GNOME + KDE = slow?

I've been wonder for a long time: If I install both GNOME and KDE on the same box, will I suffers any performance problems? Some people said that install both will affect the performance because the need to load two libraries (GTK & QT) at the same time.
Is this true? What is you guys opinion? Are there any of you who have both of them install? If so did you notices any slowdown or other side effects compare to having only one window manager? I'm currently using GNOME and I'm thinking of giving KDE a try but would like to make sure that install KDE won't affect my system speed and responsiveness.

zodmaner wrote:
mucknert wrote:And with enough RAM, it's not even an inconvenience any more.
Great! So I've got Althlon 64 3200+ with 1 gig RAM, will this be enough to run both without any slowdown?
Yes, I would think 1 G allows running both gtk and qt apps on either kde or gnome without any problems.

Similar Messages

  • What's the difference between gnome, kde and xfce?

    What's the difference between gnome, kde and xfce? Today I heard someone said gnome and kde have more software than xfce. Is that real?
    Thank you.
    Last edited by thesimpsons (2009-04-02 01:50:28)

    Its really a matter of taste, really. KDE is know to be configurable like hell, GNOME very easy to use, and XFCE lightweitgh.
    Keep in mind that whatever desktop environment (DE) you choose, you can use any application in any DE. For example, firefox, a "GTK" application, works without problem under KDE. Or Kile, a latex front-end for KDE, works perfect under Gnome.
    Personnally I prefer KDE. But I mostly prefer KDE applications like the editors (Kate/Kwrite) and file manager (dolphin).
    KDE is slower to start on my EeePC (really small machine) but because it is full featured, I can cut on number of packages installed, so in the end, with the same functionality, I have more room on my disk then using XFCE!
    Just try them, and choose the one you like

  • Install gnome/kde/xfce to /usr?

    Why don't we just put everything into /usr? The /opt serves no purpose since all apps are installed/removed by pacman and not untar/rm. And where should you install an app that needs both of kde and gnome?? /opt/kde+gnome?
    The reasons people are against this are summarized below:
    · The standard says "Large software packages must not use a direct subdirectory under the /usr hierarchy": BUT kde and gnome are not large packages (like openoffice), but many small packages, just like the rest of linux. The "GNOME" or "KDE" is just a conceptual name for end-users. Any app or user could use 1% of gnome/kde packages and keep away from the other 99%.
    · Puting all files into /usr is slow: There isn't any benchmark to confirm that. And a nearly-complete gnome 2.14 installation contains only about 100-200 files in /opt/gnome/bin/, compared to more than 1000 in /usr/bin. It just can't cause any slow down on modern linux filesystems. (it's 1,100+ not 11,000+)

    once upon a time, it was simpler and certainly cleaner to put things in opt as we do, and we didnt have a standard telling us what to do. Time have changed since, and it's quite a monumental and time consuming task to move all of gnome, all of kde, and all of the various programs back to /usr, something that just doesnt seem like it will reap any benefit for all the effort.  That's the sole reason why things are in opt. Simple.
    Sure, there's the standard -- but because there's a standard, doesnt mean we must follow it. Plenty of people get caught up in the word 'standard' and instagib-flame-kinghit-ko-up-left-right-right-down anyone who speaks against a standard irrelevant of the quality or applicability of the standard.
    It's not like most distros actually observe the standard anyway. I havn't seen a single distro having httpd serve out of /srv. The standard itself is out of date and contradictory. Xorg moved from X11R6 to /usr a while back now. Besides, why seperate  X into X11R6? what makes it so special that it must be seperated yet kde and gnome cannot?
    And is having kde and gnome seperate actually a violation of the standard?
    It's no difficult stretch of the mind to consider them "Add-on application software packages" after all, they're not required for a system to run, and nor are they installed by default, they are addons after installation.
    If we now look at the /usr section of the FHS, we see that:
    /usr is the second major section of the filesystem. /usr is shareable, read-only data ..... Large software packages must not use a direct subdirectory under the /usr hierarchy.
    It isnt difficult to consider KDE and GNOME large software packages. Saying they aren't large because they're split, is like calling OOo small if we split it up into each of it's components, libraries and programs. If you do decide to use any particular KDE and GNOME app, there exists something known as dependencies. For kde, you'll get a minimum of 30mb from kdebase, and that's just the tarball, not the extracted size.
    The desktops themselves are quite large anyway. pacman -S gnome. I havn't got a clean install on me here, but it's surely a reasonable size to install to get a functioning GNOME desktop, KDE is definitely quite big, with kdebase alone being 30mb.
    If you look at the actual standard, it's pretty flexible, and it's definition of /opt's purpose is very lofty. The rationale for it, is that "The use of /opt for add-on software is a well-established practice in the UNIX community"
    http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3 … REPACKAGES
    And we can take their approach here too, not only is it fine to put kde and gnome in opt as they are addon packages, but we can use their own rationale and say "that's how we've always done it"
    By no means do I remotely agree with the standard, but if you can use it to argue for putting them in /usr, you can also use it to argue for putting them in /opt. Either way, it negates this standard because of the ambiguity in this area and doesnt change the sole reason why things are in /opt in arch, which I explained first.
    James

  • Non-Latin characters in Sylpheed's subject when in gnome/kde

    So, this is curious and i'm not expecting an answer, but anyway i post it: 
    Sylpheed 0.9.5 [simple, not claws], works ok when opened in fluxbox or window maker; but when opened in gnome or kde, following curious behaviour shows:  in the "Subject" field, when I switch over to greek keyboard layout, it doesn't show greek characters but some not identified encoding, probably iso8859-2 or so.  This is mirrored everywhere where "Subject" field shows [ie in the headers on top of the message].  But then, if i type some greek characters in "Subject" field (which show weird there) and then copy-paste them in the message body (when composing a message), then they show allright as the greek characters i intended to type.  In the message body everything shows as it should be, ie greek, there's no problem there or when composing a message, only the subject (and only in kde & gnome).  Needless to say that this "subject" encoding behaviour also shows in message list, so most messages of mine cannot be identified via message list in sylpheed.
    Every locale setting in Arch is correct, so please don't focus there. This doesn't happen in slackware 9.0 or 9.1 or in debian sid, so it's probably either a gnome/kde problem or a sylpheed problem.
    I'm interested to know if there's someone else facing the same problem with sylpheed in arch [and probably with gtk+1.2 apps]. By this i don't neccessarily mean with greek but say with cyrillic or some other character set and encoding.
    So, this is it.  Any clues?

    The funny thing is that bold font [when message unread in message list] shows OK, ie in greek, but when i click on unread message, it is assumed to have been read, so it changes over to medium [non bold] and the encoding changes as well into the one that is not greek and thus unreadable.  In ~/.sylpheed/sylpheedrc the fonts are:
    widget_font=
    message_font=-microsoft-sylfaenarm-medium-r-normal-*-*-160-*-*-p-*-iso8859-7
    normal_font=-monotype-arial-medium-r-normal-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-7
    bold_font=-monotype-arial-bold-r-normal-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-7
    small_font=-monotype-arial-medium-r-normal-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-7
    In /etc/gtk, for gtk1.2 apps the file refering to greek encoding [el] seems to be fine [exactly the same as in slackware 9.1].

  • Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

    Arch for me is a perfect distro in that sense, that I know exactly, where all configuration is stored, what every file means and where to dig in case of problems.
    But this is true only if I don't use major DEs, such as gnome or kde.
    So I want to ask the community, what advantages and disadvantages Arch has against other distros with gnome/kde/etc (not counting rolling-release)?
    TNX.
    edit:
    As for me, Arch's main advantage - simple configuration through text files. I guess it is the same for many Arch users. But not for all.
    Why people, who prefer to use kde/gnome use Arch?
    Last edited by eDio (2009-10-18 21:40:20)

    I use ArchLinux with KDE4 because Arch gives me exactly what I want, no less, no more. KDE4 likes to be bloated and come with loads of useless crap, but not on Arch. Arch divides KDE into modules so I only get EXACTLY what i want. This makes my system fast, entirely customized, and yet it still looks good. Also if I want to remove KDE and install something else, it's extremely easy. Lastly, I love how standard Arch is. Packages are extremely standardized, none of this crap "flavoring"(as I like to call it) other distros employ, which cause more issues than they fix. Here everything is "standard linux". Everything conforms and makes sense, manual editing is simple. The AUR and PKGBUILD system is also absolutely fantastic, and probably my favorite part of the distro(along with tools like yaourt and the fact that most AUR packages also follow the Arch Packaging Standard)

  • RDP client for Xfce (without heavy Gnome/KDE dependancies)

    I'm looking for a easy to use RDP client for Xfce, and am avoiding Gnome/KDE dependancies. I am avoiding them so I can get a nice fast system. So does anyone know one?

    rdesktop

  • KDE slowness

    I haven't used KDE in ages so I was considering switching back. When I installed KDE and found it now took 40 seconds too boot into a usable desktop as opposed to XFCE (20 seconds) I decided to remove KDE and stick with XFCE.
    I just like the kde PDF reader. It renders quickly, scrolls fast. I don't understand why none of the other DE's have a good fast PDF reader. I didn't really want to install the kde libs just for okular but maybe I will. Acrobat reader needs more dependencies than okular I think (for my system).
    Would kdemod be faster to boot. Boot time is a bit important to me since I'm running this on my notebook. If it was on my desktop I wouldn't care as much.
    I know my post is all over the place, but if any of my problems can be addressed I will be happy.
    Cheers.

    mrpringle wrote:
    I did restart the PC several times. Still slow. There are a few things which put me off KDE anyway. The start menu is very slow and inefficient to use, I couldn't find any network card configuration (I use netcfg under xfce, but thought KDE would come with a graphical network configuration tool).
    I'll just stick with xfce because I feel comfortable with it.  Even though it doesn't look anywhere near as fancy as KDE4.
    Uhm what about knetworkmanager???
    [vamp898@VampLap vamp898]$ yaourt -Ss knetwork
    aur/knetworkmanager 0.2.2-4 (69)
    A NetworkManager front-end for kde3 and kde4, based in version 0.2.2 stable
    aur/knetworkmanager-unstable 737532-1 (Out of Date) (5)
    A NetworkManager front-end for KDE
    [vamp898@VampLap vamp898]$
    or what about this?
    aur/networkmanager-plasmoid-svn 1007572-1 (169)
    KDE4 NetworkManager plasmoid
    The Startmenü can be quickly changed with a right click and than to "standard menu" or something else
    Maybe you want to try GNOME. I looks a bit fancier than XFCE and is much more comfortable^^
    Last edited by Vamp898 (2009-10-02 16:47:48)

  • Why is Gnome so slow?!

    Hi, so I made a fresh install of Arch with the Gnome desktop. Really quick at first, but after a few days and restarts, Gnome is much slower now than it was before.. Opening small apps like terminal/liferea takes about 4-6 seconds (fresh install was 1-1,5)! A few apps installed (firefox3, pidgin, vlc etc), but just the basics. Compiz-Fusion and AWN starts on logging, but they barely take any mem or CPU.. I installed "preload" as I heard it would improve startup speed for commonly used apps. It's a bit disappointing as KDEmod is way faster and yet uses many larger apps (like Amarok (KDE) and Audacious (Gnome) uses about the same time to start).
    Apps opens quite fast when they have been loaded once or twice though (1,5s or less).

    Thanks, I did that, but didn't help much. Firefox, Terminal and Liferea etc is still slower to start than they were a few days ago (I feel it's gradually getting slower over time)..
    Here's my hosts file:
    # /etc/hosts: static lookup table for host names
    #<ip-address> <hostname.domain.org> <hostname>
    127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain myhost
    # End of file
    I tried to add "localhost" before myhost as well, but didn't notice any difference then either. Hostname is set to myhost in rc.conf (and in terminalname).
    Last edited by Ub1476 (2008-03-12 23:41:14)

  • KDE : slow font rendering

    Hi everyone !
    I'm completely new to Arch (coming from Ubuntu) and was really amazed at how fast my system could get and how easy it was to set it up.
    I only have one problem left (apart from the missing japanese fonts) :
    When anti-aliasing is turned on (in KDE), fonts rendering gets really slow. It can be noticed when selecting a big chunk of text with the mouse, in Konqueror or Kate : you can feel it takes some time. Or when switching tabs in Konqueror. Those are definitely much faster in Opera and Firefox.
    However, with anti-aliasing turned off, it is almost instant, as it should. But it looks really awful (in general, I have much trouble getting a good font rendering in linux. Probably because of my 19" LCD that only reached 1280x1024)
    Do you have any idea ? My config is : nvidia geforce 6600, proprietary drivers, athlon 64 3200+. I tried some MS fonts and the DejaVu font.
    Just in case, you may see my xorg.conf, below.
    THANKS EVER SO MUCH for reading this far I think my problem may concern many other newbies like me
    # nvidia-settings: X configuration file generated by nvidia-settings
    # nvidia-settings: version 1.0 (buildmeister@builder3) Thu Nov 9 17:56:12 PST 2006
    Section "ServerLayout"
    Identifier "Layout0"
    Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0
    Screen 1 "Screen1" RightOf "Screen0"
    InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
    InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
    EndSection
    Section "Files"
    RgbPath "/usr/lib/X11/rgb"
    EndSection
    Section "Module"
    Load "dbe"
    Load "extmod"
    Load "type1"
    Load "freetype"
    Load "glx"
    EndSection
    Section "ServerFlags"
    Option "Xinerama" "0"
    EndSection
    Section "InputDevice"
    # generated from default
    Identifier "Mouse0"
    Driver "mouse"
    Option "Protocol" "auto"
    Option "Device" "/dev/psaux"
    Option "Emulate3Buttons" "no"
    Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
    EndSection
    Section "InputDevice"
    # generated from default
    Identifier "Keyboard0"
    Driver "kbd"
    Option "XkbLayout" "fr"
    EndSection
    Section "Monitor"
    # HorizSync source: edid, VertRefresh source: edid
    Identifier "Monitor0"
    VendorName "Unknown"
    ModelName "LG L1915S"
    HorizSync 30.0 - 83.0
    VertRefresh 56.0 - 75.0
    Option "DPMS"
    EndSection
    Section "Monitor"
    # HorizSync source: xconfig, VertRefresh source: xconfig
    Identifier "Monitor1"
    VendorName "Unknown"
    ModelName "TV-0"
    HorizSync 28.0 - 33.0
    VertRefresh 43.0 - 72.0
    Option "DPMS"
    EndSection
    Section "Device"
    Identifier "Videocard0"
    Driver "nvidia"
    VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
    BoardName "GeForce 6600"
    BusID "PCI:2:0:0"
    Screen 0
    EndSection
    Section "Device"
    Identifier "Videocard1"
    Driver "nvidia"
    VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
    BoardName "GeForce 6600"
    BusID "PCI:2:0:0"
    Screen 1
    EndSection
    Section "Screen"
    Identifier "Screen0"
    Device "Videocard0"
    Monitor "Monitor0"
    DefaultDepth 24
    Option "metamodes" "CRT: nvidia-auto-select +0+0"
    SubSection "Display"
    Depth 24
    Modes "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
    EndSection
    Section "Screen"
    Identifier "Screen1"
    Device "Videocard1"
    Monitor "Monitor1"
    DefaultDepth 24
    Option "metamodes" "TV: 800x600 +0+0"
    SubSection "Display"
    Depth 24
    Modes "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
    EndSubSection
    EndSection

    Oh gees, it seems the culprit was the "sub-hinting" (halo de sous-pixellisation) option. I thought I had tried all possible combinations
    However, I wonder if it is supposed to slow down the display that much...
    Anyway... I would still be eager to find a solution to display japanese fonts
    Thanks for listening to me
    Last edited by mahen (2007-02-05 11:55:09)

  • Fonts configuration Gnome/KDE

    I use some programs from KDE in my Gnome desktop and fonts there do not look right.
    I tried to solve this and installed KDE Settings app. This solved the KDE fonts problem, but messed up some of my other fonts. I have been playing with it a lot and most of the fonts now look right. In programs, everything is fine, but on web, some of fonts are very ugly. Most of them are fine, but on some pages it looks like no hinting / clearing is used. The problem is in Firefox, when I have allowed pages to use their own font. When this is turned off, all works fine, but fonts look not right everywhere. Chromium does not have this problem at all.
    So how can I trace where is the problem and fix this? See images please. Thanks.
    Last edited by Raqua (2010-04-02 10:19:11)

    I tried the DPI thing, but it did not help. I did not tried the font replacement thing, because going through all the fonts and changing them manually is quite a task. There should be some other way.
    I tried to remove all my ubuntu font packages from AUR and installing stock, then back again to ubuntu in hope of restoring the settings, but it did not helped.
    Thanks for your suggestions anyway. It was working before, so I just want it to get back to the state it was before. Unfortunately my knowledge in fonts is scarce.

  • Kde slow

    I´ve just installed Arch and kde! But its running very slow.
    I get at fail message during the bootsession.
    127.0.0.1 error fetching interface information - and during shutdown : network is not running 'try network start'
    When I log in to kde - it seems to stop during initializing system services and after that it takes about 5min before my desktops appears...
    sometimes it crashes sometimes it dont.
    I´m using this hardware:
    AMD 700mhz CPU
    10BG harddisk
    320 RAM
    Lite-on Network
    Ive had activeted KsysGuard and for me it seems to be using full memory at all time -is there any way to fix that problem
    Can someone please help me with this, cause I´m from Denmark and no one here uses Arch!
    If you want some more details for help - let me know how to get´em just in case 

    Do you have proper localhost entries in /etc/rc.conf and /etc/hosts?
    /etc/rc.conf
    lo="lo 127.0.0.1"
    eth0="dhcp"
    INTERFACES=(lo eth0) #note no '!' next to lo
    /etc/hosts
    127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost

  • KDE slow without Oxygen

    Hi,
    I have noticed that my kde is very slow if I don't use Oxygen. Even with QtCurve the entire system is slower than before.
    I have a macbook (1st gen).
    Tnx for your help..

    Pierre wrote:What do you mean by "slow"? QtCurve works fine for me here.
    Open a folder with some pictures and the preview mode on. Try to scroll down and see what happens. The same happens on digikam or even in regular emails on kmail

  • After openoffice install: gnome/kde error "openssl version mismatch."

    Hello,
    i just installed a new archlinux version on my laptop. After i just installed the full cd version, i made the following things:
    pacman -Sy
    pacman -S xorg-server xf86-input-mouse xf86-input-keyboard xf86-video-vesa xorg-xinit
    pacman -S hwd
    hwd -xa
    pacman -S gnome
    pacman -S gnome-extra
    pacman -S openoffice-base openoffice-spell-en openoffice-spell-de
    Now, when i try to start gnome via "gdm", i get the following error after login screen:
    /etc/gdm/Xsession: Beginning session setup...
    /etc/gdm/Xsession: Setup done, will execute: /usr/bin/ssh-agent -- /usr/bin/gnome-session
    OpenSSL version mismatch. Built against 90805f, you have 908070
    Because i made nothing else on the system except the commands i quoted above, i guess it must be a bug. Has anyone an idea how to solve this problem?
    Thx in advance,
    Thomas
    Last edited by conflagration (2007-10-28 11:26:33)

    Update:
    I just tried a new installation and did the same steps as above, just with kde instead of gnome.  After "startkde", the same OpenSSL version mismatch error appears on the console. It's REALLY annoying...

  • Gnome incredebly slow

    Hi,
    I am using Archlinux amd64 with gnome3 on a good computer (i7 930, HD4850, 6GB,..).
    When I now am working over 4 workspaces with different IDEs on each workspace and lots of chromium instances the workflow slows down.
    I think this could be because of:
    1. Often using standby mode
    2. /home mounted over NFS
    3. full cache
    4. Gnome overwhelmed?
    What could I do to improve the speed under average load?
    Regards

    Try adding
    # Kernel sysctl configuration
    vm.swappiness=1
    vm.vfs_cache_pressure=50
    to your /etc/sysctl.conf. This forces linux to use more of the RAM before swapping to hard disk.
    It improved system responsivness dramatically on my old Laptop with only 1 GB of ram and 1 GB of Swap Partion.
    I also installed preload deamon which made my laptop even more responsive.
    Regards,
    blackout23

  • Dropline gnome / KDE for arch.

    Hey, before arch I was using slackware and dropline gnome ( go here for more info http://www.dropline.net/gnome ) and I really liked it. I was just wondering if anyone here would be interested or willing to use a custom version of gnome or kde specifically made for arch? such as dropline is for slackware.
    Just curious.

    I'd be interested in trying out such a thing, for Gnome or KDE.  Hard to say whether I'd want to use something like that long-term until I try it, though.  ATM, I'm liking fluxbox an awful lot.
    I had trouble when I tried to install a Gnome DE on Arch.  Partly, it was because of some problems with Gnome and/or Arch Linux's implementation (search the forums ... there are some pretty long threads about the trouble people have had getting Gnome to work), and partly it was because I've never used Gnome and I didn't have much of an idea of how it was supposed to work.  Gnome documentation goes into a fair amount of detail, but in the end it seemed like an awful lot of effort just to try something, so I gave up on it.
    I'm sure there are many Arch users who wouldn't be interested, or who are more inclined to customize KDE/Gnome for themselves if they use either one at all, but I think the existence of such projects would enhance Arch's appeal to people who aren't very experienced with Linux or with the DE's for Linux.  (That would be me!  ) I don't think it needs to be (or even should be) an "official" part of the Arch distro, just like Dropline isn't an official part of Slackware.  I also think, like Dropline, it would be a lot of work and require significant resources to be done right.

Maybe you are looking for