Printable View
Yeah, at the moment I have Chromium open with 15 tabs open, Desurium open in my tray, LibreOffice displaying an ODT on my second screen, and two instances of Thunar and I am only using 811 mb. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by halfmanhalfamazing
Might be a difference in how lxtask gets it's information though.
Sorry, but LXDE website is dead, its session manager is broken and many ways of performing basic tasks are counterintuitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
XFCE uses just 40MiB more and does all that better, with all major still existing issues being around Thunar, but not the DE.
Chromium has a lot of memory leaks. Consider using Firefox instead. 500MiB vs 120MiB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson
On Xubuntu with XFCE 4.8 the system used 160MiB.. Price for new features in 4.10?... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by halfmanhalfamazing
i vote for xfce, although i dont use it
too all the nitpicks: the man clearly stated that its a subjective benchmark
on the other hand, the end user is almost always subjective
even more then some1 who can read the current memory usage
PS i remember Debian with xfce using 60mb, but lately my rig (openbox/fluxbox) is over 75mb at start
still its a lot better then default Ubuntu
The LXDE website is not dead (I suggest you check it again); the last new blog post was on September 24th.Quote:
Originally Posted by crazycheese
The session manager is not broken from my experience, and everything else is just personal opinion. PCManFM is definitely much better than Thunar at the moment.
I like Xfce and use it as my primary, but I also like LXDE and see that it can be better in several other use cases.
I was just commenting about how I was using bugger all memory, but anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by crazycheese
And considering the accuracy of some of your posts here, I do not think I am going to worry about it.
Depends on whether some self-adjusting preloading mechanism is used or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by bug77
OTOH, running multiple tests and throwing away the outliers is always a good practice...
twm should be installed on every system. It is a nice, clean, simple fallback in case anything goes so wrong you can't start your normal environment. It is simple, runs if X runs and you won't feel cozy. Perfect.
This is a stupid comparison, his boot times seem way off for gnome, kde, and unity. And I think his memory comparisons are also including cached memory, which is a pointless comparison.
Multiple components of xfce just don't seem to be maintained at all (such as the volume mixer), so I don't really think xfce is necessarily in much better "condition" than lxde. And afiak, lxde's website has always had issues, I believe its still an active project. I've also never had any issues with lxdm. I've never really used lxde, but when I used XFCE on arch I used lxdm as my display manager and it seemed nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by crazycheese
Advertisements. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by RealNC