Re: efficiency of windows managers
On 9/27/07, Andy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 27. September 2007 21:02 schrieb Manu Hack:
> > Hi all,
> > I have a general question which I got when trying out different
> > windows managers/desktop environments. When I try to use windowmaker
> > (I wanted to make my computer faster as it's getting old), it
> > certainly is fast for initialization. But after that when around
> > 10-15 windows are opened and distributed in different workspaces, I
> > found moving around different workspaces and windows pretty slow (I
> > compared with KDE which I usually use.) and thus I still decided to
> > stick with KDE for the moment. Maybe the comparison is not fair as
> > KDE definitely needs longer time to initialize. But my question is,
> > is there a reason for that?
> > Thanks.
> > Manu
> You might need more RAM
> regards Andy :-)
I agree. :) But I'm still confused as to why KDE can outperform (at
least up to my experience) a supposedly light weight wm (maybe
windowmaker is not lightweight enough, will try fluxbox later) on the
same machine. Is that because of something like memory management or
something like that?
The reason I'm asking is that I want to change because before I
thought I can improve the efficiency by using a more lightweight wm
but it turns out it's not true in my case. So maybe as long as the
memory is enough to use KDE (or GNOME), KDE can be faster than those
lightweight wm because they use more memory?