jannis at xfce.org
Mon Jul 14 02:33:22 CEST 2008
Am Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:08:04 -0300
schrieb "Diego Jacobi" <jacobidiego at gmail.com>:
> 2008/7/13 Olivier Fourdan <fourdan at gmail.com>:
> > Hi,
> > On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Diego Jacobi
> > <jacobidiego at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I didnt question the purpose of xfce, i question the goals, which
> > > are not answered anywhere. I want to know if the developers still
> > > want a
> > lightweight
> > > desktop and are focused to that or just want an alternative to
> > > gnome. But
> > i
> > > think that for the bad answer that i have got, there is some kind
> > > of bad felling against gnome. That is sad, but dont blame me for
> > > that.
> > Oh no, we really have no bad feelings about gnome (afaik). Thing is,
> > we share gtk+ with gnome and gtk+ has grown quite a lot recently, so
> > the amount of (shared) memory used by every process may also have
> > grown. But that's the price to pay to benefit from all the
> > facilities provided by gtk+. There is no such thing as "light"
> > actually, it's always a balance between functionalities, memory and
> > speed.
> Nice to ear also.
> Then you agree that xfce is not looking for the lightestweight and
> pretty DE, its looking for its own implementation of "best balance
> between features, memory and speed".
Of course we are - you can see that everywhere. Just take five minutes
to compare fluxbox and Xfce and you'll notice that fluxbox is much more
lightweight than Xfce. Do you really need other people to tell you that?
Sorry for not replying to your other mails as well, but here is one
more thing you can easily see by yourself. We talked about the
configurability and you appreciated that I finally mentioned that I
consider xfwm more configurable than metacity, right? Just look at this:
These are the dialogs you get to see if you try both window managers.
Notice the difference?
If you feel insulted by me because of comparing xfwm and metacity then
you're wrong. It's not that. It's questioning things in the wrong way.
The basic message of your initial mails was to be interpreted as: "I
thought this was a lightweight desktop - now I prefer openbox - what's
your point in developing Xfce anyway?!"
And if that's what arrives at the other end then you've definitely hit
the wrong tone, don't you think?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Xfce