- This topic has 96 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated Jul 13-12:05 pm by Brian Masinick.
-
Posts
-
dolphin_oracle
Here’s my thinking.
antiX MATE (stable/buster).
Why?
1. From what I gather there is no Debian MATE distro (we don’t include Ubuntu and its derivatives such as Mint).
2. The ‘aim’ is to include the very basics for MATE plus antiX apps like package manager, live system etc.
Then users can build up. No ‘light’ apps included either. Let user decide.MATE was the first thing I thought of when I saw this thread. I liked my MATE antiX-core build.
olsztyn
antiX MATE (stable/buster).
My quite limited familiarity of MATE comes mostly from antiX MATE implementation through Package Installer, so I do not know if it is representative of other MATE implementations… Having said that, although I kind of like aesthetics, there are two questions that came to my mind:
– Initial memory used, not running anything else, measured 1.16 G using HTop. After starting Chrome memory used was measured about 1.5 G. Is current antiX implementation of MATE highly inefficient because it is kind of initial test, far from final? If so then how much is expected in terms of memory requirements? Just for comparison, Intel’s Clear Linux, which is Gnome 3 measures 515 M before running anything… So is not MATE expected to be using less, considering it is based on Gnome 2?
– I understand the top toolbar purpose but inclusion of additional bottom toolbar – does not seem that redundant waste? This is considering that running apps can be shown in the same toolbar… E.g. IceWM, Windows, etc… I have a feeling this can be configured in MATE but the mere idea of such waste being default does not instill too much confidence…
I am saying the above as my questions coming from observation as a user, not any criticism or to influence any plans by antiX owners…
Thanks and RegardsLive antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_ParametersBobC
I tried MATE recently with NuTyX. Its ok, I guess, stable but not lean.
I would rather LXQT or XFCE.
LXQT is probably going to run leaner than many of the choices, which is important for people on older hardware.
I tried MATE recently with NuTyX. Its ok, I guess, stable but not lean.
I would rather LXQT or XFCE.
LXQT is probably going to run leaner than many of the choices, which is important for people on older hardware.
Whatever Desktop antiX will end up choosing I am definitely looking forward to it. Not that I am not happy with current IceWM and Fluxbox. They are great to minimize resource requirements but they require lots of work to make them presentable to make a regular desktop, not speaking of expected nowadays functionality, such as integrated capability of networking SMB shares, integrated bluetooth, etc. Current antiX has this all available in separate unintegrated pieces of software, but not as integrated part of the antiX system.
On top of this aesthetics of DE do play significant role in day to day usability. I believe that something can be done with current IceWM and Fluxbox to match aesthetics of Gnome and derivatives but I was not able find such quality composition of Themes, Styles, Fonts, etc. I guess developers of IceWM or Fluxbox did not have aesthetics as priority.
So I think that such desktop as MATE or others can introduce this aesthetics component and I believe these desktops can be made relatively lean in resource requirements with some work, such as what Intel has done with Clear Linux, which is benchmarked as the fastest out there and has Gnome 3 desktop but uses only 515 M memory.
I think it is an opportunity for antiX to come out with truly lean version of mainstream desktop, while retaining lean system infrastructure.
This strategy would move antiX to the most popular Linux systems out there…
Just some of wishful thinking…Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_ParametersAnonymous
xfce is not very light at all, on par with kde plasma while the latter has a lot more bling and much more consistent UI due to a large collection of its own inhouse software.
lxqt is like plasma’s ugly scrawny little cousin. which may suit antix well.
latest mate is still kinda buggy and prone to crashes, especially with the brisk menu.
enlightenment on void fresh boots to 180M; with chrome one tab open, a tad north of 540M, pretty amazingly low. nice UI with lots of configuration. but doesnt play well at all with gtk. problem with running gui apps requiring root privileges – the solution offered on MX doesnt work.
I like adding IceWM to XFCE systems and using some of the XFCE utilities to make up for what isn’t built into IceWM on non-antiX systems. If not XFCE, I look for LXDE or LXQT to work from, doing the same thing. If you don’t have the antiX utilities, you need other programs to take their places.
I realize that is completely different from the ask here, but it works well and is much lighter than using XFCE, LXDE or LXQT on the same system.
I kinda like working with IceWM, and where others say it’s not so pretty, I can’t even see what they are talking about.
I hate slow systems. I’ve seen way too many of those.
I realize that is completely different from the ask here, but it works well and is much lighter than using XFCE, LXDE or LXQT on the same system.
Personally I like such idea, which to my understanding is in effect creating a new light desktop by combining the best parts of IceWM and another desktop’s utilities. If this resolves high resource requirement of other mainstream desktops that is…
To me it was kind of shock when upon trying MATE on antiX memory use jumped from 200M to 1.16G! I thought MATE was one of lightest and this was a surprise… Probably similarly others like XFCE, significant jump in memory use. And my impression was XFCE’s aesthetics were not even any better! There is something wrong with the way these desktops were developed, with no attention to resource requirements…Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_ParametersWith many distro’s I don’t think they worry about how much memory or disk it needs. This is very noticable on older machines, when they take minutes to boot and you think its broken or something. I might try installing things like that, but its not reasonable to run all the time unless you have a super big and fast machine able to make up for the relative lack of performance. Typically, the fancier ones are just painfully slow to me.
Brian Masinick
Desktop Environments almost always consume significantly more resources than any environment with just a window manager and the one or two applications that you are using.
I have never been the type of person that has a lot of window tabs open in my browser and countless windows full of applications running all over my system.
When I actually did development I had a desktop computer with one window for Email, one window for web browsing, a third window for a terminal and a fourth window for an editor. Unless I had to solve it very specific problem I rarely had more than that open.
Now that I no longer develop or test code on a regular basis I rarely have more than one or two Web browser tabs open to read information or respond to Email or forum messages.
--
Brian Masinick
Xecure
With many distro’s I don’t think they worry about how much memory or disk it needs.
This is exacly what I just found out searching for ways to reduce RAM on Mate. The funny thing is that they convince their users of the same idea. An answer I found on manjaro forum for someone asking how to reduce RAM consumption for Mate:
Why do you want to lower it? Are you having issues with running out of RAM?
…
Unused RAM is wasted RAM.
If you want to save RAM, physically remove it from the computer.Now I know why MATE didn’t start reducing memory leaks untill version 1.22. People didn’t care.
About Mate RAM consumption, on a VM with 2GB of RAM I am testing (only buster), I got mate-desktop-environment-core (plus lightdm) to 250MB or RAM for a 1080p resolution. After installing some extras it has gone up to 340 MB.
Once I understand how this environment works and I can change the terminal colors, I will try on a live USB. It has been so long I am very lost using it right now.- This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by Xecure. Reason: wording
antiX Live system enthusiast.
General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.Like MS, they just tell them to buy a faster computer, like cost was no object.
Sorry, that mentality just bothers me…
About Mate RAM consumption, on a VM with 2GB of RAM I am testing (only buster), I got mate-desktop-environment-core (plus lightdm) to 250MB or RAM for a 1080p resolution. After installing some extras it has gone up to 340 MB.
Once I understand how this environment works and I can change the terminal colors, I will try on a live USB.If MATE can be made to use this little memory then I would be very interested how to accomplish this… Provided I can configure not to have two toolbars…
Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_ParametersAR
As the antiX distro is positioning like lightweight system for old or weak computers, then, I think, it should no have any DE’s by default. WM’s are quite enough. But some DE’s should be ready-to-install via Package Installer for whom who has relatively powerful computer and/or who like DE’s. Just like it was till now.
As the antiX distro is positioning like lightweight system for old or weak computers, then, I think, it should no have any DE’s by default. WM’s are quite enough. But some DE’s should be ready-to-install via Package Installer for whom who has relatively powerful computer and/or who like DE’s.
Perhaps I misunderstood but my understanding of the original post was an intent to create a separate edition of antiX, which would have some DE as standard. This would be aimed at typical users who expect DE as assumed provided with distros. That would be for any computer and mainstream users.
Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_ParametersPerhaps I misunderstood but my understanding of the original post was an intent to create a separate edition of antiX, which would have some DE as standard. This would be aimed at typical users who expect DE as assumed provided with distros. That would be for any computer and mainstream users.
Wow! You’re wright! I really missed “separate iso” words in anti’s topic. Sorry.
So, for the separate iso i’d choose KDE. On my desktop computer I use Kubuntu 20.04, and from the start it uses about 465MiB of RAM, as Conky indicates.
- This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by AR.
- This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by AR.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
