seed changes

Harold Aling h.aling at
Tue Feb 12 15:13:06 UTC 2008

<47B04BF0.9040208 at> <fopj2t$d36$1 at>
<47B19D89.2070709 at> <749ebd440802120659j1a8f2df9n32c564c5b2ce976 at>
Message-ID: <e4db8728c74aafc36b8285db56a18905 at localhost>
X-Sender: h.aling at
Received: from [] with HTTP/1.1 (POST); Tue, 12
	Feb 2008 16:13:06 +0100
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.1-svn
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:59:56 +0100, Vincent <imnotb at> wrote:
> I've elaborated on the signigicant advantages of g-s-s before, and I
> they far outweight a marginal case as this. Realistically, how many
> have xfwm4 compositing enabled? It's not like it's that much lighter than
> Compiz, while it's far less feature rich. It might be more stable but
> people enabling compositing are willing to compromise stability for
> features.

Everyone I know that uses Xfce/Xubuntu has the compositor enabled. But then
again, they all have fast, modern computers.

As soon as a novice Xfce user will discover the window shading option, the
user will turn it on because it is way more visually appealing and gives a
nice and helpful (fake) 3D representation of your stacked windows.

Comparing Compiz' hardware rendering vs. Xfwm4' software rendering is a bit
weird though.


More information about the xubuntu-devel mailing list