Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 10th Feb 2008 21:58 UTC, submitted by Vincent
Xfce "Xfce is just as customizable as KDE or GNOME, so I set myself a goal: make Xubuntu look like Windows Vista. Though you won't be told how to achieve the exact same end result, this guide provides comprehensive instructions helping you make Xubuntu look the way you want it to. In any case, I would certainly not recommend such a setup for someone new to Xubuntu. Xubuntu is different than Windows; making it look similar is only confusing."
Thread beginning with comment 300414
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: the goal, pfft
by flashog on Mon 11th Feb 2008 08:25 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: the goal, pfft"
flashog
Member since:
2007-07-25

You are taking a comparison in performance between Xubuntu and Windows Vista and concluding that Windows XP is "more responsive". Well.. there are probably hundreds of OSes out there which performs better than XP, so if it's just about saving ressources, why don't you just jump onto one of those?

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[5]: the goal, pfft
by alias on Mon 11th Feb 2008 08:36 in reply to "RE[4]: the goal, pfft"
alias Member since:
2007-02-11

No, I'm just concluding that XFCE is not "resource saving": neither compared to other Linux dekstop alternatives, nor to a bloated version of Windows like XP. It used to be yers ago; it's time to stop spreading this rumor now.

Consider that the last version of enlightenment is considerably faster than just xfwm4 alone while having ten times as eye candy. And I don't consider enlightenment a good example of "conservative design".

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[6]: the goal, pfft
by flashog on Mon 11th Feb 2008 08:46 in reply to "RE[5]: the goal, pfft"
flashog Member since:
2007-07-25

I'm not trying to put you down or anything, but if you have any data showing that XFCE4.4 is more resource demanding than Windows Vista, or even XP, on any comtemporary Linux distribution, I sure would like to see it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: the goal, pfft
by Soulbender on Mon 11th Feb 2008 08:57 in reply to "RE[5]: the goal, pfft"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Consider that the last version of enlightenment is considerably faster than just xfwm4 alone while having ten times as eye candy.


How do you measure "fast"?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: the goal, pfft
by autumnlover on Mon 11th Feb 2008 13:23 in reply to "RE[5]: the goal, pfft"
autumnlover Member since:
2007-04-12

No, I'm just concluding that XFCE is not "resource saving": neither compared to other Linux dekstop alternatives, nor to a bloated version of Windows like XP. It used to be yers ago; it's time to stop spreading this rumor now.


In my humble opinion I agree. Canonical should move their attention from Xubuntu to Fluxbuntu. I tried Xubuntu 7.04 on system equipped with Celeron 400, 128 MB RAM and old PCI Virge DX card. Result was disastrous. Even XP was a little bit faster on that system.

Reply Parent Score: 2