• LXQt vs pure OpenBox (pros vs cons)


    @megaman Oh, I always thought that MATE was redundant (as well as Trinity, by the way). Instead of working on another gtk2 DE (Gnome2) why not help the XFCE devs? But now I have to admit that MATE feels more polished than XFCE, and it’s development pace is faster (it takes too long to XFCE devs to release new versions, and when they release not many new features are included).

    But yes, I like linux because it’s all about choice.

    Cheers!

  • @karasu i saw ubuntu mate became a official ubuntu flavor so they must be doing really well. i might have to load that in to a virtualbox and see how its doing. ya i agree xfce doesnt seem to offer many new features that often but man its always been solid as a rock for me.

  • Not to be an ass or anythng, but what freaking new features are you talking about.
    Xfce is totally customizable, and thank goodness it is as it is butt ugly in default mode, but any desktop can be changed. Xfce is, I think, inifinitely more customizable. Gnome, not so much, KDE, yeah colors and stuff, Mate, well I don’t know how polished it is, but certainly not more than what I have in Xfce.
    So can we please stop with calling Xfce outdated and old and having no new features.
    You don’t like it, don’t freaking use it. Stop with the derogatory comments.
    And no, I did not bad-mouth Mate, KDE or Gnome.;
    Differenct strokes for different folks.

  • @herbie dang dude…chill 😄 we just talking here thats what a forum is for to discuss things. we not bad mouthing anyone.

  • i forgot how heated DE talk can get

    😡

  • Wow! Sorry if I ofended somebody. It just was my “feeling” about XFCE. To tell you the truth, in my School I managed to convince the other teachers to teach using Xubuntu (mostly because I can’t stand Unity, sorry) but also because is a light DE and it’s paradigm is, as you say, rock solid. You don’t have surprises with it, and students (that are used to Windows) get used to it very quickly.

    I meant no disrespect to XFCE or their users.

    Cheers!

  • Nothing is more customizable than custom desktops!
    Compiz-standalone and openbox! xD

    Writes this from Gnome3
    I’ve used XFCE once and I agree it can be made hella sweet looking, just I couldn’t do that xD

  • @karasu thats it you are banned for 1 week. just as soon as i figure out how to do that with my limited mod powers
    😄

  • @distrohopp
    Well, Internet is outdated :)

    Yes, plain Openbox is around 60Mb, but everyone (including Antergos devs) put a docker (Plank) or just a panel (tint2).
    You have a panel, let’s have a network applet (55MB - default gtk3 one from Gnome, 50MB wicd) and a mixer applet (another 50MB). If you are on a mobile device and you want a power manager applet, another 50-60MB.

    So a naked Openbox, with tint2, Plank, pamac applet, network appplet and mixer applet goes up to 300MB. And you haven’t opened a single app. yet. If you are not interested in flash and want a decent and modern browsing, use Midori. Open a terminal console, a good music player (Deadbeef/Audacious) and you system jumps 700MB barrier.

    I think too that xfce4.12 is the best compromise between a good UI, sane (aka Windows XP/ Windows 7) desktop, modular and easy to tweak, fast and moderate on resources.

  • Just poking my head in with some thoughts.

    Openbox is only a plain window manager, while LXQt/XFCE/MATE/etc. give you a more “standard” desktop experience. That said, you can configure those things on Openbox with tint2/plank/et al. However, Openbox is just a window manager, and not a desktop environment, but it does have an easy-to-access application menu and floating windows. If you are not sure if solely a window manager is for you, Openbox is a great way to ease into that transition.

    FWIW, I use i3 standalone, but diving head-first into a tiling wm with no DE can be a very jarring experience.

    It is very easy to install and remove Openbox, so I’d say to give it a shot. You can always jump back to something more familiar if you find it is not for you.

  • @roberto said:

    @distrohopp
    Well, Internet is outdated :)

    Yes, plain Openbox is around 60Mb, but everyone (including Antergos devs) put a docker (Plank) or just a panel (tint2).
    You have a panel, let’s have a network applet (55MB - default gtk3 one from Gnome, 50MB wicd) and a mixer applet (another 50MB). If you are on a mobile device and you want a power manager applet, another 50-60MB.

    So a naked Openbox, with tint2, Plank, pamac applet, network appplet and mixer applet goes up to 300MB. And you haven’t opened a single app. yet. If you are not interested in flash and want a decent and modern browsing, use Midori. Open a terminal console, a good music player (Deadbeef/Audacious) and you system jumps 700MB barrier.

    I think too that xfce4.12 is the best compromise between a good UI, sane (aka Windows XP/ Windows 7) desktop, modular and easy to tweak, fast and moderate on resources.

    MY nm-applet uses 37mb, volumicon 3 to 8. Openbox is around 10, tint2 around 5mb. But these numbers vary depending on how much of them gets swapped or something. So I can’t really measure things correctly, but your numbers seem 6-fold off sometimes. I really don’t think 300 mb is correct.

    I also don’t think that the xfce, xp, win7 style is sane. I think it’s horribly outdated, as in unnecessarily backward. I have nothing against xfce per se. I used to like it and prefer it over other options back when I was using xubuntu. But it still looks and works mainly the same way as half a decade ago. I’d say we can do better than that today. But this comes from a guy who has no close button on it’s windows. I for one, am sticking to openbox’s elegance and am not looking back. That being said, I’m looking forward to replace openbox one day.

    @pid1 said:

    Just poking my head in with some thoughts.

    Openbox is only a plain window manager, while LXQt/XFCE/MATE/etc. give you a more “standard” desktop experience. That said, you can configure those things on Openbox with tint2/plank/et al. However, Openbox is just a window manager, and not a desktop environment, but it does have an easy-to-access application menu and floating windows. If you are not sure if solely a window manager is for you, Openbox is a great way to ease into that transition.

    FWIW, I use i3 standalone, but diving head-first into a tiling wm with no DE can be a very jarring experience.

    It is very easy to install and remove Openbox, so I’d say to give it a shot. You can always jump back to something more familiar if you find it is not for you.

    While pid1 is correct about everything here, despite OB not being just a window manager, you still do end up creating a pseudo-environment that you can only really have with openbox, and it’s pretty much “integrated”. I don’t really imagine anyone running tint2 with xfce. Whether you go for plank or something else to start your apps with, you still won’t have a “start button” most likely. So I’d say, having openbox as a window manager, will create an environment around itself… a more flexible one.

    The biggest “pro” advocating openbox would be, try it, the others are all kinda the same, you’ve already seen all that on Windows 98. Obenbox isn’t lightyears in front of them, but it has some innovative effort in it and I’d say that deserves a lot more recognition than it receives. But seriously, with openbox and deepin and e19 around, why would I want to use xfce ?

    That being said, I never said xfce doesn’t have it’s place in the world, but I’d say unless I’d need to keep things simple for my grandpa or because of some other constricting circumstanses, it should no longer be recommended. “Dumb phones” have their place on the market, and they have amazing battery lives, but sticking to xfce really isn’t rewarding, if you ask me. On the other hand Openbox can be quite a pain to set up and get used to… I kinda still miss a startup folder to drop a shortcut into sometimes, while trying to remember where the autostart file that I hadn’t touched in 2 months is. But nobody running arch should mind that.

    My take on the original question is… if you just want a desktop, no headaches, go for lxqt. If you want more, try openbox without an X (customized) in the corners of your windows.

  • @distrohopp
    I love to see you top/htop for Openbox setup, with 60MB for Openbox (10MB), tint2 (5MB), audio icon (8MB) and nm-applet (37MB).

    I see xfce (and xp/w7) as a sane desktop. With user in control of movable taskbar/panel, good file-manager, a start button, with desktop icons ( sound trivial for Gnome Devs, but what is wrong to have icons on desktop?) and reasonable computer resources for all that.

    Styling is a different issue. There are tons of gtk2/gtk3/xfce/cinnamon themes to choose from.

    Screenshot_2015-05-09_14-55-14.png

    I have a mouse and a keyboard on my computer, 24 inch display and i don’t need a GUI designed for 5" phone / 10" tablet or “social” addicts.

  • http://s10.postimg.org/7jxvw4kzr/2015_05_09_192129_1680x1050_scrot.png

    “i don’t need a GUI designed for 5” phone / 10" tablet or “social” addicts."
    I was never suggesting gnome3. I did mention openbox, deepin and e19 though.

  • @distrohopp
    My apologies! Last time a used a computer (also tablet/phone) with less than 2GB RAM was 3-4 years ago. Seems from your screenshot that it is possible to run a decent GUI on a less 1GB RAM machine.

    From your list, Deepin provide the single modern desktop experience, backed up by at least 2GB RAM and a powerfull CPU/GPU.
    Forgive me, but E19 and Openbox are horrible as Xfce is.

    So, looking at your resources, you can’t run heavy desktops like Deepin, Cinnamon, Pantheon, Gnome Shell, Plasma, Unity.
    You’re stuck with window managers or desktops like XFCE, LXDE, LXQT, E and maybe MATE. No whistles, no bells.

    <rant>Again, i prefer much outdated and horrible Xfce to modern LXQT and Openbox.</rant>

  • Up until recently I was running openbox on 512 mb ddr1. This is ddr3 and I’ve been running elementary-luna’s Pantheon on it painlessly. Freya on the other hand seems to be too much. Yes, I’m stuck with less resource hungry options, but I’d don’t miss gnome anyway. The only DE that I’m sorry to miss out on is Plasma actually. I’ve yet to give Deepin a try - but I really though it ought not be heavier than MATE. But I have been using Unity on a PC with 4gb and all, and can’t say I miss it at all.

    @roberto said:

    Forgive me, but E19 and Openbox are horrible as Xfce is.

    http://th07.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2010/093/0/3/Lime_Night_Openbox_by_ta_wan.jpg

    You are right about them being roughly similar, but I still think they all have an edge over xfce.

    <rant>Again, i prefer much outdated and horrible Xfce to modern LXQT and Openbox.</rant>

    I totally agree that openbox can be worked on, and I can see why someone would choose Xfce over OB… although I expect that the main reason would be that it works on more familiar principles. But I would take a tweaked and hacked and improved OB… let’s say the one available two-three years from now, over any current desktop.

    Whistless are usually just transitional effects that I perceive as something that takes away from snappiness… and you know what, I’ve been meaning to try something like compiz-standalone anyway, we’ll see how customizing transitions will work. Opensnap-quicktile is tilling windows for me already. The lack of a start button I perceive as a feature.

  • @roberto said:

    @distrohopp
    Forgive me, but E19 and Openbox are horrible as Xfce is.

    <rant>Again, i prefer much outdated and horrible Xfce to modern LXQT and Openbox.</rant>

    everyone has a preference but not sure what is horrible about openbox or xfce? they are both very customizable. i like openbox so much because its very minimal. the desktop bells and whistles are not needed for me. they get in my way more then anything.

  • @Yash
    i’m coming to agree: ob seems sticky by comparison to gnome : like the difference between snow ski-ing and sliding down a grass embankment on a rug however the over-riding issue for me is to learn about linux, so i’ll stick with the open-hood openbox for now, git my hands and overalls greasy

  • I really agree with you about STANDARD Xfce being a bit on the ugly side, but I customized mine to look like this.
    I feel, IMHO, that this is not ugly or not polished. Very smooth and stylish. As good as any other Modern DE.Screenshot_2015-09-25_23-15-42.png

  • Dang it, I thought it copied the whole screen.
    Let me try again.Screenshot_2015-09-25_23-15-42.png

install84 openbox43 lxqt9 lightweight1 Posts 50Views 46831
Log in to reply
Bloom Email Optin Plugin

Looks like your connection to Antergos Community Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.