XFCE vs KDE

[Moltke]

[quote author=Moltke link=topic=6940.msg49972#msg49972 date=1577050415]

I'd like to ask your opinion about kwin performance when compared to xfwm4.

I don't have one yet, it's still early days. First impressions are that I don't see much of a difference.
[/quote]

Yeah, I feel the same. 371mb? Hey, good improvement there! keep it up! ;D

Gotta say, I'm not a big fan of the KDE Menu. Too much clicking. So I installed this one...

Well, you can use the keyboard; left Alt+arrow keys to navigate through the items without even touching the mouse, once you find the one you're looking for just hit enter and it'll start. 

[Valtam]

Well, you can use the keyboard; Alt+arrow keys to navigate through the items withoout even touching the mouse, once you find the one you're looking for just hit enter and it'll start. 

Having used computers for nearly 3 decades now, I'm well aware of that

[Moltke]

[quote author=Moltke link=topic=6940.msg49977#msg49977 date=1577071001]

Well, you can use the keyboard; Alt+arrow keys to navigate through the items withoout even touching the mouse, once you find the one you're looking for just hit enter and it'll start. 

Having used computers for nearly 3 decades now, I'm well aware of that
[/quote]

But you can't do that in whisker menu, can you? At least not by default. I'm asking cause now I'm curious, it never ocurred to me to try that.

[MS]

What about the what if's - What if XFCE went away? testing now - saves for the future.

That, would be another real reason to change.

But, what if LL went away?

Its technology - one has to stay informed, one needs to trial similar/competitive software. XFCE may have also seen this and may answer back with better performance of their own or more eye candy/features or they don't - but who does that benefit?

On one hand, true, XFCE may get motivated to improve their package, because it seems unlikely they would simply want to drop the ball all of a sudden. On the other hand, it was pointed out in this thread how the scope of XFCE team, as well as social backing, cannot match those of KDE. Which is weird, since XFCE is what literally everyone uses or have used until now, while KDE was the favorite package of everybody, that nobody had actually used. I mean, was that support theoretical or what?

No its not, change is for growth, additional features, make a new path from the old...
- What if FAT never grew/changed No FAT32 or EXT3/4, XFS, BTRF or NTFS - we'd be satisfied with small partitions.

These are not the 80's. One guy is not going to revolutionize the industry, at least statistically speaking.

Ideally speaking, good change emerges from cohesiveness, coherence and concord.

In the end, I guess it boils down to the question of, does switch to KDE meet the purposes and ideals of Linux Lite better than staying with XFCE, minding also the economy of that switch?

[trinidad]

"Too much clicking."

Kinda like Windows utilities that cycle you through their redundant interfaces. Good or bad for ex-Windows users? I haven't counted the steps but in some cases might be about the same.

" since XFCE is what literally everyone uses"
Sorry no, not even close really.
TC

[MS]

" since XFCE is what literally everyone uses"
Sorry no, not even close really.

Very well, but I would be grateful if you could enlighten me some, then, as I believe you do not count in the users going text mode only on servers?

[Moltke]

[quote author=trinidad link=topic=6940.msg49981#msg49981 date=1577104989]
" since XFCE is what literally everyone uses"
Sorry no, not even close really.

Very well, but I would be grateful if you could enlighten me some, then, as I believe you do not count in the users going text mode only on servers?
[/quote]

I think "which DE is the most used" is kind of relative and user-case specific. I love XFCE, if you install it, using something like Debian netinstall, CentOS core or Arch, the download size is about 10mb and the install size is around 35mb; you get a panel, thunar and a couple of other apps (can't remember now). It doesn't ship with the xfce terminal or catfish or whiskermenu or a web browser or ristretto or screnshooter, at least not in Debian and/or Arch, can't remember if it does in CentOS, been a while since I last used it. Kde-plasma-desktop which doesn't install all the KDE apps but a few ones i.e kwrite,  download size is around 150mb and install size is around 350mb. Kde-full download size is around 600mb and install size is around 1400mb. Gnome download size is around 450mb and install size is around the same as kde-full. kde-full and Gnome both install their own apps; video player, music player, web browser, file manager, image viewer, mail client (kmail), terminal and some more stuff. I also wondered few months back what people used and most of the polls and posts I read listed Gnome and KDE as the top 2, one of the reasons is they offer all of those apps by default so people don't have to go and install anything else. I don't like Gnome, it's been a while since I last tried it though but as far as I read on the web it hasn't changed a bit and still is a resource hog, plus I don't really like its design. Some people don't even use a full DE at all but a window manager like openbox, i3, awesome, icewm ... some people don't really choose their DE; if you install Linux Lite is XFCE, if you go with Solus is budgie, Bodhi uses enlightenment, Fedora Gnome (the default one not the spins), KaOS KDE, Linux Mint cinnamon (the default) and there are many others which offer different choices of DEs as well as WMs, yes, in some of these you can install a different DE but sometimes you have to work really hard to make it work as you want it to, as I did to install and use a different DE in LL in a VM some time ago. So no, I don't think XFCE is "what everyone uses" nor I think is KDE or Gnome or any other for that matter, people will use what they see fit best for them, in my case it's been XFCE and from some time now awesome-wm, but like the old saying goes "There's no accounting for taste (my note: and/or needs)"

[MS]

Thanks, [member=7109]Moltke[/member], that was a thoughtful explanation. It is really up to Jerry, how will the LL unfold. For my assumption of 'not a number one', I could imagine LL being perhaps a 'number four' Linux distro in terms of casual popularity, in an ideal and very favorable realm, if Jerry literally danced on his eyelids to help this happen, but for how you portrayed the vision of prefabricated distros altogether, I start to believe everyone should actually assemble their own distro, albeit this would not be particularly Windows-folk friendly, right? Anyway, with a mission to intercept the loose Windows folks in mind, at least those Windows folks who have enough of situational recognition to see the possible benefits of using Linux, we may sometimes look like idolizing Windows here around LL. Which is a dangerous trait of appeal in the GNU/Linux world.

[Artim]

Most of the newbie-friendly desktops choose Xfce or Cinnamon, but an old favorite - PCLinuxOS - has always been KDE and other desktops were used to make it lighter for those with modest hardware.  Perhaps that won't be necessary soon. 

[firenice03]

[quote author=trinidad link=topic=6940.msg49981#msg49981 date=1577104989]
" since XFCE is what literally everyone uses"
Sorry no, not even close really.

Very well, but I would be grateful if you could enlighten me some, then, as I believe you do not count in the users going text mode only on servers?
[/quote]


No, one cannot count text - minimal - only, that is without a desktop interface, besides most servers(RHEL/CentOS) I do believe have either KDE or Gnome for a desktop GUI. Minimal no GUI.