E17 benchmarks

Don Christensen djc at cisco.com
Thu Jun 9 21:24:17 CEST 2005

Brian J. Tarricone wrote:
> Optimising the WM's mapping speed here is a waste of time: a classic
> case of useles optimisation of a non-critical path; a user wouldn't
> likely notice any difference.  I'd rather have the things Olivier
> describes: intelligent window placement, fast response to resize and
> move, etc.
> So: oh yay, E17 maps windows quickly.  Whoopie-do.
> 	-brian

I would generally agree with you, but the problem is one of perception.
Unfortunately, benchmark numbers have been published (loosely speaking)
that show Xfce to have abysmal performance compared with a whole host
of other WMs/DEs.  How many users are not even going to try Xfce if
they see those numbers?

I realize that isn't fair and that there are much better criteria to
base a decision on, but that's the way it is.  How many WMs/DEs have
you tried out lately?  I know I got really tired after two or three
(luckily one of those was Xfce) when I was looking, and I haven't
tried any since.  There are just too many options to try out, so it
is easy to eliminate any that are at the bottom of some benchmark.

I think that making the intelligent window placement a selectable
option would be relatively easy and could help with benchmarks.
And heck, someone might even prefer the non-intelligent placement


Don Christensen       Senior Software Development Engineer
djc at cisco.com         Cisco Systems, Santa Cruz, CA
   "It was a new day yesterday, but it's an old day now."

More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list