Which is your favourite DE?

  • Gnome

    Votes: 8 18.2%
  • KDE Plasma

    Votes: 16 36.4%
  • Xfce

    Votes: 9 20.5%
  • Budgie

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Deepin

    Votes: 3 6.8%
  • MATE

    Votes: 2 4.5%
  • Cinnamon

    Votes: 4 9.1%
  • LXDE

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 4.5%
  • Total voters
    44

Raiden

Level 18
Verified
Content Creator
Had a first run with Ungoogled Chromium and LibreWolf from AUR with Manjaro using Yay AUR helper. Took a long time to run the compilation and Ungoogled Chromium threw up an error message and quit whilst LibreWolf just hangs there without error message after some time.

Very disappointed indeed for wasting time.


The thing with the AUR is that virtually all packages there are built from source. You pretty much compile the package than install it, which takes a much longer time due to the compiling aspect of it. The speed of it will really depend on your processor and how fast it can handle it. The AUR is great and all, but IMHO, I think it's a little overrated. It's nice that people can write scripts to install virtually every package available on Linux, but really if you think about it, it's just a gap stop compared to Debian and Redhat based distros. Debian especially has the largest repo, with the most officially supported apps. Many of the AUR scripts take a .deb file and configure it to install and run on Arch/Arch based distros. Arch by comparison doesn't have no where near the repo size that Debian and RedHat do, but the AUR makes up for that.

The one thing to note about the AUR is that it is not officially maintained by Arch devs. By it's very name it's maintained by users in the community. While people keep an eye on things, there's always the potential for someone to load malware on to it. It's the reason why Manjaro and even Arch don't enable it by default and put up warnings about using it. Not that it's not good and not safe, but they just want users to know that you have to be more vigilant, as anything can happen.

Don't get me wrong, I really like Manjaro, I think it's a fantastic distribution, but as with anything, nothing is ever truly perfect and all distros will have their pro's and con's
 

shmu26

Level 85
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
The thing with the AUR is that virtually all packages there are built from source. You pretty much compile the package than install it, which takes a much longer time due to the compiling aspect of it. The speed of it will really depend on your processor and how fast it can handle it. The AUR is great and all, but IMHO, I think it's a little overrated. It's nice that people can write scripts to install virtually every package available on Linux, but really if you think about it, it's just a gap stop compared to Debian and Redhat based distros. Debian especially has the largest repo, with the most officially supported apps. Many of the AUR scripts take a .deb file and configure it to install and run on Arch/Arch based distros. Arch by comparison doesn't have no where near the repo size that Debian and RedHat do, but the AUR makes up for that.

The one thing to note about the AUR is that it is not officially maintained by Arch devs. By it's very name it's maintained by users in the community. While people keep an eye on things, there's always the potential for someone to load malware on to it. It's the reason why Manjaro and even Arch don't enable it by default and put up warnings about using it. Not that it's not good and not safe, but they just want users to know that you have to be more vigilant, as anything can happen.

Don't get me wrong, I really like Manjaro, I think it's a fantastic distribution, but as with anything, nothing is ever truly perfect and all distros will have their pro's and con's
In agreement with the above, there are often several versions of the same software in AUR. Some are outdated, some are dev, etc. You need to look at the ratings and the description and make sure you pick the best package for yourself.
 

AtlBo

Level 27
Verified
Content Creator
Manjaro on an old 13-540 based computer. The DE I chose after research was KDE Plasma, and the machine seems able to handle the load fine. This PC does have graphics help with a 2 GB RX 240 and 8 GB RAM which makes the experience better. Overall, KDE seems to stay out of the way performance-wise, even though the specs aren't very good. I do like it better than Windows, and the DE is not hard to learn in my experience. Just a matter of finding a few things. The difficulties I have had are just a Linux thing I would say. Really like the rolling updates in Manjaro.
 

geminis3

Level 16
Verified
Malware Tester
Since Ubuntu left GNOME 2, I haven't used GNOME again, GNOME 3 is like Windows in terms of resources, (information from some people who have used it)

As a side note KDE's KSysGuard and GNOME's system monitor don't measure RAM usage the same way (there isn't a de facto method on Linux) so use htop (or other DE agnostic tool) for doing RAM usage comparisons.
PD: KDE uses less RAM according to htop but GNOME should be able to reduce it's usage if the system is running out of RAM
 

Raiden

Level 18
Verified
Content Creator
KDE is a great DE I like it a lot!
I am probably in the minority here, but I actually like Gnome 3. Took a little getting use to, but once I learned how to navigate around and understand where the Gnome team is going, I actually really like the simplistic get out of your way approach. That being said, it's a little heavier than KDE and and XFCE, however, since Ubuntu has gone back to Gnome for their DE, they have actually helped out quite a bit on the performance front. While still using a little more ram, 3.36 is definitely a lot snappier, compared to 3.34 IMHO.

The only thing that drives me a little crazy about Gnome is fractional scaling. It's pretty poor atm. KDE for the most part is much better in this regard.

Here are some screenshots of different DE setups I am playing around with. Still undecided, but it's what I like about Linux, choice to set it up they way YOU want it to be set up.
Screenshot.png


Screenshot 2.png
Screenshot3.png
 

brigantes

Level 1
KDE is not optimized for all distros equally. For example, its resource usage is different on Fedora versus Ubuntu versus PoPOS versus Arch Linux.

But it does offer the closest Windows-like GUI and therefore its popularity. Some like LXDE require the end user to know linux at least to the upper-end of the intermediate spectrum and a willingness to build it out manually. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that nobody here uses it.
 
Raiden you can make every DE looks beautiful. It's really all about functionality.
KDE DE and apps are more powerful and customizable. This is very important to me. But some people perfer basics. When i try other DE it fells so empty but i've been KDE user for 20 years.

KDE Plasma is stable as hell. I can't remember last time it crashed.
 

shmu26

Level 85
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Raiden you can make every DE looks beautiful. It's really all about functionality.
KDE DE and apps are more powerful and customizable. This is very important to me. But some people perfer basics. When i try other DE it fells so empty but i've been KDE user for 20 years.

KDE Plasma is stable as hell. I can't remember last time it crashed.
Xfce packs a lot of functionality. It is not gorgeous like KDE but it works just as well in my experience.
 

Raiden

Level 18
Verified
Content Creator
It is true that it has more beautiful desktops than XFCE, but if you dedicate yourself a little, it can be acceptable.

View attachment 244202
Looks really nice!

I do agree, out of the box xfce really is not very appealing to the eye. Take some time and you can make it look really nice! Manjaro does a good job of teeming out their xfce version to look reakky good out of the box.
 

JoyousBudweiser

Level 9
Verified
I am an ardent fan of gnome. I was so used to gnome Ubuntu when it was shipped as a different flavour than the default one. I was never a fan of Ubuntu's default unsymmetrical dock. I preferred linux as it has something different from windows theme, so never tried kde more than a day or two. Now I have shifted to pop os ( not my daily driver). Pop guys have really lifted the gnome to different league.
 

bribon77

Level 34
Verified
Looks really nice!

I do agree, out of the box xfce really is not very appealing to the eye. Take some time and you can make it look really nice! Manjaro does a good job of teeming out their xfce version to look reakky good out of the box.
@Raiden, Manjaro and MX Linux have done a good job with XFCE.
But, in Debian it comes horrible, you have to work, to look good.