What desktop enviroment do you use and why?
What desktop enviroment do you use and why?
So a few months back I asked about you guys os in c/asklemmy, so this time I wanna ask about your desktops you use on this same account.
(I use kde but plan to move to cinnamon I find kde buggy and gnome tracker3 randomly broke for no reason + themeing so yh idk if these happened to anybody)
You're viewing a single thread.
After trying mostly everything, I always come back to my "custom desktop": (openbox + xfce4-panel + thunar + xfce4-terminal + dunst) .. for the last 15 years or so. It doesn't get in the way, is fast AF, it takes very very little ram/cpu (4.5 Mb !!) and it has everything I need (even tiling via keyboard). It's VERY customizable and it does as I tell. No crashes, no weirdeness. It just works. I will probably move to labwc in a future, just because.. wayland. And now I'm about to use it on a steam deck... it's gonna be fun.
Same. Didn't know about labwc, will look imto it when i swiych to Wayland someday!
Did you come off a Crunchbang distro as well? 🙂
I started playing with linux (ubuntu and a macbook [I know, the worse combo possible]) around 2006 or so. I tried some linux distros before, but just for fun, never as a daily driver. I come from the times of DOS and even a little before that (amiga 500, commodore 64, spectrum...[I feel old]) . After some time with ubuntu, I found out ubuntu was bloated and quite slow, so I gave debian a try and never came back after that. Among others, I tried crunch and bunsen and while I liked them, I got a few ideas from them and applied them to my vanilla debian installs. I usually install debian testing netinst and a script I made to install/customize packages/apps/etc. A debian install (testing netinst from usb pendrive) from 0, usually takes me about 15 min.
I've been testing out arch since I got a steamdeck as a replacement for my main PC a few weeks ago but I don't think it's gonna stick. I've got a vanilla arch install running but it's way too cumbersome to reinstall/maintain it. I have to say, arch feels lighter. I will probably take another look at it sometime.
Wayland is neeeeeaaaaar!. LabWC is the closest to openbox I've found. I just hope it is as snappy and stable as openbox is always been. The config is pretty similar and the way it works (as little as I've tried it) is also quite similar.
About eyecandy and so, I have to say KDE and Gnome looks better everytime I take a look at them, but I feel like I have to be waiting for them to complete the tasks I ask of them, they don't feel as "immediate" as openbox (KDE is getting there) and since I don't use a compositor, games always run as expected (I'm talking X11 only). I've read about KDE/xfce running great so many times, but I had microstutters in games and or less avg FPSs while gaming, and switching to openbox just fixed that. I found out that disabling compositing in xfce also fixed that... but in that case I'd just rather go the openbox way. Openbox/lxde/lxqt can be pretty/ok/nice too:
About the "desktop" concept, I just need a panel, a file manager and a terminal, all the applets KDE has feel redundant, slow and way too much windows>8-alike. I like windows 98 functionality better (do as I say, let me alone, don't pester me with notifications and applets and crap everywhere). For example, I have always hated the "safe remove drive" applet from windows/kde and so on. I just go to thunar, click on the eject icon close to the drive... and done.
Sorry for the long post, and of course this is my own experience, to each their own...etc. Just use what you like/works for you and mix it however you like (one of the best things linux has).
Excuse my english (not my mother language) and I'm quite sleep deprived.
Reminds me of how lxqt uses openbox for its windowing.
AFAIK, lxde uses openbox, and lxqt uses xfwm.
Lxqt uses openbox, I tested it, and am pretty sure lxde ships its on window manager.
I should have said I was speaking about debian. Other distros may use different defaults.
Ohh