Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 27th Feb 2009 11:53 UTC, submitted by B12 Simon
Xfce It took them two years, but the Xfce team has just released Xfce 4.6.0, with a whole slew of improvements. Xfce started back in 1996 as a Linux equivalent of CDE, but soon diverged from that goal to stand on its own two feet, and by now it's safe to say that Xfce is the best of the rest - after KDE and GNOME. Xfce 4.6.0 seems to cement them further into that position.
Order by: Score:
Awesome
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 27th Feb 2009 12:06 UTC
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

I'm a fan of Xfce myself, although I don't currently use it. What I hear so far sounds good. Can't wait to try it. I might attempt to compile it... although that's something I've never done before. The most I've done so far is compile small, simple, individual apps, and have had some problems there... so it's likely I'll end up giving up and just waiting for a distro (Zenwalk?) to release with it.

Edit: It seems they have installers. Maybe this won't be so painful after all...

Edited 2009-02-27 12:07 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Awesome
by B12 Simon on Fri 27th Feb 2009 12:38 UTC in reply to "Awesome"
B12 Simon Member since:
2006-11-08

Zenwalk were waiting for XFCE 4.6 before releasing a new version. There's been a lot of activity in the changelog lately so you (and me for that matter) shouldn't have long to wait!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Awesome
by Valhalla on Fri 27th Feb 2009 18:44 UTC in reply to "Awesome"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

I really liked XFCE when I tried Xubuntu a while back, and while I returned to OpenBox I did stick with Thunar. Judging by what I see on the tour, i'm thinking it's time I took XFCE for another spin.

Reply Score: 2

Oh well
by Vinegar Joe on Fri 27th Feb 2009 12:33 UTC
Vinegar Joe
Member since:
2006-08-16

"Xfce started back in 1996 as a Linux equivalent of CDE, but soon diverged from that goal...."

And that's why I stopped using it.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Oh well
by JMcCarthy on Fri 27th Feb 2009 13:25 UTC in reply to "Oh well"
JMcCarthy Member since:
2005-08-12

Same here, personal preference of course. Installed it one day and it looked and felt more like GNOME-lite than it did CDE. No idea when that happened as I don't use as my main desktop, but it happened somewhere in 4.X for me, as far as looks. Functionally before that.

Edited 2009-02-27 13:29 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Oh well
by joekiser on Fri 27th Feb 2009 15:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Oh well"
joekiser Member since:
2005-06-30

I think Xfce abandoned its CDE goals around the time that they moved to GTK+ 2.x with Xfce4. I remember one of the features that I missed was 'iconify' or 'minimize to the desktop' as it would be called today. It's a shame, really, because Xfce tries so hard now to be Gnome. What's the point?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Oh well
by sofar on Fri 27th Feb 2009 18:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oh well"
sofar Member since:
2008-09-04

Those features still work. Maybe they are no longer the default, but applications can still be iconified to the desktop.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Oh well
by joekiser on Fri 27th Feb 2009 23:41 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Oh well"
joekiser Member since:
2005-06-30

Those features still work. Maybe they are no longer the default, but applications can still be iconified to the desktop.


Iconify to desktop was only added back with the 4.4x release. But there were a few years where the option simply wasn't available.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Oh well
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 27th Feb 2009 13:27 UTC in reply to "Oh well"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

"Xfce started back in 1996 as a Linux equivalent of CDE, but soon diverged from that goal...."

And that's why I stopped using it.

And you feel the need to advertise that? Seriously, who cares?

Reply Score: 13

RE[2]: Oh well
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 27th Feb 2009 13:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Oh well"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

And you feel the need to advertise that? Seriously, who cares?


I do, because I agree. CDE is too good to not be updated to modern times. CDE is still the best DE ever made, for the simple reason it was the first and last DE that MADE SENSE. You didn't need to think - it just did exactly what you expected it to do.

http://www.osnews.com/story/18969/pt_VII_CDE

It's a shame something like that doesn't exist anymore.

Edited 2009-02-27 13:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Oh well
by spiderman on Fri 27th Feb 2009 16:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oh well"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

This is not possible. If you want CDE, you've got to use CDE.
If you want an improved CDE, then it is not CDE anymore.
XFCE is not CDE and is wonderful. I use it everyday with full satisfaction. Every release is better than the previous one.
On my netbook, this is the only DE I've found that let me put everything vertically (including window list) to save vertical space. There is windowmaker but XFCE is much more usable.
So it is not CDE, good! If I wanted CDE, I would use CDE!
At least tell us what you think is wrong with XFCE that make you prefer the way it was when it was closer to CDE!
You don't like having the possibility to have several dock? Just use one! You don't like antialiased fonts? Just don't use them! You like your desktop acting as a window list? Use it like that!
What don't you like precisely?
If all you don't like about it is that it is not CDE, you've got to know that CDE does actually still exist. It didn't disappear.

Edited 2009-02-27 16:06 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Oh well
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 27th Feb 2009 16:25 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Oh well"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

If you want an improved CDE, then it is not CDE anymore.


So GNOME 2.26 is no longer GNOME because it's an improved version of GNOME 2.24...?

Your logic alludes me, oh great one.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Oh well
by spiderman on Fri 27th Feb 2009 18:24 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Oh well"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

GNOME 2.24 and GNOME 2.26 are both GNOME but XFCE is not CDE.
You didn't get the point.
You are complaining that XFCE is not CDE. If you were complaining that GNOME 2.26 was not GNOME 2.24 then they would tell you just to use GN0ME 2.24. There would be no point in doing GNOME 2.26 if that was to make it like 2.24
It's impossible to improve something and make it the same at the same time. Either you improve it or you do it the same, but there is no point in doing the same either.
It's not constructive to say that you don't use XFCE because it is not CDE. What would be more interesting is what you like in CDE that is not in XFCE. How you would like XFCE to improve, what feature you miss, etc...

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Oh well
by vitae on Fri 27th Feb 2009 20:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oh well"
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20


CDE is the environment to check out. CDE made me realise just how much KDE, GNOME, Windows, and OS X suck.



It's impossible to take you serious when you say things like that.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Oh well
by Dasher42 on Sat 28th Feb 2009 00:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oh well"
Dasher42 Member since:
2007-04-05

You know, Thom, I agree with you on some points about CDE, but generally when I've had to use it I find it to be in the way. I am highly keyboard-centric and want things to respond as instantly as possible; alt-tabbing past the dock is an extra keystroke I don't want. The drawers are okay, but I find that they occupy screen real estate I'd rather keep unless I do the extra work to shut them down. Likewise for all the extra widgets on that dock; more screen real estate consumed. And if I want to get at everything I iconified, I have to get all the windows out of the way.

It seems to me that OSX's dock with an added option to keep its stacks open would have most of the merit that I see. KDE's Plasma could feature plasmoids on the desktop for minimized windows if you so pleased. I'm not sure we've left the realm of subjective preference though.

Usage patterns differ, obviously, and to me an app-centric Dock and command-Tab switching, consistent keyboard shortcuts, a nice tabbed terminal, and generally high responsiveness keeps OSX in my top spot for interfaces I use.

Reply Score: 2

SVN
by big_gie on Fri 27th Feb 2009 12:44 UTC
big_gie
Member since:
2006-01-04

Using 4.6 svn since two month and it works great. I tried 4.4 some years ago but went back to kde on main machine. 4.6 now gives a light and modern look to my eeepc 1000 without struggling.
The addfinder is also very welcome. I did not know about it so I had to create manually some launchers, which is a pain.

Reply Score: 1

no subject
by 3rdalbum on Fri 27th Feb 2009 13:40 UTC
3rdalbum
Member since:
2008-05-26

XFCE is a piece of piss to compile; it's all graphical and it lists all dependencies, giving you a tick alongside each one if you've got it. Fantastic build system, absolutely fantastic.

And XFCE 4.6 is probably what I'll use on my netbook. I started to like it more when it became more like Gnome, although I found that the previous version didn't really like my desktop computer that much.

Reply Score: 2

Xfce and XDG
by fresch on Fri 27th Feb 2009 15:19 UTC
fresch
Member since:
2006-09-12

Besides being light, fast, less needy on the dependency side than Gnome, and still offering more features, there is one other thing I like about Xfce... their adherence to standards worked out by freedesktop.org.

Open Source is great, but Open Standards and Software actually implementing it is even better...

Reply Score: 5

RE: Xfce and XDG
by Trenien on Sat 28th Feb 2009 12:17 UTC in reply to "Xfce and XDG"
Trenien Member since:
2007-10-11

Honestly, only by comparing it to Gnome can one say Xfce is light...

Reply Score: 3

Considering ditching GNOME.
by bryanv on Fri 27th Feb 2009 15:24 UTC
bryanv
Member since:
2005-08-26

I ran XFCE at work for about two weeks back around 2003, I think. (It was before Thunar) Eventually, I decided I missed some things from GNOME, and went back to that.

Now I work at place entrenched in, and requiring Windows, (Which sucks so bad it's not funny. I got used to running Linux at work! Now that Linux isn't an option for me, I realize how -bad- Windows is for productivity.)

Anyhow, I'm wondering if it wouldn't be worth giving XFCE a go on my other system at home.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Considering ditching GNOME.
by B12 Simon on Fri 27th Feb 2009 15:52 UTC in reply to "Considering ditching GNOME."
B12 Simon Member since:
2006-11-08

Thunar was the final piece of the XFCE puzzle for me. Since playing with it, XFCE's replaced KDE on all my PCs.

Reply Score: 1

Xfce is a horrible name to catch.
by Jason Bourne on Fri 27th Feb 2009 15:39 UTC
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

One of the things that is needed for Xfce to become number one is a name change. Seriously. KDE & GNOME are very catchy, but Xfce... did you ever try to spell this? What about spelling in a foreign language? Even more complicated? I wished I knew how to spell in french.

In all seriousness, If I were Olivier, I would change this name to something like Nebbia, Andromeda, XF², Modex, Orion... but eks-éf-see-ee is damn hard to hear, swallow, or speak.

I completely understand the *nix name and acronyms mania, but something like fwmn, xfce, lpqs, qxnp... is hardly human. Microsoft did its homework and chose the stupidiest name to name their OS/Desktop: Windows.

For example... You are not familiar to Linux and not even familiar with desktops. Suppose I present you the new desktop environment:

wxfzk

See what I mean?

Reply Score: 7

merkoth Member since:
2006-09-22

I heard some people saying "x-face" for example. That isn't that bad... I don't know if it's official or not, though.

Reply Score: 3

Michael Member since:
2005-07-01

I heard some people saying "x-face" for example. That isn't that bad...

It sounds like a generic insult.

Reply Score: 6

prickett Member since:
2007-04-03

Not as bad as when my eyes read Xfce and I hear in my head "X Feces".

Reply Score: 2

dvzt Member since:
2008-10-23

That would be something based on wxwidgets, right?

Reply Score: 1

well done Xfce team
by poundsmack on Fri 27th Feb 2009 16:21 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

It's been a while comming, and it was worth it.

Reply Score: 3

I used XFCE back in the day
by TaterSalad on Fri 27th Feb 2009 17:15 UTC
TaterSalad
Member since:
2005-07-06

I remember compiling XFCE back in the day because it was much lighter than GNOME. Unfortunately it was still a bit too heavy for the weak powered laptop I had at the time so I had to go to fluxbox and openbox. Good to see they are still developing it even though I no longer use it.

Reply Score: 3

Good news
by spectator on Fri 27th Feb 2009 17:59 UTC
spectator
Member since:
2006-02-27

Now it's time to look forward to 4.8! ;) Editing menus and connecting to sftp via Thunar are last two features, that Xfce lacks from my point of view. Anyway, a big "thank you" for the devs!

Reply Score: 2

I still like it for the philosophy, but...
by Googol on Fri 27th Feb 2009 20:58 UTC
Googol
Member since:
2006-11-24

one of the mayor points it had going for it isn't unique to it anymore when compared to KDE: Checking the memory usage, it seems to me that KDE is just as slim now. Years ago, if you wanted slim + a bit of sexiness, KDE was no option.

Reply Score: 2

XFCE is my current pick
by Dasher42 on Fri 27th Feb 2009 22:53 UTC
Dasher42
Member since:
2007-04-05

I have a Linux desktop and a Mac notebook. Windows is at long last out of the picture. I like to be able to switch with a minimum of fuss between the two remaining platforms, but I'm still settling on the components of my Linux desktop.

I like KDE's power and the reinterpretation of the desktop through Plasma, but I find the interface a little high on the latency, especially the console, and I dislike how much the interface models itself on Windows. I like Gnome's interface; it's almost clean and snappy enough to be Mac-like, but there are still pieces of it that don't seem integrated or quick.

XFCE has a light touch, and still feels modern. It doesn't add as much power, but it doesn't get in my way either. I really think it deserves a higher ranking on the Linux desktop. Here's hoping this next release gets its due!

Reply Score: 1

Looks very nice!
by obsidian on Sat 28th Feb 2009 00:06 UTC
obsidian
Member since:
2007-05-12

This latest release really does look polished! Well done to the devs!

Although I'm not using Xfce at present, I do use Thunar - a great file manager. I'll definitely be installing this latest Xfce release!

Reply Score: 2

some benefits over Gnome
by buff on Sat 28th Feb 2009 01:07 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12

I get a little performance boost on my older Athlon 1 GigHz system when I use Xubuntu. Application windows are snappier and it loads faster than Gnome. At startup it also uses less RAM for me. I can't add any more memory to my system so XFCE is a nice alternative. I am excited to try out this new release.

Reply Score: 2

RE: some benefits over Gnome
by hussam on Sat 28th Feb 2009 07:59 UTC in reply to "some benefits over Gnome"
hussam Member since:
2006-08-17

I get a little performance boost on my older Athlon 1 GigHz system when I use Xubuntu. Application windows are snappier and it loads faster than Gnome. At startup it also uses less RAM for me. I can't add any more memory to my system so XFCE is a nice alternative. I am excited to try out this new release.

I think the major performance boost comes from gtk+ 2.14.x if you use xubuntu.

Reply Score: 1

XFCE
by OSGuy on Sat 28th Feb 2009 05:00 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

XFCE is a great DE but I miss an option like "Arrange Icons by" -> "Date, Type" etc on the desktop. GNOME at least has "Clean Up By Name". Though I'd like to see "Snap To Grid" "Auto Arrange" ... Does anyone know if this possible at all? Perhaps a plug-in for either XFCE or GNOME?

Reply Score: 3

XFCE = Gnome minus what?
by Lobotomik on Sat 28th Feb 2009 08:41 UTC
Lobotomik
Member since:
2006-01-03

XFCE paint themselves as some sort of Gnome lite, and they do share a lot of infrastructure with gnome, such as GTK and GSttreamer.

However, I have been unable to find out what is it that makes XFCE 'lite', in their website or elsewhere. What does Gnome have that is missing in XFCE? What would I miss if I switched? Can somebody point me to an explanation?

Reply Score: 2

RE: XFCE = Gnome minus what?
by spiderman on Sat 28th Feb 2009 09:10 UTC in reply to "XFCE = Gnome minus what?"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

You would miss CORBA/bonobo and mono and a lot of over-the-top engeneering. XFCE does the same things with a simple design. The interface is not the same but can be tweaked.
To be fair, there are some things that XFCE does not have still, like at-spi integration (accessibility)

Reply Score: 2

RE: XFCE = Gnome minus what?
by rajan r on Sat 28th Feb 2009 10:04 UTC in reply to "XFCE = Gnome minus what?"
rajan r Member since:
2005-07-27

Better software engineering, perhaps?

For example, Thonur vs. Nautilus: Nautilus used to be so slow, I could go out and fetch a nice cup of coffee between lag times. Looks pretty, yes, but not very efficient.

GTK+ isn't GNOME's speed bump.

Reply Score: 2

XFCE == Gnome done right
by madcrow on Sat 28th Feb 2009 13:28 UTC
madcrow
Member since:
2006-03-13

XFCE really is the better of the two GTK-based DEs in many, many ways. GTK is not as "nice" an API as Qt in many ways, but used properly, it can be lighter. Gnome squanders that opportunity and actually manges to be heavier than KDE 4. XFCE takes advantage of it and is awesomely light and fast. The only thing I really miss in XFCE is the ability to control my wireless card through NetworkManager...

Reply Score: 2

RE: XFCE == Gnome done right
by Isolationist on Sun 1st Mar 2009 15:40 UTC in reply to "XFCE == Gnome done right"
Isolationist Member since:
2006-05-28

XFCE really is the better of the two GTK-based DEs in many, many ways. GTK is not as "nice" an API as Qt in many ways, but used properly, it can be lighter. Gnome squanders that opportunity and actually manges to be heavier than KDE 4. XFCE takes advantage of it and is awesomely light and fast. The only thing I really miss in XFCE is the ability to control my wireless card through NetworkManager...


Have you tried wicd? ... http://wicd.sourceforge.net/

Reply Score: 3

kudos
by motang on Sat 28th Feb 2009 14:36 UTC
motang
Member since:
2008-03-27

I Xfce for what it is, and they seem to do many good tings. I shall try this out once Xubuntu has it. ;)

Reply Score: 1

mini-Gnome
by sigzero on Sat 28th Feb 2009 18:44 UTC
sigzero
Member since:
2006-01-03

That is what I think of Xfce. I use it. I love it. It is simpler to use and it is faster (for me at least). Applications open very quickly under Xfce...more quickly than the same applications I use under Gnome.

I like Gnome...I like Xfce better.

Reply Score: 2

Terminal
by iptables on Sun 1st Mar 2009 04:59 UTC
iptables
Member since:
2009-02-26

The terminal in xfce has some nice features, I have tried it out before, however switching back to gnome and I have tried out kde4.2 which has a lot of functionality.


The best aspect of all of the desktop managers is the 'choice' of choosing a different one sometimes. A change is nice, before I was required to get my RHCE I did not understand a lot of the underpinnings (still learn new things everyday), I am just amazed at how awesome the entire open-source community is and how far it has come since when I first installed Red Hat 6.0 Professional back in 1999 or so.


I am running several distro's, I am fixin to install xfce as I write this.


:)

Reply Score: 1