Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Features Coming In The Xfce 4.12 Desktop

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

  • mrugiero
    replied
    Originally posted by chrisb View Post
    Agreed on installing Xfce rather than xubuntu-desktop-task or whatever. You will miss a few things - WiFi manager, volume slider etc but those can be installed later. I wish every desktop had a minimal install option. IMHO one of the great mistakes of the Linux desktop was the belief that every desktop had to have its own suite of applications. Notepad, calculator, text editor, web browser, email client, media player, search system, IM client, package manager, office apps, graphical editors, etc. KDE even developed its own IDE!

    We would've been much better off if desktops had stuck to being thin, fast, optimised ui bases for running common software, instead of trying to build these massive cathedrals.
    I *think* this comes from times where you couldn't use apps designed for one desktop in another, because there was no standard hints for the WM to manage them. Right now, I think some make sense to be desktop dependent (like the notepad and the calculator, maybe), but office suits I think it should be one aiming to nice features and one aiming to be lightweight, and that's it.

    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Besides that, I don't think anyone else is making specific programs. LXDE and XFCE share the programs to some extent. The WMs, like Fluxbox, don't trouble themselves with programs to begin with. Enlightenment is doing something, but I never used E17 so I can't really comment on that (although I hear good things about it).
    Actually, LXDE is pretty thin in that aspect, there isn't even an *official* WM for LXDE, but is supposed to be used with the one you want (I tried it with Openbox, Fluxbox and IceWM). The default is usually Openbox.

    Leave a comment:


  • GreatEmerald
    replied
    Originally posted by chrisb View Post
    Yes but the apps don't need to be part of the desktop project - they can be third party apps with the overall end user desktop environment potentially put together by someone else (as the reality is with distributions today). It is very telling that the most popular apps (chromium, Firefox, Thunderbird, Skype, mplayer, vnc, open libre office) aren't part of a specific desktop, whereas their counterparts (gnome office, koffice, epiphany, konqueror, kmail, evolution, kCalendar etc) became less popular. Why did we need to have desktop specific web browsers and office suites? What good did it ever do us? As if writing all this software wasn't enough work already, we had to do it for every desktop.
    Only for two desktops. KDE and GNOME. I think the reason why that happened is due to the same reason why GNOME existed to begin with: licensing issues. at the time Qt was not as open as it is these days, so people created the GNOME project as the "more open than KDE" desktop environment. So while KDE had apps written in Qt, it was deemed insufficient by the GNOME camp and those programs were remade in GTK. Then as new programs emerged, given that the base desktops used GTK and Qt, with their own integration and theming issues and what not, it made sense to keep the whole separation.

    Now for XFCE, their programs have a different goal in mind: light weight. They remake programs and make sure that they don't have unnecessary bloat. Since their design decisions come from GNOME, they use GTK for this. That results in another separation when it comes to Razor-qt: their desktop is Qt, but loading the KDE libraries is super slow, so they also want their own light-weight Qt apps.

    Besides that, I don't think anyone else is making specific programs. LXDE and XFCE share the programs to some extent. The WMs, like Fluxbox, don't trouble themselves with programs to begin with. Enlightenment is doing something, but I never used E17 so I can't really comment on that (although I hear good things about it).

    Leave a comment:


  • Serge
    replied
    Originally posted by Artemis3 View Post
    Someone tested memory usage of basic desktop installs:


    I use Xubuntu but switched the desktop to E17, and the memory used went down from 150ish mb down to about 50 mb; looks better AND has more features than KDE, which is a memory hog and takes ages to load, comparable to Unity and Gnome 3 of course.

    But aside from E17 which might look intimidating for having so much customization (like KDE), XFCE, and LXDE are very good. For true old machines, you might go with IceWM or similar.

    The base system also helps. Instead of Xubuntu, try ubuntu minimal, (pick option command line only) then just the apt-get the package xfce4. Or switch distro if you don't care about Canonical repositories. I'm hoping for Bodhi Linux to improve, but they need to fix PXE install using their ISO. You might also try the Linux Mint flavors.
    I've seen that chart before and as I recall, the person who put it together did not provide much background information other than that those were just the default installs from the distro he / she was using, and did not specify what distro it was. I would be very curious to see just what is included in those default installs, and in the default session launcher configurations, by his / her distro's packagers.

    Pound-for-pound comparisons of components make sense (for example, file manager vs file manager, wm vs wm, and so on). As it is, comparing such "DEs" is too much apples and oranges, and this is only made harder when we don't even know what the default installs and sessions include.

    Leave a comment:


  • chrisb
    replied
    Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
    Having those applications what is the very definition of a desktop environment. If you don't want to use something like that just use a simple WM.
    Yes but the apps don't need to be part of the desktop project - they can be third party apps with the overall end user desktop environment potentially put together by someone else (as the reality is with distributions today). It is very telling that the most popular apps (chromium, Firefox, Thunderbird, Skype, mplayer, vnc, open libre office) aren't part of a specific desktop, whereas their counterparts (gnome office, koffice, epiphany, konqueror, kmail, evolution, kCalendar etc) became less popular. Why did we need to have desktop specific web browsers and office suites? What good did it ever do us? As if writing all this software wasn't enough work already, we had to do it for every desktop.

    Leave a comment:


  • dee.
    replied
    Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
    Cinnamon having only a bit more than XFCE?

    Might not be quite as low as in the chart, but it definitely fits in the spot between XFCE and Razor-Qt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vim_User
    replied
    Originally posted by chrisb View Post
    Agreed on installing Xfce rather than xubuntu-desktop-task or whatever. You will miss a few things - WiFi manager, volume slider etc but those can be installed later. I wish every desktop had a minimal install option. IMHO one of the great mistakes of the Linux desktop was the belief that every desktop had to have its own suite of applications. Notepad, calculator, text editor, web browser, email client, media player, search system, IM client, package manager, office apps, graphical editors, etc. KDE even developed its own IDE!

    We would've been much better off if desktops had stuck to being thin, fast, optimised ui bases for running common software, instead of trying to build these massive cathedrals.
    Having those applications what is the very definition of a desktop environment. If you don't want to use something like that just use a simple WM.

    Leave a comment:


  • chrisb
    replied
    Originally posted by Artemis3 View Post
    The base system also helps. Instead of Xubuntu, try ubuntu minimal, (pick option command line only) then just the apt-get the package xfce4. Or switch distro if you don't care about Canonical repositories. I'm hoping for Bodhi Linux to improve, but they need to fix PXE install using their ISO. You might also try the Linux Mint flavors.
    Agreed on installing Xfce rather than xubuntu-desktop-task or whatever. You will miss a few things - WiFi manager, volume slider etc but those can be installed later. I wish every desktop had a minimal install option. IMHO one of the great mistakes of the Linux desktop was the belief that every desktop had to have its own suite of applications. Notepad, calculator, text editor, web browser, email client, media player, search system, IM client, package manager, office apps, graphical editors, etc. KDE even developed its own IDE!

    We would've been much better off if desktops had stuck to being thin, fast, optimised ui bases for running common software, instead of trying to build these massive cathedrals.

    Leave a comment:


  • Redi44
    replied
    Originally posted by Artemis3 View Post
    ...
    Cinnamon having only a bit more than XFCE?

    Leave a comment:


  • spacetoilet
    replied
    Originally posted by Artemis3 View Post
    Someone tested memory usage of basic desktop installs:


    I use Xubuntu but switched the desktop to E17, and the memory used went down from 150ish mb down to about 50 mb; looks better AND has more features than KDE, which is a memory hog and takes ages to load, comparable to Unity and Gnome 3 of course.

    But aside from E17 which might look intimidating for having so much customization (like KDE), XFCE, and LXDE are very good. For true old machines, you might go with IceWM or similar.

    The base system also helps. Instead of Xubuntu, try ubuntu minimal, (pick option command line only) then just the apt-get the package xfce4. Or switch distro if you don't care about Canonical repositories. I'm hoping for Bodhi Linux to improve, but they need to fix PXE install using their ISO. You might also try the Linux Mint flavors.
    cant wait for E17 to be on Wayland to test it

    Leave a comment:


  • Artemis3
    replied
    Originally posted by verde View Post
    XFCE is a fantastic desktop environment for hardware-outdated systems! It consumes just 130-150mb of RAM on x32 versions and its GPU requirements are very basic.
    Someone tested memory usage of basic desktop installs:


    I use Xubuntu but switched the desktop to E17, and the memory used went down from 150ish mb down to about 50 mb; looks better AND has more features than KDE, which is a memory hog and takes ages to load, comparable to Unity and Gnome 3 of course.

    But aside from E17 which might look intimidating for having so much customization (like KDE), XFCE, and LXDE are very good. For true old machines, you might go with IceWM or similar.

    The base system also helps. Instead of Xubuntu, try ubuntu minimal, (pick option command line only) then just the apt-get the package xfce4. Or switch distro if you don't care about Canonical repositories. I'm hoping for Bodhi Linux to improve, but they need to fix PXE install using their ISO. You might also try the Linux Mint flavors.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X