Re: Gnome and Afterstep... (A testimonial)

David Mihm (davemann@ionet.net)
Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:10:38 -0500 (CDT)


! On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, Martin Andersson wrote:
! 
! > Now that Gnome-compliance is almost complete.. is the wharf obsolete
! > when the panel is working? r is there a reason to keep it?

	One quick look into your top output will surely clear up any
confusion about which app, Wharf or Gnome panel; deserves to continue in
it's existence.
	With the amazing work Rafal has done to make AfterStep reach it's
goal of 99.9% Gnome compliance, I had decided to try this new thing all
the kids seem to think is the rage.  I tried to take the approach as,
maybe it's not really just a trend similar to Java, et al. Then, spending
around 4 to 6 hours acquiring all the necessary packages to move to gtk
1.2, and gnome 1.0.4 and installing them, I do admit there was a coolness
factor due to it being "something new, and different".  I played around
with a few of the limited things that came with the basic installation.
Some neat things were the inclusion of distro specific menus in it's own
menuing system.  I should possibly step back to the beginning and mention
that when I started AfterStep with Gnome, I had seen an increase in
memory usage by some 42 odd percentage; I shrugged this off as a couple
other jobs had started to run in the background at around the same time.
Now, fast forward to when I tried all the fancy things in the panel. I
looked at top to see why my memory had shot up and I was now using swap
(on a 96MB machine).  Low and behold but several of the "cute" apps I had
started in the panel did not exit properly and were still running; killed
those.  So I sorted top by memory usage.  This is the point I fell out of
my chair.  The panel was taking 10MB's; nope, that's not a typo, it says
TEN!  Okay, so you might be saying to yourself, well man, how many apps
were you running in the panel?  None, I was merely running the panel after
having killed the 3MB+ clock applet that was swallowed in it!  The only
thing that was running in the gnome panel was itself, the little menu
button.  I suppose some Gnome zealots would argue that this is in fact a
program which you can choose not to run; but to this I say - then what is
the point.
	To be fair, let me compare here.  My Wharf runes as two different
instances - one having simple icons and the other running several
swallowed apps.  The simple Wharf only uses 1MB; whereas the Wharf
running swallowed apps total to 5MB (all 5 apps included).  Now looking at
the Gnome panel which had NO apps running, it was 10MB.
	I think it is crystal clear what the past has proven and what the
future holds.  It might be nice for all those folks getting their new PIII
500's with 256MB of RAM on their birthday; but Linux was brought into this
world to be able to operate quickly and efficiently on even the lowliest
hardware.  The ridiculousness of a gnome 'who' program which requires a 
3MB memory footprint to run might not seem dumb to some, but in this
authors opinion, Gnome is turning our sleek and beloved Linux into
something akin to *shudder* Microsoft Windows.
	
P.S. I would like to say, these are my opinions and mine alone; I do not
speak for anyone but myself.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| d a v i d  @  m i h m                         reality.sys corrupt! |
| davemann  @ ionet.net                        reboot universe(y,n)? |
| webmaster @ afterstep.org                               ICQ:906859 |
| ftpmaster @ afterstep.org                www.the-site.loonybin.net |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
           E4 90 15 ED E5 9F 18 8A B0 CC FF 68 61 36 4A 6F


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