Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clear Linux Switches From Xfce To GNOME, Benchmarks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GdeR
    replied
    Originally posted by eggbert View Post
    xfce is barely usable. I'm surprised anyone puts up with it. It's damn near impossible to resize a window by click+dragging the corner of the window. You have to be laser pinpoint accurate and get your mouse pointer on the exact corner pixel. Unfortunately, I've found you have to resize windows often in xfce as they often open in inexplicably weird sizes. And then there's the broken tear-ridden compositor and random thunar crashes...

    Not a Gnome fan, but it's 100 times better than that mess.
    Usually I just Alt+RightClick and Drag.. this is how you're supposed to resize windows on Xfce. You don't need that much precision if you do that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Griffin

    I can't even change basic things without gnome tweak, so what the hell are you talking about? There's also no point in making themes, because they break api all the time. Gnome app store is a joke application. Ubuntu has much better equivalent.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    @griffin

    So, you're denying facts, aren't you? They chose unstable DE with serious problems. I feel sorry for their users until problems are fixed. There's a chance Canonical will make Gnome usable again like they did with Gnome 2. However, I don't think they'll be able to fix technical problems like huge memory leaks all over the place.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Griffin View Post
    Dungeon. Gnome 3.22 is ready for RHEL because Gnome is not overly bloated and unaudited like most KDE5 stuff.

    KDE5 stuff is not allowed in SLE or RHEL because of this. See the point?
    Gnome is not audited at all and it's much more bloated than KDE. I showed you this before. It's just developed by Red Hat friendly guys and this is the reason it's enforced in distributions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    leipero

    How do you know most people don't configure their DE's? Oh, KDE is customizable and this is problem for you? For sane people lack of ability to customize is the problem. Gnome isn't customizable, because it's based on gtk crap which makes things really complicated. Don't fool us it's an advantage. It's huge downside.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Griffin View Post
    Peppercats. Go figure. A usable linux desktop can't be heavily customizable. You will run out of developer resources.
    KDE is the most usable desktop. If Gnome doesn't have enough menpower it's Gnome problem. However, how can you say Gnome is usable? It suffers from huge memory leaks and Mutter performance problems. What's worse those memory leaks aren't fixed since years. If they fix this mesd it will be quite good DE. However, I'm afraid main problems are in its core libraries.

    Leave a comment:


  • suberimakuri
    replied
    muncrief , what file manager do you predominantly use on XFCE?

    Leave a comment:


  • muncrief
    replied
    Well, I certainly hope XFCE continues to be developed as it's the only GUI that doesn't seem like it's trying to emulate Windows 8/10. I mean sheesh, I could live with a hit on performance but not Windows 8/10 again. I've spent years developing my own custom flat theme, now running on Xubuntu 16.04.2, and it's absolutely beautiful!

    And by the way, the Thunar crash problem when renaming files was fixed awhile ago, and in any case there are quite a few other file managers you can use if you don't like it.

    I really enjoy making my desktop work and look they way I want it to, and unfortunately Gnome and KDE seem to fight customization every inch of the way. Even Mate and Cinnamon seem fairly locked down nowadays.

    My fear is that Microsoft has set a bad example for everyone, and yet many developers still seem to want to follow them. I have no idea why since their last few GUIs have been almost universally panned.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guilden_NL
    replied
    Last time I checked XFCE it was inflexible hog. I went Lubuntu over it for a 7 yr old netbook and an 11 yr old laptop.

    I've been using Mint with Cinnamon for about 7 years. The latest kernel update threw my five monitor setup into a tizzy, so I thought I'd give a bunch of the others a quick run-through to see what shape they're in. I started using Linux in 1994, so I've seen a lot. The mess that I went through with KDE in both Fedora and OpenSuse told me that it has not improved one iota since I last gave it a spin around 2009.

    Furthermore, both of those distros have an unbelievably rotten partition manager. I work with several thousand RHEL servers every day, so I'm very familiar with RH's partition management. Therefore I was extremely amazed that the Fedora approach was worse than what I first experienced back around 17 years ago when Red Hat under the name Red Hat, first came out.

    After fussing around with those, I can understand why more people have not adopted Linux as a desktop. I deem them both absolute bottom of the septic tank garbage. And KDE in its current state, is the corn kernels stuck in that waste.

    I don't have time to mess about with many distros and many desktops, so for now, I'm going to stick with Mint Cinnamon and Lubuntu, based on the profile of the client.

    I understand the move from XFCE, and though Gnome isn't great, I can't argue their move to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • leipero
    replied
    Originally posted by DebianXFCE Jr View Post

    The part: "With some tweaks and extensions".
    A DE should have that by default. It's like stitching genitals to castrated person. I'm with you but on absolutely on the other side of the fence. I don't understand how DE that ships with pre-configured shortcut suite can be called innovative?
    And it's not only about performance. Personally I'm Mate/Xfce user and I find those des superior to gnome3 anytime.
    Most people do not customize their DE's, and DE is made to manage your applications/windows and stay out of your way, that's about it. GNOME 3 can be customized, you can change your background, privacy settings, display settings, power settings and most important settings in general. You can use tweak tool and change themes, fonts, layout and lot's of other things..., from that perspective it makes sense, users who know about theming posibility (in general) and can find themes, can easilly find tweak tool also, the only real feature that is missing (probably) is font settings, that should be in gnome control center.

    I don't know about XFCE, I didn't used it more than 1 hour in total, but how could DE's such as MATE (old gnome) and KDE be better with completely irrelevant settings that are not centralized but all over the place in sub-menus, tabs etc. (complete disorganized nightmare...) but without meaningful privacy option be better than DE with all relevant options available out of the box? I remmember when using MATE i had to delete "recently-used.xbel" and create folder in order to prevent dumb panel of tracing documents, how is that fucntional? On KDE also, but much worse, it's racing everything, and tehre's literally no option of preventing panel of colecting recent doc's and applications, in GNOME 3, you can completely disable any tracking by simply pressing off switch in control-center, privacy. Now enlighten me, how are DE's that lack some basic features and have some completely irrelevant disorganized settings better than the one that does not lack at least basic features?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X