| |||||||||||||
A GNOME 3.0 planA GNOME 3.0 planPosted Apr 4, 2009 11:13 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: A GNOME 3.0 plan by oblio Parent article: A GNOME 3.0 plan
Note the past tense. It is still sort of true for memory consumption, but
even there reducing memory consumption (or, rather, short-to-medium-term working set) can increase speed, 'cos caches aren't anywhere near as large as RAM.
It is no longer true for CPU consumption. For non-parallelizable code
(Log in to post comments)
A GNOME 3.0 plan Posted Apr 4, 2009 13:29 UTC (Sat) by oblio (guest, #33465) [Link]
Even if it's parallelizable, you have all sorts of single core embedded CPUs, in which case it isn't true either. So I get your point.
But something like making a whole major release whose primary goal is to reduce the memory consumption of Gnome to 10% is prone to leaving Gnome in the dust bin of desktop history - you only have so much resources, and when you try this kind of optimization it becomes all you do, you can't really add features.
|
|||||||||||||