Hi all,<br><br>for those interested:<br><br>I've done a basic speed comparison with QtE based on a SHR build (the lite image, many things stripped from it, so it is comparable with the FSO nox image), the FSO nox image and QtMoko (the debian version created by Radek). Since I compared 2.6.28 kernel versions, I didn't include the current qt-extended-improved version from Karadog.<br>
The SHR and FSO images were installed using my install script. QtMoko already came prepared :-)<br>I ran all 3 versions from a user perspective (so no console work done after install). Since all 3 use the same QtE I'm not commeting on ease-of-use or menu structure or stuff alike.<br>
<br>1) SHR image: had some issues installing the correct atd version, after that it worked ok. Interface seemed sluggish, although resume seemed better than the rest (because on resume, you immediately had an image, even though it took a second before that image became responsive).<br>
2) QtMoko: interface also very slow (probably the kernel is not yet fully optimized built for openmoko, or maybe qtopia 4.5 is the cullprit). Sometimes the impression that it missed (even refused) the touching of an icon, even on the homescreen (btw Radek: delete of a recorded voice note crashed that app for me ...). Launching other apps also slow.<br>
3) FSO: you guessed it, the best :-) I tested the basic nox image (from April 5th, since later version don't have ssh working anymore) and the latest andy-tracking kernel. Interface and apps are respond within acceptable user-experience-timeframes.<br>
<br>The 2.6.24 version of Radek is still ok, since that's the only version where bluetooth works reliably from within QtE. Even on 2.6.28 bluetooth is working ok (probably better, since lots of bluetooth bugfixes made it to the mainstream kernel and bluez4 is more stable than bluez3), but QtE is not compatible with bluez4 due to different dbus calls/responses. Work is needed here and any volunteer is welcome.<br>
<br>Franky<br>