Xfce Forum

RobtWB

Member

Registered: 2011-09-29

Posts: 6

Desktop Environment?

Thank you XFCE developers and contributors. I've been a Linux user since the mid-90's, back when KDE was just starting and a new kid named "Gnome" came along. Personally not caring about the politics of toolkits, I chose KDE and have been a user for about 15 years. I use a computer to do historical and genealogical research, for me it's just a tool for finding and organizing information; I'm not a programmer or hacker or someone interested in the nuts and bolts of how it all works, I just need it to work.

When KDE made the leap from 3.5 to 4, it was too much for the machine I had at that time to handle, so I had to look for alternatives and settled on Gnome 2. Through the past few years and several "performance improvements" in KDE 4 I've tried to go back, but while the interface may have improved in speed, it's more than a bit weighted down by the semantic background, and while I have a newer, faster computer, it still takes more than half my 2 gigs of memory just to run the desktop and it's background processes. I finally threw in the towel and switched to Gnome. Then Gnome 3 came along...

Perhaps it's me, but how does taking away half of his tools help a mechanic do his job? That's how I see Gnome 3. They tout the "unobtrusive" as a better way of doing things, that you have a "cleaner" environment to work in. I akin that to someone going to a repair shop and taking the top toolbox off a mechanic's set and setting it on the other side of a maze, then telling him he now has this nice, clean surface to work on. True, but half his tools are gone! "Not really" they say, all you have to do is navigate this maze and you can get any tool you need. Is this logical, or is it just me?

To my point of view, having my tools set up to be close at hand and convenient is not a drawback, and I have better things to do with my time and computer than navigate a maze, trying to get to something I should at least have the option of keeping close to hand. And when "background" processes take more memory and computing power than my software does, well, there's something wrong there. For me - and I'm sure from what I've been reading I'm not alone - my ideal "desktop environment" is a place I can configure to suit my taste and needs. It should be responsive, stable, and extensible, allowing me to put what I use wherever I wish. XFCE gives me that environment. I realize compared to the other two "big guns" XFCE has a small but very dedicated group of developers. I would personally like to thank them for all the hard work and time they give to make the computing experience of this user so much better. You've show that someone does actually care about the wants and needs of the average Linux user. You have my profound gratitude, as well as one more on the list of the faithful.

wkr

Member

Registered: 2011-01-01

Posts: 88

Re: Desktop Environment?

and I have better things to do with my time and computer than navigate a maze, trying to get to something I should at least have the option of keeping close to hand.

Well said

Z_Tagr

Member

From: Assiniboia, Saskatchewan, CA

Registered: 2011-08-24

Posts: 4

Re: Desktop Environment?

For me - and I'm sure from what I've been reading I'm not alone - my ideal "desktop environment" is a place I can configure to suit my taste and needs. It should be responsive, stable, and extensible, allowing me to put what I use wherever I wish. XFCE gives me that environment. I realize compared to the other two "big guns" XFCE has a small but very dedicated group of developers. I would personally like to thank them for all the hard work and time they give to make the computing experience of this user so much better. You've show that someone does actually care about the wants and needs of the average Linux user. You have my profound gratitude, as well as one more on the list of the faithful.

    My feelings EXACTLY!!!

   Cheers!
   Andre. (Z_Tagr)