# What is your ideal desktop experience?



## Beastie7 (Aug 24, 2020)

This is just a thought experiment to gauge what the general FreeBSD community prefers or likes in a desktop experience. I have an idea I’d like to tinker with, but I’d like to start with user feedback first. If you can, also please explain what the “feel” would be for you as well; ie. Compositing features, client/server side decorations, default tooling/apps, etc.

Thanks


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 24, 2020)

My favorite desktop experience has always been - and probably will remain - Window Maker - but I deliberately checked _Minimalist_ above, because the dock is the least interesting part of it. 
CDE would come out as a close second, because it is a _coherent _desktop with no obvious third-party alien parts.


----------



## a6h (Aug 24, 2020)

Anything that resemble CLI experience.


----------



## scottro (Aug 24, 2020)

I like fairly, but not completely simple. I generally use openbox with a background I made that I like (and hey, one of my co-workers, not knowing I'd made it, said it was beautiful) <stops to take modest bow> and have it configured so that I can open my frequently used programs (terminals and browsers) with keystrokes. I use tint2 as my task bar, which doesn't, as far as I know, launch programs, just keeps track of them.
My other favorite is dwm, which again, has keystrokes to open most used programs, and also uses dmenu (which allows you to open programs).  I use it with one of the move resize patches so that I can use it as a stacking window manager if I prefer. At work, where I have a multi-monitor setup, dwm is better because I can go to a different tag (think workspaces) on one monitor and the others stay the same.


----------



## garry (Aug 24, 2020)

Beastie7 said:


> This is just a thought experiment



I ran a series of usability experiments on some "desktops".  In each experiment I search for way to access the working documents, folders, tools for each of my current tasks, e.g. one task is broadly "Courses" and another is more specifically "IIT Kanpur -- Introduction to Programming in C".  I should be able to put any item for the task (its zim notebook, the pdf for a textbook, a web url, or any other unix file object) on the desktop or on a shelf (dock or panel) by drag and drop from the file manager.

Further I should be able to create a separate desktop and shelf for each task, so that I can see a different set of working documents when I switch tasks.

i.e. a work-centric, document-centric interface for Getting Things Done.  When I'm working on Courses I see a shelf across the top of my screen with quick access to my course folders, references, and stuff in progress.  It's like a real shelf above my desk where I put things I'll need to touch when I return to working on Courses.  There's a separate shelf for Admin, and for Readings, and for Journaling, etc.

The current open-source desktops fail to even let me drag a document to the dock or panel.  I looked for a way to do this simple drag-and-drop task in Gnome3, XFCE, enlightenment e24, and Plasma 5.  Each is a complete FAIL for this simple task.  But each one provides a multitude of ways to launch an application, and you can always add on the dock of the day and get yet more (and pretty) app launchers.  I read Release Notes for each of the recent releases of these desktops and almost all prominently brag of their *improved icons* and better app menus and new launchers!!?!

How can one have a favorite amongst such a loser crowd of alternative application launching interfaces?

KDE Plasma did allow me to  drag a document to the desktop and does provide a different desktop for each activity so it is VERY close to passing my test.  There is still no concept of "shelf" where one can put work aside, putting documents on the desktop is awkward because (1) documents can't be just dragged onto the desktop (a dialog pops up asking you if you want to create a "link" or an "icon" -- do you know the difference??).  And of course, documents on the desktop are less useful than having an actual shelf for work-in-progress because the desktop is covered by windows.  I found the whole process of trying to keep activity-centric documents on activity-specific desktops to be workable but requires way to many mouse clicks and unnecessary transtions.  

The environment that I've been using for years allows me to have a different desktop (wallpaper and icons) and different panel for each task on which I can put ANY kind of object including mountpoints, folders, documents, applications.  I've got key-triggered window tiling AND window tabbing (drag one window title bar onto another window titlebar).  The window manager can be asked to remember the state of each window (which monitor, dimensions, position, fullscreen, maximized, minimized, etc.) and when you open it next time will restore it the way you left it.  The file manager uses a spatial view so that an object on the screen seems to be there, not be just a transient object in a browser view allowing one to search up and down the heirarchy of many thousands of directories that are on my workstation.  Rox-filer provides the desktop "pinboard" and the panels and can have any number of them and switch between them freely.  This file manager allows me without lifting my hands from the keyboard to navigate the folder heirarchy, select any object, open the object or execute any shell command on that object.  This feels to me like a gui SHELL.

In other words, with the simplest of all window managers and file managers I've got a document-centric, work-centric interface with on-demand window tiling and tabbing and no limitations on what I can put on the desktop or the panels (up to four panels at a time).

  So MY enironment with FLUXBOX and ROX-FILER is the desktop environment that I prefer.  

Everything else sucks.


----------



## mark_j (Aug 24, 2020)

vigole said:


> Anything that resemble CLI experience.


Yeah mice are for loozers.


----------



## garry (Aug 24, 2020)

scottro said:


> I like ... simple ... uses dmenu (which allows you to open programs).



Oh yes.  Dmenu and rofi can do so much.  I make heavy use of dmenu and rofi and a set of scripts I call "*everything*".  In each DE that I use I set Super-semicolon to execute ~/everything/.run -- a shell script that uses dmenu to select one of the (visible) items in ~/everything

~/everything has _apps_, _courses_, _enter_, _home_, _notebooks_, _places_, _tasks_ and a few scripts such as _sleep_ and _xportrait_ (put X in portrait orientation) and _xnormal_ (put X in nomal orientation).

~/everything/.run checks object returned by dmenu to see if it is an appdir, a folder with a .run script, a simple folder, or a "file".  It does the right thing for it.  e.g. "*enter*" asks for the key into my password database and, prompting for the master password if necessary, puts the password on the clipboard.  *places *lists bookmarked places in the file system and opens the chosen bookmark. * notebooks *uses rofi to show me the names of all of my zim notebooks and lets me open one.  

dmenu and my everything/.run script are the only launchers I need.  dmenu can run everything!


----------



## a6h (Aug 24, 2020)

mark_j said:


> Yeah mice are for loozers.


Computing has degenerated since mouse was shoehorned to computation. Yay for x11-wm/i3 and _real programmers don't use pascal_.
But When I'm on a mission, to convert Windows users (there's no hope in Mac-land), I'll show them a x11/kde5 desktop. KDE is the winner and I've achieved some miraculous results.


----------



## garry (Aug 24, 2020)

vigole said:


> Computing has degenerated ..._real programmers don't use pascal_.


Real programmers use Ada.


----------



## Beastie7 (Aug 25, 2020)

For those who picked the minimalist option, what drives you to such an environment? Is it the keyboard-centric experience of managing windows or some other reason?

If a full DE incorporated a window manager with built in key bindings (like i3, etc), and gave you the ability to get rid of client side decorations (ie. title bars), and taskbars, would you use it? Kind of like a on/off switch between a ‘minimal’ experience and a full featured window manager.


----------



## a6h (Aug 25, 2020)

Beastie7 said:


> For those who picked the minimalist option, what drives you to such an environment? Is it the keyboard-centric experience of managing windows or some other reason?


For whole my life I was a Microsoft user. Starting with DOS 5.0 moving forward, and all along I found myself arranging windows in a tiling form in Windows OS, from 3.1 onward. I am/was technically a windows user. Nobody around me was using titling WM or FreeBSD, nor Linux. Then I found FreeBSD (after a few month testing OpenSUSE), comparing a few WMs, reading most of related threads in this Forums and finally I chose x11-wm/i3, stick with it and that's it. I can't give you any reason. It's just the way it is. If I have to provide some rationale, I will say it is the _animal instinct_.


----------



## scottro (Aug 25, 2020)

I remember an old debate about mutt and pine where someone stated that people will pull out all sorts of technical reasons to justify what is, in the end, an emotional decision. I prefer more minimal managers because it seems there is less to go wrong. For example, on Fedora forums, where the default is Gnome, I see all sorts of problems where they get an unhelpful error message like Something has gone wrong. 
The other aspect, (for me), is that ability to do most of what I want to do by keyboard. But, I think that like vigole part of it is just that it's what I like, and I don't really have a reason.


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 25, 2020)

mark_j said:


> Yeah mice are for loozers.



Until you tried Acme.


----------



## mark_j (Aug 25, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> Until you tried Acme.


I did but the damn coyote keeps blowing it up!


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 25, 2020)




----------



## jardows (Aug 25, 2020)

I have to select other, because I like a taskbar and a dock, like the default XFCE setup.  I like the dock for quick launching of programs, and the taskbar to keep track of things.  I still keep the launch button on the taskbar, but I'm finding myself more using the right-click menu more, saves me just a few moments of moving my cursor to the upper left part of my screen.  When I was using NomadBSD on my laptop, I did like the way they had the environment configured, and plank was nice.  I've since returned to "vanilla" FreeBSD and didn't want to go through the hassle of all the manual setup to get the same environment, so went back to my old stand-by XFCE.  I think I like plank better than the bottom panel of XFCE, but since the panel works, I didn't want to mess around with installing an extra piece of software.  This seems to work well for my workflow.


----------



## Sevendogsbsd (Aug 25, 2020)

I selected minimalist because my experience on FreeBSD with desktop environments has been less than stellar in terms of performance. My only comparison is against Linux. For example, Mate`, Xfce4 both "feel" slower to me. This is totally subjective though. I have never tried KDE on FreeBSD.

I find that a minimal window manager is my favorite on FreeBSD, Fluxbox to be exact. I bounce around between it, Windowmaker and CWM. File management is my only gripe as normally I use pcmanfm for its simplicity but prefer Dolphin for its sheer power, however Dolphin has a billion dependencies so prefer not to use it. On Linux I would normally use KDE for its sheer power and flexibility.


----------



## Mjölnir (Aug 26, 2020)

In KDE, I can easily set up a _dock, taskbar_ (standard) & _panel_, and configure it to fit my needs.  Additionally, I can configure different set-ups via _activities_.  Very handy.

It's kind of funny that the same persons praising CLI & UNIX philosophy prefer crippled minimalistic GUIs, but do not realize that a modern GUI like _Qt/KDE_ implements exactly that same philosophy on the GUI level: various small modules, each built to offer a small set of functionality, bundled & linked together in the GUI.  So yes, there has been some progress in the richness of features that today's GUIs offer.  I wrote more than once that IMHO _KDE_ exaggerates the _featuritis_, but still it offers so many sensible features that no other GUI has, thus I consider it the best reasonable choice.


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 26, 2020)

mjollnir said:


> crippled minimalistic GUIs



You mean GUIs which don’t distract you from whatever you plan to do?


----------



## hruodr (Aug 26, 2020)

I do not know if people is aware that x11-wm/twm is much more sophisticated
than it is out of the box: it needs some configuration. Unfortunately it has not virtual desktops.
x11-wm/fvwm has them and with motif outlook is very nice, in opposite to the 
ugly default configuration in FreeBSD. Also x11-wm/cwm seems to be simple
and powerful, but I never felt the necessity of something better or different from the first two.
I think file or application managers can be implemented separately from the window manager,
but I do not need them unless I have a directory with many Photos and want to have an
overview of all them as small images.


----------



## Mjölnir (Aug 26, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> You mean GUIs which don’t distract you from whatever you plan to do?


No I mean a GUI that offers exactly what I plan to do, when I open the context menu, in many cases.  Not always, but very often.  What distracts me is cruising the FreeBSD forum & add my 2¢ too often.  Please stop posting on interesting topics!


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 26, 2020)

mjollnir said:


> No I mean a GUI that offers exactly what I plan to do



On would think that what you plan to do happens in application software, not in a program launcher...


----------



## Mjölnir (Aug 26, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> On would think that what you plan to do happens in application software, not in a program launcher...


_KDE_'s program launcher is very sophisticated, and there is an alternative one.  They have their own context menus.  It's very intuitive.  When did you last try _KDE Plasma_?  Maybe you should install it (optionally in a BE+snapshot of your $HOME, so you can revert quickly) & try it out for a day or two.


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 26, 2020)

Last time I tried KDE, it ate all my RAM, so KDE was the only application software I could use.

Personally, I prefer to use text editors, web browsers and the like, but what do I know?


----------



## scottro (Aug 26, 2020)

You know what you like.    As does mjollnir.  I think it's really a matter of personal taste. I can think of proverbs in English, French, and Japanese to that effect. Person A's workflow may be better served by vi while person B may need gedit.  
Anyway, I'm going back to my earlier quote, that we can pull up reasons to support what is often an emtional decision--one person likes minimalist, another doesn't consider KDE's features to be a distraction, but a way to improve their work flow. 
Ok everyone, group hug.      (Or not.)


----------



## Mjölnir (Aug 26, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> Last time I tried KDE, it ate all my RAM, so KDE was the only application software I could use.


KDE does not _eat_ RAM, but _makes use_ of it... It handles low resources well & runs sufficiently well on a system with 1 GB RAM (I tested that), since it's framework has undergone a major overhaul a decade ago or so, with emphasis on resource usage.  Graphical effects are auto-tuned to match the hardware's capabilities, and it also adopts it's RAM usage.  Various tests showed KDE's RAM footprint is slightly higher than XfCE's and lower than Gnome or Mate, while at the same time it offers much more features.  Naturally, these must be coded & need data, so that's reasonable.  Obviously, if you don't need many features, you can tweak a minimalistic DE to match your workflow.  Once your needs grow, that can become a time-consuming task, and you may be better off using a "full" DE like Mate, XfCE or even KDE and accept there are features you don't use (and, of course, bugs).


> Personally, I prefer to use text editors, web browsers and the like, but what do I know?


I'll never understand the argumentation to choose the combination of a minimalistic DE (_because it uses less resources_) + over-bloated, resource-hungry web browser (_firefox)_, whose source code is a sequence of security flaws & needs a dozen of resource hungry plugins to work properly.
`pkg rsize firefox`: 228MiB vs. `pkg size falkon`: 10.3MiB


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 26, 2020)

mjollnir said:


> I'll never understand the argumentation to choose the combination of a minimalistic DE (_because it uses less resources_) + over-bloated, resource-hungry web browser



While I agree that modern web browsers are usually annoyingly bloated (which is why I’m always trying alternatives), I still prefer a minimalistic DE with a resource-hungry web browser to a resource-hungry DE with a resource-hungry web browser. The only_ desktop_ I need is a Run A Command dialog - or even: menu.


----------



## MarcoB (Aug 26, 2020)

You forgot that falkon needs an additional rendering engine (qt5-webengine) which makes the total package size a lot larger.


----------



## phalange (Aug 26, 2020)

Beastie7 said:


> For those who picked the minimalist option, what drives you to such an environment? Is it the keyboard-centric experience of managing windows or some other reason?
> 
> If a full DE incorporated a window manager with built in key bindings (like i3, etc), and gave you the ability to get rid of client side decorations (ie. title bars), and taskbars, would you use it? Kind of like a on/off switch between a ‘minimal’ experience and a full featured window manager.



As some have already noted, it's really a matter of taste more than pragmatics or even logic. I can rationalize my affinity for minimalist WMs (I personally use spectrwm), but it's a rhetorical exercise. I really like tiling vs floating, so that's a thing for me. I like that stripped down look. I like configuring it myself with scripts. I like being able to make a distraction-free environment. I like keyboard-centric navigation. And I like being able to trim down running apps as I please.

And to your second point, I actually would say no. It's done often actually, where people use i3 et al. in tandem with Plasma. I've tried it, but it's defeating at least part of the purpose for me, which is running a fairly spartan system.


----------



## Mjölnir (Aug 26, 2020)

MarcoB said:


> You forgot that falkon needs an additional rendering engine (qt5-webengine) which makes the total package size a lot larger.


Yes, (`pkg size qt5-webengine`: 144 MiB) plus many other Qt & KDE libraries.  _Firefox_ needs many other packages, as well (38, incl. various GTk2 & GTk3 libs vs. falkon needs 26).  But there's an important point here: any other KDE application can make use of the HTML render engine, e.g. the _"jack of all trades device"_ _Konqueror_ & the KDE PIM suite _Kontact_, and they're all benefiting the tight integration & cross-module interoperability that the framework offers.  E.g. I'm comfortably reading RSS news (among others, FreeBSD newsfeed) with _Kontact_.
EDIT and security advisories & errata notices.  But I did not manage yet to include the FreeBSD Events iCal calendar


----------



## Beastie7 (Aug 26, 2020)

All of you are grey beards. 

/s

thanks for the responses. Keep them coming!


----------



## Deleted member 63539 (Aug 26, 2020)

I'm using MATE but found I'm mostly use the Task Bar like when I'm still use Windows. I'm too used to the Windows' way, so even after converted to Linux then FreeBSD, I'm still somewhat a Windows user with a Unix terminal.


----------



## Argentum (Aug 26, 2020)

I installed several GUI-s on my desktop. SDDM first for logins, then KDE Plasma, Gnome3 (broken today), Xfce and MATE. All accessible from SDDM login screen so I can easily experiment and use all of these. GUI-s also bundle applications, especially KDE and these are cross-functional. After using Plasma for some time I switched  to Gnome 3, but still use some KDE applications. Actually liked Gnome3 and it is pity that it does not work any more. Xfce I keep for backup, but feels a bit inconvenient. Eventually landed on MATE with some bundled applications from KDE and Gnome3.

However already used to MATE, I have still a little dream about Gnome3 coming back again...

... and of course web-browser and mail client are big parts of desktop experience, however not directly part of GUI. So I have installed (from ports) Chromium and Firefox for web and Thunderbird for mail. Thunderbird is my absolute favorite! Chromium and Firefox are pretty much equal for me. Chromium builds a long time from source...

In addition for that Shotwell for photos, Gimp for editing, FreePlane for mind-mapping, Wireshark for packet sniffing, VLC media player, LibreOffice for documents, etc. Used to like KDE terminal, but switched to MATE terminal after some time. Both still available.


----------



## jbo (Aug 26, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> Until you tried Acme.


Please elaborate.



Beastie7 said:


> All of you are grey beards.


Unfortunately I am far from being a greay beard. I hope to get there one day, but it will certainly be a long journey. I grew up with mice already invented & imancipated. However, I prefer something minimalistic / heavily key-stroke based / tiling. I started out using awesome but converted to i3 eventually and that's what I've been using ever since whenever possible.


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 26, 2020)

joel.bodenmann said:


> Please elaborate.








						Mouse Shortcuts in Acme
					






					acme.cat-v.org


----------



## jbo (Aug 26, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> Mouse Shortcuts in Acme
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Uhm, this looks very intriguing... Would you recommend trying this to a tiling WM user?


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 26, 2020)

Honestly, probably not, unless you use a tiling WM that you control with a mouse (or you want to break with your habits). Acme does not _support_ a mouse - it _requires_ one. 
(But I surely like using it.)


----------



## mickey (Aug 27, 2020)

I have been using twm for a short while long time ago, followed by rather happily using fvwm2 for many years, after which came gnome2, about which i had rather mixed feelings. After the demise of gnome2 I tried out mate, but somehow it felt like someone did _s/gnome/mate/g_ on the source code of gnome and changed the sticker on the box. It just didn't feel right. At least not at that time. Then my old desktop machine broke and had to be replaced. As the integrated HD graphics in my new machine wasn't supported at that time, my only 'desktop experience' for a while was FreeBSD /w text-console in dual-boot configuration with windows, until I added a supported nvidia graphics card, which finally brought new perspective to regaining a FreeBSD desktop. After throwing up over gnome3 and trying out a few other DEs, I finally landed with KDE5 plasma, which in a way just felt about right, so I made myself a new home and never looked back.

Not that I'm a typical desktop user, most of my desktop experience runs in one terminal emulator or the other. Otherwise I use a browser or two, an email program, a file manager and media player, but that's about it. For me it's the little things that decide whether my desktop experience is a pain or a pleasure. Like making effective use of virtual desktops, and by that I mean being able to switch those using keyboard shortcuts, or having a desktop that actually does work with focus-follows-mouse setting (one thing that Microsoft never really got to work, even in Windows 10, or maybe they are just ignorant of people who don't feel comfortable with their click-to-focus policy). If you want to experience true pain, try navigating the Steam UI on windows with your mouse set up for focus-follows-mouse. 

Also it is 2020 not 1995, so when I think of desktop I most certainly do not think of things like editing my .fvwm2rc in a text editor. Been there, done that, thanks, no more please. This is where KDE5 really pleases me. It is highly configurable and extensible without ever needing to touch a single text configuration file (unlike gnome3 where even some of the most basic configuration settings are considered 'tweaks' and you need additional software to 'tweak' your settings). KDE5 also seems to support my bad habit of adopting my Windows 10 desktop to my FreeBSD desktop and vice-versa rather well, and I can't say that it eats my RAM either. In fact just couple months ago I wiped Windows 10 off my old Notebook (core2 duo, 4GB RAM) after I finally had it, and replaced it with FreeBSD 12.1 /w KDE5 plasma and ZFS on root and it runs perfectly fine for the things I need it for.


----------



## Dendros (Aug 27, 2020)

When I use a GUI, in both Linux and FreeBSD, what I like to have is *consistency*, *ease of use* and some *security* (namely a login manager that allows a non-root X session). 

KDE would have been my choice but there are some things that annoy me: SDDM is not visually consistent with the rest of KDE desktop, does not allow non-root X session and in desktop font rendering is not as good as in a GTK based GUI.

Gnome 3 - I don't like it at all, its desktop experience feels alien to me and although it does have a login manager that allows non-root session (GDM3), this login manager is also very hard to customize and thus it's not visually consistent with the rest of desktop.

Cinnamon and Mate - I don't know much about them since I rarely used them so I cannot comment about their strengths and weaknesses.

Xfce is now my preferred DE - very customizable and easy to use, unfortunately it does not have a login manager that allows a non-root session - LightDM would be perfect if it would allow non-root X like GDM3 while retaining its customizability.
So I use Xfce without a DM, by typing *startx *which is a bit annoying but nothing is perfect.

I don't use WMs because they're not that easy to use and not visually consistent when running different apps but I admit that some of them, like WindowMaker, are interesting.

So my ideal desktop would be something like Xfce + a really customizable login manager like LightDM that also would allow a non-root X.


----------



## kpedersen (Aug 27, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> Acme does not _support_ a mouse - it _requires_ one.



Yep. You can't even use the up or down arrow to go to the previous or next line respectively.


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 27, 2020)

Certain Acme forks allow this, e.g. acme2k:








						GitHub - karahobny/acme2k: acme2k - text editor fo' all the cool cats who ain't 'fraid of no mice
					

acme2k - text editor fo' all the cool cats who ain't 'fraid of no mice - GitHub - karahobny/acme2k: acme2k - text editor fo' all the cool cats who ain't 'fraid of no mice




					github.com


----------



## Mjölnir (Aug 27, 2020)

Dendros said:


> When I use a GUI, in both Linux and FreeBSD, what I like to have is *consistency*, *ease of use* and some *security* (namely a login manager that allows a non-root X session).  KDE would have been my choice but there are some things that annoy me: SDDM is not visually consistent with the rest of KDE desktop, does not allow non-root X session and in desktop font rendering is not as good as in a GTK based GUI. [...]


What do you mean with _non-root X session_?  Do you mean the Xserver runs as user?  There's a Xorg.wrap suid _root_, excerpt from the man page: _By default Xorg.wrap will autodetect if root rights are necessary, and if not it will drop its elevated rights before starting the real X server. By default Xorg.wrap will only allow executing the real X server from login sessions on a physical console._
On font rendering in KDE I can not comprehend that it's worse than other's. Maybe you did not have anti-aliasing enabled?


----------



## Alain De Vos (Aug 27, 2020)

sidenote : There are not many window managers based on qt/kde. The only one i know is kwin.
I have not tried it but maybe lxqt+kwin


----------



## Dendros (Aug 27, 2020)

mjollnir: yes, by "non-root X session" I mean running X as an user. Not many Display Managers allow for this, I know this because when I type *ps aux*, I see that X has root as UID. I like that OpenBSD has a Display Manager (xenodm) that starts X as the _x11 user, but I don't know if it's configurable and themeable.

GDM3 also allows this but as I said, it's not customizable, at least not easily. And it pulls a lot of Gnome dependencies if you want to use it in other DEs.
If LightDM would start X as a non-root user, it would be a perfect DM since it's easily customizable so it can be made consistent with the desktop.

About KDE, its font rendering is not as good as in a GTK based desktop because fonts are not crisp but blurry and yes, I do have anti-aliasing enabled but still does not look good enough to me. By "does not look good enough" I mean that no matter what tweaks I apply, fonts are still a bit blurry, not crisp and clear.


----------



## Mjölnir (Aug 27, 2020)

Well, I can not comprehend that... On some monitors, the _hinting_ parameter makes a difference.  Usually it should be _none_ or _light_ on modern HiRes displays.  In contrast, the Gtk people decided to ignore HiRes setups, and _intentionally_ set the DPI to always be 96 DPI.  Such nonsense was the final reason for me to to deinstall all Gtk apps.  Search the web & you will find the outrage.  If I enable the physically correct DPI, Gtk apps look even smaller than on this screenshot



PS: I'm aware that KDE has bugs, too.  But these are not _intentionally_.


----------



## Dendros (Aug 27, 2020)

In every DE that I have used, including KDE, I always set hinting to slight and anti-aliasing is enabled, I even create a fonts.conf file in my home directory to manually set all these settings and yet I never managed to make fonts in KDE to look as crisp as I would like. That is just my experience, perhaps I'm doing something wrong.


----------



## Rastko (Aug 27, 2020)

On FreeBSD, Xorg + WindowMaker + GNUstep utilities
But that's if you got a dedicated FreeBSD machine with a hardware terminal.

I keep away from X remote sessions (it works properly only in the UNIX domain),
so I side with the command line interface philosophy (how cool Microsoft hijacked the CLI for Common Language Interface?). 

FreeBSD, as versatile as it is, shines shiniest through ssh.

It also depends on your hardware though. Finding the best *NIX-like system depends on hardware support,
For my hardware, Fedora Linux is the best match. That is, if you need GUI interface.

For CLI/ssh, FreeBSD is the mother.


----------



## Rastko (Aug 27, 2020)

Rastko said:


> On FreeBSD, Xorg + WindowMaker + GNUstep utilities
> But that's if you got a dedicated FreeBSD machine with a hardware terminal.
> 
> I keep away from X remote sessions (it works properly only in the UNIX domain),
> ...


 + emacs, that's a game changer


----------



## Lamia (Aug 27, 2020)

hruodr said:


> x11-wm/fvwm has them and with motif outlook is very nice, in opposite to the
> ugly default configuration in FreeBSD


Fvwm2/Fvwm-crystal + rofi + conky


----------



## Beastie7 (Sep 7, 2020)

Thanks for the replies and votes. I’m actually surprised the Taskbar, and Dock options are relatively tied. This will put a slight shift in my design process.


----------



## Mjölnir (Sep 7, 2020)

Beastie7 said:


> Thanks for the replies and votes. I’m actually surprised the Taskbar, and Dock options are relatively tied. This will put a slight shift in my design process.


You're aware that these votes are not representative since only _nerds_ hang around here?


----------



## Cthulhux (Sep 7, 2020)

Nerds and KDE users.


----------



## Beastie7 (Sep 7, 2020)

mjollnir said:


> You're aware that these votes are not representative since only _nerds_ hang around here?



I don’t understand this statement. Representative of what? What constitutes a nerd demographic? This poll is about preferred experiences. That’s it.


----------



## Phishfry (Sep 7, 2020)

I have been using Windows since version 1.04 in 1987.
For me to configure Xfce with the button on the bottom left corner and taskbar on the bottom just seemed natural.
Ala Windows NT 3.1 and newer.
I think its a wonderful thing that our desktops are so configurable.


----------



## mickey (Sep 7, 2020)

mjollnir said:


> You're aware that these votes are not representative since only _nerds_ hang around here?


A total of 38 votes can hardly be called representative by any standards.


----------



## ekvz (Sep 7, 2020)

Beastie7 said:


> I don’t understand this statement. Representative of what? What constitutes a nerd demographic? This poll is about preferred experiences. That’s it.



I could not decide what to vote. I am using a WM but it has a taskbar... so i don't really know.

Edit: Voted. I think i got the question all wrong.


----------



## Beastie7 (Sep 7, 2020)

Phishfry said:


> I have been using Windows since version 1.04 in 1987.
> For me to configure Xfce with the button on the bottom left corner and taskbar on the bottom just seemed natural.
> Ala Windows NT 3.1 and newer.
> I think its a wonderful thing that our desktops are so configurable.



I think configurability is the most difficult thing for me when trying to conceptualize how an experience should be. In your opinion, do you think a desktop should be configurable, piece-by-piece or by paradigm?

For instance, a simple switch where you can dynamically change paradigms or piece it together on a very generic session (ie. Xfce).

I can kind of see where mjollnir is coming from with his statement; but I’m using feedback to craft my implementation, so to speak.


----------



## Phishfry (Sep 8, 2020)

I think a good case study is Mint Linux. Gnome3 changed their paradigm so radically that users fled to Mint.
People don't like radical change. Especially when it was similar to Windows8 and their desktop redesign.
One desktop environment for all devices. Phones, Tablets and Desktops. Not a laudable goal as so many varying screen sizes IMHO.

Back to MInt. What made it the choice of fleeing Gnome3 users? I believe it was Cinnamon and Mate.
It was a desktop environment they could easily use as it mimicked Windows 3.1

Configurability is hard for me to pinpoint. Part of it has to do with changing taskbar location but more deeply it is the theming.
GTK theming is probably equal to or greater than Windows theming. That is what I want. From changing desktop colors to Window title bar colors and fonts. That is configurability.

Then we can discuss Openbox. Completely a blank slate. Which direction do you want to go. OpenStep like or Windows taskbar like.
I know Xfce is more bloated than OpenBox and Tint2+Conky. But I feel that Xfce has made some good desktop design decisions.


----------



## mickey (Sep 8, 2020)

Beastie7 said:


> I think configurability is the most difficult thing for me when trying to conceptualize how an experience should be. In your opinion, do you think a desktop should be configurable, piece-by-piece or by paradigm?
> 
> For instance, a simple switch where you can dynamically change paradigms or piece it together on a very generic session (ie. Xfce).


I don't think that one (or a few for that matter) paradigm(s) can fit everyone's needs/expectations. What I do know for sure is that things that cannot be changed to the way I'd like them really annoy me. The inability of Windows 10 to work in focus-follows-mouse mode or to change key bindings cause your keyboard just happens to not have a damn windows key are good examples of that. And as those things happen on your desktop, the thing you work with on a daily basis, there is a strong possibility that these things not just annoy you eventually, but constantly.

One thing I'd like to know: What exactly makes the difference between a panel and a taskbar? My understanding is that a taskbar is a panel (or something you put in a panel, like in KDE) but not necessarily the other way round.


----------



## phalange (Sep 8, 2020)

mickey said:


> One thing I'd like to know: What exactly makes the difference between a panel and a taskbar? My understanding is that a taskbar is a panel (or something you put in a panel, like in KDE) but not necessarily the other way round.



Someone may correct me here, but as I learned it a panel is simply a long narrow bar that displays information. A taskbar has clickable applets in it. In most cases they're combined. The only time you see them separated is in some window managers that have a panel but no task bar. I use spectrwm and it has only a panel; I would have to add the taskbar separately if I wanted it.


----------



## Cthulhux (Sep 8, 2020)

Phishfry said:


> For me to configure Xfce with the button on the bottom left corner and taskbar on the bottom just seemed natural.
> Ala Windows NT 3.1 and newer.



You haven't even used that.
Case in point:


----------



## mickey (Sep 8, 2020)

phalange said:


> Someone may correct me here, but as I learned it a panel is simply a long narrow bar that displays information. A taskbar has clickable applets in it. In most cases they're combined. The only time you see them separated is in some window managers that have a panel but no task bar. I use spectrwm and it has only a panel; I would have to add the taskbar separately if I wanted it.


I guess the line is a bit blurry here. Earlier versions of windows used to have distinct areas for quick launch icons to start programs, and the task manager area where running programs appear. Nowadays it's mostly combined into one. I think of a panel like a (customizable) container that could basically contain anything from start buttons/menus/icons over a task manager/bar (KDE actually has two you can choose from) to status information, system tray and clock. Therefore it did not make much sense to me having to vote for Panel or Taskbar.


----------



## Hakaba (Sep 8, 2020)

I vote Minimalist.
In a sentence, after a lot of test, KISS stay the best approach event for "complex" usage like OS GUI.

*Historic with desktop OS:*
I discover the computer world with a Thomson (TO9+) computer (games, animated cartoon builder and basic...)
I was a Mac OS 6 -> 8 user and left the Apple world to Linux (Yellow Dog Linux, Debian and a lot of "distro" I was comfortable with Xubuntu).
When Apple launched Mac OS X, I saw a real bookmark with "#!/bin/sh on a mac, you bet ?"
And I bet... I was back on Mac (I still use Mac OS X today).
I stop using linux in my desktop (thanks X11 on Mac OS X) and in the same time, I replace Linux by FreeBSD on my servers.
I never had a DOS/Windows computer.

*Why OS X stopped to be sexy for me?*
This 4 last years, a lot off features that I use every day is remplaced with a golden jail in OS X.
Screens (virtual desktop in grid) is remplaced by virtual desktop in row !
The mixing "fullscreen application" "desktop / window" is a nightmare. You nver know where a new window open, when you want move a window, you need to minimalize it in some case. Why a new mail message open an half fullscreen window aside my browser ? And how the hell I can drag and drop from my desktop to my fullscreen app without touching my keyboard ?
The Mac OS X desktop inherit from iOS usage and the result is against my productivity and my 'liberty'.

*What I try and why dwm ?*
So, I bought a laptop and decide to use FreeBSD as desktop OS.
I try my old friend (XFCE) but it was not as sexy as I remember.
So I try, Gnome, KDE, Enlightment ... a lot of test, and all is under the OS X quality.
One day, on my OS X, I try to project the OS X futur. And for me Apple try clearly to transform the OS X desktop into a tiling window manager. All things that I dislike is a mix between "finder/window" mode and fullscreen mode.

Finally, I try some WM and I am very comfortable with dwm.
I write a script to launch app from image with sxiv in 20 mins and the result is as good as Apple launcher.
dmenu is a good tool (but I will filter the entries ...) and finally a lot of cli tools are very good for mail, IRC ...
When something is nasty, I can fix it with a specific tool (or script). I am free, I have a computer that fit my needs.
KISS (a concept that I honestly forgot) is a winner for me.


----------



## Mjölnir (Sep 8, 2020)

Beastie7 said:


> [...]  I can kind of see where mjollnir is coming from with his statement; but I’m using feedback to craft my implementation, so to speak.


My objection was that IMHO most "average Joe" users don't care about implementation details, but instead want & need graphical configuration tools for their GUI.  Obviously, many of those who answered your poll prefer a minimalistic & highly customized DE setup; in that this is not representative, as the average non-nerd user lacks the skills & time for such customization.  If you want to create such configuration interface for one of the numerous (tiling?) window managers, and/or enhance one to better fit your needs, that's for shure a good thing.  As is to collect feedback before going to design & coding.


----------



## kpedersen (Sep 8, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> You haven't even used that.
> Case in point:
> View attachment 8446



He was close. Windows NT 3.51 was the first version of Windows to get the modern Windows 95 style shell. It was called newshell and was effectively a preview. Similar to the Windows 95 active desktop being a preview for Windows 98's one.



			https://winworldpc.com/res/img/screenshots/beta-29215ce26a0edb96467610e8375b5585-Newshell%20-%20Desktop.png
		


It is weird how I used to give a damn about Windows back then. It was exciting and fun to see what things Microsoft were doing. Now all they do is try to get more power and control over their customers. Bunch of criminals.


----------



## ekvz (Sep 8, 2020)

kpedersen said:


> It is weird how I used to give a damn about Windows back then. It was exciting and fun to see what things Microsoft were doing.



At this point in time there actually was some innovation to be made. Nowadays it's  just a race to the bottom about who targets the least able users and while managing to lock in most of them.


----------



## Cthulhux (Sep 8, 2020)

ekvz said:


> At this point in time there actually was some innovation to be made.



You mean, when everyone copied NeXT?


----------



## ekvz (Sep 8, 2020)

Cthulhux said:


> You mean, when everyone copied NeXT?



Maybe. What would you copy these days? Exactly.


----------

