Re: Why is RH9 slower than Windows98SE. Any advice?

["Shaun T. Erickson" <ste ste-land com>]

Reuben D. Budiardja wrote:
> And I'll say it again, X + another lightweight WM is fast. This alone is proof 
> that X is fine. Because if X also sucks, then you can put anything on it, it 
> will still sucks.

Yes. X is not particularly slow. It's what Window Manger/Desktop 
Environment that a vendor chooses to layer on top of it, that makes it 
appear slow.

For example, Mac OS X uses X, but the Aqua Window Manger/Desktop 
Environment is very fast, so the whole thing is fast.

So the focus needs to be on the Window Manger/Desktop Environment, not X.

	-ste