After the initial release of LXQt, I found that there is a FAQ. How’s the memory usage? Will it become a bloated memory hog because of Qt? Here are some numbers for you.
My test environment is the latest Debian stable installed in VirtualBox with 512 MB of RAM and 1 CPU core assigned. After cold boot, the memory usage is as follows.
The screen resolution is 1280 x 1024. So a wallpaper roughly used 1280x1024x4 bytes = 5MB of RAM. If you don’t set a wallpaper, this number can be lower. Besides, this is a virtual machine so some special modules for vbox are loaded. I turned off printer service and network-manager applet since they’re not used.
Yes, the memory usage slightly increased, but the difference is really negligible. Moreover, LXQt has more features, such as a better program launcher and new power management stuff.
Apparently the gtk+ 2 version uses less memory, but we cannot use gtk+ 2 forever. It’s not a secret that gtk+ 3 is not a memory saver. So, I’d say Qt is really not that bad.
Why yet another DE? Why can’t you do something more innovative? I think the answer for this FAQ is simple.
The following is my personal opinion (not on behalf of other LXQt developers)
Seriously, if a 17 MB memory usage increment can buy us faster development, more active developers [Figure 1], more contributors, and a healthier upstream community, that’s definitely worth it. When I say healthier, I mean those who do not hold a “Follow our way, or go away!” attitude. This is just as important as other technical considerations when you choose a toolkit.
Many people like to argue that Qt is not C++ since it requires a pre-processor. Did anyone tell you that Gtk+ actually uses a preprocessor, too? Check the manpage of “glib-genmarshal” please. Without this pre-processor to generate some code for you, it will be awfully difficult to add signals to your GObjects. That’s not C language, right?
It does not really matter for users what toolkit you’re using given the final result works. Let’s save some time not arguing which is better and focus on what we can do with them.
Recently, PC-BSD developers just reminded us that there is an unmet need for a Qt desktop for BSDs. So, here you go.
As stated earlier, we’re not really Linux-centric. We support Linux better simply because we’re Linux users. Now with some help from several FreeBSD users, things can be different. I installed FreeBSD 10 in Virtualbox last week. After reading some docs and fighting with it we fixed some broken makefiles. Now the major components should work as expected.
Of course, there are still some Linux things which do not work (yet).
Other parts should just work. We hope that we can improve FreeBSD support more. Of course, help from the BSD community is needed.
Since the merge of the LXDE and Razor-Qt teams in July 2013, there has not been any releases to the public. After months of works, the merged product is in a good shape now. It’s quite stable and usable. So we are discussing about the possibility to make the first alpha release for the long awaited DE. The exact date of the release is still under discussion, but we will do it as soon as possible. Since it’s an alpha release, which means it’s for early testers and developers interested, please do not expect too much. Things are expected to be broken and some parts might still need some polishing. For example, translations are not done yet. They will be done before the final release of LXDE-Qt (or LXQt).
p.s.: If someone is willing to help test it on FreeBSD, please let us know. :-)