Originally posted by bple2137
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
GNOME 40's Shell Theme Code Is Rather Expensive But Optimization Pursued
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
So that solves the issue (maybe) for those with accellerated GPUs. I am sure he will also overconsume shader features requiring the very latest GLSL revision (version 460) or Vulkan.
However mobile's, VM and tablets rarely have accellerated GPU access due to missing drivers. Is mobile platforms not one of the main reasons Gnome 3 is so... awkward in terms of usability? Surely due to the focus, they want to keep them fast and usable. This will be very difficult with LLVMpipe.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Vistaus View Post
Windows is better on hi-res? LOL. On other tech sites, I constantly read complaint after complaint because people can't get Windows to work well on hi-res screens.
Comment
-
Originally posted by xnor View Post
A new generation of (lazy?) developers that jumped on hip web technologies have infected lots of products and companies. A messenger that used 40 MB memory was considered bloated a few years ago, now we got messengers that use gigabytes of memory with basically the same or even less functionality thanks to hip new web technologies.
I mean JavaScript in the desktop? What an amazing idea... the benefits are outweighed by all the performance issues and image damage it caused to Gnome.
I'm not discussing the implementation, mind you.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by s_j_newbury View PostMost GNOME image damage is due to the complete disregard of the users by the project management. They're more interested GNOME being familiar to users of Mac OS and Windows, than their actual user base.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Vistaus View Post
In my years of experience, Compiz was nice, but also buggy. I do agree that Unity was better, though.
Unity _is_ good. Why the past tense? It will never support Wayland and will never be suitable for a containerized desktop system, but I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Unity can remain a shell for traditional non-container desktops. It'll sort of be like a Windows XP for the Linux world and that's not a bad thing.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by arun54321 View PostJust dump, abandon gnome shell and write a new DE from scratch. It is not worth fixing.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by lumks View PostConsidering that Shell40 is noticeable faster/more fluent on all of my systems compared to 3.38, I wonder how this is possible.
That's strange. 40 is significantly slower than 3.38. Here are some numbers. Overview animation, 20 windows, with !1441
Code:mutter 3.38.4+9+g607803c4b / gnome-shell 3.38.4 *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 60.04 FPS, average: 8.0ms, peak: 15.1ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 60.02 FPS, average: 12.9ms, peak: 13.6ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 59.99 FPS, average: 12.8ms, peak: 14.2ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 59.97 FPS, average: 12.8ms, peak: 13.9ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 60.00 FPS, average: 12.8ms, peak: 13.6ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 60.02 FPS, average: 12.7ms, peak: 13.6ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 57.73 FPS, average: 12.5ms, peak: 18.0ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 60.26 FPS, average: 13.0ms, peak: 14.6ms *** X11 screen performance over 1.0s: 57.89 FPS, average: 13.0ms, peak: 18.4ms
Code:mutter 40.0+51+gcf8efb582 / gnome-shell 40.0+37+g1f0ef7fb4 *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 36,14 FPS, average: 19,6ms, peak: 23,9ms *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 35,87 FPS, average: 17,8ms, peak: 24,1ms *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 35,48 FPS, average: 18,1ms, peak: 25,5ms *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 35,46 FPS, average: 17,7ms, peak: 26,0ms *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 34,39 FPS, average: 20,0ms, peak: 27,2ms *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 32,93 FPS, average: 20,4ms, peak: 28,3ms *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 32,56 FPS, average: 20,9ms, peak: 28,7ms *** X11 screen frame timings over 1,0s: 33,33 FPS, average: 19,1ms, peak: 28,1ms
Originally posted by arun54321 View Post[...] write a new DE from scratch. It is not worth fixing.
- Likes 3
Comment
Comment