Are desktops trying to do too much?

BigglesPiP

BigglesPiP

BigglesPiP

Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2006
Posts
13,300
Location
Near Winchester
I've tried KDE4, and found it to be the most awful, ugly, overcomplicated, finicky, hard to use, impossible to configure desktop I've ever had, including Windows Vista.

So I use KDE 3.5 instead.

Are all the desktops getting like this as they evolve? I'm finding myself searching for simpler alternatives like XFCE, just to get some usability back. What am I going to do when that starts adding stupid stuff?
 
Im in complete agreement, for the past few years i always used KDE 3.x as it was relativly simplistic and easy to work with. But when KDE 4 hit the scene IMO its bloated and hard to work with, I mean your cant even have desktop icons without an overlay folder view thing... and it forced me to Gnome, which I dont regret. I just hope Gnome doesnt go in a similar direction :)
 
KDE4 is trying to change the way we think about desktop environments or some other similar malarkey. Others just want to allow you to launch programs, change some bits and bobs, and display windows. I suppose it's then a design philosophy thing.

Gnome seems to be pretty similar in functionality to what it's always been. Do you have a problem with it?
 
I've not ever liked Gnome, but then I haven't used it since I was a Linux n00b (must be almost 5 years ago), so it may be because nothing I did ever worked, and I just learned to hate it because of that.

I'm switching my desktop at work from Windows to xUbuntu, so we'll see how that goes.
 
I dislike both Gnome and KDE with their one-size-fits-all approach. I like my WMs lean and mean.

For those who have tried and rejected *box WMs, what was lacking for you?
 
eXor said:
I dislike both Gnome and KDE with their one-size-fits-all approach. I like my WMs lean and mean.

For those who have tried and rejected *box WMs, what was lacking for you?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm finding it impossible to search for the whosit you're referring to. Any chance of a linky thing?
 
Openbox, Blackbox, Fluxbox, etc.

Remember that those aren't desktop environments, they're window managers. Gnome uses the Metacity window manager, for instance.
 
Last edited:
Ah, I've used fluxbox before, a little too lightweight to be usable IMO. That or I'm just not a fan of right clicking to do commonplace tasks, or not having a nice safe place to go to start an app.
 
It's too inconsistent and too much like Windows. The stupidly named apps also annoy me greatly. K here, k there.

Go Gnome or go home! :)
 
BigglesPiP said:
I'm just not a fan of right clicking to do commonplace tasks, or not having a nice safe place to go to start an app.
Click to expand...

Openbox is very customizable. If you click my sig, you will see an example of clickable icons on the taskbar.

It takes a bit more time to set up, but you end up with exactly what you want. Nothing more, nothing less.

yashiro said:
Go Gnome or go home! :)
Click to expand...

Har Har. :D
 
If you like the Ubuntu way of doing things but want to try a *box window manager, check out Crunchbang Linux. It's Ubuntu-based and uses Blackbox. Its live CD is a nice example of what a well-configured default can do. :)
 
I've tried KDE4, and found it to be the most awful, ugly, overcomplicated, finicky, hard to use, impossible to configure desktop I've ever had, including Windows Vista.
Click to expand...

Come on, the Windows Vista desktop is just a taskbar and nothing else, it's the same as XP.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom