,
I’ve appreciated this white paper.
I send you this hyperlink:
http://www.google.com/search?q=Running+XFce+Linux%27s+greatest+strengths+is+that+it%27s+easily+customized&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7IRFA

As you can see, webinars can easily enter this Linux Magazine Connection’s DB of white papers.
Mr Martin Streicher, the former Linux Magazine Connection’s editor-in-chief, gave me some login parameters to read a white paper.
Sincerely yours,
prof dr ing Dan Gheorghe Somnea,
Bucharest ROMANIA
http://dansomnea.tripod.com/whoami.html

]]> By: matador http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4847 matador Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4847 I started using xfce on an old gentoo 2005.0 mainly because compiling KDE for five days wasn't an option. I really liked xfce and as Pravat Santra said, there are particular uses where a solution can be better than others, but today with PC's running 2-4Gb of RAM, I couldn't care less about memory or CPU usage.<br /> Anyway, just today I've read this:<br /> http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html<br /> It's a benchmark about memory usage of the different Desktop Managers I started using xfce on an old gentoo 2005.0 mainly because compiling KDE for five days wasn’t an option. I really liked xfce and as Pravat Santra said, there are particular uses where a solution can be better than others, but today with PC’s running 2-4Gb of RAM, I couldn’t care less about memory or CPU usage.
Anyway, just today I’ve read this:
http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html
It’s a benchmark about memory usage of the different Desktop Managers

]]> By: nebbit http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4848 nebbit Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4848 Is this low memory footprint the ideal solution for netbook?<br /> Has anyone ported Xfce to the netbook screen resolution?<br /> I think this would be the ideal fit. Is this low memory footprint the ideal solution for netbook?
Has anyone ported Xfce to the netbook screen resolution?
I think this would be the ideal fit.

]]> By: masinick http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4849 masinick Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4849 I did not follow the project change list for XFCE 4.6 and 4.6.1, but I can tell you that the current XFCE 4.6.1 runs smoother and faster than any XFCE release since the changes to Gtk2+ that were made in the V4.0 time frame. XFCE 3.8 was lighter and faster, but nowhere near as nice in the appearance of the window manager widgets themselves. XFCE 4 is much better in that regard, but consumes more resources than the old XFCE, but still fewer than KDE and GNOME, but with fewer integrated actions.<br /> <br /> XFCE is great for a moderate desktop. For those who want a REALLY light desktop at the desktop entry level, take a look at LXDE. It uses lighter components and is one of the fastest, if not THE fastest desktop environments currently available. If LXDE isn't light enough, you may need something ultra light, such as IceWM, Fluxbox, Openbox (without LXDE), or JWM.<br /> <br /> XFCE strikes a nice balance, and is great for all but the oldest systems, and it provides plenty of functionality. I am using it right now in fact. I did not follow the project change list for XFCE 4.6 and 4.6.1, but I can tell you that the current XFCE 4.6.1 runs smoother and faster than any XFCE release since the changes to Gtk2+ that were made in the V4.0 time frame. XFCE 3.8 was lighter and faster, but nowhere near as nice in the appearance of the window manager widgets themselves. XFCE 4 is much better in that regard, but consumes more resources than the old XFCE, but still fewer than KDE and GNOME, but with fewer integrated actions.

XFCE is great for a moderate desktop. For those who want a REALLY light desktop at the desktop entry level, take a look at LXDE. It uses lighter components and is one of the fastest, if not THE fastest desktop environments currently available. If LXDE isn’t light enough, you may need something ultra light, such as IceWM, Fluxbox, Openbox (without LXDE), or JWM.

XFCE strikes a nice balance, and is great for all but the oldest systems, and it provides plenty of functionality. I am using it right now in fact.

]]> By: argon99 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4850 argon99 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.linux-mag.com/id/4404/#comment-4850 I know this is about xfce but I have recently been playing with enlightenment E17. I haven't taken the time to get any numbers for memory or cpu usage but it seems very responsive. And it looks very nice. I would very much like to see how it stacks up with the other main window manager/desktops. E17 is still listed as unstable, and I have found areas that need improvement, but it is usable enough to test. For me it had a problem when vlc went full screen. But I'm sure that is a small problem that will be fixed. For me it seems to have a small foot print and the eye candy of KDE. Well worth a look. But there are some issues that I have not resolved. Some distros running E17 seem to be different the other distros. I suspect this is the problems introduced by the package manager ( I haven't tried to compile from source yet). I know this is about xfce but I have recently been playing with enlightenment E17. I haven’t taken the time to get any numbers for memory or cpu usage but it seems very responsive. And it looks very nice. I would very much like to see how it stacks up with the other main window manager/desktops. E17 is still listed as unstable, and I have found areas that need improvement, but it is usable enough to test. For me it had a problem when vlc went full screen. But I’m sure that is a small problem that will be fixed. For me it seems to have a small foot print and the eye candy of KDE. Well worth a look. But there are some issues that I have not resolved. Some distros running E17 seem to be different the other distros. I suspect this is the problems introduced by the package manager ( I haven’t tried to compile from source yet).

]]>