4 ms·
Yes, all of those things. Sure, they are cheap, but if you ever try using Xfce (or similarly small DE) for a bit you will quickly realise just how slow other d
by koyote 4y ago
Yes, all of those things.
Sure, they are cheap, but if you ever try using Xfce (or similarly small DE) for a bit you will quickly realise just how slow other desktop environments (and Windows/OSX) are. Unnecessary animations is another one.
I've seen a similar argument defending "bloated" websites but then whenever a minimal website (e.g., a text-only site) is posted, people are astonished at how snappy it is.
That being said, I last used KDE over 10 years ago and computers have definitely become faster since then.
- kombine 4y agohttps://itvision.altervista.org/linux-desktop-environments-system-usage.html https://itvision.altervista.org/linux-desktop-environments-s... According to this test it uses approximately as much RAM as GNOME and 1GB more than XFCE. I guess on older hardware with 8GB RAM XFCE would make more sense, perhaps even for mobile devices where battery life is a scarce resource.
- ssnistfajen 4y agoA NUC-sized mini PC with Q1'21 Intel Celeron ran all three DEs with no noticeable difference in speed. Perhaps there's a difference for hardcore usage but it simply isn't applicable to the vast majority of use cases. So yes computers have definitely become much faster since 10 years ago that a lot of these "bloat" really aren't noticeable anymore.
- shrimp_emoji 4y agoI assert that one exception to this is compositing. Even if you're on a gaming rig with a really beefy GPU, you might not notice that DE compositing is on, but you will notice the difference once you turn it off. To test this, try dragging a window around on a high refresh rate monitor on LXDE (since that DE has no composition by default, iirc) and then on GNOME, KDE, et al. The overhead of composition extends to games as well, which is why I like KDE for being the only full-featured DE that lets you turn composition off.