Reply With QuoteWithout upgrading to at least Gtk3 it's stuck with old app versions too, dead-end. I'd rather use Gnome3 as much as I hate it with up to date apps, rather than Gnome2 with outdated apps.
Phoronix News Bot
MATE Desktop 1.2 Released
Phoronix: MATE Desktop 1.2 Released
The MATE Desktop, which is the fork of the GNOME2 package-set, just experienced its 1.2 stable release. Will this be a viable fork to allow GNOME 2.x to live on?..
http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA4ODI
Senior Member
Without upgrading to at least Gtk3 it's stuck with old app versions too, dead-end. I'd rather use Gnome3 as much as I hate it with up to date apps, rather than Gnome2 with outdated apps.
Senior Member
I love how most people threaten to go kde or xfce but in their minds know that their bluffing.
kde- clusterfuck
xfce- apps are too feature light.
Senior Member
AFAIK, you could just install gtk3 on MATE and still use newer programs. I use KDE and I have GTK3 programs, so I'm not sure what the big deal is.
Also, what is everyone's problem with KDE? KDE 4.3 and older were a complete utter mess, KDE 4.4 was the first release that was pretty good and didn't have many problems, and today I'd say my only complaint about KDE is how its a little too heavy (with all built-in features on). I'd really like to know what people's problems are with it as of its current release.
As for GNOME 3, I haven't tried it and I have no intention in using it as my main DE on any of my computers, but from what I've seen, it has plenty of room for improvement but it seems nice - I like how "new" and refreshing it is. It has its own personality in a way.
As for XFCE, I admit I haven't tried it in over a year but to me, that whole project is a failure. It strives to be lightweight but instead its just as resource consuming as MATE but lacks features.
Senior Member
Originally Posted by garegin
Exactly, just another wasted effort, it's more useful to everyone to just make Mate/Gnome2 faster then to do a crappy rewrite with half the functionality and no real performance gain.
KDE has always been a clusterfuck and it has the most asinine naming convention ever conceived.
Senior Member
Mind explaining your definition of "clusterfuck"? Because to me, that's like saying "this is bad" and leaving it at that, which isn't a reason. I can see why some people wouldn't like the naming scheme of it but what is nice is it lets you know what is part of the KDE suite and what isn't. Besides, do you have a better name for many of the things? For example, kolourpaint. What else are you gonna call it? Colourpaint is just plain boring and you can't call it "Paint" due to confusion with mspaint. GNOME has a similar naming scheme that start with G or GN.
Phoronix Member
I hate KDE looksGnome atleast looks elegant.
Phoronix Member
I dare to say that again. KDE can be tweaked to look like Gnome (be it classic or GShell). Overall it's a better desktop environment.I hate KDE looks
Senior Member
How about KDE Paint?
Junior Member
When your computer is fast enough, you may not notice the difference between gnome2/MATE and XFCE. XFCE is now 4.8 and they have done very well to keep their DE light and useful. xfdesktop and thunar in particular open much faster than nautilus. Also, XFCE have build in a compositor and can handle desktop switching etc. It includes not many features, but just enough common ones so that I do not need to install compiz.
As you are using KDE, XFCE is definitely not for you. KDE is full of features.
But I guess for Linus and others that like XFCE, simpliness itself is a feature.
Posting Permissions