[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Why is KDE so _slow_?
From:       Andras Mantia <amantia () virtualartisans ! com>
Date:       2002-11-16 8:07:32
[Download RAW message or body]

On 2002. November 16., Saturday 07:41, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> Andras Mantia wrote:
> > On 2002. November 15., Friday 22:37, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> >>NOTE: I think that the solution to some of the speed problem is to have
> >>Konqueror be set up as application that is always running (without a
> >>window open) and then when you "start" it, it just forks off another
> >>instance all ready to go except for startup of the 'part' that it
> >> contains.
> >
> > Looks like a bad solution for me and remembers of the Windows and IE
> > linking.
> >
> > :-(
> >
> > One of the reason why I think it's bad is that in case it will consume
> > more memory (even if it's swapped out).
> >
> > Just my thoughts.
>
> You do know that Konqueror used as FileManager already works this way
> when started with:
>
> 	kfmclient openProfile filemanagement <file>
>
> don't you??
>
> But not with the profile: "webbrowsing".

Sincerly I did not know. :-( But as you wrote, I've tried and launched 
Konqueor both for filemanagement and webbrowsing and I see no _visible_ 
differences between the startup speed, so I do't know what's the gain from 
being kept in the memory from the start. Maybe it shows up with slower CPU's, 
but I still think that requiring more memory is a bad thing, and I think one 
of the KDE's problem is its memory consumption. Anyway, I don't want to start 
a discussion about this know, as I don't know so much about the internal, so 
my opinions are rather theoretical ones. But I still don't like the above 
idea.

Andras

>
> --
> JRT
>
> >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to
> >> unsubscribe <<

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]