Posted by: Administrator
on February 02, 2006 11:38 PM
I don't mean to undermine the article, but I tried a few years ago to find a similar light but good environment to run on my system. I tried Openbox at one point (and Fluxbox and Blackbox) but found all of them a bit counterintuitive when it came to configuring, especially when it came to the menus. I also didn't like how they didn't seem to fit in with the other apps (I tend to favor GTK+ and GNOME apps).
With those things in mind, I've found <a href="http://xfce.org/" title="xfce.org">Xfce</a xfce.org> to be a good choice. It's configurable (though probably not as much as Openbox), but light and fast, and also favors the model that you can extend your desktop as needed. (I think I've heard that same paragraph about desktop icons on the Xfce mailing list.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) I really find that it's what GNOME is trying to be--the options you need with programs that Just Work. 4.4 is due out this year--with desktop icons, Thunar (a filemanager that rivals Nautilus in functionality, but being smaller and faster), and a host of nice updates, making it seem even more appropriate for those looking to replace GNOME or KDE without losing a lot of features.
I respect that you came to the decision of Openbox (especially after looking at your nice screenshot), but I am wondering how you think it compares--in resources, configurability, etc.--with Xfce.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Why not Xfce?
Posted by: Administrator on February 02, 2006 11:38 PMWith those things in mind, I've found <a href="http://xfce.org/" title="xfce.org">Xfce</a xfce.org> to be a good choice. It's configurable (though probably not as much as Openbox), but light and fast, and also favors the model that you can extend your desktop as needed. (I think I've heard that same paragraph about desktop icons on the Xfce mailing list.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) I really find that it's what GNOME is trying to be--the options you need with programs that Just Work. 4.4 is due out this year--with desktop icons, Thunar (a filemanager that rivals Nautilus in functionality, but being smaller and faster), and a host of nice updates, making it seem even more appropriate for those looking to replace GNOME or KDE without losing a lot of features.
I respect that you came to the decision of Openbox (especially after looking at your nice screenshot), but I am wondering how you think it compares--in resources, configurability, etc.--with Xfce.
#