samuel.verstraete at gmail.com
Thu Jun 9 13:13:12 CEST 2005
I mailed with Rasterman... Asking some things... He had a few
suggestions... Shall i forward them to the list or do you guys don't
feel any need to look into this benchmark thing?
I personally feel it has some importance ... Benchmarking doesn't need
to reflect real world situations. That's not what it's ment for... It's
meant to show weaknesses in code and that can only be done by stressing
the code not by giving you real world situations. If you agree with me
on this i think we can look into this. If you guys feel more like this
benchmarking stuff is crap or BS... than lets just ignore this whole
n Thu, 9 Jun 2005 12:54:05 +0200
Jens Luedicke <jens.luedicke at gmail.com> wrote:
> the usability of a window manager can hardly be measured by the amount
> of windows it can create/show per second.
> the numbers in the second test. they differ all up from the third
> digit after the comma. the difference is hardly noticable for a
> generic human.
> granted, E17's graphic features are probably much more advanced than
> those of the other window managers. but that's about it. when I tried
> E17 the last time, it was all eye candy without any comfort.
> On 6/9/05, Jasper Huijsmans <jasper at xfce.org> wrote:
> > Hi Olivier,
> > Just saw some benchmarks by rasterman for E17. Xfwm4 comes out at the bottom,
> > far below metacity. That sounds wrong to me. Maybe it's useful, maybe not...
> > http://www.rasterman.com
> > Jasper
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xfce4-dev mailing list
> > Xfce4-dev at xfce.org
> > http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
> Jens Luedicke
> web: http://perldude.de/
> Xfce4-dev mailing list
> Xfce4-dev at xfce.org
More information about the Xfce4-dev