What is Digg?96 Comments
- Ademan, on 08/07/2008, -2/+86How is this an "implementation of GNOME" ?! It's a desktop environment that happens to use gtk+, as does Xfce but no one in their right mind would call Xfce an implementation of Gnome. Unless LXDE uses gconf or implements its own version of it, uses bonobo, or even dbus (would have to use it alot, using dbus is pretty standard these days) calling it an implementation of Gnome is just stupid...
- Nastjuid, on 08/07/2008, -3/+30If only there was a... gnome-light, or something like it... we could call it XFCE or something like that ... damns yous internets! damns yous!
end lols here.
guess I'll have to check it out. - regeya, on 08/07/2008, -1/+23I guess I'll have to add my voice to the "why not XFCE?" hoard. I guess it's a matter of preference, but between PCmanFM and Thunar, I'll choose Thunar. I much prefer it to Nautilus.
- inactive, on 08/07/2008, -4/+24fluxbox = win
- stevensj2, on 08/07/2008, -5/+24Why re-invent the wheel?
XFCE has a lot more development behind it, and does quite the nice job for anyone who doesn't like Gnome, and isn't fond of the *box setups (or any pure-WM environment, for that matter). - Stiverton, on 08/07/2008, -1/+18Lightweight GNOME alternative eh, aren't those called Halflings?
- Megatog615, on 08/07/2008, -1/+14"Why re-invent the wheel?"
From the site: "Because it's cool!" - geeshock, on 08/07/2008, -1/+13Looks promising but there is strong competition, for example XFCE or even Sugar for netbooks. A "Scaled down" Gnome does not give me a good outlook, lets hope its performance stacks up.
- inactive, on 08/07/2008, -3/+14hijacked thread in progress.
XFCE best desktop ever. Runs on on less than half the resources and memory than GNOME or KDE and looks better by default. The XFCE team pay attention to being more minimal and aesthetically pleasing, I never even have to customize it, it just looks so nice on install. - trogdoor, on 08/07/2008, -0/+9*Metacity is a WM ( nautilus is a file browser )
- bruenig, on 08/07/2008, -1/+10It uses openbox as its window manager, so there was no wasted development time there. Oh and you may want to read up on the difference between a WM and a DE. Gnome is a DE, nautilus is a WM. KDE is a DE, kwin is a WM.
And furthermore, these guys are writing this for free and because they want to. There cannot be any "better use for development time" than the time you spend developing ***** you feel like. - greensky, on 08/07/2008, -5/+14It's nice to see all the mentions of XFCE in this threat. I've been using it a long time now and it's great.
- inactive, on 08/07/2008, -1/+10Xfce = win , you can see the difference compared to gnome or kde. But i'm mad that it doesn't come with a built in network browser, = fail
- depro9, on 08/07/2008, -0/+8I loves the fluxbox
- larryjr88, on 08/07/2008, -1/+9Stupid story, but Dugg for being Linux related and not a lolcat or Obama spam.
- mk3k, on 08/07/2008, -6/+14Boy just what Linux needed.
- solidcube, on 08/07/2008, -3/+11Is there no better use for development time than yet another linux WM?
There are seriously like 50 or so. In 2 years, current Gnome will be a minimal WM. Cutting edge window managers become minimal over time. Windowmaker is still a great windowmanager, as are blackbox and fluxbox. And XFCE. So, did they really need to make yet another? - Taiyoryu, on 08/07/2008, -1/+8I predict a digg for an XFCE vs LXDE head-to-head article
- Eezyville, on 08/07/2008, -3/+10Threat?
- growler1, on 08/07/2008, -1/+8XFCE fanboy here, too. It runs great with Compiz Fusion and Emerald, and makes my poor Celeron D salvaged box run smoothly and efficiently.
- harmil, on 08/07/2008, -0/+6It would appear that that's just a mis-characterization. LXDE is just a desktop environment. I can't tell (mostly because their site has been dugg under) if they conform to the various desktop interoperability "standards" that allow KDE and Gnome to interoperate.
However, like most new efforts to replace a large system with something lightweight, this project will be impossible to evaluate until it's become mature. For now, it is likely lightweight as a result of a lack of features that will likely be added as their user base grows. Modern desktops are expected to support the handicapped; multiple languages / text directions; interoperation with highly complex applications; integration with operating system management tools; and a host of other things that your average "isn't a desktop just a Window manager and a filebrowser" crowd doesn't see. - solidcube, on 08/07/2008, -2/+7The great thing about fluxbox is that it will run on a teletype.
There's such a thing as too much minimalism. - Megatog615, on 08/07/2008, -0/+5Great, but not on-topic.
- freezerburn666, on 08/07/2008, -3/+8my trust is with XFCE... but i dunno, two dudes from Taiwan... u know, it could just be THAT much better... ahem..
- Knet88, on 08/08/2008, -0/+5Just what we need, another completely useless comment
- Stevo23, on 08/07/2008, -1/+6Learn computers, damnit.
- Naidel, on 08/07/2008, -0/+5LXDE is based on Openbox.
- webhead74, on 08/07/2008, -1/+5ooh! and it even comes with interweb explorer!!
- Rudegar, on 08/07/2008, -2/+6if LXDE is an implementation of gnome so then i guess gimp is a pretty lean implementation of gnome
no wait gtk was something gnome got from gimp :P - lemur, on 08/07/2008, -0/+4I used to only use very minimal/light desktop environments or standalone window mangers with some DE features such as wmaker and fluxbox. Those were nice, and for a while I used to use XFCE because I just liked the way that GTK looked when properly themed.
However, the reason why these things don't really compete with a full Desktop Environment is because the DE does too many things that window managers and "light" desktops will never do. For example, I'm using GNOME right now, and I don't feel like I can't live without services like automatic disk mounting and the hordes of useful tools that come along for the ride.
The Desktop itself provides applications with the tools and infrastructure they need to integrate. Anyone who has used KDE for a while knows how beautifully KDE apps interact with one another, and GNOME also works to provide a cohesive environment.
While the Linux philosophy of combining disparate parts sometimes works out beautifully, it just doesn't work on the GUI. Things like LXDE can provide a little window manager and lovingly handcraft a few simple tools to "fake" the DE such as a basic file manager, image viewer, text editor, icons, etc, but they just can't match the deeper, hidden functionality that has spent years in implementation on the older, more well established desktops. - J4k3, on 08/07/2008, -1/+5Anything based on Openbox is a winner in my book.
- jejones, on 08/07/2008, -0/+4Woot! If LXDE makes it easy to replace that non-user-configurable POS, gnome-screensaver, I'm ditching GNOME in a heartbeat!
- abbathdoom, on 08/07/2008, -0/+4Even if I had a Quad Core with 4GB of RAM I'd still run XFCE. It is like gnome but without the fuglyness.
- sbin, on 08/07/2008, -0/+4Despite my using Nautilus. I think Thunar's not bad at all.
And all of us who code for a living know: It takes the threat of something like Thunar to motivate the Nautilus guys to make it faster/improve it.
But you know, anyone else is welcome to add their FM in the mix.
I don't really want one of them to "win" the competition.
I just want them all to be different. So that I can choose one of many, instead of having a billion options in the same FM. - sbin, on 08/07/2008, -1/+5Actually if this is an implementation of GNOME then GNOME is an implementation of GIMP what with GTK coming originally from GIMP.
Anyhow, I'm happy to hear there's more things using GTK :) - Naidel, on 08/07/2008, -0/+4It's not a scaled down Gnome. It actually has very little to do with Gnome, and is designed with modularity in mind, minimizing the required dependencies to run it. It uses openbox as the window manager.
And yes, it is fast; it is a lot faster than XFCE on an ancient pIII 700 mhz I have lying around. Configuring the DE is a lot easier on XFCE, however, which is why I still generally prefer it. - oobuntu, on 08/07/2008, -2/+5Sorry but that looks ugly to me. reminds me of puppy linux or windows 98. netbooks/eee pcs don't have to have ugly UI just because the screen is small!
- tvanwyk, on 08/08/2008, -0/+3"Not everyone on this earth is rich. There must be a nice desktop environment for those who can't afford new fancy hardware, and we have the ability to help them."
Fluxbox (on Slackware) runs great on my old PIII 500mhz box with 128MB of very slow DDR. Of course, Flux is "just" a window manager (it also happens to be a standalone window manager that blows the bloated big two way the hell out of the water). - freezerburn666, on 08/07/2008, -0/+3ding ding ding!
- rocknrolf77, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2Check out slitaz and you will see how lighweight lxde is. 80 mb installed on disk.
- Naidel, on 08/07/2008, -0/+2In Puppy's defense, the latest release actually looks quite nice. And LXDE is a lot better than Win 98. If you have an old PC lying around and even XFCE runs slow on it, consider giving LXDE a shot.
- greensky, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2lol, thread...
- RaulMuadDib, on 08/08/2008, -1/+3LXDE uses Openbox for a Window Manager
- ilgaz, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2The problem of Gnome isn't the bloat, the problem is its creator and some of the developers forming some kind of gang to push Microsoft technologies/patents to users. How many full feature gnome desktops out there which will function without Mono framework?
- drag, on 08/09/2008, -0/+2Well First Off:
XCFE isn't really that "lite". It just isn't. People who say 'it uses half the ram' either are not comparing equivelent functionality or are comparing the version of Gnome that Ubuntu ships or Fedora ships vs XFCE, which are not the same thing.
For example Ubuntu will ship Gnome with Firefox and OpenOffice.org. Firefox is _not_ part of Gnome. OpenOffice.org is _not_ part of Gnome. Beagle desktop search is not part of gnome. Instead the default Gnome applications are Epiphany Browser and things like Abiword and Gnumeric for office tools and Tracker for search. All of these default Gnome components use much less resources then what most people end up using.
So when you compare the _default_ Gnome configuration with the default XFCE environment you'll quickly find that while XFCE uses less resources, it's not by a large amount. If your system is unusable with Gnome with 256 it will only be very slighlty more usable with XFCE. And on top of that because XFCE only provides a subset of functionality that Gnome provides when you try to do a Apples to Apples comparison based on functionality you'll see that you can actually end up with XFCE using _more_ resources then Gnome.
If your going to want to use a 'lite' desktop your going to end up having much less functionality available to you then if you used Gnome or KDE.
Less resources == Less functionality.
So I am just going start trying out LXDE... I have some projects were a truly lightweight desktop will be very nice. - Kral, on 08/07/2008, -1/+3Why not just optimize GNOME?
- JonForTheWin, on 08/07/2008, -0/+2Get the ***** off Digg go back to your aol chatrooms, damnit.
- regeya, on 08/07/2008, -0/+2Openbox is indeed nice, and can replace Metacity in GNOME. I used to use it in that manner.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=75471 - sx66gns, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2as do I , but it's not practical for most.
- Naidel, on 08/07/2008, -1/+3Why is he being dugg down? Gnome's screensaver "settings" GUI SUCKS. It's one of many annoyances (like the fact that resizing a window is -hardcoded- to alt+middle click, when alt+right click is so much more superior esp. on laptops without a third mouse button), that makes me want to switch. When KDE4 has matured a bit, I definitely will.
-
Show 51 - 97 of 97 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is