<br><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">William Munson wrote:<br>> No reason at all other then its another bloated display manager. You
<br>> would be better off with one of the "lightweight" managers like fluxbox.<br>> Load time is about 1/3 that of Gnome/KDE and it does not load lots of<br>> background tasks to slow your system down.<br>
<br>If the difference between your machine running slowly and acceptably is<br>the difference between fluxbox and KDE then you are either running on<br>very low end hardware or there is something very wrong with your system.
<br><br>Just my 2p<br><br>DC</blockquote><div><br>Yep. both Gnome and KDE (and their associated sub-processes) idle down to basically less than 1% CPU and memory use once launched. I found that using KDE, changing the startup splash to "basic", and using the control center to turn off all the little "helpers" (I found a howto somewhere on the wiki for this) causes KDE to appear for only 1 or 2 seconds before Myth launches and takes over the screen.
<br><br>Overall, it takes Myth longer to launch on my system than it does KDE. I switched because my Gnome config kept getting fouled up for no reason. <br><br>If you're really obsessed over this, the new MythDora let's you choose several of the smaller footprint window managers. I ran MythDora for a year and loved it. I only switched off because I wanted some of the new features and didn't want to wait for MythDora
4.0. <br><br>I run Fedora Core 6 with Myth from the ATRPMS bleeding repo.<br> </div></div>