[Welly Wu]

I am loving Linux every day I use it! I noticed that GNOME and KDE are resource hungry and that things tend to be a bit unreliable, unstable, and applications break under both of those major desktop environments. So, I decided to try Xfce because I am becoming a big believer in simplicity, minimalism, and reliability. Xfce is so light and fast. I can minimalize useless eye candy and clutter off of my desktop with it. Apps must be running about 10% faster and nothing breaks suddenly without explanation. All in all, I think I'll be heading toward simpler and more minimalistic desktops. It's always the one that gets little to no attention that works best.

Linux just rocks. I'm going to see if I can run Xfce for a full week without rebooting or powering down. Hopefuly, no apps will break and my computer won't freeze under stress. Red Hat FC3 SELinux is still kind of experimental and I'm looking forward to FC4 SELinux soon. RH can do better than this...much better. I'll be sticking to RH Fedora anyway because most of my knowledge (i.e. the computer books I'm buying and reading) are in RH so I'm invested for the long haul.

Xfce is simply the best for my needs: simple, easy, minimal, fast and reliable.

 

[ADS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welly Wu I am loving Linux every day I use it! I noticed that GNOME and KDE are resource hungry and that things tend to be a bit unreliable, unstable, and applications break under both of those major desktop environments. So, I decided to try Xfce because I am becoming a big believer in simplicity, minimalism, and reliability. Xfce is so light and fast. I can minimalize useless eye candy and clutter off of my desktop with it. Apps must be running about 10% faster and nothing breaks suddenly without explanation. All in all, I think I'll be heading toward simpler and more minimalistic desktops. It's always the one that gets little to no attention that works best. Linux just rocks. I'm going to see if I can run Xfce for a full week without rebooting or powering down. Hopefuly, no apps will break and my computer won't freeze under stress. Red Hat FC3 SELinux is still kind of experimental and I'm looking forward to FC4 SELinux soon. RH can do better than this...much better. I'll be sticking to RH Fedora anyway because most of my knowledge (i.e. the computer books I'm buying and reading) are in RH so I'm invested for the long haul. Xfce is simply the best for my needs: simple, easy, minimal, fast and reliable.

Glad to see another person has seen the light. I use Linux for a lot of what I do (I'm an ECE). My current best uptime was ~270 days (using Slackware). I personally like blackbox, but XFCE is great as well.

 

[gsferrari]

I used to be fulltime on linux because my university software tools demanded it (Cadence, spice, matlab, verilog etc.). Everything was easier with linux...no slowdowns because of emulation etc.

I dont need it anymore but I am definitely gonna stick with it. Just downloaded ubuntu for a trial run.

I am all for linux for almost everything except multimedia and games...I switch back to windows.

What I would like MOST is to have two desktops - a decent one for linux and a kickass one for windows. That is my dream.

gs

 

[ADS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsferrari I used to be fulltime on linux because my university software tools demanded it (Cadence, spice, matlab, verilog etc.). Everything was easier with linux...no slowdowns because of emulation etc. I dont need it anymore but I am definitely gonna stick with it. Just downloaded ubuntu for a trial run. I am all for linux for almost everything except multimedia and games...I switch back to windows. What I would like MOST is to have two desktops - a decent one for linux and a kickass one for windows. That is my dream. gs

I'm using Ubuntu now, and it's very good, but not perfect. I think I'm going back to Slackware when Slackware 11 comes out. I prefer the semi-old school way of doing things.

 

[Megaptera]

Xfce has been my WM of choice for a while now -- my personal tweak is to use gnome-panel instead of the native xfce4-panel. Very good stuff.

 

[Welly Wu]

But, the beauty of Xfce and Linux is choice of a WM and simplicity. No more wasted mouse clicks to get useless pop-up windows just to find a darn program anymore. It's so much more efficient. There's a lot less junk being loaded (most of it behind your back without your knowledge or permission like in Microsoft Windows) which means less stuff to stall, freeze, or lockup. Fewer chances for things to go wrong and Murphey's Law stuff definitely applies here in the world of computers too.

I like GNOME, but it's a bit too bloated for my very extremely simple needs. I know Red Hat prefers GNOME and coded Fedora / RHEL for GNOME, but if my needs can be best served through Xcfe, then why should I opt for something more feature laden?

Xcfe is a great small footprint WM. It's simple, easy, stable, reliable, and there's just less stuff that can go wrong. For me, I value simplicity, reliability, integrity, and security over features and custom options. Right now, my dream is to run RHFC3 SELinux without rebooting or shutting down until RHFC4 SElinux is released on June 6th 2005. Then, I'll upgrade for free for sure. Even then, I'll stick to Xcfe instead of GNOME or KDE (I hate KDE -- it's for users with powerful desktop / notebook PCs).

 

[wallijonn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsferrari What I would like MOST is to have two desktops - a decent one for linux and a kickass one for windows. That is my dream.

'Virtual OS Desktops' will soon be here - all you will need is a dual cpu chip. You'll be able to run Linux and Windows at the same time. (I can't find the link righ now, though...)

 

[averydonovan]

I personally like WindowMaker the best, and it's been my *nix window manager of choice for 5 1/2 years. Xfce is nice and for many people probably better than WindowMaker, although for me I liked WindowMaker better. Gnome and KDE have taken some long strides in the past few years but are still far too resource hungry.

I haven't installed a *nix system in a while simply because Windows gives me the combination of hardware and software support that I need. When I go with a *nix system I prefer one of the BSDs, especially FreeBSD or NetBSD. If I have to go Linux for hardware support, then Gentoo is my choice there although I was very impressed by Fedora when I tried it. I run a lot of open-source software that is available on other platforms and I also run some proprietary software that is Windows-only. Not being a fan of having to dual-boot I just stick with Windows XP for now. I'm glad that at least I have the choice of running the system that meets my needs best

 

[gsferrari]

I have actually NEVER looked at FreeBSD...gonna check it out now.

I love free crap...who doesnt

gs

 

[Welly Wu]

FreeBSD is more secure than most major distributions of Linux, but you can narrow the gap by careful reading and implementation of best security practices. It shares a strikingly similiar heritage to UNIX and Linux. However, the biggest challenges facing BSD are leadership vision, politics, and obsolescence by virtue of diminishing usage. The two major operating systems in the next five years will be Microsoft Windows and Linux.

All are my opinions. Thank you!

 

[uzziah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallijonn 'Virtual OS Desktops' will soon be here - all you will need is a dual cpu chip. You'll be able to run Linux and Windows at the same time. (I can't find the link righ now, though...)

no kidding? that really is a beautiful idea. i really like the: have one linux and one windows pc idea though: i think that's a great idea. heck; you could build a linux pc for like 250 bucks and run something like gentoo and minimal apps and it still would be plenty fast for just about anything. i'd go for something like an athlon xp 1700+ on ebay with a refurb socket A mobo; total cost would be like $75, add a used older hdd, a cheap monitor, a cheap cdrom, and 256mb of ram and you'd have a snappy minimilist rig. 300w would be more than enough: to much really.

 

[uzziah]

ps: linux is coming of age! if we can get better windows-emualtors than wine and really be able to run most windows apps on linux WELL, that would be perfecto.

 

[Welly Wu]

Uzziah:

It's coming. Development of WINE and its' counterparts both non/commercial are coming on pretty decently and 2005 is the year to watch in terms of WINE development. With the advent of dual core, multi-threaded CPUs, well, just think of the possibilities. WINE serves my needs enough for now. However, I have noticed that Windows applications that run under RHFC3 SELinux and WINE run about 25% faster and are more stable, reliable, etc. than in Windows. It's crazy, but it's my experience.

The next 2 years will be interesting to watch the full development of multi-core, multi-threaded CPUs, DDRII SDRAM, and PCI-eXpress along with SLI. When all of these technologies become mainstream in 2 - 3 years, then the "compelling reason" to upgrade will be too hard for me to resist.

 

[ADS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by uzziah ps: linux is coming of age! if we can get better windows-emualtors than wine and really be able to run most windows apps on linux WELL, that would be perfecto.

Wine Is Not an Emulator.

Remember that.

 

[Stephonovich]

Never much liked Xfce, myself. Then, I didn't get into much customization. Usually, if I want fast and lightweight, I go with Fluxbox, which works great in stock setup. If I want lots of bells and whistles, I like Gnome, tweaked a lot. I've seen some extremely beautiful Enlightenment setups, though, so I'm trying to work on that. Just a beast to setup, is all.