Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Xfce 4.12 Desktop Release Ends Up Behind Schedule

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

  • korrode
    replied
    Originally posted by ArtKun View Post
    I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't like *buntu at all, but Xubuntu is definitely the best "out-of-the-box" Xfce Linux distro.
    Have they fixed it yet so it's resource footprint isn't the same size as a full Gnome install?

    In my opinion; the only argument for calling Xubuntu the "best" out-of-the-box Xfce experience has little to do with how well Xfce has been pre-configured and setup. The underlying Ubuntu infrastructure is what makes it a good choice for joe-user. Ubuntu's large software repo, support and being start-point for popular commercial software endeavours (eg. Steam) is what would sway me to recommend it. If we're going to debate only on the merits of the Xfce pre-configuration, and not consider the benefits of the underlying distro (which have nothing to do with Xfce itself); I don't see how Xubuntu is better than the offerings from Linux Mint (which retains much or all of the underlying Ubuntu benefits) or Manjaro (which gets the underlying Arch benefits, and also "non-free" stuff like Flash and nvidia drivers literally out-of-the-box - they're on the disc and even operational when just running it as a 'LiveCD'), both of which offer better system responsiveness and general performance than Xubuntu, last I checked.

    Leave a comment:


  • ArtKun
    replied
    Originally posted by korrode View Post
    No.
    Bad.
    Don't do that.

    Last i looked at Xubuntu it was Xfce after Canonical had severely beaten it with the bloat stick.
    I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't like *buntu at all, but Xubuntu is definitely the best "out-of-the-box" Xfce Linux distro.

    Leave a comment:


  • korrode
    replied
    Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
    xubuntu
    No.
    Bad.
    Don't do that.

    Last i looked at Xubuntu it was Xfce after Canonical had severely beaten it with the bloat stick.

    Leave a comment:


  • gilboa
    replied
    Originally posted by JS987 View Post
    gtk3 is useless if it doesn't keep backward compatibility between minor releases like 3.4 and 3.6
    http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/opinion/a...spiracy-theory
    I've got a fairly large python application that uses Gtk-3 via PyGI and I can say that I had any issues moving from say, Fedora 15 to Fedora 18.
    Granted, its not a big application and some of the underlining changes might be handled by PyGI, but I at least in my experience, Gtk-3 is far from being useless.

    BTW, my actual desktops either run XFCE 4.10 or KDE 4.10.

    - Gilboa

    Leave a comment:


  • gilboa
    replied
    Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
    Standard response. No, it was a suggestion not an order for anyone to do anything lol. Besides, it's probably easier to just stick with a gtk2+ distro then.
    For now, people who really dislike Gtk-2 can stick to LTS distro's such as RHEL/CentOS or Ubuntu LTS.
    But in the long term, using an old toolkit with zero support and possible security vulnerabilities that no-one will ever fix is a very bad idea.

    - Gilboa

    Leave a comment:


  • JS987
    replied
    Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
    Just what the linux desktop needs right now is more toolkit fragmentation. gtk3 may have its problems, but forking gtk2 would be even worse.
    gtk3 is useless if it doesn't keep backward compatibility between minor releases like 3.4 and 3.6
    http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/opinion/a...spiracy-theory

    Leave a comment:


  • Rexilion
    replied
    Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
    Just what the linux desktop needs right now is more toolkit fragmentation. gtk3 may have its problems, but forking gtk2 would be even worse.
    Yes, and the other 50% of the Linux crowd claims that: choice is good!. Well, here it is! Look at the display servers: X, Mir and Wayland. Toolkits GTK3+, QT, Enlightenment etc. Look at the office suites. Multimedia applications. But most of all, look at the huge amount of different distro's.

    If people want to 'waste' time on fragmentation then let them be. If it works really well, the project will become important. If it's not important to everyone else but you, you are free to maintain it.

    Leave a comment:


  • bwat47
    replied
    Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
    Time to fork GTK+2 then .
    Just what the linux desktop needs right now is more toolkit fragmentation. gtk3 may have its problems, but forking gtk2 would be even worse.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rexilion
    replied
    Originally posted by gilboa View Post
    I assume that you're volunteering?
    Standard response. No, it was a suggestion not an order for anyone to do anything lol. Besides, it's probably easier to just stick with a gtk2+ distro then.

    Leave a comment:


  • gilboa
    replied
    Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
    Time to fork GTK+2 then .
    I assume that you're volunteering?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X