Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- terminal:comparison [2020/12/19 21:50] – [Footprint] senioradmin
+++ terminal:comparison [2021/01/16 22:43] (current) – [Footprint] senioradmin
@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ===== Footprint =====
+On: Artix Linux
-^Command ^Version                          ^USS      ^PSS      ^RSS^
+From low to high in kB
+^Command ^Version ^[[:glossary#USS|USS]] ^[[:glossary#PSS|PSS]] ^[[:glossary#RSS|RSS]]^
 |xterm  |362   |4112 |5277  |8800|
 |mlterm  |3.9.0                          |7200     |8744    |12500|
-|xterm (using xft Font)|362 |9188|10356|13988|
+|xterm (using xft font)|362 |9188|10356|13988|
 |urxvt  |9.22                          |9160     |10418    |13972|
@@ Line 18: / Line 21: @@
 ===== Recommendation =====
-Although xterm has the lowest memory footprint, it has only so when using bitmap fonts. Those have some disadvantages as not relly being scalable. When using xft fonts the memory usage of xterm rises considerably.
+Although xterm has the lowest memory footprint, it has only so when using bitmap fonts. Those have some disadvantages as not really being scalable. When using xft fonts the memory usage of xterm rises considerably.
-urxvt was one a lightweight alternatove to xterm. Now it has a bigger footprint then the mother of all X11 terminal emulators.
+urxvt was one a lightweight alternative to xterm. Now it has a bigger footprint then the mother of all X11 terminal emulators.
 mlterm was surprisingly the terminal emulator with the lowest footprint when using xft fonts. Additionally it offers configuration by using a command line tool for experienced users as well as a GUI. So this is the recommended terminal emulator.