2 ms·
You can already do that by choosing desktop environments that aren't trying to be all things for all people. More bling is literally more resources. A lot of i
by ksaj 6y ago
You can already do that by choosing desktop environments that aren't trying to be all things for all people. More bling is literally more resources.
A lot of it is merely feature creep. Remember when OSX used to have animations (like applications minimizing like a genie getting sucked back into its kettle) as a feature you could turn on if you wanted it? Now it's pretty much default, and most people don't know you can shut that stuff off. And that's how things get sluggish. Sexy new "advanced" features become default, and you always need faster computers and more memory to keep up.
If you insist on using Gnome or KDE, obviously bloated because everything has extra features enabled by default, then then shut those resource hogs off. You'll start to get back to fast desktop days again. Some people will miss the bling, but you can't have one without the other. You can't expect all that sweet sweet bling without the resources being tied up to make it happen.
- ksaj 6y agoI got voted down by someone who obviously never compiled their own kernel (which used to be the norm). After lots of questions about how you need to config, you get your kernel... THAT is Linux -- the kernel. The rest, the part you are complaining about bloating is the GNU part. I'm not complaining about that GNU part, btw. I've lived in it since the early 90's. But the Linux kernel can be as slim and responsive as you want it to be if you are willing to compile yourself. You can even compile it as an RTOS, and you can never convince me that would be too sluggish. What I got voted down for was pointing out that Linux-proper wasn't the slow part of that blend. It was the desktop. And that part is GNU, not Linux. Period.