What benefits does a "desktop environment" convey?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| phsolide Apr 25, 2009 2:18 PM EDT |
FVWM is too usage-heavy for me: I use twm, which comes stock with every X11 that I've ever used. But occasionally, if I boot Knoppix or Backtrack or some live CD, I see something else. I never use them enough to find out what they're good for. I use Windows XP at work, and I fail to see that its "environment" provides anything interesting or helpful - Windows cut-n-paste has just as many failings as the X11 version, so don't give me that sort of example. So, seriously speaking, what benefits does a "desktop environment" convey to me? I don't need or want buzzwords like "integration", "environment", "dashboard", "widgets" or "gizmos". I want simple, easy-to-understand examples. |
| tuxchick Apr 25, 2009 2:45 PM EDT |
"Innovation". |
| tuxchick Apr 25, 2009 3:01 PM EDT |
Seriously, I think that the whole 'desktop' metaphor is one of the worst afflictions ever. It's inaccurate, it's vague, and it's not helpful. I don't like analogies and metaphors because they're more confusing and complicated than just learning the correct terminology in the first place. I prefer 'computer interface'. I think that says it all, and it doesn't make artificial distinctions between different uses, such as server, client, portable device, and what-have-you. So then you could have sub-categories such as a headless server interface, a graphical workstation interface, an embedded device interface, and so on. In regards to the article and the OP's question, a "desktop environment" is simply a graphical computer interface. In Linux you have many excellent choices and all of them are highly customizable, so you can tailor your graphical computer interface to suit your exact needs. If all you need is a simple application launcher that lets you run multiple apps at the same time, no sweat, there are zillions of them. If you want something more complex that knows what to do with protocols and filetypes, then KDE has all the bells and whistles. Prettiness counts for a lot of users, and again Linux has something for everyone. KDE lets you have a different background for every virtual desktop, including a built-in slideshow feature. Widgets are big for some users, so they have system monitors and weather thingies and network status and all kinds of stuff cluttering up the joint. I have a simple CPU and memory monitor in the panel, which tells me when to cuss stupid script-heavy web pages that bog down my whole system. It takes talent to bog down a modern high-power CPU. The line between window managers and desktop environments has never been clear, and it's even less so now. It used to be that Gnome allowed you to use whatever window manager you wanted, back in the 1.x days, and theoretically you still can, but in practice it doesn't work very well to replace the default. Same for KDE. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 25, 2009 3:02 PM EDT |
Does "usage-heavy" mean too much memory and CPU? If twm is what you like, use it. The line between "window manager" and "desktop environment" is a bit fuzzy in my mind. If you have a "modern" computer with lots of CPU and RAM to spare, and you like GNOME or KDE, the "environment" gives you lots of tools to manage files, applications and the system itself. The beauty of X is that there is lots of choice in how you want your desktop to look and act. |
| hkwint Apr 25, 2009 4:13 PM EDT |
Quoting:What benefits does a "desktop environment" convey? Maybe some of these out of the box experiences: Working EuroSign, easy way to change keymaps etc., right applications for the right MIME-types when you want to open some file in your browser, lots of drag and drop between 'anything' that's part of the DE, everything you _might_ need installed by default (KDE-PIM for example doesn't include KWallet over here), new programs automatically being added to your start menu, consistent keyboard shortcuts (those of applications not interfering with the Window Manager) all windows looking the same (and not xmms and mplayer different than all others), background switching without using CLI, easier integration in your desktop of weather, CPU-stats etc, no sound conflicts between applications (nowadays that doesn't seem like a big problem anymore, but it used to be), easy management of plug-in media such as SD-cards, USB-sticks and the like. I was also going to mention session management, but I just learned about xsm being part of tvm, so that probably doesn't count. That's what I can think of right now and what I don't have out of the box because I don't use a full-blown DE (mine doesn't have any release after Q2 2005). All that is possible without using a DE, but it's not out of the box, it requires searching in man's and internet for answers, contains manual configuration sometimes, and takes time and effort. I believe the aim of DE's is to provide all this 'experiences' (sorry for the buzzword) right out of the box. |
| Bob_Robertson Apr 25, 2009 5:10 PM EDT |
I must agree, "desktop" is an awful metaphor. Using "Window Manager" or maybe "Application Manager" does make sense. As Hk points out, the services provided by the "full blown" managers, such as MIME types, automounting, system trays (or is that called "docking" this time?), shortcuts, menus, really don't have anything to do with a "desk". While I've happily used twm and olvwm in the past, I've grown accustomed to the automatics built into KDE. |
| gus3 Apr 25, 2009 6:25 PM EDT |
My real desktop can only aspire to the neatness of my 1280x1024 desktop. I'm becoming very adapted to FVWM-Crystal. My only complaint is that the Gnome settings are lost, and for some applications (Firefox in particular) it vastly improves readability if I can get those settings applied. So far, the only way I've found to launch the Gnome settings server is to start the settings manager. Can anyone help? |
| techiem2 Apr 25, 2009 6:29 PM EDT |
*hugs his dual 1680x1050 fluxbox desktop* :P |
| hkwint Apr 25, 2009 7:08 PM EDT |
Indeed Bob, configuring autofs and udev by hand while fun is time consuming. If a 'desktop environment' would take away those nuisances I'd think about using one. One part of KDE (not sure which part, probably HAL or so IIRC) let's me type media:/ and then I can use external filesystems on ext. devices by just pressing ENTER. No more mounting and authorization hassles. I know that's also possible with udev, but quite a hassle. |
| Sander_Marechal Apr 25, 2009 7:20 PM EDT |
Quoting:Seriously, I think that the whole 'desktop' metaphor is one of the worst afflictions ever. ... I prefer 'computer interface'. I think 'desktop' perfect. Wait. Stop. Put down your flame thrower and let me explain. 'Desktop' is just one type of 'computer interface'. There are many types of computer interfaces and many of them do not resemble desktops. Your rationale makes as much sense as saying "I hate humans. I prefer mammals". The same goes for Bob's 'application manager'. A desktop is one type of application manager. There are others. Now I agree that the 'desktop' way may not be the best way to interface with a computer, but 'desktop' describes perfectly how most of us currently are interfacing with a computer. Call a spade a spade :-) |
| hkwint Apr 25, 2009 7:37 PM EDT |
Quoting:but 'desktop' describes perfectly how most of us currently are interfacing with a computer But does that go for users of tvm and other non-DE managers too I wonder? |
| Sander_Marechal Apr 25, 2009 7:55 PM EDT |
Don't know. I've never used tvm. |
| tracyanne Apr 25, 2009 8:38 PM EDT |
Personally I don't care what you call it, so long as it makes my life easier. |
| gus3 Apr 25, 2009 10:51 PM EDT |
ta, I think people might look at you if you started talking about your "purple penny." "I use the GNOME purple penny, because the KDE4 purple penny changed too much from the way I prefer to work." |
| tuxtom Apr 27, 2009 6:55 AM EDT |
Quoting:'desktop' describes perfectly how most of us currently are interfacing with a computerA lot people interface with it more like a cheap motel-room mattress. |
| gus3 Apr 27, 2009 10:56 AM EDT |
And no, uh, "protection." |
| Bob_Robertson Apr 27, 2009 12:30 PM EDT |
Protection from a mattress? |
| dinotrac Apr 27, 2009 1:03 PM EDT |
Bob - Been to many cheap motel-rooms? I'm a thinkin' haz-mat suits. Lest I forget: GO BULLS!!!!!!! |
| jdixon Apr 27, 2009 1:24 PM EDT |
> GO BULLS!!!!!!! Yeah, the San Fermin festival is always entertaining. Oh, wait, you didn't mean those bulls. Never mind. |
| Bob_Robertson Apr 27, 2009 2:40 PM EDT |
> Been to many cheap motel-rooms? Not really, no. But then, after a day on the bike I'd sleep on a bare board and be happy to get it. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!