Results 1 to 10 of 139

Thread: SphinUX OS Claims To Be ~150% Faster Than GNU/Linux

Threaded View

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    You were saying Amarok is slower than Banshee or uses more memory, but I showed you it was a different. Tomboy - a simple note taking application - was heavier than Firefox and it was also showed to you. SharpDevelop or Visual Studio could offer less features and that's why they were more lightweight. It's unprovable if you were criticizing Qt unfairly or fairly, but it was shown to you Qt applications are usually lighter and more responsive.

    http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...163#post177163

    You were trying to convince us java is worse than MS MONO.
    Do we read the same messages?

    I said: AmaroK starts slower than Banshee (and this was shown!). Is it different from the statement of Banshee being faster (faster in playing a 3 minutes song? Will it play it in 2 minutes 30 seconds!?). It use (at least at the time) less memory.

    So, it is not unfair, this part, right?

    Did I defend Tomboy for memory usage? Or did I defend it as it was an useful application (for people that were not memory conscious), right?

    I think exactly in the post, the center part is the most important (because it shows the context of the topic, plus my views) :
    This is here, 2 answers earlier of what was told by you:
    http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...144#post177144
    Also, I've wrote things that disagree with Miguel on his page, so taking this into perspective is equal like an alter-ego of Miguel enters on his page to criticize him?!
    At the end, my messages were about reasonable thinking, not biases. I honestly don't like KDE look, but I do think that is an amazing piece of software, so I don't write crap about KDE. Also, I don't attack Nokia for its contributions to Qt or KDE (yes Nokia pay developers for KDE project), and I do think that a lot of technologies to Linux bring more choice than fewer. Why you don't attack the opensourceness of Qt that have also a comercial license? Why don't attack LLVM/CLang that "sneak" into a lot of opensource projects?
    It looks to me, that what I asked all around the topic was: "I personally found Mono useful, and the FUD that was told about Mono is as equal for Qt/Nokia, or Apple/Clang, wasn't it?" Also, some claims (like the startup time), I tested them and I found them lacking (because people think to Mono as "enterprisey", so all Mono applications are by definition slow), I rembember the Amarok + QtCreator was like 21 seconds, when Banshee and MonoDevelop was like 14-15 seconds.

    If you try to see that Java is worse than Mono, please read again, I said: C#/Mono is slower (in raw performance numbers), but is better integrated with desktop (If you know JNI, and you compare with PInvoke, you know what I'm talking about). Also as of the time of writing, can you name some Gnome applications written in Java? Azureus (even is not a Gnome application)!? Eclipse (!?) Really, I don't know any! At least on Gnome at that time was at least a bit different (thanks to Novell): Gnome Do, F-Spot, Banshee, Beagle, Tomboy, MonoDevelop were targetting Gnome/Gtk# by default, not WinForms. Do you know any Java integration to write Gnome applications? Maybe can you point to me to a tutorial how to set Java with Gtk?
    Last edited by ciplogic; 06-11-2013 at 12:39 PM.

Posting Permissions

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