[geeks] Itanium 32 bit performace.... hahahaha

[Jonathan C. Patschke]

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Jochen Kunz wrote:

> > KDE and Gnome both suffer from a lack of discipline still.
> What do you expect from a bunch of WinKidz, suffering from featureitis,
> that converted to Linux to be c00l?

This would be why I left the Linux scene.  In late 2000 or so, there was
a significant shift from "let's build a free Unix that works as well as
$commercialOS" to "let's build a free Windows with Unix underneath".

At that point, you just have to wonder WTF.  I have to admit that coming
from the easy-to-use Linux world, adapting to the BSDs was hard, but the
BSDs still have the feel of the computer being -yours-, not belonging to
some newbie developer trying to cram pixmaps and texinfo into every corner.

> A loong time ago I tried the enlightenment window manager. What a
> bloated pile of shit.

They've never claimed to be anything but.  Enlightenment was one of the
first WMs that I remember whose first (only?) goal was to look nice
right out of the tarball.  I ran it back in 1997 or 1998, and I remember
it being dog-slow on my ancient S3 video card, but it sure did look nice.

I ran it briefly while I was at Rice, but it was just too painful on a
Sparcstation 4.

> hossed my mbox files. mv balsa /dev/null.  Now I am trying sylpheed.
> Seams to work better. Only two examples. I stay away from that KDE and
> GNOME stuff nearly as much as I avoid Windows.

I can't claim any better experience.  My system at work is a 1.2GHz IBM
p615 system.  It's not slow by any possible definition.  KDE's still a
dog on it.

I really like running PINE inside of rxvt under WindowMaker, though. :)

-- 
Jonathan Patschke  ) "Earth works.  That's proof positive that Mother
Elgin, TX         (   Nature isn't a suit."            --Dave McGuire