Where are the goals of XFCE.
markus.hoenicka at mhoenicka.de
Mon Jul 14 09:41:51 CEST 2008
Quoting Diego Jacobi <jacobidiego at gmail.com>:
>> > I know about it of the fast and low resources DE. but it is just a few Mb
>> > less than gnome and in some cases i need of nautilus to easily browse on
>> > lan by example.
>> Fine, you can use Nautilus, dolphin, konqueror, whateverfm...
> I can use nautilus, but then whats the point of thunar being so good?
> i cant use dolphin or konqueror, why would i choose a like weight DE and
> open heavy KDE apps.
> I want to use thunar, but i need it to have features to browse the lan, just
> because of that i need to have nautilus.
I've followed this thread half-bemused, half-wondering. The bottom
line seems to be that you want to have a desktop as lightweight as
XFCE, but with all bells and whistles and candy sticks of a bloated
desktop please. This ain't gonna work. More features mean more code.
More code means larger memory footprint. I have to say in defense of
the XFCE developers that their product allows everyone to have it
their way. It's not like the choice between Windows or OSX. You can
use XFCE without any bloat. If you miss some features of other
desktops, replace parts or all of XFCE with more bloated components.
The choice is yours.
Let me use this occasion to thank the XFCE developers for providing a
desktop which pleasantly stays out of my way while working and which
is as configurable as it needs to be at the same time.
markus.hoenicka at cats.de
(Spam-protected email: replace the quadrupeds with "mhoenicka")
More information about the Xfce