On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 09:15, Chris Rouch wrote: > I think, unfortunately, that's just the way it is. gnome 2.4 seems to be > designed to look pretty rather than be fast. I'm hoping this will be > addressed in 2.6. While the performance is good on my desktop (AMD > 2800+, 1Gb ram, so it should be!), it was unacceptable on my laptop > (750MHz pentium II, 256Mb ram), so I ended up switching back to fvwm for > my desktop and just using the gnome clients. Given that I ran 2.0 on a machine worse off than that (same RAM, 400mhz CPU, NFS homedir) and it was as snappy as could be, I would wager your problem wasn't GNOME itself. > You could try picking a 'fast' theme - one that minimises eye candy and > thus the cpu cycles needed to redraw the screen when you change > desktops. You could also try getting rid of any applets that you can't > live without. You could try changing metacity to sawfish (I don't know > if it's any faster, but IMO it's more 'non-newbie-friendly') I don't think Sawfish is any faster; I wouldn't be surprised if it's just the opposite. Not sure on that tho. So far as the theme, it's not quite so important to pick a "fast" one as it is to just not pick a slow one. Lots of themes are very poorly made and are, thus, very slow. -- Sean Middleditch <elanthis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> AwesomePlay Productions, Inc. _______________________________________________ gnome-list mailing list gnome-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
