resources Thread last updated on 2004-07-28 04:35:52

Posted by member 183918 on 2004-07-27 11:28:57

does using litestep improve performance compared to explorer or is it theme dependent?

Posted by member 37809 on 2004-07-27 11:49:51 link

theme dependent

Posted by member 117872 on 2004-07-27 12:00:59 link

Search for minimalist themes if you want extra performance. Otus is one of my favorites, I got mem usage down to 5 megs with it (compared to explorers 13).

Posted by member 103254 on 2004-07-27 12:37:35 link

On average, I get half the memory usgae from ls than from explorer. Some themes/modules are resource hogs though.

Posted by member 12025 on 2004-07-27 12:51:28 link

It does depend on the theme, and other factors that I don't know about. My themes typically run from 2.5-5.5MB, and I have no clue why they change :).

Posted by member 183918 on 2004-07-27 15:48:38 link

thanks good to hear

Posted by member 45783 on 2004-07-28 04:35:52 link

In the past I rationalized my Litestep use by the claims that it was faster and hogged less memory, and being the little hacker-wannabe this was enough. Nowadays, however, my themes have evolved, and though they still consume very small amounts of memory, I definetely cannot say the same about CPU time.

This is of little significance though, as computer processing power has grown exponentially and most LS themes have not matched that.

All in all LS should not be used because it consumes less memory or recources, as I believe both memory and resources are much cheaper than the frustration you experience learning this thing.
Litestep is good because it can do things Explorer cannot.