You are not logged in.

#1 2009-06-22 03:29:02

Rinaldus
Member
From: Moscow, Russia
Registered: 2008-03-04
Posts: 40
Website

Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

I try to make my computer quicker several weeks. I installed LXDE but I feel uncomfortable without Gnome panels with its menu, traffic report, weather report and etc. If I install Openbox and gnome-panel is this combination equal to Gnome by quickness or will my computer work qucker? Because of what Gnome works slower than WMs?


Sorry for my bad English. smile

Offline

#2 2009-06-22 03:58:39

snoblo
Member
Registered: 2008-05-01
Posts: 47

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

openbox + gnome-panel will use less resouces than gnome (which is pretty bloated). Just try it out yourself!


pacman is hungry today
My webcomic series about lonely programmers smile

Offline

#3 2009-06-22 05:09:48

Rinaldus
Member
From: Moscow, Russia
Registered: 2008-03-04
Posts: 40
Website

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

openbox + gnome-panel will use less resouces than gnome (which is pretty bloated)

Thanks. smile But in comparision with LXDE what is quicker: LXDE or openbox + gnome-panel?


Sorry for my bad English. smile

Offline

#4 2009-06-22 05:34:06

iphitus
Forum Fellow
From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2004-10-09
Posts: 4,927

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

On any remotely modern computer you'll see no visible change in "quickness". It merely uses less ram, and relatively less CPU time.


Theoretically the lower ram usage would increase the ram available for caching. The reduced processes would reduce CPU usage and result in more CPU time available for other processes. However in practice the ram saved is going to be relatively insignificant on any remotely recent computer, resulting in negligable improvements from extra cache.  GNOME itself uses very little CPU time when in use. The average desktop user can spare the extra CPU time without any noticable effect.

So unless you've got an older machine (older than <512MB ram, <1.4GHz) you'll not really notice any performance difference. 

Keep the features you want to use, your computer usage will be "quicker" from using what's comfortable, familiar and does what you need.

Offline

#5 2009-06-22 05:51:31

eDio
Member
From: Ukraine, Kyiv
Registered: 2008-12-02
Posts: 422

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

If you choose gnome-panel + openbox, you will keep the main arch advantage (IMHO) — simple configuration through rc files.

Offline

#6 2009-06-22 11:40:23

moljac024
Member
From: Serbia
Registered: 2008-01-29
Posts: 2,676

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

iphitus wrote:

On any remotely modern computer you'll see no visible change in "quickness". It merely uses less ram, and relatively less CPU time.


Theoretically the lower ram usage would increase the ram available for caching. The reduced processes would reduce CPU usage and result in more CPU time available for other processes. However in practice the ram saved is going to be relatively insignificant on any remotely recent computer, resulting in negligable improvements from extra cache.  GNOME itself uses very little CPU time when in use. The average desktop user can spare the extra CPU time without any noticable effect.

So unless you've got an older machine (older than <512MB ram, <1.4GHz) you'll not really notice any performance difference. 

Keep the features you want to use, your computer usage will be "quicker" from using what's comfortable, familiar and does what you need.

I can notice a speed difference between Openbox and Xmonad on my remotely recent dual core laptop.
I can especially see the difference between GNOME and any lightweight WM..


The day Microsoft makes a product that doesn't suck, is the day they make a vacuum cleaner.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But if they tell you that I've lost my mind, maybe it's not gone just a little hard to find...

Offline

#7 2009-06-22 12:00:32

trontonic
Member
Registered: 2008-07-21
Posts: 80

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

I also recommend trying out other combinations of windowmanagers and parts of Gnome/KDE.

For instance:
FVWM2 + gnome-session
or:

KDEWM="fvwm2" startkde

It takes some effort to configure FVWM2 to act and look like a modern windowmanager, though.

Gnome and KDE isn't lightweight, of course, but it seems like most of the perceived slowness comes from the windowmanagers that are included, not so much the panel and desktop background application.

You've also got applications like "trayer", which is just for the tray icons.

Last edited by trontonic (2009-06-22 12:05:27)

Offline

#8 2009-06-22 12:36:32

snoblo
Member
Registered: 2008-05-01
Posts: 47

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

Rinaldus wrote:

openbox + gnome-panel will use less resouces than gnome (which is pretty bloated)

Thanks. smile But in comparision with LXDE what is quicker: LXDE or openbox + gnome-panel?

lxde is just openbox + lxpanel + lxsession stuff, so it will probably be very similar to openbox + gnome-panel. I currently use openbox+xfce4-panel, which is pretty nice smile. What are the specs of your computer?

iphitus wrote:

On any remotely modern computer you'll see no visible change in "quickness". It merely uses less ram, and relatively less CPU time.

There still is a small visible difference, at least on my computer (which is decently modern, just bought this year)

Last edited by snoblo (2009-06-22 12:37:05)


pacman is hungry today
My webcomic series about lonely programmers smile

Offline

#9 2009-06-22 12:40:15

gen2
Member
Registered: 2006-09-07
Posts: 32

Re: Gnome vs openbox+gnome-panel

I've been using openbox with tint2.

Runs quite well. There are a few issues like tray-icons being twice as big sometimes, but opening an app which uses tray-icons generally fixes that.

The other reason for using tint2 is its multi-screen capability. It seems to cope very well is multiple screens.

The only downside I have is it doesn't have a desktop pager, so I can't quickly determine which virtual desktops are full.

In any case, the only other app I have running on all screens is gkrellm. I find it provides better detail and uses less cpu than conky.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB