LXQt Memory Usage On Par With LXDE, Loiwer Than Xfce

[birdie]

The way he "measured" the memory consumption is wrong.

This is how it must have been done:

1) Fire up VirtualBox with your favorite DE - that's OK
2) Then open an xterm window and run echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
3) Run `free -mh` as usual and calculate Memory allocated to your VM minus Free RAM

This value will represent the actual memory consumption.

Michael, could you actually compare different DEs in several modern distros of your choice using the outlined method? Say Ubuntu 16.XX/Fedora 24/Linux Mint/etc.

[M@GOid]

A few weeks ago I installed various Ubuntu 16.04 derivatives in one pendrive to check memory consumption in a Lenovo T430 with 6GB of RAM. After booting I opened a Xterm console and typed "free -m". If my memory didn't fails me, Lubuntu got 270MB of RAM, Xubuntu 290 MB, Kde neon 380, Ubuntu about 600 MB, Kubuntu around 700 MB and Ubuntu Gnome a wooping 800 MB.

If you use Kubuntu and you didn't use any Akonadi stuff, like Kmail or Amarok, you can lower your RAM consumption to something around 500 MB uninstalling Akonadi, mysql, Amarok and all their dependencies. To substitute Amarok you can Use Clementine, and Kmail with Thunderbird.

[starshipeleven]

The way he "measured" the memory consumption is wrong.

This is how it must have been done:

1) Fire up VirtualBox with your favorite DE - that's OK
2) Then open an xterm window and run echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
3) Run `free -mh` as usual and calculate Memory allocated to your VM minus Free RAM

This value will represent the actual memory consumption.

He is measuring the mem consumption without kernel's, it's not "wrong".

Also, why Virtualbox? you know total RAM installed in hardware.

[birdie]

He measures whatever cache pollution which affects his running system.

Why not on real hardware? If you are ready to sacrifice your distro and install a fresh one for the testing purposes, then go for it. Otherwise it'll be 100 easier, faster and more efficient to test in a VM. Besides in a VM you won't be running any compositing window manager which on real hardware may lead to very different memory measurements.

In short go fuq off. You seem like to know nil about memory management and don't understand the intricacies of modern hardware, then why argue with me?

[schmidtbag]

It seems many of you aren't aware that pcmanfm-qt exists... Anyway, I actually like it. My main gripe with it is how unstable it is, but I overall prefer it over Thunar.


I also don't see how having a smaller footprint than XFCE is impressive. XFCE was never as memory efficient as people claimed. Back in the GNOME 2 days, it was a littlelighter, but if you wanted it to do everything that GNOME could, it ended up being roughly just as heavy. Today, XFCE is really the only option if you want a very functional light-weight desktop.
I personally like LXQt for my gaming PC though. It comes with everything I need and nothing more.

[starshipeleven]

He measures whatever cache pollution which affects his running system.

Which is a realistic test, and not a synthetic one. People will run a real system without dropping caches every 2 seconds, so he tested that.

Why not on real hardware? If you are ready to sacrifice your distro and install a fresh one for the testing purposes, then go for it.

USB drives, multibooting, another hard drive around. Moron dumbfuck retard.

Besides in a VM you won't be running any compositing window manager which on real hardware may lead to very different memory measurements.

In professional tests, the person setting this up isn't an idiot and can set these things properly without disabling 3D acceleration in VB. Also, he needed to test Cinnamon and Gnome3 that do need compositing.

In short I should go fuq off. I seem like to know nil about memory management and I don't understand the intricacies of modern hardware, then why post bullshit?

fixed.

[Brane215]

I'm not that thrilled with E17, but I think it shjould be a first choice for anyone seeking small footprint solutions.
I don't like having something like Qt iin such things.

With E17, you just have EFL with its parts and modules.

[bobwya]

I'm not that thrilled with E17, but I think it shjould be a first choice for anyone seeking small footprint solutions.
I don't like having something like Qt iin such things.

With E17, you just have EFL with its parts and modules.

Goody... That quality EFL code base...

[starshipeleven]

I'm not that thrilled with E17, but I think it shjould be a first choice for anyone seeking small footprint solutions.
I don't like having something like Qt iin such things.

With E17, you just have EFL with its parts and modules.

Here an obligatory link about Enlightenment https://what.thedailywtf.com/topic/15001/enlightened

[andrebrait]

For me, even though I like XFCE, MATE just feels better. Maybe it's nostalgia, but I don't know. It's the only lightweight desktop I would use nowadays (I run KDE because my machine handles it, I getball the bells and whistles modern DE's have and because I can't bear GNOME 3)