Linked by Neven Bijelic on Wed 24th Nov 2004 08:45 UTC
Xfce No doubt, all of you have heard of Xfce and those who haven't will hear about it soon anyway. I remember trying out Xfce for the first time back on SuSE 9.0. I am not sure if it came with the distrobution or if I downloaded it. At the time 9.0 came out I remember thinking to myself "nice, good potential, could be eyecandy, fast..." but I still logged into KDE upon booting. Sure I tried Gnome but somehow for a windows-commer KDE was more user friendly at the time. Update: More screenshots of XFce.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I just don't know about this...
by Eddy on Wed 24th Nov 2004 16:45 UTC

Honestly, I don't get these things much. Is KDE big and slow? On older machines, somewhat. (I don't have much Gnome experience.) It has gotten much snappier with recent versions. But on older machines, I'd say it's hard to beat good old FVWM. So really, what's the point of XFce? I read somebody saying that it's good for "new users". Give me a break! If as a sysadmin you want to be tweaking things just to push XFce on new users, then I say you have too much time on your hands. For new users, pick Gnome or KDE and be done with it.

So no, XFce is not for new users. It is for power users who want speed and simplicity. Er, sorry guys, there's FVWM for that already (or pick your other favorite lightweight WM). So what is XFce for again? As I see it, it is an experiment in making the DE completely independent from the applications it runs, thus something that pushes for standards. I'm all for that, but please don't give me the "it's easier/nicer/better" reason. That's not what XFce is good at.

And if standards are the goal, then why not work directly with Gnome and KDE teams to make it happen, instead of staying in the middle? Sounds like some effort is being wasted to me...