Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 11 Preview

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
    I usually consider your posts as trolling. I think you're doing the same right now. Probably only reason why I'm using KDE are native QT apps. You see 1.85x more memory usage, because there's a cache too. KDE is known it has far more feature then Gnome and maybe that's a proof you're trolling here. Btw. when comes to resizing windows it's perfectly smooth here with radeon driver and QT apps and animation is choppy when comes to Gtk* apps (here). I have better performance with KDE4. P.S. my sister cares about looks.
    Yeah I'm a troll, I'm speaking facts. KDE and GNOME has basically same features, but other DE like XFCE have little less. 1.85x memory usage is a fact, I took caching and buffers out of the consideration. List me some good QT apps except vlc.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by hax0r View Post
      Yes, there is, it's called programming and reading code & manual.
      Very funny!

      So you can see my point why most of KDE apps have more features than their GNOME equivalent. If developer spent time on implementing features instead of reading manual how to draw a button in a window, GTK programs would be more like Qt programs - with more features.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by DoDoENT View Post
        Is there any GTK support for C++? But I mean 'real' support, not just using GTK's C functions from C++. Is there any visual designer tool for GTK applications as there is for Qt? But not GLADE, because it creates some weird xml file which has to be parsed every time window is drawn. That's slow.
        There are GTK bindings for many languages, including C++ and Python. Inkscape is one of the programs which uses the C++ bindings.

        I don't know where you got the silly idea that Glade is slow, It's not.

        Originally posted by DoDoENT View Post
        Is there any 'real' visual designer tool for GTK apps, which will generate C/C++ drawing code?
        AFAIK Glade used to have an option to create code, but thank god they removed it. Xml is the way to go.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by monraaf View Post
          I don't know where you got the silly idea that Glade is slow, It's not.
          Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't XML parsing slower than compiled window drawing instructions?

          I didn't say that Glade programs are slow, but just that they could be faster, if they wouldn't parse XML window drawing instruction every time.

          Comment


          • #35
            I haven't delved into the internals of Glade, but AFAIK the XML parsing only happens on window creation, once you got your UI setup there isn't much XML parsing going on.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by monraaf View Post
              I haven't delved into the internals of Glade, but AFAIK the XML parsing only happens on window creation, once you got your UI setup there isn't much XML parsing going on.
              True. Imagine an application with a lot of windows which are created and destroyed a lot.

              Or imagine an application which has big windows with a lot of components (wizard maybe, or something like KDE control center).

              In such applications window creation time may differ significantly if parsing XML or just drawing from code.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by hax0r View Post
                Yeah I'm a troll, I'm speaking facts. KDE and GNOME has basically same features, but other DE like XFCE have little less. 1.85x memory usage is a fact, I took caching and buffers out of the consideration. List me some good QT apps except vlc.
                Gnome doesn't have many KDE 4 features (or maybe I should say Gnome apps doesn't have many KDE apps features). About memory I already said why its usage seems higher on KDE. XFCE in example uses much less memory then Gnome. Think about this. If you weren't trolling give me names of Gnome applications which has same or more features as those: Amarok, Kate, Krusader, Konqueror, KMail, K3b, Gwenview, Okular, Okteta, SMPlayer. What's name of plasma equivalent in Gnome (in current version)? It seems you don't have idea what are you talking about.

                I need to check, but as far as I know Gtk* uses stupid pixmap handling.
                Last edited by kraftman; 05-01-2009, 02:34 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by DoDoENT View Post
                  True. Imagine an application with a lot of windows which are created and destroyed a lot.

                  Or imagine an application which has big windows with a lot of components (wizard maybe, or something like KDE control center).

                  In such applications window creation time may differ significantly if parsing XML or just drawing from code.
                  And what about config files?
                  Just imagine a huge configuration file with 1000 of options, it will take _ages_ to get loaded at runtime!

                  On a more serious side, it's really just open the file and read what widgets to use, the most time is spent on actually CREATING the widgets anyways

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    Gnome doesn't have many KDE 4 features (or maybe I should say Gnome apps doesn't have many KDE apps features). About memory I already said why its usage seems higher on KDE. XFCE in example uses much less memory then Gnome. Think about this. If you weren't trolling give me names of Gnome applications which has same or more features as those: Amarok, Kate, Krusader, Konqueror, KMail, K3b, Gwenview, Okular, Okteta, SMPlayer. What's name of plasma equivalent in Gnome (in current version)? It seems you don't have idea what are you talking about.

                    I need to check, but as far as I know Gtk* uses stupid pixmap handling.
                    Amarok is overrated in my opinion and is pure bloat in terms of performance, the area of sound isn't really something that's GNOME/KDE-specific (mpd, for example; I use moc).

                    Don't know Kate. I haven't used Krusader a lot because as I said, all my experiences with KDE ended up with trying to do something and things taking quite bloody long, which sort of takes the fun out of it. I'd say Nautilus / Thunar in that respect are much superior (especially the later, does exactly what it needs to do, nothing more, nothing less).

                    I do realise Webkit which is a great engine is based on KHTML, so kudos there to the KDE developers. Konqueror itself was ever slow in every test I did. I'd take Firefox over it every day or any console browser. But I do plan to switch over to Midori once it leaves alpha status (oh, the irony - it uses Webkit).

                    I can't be inclined to delve into every last application you mentioned, but one that indeed springs to mind positively as one of the best media players I've ever encountered is SMPlayer. It's really great, my only fault is that I try to avoid toolkit-based interfaces so using mplayer is more attractive for me. Otherwise I'd use it without thinking twice, willing even to sacrifice my wish to keep my box clean of qt-bloat.

                    But my post boils down to what I've already said. KDE is not essentially bad, it's just _slow_ and it bugs the crap out of me. I get more or less the same functionality without paying with so much juice for it.

                    At the end, cuique suum, wasn't it?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by NeoBrain View Post
                      And what about config files?
                      Just imagine a huge configuration file with 1000 of options, it will take _ages_ to get loaded at runtime!

                      On a more serious side, it's really just open the file and read what widgets to use, the most time is spent on actually CREATING the widgets anyways
                      True. I've got the point... So, Glade isn't so bad after all

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by susikala View Post
                        Amarok is overrated in my opinion and is pure bloat in terms of performance, the area of sound isn't really something that's GNOME/KDE-specific (mpd, for example; I use moc).

                        Don't know Kate. I haven't used Krusader a lot because as I said, all my experiences with KDE ended up with trying to do something and things taking quite bloody long, which sort of takes the fun out of it. I'd say Nautilus / Thunar in that respect are much superior (especially the later, does exactly what it needs to do, nothing more, nothing less).

                        I do realise Webkit which is a great engine is based on KHTML, so kudos there to the KDE developers. Konquerer itself was ever slow in every test I did. I'd take Firefox over it every day or any console browser. But I do plan to switch over to Midori once it leaves alpha status (oh, the irony - it uses Webkit).

                        I can't be inclined to delve into every last application you mentioned, but one that indeed springs to mind positively as one of the best media players I've ever encountered is SMPlayer. It's really great, my only fault is that I try to avoid toolkit-based interfaces so using mplayer is more attractive for me. Otherwise I'd use it without thinking twice, willing even to sacrifice my wish to keep my box clean of qt-bloat.

                        But my post boils down to what I've already said. KDE is not essentially bad, it's just _slow_ and it bugs the crap out of me. I get more or less the same functionality without paying with so much juice for it.

                        At the end, cuique suum, wasn't it?
                        That's not what I asked for and I didn't ask you . I know Gnome quiet good :> Maybe you should try KDE 4.2.2, because I didn't notice any bugs in this release (and KDE 4.2.3 should be available in few days, because some packages are already in Arch Linux testing repo ). QT4 isn't well accelerated on some cards yet. P.S. Dolphin is very similar to Thunar in my opinion and in some places KDE devs probably based on Gnome, because they slimmed down some apps etc.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                          That's not what I asked for and I didn't ask you . I know Gnome quiet good :> Maybe you should try KDE 4.2.2, because I didn't notice any bugs in this release (and KDE 4.2.3 should be available in few days, because some packages are already in Arch Linux testing repo ). QT4 isn't well accelerated on some cards yet. P.S. Dolphin is very similar to Thunar in my opinion and in some places KDE devs probably based on Gnome, because they slimmed down some apps etc.
                          Cool, I'll spin an arch install through kvm when I find some time and test it for myself. (I've wanted to test that distro anyway for some time now.)

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I don't know, but I personally find most of the "features" in KDE apps. to be bloat. Nice to have, but ultimately don't really make the job any easier. I think that if GNOME devs. wanted to make apps. with just as many features they could, but that doesn't really fit with the GNOME "philosophy" .
                            It's all preference really. Arguing over which one looks better or works better is useless, since those things are highly subjective to individual opinion. They both get the job done, so in the end what matters is how the end user likes to work and interact with his DE.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by susikala View Post
                              Cool, I'll spin an arch install through kvm when I find some time and test it for myself. (I've wanted to test that distro anyway for some time now.)
                              Arch Linux is a really great distribution! Simple, rolling release and follows the KISS principle.

                              If you are going to try it, I recommend you to use KDEmod. it's a modular and tweaked package set of KDE with some useful additions.
                              You have to only add an extra repository to use it.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by KDesk View Post
                                Arch Linux is a really great distribution! Simple, rolling release and follows the KISS principle.

                                If you are going to try it, I recommend you to use KDEmod. it's a modular and tweaked package set of KDE with some useful additions.
                                You have to only add an extra repository to use it.
                                Also 4.3 svn packages are great too http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=44507, stability is on par with 4.2.3.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X