<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Since we are talking about the Strategy
Document, please let me remind that performance is still one of
our focuses. Just not in the same way than before.<br>
<br>
In my opinion, the ultimate question about any new feature or
inclusion is if it's worth using the extra system resources for
that. And that again is something that the Xubuntu team should
discuss and decide on using the Strategy Document as their guide.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Pasi<br>
<br>
On 24/04/13 20:39, Bruno Benitez wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAKGTh9HvP3C4PYRXMk1uBMBL-mtPagaJ5E=fPiQx8MjZ_pk2Kw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">In our
voted and accepted strategy document we state:<br>
<br>
"Xubuntu does not explicitly target users with low, modest, or
high powered machines but instead targets the entire spectrum.
Xubuntu's extra responsiveness and speed, among other positive
traits, can be appreciated by all users, regardless of their
hardware."[1]<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">I
sincerely think we should not focus on "old/low specs"
machines. I don't think that would help xubuntu in the
imminent future.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">Having
default applications that run smoothly and are simple but
powerful its awesome, but we already know, and it was
discussed to death before that people usually just apt-gets
the applications they like most almost immediately after
installing xubuntu.<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">stuff
like default media player, default text editor, default office
suite, default web browser are usually very personal and
changes from person to person.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">But the
poeple who develops xubuntu might want to consider taking what
its best of the rest of ubuntu, stuff like HUD are awesome, it
makes the system more modern and brings more power to the
users hands, while not taking the whole unity road and using
HUD to take lots of other stuff from the user. Unity its not
pretty. HUD is.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">But
again, thats my opinion and I might be alone here.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">
<br>
[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Xubuntu/StrategyDocument">https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Xubuntu/StrategyDocument</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2013/4/24 Eero Tamminen <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:oak@helsinkinet.fi" target="_blank">oak@helsinkinet.fi</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On keskiviikko 24 huhtikuu 2013, Bruno Benitez wrote:<br>
> Yes, HUD integration might increase system load, but
would that harm<br>
> much? i think not.<br>
<br>
</div>
On several years old laptop with Intel IGP, Unity and Gnome3<br>
desktop performance is clearly subpar [1], while Xubuntu
works<br>
fine.<br>
<br>
I would say that compositing desktop starts to perform well
enough<br>
when one has something like desktop i3 IGP with at least 2GB
(system)<br>
RAM. If you have something older & slower, especially
with mobile<br>
version of IGP, or less RAM, it's uncomfortably slow.<br>
<br>
There's also increasing number of ARM devices, tablets and
things like rPi<br>
(which run at ~1Ghz and have 0.5 - 1GB of RAM). While
these can run<br>
current Xubuntu fairly comfortably, compositing desktops are
not that<br>
good match for them, because of compositing memory overhead
[1], especially<br>
for larger resolution (HDTV) desktops, and window sizes on
such desktops.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
- Eero<br>
<br>
[1] It's a bit funny when people so lightly suggest adding
non-optional<br>
compositing memory overhead to Xubuntu when people
obsess about gnome<br>
library dependencies, which memory impact would be
smaller than<br>
the memory overhead from composited windows...<br>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5"><br>
--<br>
xubuntu-devel mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com">xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel"
target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Bruno.-<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Pasi Lallinaho (knome) » <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://open.knome.fi/">http://open.knome.fi/</a>
Leader of Shimmer Project and Xubuntu » <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://shimmerproject.org/">http://shimmerproject.org/</a>
Graphic artist, webdesigner, Ubuntu member » <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://xubuntu.org/">http://xubuntu.org/</a></pre>
</body>
</html>