How Slow is KDE?

[Collins Richey]

On 1/22/06, Tim Wunder <tim at thewunders.org> wrote:
> On Sunday 22 January 2006 11:39 am, someone claiming to be Kurt Wall wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 08:55:27AM -0500, Tim Wunder took 71 lines to
> write:
> > > On Sunday 22 January 2006 1:33 am, someone claiming to be Net Llama!
> wrote:
> > > > On 01/21/2006 10:30 PM, Kurt Wall wrote:
> > > > > As seen on alt.os.linux.slackware:
> > > > >
> > > > > "KDE is still as slow as a frozen turd sliding down a horizontal
> > > > > plane."
> > > > >
> > > > > That'd be pretty darn slow.
> > > >
> > > > And that's on a good day.
> > >
> > > Especially if you don't look for evidence otherwise:
> > > http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/1664
> >
> > Which shows that start time is roughly equivalent between KDE and
> > XFCE4.
> >
>
> So KDE starts as fast as XFCE4, yes. XFCE4 is still considered
> "lightweight."
> Not as light as XFCE pre 4, but light nonetheless...
>
> > >
> http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2004/10/konsole-vs-xterm-or-proof-that-kde-is.
> > >html
> >
> > Which only says that konsole eats less memory than xterm.
> >
>
> By what other measure does one judge "bloat" than RAM usage? CPU usage, I
> suppose. But I doubt that you'll find any difference in CPU usage between
> konsole and xterm.
>

Interesting sidenote on bloat from a heavy duty KDE user (CentOS
list). KDE 3.5 is slower than the previous versions unless you have
>512Mg - especially noticeable with Kmail according to this user.
Apparently if you have 1Gb, there is a considerable speedup over prior
versions.

As mentioned elsewhere, speculation about KDE and/or the Diaper
project beats the hell out of Fox vs CNN.

--
Collins Richey
      Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code ... If you write
      the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not
      smart enough to debug it.
             -Brian Kernighan