4 ms·
The claim is Mate can do almost everything this DE does, so switching to yet another wannabe Mac DE isn't worth the hassle. (I'd be interested had they broke aw
by culebron21 2y ago
The claim is Mate can do almost everything this DE does, so switching to yet another wannabe Mac DE isn't worth the hassle. (I'd be interested had they broke away from this ubiquitous Mac mimicry.)
- jklinger410 2y agoAh so I guess XFCE, KDE, and MATE are all just pretty much the same DE then.
- loa_in_ 2y agoOut of those XFCE supports basic theming, etc. It's very usable even on most modest machines. KDE and MATE support all XFCE does, but they have each their own community driven ecosystem of extensions that are not cross-supported: - KDE has https://store.kde.org/browse https://store.kde.org/browse , and non-federated too - MATE has a variety of non-federated plugins with no centralized-store like Compiz (which has it's own plugin ecosystem https://www.compiz-fusion.org/wiki_subdomain/welcome.html https://www.compiz-fusion.org/wiki_subdomain/welcome.html), and more KDE is fully based on graphics accelerated drawing, it is expected AFAIK. MATE is mostly software-rendered unless extended with Compiz. Basically, yeah. They can all be made to look and feel identical to each other, and their functionalities are supersets of MacOS launcher functionality set.
- culebron21 2y agoExactly. I switched from XFCE to MATE only because the former was very buggy. Except for their control panels, the differences are cosmetic.