Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: KDE hardware requirements blown out of proportion

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: KDE hardware requirements blown out of proportion

    Quote Originally Posted by qalimas
    The article says KDE needs 512MB of RAM.
    yeah, but if you tell people you only need 128 mb of ram, they will expect to be able to run everything they ever wanted on 128 mb of ram. 512 is a safe number
    briancurtin.com | archlinux.org
    Quote Originally Posted by jeepmanjr
    This is not about checking email and looking at porno after mama goes to work. It's about application specifics.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    US
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: KDE hardware requirements blown out of proportion

    Quote Originally Posted by briancurtin
    yeah, but if you tell people you only need 128 mb of ram, they will expect to be able to run everything they ever wanted on 128 mb of ram. 512 is a safe number
    Except that the article says Gnome needs only 384 MB:
    Code:
    Desktop 	Required RAM 	Required CPU
    fluxbox/idesk 	48 	100 MHz
    XFCE4 	128 	200 MHz
    Gnome 1.x 	256 	500 MHz
    Gnome 2.x 	384 	800 MHz
    KDE 3.x 	512 	1 GHz

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cupertino, CA
    Beans
    5,092
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: KDE hardware requirements blown out of proportion

    That article is clearly biased against the full-blown desktop environments with a particular grudge against KDE. Don't believe those ludicrous requirements for 'running KDE' or even 'running GNOME'
    Quote Originally Posted by tuxradar
    Linux's audio architecture is more like the layers of the Earth's crust than the network model, with lower levels occasionally erupting on to the surface, causing confusion and distress, and upper layers moving to displace the underlying technology that was originally hidden

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Beans
    74
    Distro
    Ubuntu 6.06

    Re: KDE hardware requirements blown out of proportion

    I did a test with KDE once. Someone was telling the usual "KDE is bloated and eats RAM for breakfast!"-claim in Slashdot. And I wanted to shut him up. What did I do? I tried my best to make KDE eat as much RAM as possible. And I did that by loading bunch of apps. I believe I had Kspread, Kword, Kpresenter, Konqueror, Amarok, Konsole, Kate, Kdevelop, Karchive, Kstars, Calculator, Juk, Kontact, Kopete, *******, and few others all up & running, and IIRC the system was consuming about 360MB of RAM (not including cache and buffers).

    So if someone claims that KDE NEEDS 512MB of RAM, you can be rest assured that he's full of crap.
    Blog

    Linux: The OS of the righteous

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Aalborg, Denmark
    Beans
    142
    Distro
    Ubuntu 6.06

    Re: KDE hardware requirements blown out of proportion

    Quote Originally Posted by njf
    Stop the fud non-sense please.
    I made no FUD, just a joke towards the funny naming schemes of KDE/Linux/UNIX system libraries like "glibgjc1-2". In fact, I prefer KDE over GNOME, I'm just exploring Ubuntu a bit.

    What I really mean, and some may have overlooked, is that if a desktop environment (and I used KDE because it is the topic) has to use more RAM than you've got, your harddisk will be the bottleneck no matter how fast memory sticks you've got.

    This is not a hardware enthusiast forum, and sometimes it's noticed. In Linux, people tend to overlook some basics principles of modern hardware.
    We should have UbuntuEvolve for official artwork!
    The easy way to nVIDIA drivers and Xgl/Compiz: Automatix and Automatix Bleeder

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •