The patience part kills me, though. And I don't need to burn out my own patience to do it, someone will burn out theirs for me and will threaten to destroy my laptop while I'm still compiling the base system - literally.



Nepomuk isn't a KDE-exclusive thing, KDE just happens to adopt it for KDE SC 4. Naturally, KDE is based in . I think I'm beginning to understand why there was the hate for KDE 4 when it first came out...

Since what it does is track the data used on every single application you have, I can see why most users can be so concerned about it because it eats up resources in doing so. Anyway, I don't think the KDE desktop is something you should want to use in low-resource environments such as older computers and/or low-spec'd computers, because I don't really think that's the focus of the KDE desktop, and it puzzles me why people are complaining about its heavyweightness when they can opt not to use it. Probably they like to ridicule some other people about it as well? Sure, we're in the Linux world, but still. If you really want low resource usage go for the small memory footprint window managers... or just dump Xorg. DEs will and will always be the most resource-heavy, no matter how light, component of what makes a GUI environment in the Linux world.

I really want to see how KDE performs with their optimized KWin with OpenGL ES 2.0 support, though.

Cocooh: Because they liked the old KDE 3, but I don't have a reason which can convince me why I should like it myself.

I'd rather someone work on GNOME 2.x and make it a GNOME Legacy fork.

This post has been edited by FlameReaper: Aug 14 2011, 07:20 AM

^And there you summarized my problem with KDE people. It's not that I want to see KDE go lightweight or adopt a less resource-intensive backend or whatever since there are other non-resource-related needs KDE fails to meet when it comes to the way I compute (KDE's "tiling" doesn't hold a candle compared to a real tiler).

What I like/want is QT (which is already quite light, comparatively sopeaking) native engine support from the more popular apps. Remember, I said QT, not KDE. You can keep your Konqueror and your KAlgebraand your KinkyKelly, I have no interest in the K-suite (though I admit K3B is damn good). I want the of the QT engine only. KDE and QT are not one and the same.

Problem is, that's a 2-way street. We need the developers of apps like FF, Gimp, Thunar, etc to make their programs QT friendly, and I doubt they have the resources for that. Sad, but true. I once tried QTcurve and made a damn nice *box-style desktop. If only I (or someone more skilled) could make a standalone light WM out of QT.

This post has been edited by G-17: Aug 15 2011, 06:39 AM

Finally got myself a 2nd hand N900!

This post has been edited by FlameReaper: Aug 18 2011, 02:12 PM

I'd tried ubuntu studio ones. its kinda cool really. you'll have all the apps and software you can get to make audio and video things, i mean , multimedia things. but that was was when its 9.10 I think...not really sure now...

---

Added on August 18, 2011, 2:20 pmgot android meh inside that? hehe.
btw , how much you get that second hand?

This post has been edited by maizuddin35: Aug 18 2011, 02:20 PM

Hey guys , I am currently having Ubuntu 11.04 in my lappy and I feels like alot of apps doesnt support this OS. So I decided to convert back to 10.04 LTS.

I visit the site http://releases.ubuntu.com/lucid/ . Wondering which one shud I choose. My lappy is Compaq Presario CQ40-420AU AMD TurionX2 64 proc.. Shud I choose AMD 64 or Intel x86 for better performance ?

Android? I don't need such a thing.

Maemo will stay.

Got it for 680. I know I can get cheaper but frankly I don't want to waste time when there's a shop selling these right before me.

This post has been edited by FlameReaper: Aug 18 2011, 03:19 PM

I think better go for Intel x86 if you want stability and if you performance go for AMD64...

^No, both architectures are equally stable at this point in time. Even Adobe 64bit Flash is usable. His processor clearly supports 64it, so it all boils down to how much RAM he's got. If you're running standard out-of-the-box Ubuntu, then I say stick aith x86 if you've got 3gb ram or less.

Someone has just fork the Gnome 2 project I guess its long live Gnome 2

The project is called Mate

However their website is down

In the mean time , the packages are available for Arch Linux users but i guess it will be ported to other distro as well

As for an OS , Fusion OS is offering the forked Gnome 2 as default de

This distro seems to be unorganized , http://www.fusionos.net/

Some stated it is based on Ubuntu 10.10 while other stated it was based out of ReactOS

Something to ask,since i switchd from ubuntu to cruchbang on my notebook:
-how to make flash audio work on chrome debain version? Tried to apt-get pluseaudio,but failed
-how to have volume control on desktop?

Crunchbang which version ? Openbox or XFCE ?

As for volume control , do you have any buttons or keys to control the volume ?

For a gui volume control , Crunchbang wiki stated that xfce mixer is already pre-installed , try and search for it

As for the Chromium , what version is it ? Did you install it from the repo ? Or you download it from the website ?

As i can see from their repo , Chromium is not been updated since Jan

Try download the latest Google Chrome from here

If Chromium is your choice , try these :

In terminal , type

su -
nano /etc/apt/source.list or gedit /etc/apt/source.list

Add the following

deb http://dl.google.com/linux/deb/ testing non-free main

Then type , apt-get update && apt-get upgrade

thanks,downloaded a dev build of chrome solved my problem,thought i still don't know how to manualy set icon on the bar.
BTW,i'm using openbox 64bit version.

Which bar ? Tint2 ?

yeah,i think is that one.
It only show wireless,clock,and clipboard manager,but GUI config doesn't give me option to add volume control(Or i just don't know)
And how do i install unstable version of wine on crunchbang(debain 6 based)?

Refer here http://www.winehq.org/download/

I downloaded latest FreeBSD (8.2)
Tried to install and enable the Kde4 by following instruction in
http://wiki.freebsd.org/KDE4/Install
but unsuccess ...
than tried to enable the gnome (by following instruction in
http://www.freebsd.org/gnome/docs/faq2.html#q1)
....this one ok
but the default installation is without firefox

(addition edit:) finally figured out how to install firefox
that is
cd /usr/ports/www/firefox
make install clean

(addition update:) but the above built firefox 3.6
so i downloaded firefox 6.0 from:
http://cvsweb.freebsd.org/ports/www/firefo...ar.gz?tarball=1
and install it into my freeBSD machine

This post has been edited by tanhks: Sep 9 2011, 04:25 AM

ok,i'm have done installed my very own 3.03 linux kernel on crunchbang openbox 64bit,but i lose some of my hardware support...i cannot use my wifi.
do i need to upgrade my package/

Good for you!! Welcome to the land of good design, clean code and proper documentation, unlike some other operating systems (cough... Linux ... cough)



Depends. What brand/make is your wireless chipset?
What sources are you using, Stable, Testing or Sid? (post your sources.list if possible)
What kernel? (Vanilla Debian, Zen, Liquorix?)

Erm , this new Ubuntu looks kinda --- weird to me

^Well, I suppose it's not for us to judge. Ubuntu's trying to lure new Linux users. Whether Unity helps in that or not remains to be seen. I still think it's a fairly decent distro under the hood (mini.iso install).

What I don't understand is why they moved the minimize,enlarge,close buttons to the left. I could never get used to that, despite spending years with Mac OS. It just feels so unnatural (for a right handed person) flicking the mouse to the left side.

The other thing is the size of the unity panel in proportion to the taskbar on top. Their pronounced difference in size and symmetry shows (imho) the design team's failure in grasping basic design sensibilities.

This post has been edited by G-17: Sep 2 2011, 08:54 PM