kendell clark coffeekingms at
Fri Mar 18 05:33:10 UTC 2016

One thing I've noticed about mate, and probably other desktops as well,
is that they seem to have some kind of algorithm for measuring how much
ram a system has and adjusting how they use ram accordingly. On my
system, which has 8 gb of it, mate isn't all that resource efficient in
the ram department, usually idling at around 700 to 800 mb used.
However, on my mac and on mellisa's toshiba, mate idles at around 350 mb
used, and there's zero difference in performance. Gnome and unity
probably do the same thing, but they also use more effects so can be a
little heavier on the system. The biggest problem with unity and gnome
is, my opinion only, cpu usage. They use up a lot of the cpu cycles if
you have a slow one, and that can make the thing feel sluggish or
unresponsive. It's why I switched from gnome to mate on my mac, gnome
did not like my mac much.
Kendell Clark

B. Henry wrote:
> It is something specific to your system if mate term is faster. It's as close to the same thing as is possible, was actually the exact same size, and 
> had 0 differences one time when I dcompared.
> Thunderbird  works perfectly with unity. It sounds like something is messed up, corrupted or badly configured if you are having the problems mentiioned, 
> Jude.
> Gnome is notably lighter than unity when it comes to RAM usage.

More information about the Ubuntu-accessibility mailing list