After decades of Linux the best desktop environment is still Xfce, something that gets updated every 5 years almost...

After decades of Linux the best desktop environment is still Xfce, something that gets updated every 5 years almost. How is this possible? Why is gnome so heavy on ram usage? Why is KDE so bloated? Why is lxqt so trash where if you change a thing or two you almost break it? Honestly this has to be the weakest point of Linux, no wonder many people use tilling windows instead of complete DE's.

Attached: 666666.png (1200x1414, 259K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=KVndsD3Bomw
ubuntu-mate.org/
wiki.xfce.org/releng/4.14/roadmap
blog.xfce.org/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

LXQt just werked last time I used it.

XFCE really is the best. No matter how many other DEs I try, I always end up on XFCE.

>using a DE
i use i3 btw

gnome is still lighter and faster than windows.
nobody cares about your snowflake outdated desktop in unixporn

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

based && GNU/Pilled

Attached: rms_interjection.jpg (1600x900, 464K)

>i3
go back to Jow Forumsunixporn

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'.
One guy, Linus Torvalds (me), used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you? (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system.

By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use.

However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution.
Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example. Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.

Based and Tuxpilled.

Attached: file.png (900x640, 300K)

>Why is KDE so bloated?
it's not 2005

KDE is really light these days, but what I understand when people tell it is bloated is in the sense that it pulls a lot of dependencies/packages and the software is 'bloated' with settings.

KDE is one of the worst experiences i've had on Linux, so buggy! No wonder GNOME is a better choice.

>KDE
>bloated
even with chromium open I rarely pass over 1GB of RAM usage ever

Attached: wat2.png (1600x900, 319K)

Has XFCE fixed their screen tearing problem yet?

it's shit bloated and buggy, gnome is better. but if you like windows like install windows

I'm using Gnome right now, but I disagree with all this "KDE is buggy".
Last KDE versions are great.

I will try it in a VM then. But gnome/budgie is comfy

cinnamon

>xfeces

slightly unrelated, but does anyone know of an impartial (well, as much as it can be. you know what I mean) comparison of resource usage of a default plasma 5 install, win 7/10, and OSX desktop environments? I've always wondered how they compared but every comparison I've seen is either some Jow Forums autist yelling about customization or some pajeet raving about how much smoother win 10 is than 7 and how everyone should upgrade

the lack of aerosnap just made it a deal breaker for me

Yeah, I used to shitpost about Gnome but I'm actually liking it.
It seems retarded at first, but then it grows on you. I think it's just like autism.

I actually just installed a new distro yesterday that uses XFCE and I was having some major screen tearing at first. I ended up setting up nvidia proprietary drivers and then enabling "force full composition pipline" and I have not noticed any more tearing since doing so. Out of the box it seems the tearing issue is still present without some form of vsync enabled.

>Posting fabricated quotes on the internet.

Attached: 1532359600861.gif (342x342, 777K)

When I used it I just used compton to fix the screentearing.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

COUNTERED, ASSHOLE!

Attached: brainless(1).jpg (540x521, 44K)

We use window managers because the entire idea of a DE is garbage. It's impossible to make a DE that isn't bloated resource wasting garbage because otherwise it would be a wm.

none of the things you said are true today faggot

desktop environments are plebeian

patricians use window managers

these

That's the window managers job. LXQt does not ship with one, it just defaults to Openbox. You can always use another one or script it.

Thank you, Richard.

I admit that I am totally wrong. It is indeed GNU/Linux, as it should be.

Everything I am I owe to you. Without the generous, benevolent work of you and the FSF, I would be flipping hamburgers in Helsinki.

I am not even worthy of washing your feet with my tongue.

Thank you for correcting my disgraceful errors.

Love,
L.

I have xubuntu in a core2duo imac.

I use a WM but if I were forced to use a DE I would pick xfce in a heartbeat.

KDE isn't bloated but it's default UI is a clusterfuck. It's also still somewhat buggy.

They fixed it over a year ago when xfwm 4.13 was released. Mint Xfce enables vsync by default.

Compton is garbage and no longer necessary.

youtube.com/watch?v=KVndsD3Bomw

Attached: 1549853890954.jpg (600x600, 73K)

This looks soo cool...

MATE is the best DE.
ubuntu-mate.org/

I've been meaning to try it but I like gnome 3.
mate looks like an usable version of Xfce/KDE

there is literally nothing wrong with being a pedophile

I started using MATE because I hated Gnome 3 and I missed Gnome 2.

Caring about RAM usage of DEs is autistic as fuck when all of them use basically nothing.

I accidentally used a Gnome live CD on a server instead of a netinstall CD and I got about 1 frame per 2 seconds

Gnome 3 used to leak memory like a motherfucker though. You're right though. Chances are that your browser will rape most of your system's memory anyway.

not him but this, any DE that uses a consistent ammount of memory is fine.
No DE uses crazy lots of ram in linux. Personally I like gnome, but for example the debian stretch version has the memory problem, it starts at 120MB and goes up trough the session in Xorg. You have to reset the session, pretty bad.
Right now it's fine. I don't know if there is going to be any surprises but Xfce is what I would use to be sure it works. KDE is a joke full of bugs.

What DE should I use if I only have 2gb of ram?

Fuck you guys, KDE is based. I use it as my daily driver and it isn't bloated in any way. It's programs just werk, and it's to date the only DE that supports hidpi out of the box. All you fuckers complain about bloat and RAM usage, then turn around and use Discord and Slack. Have you even stopped to use KDE Neon recently instead of screaming some bs info that you heard from other anons through a game of telephone? Use KDE now and comment with reasons or your "opinions" are worth less than what I'd pay for GNOME (hint: 0)

Linux is a kernel

Wasn't nthere an xfce update this month that moves everything to gtk3? Where is it?

Attached: 1553919112643.png (552x688, 358K)

XFCE, of course.

XFCE 4.14 aims to have everything ported to GTK 3. wiki.xfce.org/releng/4.14/roadmap

I think the new xubuntu has it.
blog.xfce.org/

>actually good looking DE
>based on fucking gtk
>and is literal chinese botnet
So what gives? qt port when?

Attached: deepin.png (1920x1080, 2.83M)

>Why is KDE so bloated?
Why would someone just go on the internet and tell lies

on laptops, the lack of actual backlight control (only dialling down the gamma) is a dealbreaker.
its support for multiple monitors is also very rudimentary.