5 ms·

"Totally configurable, which is ESSENTIAL for new users who want their Linux desktop configured to emulate the exact rendering of Windows (XP or 7)" Funny argu

"Totally configurable, which is ESSENTIAL for new users who want their Linux desktop configured to emulate the exact rendering of Windows (XP or 7)" Funny argument after Windows 8. So KDE gets marketed as ressort for confused windows xp users? I enjoyed customizing my workspace for years. Now I use gnome shell, I relax and don't waste brain cycles on irrelevant stuff like which icons show up here or there. I don't use my desktop to do work or anything meaningful.

subsection1h 9y ago
If you really enjoyed customizing your desktop environment for years, you would have graduated to a tiling window manager. And if you had been smart about it, you would have chosen one with a stable API. And if you had done so, you wouldn't need to "waste brain cycles" configuring your environment because it would be a solved problem. But since your example of desktop configuration is "icons show up here or there", I assume you never graduated to a real window manager.
- hanklazard 9y ago
  Is there one that you recommend?
  - Sylos 9y ago
    Many people recommend i3wm to start out on, because it has good documentation. Personally, I'll run away screaming from reading any sort of manual on how to use software, rather than just dicking around with it, so I only really managed to get into tiling WMs with AwesomeWM, which is still relatively graphical.
    - hanklazard 9y ago
      Thanks! I'm going to check out AwesomeWM.
simion314 9y ago
Configuring KDE and apps is more then GUI customization. The file manager has many options that anyone that does any work would be useful, like tabs, splitting the screen, icons/list/detailed view of files, opening a terminal inside the file manager,previews, FTP integrations and all of this is an option, including that you can configure the toolbars to show/hide buttons. Other example(maybe other DEs have this too) I can have tabs in the terminal app (konsole) and in the tabs that I am SSHed in I use different color scheme(with red on black) so I am aware and not run dangerous commands on a remote server. My point is that a KDE user is not one that chooses KDE over Gnome due to UI but is more about functionality.
- stewbrew 9y ago
  At what costs wrt ressource usage & startup time do you get these features? IIRC KDE comes last in all tests about DE performance. I could become potentially interested in KDE if this had changed over the years.
  - simion314 9y ago
    Startup is not important if you start the DE once a day, it is like saying Notepad is better then Visual Studio for coding because it starts faster. As of CPU and memory use KDE is not the most bloated DE, This is a myth so you should recheck things with latest versions of KDE,GNOME,XFCE and the others.(use what is better for you but you should not stay away from KDE because of memory or CPU usage) I agree that a WM will have less features and eat less memory so if you do not need the features of KDE use a WM. Also you can disable some of KDE features like compositing, akonadi if those are the things you do not need.
    - stewbrew 9y ago
      I think this was the test I vaguely remembered. Anyway, such a test probably doesn't really say much. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubu-1704-desktops&num=3 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubu-1704...
digi_owl 9y ago
I have landed on IceWM over the years. Its Win9X/2k-ist behavior fits me just fine, as i try to ween myself off anything involving the big DEs.
- bwbw223 9y ago
  i3 is fun :P
ssivark 9y ago
I’ve been using Gnome Shell for the last several years, but recently got annoyed enough to switch to KDE/Plasma for a while. Gnome Shell is okay if you buy into the exact configuration/vision it presents. If you want anything slightly different, the extension system is a clusterfuck, as an end user. Extensions crash, don’t work with updated versions of Gnome Shell, etc. And several simple functional needs such as hide window title bars (to save screen space) were a pain to get working correctly.
- youseecomrade 9y ago
  And you start fearing what they might remove next instead of eagerly waiting for new features. It's like using Google products.

subsection1h 9y ago

If you really enjoyed customizing your desktop environment for years, you would have graduated to a tiling window manager. And if you had been smart about it, you would have chosen one with a stable API. And if you had done so, you wouldn't need to "waste brain cycles" configuring your environment because it would be a solved problem. But since your example of desktop configuration is "icons show up here or there", I assume you never graduated to a real window manager.

hanklazard 9y ago
Is there one that you recommend?
- Sylos 9y ago
  Many people recommend i3wm to start out on, because it has good documentation. Personally, I'll run away screaming from reading any sort of manual on how to use software, rather than just dicking around with it, so I only really managed to get into tiling WMs with AwesomeWM, which is still relatively graphical.
  - hanklazard 9y ago
    Thanks! I'm going to check out AwesomeWM.

simion314 9y ago

Configuring KDE and apps is more then GUI customization. The file manager has many options that anyone that does any work would be useful, like tabs, splitting the screen, icons/list/detailed view of files, opening a terminal inside the file manager,previews, FTP integrations and all of this is an option, including that you can configure the toolbars to show/hide buttons. Other example(maybe other DEs have this too) I can have tabs in the terminal app (konsole) and in the tabs that I am SSHed in I use different color scheme(with red on black) so I am aware and not run dangerous commands on a remote server. My point is that a KDE user is not one that chooses KDE over Gnome due to UI but is more about functionality.

stewbrew 9y ago
At what costs wrt ressource usage & startup time do you get these features? IIRC KDE comes last in all tests about DE performance. I could become potentially interested in KDE if this had changed over the years.
- simion314 9y ago
  Startup is not important if you start the DE once a day, it is like saying Notepad is better then Visual Studio for coding because it starts faster. As of CPU and memory use KDE is not the most bloated DE, This is a myth so you should recheck things with latest versions of KDE,GNOME,XFCE and the others.(use what is better for you but you should not stay away from KDE because of memory or CPU usage) I agree that a WM will have less features and eat less memory so if you do not need the features of KDE use a WM. Also you can disable some of KDE features like compositing, akonadi if those are the things you do not need.
  - stewbrew 9y ago
    I think this was the test I vaguely remembered. Anyway, such a test probably doesn't really say much. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubu-1704-desktops&num=3 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubu-1704...

digi_owl 9y ago

I have landed on IceWM over the years. Its Win9X/2k-ist behavior fits me just fine, as i try to ween myself off anything involving the big DEs.

bwbw223 9y ago
i3 is fun :P

ssivark 9y ago

I’ve been using Gnome Shell for the last several years, but recently got annoyed enough to switch to KDE/Plasma for a while. Gnome Shell is okay if you buy into the exact configuration/vision it presents. If you want anything slightly different, the extension system is a clusterfuck, as an end user. Extensions crash, don’t work with updated versions of Gnome Shell, etc. And several simple functional needs such as hide window title bars (to save screen space) were a pain to get working correctly.

youseecomrade 9y ago
And you start fearing what they might remove next instead of eagerly waiting for new features. It's like using Google products.