If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slashdot)   Creator of the Linux kernel switches from XFCE to KDE because A) more configurability options B) less resource reliant or C) wobbly windows eye candy   (linux.slashdot.org) divider line 103
    More: Obvious, linux, Xfce, kde, gnomes, IIRC, Linus Torvalds, Mark Hurd, switches  
•       •       •

4544 clicks; posted to Geek » on 13 Nov 2012 at 7:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



103 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-13 10:35:26 PM  
XMonad. Sure, you have to configure it in Haskell. But it's a real WM.
 
2012-11-13 11:11:44 PM  
Depends on the machine, but I am happy very much with KDE as it stands now, and I use XFCE quite a bit as well. Depends on the machine and so on, and what I am doing with it.

Unity sux. Hard. Gnome 3? Not tried that yet.
 
2012-11-13 11:19:56 PM  

cman: I wasnt even alive during the MSDOS/CP/M standardization war. I was born in 83.

/Although I did use CP/M on a Commodore 128. Good times.


You children are missing out on the sheer beauty of an OS that was just designed to do solid work. No flash, no frills, just did its job.

A circa-2012 OS might be able to run Crysis, but it's a pale imitation in a lot of ways.
 
2012-11-13 11:28:06 PM  
XFCE?

I really like their cartoons!
 
2012-11-13 11:41:01 PM  

CP/M_Yes: cman: I wasnt even alive during the MSDOS/CP/M standardization war. I was born in 83.

/Although I did use CP/M on a Commodore 128. Good times.

You children are missing out on the sheer beauty of an OS that was just designed to do solid work. No flash, no frills, just did its job.

A circa-2012 OS might be able to run Crysis, but it's a pale imitation in a lot of ways.


Wow what a great fark handle, lol
 
2012-11-14 12:08:54 AM  
I feel vindicated for some reason!
 
2012-11-14 12:09:56 AM  
Anyone have a Linux distro they like for their HTPC? I just ordered the pieces to put one together but havent decided on an OS yet. I am leaning toward Mint with MATE
 
2012-11-14 12:10:52 AM  

Swoop1809: Anyone have a Linux distro they like for their HTPC? I just ordered the pieces to put one together but havent decided on an OS yet. I am leaning toward Mint with MATE


Ubuntu has a release that is focused around Boxee. Google it, it may interest you
 
2012-11-14 12:19:46 AM  
Where's the LXDE love? I like the way Knoppix customizes LXDE, and it's lightweight while still being reasonably functional. Or, if you liked KDE 3, the aptosid (formerly sidux) respin of KDE 4 is pretty nifty.

/ I use MATE when I'm not using LXDE
 
2012-11-14 12:21:04 AM  
Does an OS even really matter on an HTPC? Networking on any Linux build is cake as it makes the simple concept of samba sharing...Well.. Simple.. Unlike Windows which makes simple folder sharing across a network more of an asshole process than Chinese arithmetic.

Build PC
Load with media
Install XBMC
Profit..

cman: Swoop1809:
Ubuntu has a release that is focused around Boxee. Google it, it may interest you


i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-14 12:21:30 AM  

Swoop1809: Anyone have a Linux distro they like for their HTPC? I just ordered the pieces to put one together but havent decided on an OS yet. I am leaning toward Mint with MATE


Mythbuntu has its good points.
 
2012-11-14 12:23:49 AM  

SomeTexan: Where's the LXDE love? I like the way Knoppix customizes LXDE, and it's lightweight while still being reasonably functional. Or, if you liked KDE 3, the aptosid (formerly sidux) respin of KDE 4 is pretty nifty.

/ I use MATE when I'm not using LXDE


Where is the BSD love? LXDE is the BSD of desktop environments

Also, why arent any distros using Darwin as a basis for an OS? Darwin has professionally written drivers (by a real company named Apple) for a large range of hardware, making the most common gripe about Linux distros moot.
 
2012-11-14 12:25:57 AM  

styckx: Does an OS even really matter on an HTPC? Networking on any Linux build is cake as it makes the simple concept of samba sharing...Well.. Simple.. Unlike Windows which makes simple folder sharing across a network more of an asshole process than Chinese arithmetic.

Build PC
Load with media
Install XBMC
Profit..

cman: Swoop1809:
Ubuntu has a release that is focused around Boxee. Google it, it may interest you

[i.imgur.com image 259x194]


HOW DID I MISTAKE BOXEE FOR XBMC? They are phonetically similar in a Dyslexia kind of way, so I guess that is how it happened
 
2012-11-14 01:09:45 AM  

Swoop1809: Anyone have a Linux distro they like for their HTPC? I just ordered the pieces to put one together but havent decided on an OS yet. I am leaning toward Mint with MATE


Depends what you're doing, but I just finished putting together a Mythbuntu box. If you're into MythTV I highly recommend it -- their control panel simplifies the process quite a bit. It helps you install proprietary drivers, setup your channels, the remote, etc.

It comes with XFCE, but ideally you'd run the MythTV frontend most of the time.
 
2012-11-14 01:16:09 AM  
I understand some of these words, but the order they're put together is confusing me.

And these acronyms, what the hell am I supposed to do with these acronyms?

Why do I care what this guy thinks about computers just because he invented popcorn?

Isn't he just some military guy?
 
2012-11-14 01:55:05 AM  
halB


Smartest
Funniest

2012-11-14 01:16:09 AM

I understand some of these words, but the order they're put together is confusing me.

And these acronyms, what the hell am I supposed to do with these acronyms?

Why do I care what this guy thinks about computers just because he invented popcorn?

Isn't he just some military guy?

And this thread, why did I come into this thread and post when I knew damn well I didn't know what it was about?

I guess I'm just bored, or drunk, or high or something.


// fixed
 
2012-11-14 02:11:09 AM  

styckx: Unity isn't bad once you give it a shot but it's still just not how I want to work..


I gave Unity a "shot". Attempting to open the system menu always, on every occasion, caused substantial swap space thrashing that resulted in a pause lasting from several seconds to a minute.

I do not experience such problems with KDE.
 
2012-11-14 02:53:43 AM  

styckx: Does an OS even really matter on an HTPC? Networking on any Linux build is cake as it makes the simple concept of samba sharing...Well.. Simple.. Unlike Windows which makes simple folder sharing across a network more of an asshole process than Chinese arithmetic.


Matters if Windows has better driver support, especially for graphics-card-assisted video decoding on low power systems (say, an Atom box).

Usually better for sleep/hibernate and other power management stuff. Linux still sucks balls at that, unless you get damn lucky with your hardware. Windows used to suck too, but it's mostly better now.

A couple of the more obscure consoles have better emulator support in Windows. Graphics card support matters for those, too. Or for most other games, even lighter-weight ones.

HDMI audio support is twitchy enough in Windows; I'd be surprised if Linux isn't even worse, since it's a multimedia-related feature. The couple times I've tried Linux on an HTPC recently I've had to ditch it for one or more of the reasons above before I could get that far, though, so maybe my guess is wrong.
 
2012-11-14 03:05:59 AM  

cman: DjangoStonereaver: zedster: Nadie_AZ: Wait, gnome is going away? I've been using gnome 2.x for many many years now. I switched from KDE 1.x, windowmaker and blackbox. Why? I dunno ...

Is KDE 4.x really that good? Or is gnome done? And don't get me started with that unity sh*t.

Gnome 3 is bad, like Vista GUI bad. Unity UI, the Ubuntu addition to Gnome 3 is like attending a Nickleback concert filled with incontinent people bad

Mate, a 3rd party fork of Gnome 2 is pretty good and getting better

MATE is probably going to wither on the vine in favor of Cinnamon, also from the Linux Mint team. Basically, its
a fork of Gnome Shell/Gnome 3 that has the visual look of the older Gnome 2 environment.

Personally, I prefer XFCE, and don't understand why Linus switched back to KDE.

Personally I liked CP/M better than MSDOS, but MSDOS won out because of how much of an idiot Kildall was. Pretty much GNOME/XFCE/Uubuntu are acting like Gary Kildall


FTFY; the whole Linux desktop pissing match started because the Gnome Foundation decided to start acting
like Apple instead of actually engaging their user community. Canonical decided to create their own desktop
environment because THEY wanted to be able to dictate to their users "You'll get over it". The XFCE people
have been smart and realize that there is a place for the standard GUI desktop even in the age of touch
screens and tablets.
 
2012-11-14 03:35:30 AM  
I like Unity fine, but my one gripe is that each subsequent version of Ubuntu seems to be subtracting customization options, which I don't understand. It's not as though simplifying that aspect makes for an easier interface. Just the opposite. Casual Linux users (like myself) can't be expected to dive into the terminal to, say, add a screensaver option (which I use as an example, despite not really caring if I have a screensaver or not).
 
2012-11-14 05:13:10 AM  
Don't worry Linux - someday you'll be a real OS
 
2012-11-14 05:43:58 AM  

CP/M_Yes: cman: I wasnt even alive during the MSDOS/CP/M standardization war. I was born in 83.

/Although I did use CP/M on a Commodore 128. Good times.

You children are missing out on the sheer beauty of an OS that was just designed to do solid work. No flash, no frills, just did its job.

A circa-2012 OS might be able to run Crysis, but it's a pale imitation in a lot of ways.



Lol, nice. I look forward to OS/360_Yes, etc.
 
2012-11-14 05:48:21 AM  

lohphat: DjangoStonereaver: Personally, I prefer XFCE, and don't understand why Linus switched back to KDE.

Because kernel hackers and developers have no skin in the long-term supportability of applications within an environment.

Because of short-sighted crap like this, application houses hate linux because of all the variants caused by someone making a selfish decision somewhere which causes all the install base to re-engineer their products. Do that enough times and they abandon the platform for the most part.

Linux on the desktop will hit the big leagues any day^H^H^Hyear^H^H^H^Hdecade now.



lolwut. His personal usage decision drives away developers?
 
mhd
2012-11-14 06:19:44 AM  
What's wrong with CDE?
 
2012-11-14 07:52:08 AM  
Gonna go ahead and jump on the Unity-hate bandwagon. It f*cking sucks biiiiiig donkey balls.
 
2012-11-14 08:03:57 AM  
XFCE is nice. So is LXDE if you want to go even more minimalist. Myself, though, I use Awesome at home, DWM at work. Dynamic tiling window management FTW.
 
2012-11-14 08:10:53 AM  

SomeTexan: Swoop1809: Anyone have a Linux distro they like for their HTPC? I just ordered the pieces to put one together but havent decided on an OS yet. I am leaning toward Mint with MATE

Mythbuntu has its good points.


I keep a Mint/MATE flash drive for interoffice travel. Very handy, no complaints yet.
 
2012-11-14 08:16:19 AM  
AustinFakir
2012-11-13 08:33:46 PM

GNOME wanted to be Steve Jobs. They wanted to be so good they could ignore what users told them -- because they knew what users wanted better than the users did.[/quote
Sort of like kde told users to go fark themselves about wanting to remove that G.D. plasma widget icon (aka "Cashew")? Or that we simply want to be able to throw an Icon on the desktop w/o having to run some farked up plasmoid widget area that allows icons?

fark kde 4.xxxxxxxx
 
2012-11-14 08:18:12 AM  

Millennium: XFCE is nice. So is LXDE if you want to go even more minimalist. Myself, though, I use Awesome at home, DWM at work. Dynamic tiling window management FTW.


I actually find I like OpenBox almost as much as I do XFCE, actually, and I'm not generally one for
minimalist GUIs.
 
2012-11-14 09:00:10 AM  
I'm afraid that I need a xkcd strip to explain this.
 
2012-11-14 09:03:42 AM  

fallingcow: HDMI audio support is twitchy enough in Windows; I'd be surprised if Linux isn't even worse, since it's a multimedia-related feature. The couple times I've tried Linux on an HTPC recently I've had to ditch it for one or more of the reasons above before I could get that far, though, so maybe my guess is wrong.


Never had a problem. I have an Atom-based HTPC and it has only ever been connected to my HDTV via HDMI. Out of the box it has never had any problems relating to HDMI audio or video.
 
2012-11-14 09:34:35 AM  
Come to think of it, since when is KDE less resource-reliant than XFCE?
 
mhd
2012-11-14 09:56:36 AM  

Millennium: Come to think of it, since when is KDE less resource-reliant than XFCE?


I don't know where that is coming from, since Linus didn't mention it in his post.

Although the difference isn't that big, especially if you tone down KDE a bit. The runtime differences between xfwm/kwin and thunar/dolphin basically vanish in comparison to what your browser is using, both regarding CPU and memory.
 
2012-11-14 10:21:34 AM  

Isildur:
lolwut. His personal usage decision drives away developers?


Yes, because unfortunately the tribalism of the OS factions of "my distro is cooler than yours" causes those who follow Linus to turn everything upside down every time he farts.
 
2012-11-14 10:34:25 AM  

cman: SomeTexan: Where's the LXDE love? I like the way Knoppix customizes LXDE, and it's lightweight while still being reasonably functional. Or, if you liked KDE 3, the aptosid (formerly sidux) respin of KDE 4 is pretty nifty.

/ I use MATE when I'm not using LXDE

Where is the BSD love? LXDE is the BSD of desktop environments

Also, why arent any distros using Darwin as a basis for an OS? Darwin has professionally written drivers (by a real company named Apple) for a large range of hardware, making the most common gripe about Linux distros moot.


You know, I was looking into that recently. I think a Debian/Darwin OS would be awesome, but I'm sure that I could use MacPorts to have a Gentoo Darwin style setup (I might try that in a VM first, when I'm bored). But I think it has potential.
 
mhd
2012-11-14 11:13:17 AM  

cman: Also, why arent any distros using Darwin as a basis for an OS? Darwin has professionally written drivers (by a real company named Apple) for a large range of hardware, making the most common gripe about Linux distros moot.


I don't even know where to start here. First of all, there used to be such a project, called OpenDarwin. But cooperation with Apple was apparently worse than cooperation with Sun (cf. OpenSolaris), and quite a few of those professionally written drivers were only available as binaries - and even then most of them not written by Apple, but by the hardware companies. Which right now is often the same with Linux, it's not like this is still '95 and all kernel developers are European students. Quite a few large companies hire kernel and driver developers, and even smaller ones have to provide drivers. The biggest hardware-related problems you're having right now is if there's some piece of hardware in there where the manufacturer refuses to fully cooperate (binary blobs, no info at all) or even maliciously tries to sabotage non-Windows systems (as happened with some BIOS/ACPI versions in the past).
Problems OS X doesn't have, due to its curated hardware support. If you only need to support a dozen computers with many shared components, having somewhat reliable drivers isn't that hard. Getting something to run on old, un-supported minority laptops with firmware issues is another matter. Don't really think that magically Apple-written drivers would appear for weird Taiwanese systems.

Never mind that there's nothing really exciting about the core system, all the interesting bits are in the GUI and related libraries -- none of them OSS. The userland is mostly FreeBSD, the kernel is a bit out-dated (one reason why Apple got out of the server business, even for SOHO). Let's better not talk about what it calls a proper filesystem...

By now even OpenBSD might have surpassed it on a technical level.
 
2012-11-14 12:02:32 PM  
I just woke up from a 12 day nap and posted this witty reply.
 
2012-11-14 12:16:21 PM  

zedster: jonny_q: I thought Linux had switched the KDE a long time ago

[www.billymeade.com image 235x163]


I meant Linus :(
 
2012-11-14 12:32:37 PM  

OnlyM3: AustinFakir
2012-11-13 08:33:46 PM

GNOME wanted to be Steve Jobs. They wanted to be so good they could ignore what users told them -- because they knew what users wanted better than the users did.[/quote
Sort of like kde told users to go fark themselves about wanting to remove that G.D. plasma widget icon (aka "Cashew")? Or that we simply want to be able to throw an Icon on the desktop w/o having to run some farked up plasmoid widget area that allows icons?

fark kde 4.xxxxxxxx


I'm not a big fan of KDE 4 myself. I never used, needed, or was aware of the existence of any documentation for KDE 3, because configuration was extremely discoverable. I just clicked around until I found things, and I made KDE 3 do exactly what I wanted. KDE 4 was built to be super-customizable, but the customization methods were non-discoverable and poorly documented. I ended up watching YouTube videos to figure out how to do basic stuff.

Plus KDE released a pre-release build as 4.0 to just meet a deadline, which was completely, utterly, farking retarded. A bunch of basic functionality was missing or broken, and their response was, "Well, what do you expect from a dot-zero release? It's just beta software." I had been using KDE since 2000, hated GNOME, but right there I decided to give GNOME another chance, which lasted until KDE 4.1, which was more complete but just as non-discoverable as 4.0. Then I switched to Awesome for getting work done and who-cares-what (currently XFCE) for my email/web/videos computer where ergonomics don't matter.
 
2012-11-14 01:16:47 PM  

lohphat: Isildur:
lolwut. His personal usage decision drives away developers?

Yes, because unfortunately the tribalism of the OS factions of "my distro is cooler than yours" causes those who follow Linus to turn everything upside down every time he farts.


What the fark are you talking about? Development of the various desktop environments has continued with or without his approval, and apps can easily run in different ones. You're not even remotely making sense, so are you trolling or what?
 
2012-11-14 01:29:34 PM  

Isildur: lohphat: Isildur:
lolwut. His personal usage decision drives away developers?

Yes, because unfortunately the tribalism of the OS factions of "my distro is cooler than yours" causes those who follow Linus to turn everything upside down every time he farts.

What the fark are you talking about? Development of the various desktop environments has continued with or without his approval, and apps can easily run in different ones. You're not even remotely making sense, so are you trolling or what?


And the resulting fragmentation of everyone doing their own thing is core to why Linux is not a widespread OS.

/buh bye
 
2012-11-14 02:12:16 PM  

Lets talk frankly about internal cleanliness: urger: XFCE FOREVER!

[www.rachelcericola.com image 400x353]


Oh, God, thank you, I thought I was going to have to do it.
 
2012-11-14 03:21:50 PM  

lohphat:
And the resulting fragmentation of everyone doing their own thing is core to why Linux is not a widespread OS.


The people trying to make Linux a "mainstream" desktop OS are annoying and have only farked things up for people who actually use it. It's a silly goal that dates back to the days of Linux obscurity, before it became one of the dominant players in the server space. Insecure geeks thought the only way to prove their hobby was legitimate was to take over the desktop, so there was much discussion of how to get people's computer-illiterate grandmother using Linux. The GNOME project's UI oversimplifications and arrogant, condescending attitude towards users are a scar of that misguided idea.

Linux is awesome for geeks, programmers, and power users and will continue to serve them well. Geeks and tech professionals like simple software, working drivers, and no-fuss configuration as much as the next person, so it isn't implausible that one day Linux will become acceptable to the mainstream as a side effect of improving support for current users, but the people who have fervently wished and worked towards that goal at the expense of alienating real, existing users can eat a bag of dicks.
 
2012-11-14 03:32:09 PM  

AustinFakir: lohphat:
And the resulting fragmentation of everyone doing their own thing is core to why Linux is not a widespread OS.

The people trying to make Linux a "mainstream" desktop OS are annoying and have only farked things up for people who actually use it. It's a silly goal that dates back to the days of Linux obscurity, before it became one of the dominant players in the server space. Insecure geeks thought the only way to prove their hobby was legitimate was to take over the desktop, so there was much discussion of how to get people's computer-illiterate grandmother using Linux. The GNOME project's UI oversimplifications and arrogant, condescending attitude towards users are a scar of that misguided idea.

Linux is awesome for geeks, programmers, and power users and will continue to serve them well. Geeks and tech professionals like simple software, working drivers, and no-fuss configuration as much as the next person, so it isn't implausible that one day Linux will become acceptable to the mainstream as a side effect of improving support for current users, but the people who have fervently wished and worked towards that goal at the expense of alienating real, existing users can eat a bag of dicks.


I would like to add that the plethora of choice confuses the hell out of computer users. There are too many damn distros out there with configuration options that confuse the hell out of a inbred southerner. I can understand Ubuntu with their Unity project and that they are trying to make it attractive for new users, but at the same time, you should not go after new users with the risk of pissing off your base.
 
2012-11-14 03:33:10 PM  

zedster: Gnome 3 is bad, like Vista GUI bad. Unity UI, the Ubuntu addition to Gnome 3 is like attending a Nickleback concert filled with incontinent people bad


I couldn't disagree more. I have been using Gnome 3 (Gnome-Shell) on Debian (Wheezy) for several weeks now and it is stable, intuitive, and integrates well with varied online accounts and services. I like it better than Gnome 2.x, Unity, or KDE.
 
2012-11-14 06:33:27 PM  

lohphat: Isildur: lohphat: Isildur:
lolwut. His personal usage decision drives away developers?

Yes, because unfortunately the tribalism of the OS factions of "my distro is cooler than yours" causes those who follow Linus to turn everything upside down every time he farts.

What the fark are you talking about? Development of the various desktop environments has continued with or without his approval, and apps can easily run in different ones. You're not even remotely making sense, so are you trolling or what?

And the resulting fragmentation of everyone doing their own thing is core to why Linux is not a widespread OS.

/buh bye



Oh noes, interface fragmentation. That's why android never got off the ground. TouchWiz, Sense, MotoBlur, etc. killed it.

/and for many uses it is a widespread OS
//some people may be obsessed with trouncing Windows, but I'm not.
 
2012-11-14 06:46:55 PM  

AustinFakir: Linux is awesome for geeks, programmers, and power users and will continue to serve them well.


True but only in a one-off one to one scenario. Try to be compliant in an enterprise full of geeks using their highly customized system and it's anarchy that costs the company real money to have to manage and audit.

PCI, SOX, litigation hold and discovery requests, full disk encryption, etc.

That's the problem. The anarchy must be managed due to external requirements you can run from.

Are you a 1099 contractor that uses your own gear? Fine. Knock yourself out. Good for you. I do the same thing, but when you have to meet audit compliance the fragmentation is painful and costly to businessses and it doesn't scale past 200 employees and 3 linux variants.
 
2012-11-14 07:07:52 PM  
cman: I would like to add that the plethora of choice confuses the hell out of computer users. There are too many damn distros out there with configuration options that confuse the hell out of a inbred southerner. I can understand Ubuntu with their Unity project and that they are trying to make it attractive for new users, but at the same time, you should not go after new users with the risk of pissing off your base.

Stuck unity on one of my boxes, and that's as far as it got.

// running 10.04 for as long as I can. I've got it configured just the way I want it now.
 
2012-11-14 07:53:42 PM  

lohphat: The anarchy must be managed


Why can't it be? If a boss can uniformly impose Windows, why can't he or she impose one flavor of Linux, with whatever level of uniformity in configuration he or she would require of Windows installs?
 
2012-11-14 09:24:19 PM  

lohphat: AustinFakir: Linux is awesome for geeks, programmers, and power users and will continue to serve them well.

True but only in a one-off one to one scenario. Try to be compliant in an enterprise full of geeks using their highly customized system and it's anarchy that costs the company real money to have to manage and audit.

PCI, SOX, litigation hold and discovery requests, full disk encryption, etc.

That's the problem. The anarchy must be managed due to external requirements you can run from.

Are you a 1099 contractor that uses your own gear? Fine. Knock yourself out. Good for you. I do the same thing, but when you have to meet audit compliance the fragmentation is painful and costly to businessses and it doesn't scale past 200 employees and 3 linux variants.


I worked at a company that had the highest level of PCI compliance, and developers were free to run whatever we wanted on our machines. PCI compliance has very little to do with that. For PCI compliance, the potential hostile force controlling a developer's computer is the developer himself. The PCI guys focused on network security, network topology, development practices, etc. Some of our developers were interviewed during the certification process, but they were only asked about how security worked for specific applications and about general security-related programming practices.

The way IT handled desktop administration was handled was, if you can't make your computer work, IT will be happy to wipe it and reinstall Windows.
 
Displayed 50 of 103 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report