On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Grant Edwards <<a href="mailto:grante@visi.com">grante@visi.com</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On 2008-07-14, Vincent <<a href="mailto:mailinglists@vinnl.nl">mailinglists@vinnl.nl</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Of course talking light-weightness is not stupid. However, it<br>
> is madness to assume that, because Xfce ran on old computers<br>
> five years ago, Xfce should still run on those same computers<br>
> today even though they've become five years older. "Old<br>
> computers" of today can handle more than "old computers" of<br>
> yesterday.<br>
<br>
</div>Cool. Where do you get one of those computers who's capacity<br>
increases with time? My "old computers" of a few years ago are<br>
the same machines as my "old computers" of today. :)<br>
<font color="#888888"></font></blockquote><div><br>I think something like a 5 year old or 8 year old moving window is completely reasonable. Xfce works great with my P4-3Ghz which is now probably 5 years old. Gnome works, but not nearly as well. But I don't expect XFCE to work well with my Pentium75 from years gone by. Things have to change. But you can still make sure you cater to old machines and define what that means based on the current state of the art.<br>
<br><br><br> <br></div></div><br>