If you have to pick only one Desktop Environment and use it till your computer breaks, what would you choose?

[Guest]

I use XFCE, but I like Cinnamon too. I use Nemo and Xed instead of Thunar and...whatever.

[Guest]

TBH, I've always wanted to do this.

[Guest]

W2k was the best.

[Guest]

I am absolutely with you about i3. Simply great (there is also dwm or qtile)! But it is a WM, not a DE, what OP asked about.

[horse@lemmygrad.ml]

fair

xfce+i3 i guess

[jimmy90@lemmy.world]

ya totally

[Guest]

You mean switching between the DE xfce and the WM i3wm, right? Yep, this works and it can indeed make life sometimes easier to have a DE and a WM aside each other.

[horse@lemmygrad.ml]

yeah, basically just running xfce but replacing xfwm4 with i3
i was kinda surprised how well it worked tbh, i had been using i3 on it's own for like a year before i tried it

[Guest]

Oh, I did not know about the possibility of replacing xfwm4 with i3. I too am using i3 for some years and like a lot to have a clean surface which facilitates focussing on my tasks. However, never thought about integrating it in a DE.

[Guest]

KDE, it's the swiss army knife of DEs.

[Guest]

Glad KDE has been putting major efforts over recent years into improving stability instead of just adding features.

[Guest]

Apple actually had good visionaries and design decisions, sometimes.

Never been a fan of apple's hardware decisions, but their software is routinely state-of-the-art even to this day.

They value treating the user like a human instead of a programmer. GNOME values removing as many features as possible to make their jobs easier.

[Guest]

Until they need gnome to do something it doesn't do...

[Guest]

Agreed. I used to be a diehard XFCE fan and hated KDE. Then I saw their resource usage came pretty close to each other but KDE had way more development behind it so they could add Wayland support (which I actually don't even use.)

KDE used to be buggy and bloated. They've been improving stability for years and their efforts really show. I used to think it was bloated, but it really isn't if you only use the parts you need. I use it pretty similarly to XFCE, it just has more dev support.

[Guest]

Personally, I'm disgusted by the "matter of fact" tone GNOME devs take to criticism only to be wrong in the end.

It's like, they did their heels in so deep on dumb shit like "the dock should be on the side because vertical space is at a premium!" Literally whoever is floating ideas like that on their team needs to be fired and blacklisted, but unfortunately they're probably promoted.

[Guest]

I also wouldn't have as much of an issue with gnome for removing features if they also made the right design decision in place of those features.

They want to remove features to make things easier on them, not users.

[Guest]

I mean, we already know the solution to gnome's trite is to use something else.

[Guest]

I mean, they added a ton of features, especially minor or niche ones, but a lot of amazing ones like KDEConnect too.

But what makes KDE the best is that the features don't get in the way of core functionality anymore, the basic DE is always safe and they generally layer stuff on such that it doesn't break anything.

So basically the opposite of most of modern software nowadays.