Re: Default window manager
- From: David Ford <david kalifornia com>
- To: Andreas Hyden <andreas hyden telia com>
- CC: gnome-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Default window manager
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 12:38:49 -0700
I'll provide the balance.
E has been rock solid for me, up 74 days until a visitor decided to play with
Memory? hah! i have lots of E toys turned on and E takes about 4 odd megs. If
you don't want all the toys, turn 'em off. I don't find it slow and I don't
have a fancy schmancy "phat" pII 400 or better cpu.
And yes, I nearly always use CVS for most of my stuff. So I tend to have more
toys on the desktop than the average.
Why not just leave enlightenment the default. It's a one time issue and rarely
even an issue. Most people already have whatever they like installed, they pop
in gnome and don't even bother with changing their manager.
> > > I think that it should have another default window manager
> > > than the buggy and slow enlightenment.
> Any proof?
> I nooticed it my self.. and all people I know..
> One of Gnome's goals is to provide a desktop environment
> for beginners...
> When for instance a beginner install it and use enlightenmnent they noticed
> that the memory isn't enough and it's slow... and they think. "Gnome is
> slow and buggy, better to use KDE instead".
> Why don't just replace enlightenment with another wm?
This is Linux Country. On a quiet night, you can hear Windows NT reboot!
Do you remember how to -think- ? Do you remember how to experiment? Linux
__ is an operating system that brings back the fun and adventure in computing.
\/ for linux-kernel: please read linux/Documentation/* before posting problems
] [Thread Prev