LXDE

Why is it so comfy, and why did the developers drop it in favor of the much worse LXQt?

Attached: LXDE_desktop_full.png (801x601, 260K)

>the much worse LXQt?
This is what bugs me the most.
I hope someone forks the original LXDE, or continues it. Because so far LXQt is complete garbage.

why is LXQt garbage?

It's basically a fucking KDE but ugly.

You guys seem to be new....

It's like that. Lxde, as a gtk based desktop envrioment is 2d. It already won't work proberly on dri drivers on Linux. You'll get screen tearing and stuff. While you can still use it in x11, there is Almost no chance for it to run on Weston. Qt supports 3d so it's easier to "port" it to qt than gtk3+.

You'll need 3d accerelation. Because there are no good open 3d drivers you'll need binary blobs with malicious code inside.

Binary blob acceptance... Welcome to the great Linux freedom sellout conspiracy!

you must be retarded if you cannot differentiate between 1) a toolkit, and 2) its implementation

theres lxde, a lightweight, simple, polished, and stable implementation of gtk
and lxqt, a not-as-lightweight, overly complicated, instable, and unpolished implementation of qt

>is GTK
Exactly you numbskull! All major GTK based DEs already transistioned to gtk3. They went qt because it already has the building Blocks they need because those lazy lxde guys didn't want to port everything to gtk3.

Gtk3 and qt come with 3d accerelation only design. That's why they got pushed (kde4, gnome3) even though sane people hated it.

>why did the developers drop it in favor of the much worse LXQt?
That was the original plan, but they decided against it. LXDE is still being developed, just at a slower pace.

The usage of Qt doesn't automatically make it like KDE.

They decided to use Qt, because it's easier to find developers for it. Same reason as to why they switched to C++.

i'm still using lubuntu 16.04 and am nervously eyeing the calendar. lxde has major problems especially ubuntus fork and it's application limitations and use of god awful gnome shit. i seriously doubt i'll like lxqt from what i've seen so far. am i an /archguy/ now?

lxqt is really a combination of different projects (mostly the former Razor-qt) and not an actual attempt to port lxde to qt framework, like people got their mistaken impression.
the one major lxde legacy in the project is the file manager.

as someone who tried razor when that was a thing, im pleased with how it has turned out, but i think that lumina is a serious contender that lxqt could learn a few things from.