GuTSy is slow!

[Derek Broughton]

Mario Vukelic wrote:

> 
> On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 15:20 -0300, Derek Broughton wrote:
>> I begin to wonder.  I use it because it has a better release cycle than
>> Debian, but I've never been happy with its choices of applications that I
>> just _have_ to have running.
> 
> You don't _have to. Disabling compiz is like, what, 3 clicks? And
> tracker is 3 more?

But they're still there.  Like ttf-baekmuk!  It's bloat taken to the logical
limit when it seems drive space is limitless.

How about bluetooth?  I _can't_ manage to turn that off.  How about the
ridiculous network notification daemon, which makes it impossible to use
konqueror to browse a localhost website, unless you're actually connected
to the Internet (same problem with kmail and local imap servers).

> But anyway, the direction Ubuntu was headed seemed always very clear to
> me. It's actually why I chose it after many years of Debian: my needs
> had changed and I just needed a reliable desktop machine that does
> things without me fiddling around.

And really, for the most part I just keep running these things because they
don't use _too_ many resources, and one day I might need them, but some of
them are going to cause noticeable problems for people like the OP.
 
>>  I load my machine up enough without silly
>> stuff like tracker and beryl.
> 
> Well, on most modern desktops/laptops, compiz (as it is now known
> again ;) uses actually less CPU resources than non-accelerated X.
> Thought the GPU load may be an issue with battery life, but I dunno.
> 
>> updatedb once a day was always good enough for me...
> 
> Monty Python jokes aside, updatedb sucks terribly at indexing file
> (email, IM, ...) content. If this is what you want/need, tracker is
> decidedly not silly.

I don't know - but I haven't seen any value to it yet.
> 
> 
>> As for network manager - for a fixed desktop machine, it really is
>> serious
>> overkill.  Laptops need something like NM (I use it/I like it), but it
>> should be a laptop option.
> 
> Functionality-wise, I agree. But laptops _are the biggest market segment
> today, and why maintain a separate networking solution when NM needs
> scarcely any CPU and RAM, when most desktop/laptop machines are idle
> most of the time anyway? It's easy to remove, use another distro, etc.

Because it still isn't reliable?  The first thing I do after booting up my
laptop is hibernate it.  NM will not associate with my network on boot. 
Hibernate/resume, and suddenly NM works.  For too many people, it's much
worse than that.  And the problem is - however small you say the overhead
is - it's a problem just waiting to happen.  It needs udev, dbus, nm, hal,
and who knows how many cooperating subsystems.


-- 
derek