Re: Are there any GNOME specific performance tools?

[Chris Rouch <crouch pobox com>]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:43:43 -0500
Sean Middleditch <elanthis awesomeplay com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 09:15, Chris Rouch wrote:
> 
> > I think, unfortunately, that's just the way it is. gnome 2.4 seems
> > to be designed to look pretty rather than be fast. I'm hoping this
> > will be addressed in 2.6. While the performance is good on my
> > desktop (AMD 2800+, 1Gb ram, so it should be!), it was unacceptable
> > on my laptop(750MHz pentium II, 256Mb ram), so I ended up switching
> > back to fvwm for my desktop and just using the gnome clients. 
> 
> Given that I ran 2.0 on a machine worse off than that (same RAM,
> 400mhz CPU, NFS homedir) and it was as snappy as could be, I would
> wager your problem wasn't GNOME itself.

No it was the whole installation. redhat 7.2/gnome 1.4 was fast. redhat
8/gnome 2.0 (I think) was acceptable, redhat 9 / gnome 2.2. was too
slow. Using fvwm instead of gnome panel+sawfish made the system useable.
Possibly running redhat 7.2 with gnome 2.4 would be blindingly fast, but
I have my doubts. In any case it's not really an option. 

It seems to be the nature of big s/w that the more mature it gets the
bigger and slower it gets. Generally it doesn't matter because the h/w
has got even faster in the same time. It's when the h/w stands still
that you notice it.

I still have an old 450MHz box I can put Fedora and gnome 2.4 on. If
gnome is useable on there maybe I'll have another look at using it on
the laptop again. 




Regards,

Chris
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Rouch
crouch pobox com