Which desktop?

ody · 2003-05-09 12:31:24

no offence to anyone but Ive used kde for years and it is far far better than gnome, if anyone even trys to argue against me I shall slap you with a kipper. And Ive never noticed any serious problems with it, I dont know what the fuck you people are doing but its obviously your inability to use kde thats the problem, not kde.

The only desktop manager that sorta betters kde is Equinox which is fltk based and very very fast.

im done.

sarah31 · 2003-05-09 15:20:44

ody wrote:

no offence to anyone but Ive used kde for years and it is far far better than gnome, if anyone even trys to argue against me I shall slap you with a kipper. And Ive never noticed any serious problems with it, I dont know what the fuck you people are doing but its obviously your inability to use kde thats the problem, not kde.
The only desktop manager that sorta betters kde is Equinox which is fltk based and very very fast.
im done.

bah you always say crap like this it is evil pure and simple.

i like kippers so whack away

You're suffering the "KDE == windows" syndrom

actually no i am suffering DE have more than i need so i use a wm syndrome

Blaasvis · 2003-05-09 18:03:45

i agree completely with sarah31, kde is a good desktop but look to much like windows.

also it has too many unusefull functions.

hApy · 2003-05-10 00:28:26

I am using kde right now and it's pretty good. It *does* have a few annoying bugs like if you fuck up a config it can get messy (I had it happen that every time I tried to remove something from the panel menu kde would crash & FREEZE, also if I move the desktop icons around too much it can cause a complete freeze as well)....

I think eventually I will look into a smaller more lightweight DE.

Saying KDE == Windows is completely unfair though, IMO. KDE is *far* better than windows. Yes, it does have a few too many additional things installed.. really they should work on a higher resolution solution to KDE apps... like where you only pick *exactly* what apps you want, and not just classes of apps. KDE Bare + packages for everything else would be wise. Of course including the current style does make it easier for alot of people.

Hapy.

dariball · 2003-05-11 18:49:35

yes, exactlly this is the point, kde is much too overcrowded with absolute useless applications, it would be really nice to have a kde-struct and then there should be an option to install additional applications.
and that's why I like smaller WMs like flux or openbox, because i only have a WM and can the apps I want and no others.

ah, and something personal: i don't like the qt gui toolkit, i think gtk+ looks much better....

but this is also no offence to people using kde, i just don't like it that much

greetz
dariball

Gyroplast · 2003-05-11 21:23:10

I'll just add my two worthless cents to this interesting, although hardly objective thread as well and admit that I have, so far, found XFCE3 to fulfill my needs pretty well. Actually all I need is a shell multiplexer (twelve F-keys simply aren't enough) and a browser. Of course that begs for the question why not to use twm, then, and I must admit that I kinda like having at least a couple icons for quick access and some more sophisticated window managing functions.

Hey, and what can I say.. setting it up is a one-liner, it's simple and fast, and the CDE style panel is soooo special that it confuses the heck out of any KDE or Gnome users. Hehe.

There. Next please!

jlvsimoes · 2003-05-11 22:40:28

i just install kdebase and kdelibs
other apps i put but its true kde as a lot of apps that are not necessary

Nickm · 2003-05-21 10:21:18

I'm using kde most of the time, but about a year ago i thought it was to slow. so i tried all wm i could find, i liked enlightenment a lot and then switched to the combination of enlightenment and gnome. after that i switched to gnome2 with metacity then to kde with metacity and now i'm just using kde again.

The speed of KDE increases a lot due to fam so I have nothing to complain anymore but it's just not perfect. actually i'm waiting for e17 to be completed.

jlvsimoes · 2003-05-21 21:34:27

wath kde are you using you got kde 3.1.2
to build just chance the pkgversion on the pkgbuil and it works fine another thing pleople think im crazy wen i say that my kde and mozilla are fast but its true thei are fast i got no bugs every thing works just fine

scottro · 2003-08-01 18:10:07

I'm a fluxbox fan--I've been a bit of a WM slut, but I keep coming back.

I have a page on a few tips and tricks of it at

http://home.nyc.rr.com/computertaijutsu/fluxbox.html

Please note, for those who like the idea of the root menu being bound to keystrokes, a version of fluxbox with the menu patch mentioned on the page is in incoming

Scott

vande198 · 2003-11-07 00:59:38

I'm more of a noob than most people here, but I LOVE XFCE4. Great Feel, I love gtk2 themes, and (if I acutally dedicate myself to it) I'll configure ROX to be my file and desktop manager. Great combination. I use KDE once in a while just because it's just really nice (and when I have to switch keyboard layouts to German), but most of the time I don't need all those fancy bells and whistles.

bogomipz · 2003-11-23 21:01:32

I just got to say, I love OpenBox3. It's fast, stable, simple to configure and I can make keyboard shortcuts that do exactly what I need (maximize to fullscreen among other things). I used to run PekWM because it had powerful keybindings and the tagged frame feature that I thought I needed for a while. After I tried OB3 I totally converted. It' so much more elegant. Oh, and I never really understood that bar-thingy in blackbox, so I'm just glad openbox kicked it out.

To get more of a desktop feel, I use the ROX filer. Presently I use it's pindown feature to add a couple of icons to my desk. I don't use it's panel or session manager. All the programs I use on a daily basis can be started as rox AppDirs, even the terminal emulator (although I usually start that by a key stroke). It's very easy to make AppDir wrappers for programs not meant to run from rox: mkdir Apps/GVim; ln -s `which gvim` Apps/GVim/AppRun

sarah31 · 2003-11-24 03:21:57

actually openbox3 is completely rewritten it has no code from blackbox anymore.

i am undecided on it though i found the slit stupid too i find the xml menu a massive pain in the ass to edit. i also do not like the fact that it has it files in three different places.

MNKyDeth · 2003-11-24 04:19:40

Well, I actually prefer XFCE4. Great setup IMO. I changed a bit of stuff around though. What I did was download the kdelibs so that way I could use konq for my file browsing and konsole instead of the term in XFCE4. So I added some weight to it. Overall, it is fast and still fairly lightweight.

Here is some SS's if you wanna look at it.
http://files.triton.net/microneb/ss1.jpg
http://files.triton.net/microneb/ss2.jpg

Jagged · 2003-11-24 18:39:04

All your base are belong to Fluxbox 0.9

LB06 · 2003-11-24 22:34:37

I used XFCE4 when I started using Arch. It has great features like margins, so maximising a window would never come on top of my XMMS and GAIM for example. It was fast and reliable overall. However, I didn't really like xffm and I really missed a session manager. That's why I returned to Gnome. It looks beautiful, has session support is widely supported and runs hardly any slower than XFCE4 on my system. Only startup was noticable slower.

Some screenshots from Gnome. The second one is from before I started to use Arch.

http://members.chello.nl/w.vandenborne/screen.png
http://members.chello.nl/w.vandenborne/gdesklets.png

im_ka · 2004-03-14 12:10:30

old thread, let's bring it up 8)

i've only used kde for the first (suse) days of my linux experience, then i switched to gnome quickly and used it until i decided to get rid of fedora.

i started arch with flux, but changed to enlightenment yesterday. i find it much smarter and really fast as well. plus i find it cool that it's not a clone or a fork, they did they very own thing.

i love the icon box and the settings menu. i've found a "mozilla modern" theme on freshmeat, i love it.

m33sb3w · 2004-03-14 14:19:17

im_ka wrote:

i started arch with flux, but changed to enlightenment yesterday. i find it much smarter and really fast as well. plus i find it cool that it's not a clone or a fork, they did they very own thing.

I use enlightenment too. I can't stand kde or gnome. Enlightenment looks good but it doesn't demolish my cpu like kde or gnome do. I really like the window border style options which, last time I checked, other DEs don't have. For instance, I can make it so my gaim buddy list will shade into the side of the screen.

im_ka · 2004-03-14 14:28:24

all i have from kde/gnome: kdelibs (for k3b, there's no better cdburning app), and gnome-common (need that for bluefish).

wakeupbomb · 2004-03-15 00:30:30

Argh, well I currently can't decide which desktop I want, I'm not completely happy with any iv'e tried. Currently using fluxbox but it can be a bit of a bugger to configure sometimes...and well it's annoying me a bit. So i'm gonna try enlightenment (if pacman stops being a gimp) and then openbox, and see which is better.

cartridge · 2004-03-16 15:57:55

i agree with dariball and sarah,
i dont like kde, but there some very good points in kde.
1. KDE helps bringing windows user to lx
2. KDE is dumb (as win), so users feel confortable with it
3. KDE is QT based, and for god sake, QT owns GTK2, is faster, more stable, although its too f*&#ing ugly.
4. KDE runs better than gnome on old systems because of QT.

i personally love blackbox, gnustep & windowmaker, and i hate those kde apps, like kopete. damn, kopete sux, but i use it because is QT based and runs ok in my celeron 333 (my office pc).
so in my opinion, the only REAL good point of kde, is QT.

up with the box !

LB06 · 2004-03-16 17:42:51

What exactly do you mean with 'dumb'?

LB06 · 2004-03-16 17:53:18

btw. I just started writing some apps, some CLI-based apps and some with a GUI. I found out QT is so more powerfull and easy to develop apps for. KDE/QT is way more powerfull under the hood. They use great techniques. KDE's IDE kdevelop turned out to be a great tool, too. It's better than Anjuta in most respects. The only disadvantage is that GTK has more language bindings, but pyQT turned out to be quite mature, too.

cartridge · 2004-03-16 19:38:18

i mean dumb by easy to use
there is no RTFM in kde, there are no config files, you got everything you need and dont need.
this can be good, or can be bad.

LB06 · 2004-03-16 20:03:11

cartridge wrote:

i mean dumb by easy to use
there is no RTFM in kde, there are no config files, you got everything you need and dont need.
this can be good, or can be bad.

I see...

But I think Gnome is even dumber. To give you an example: if I want to change the look & feel in every Gnome/GTK app (aka I want apps to be consistent), I'll have to be in at least 3 different places. That really turned me off.

I really began to like KDE since I've discovered the power of QT (under the hood) and I'm a fulltime KDE-user now. btw I don't want to cause a flame war or something. I still love Gnome and xfce4, as I said on page 2

Arch Linux

#26 2003-05-09 12:31:24

Re: Which desktop?

#27 2003-05-09 15:20:44

Re: Which desktop?

#28 2003-05-09 18:03:45

Re: Which desktop?

#29 2003-05-10 00:28:26

Re: Which desktop?

#30 2003-05-11 18:49:35

Re: Which desktop?

#31 2003-05-11 21:23:10

Re: Which desktop?

#32 2003-05-11 22:40:28

Re: Which desktop?

#33 2003-05-21 10:21:18

Re: Which desktop?

#34 2003-05-21 21:34:27

Re: Which desktop?

#35 2003-08-01 18:10:07

Re: Which desktop?

#36 2003-11-07 00:59:38

Re: Which desktop?

#37 2003-11-23 21:01:32

Re: Which desktop?

#38 2003-11-24 03:21:57

Re: Which desktop?

#39 2003-11-24 04:19:40

Re: Which desktop?

#40 2003-11-24 18:39:04

Re: Which desktop?

#41 2003-11-24 22:34:37

Re: Which desktop?

#42 2004-03-14 12:10:30

Re: Which desktop?

#43 2004-03-14 14:19:17

Re: Which desktop?

#44 2004-03-14 14:28:24

Re: Which desktop?

#45 2004-03-15 00:30:30

Re: Which desktop?

#46 2004-03-16 15:57:55

Re: Which desktop?

#47 2004-03-16 17:42:51

Re: Which desktop?

#48 2004-03-16 17:53:18

Re: Which desktop?

#49 2004-03-16 19:38:18

Re: Which desktop?

#50 2004-03-16 20:03:11

Re: Which desktop?

Board footer