What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

patrikboon · 2010-09-27 11:01:30

I know XFCE is lightweight and runs better on older hardware. But what makes Gnome the more popular desktop environment then? What is still superior in Gnome that can't be done well in XFCE?

-- Banned user - nick

herd · 2010-09-27 19:13:25

Is this a trick question? Let's fancy a haiku:

One is lightweight, one is huge.
One is the bare metal, one is suitable for your granny too.
If you compare the motorcycle to the truck,
you want the mileage of the one with the others trunk.

gnome_refugee · 2010-09-27 23:20:58

I don't think Gnome is superior, which you could have guessed from my username and my happiness with Xfce. I think Gnome appeals to the distro designers who want a desktop environment that parallels/replicates the menu-crowded Windows interface, to make it easier for Windows-to-Linux migrants.

I personally prefer Xfce for its higher speed on a new machine with good specs, and its easy configurability. My desktop looks nothing at all like the default that came with the Linux Mint Xfce I run. I configured the desktop to my particular tastes very quickly and simply with the standard Xfce controls. From my point of view as a user, there is no disadvantage at all to Xfce over Gnome.

zsharon · 2010-12-29 08:32:26

I know that this thread is a bit old...

I think the only disadvantage of xfce is that it's occasionally a little less convenient than gnome due to its minimalist design (gnome has many more graphical tools). But, that's really just the natural result of being less cluttered.

vrkalak · 2011-01-07 01:51:13

I don't think that there are any advantages to Gnome.

We (Xfce) has a great 'right-click' Full Menu ... gnome doesn't.

What can Gnome or KDE do that Xfce can't . . . nothing really.
And Xfce is lighter, faster (more responsive) and prettier.

"We (Xfce) don't need no 'bloat'"

Last edited by vrkalak (2011-01-07 01:51:59)

xfcelav · 2011-01-08 15:21:03

If we think carefully, it's almost like Gnome Xfce about interface. I mean the appearance, panels, etc. Now, I think that Xfce has nothing to envy to Gnome, but 3 things:
1 - Integration of applications with the desktop environment, which leads to the second.
2 - Integration with Global Proxy.
3 - Tools such as gnome-disk-utility, which allows you to format the flash memory.

Beyond that, I do not think much more is missing Xfce

mcc · 2011-02-27 17:25:15

IMHO, the biggest difference between Gnome and Xfce is 'Eye Candy.' If you like the eye candy of Compiz and the 3D desktops or dare I say the eye candy of Windows Aero then Gnome might be for you. If you want a simpler and less taxing (for your cpu, etc.) windows manager then Xfce is the one. It's all relative. What do you want and what are you willing to compromise.

Personally, I have used both and like many parts of both. As for me, I was never really one for Aero or Compiz and turned those features off in my home and work computers. I also like to see my computer react a little more quickly without the distractions. If I wanted flashing lights I could go to Las Vegas but I don't hence my desire to use/learn/play with/see Xfce.

HTH,
M

Last edited by mcc (2011-02-27 17:33:39)

JuanFGS · 2011-03-02 11:57:12

Well I recently switched to XFCE on my main workstation (I plan to install it on my laptop) and for me there are some things that could be better (but i think that's because GNOME has been on the playground some more time).
Compiz kind of works on XFCE, and I admit it's not a vital part of the desktop but it does have some handy features (zoom in for example), however I've learned to live without it (i didn't use it that much anyway) and using XFWM.
I would love the "flashing" alert on the taskbar when a window requests attention and that alert to appear on the current workspace no matter on which workspace the app is.

On 4.6 I missed the remote filesystem access, but now that's solved so that's not a problem anymore .

Trommelhawks · 2011-03-02 15:16:26

Just switched to Xfce from Gnome and can not see any disadvantage yet. All functions I need are available.

danny0085 · 2011-05-04 23:21:22

If you are a new linux user you might find xfce a bit difficult to use

---------------------------------------------------
msn for linux .

Ion Silverbolt · 2011-05-06 03:26:22

Xfce lacks a good editor for the menu, other than that, I think it's far better than Gnome in many ways.

akb825 · 2011-05-07 03:43:26

JuanFGS wrote:

Compiz kind of works on XFCE, and I admit it's not a vital part of the desktop but it does have some handy features (zoom in for example), however I've learned to live without it (i didn't use it that much anyway) and using XFWM.

I don't know what you mean by "kind of works". Compiz works perfectly fine on my system.

I think the two largest disadvantages I've found so far are some bugs with the desktop (but the desktop will be redone for 4.10) and the lack of file search in Thunar. It is much faster than Gnome, though. I ended up switching to Xfce because I was tired of how long it took Gnome to log in, even on a fast computer.

I think that the biggest advantage of Xfce has come with Gnome3, though. Gnome3 has gnome-shell, which forces you into a completely new interface method, and offers almost no customization. They have fallback mode, which is somewhat similar to Gnome2, but it also suffers from the same lack of customization, and is considered deprecated and will be removed. I think that Xfce has a good chance to become the replacement of Gnome2.

dyfet · 2011-05-31 08:55:30

I think this question should have been reversed . There are a number of useful and effective features xfce has always had which I would have loved to have seen appear in gnome 2, and clearly that will never happen, and they are not always the most obvious one. I think having right-click access to the application menu was mentioned earlier. To me, of course being able to open terminal everywhere is also particularly useful. In 4.8 in particular, while there are things like turning directories into panel menus, and of course also launchers can also be used to make menus, xfce also has the ability to anchor a panel menu tied to an entirely "custom menu" file. I even experimented with creating a custom menu some by hand editing one and attaching a custom menu panel icon to it. In gnome (2) you can only do this by anchoring a submenu to the panel, but it had to be part of the single main gnome menu, rather than entirely separate. It is the small things, and those not always immediately obvious, that sometimes may prove the most useful.

chipong · 2011-06-24 02:54:51

# It is useless to measure Xfce's strength with Gnome.

# We should just ask : Does Xfce do the job to my needs?

# It is just our choice!

rafo · 2011-07-13 21:51:30

I just discovered a feature of XFCE that I would like to have in every desktop environment. Namely, in Settings/Desktop, under the "icons" tab, there is a drop-down menu where you can select what kind of animal an icon should represent. The default setting is "File/Launcher", which is what the world is used to ever since Windows 95. The alternative setting is "Minimized application icons", which means that when you minimize a window it goes onto a spot on the desktop, and when you double-click it the window reappears. When you get used to it you may even consider getting rid of the Window Buttons area in the panel.

Since you no longer can see the filesystem objects in the ~/Desktop folder you will likely need to use a file manager more than before.

The really nice thing about minimizing windows to the desktop is that you can drag them around and group them as you please. Unlike the horizontal panel, where window buttons are added in the order that windows are created, typically resulting in a random mix. Worse still, as the panel gets crowded the buttons start to shrink and thus move sideways, making it harder for you to associate button positions to work tasks (to avoid sideways-creeping buttons I tend to prefer vertical panels; this works reasonably well in Windows 95 and KDE 3.5 but is awkward in Gnome, KDE 4 and most other DEs).

The concept of using the desktop area for iconized tasks is not a new one. Some previous implementations are WindowMaker and OLVWM (http://xwinman.org/olvwm.php).

dyfet · 2011-07-14 09:10:28

In the beginning, and well before desktops were littered with other kinds of icons, "iconifying an application" (what is now called minimize) was exactly that. It is certainly older than windowmaker, as it goes back to the earliest X desktops. Yes, it can be very useful, and I am glad xfce preserves this classic X desktop feature. Also, before this concept of a task-bar, an icon box (like windowmaker also has) was simply a way to "dock" these iconified applications. I also like that the current task-bar in xfce can behave like an icon dock at least in appearance and behavior, though it does so by virtue of simply being an "unlabeled" task-bar setting now.

paolo321 · 2011-07-31 15:55:08

I tried xfce when disappointed about gnome3, unity, ...
I liked it from the beginning, since it was a "traditional" and "plain" interface.

What else? Try it and see if it fits your needs :-)

mike555 · 2011-08-01 21:08:55

Ion Silverbolt wrote:

Xfce lacks a good editor for the menu, other than that, I think it's far better than Gnome in many ways.

+1

Xfce Forum

Sub domains

#1 2010-09-27 11:01:30

What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#2 2010-09-27 19:13:25

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#3 2010-09-27 23:20:58

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#4 2010-12-29 08:32:26

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#5 2011-01-07 01:51:13

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#6 2011-01-08 15:21:03

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#7 2011-02-27 17:25:15

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#8 2011-03-02 11:57:12

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#9 2011-03-02 15:16:26

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#10 2011-05-04 23:21:22

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#11 2011-05-06 03:26:22

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#12 2011-05-07 03:43:26

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#13 2011-05-31 08:55:30

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#14 2011-06-24 02:54:51

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#15 2011-07-13 21:51:30

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#16 2011-07-14 09:10:28

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#17 2011-07-31 15:55:08

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

#18 2011-08-01 21:08:55

Re: What is the disadvantage to XFCE interface as compared GNOME in Linux?

Board footer