Re: (ximian) Gnome 1.4 - Lurkers feedback

[Steve Vertigan <vertigan bigfoot com>]

Renze de Ruiter wrote:
> 
> On 01 May 2001 15:50:17 +1200, Rob Brown-Bayliss wrote:
> 
> > Perhapse, but nautilus is a dog even when not viewing web pages.  I have
> > a PII300 with 96meg of ram, and nautilus takes (just took, I timed it)
> > 47 seconds to open. 40 secondss before it even displyed a window.  If I
> > dint not know better I would have thought I had miss-cliked teh icon!
> 
> Bizarre.  I have a PII266 with 64MB of RAM and I don't have to wait
> anywhere near this long. Nautilus takes about 5 seconds to display a
> window for the first time, and maybe 8-10 seconds to load.

On my Pentium 200 with 96meg ram it took 40 seconds the first time I
loaded to display a window, and that included taking over the desktop
display.  The second time, with the desktop display already loaded it
took 20 seconds.  Both times it took a further 20 seconds to completely
load so if you've already started it when starting gnome that might go a
ways torwards explaining the discrepancy.  
In any case it's Nautilus's thorough unusefulness as a filemanager and
clunky display that stops me from using it.  Gmc's behaviour with
symlinks makes it similiarly unattractive to me and I currently use the
X Wincommander file manager.  It's minimalist and does everything I
need.  Using it gives you the impression it's been designed and written
by someone that's actually going to use it every day rather than a team
of overexcited graphics designers.

Steve

-- 
FreeBSD maelstrom.dyn.dhs.org 3.4-STABLE i386
 6:40PM  up  1:46, 1 user, load averages: 0.95, 0.92, 0.92
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but
when there is no longer anything to take away.
		-- Antoine de Saint-Exupery