XFCE vs KDE

[MS]

Roughly offtopic, but what about LXQT?

[Valtam]

Roughly offtopic, but what about LXQT?

Not sure if you are trolling or serious. Stay on topic people.

Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk

[MS]

[quote author=MS link=topic=6940.msg50144#msg50144 date=1577799545]
Roughly offtopic, but what about LXQT?

Not sure if you are trolling or serious. Stay on topic people.

Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk
[/quote]
You would never want to hear someone comment on your OS with a statement such as: are you trolling or serious?

Wait...

Umm... KDE?

Uh oh...

[firenice03]

[member=2]Jerry[/member] may be onto something  ;D ;D


https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevange...76065a26d2

[TheDead]

First off,  thanks to Jerry for that video showing the gazillion KDE settings, which was long, and almost scary, but cool. Like "The Arrival"

I think of myself as open minded person and don't cling to anything blindly but this discussion touches on "The Great DE Warz"...
Some parts of this thread almost sound like the Beta/VHS, Nintendo/Sega then PlayStation/Xbox days.
The phenomena of having adopted one "brand" that automatically transforms a user/gamer into a fanboy/fanperson of the the said brand.

If any DE can be configured easily for a specific purpose and layout, is stable and lightweight... it deserves attention.
Will it become standard? Maybe. Thing I'm sure, if it's not up to par for everything achieved in Linux Lite up to now, it will stay a pet project a while longer and/or die as a DE highschool fling.

XFCE is great and really versatile, like I mentioned before, Whiskers sold me to it, heck I even use Mint XFCE+Whiskers sometimes (can't stand Cinnamon/Mate/Gnome since I always "get stuck" somewhere). But, I'm not "sold" to anything. Even Microsoft did some cool stuff... but also horrible, Horrible, nightmare-ish stuff that haunt the collective mind to this day... Hi Bob!

Personally I had an eye for KDE for some time. First raised eye brow was trying the different DE with Porteus 4 and found that KDE was lighter than Mate and Gnome, and thats been sometime now. They seem to have continued in this path and completely understand the excitement of Jerry for it.
But MS, don't confuse excitement as being "disturbing". I don't have a Psych Doctorate (... or maybe I do, cuz, let's be mysterious in this Internet anonymity ).
I'm quite certain that Jerry is not "insane" or "obsessed" just by trying out different things. Or... he's just a brain with eyeballs floating in a glass jar in a lab somewhere, no one really knows, since he probably never sleeps. :-D

(Oh noes, here it comes, another "car" analogy...)
I know quite a lot of people, including myself that would be exited and find it cool to drive a, I dunno, a BMW760 (or any other other expensive car of your choice representing KDE). Would I buy one, no, too much resources needed.
But... what if it costs the same as your standard sedan (being XFCE) and took the same amount of gas to run? ... Things that make you go hummm!Pretty sure people would think twice aboot keeping the standard familly sedan.
Edit: 'cuz I'm lazy

[robinc]

My cats had whiskers
and they both liked Whiskas.
But when I see Whisker I paws
and then I replace it
with XFCE menu
which also  has whiskers - of course!

[Teddy]

Why I'm in favour of a future with KDE.

- It is Windows like
- Massive development team
- Detailed, almost to a point of overdoing it, configurability
- Stunning themes
- Mobile phone management with KDE Connect
- Continuously improving performance
- Konsole, has to be one of the best ootb Terminals available


Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk

Everything here I agree on and am (of course) biased towards KDE. Of course I'm no stranger to other DEs either (using MATE Linux Mint on another machine for example) and I have no problem with XFCE at all. Just don't use GNOME whatever you do  ;D !

That disclaimer aside, I am going to go out on a limb and say that it would NOT be a good idea to change LL to KDE for the benefit of the community and your target userbase. I mean don't get me wrong, better development pace, good features are great assets to have, but do those things really warrant the risk of potentially alienating a good chunk of your userbase? I may like the change, and will welcome it if you decide so but I must disclose myself as someone who isn't the target demographic of LL generally speaking. We gained many LL users from the support closures of Windows XP/Vista and probably will receive many former Windows 7 users when support ends for it on 2020-01-14. Those people most likely appreciate the no-nonsense feel and arrangement of XFCE, while KDE can be overwhelming to someone completely brand new (it certainly was to me until after a month or so back during the KDE4 days). Even after all this time I still don't understand what the purpose of the 'Activities' feature that KDE has had for a long time. Never used it and I feel that the virtual desktops do the same thing anyway. The KDE settings and widgets panel alone can literally scare someone away from changing anything because of how detailed it is. Those already used to XFCE will want to stay with it most likely as well (my grandparents who use LL are a good example of this, they came from Windows XP).

In my mind, I think of Linux Lite as a 'Function over Form' style of distro, where productivity/usability/ease of use are at the foreground of priorities and the looks/theme/eye candy supplement the productivity/usability. KDE is all about eye candy and is a tinkerer's dream. As an example: I can only think of KDE Connect as a gimmick in many ways: Notifications that sync with a smartphone, ability to use smartphone as a touchpad & remotely controlling multimedia with a smartphone. Yes these features are nice but are they essential? The cool thing about KDE Connect though is sending and receiving files wireless which is very helpful and the only non gimmick service that KDE Connect provides. XFCE fits that 'Function over Form' mission better for LL I think.

[Artim]

[member=10]Teddy[/member] nailed it.  My last flirtation with KDE, admittedly years ago now, was very confusing.  I was like, "What is all this stuff and what does it do?  Can it be undone if I change something and don't like it?  It's very busy and so full of unfamiliar stuff that I found it overwhelming.

One of the coolest things Linux Lite has done with the Xfce desktop is change the names of apps to reflect their function.  A newbie wouldn't know that Thunar is the file manager, for example, so it's not called Thunar in Linux Lite.  Do that for a KDE desktop and you'll be onto something awesome for the (hopefully distant) future.

[m654321]

[member=10]Teddy[/member] nailed it.  My last flirtation with KDE, admittedly years ago now, was very confusing.  I was like, "What is all this stuff and what does it do?  Can it be undone if I change something and don't like it?  It's very busy and so full of unfamiliar stuff that I found it overwhelming.

It was my experience too, with KDE, three or four years ago. A few times I messed up with KDE, couldn't get out of it, and in the end got so frustrated I finally ditched it.  At the time, it seemed that the only folk that used KDE were the linux-savvy; not something for novices ...

That said, maybe Jerry can simplify KDE: cut out all the superfluous stuff, including the eye-candy, and spin something equally magical out of it, as he has done with LL & XFCE - perhaps best just to wait and see ...

[amigo]

Jerry, thank you for taking LL to where it is today.
I'm 74, so do me a favor. Stay with xfce for a few more years. After I'm gone, do what you want.
Amigo......