Cost of running KDE apps with Gnome

[Dazed_75]

On 12/5/06, Nathan England <nathan at paysonlinux.org> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 05 December 2006 15:34, Dazed_75 wrote:
> > I prefer Gnome to KDE generally, but there are some KDE apps that are
> > really nice so I install and run them on my gnome desktop.  I know that
> > means some library duplication and probably various kinds of
> overhead,  But
> > that is the extent of my knowledge.  I don't see any obvious negatives
> so
> > far though this is a 3.0 GHz P4 with HT on 1 GB ram so should have
> plenty
> > of horsepower for such things.  But ...
> >
> > 1) Might I lose any functionality running the KDE apps under Gnome?
> > 2) Are there definitive caveats or known problems doing so (or a list
> > somewhere)?
> > 3) Is there any way to get an idea of how badly resources are being
> wasted?
> >
> > Specific example: Comparing AmaroK to Sound Juicer is like comparing a
> 67
> > Corvette to a Model T.  But when I was looking through preferences I got
> a
> > report that there had been an error running/accessing/??? aRTs (sic) for
> > AmaroK.  I ended up turning it aff and I can't even find out what it is.
>
>
> First off, run kcontrol and go into the sound setup, disable arts use.
> Setup
> an external player and give it mplayer as the command. This makes many
> things
> a bit quicker.
>
> The other thing I would do is disable HT, as you will be using a LOT of
> memory
> for both desktop libraries, and in my experiences, when you are using a
> lot
> of memory, HT will slow it down.
>
> I hate Gnome with a passion, but I hate arts even more! mplayer as the
> external command allows all my normal KDE sounds to work great.
>
> nathan
>
> Nathan,

I do not have KDE installed, I do not have arts or kcontrol on the machine.
I am not experiencing any problems that I amaware of.  I am simply asking
the questions in a search for knowledge.
-- 
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind.  - Dr. Seuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20061205/f27f8601/attachment.htm