Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: KDE Software Compilation 4.5.2 Is Here

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,650

    Default KDE Software Compilation 4.5.2 Is Here

    Phoronix: KDE Software Compilation 4.5.2 Is Here

    It's that time of the month for another update to the KDE Software Compilation. The October point release to KDE SC 4.5 brings a variety of bug-fixes to KWin, Dolphin, and KSharedDataCache, among other KDE packages...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODY1Mg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Fail Software Compilation.

    This software is unusable on most of the machines do to the unoptimized, slow, memory hungry code. It was such a pain on my laptop for the last few months, there's no word to describe it. Still has a stupid long logout and startup, plus disk grindage everywhere. Simple thing like launching kwrite requires serious disk grindage.

    I should be quiet now I guess, back to BFS scheduler, fluxbox, and my 5400RPM laptop disk but yet 80MB/s read rate, sorry for the rage .

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hax0r View Post
    Fail Software Compilation.

    This software is unusable on most of the machines do to the unoptimized, slow, memory hungry code. It was such a pain on my laptop for the last few months, there's no word to describe it. Still has a stupid long logout and startup, plus disk grindage everywhere. Simple thing like launching kwrite requires serious disk grindage.

    I should be quiet now I guess, back to BFS scheduler, fluxbox, and my 5400RPM laptop disk but yet 80MB/s read rate, sorry for the rage .
    Fix your computer. Most apps open almost instantly for me and memory usage beats the pants off Windows 7 (not saying much, but still). Even on my older laptop, it runs fine. Only big complaint I have is that KWin is still inefficient with in OpenGL mode. Compiz runs just fine, but KWin is sluggish, albeit more consistent in performance.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hax0r View Post
    Fail Software Compilation.

    This software is unusable on most of the machines do to the unoptimized, slow, memory hungry code. It was such a pain on my laptop for the last few months, there's no word to describe it. Still has a stupid long logout and startup, plus disk grindage everywhere. Simple thing like launching kwrite requires serious disk grindage.

    I should be quiet now I guess, back to BFS scheduler, fluxbox, and my 5400RPM laptop disk but yet 80MB/s read rate, sorry for the rage .
    KDE apps start faster then Gnome apps. Compare your ubuntu memory usage to Kubuntu and explain me, why ubuntu uses more then 800MB after while? Unoptimized, slow and memory hungry code is present on ubuntu, it's called dumb C hacks, python everywhere and mono. What bfs has something to what you wrote earlier? Oh, it was some kind of brain fuck for the moment I guess.

    You could have used GNOME...
    Maybe in next ten years it become feature rich and usable as KDE is now.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman
    KDE apps start faster then Gnome apps.
    I've tried both KDE and Gnome installs on Gentoo and that's absolutely not the case for me. Regardless of which DE I'm in, equivalent KDE apps take maybe 3 times longer to start, and use a lot more memory.

    KDE itself also takes quite a while to get going.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wingfeather View Post
    I've tried both KDE and Gnome installs on Gentoo and that's absolutely not the case for me. Regardless of which DE I'm in, equivalent KDE apps take maybe 3 times longer to start, and use a lot more memory.
    Just curious what apps were you using?

    KDE itself also takes quite a while to get going.
    That's true.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wingfeather View Post
    I've tried both KDE and Gnome installs on Gentoo and that's absolutely not the case for me. Regardless of which DE I'm in, equivalent KDE apps take maybe 3 times longer to start, and use a lot more memory.
    What's your rig? Have you tried preload? Due to cashing load times are totaly redundant

    KDE itself also takes quite a while to get going.
    True. But init startup times are drasticaly decreasing so overal total OS load time with KDE is getting smaller and smaller every six months or so.

    And KDE is kind of like a massive weighting object; takes long to get it up to speed, but when it's at that speed, the object has so much momentum that it's hard to slow down. I'm reffering to cashing and shared resources and much more effective resource management than other DE's

    As usual KDE is faster on newer hardware and slower on older hardware. Speed Vs. load

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,153

    Default

    Nice work! I don't think I'm needed here.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    KDE apps start faster then Gnome apps. Compare your ubuntu memory usage to Kubuntu and explain me, why ubuntu uses more then 800MB after while? Unoptimized, slow and memory hungry code is present on ubuntu, it's called dumb C hacks, python everywhere and mono. What bfs has something to what you wrote earlier? Oh, it was some kind of brain fuck for the moment I guess.

    Maybe in next ten years it become feature rich and usable as KDE is now.
    I've never experienced 800 MBs. You might try looking at Firefox. But regardless it's always important to be watchful of optimizations. It is annoying how slow Gnome apps take to load though I very much agree there, but that may be due to pre-loading certain libraries. You could pre-load more, but have higher mem use. Ideally the most commonly used apps should all be pre-loaded though. Windows Explorer, for example, loads instantly. Perhaps "Linux desktops" could just really use some more pre-loading intelligence is all.

    One thing that Windows does is pre-load a lot of things (Windows takes for ages to fully load because of it), and then unloads some of those things if they aren't in use and another app wants more memory. I don't know if Linux tries to do such things, but doing so would probably be ideal and should be the default setting.

    As for the Gnome not being feature-rich, I would have to agree. I love the simplicity of Gnome and hate KDE due to the clutter, but the *options* should still be present, just buried. The default Gnome desktop is barren even when compared to a default Windows XP install, but the same largely goes for KDE as well as far as features, KDE just has more than Gnome does.

    Hell, it's 2010, and there isn't even a decent theming system implemented on Linux desktops for sound, let alone visual appearance. Windows Vista/7 did a good job by having the option for bundling sound and visual appearance all into one selectable theme, yet on Linux you have to install that as root, or copy this there as root and read some stupid installation text file, or install a distro-specific package, or install it from a repository. Come the hell ON, COMMUNICATE, STANDARDS, WHERE the %#@! are they??? Seriously, someone pound FreeDesktop.org for standards until it is overflowing with them so that users can have an easier experience with Linux in ALL areas, THEN we can discuss why it's not the year of the Linux desktop yet.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yfrwlf View Post
    I've never experienced 800 MBs. You might try looking at Firefox. But regardless it's always important to be watchful of optimizations. It is annoying how slow Gnome apps take to load though I very much agree there, but that may be due to pre-loading certain libraries. You could pre-load more, but have higher mem use. Ideally the most commonly used apps should all be pre-loaded though. Windows Explorer, for example, loads instantly. Perhaps "Linux desktops" could just really use some more pre-loading intelligence is all.
    I did when I tried Ubuntu 10.04. Firefox wasn't consuming, so much of memory and I get rid of mono immediately. However, I suppose it was due to caching or something similar and if that's true it's a good thing. I was just answering some guy who was saying KDE apps consumes a lot of memory, but there's caching enabled too.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •