91–100 of 204 posts
My accessibility needs are dead under Wayland. There needs to be shortcuts that can be emulated per application and global shortcuts. Their security model won't allow this. I don't know how accessibility and automation tools are going to get by trying to support every wayland compositor.
Genuinely find XFCE the only pragmatic option when it comes to "no-fiddling-just-working-and-lightweight" WMs in Linux/BSD land - it's basically like a better Windows 2000 UI with sane defaults throughout. Thanks so much to the devs involved in keeping XFCE up to date. This is major good news.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Source?
It used to use more resources and was slower than Gnome 2, when it was still a thing. I don’t know why it got a reputation of being lightweight. I guess people assume less features mean better optimized, which is jot really true. I used to run it for years though, really liked it for a while.
The transition to Wayland also seems to correlate with the adoption of client side decorations (CSD). This "modern" approach destroys the traditional UX of XFCE as seen by recent changes in the settings manager. I fear for the future of XFCE. The advantage of XFCE for me has always been that it's a stable implementation of a traditional Win98/XP UX. I hope they don't adopt more Gnome3 patterns.
My accessibility needs are dead under Wayland. There needs to be shortcuts that can be emulated per application and global shortcuts. Their security model won't allow this. I don't know how accessibility and automation tools are going to get by trying to support every wayland compositor.
Genuinely find XFCE the only pragmatic option when it comes to "no-fiddling-just-working-and-lightweight" WMs in Linux/BSD land - it's basically like a better Windows 2000 UI with sane defaults throughout. Thanks so much to the devs involved in keeping XFCE up to date. This is major good news.
KDE is actually lighter. And hidpi is much better on Qt.
The transition to Wayland also seems to correlate with the adoption of client side decorations (CSD). This "modern" approach destroys the traditional UX of XFCE as seen by recent changes in the settings manager. I fear for the future of XFCE. The advantage of XFCE for me has always been that it's a stable implementation of a traditional Win98/XP UX. I hope they don't adopt more Gnome3 patterns.
CSD has nothing to do with UX. CSD just means the application draws the window controls and borders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This guy was using Gentoo on what I'm guessing is an older laptop. That kind of comes with the territory. You don't use LFS or Gentoo as a daily driver and expect not to do some footwork... but if you use Mint, Fedora, Pop_OS, Ubuntu/Debian etc... it pretty much is "just works." Of course, you have to do stuff on pretty much any PC, Windows, Mac or Linux. I own them all and know this to be the case... it's just that…
"but if you use Mint, Fedora, Pop_OS, Ubuntu/Debian etc... it pretty much is "just works." " I just started to make the transfer to Linux from windows. I have limited experience after running Ubuntu on a dual boot laptop back in school a long time ago. It wasnt my daily driver at the time but class required it. I recently downloaded fedora onto a desktop and it has been a horrid experience. It's sooo slow compared to…
A typical way would be using xfce's "enable display compositing" setting with a graphics driver that doesn't support proper acceleration.