Re: It's spelled

Mike S. Avelar (avelar@netrover.com)
Wed, 19 Aug 1998 21:33:23 -0400



--------------3C4A4EFA38375F7196630D41
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Steve Williams wrote:

> Umm...you're doing something wrong.  I'm running the latest AS beta and
> have run most of the version from 1.4, up.  If anything it's faster:
>  p100-64 megs of RAM, xterm comes up in less than a second.  Switching
> between desktops is painless and instantaneous.
>
>  I recently upgraded to 96 megs of ram, things are even faster.  If you
> have a P5/200 with 64 megs of RAM and it's slow, then it's not the fault
> of AS.
>
> >Subject: It's spelled "A f t e r S t e p", but it's pronounced
> "BloatStep"
> >To: afterstep@linuxcenter.com
> >Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 14:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
> >From: byron@omix.com (Byron Brummer)
> >Reply-To: afterstep@linuxcenter.com
> >
> >
> >Why is Afterstep getting so bloated?!
> >
> >I've been using v1.0 for quite some time, and love it.  I upgraded to
> 1.4
> >and later to 1.4.5 and ran that for about a month before finally giving
> up
> >on it and reinstalling v1.0.  I am now moving to WindowMaker, as
> Afterstep
> >is killing itself... :-(
> >
> >Why is v1.4.* so *incredibly* bloated and slow compared to v1.0?
> >
> >The more I look at the new Afterstep, the less I like it.  More and
> more
> >features are added that are of little use or at least questionable use
> >(different settings for each work space...?) and add huge amounts of
> >baggage.  On my P5/200 with 64 Megs it can take quite a few seconds (up
> to
> >15?!) to switch between workspaces which also causes an effect on the
> >display very similar to when the manager is restarted. This makes
> multiple
> >workspaces less then worthless, and this is only one area of *massive*
> >bloat...  Just starting an *xterm* now takes number of seconds that in
> v1.0
> >came up in a nano-second...
> >
> >I am very, very disappointed to see the direction that Afterstep has
> taken.
> >
> >Afterstep v1.0 was very clean, pretty light weight, fast, and useful.
> The
> >new releases however, are *huge*, bloated, slow, and add few really
> useful
> >features for the massive cost they take from the system.  Hell, MS
> Windoze
> >95/NT are *much* faster on the same hardware, and more useful... :-(
> >
> >With the upcomming GNOME support this is probably just going to get
> much,
> >much worse.  Not that GNOME is a bad thing at all, I just don't think
> AS
> >can handle *any* more "features"...
> >
> >As a long time Afterstep user, I hate to say it but I'm moving to
> >WindowMaker.  With all the useful features plus some (drag and drop,
> etc)
> >I looked for in the newer AS, with none of the bloat (*faster* then
> ASv1.0, as
> >far as I can tell) WindowMaker is going to be the Afterstep killer.
> >
> >But then, Afterstep v1.4+ will be the real cause of Afterstep's
> death... :-(
> >
> >--
> >-Zenin (zenin@archive.rhps.org)           From The Blue Camel we learn:
> >BSD:  A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
> >Berkeley or thereabouts.  Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
> >medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at
> least,
> >more fun.)  The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
>

Here is something wierd... I just upgrade my P200MMX with 64MB SDRAM to
128MB SDRAM and there is no real speed difference. Well after using some
apps, of course they get cached in memory.

--------------3C4A4EFA38375F7196630D41
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>
Steve Williams wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>Umm...you're doing something wrong.  I'm running
the latest AS beta and
<BR>have run most of the version from 1.4, up.  If anything it's faster:
<BR> p100-64 megs of RAM, xterm comes up in less than a second. 
Switching
<BR>between desktops is painless and instantaneous.

<P> I recently upgraded to 96 megs of ram, things are even faster. 
If you
<BR>have a P5/200 with 64 megs of RAM and it's slow, then it's not the
fault
<BR>of AS.

<P>>Subject: It's spelled "A f t e r S t e p", but it's pronounced
<BR>"BloatStep"
<BR>>To: afterstep@linuxcenter.com
<BR>>Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 14:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
<BR>>From: byron@omix.com (Byron Brummer)
<BR>>Reply-To: afterstep@linuxcenter.com
<BR>>
<BR>>
<BR>>Why is Afterstep getting so bloated?!
<BR>>
<BR>>I've been using v1.0 for quite some time, and love it.  I upgraded
to
<BR>1.4
<BR>>and later to 1.4.5 and ran that for about a month before finally giving
<BR>up
<BR>>on it and reinstalling v1.0.  I am now moving to WindowMaker,
as
<BR>Afterstep
<BR>>is killing itself... :-(
<BR>>
<BR>>Why is v1.4.* so *incredibly* bloated and slow compared to v1.0?
<BR>>
<BR>>The more I look at the new Afterstep, the less I like it.  More
and
<BR>more
<BR>>features are added that are of little use or at least questionable
use
<BR>>(different settings for each work space...?) and add huge amounts
of
<BR>>baggage.  On my P5/200 with 64 Megs it can take quite a few seconds
(up
<BR>to
<BR>>15?!) to switch between workspaces which also causes an effect on
the
<BR>>display very similar to when the manager is restarted. This makes
<BR>multiple
<BR>>workspaces less then worthless, and this is only one area of *massive*
<BR>>bloat...  Just starting an *xterm* now takes number of seconds
that in
<BR>v1.0
<BR>>came up in a nano-second...
<BR>>
<BR>>I am very, very disappointed to see the direction that Afterstep has
<BR>taken.
<BR>>
<BR>>Afterstep v1.0 was very clean, pretty light weight, fast, and useful.
<BR>The
<BR>>new releases however, are *huge*, bloated, slow, and add few really
<BR>useful
<BR>>features for the massive cost they take from the system.  Hell,
MS
<BR>Windoze
<BR>>95/NT are *much* faster on the same hardware, and more useful... :-(
<BR>>
<BR>>With the upcomming GNOME support this is probably just going to get
<BR>much,
<BR>>much worse.  Not that GNOME is a bad thing at all, I just don't
think
<BR>AS
<BR>>can handle *any* more "features"...
<BR>>
<BR>>As a long time Afterstep user, I hate to say it but I'm moving to
<BR>>WindowMaker.  With all the useful features plus some (drag and
drop,
<BR>etc)
<BR>>I looked for in the newer AS, with none of the bloat (*faster* then
<BR>ASv1.0, as
<BR>>far as I can tell) WindowMaker is going to be the Afterstep killer.
<BR>>
<BR>>But then, Afterstep v1.4+ will be the real cause of Afterstep's
<BR>death... :-(
<BR>>
<BR>>--
<BR>>-Zenin (zenin@archive.rhps.org)          
>From The Blue Camel we learn:
<BR>>BSD:  A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed
at UC
<BR>>Berkeley or thereabouts.  Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
<BR>>medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at
<BR>least,
<BR>>more fun.)  The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
<BR><A HREF="http://www.caldera.com/linuxcenter/forums/afterstep.html"></A> </BLOCKQUOTE>
Here is something wierd... I just upgrade my P200MMX with 64MB SDRAM to
128MB SDRAM and there is no real speed difference. Well after using
some apps, of course they get cached in memory. </HTML>

--------------3C4A4EFA38375F7196630D41--


--
   WWW:   http://www.afterstep.org/
   FTP:   ftp://ftp.afterstep.org/
   MAIL:  http://www.caldera.com/linuxcenter/forums/afterstep.html