On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 17:13:04 -0500 (EST) Stephen Powell <zlinux...@wowway.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 17:01:37 -0500 (EST), Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > > All GTK dependent DEs have their drawbacks. Xfce still is and will > > be my DE for a while, but I'm already testing Razor-Qt. It's not > > that good at the moment, but since LXDE is similar ok as Xfce is, > > it might be interesting to wait for LXDE-Qt. IIUC the Razor-Qt and > > LXDE folks work together on LXDE-Qt. Perhaps LXDE-Qt would be a > > better choice as a default DE for Debian and some other distros. > > I haven't tried the other DEs that you mentioned. From my research it > seemed that XFCE was pretty close to the "look and feel" of the old > GNOME 2 interface, which is what I am used to, and what "fallback > mode" users of GNOME 3 are used to. As such, it seemed like a pretty > good default DE for new installs to me. But I do feel strongly about > one thing: the default DE should not be one which *requires* 3D > acceleration support! The default DE should be one which is usable by > as wide a variety of video hardware as possible. > Indeed, and I eventually found that my video hardware and driver did indeed do 3D acceleration, but it was not enabled by default. So I gave Gnome3 a try, but didn't like it. I had used the fallback mode, but I then wandered off and tried Xfce and LXDE, and stayed with the latter. It's a pig to get the Debian menu to display on LXDE, if you use that, and I don't know if Xfce has the same trouble. -- Joe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131206082056.39d13...@jretrading.com
