×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Why KDE Plasma Makes Sense For Linux Gaming

timothy posted about a year ago | from the compatibility-matters dept.

Graphics 152

sfcrazy writes "Martin Gräßlin, a lead KDE developer, addresses some queries around a topic bugging Gnome and Unity users — the fallback mode. In this post he says that 'having the non-composited mode around allows us to do things like turning compositing off when running games or heavy OpenGL based applications such as Blender. So if you want to get some of the now finally available games for Linux, KDE Plasma should be your primary choice to enjoy the game. I have also heard of users switching to KDE Plasma because we still provide non OpenGL based setups.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

152 comments

Alternative: XFCE (5, Interesting)

gagol (583737) | about a year ago | (#42157771)

I much prefer the simplicity and conservatism of XFCE4. Can optionally use compositing too and no need to relearn interface.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42157775)

sure, but you dont look like your using a movie OS ;-D

Re:Alternative: XFCE (5, Interesting)

Threni (635302) | about a year ago | (#42157861)

I switched to (Linux Mint 13) KDE precisely because I didn't want to learn a new interface (Unity). It's great. I used XFCE and LXDE previously, having read of their great suitability for lower end hardware, but..well, I don't have any low end hardware. I have nothing special but it runs KDE perfectly, and it looks great. I can't be bothered to learn all the ins and outs of it - I launch stuff via what I'll always call the 'start menu' or shortcuts or from the 'task bar' - but it's good to know that there's more to it if I could be bothered to learn it. The point is, nobodies forcing me to use it. There seem to be a rash of these Mac-like OSes these days (including the hilarious Windows 8) - I don't quite understand the appeal.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158043)

There seem to be a rash of these Mac-like OSes these days (including the hilarious Windows 8) - I don't quite understand the appeal.

That's because you (like most of us here) learned about computers using devices with separate keyboard, mouse and screen. We are currently at the tipping point where more youth learn about computers through devices with only a touchscreen (phones, tablets) and have never used a laptop.

That tipping point is driving interfaces that cater to the touchscreen user experience, even though those interfaces don't allow for as much interaction as UIs driven by the keyboard/mouse/screen user experience.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (5, Insightful)

Threni (635302) | about a year ago | (#42158161)

Yes, but I had no problem picking up Android, whether on phone or tablet. It's just intuitive. I didn't have the first fucking clue how I was supposed to use Unity to do anything. Windows 8 is worse because you now have to learn two completely different interfaces instead of one. I need a 'normal' interface on a 'normal computer' because I develop software, edit photographs, tag/copy mp3 files between devices, use one device to control another etc. Sure, if I were a user and had no need to actually create anything I'd use a tablet. But these desktop OSes (Windows 8, unity etc) will mostly be running on regular computers without touch screens, so i'm not sure of the utility of making this change. I'm sure Microsoft and Canonical believe that their OSes will soon be on millions of touch-enabled devices; I find this unlikely.

(BTW: You're the first AC I've responded to in years. Why haven't you created an account here? I almost didn't see your reply as I filter ACs away).

Re:Alternative: XFCE (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158651)

Yes, but I had no problem picking up Android, whether on phone or tablet.

That is because you're a fandroid.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (5, Interesting)

Inigo Montoya (31674) | about a year ago | (#42159191)

It's very likely, as interfaces evolve, that we will have specialized "developer" versions of these interfaces. These developer versions enable you to be creative, and to do all that you need to do to make an application that is primarily targeted at these newer interfaces, including having keyboard access, pen, 3d input mice, multiple monitors, system simulators, etc...

This is already the case with game consoles; There is always a developer version of the hardware.

In time, I expect the same from an OS targeted for end-users.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year ago | (#42159575)

A sad day that will be if it comes to pass. One of the wonderful things about the internet is the way it's turning the "traditional" (for a couple centuries anyway) few->many publishing industry on its ear and letting everyone join the creative process. Sure, most of it's stuff that could readily be done from a dumbed-down tablet, but there's a nice smooth learning curve for those who want to take it to the next level - maybe you have to learn a new more powerful program, but the computing interface is the same. How much worthwhile content will never be created because an aspiring creator was overly daunted by learning the "developer interface", or couldn't afford the "developer edition" OS (okay, so the existence of Linux will *probably* guard against that). Okay, so we may have fewer funny cat videos flooding the web so it's not all bad, but still compared to say daytime television, even most of those are worthwhile.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (2, Insightful)

Pentium100 (1240090) | about a year ago | (#42159491)

Yes, but I had no problem picking up Android, whether on phone or tablet. It's just intuitive.

I got an Android phone to try and was fuming most of the time I used it.

OK, so I have this new phone, I want to copy the call and SMS ringtones from my old phone (call ringtone is an mp3, SMS ringtone is a midi file). So, I transfer them over bluetooth and now they are sitting in the phones memory. OK.
On a few Nokia phones I had you selected a custom ringtone just like the builtin ones, except you selected "custom" and then browsed to where the file was. So I try this here, no "custom". OK, maybe I can select the file in file manager and make it as ringtone - no, the file just starts playing. It turns out that I need to open the music playing app, open the file then I can finally set it as my ringtone. Great. Except there is no way to set the SMS ringtone. To do that I needed to download a new app from the app store and use it to set the SMS ringtone, except that app does not support midi files (even though the phone does) so I had to
convert my file to mp3.

Yep, that was so intuitive, I had to google a few times.

At work I used unity for a few minutes at most - it was installed by default, so I used it to launch a terminal window and install KDE.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42160099)

Yes, but I had no problem picking up Android, whether on phone or tablet. It's just intuitive.

Absolutely not intuitive. Case in point: long-pressing to bring-up a menu. There is no real-life prototype for that nonsense.

Why haven't you created an account here?

Perhaps he has, like me, but coulnd't be bothered logging in every time he starts his browser.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42160281)

Unity is not a touch screen interface. It's not a netbook interface. Everyone assumes that it's designed for a device they don't have. But the truth is that it's just a bad idea that's equally as clumsy and poorly thought through no matter what device it's used on.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

horza (87255) | about a year ago | (#42160493)

Didn't have a clue? Was it that the menu bar was vertical instead of horizontal that threw you? Other than that, everything else is nearly the same. The software is identical as the OS doesn't change that. The only other thing is the Dash instead of the Start button, but after 10 seconds you figure that out then will not enjoy going back to the old way of doing things.

Phillip.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (4, Insightful)

Karzz1 (306015) | about a year ago | (#42158237)

That's because you (like most of us here) learned about computers using devices with separate keyboard, mouse and screen. We are currently at the tipping point where more youth learn about computers through devices with only a touchscreen....

I agree with what you are saying, to a point. I have been using computers of one sort or another since the early 80's and have always had a keyboard at minimum, and a mouse and possibly other HID devices later.

Recently (past ~3yrs) I have used several tablets/smartphones. While I am continuously impressed with what can be done on these devices, I am always cognizant of what *can't* be done on these devices.

Tablets/Smartphones are great for instant satisfaction, but are quite weak compared to a desktop, unless you have great eyesight and you only do a few minimal things. Even browsing the web becomes cumbersome quickly when you need to *type* anything. Forget about doing any actual work on one of these things such as replying to emails or anything that is enhanced by more than one 10" screen.

I realize that the hardware/software manufacturers love the idea of these portable devices and all of the restrictions (hardware/software locks) contained within, but I like to think that people will not always be content with the lowest common denominator.

I agree that these devices have a place , however they will never fully displace desktops/laptops.

Mod parent up. (2)

khasim (1285) | about a year ago | (#42158457)

While I am continuously impressed with what can be done on these devices, I am always cognizant of what *can't* be done on these devices.

Exactly. The interface for a less complicated device (a car) should be different from the interface for a more complicated device (jet airplane).

Even browsing the web becomes cumbersome quickly when you need to *type* anything.

You hope that you are in a place where you can use Siri and that Siri understands what you are saying.

And don't forget the web sites that just suck on a mobile device. Like when you have to scroll and scroll and scroll left to read something.

Forget about doing any actual work on one of these things such as replying to emails or anything that is enhanced by more than one 10" screen.

They are designed for consumption of media. Not for production of anything.

I know there will be people who claim that they use their mobile device for writing thousands of lines of code and composing spreadsheets and documents but even if they are real they are the minority.

I realize that the hardware/software manufacturers love the idea of these portable devices and all of the restrictions (hardware/software locks) contained within, but I like to think that people will not always be content with the lowest common denominator

I think that most people will love their mobile devices for media consumption and many people will like the same interface for their desktop/laptop because that is the way they work (full-screen apps possibly layered over each other but only one being interacted with at any time).

But for me, I want my stupid "Start" button or equivalent. I don't want to have to remember the name of an app to launch it. I want to build the menu tree the way I want to use it.

Re:Mod parent up. (1)

horza (87255) | about a year ago | (#42160557)

And don't forget the web sites that just suck on a mobile device. Like when you have to scroll and scroll and scroll left to read something.

We had the same with normal web sites on the desktop for a while, where they were designed fixed for 800x600 and IE only. Looked awful 1600x1200 on Firefox. With the current move to rewriting all the sites as 'responsive' the web will clean itself up for mobile.

They are designed for consumption of media. Not for production of anything.

Not true for real estate any more. I know agents now that walk around with a pad, use it to take photos, draw a floor plan, and enter the description. They can then put it instantly online. Still a tiny minority but I can see that growing.

I know there will be people who claim that they use their mobile device for writing thousands of lines of code and composing spreadsheets and documents but even if they are real they are the minority.

Ah I can see your bias as a coder of some sort. The fact is these kinds of people are the minority, most people don't spend their day writing thousands of lines of code.

I think that most people will love their mobile devices for media consumption and many people will like the same interface for their desktop/laptop because that is the way they work (full-screen apps possibly layered over each other but only one being interacted with at any time).

The Samsung Galaxy Note 2 can have multiple apps running side by side, but I don't think many people use it.

But for me, I want my stupid "Start" button or equivalent. I don't want to have to remember the name of an app to launch it. I want to build the menu tree the way I want to use it.

I always hated the stupid "Start" button. That menu always seemed very inefficient to me. It's the one thing I REALLY do not miss. This is one area where Unity really has it right. There are occasional hiccups. I installed "Sweet Home 3D" to do floor plans, but typing "plan" didn't bring up my app. I need some way to add keywords to an app to help me find it. What would be ideal is right-clicking, instead of launching, brings up a context menu which includes "Add keywords".

Phillip.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (4, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about a year ago | (#42158405)

There seem to be a rash of these Mac-like OSes these days (including the hilarious Windows 8) - I don't quite understand the appeal.

That's because you (like most of us here) learned about computers using devices with separate keyboard, mouse and screen. We are currently at the tipping point where more youth learn about computers through devices with only a touchscreen (phones, tablets) and have never used a laptop.

That tipping point is driving interfaces that cater to the touchscreen user experience, even though those interfaces don't allow for as much interaction as UIs driven by the keyboard/mouse/screen user experience.

Your statement is not that far removed from "Most youth learned about computers through devices with only a gamepad. It's true, but it doesn't mean much. The thing that makes what we call a "computer" a "computer" is that it's general purpose, and designed to empower creative work. Barring radical developments, tablets and phones are not going to displace the traditional computer any more than game consoles did.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158695)

general purpose, and designed to empower creative work.

Oh, come on!

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about a year ago | (#42158707)

"The thing that makes what we call a "computer" a "computer" is that it's general purpose, and designed to empower creative work. Barring radical developments, tablets and phones are not going to displace the traditional computer any more than game consoles did."

I have a problem with your definition of "computer". The first computers weren't general purpose in any modern sense, simply because they were too low-powered to be anything other than glorified adding machines, or primitive calculators.

Even a smartphone is more general purpose than any computer made before the invention of the so-called "personal" computer. As for "empowering creative work", that's more a legacy of the Macintosh, although printing dot-matrix birthday banners might be considered "creative" by the users of the early keyboard-only Apple computers.

Tablets will displace the desktop computer and laptops in contexts where users don't need to input large amounts of alphanumeric data. Tablets have the advantage of being more discreet, physically more manageable, and yes more versatile than a traditional laptop. I've seen people use their tablets as a video camera. Even without an e-Ink screen, they work better for reading ebooks, especially when you don't have the luxury of a level surface.

Note how I specifically mentioned "alphanumeric data" above. A hardware keyboard has definite advantages for programmers and users of alphabetic writing systems. But for users of writing systems that require up to thousands of unique symbols, a hardware keyboard with its fixed set of keys isn't that more efficient than having the on-screen ability to summon different sets of virtual keyboards.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

theArtificial (613980) | about a year ago | (#42159621)

Note how I specifically mentioned "alphanumeric data" above. A hardware keyboard has definite advantages for programmers and users of alphabetic writing systems. But for users of writing systems that require up to thousands of unique symbols, a hardware keyboard with its fixed set of keys isn't that more efficient than having the on-screen ability to summon different sets of virtual keyboards.

Are you aware of how those systems with unique symbols operate? The fastest method by far is converting "alphabet" to symbol then using an autocomplete (or button on the keyboard) to compound the "word". The claim, that hunt n peck is not that less efficient than 10 fingers, is not based in reality. Lookups by radical or brushtroke are slow, and so is your solution with different sets of virtual keyboards which cater to this proposed solution.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

Sigg3.net (886486) | about a year ago | (#42160423)

This.

We should move away from the 'y' will replace 'x', because what we always end up with is y in the y-usecase and x in the x-usecase.

I play L4D2 on Wine on my Fedora PC, because any self-respecting FPS require Keyboard and Mouse. I play Skyrim on ps3 because it's a kick-back and relax enjoying the great outdoors type of exploration, for which the couch provides the perfect seating. The scenario for laptops (work), PCs (gaming), tablets/phones (communicating and commuting) and consoles (relaxation) are wholly different for most people. I wouldn't want an e-mail reader on my PS3. It's not a work-platform.

Touch screens - the early years (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year ago | (#42159727)

even though those interfaces don't allow for as much interaction as UIs driven by the keyboard/mouse/screen user experience.

I'm not sure that's fundamentally true - we're currently looking at the early steps of touch-based interfaces, it might be better to compare them to the early pre-unix years of the command line interfaces, or the early Apple and Amiga GUIs - functional, but horribly anemic by today's standards because we've had decades to refine the user experience. Give touch interfaces a few decades to mature and they may we'll exceed the capability and versatility of keyboard & mouse. I can already think of a few text-entry interfaces that are potentially far faster than an average typist, especially if using haptic/textured screens, and stylus support restores mouse-like precision when needed while potentially adding all those yummy Wacom-esque subtleties like orientation and pressure. Combined with intuitive multi-touch enhancements... well it's potentially an *extremely* intuitive and input-rich interface. For now though we're still stuck in the awkward transition period - the OSes are kludgey, and ports of traditional software are even worse. A lot of the new tablet-specific apps are exploring interesting new input techniques, but it will take a while for the really good ideas to sift out. With luck the assortment of tablet interfaces will keep any "adequate" solutions from gaining too much traction before the really good ones emerge.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (2)

yusing (216625) | about a year ago | (#42159681)

Not only is LM13 KDE a great distro, it's very turnkey. Audio, second monitor, wifi, usb, mice, touchpads ... all just work. I tried it in August - my first Linux install - and have only visited the previous OS once a month since. WIth dozens of apps added (and some Office grunge uninstalled) takes up a whole 6GB.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42157983)

Windows manages to still perform well without sacrificing 3d performance.

Seems to me Linux is trying to emulate WIndows XP days where there is tons of ways to do everything and it changes all the time and is total unintuitive.

After all the hassle Linux audio has had it still sucks. (Other than jackd that is great for what it is intended for).

Graphics drivers are still awful. (AMD released the specs after all the moaning of the community the end result still worse than AMD's drivers and not the exponentially better that XiG managed with the r200 specs).

Nvidia has not even managed getting an xterm to scroll perfectly without tearing.

I cannot understand why anyone would ever take 3d eyecandy over being able to use an application properly.

(If you don't need X the framebuffer looks beautiful all the HW accel is now broken though :/)

Re:Alternative: XFCE (3, Informative)

gagol (583737) | about a year ago | (#42158053)

Last windows I actually used was vista on a laptop. With composition activated I lost 25% battery life, deactivated I got a UI so ugly its not even funny jocking about it. I went to linux and will never looked back.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

Bengie (1121981) | about a year ago | (#42158625)

Win7 gets better battery life with composition because it offloads to the GPU instead of using the CPU. Vista had a lot of issues with RTM, not sure how SP3 is doing, but most people I know skipped Vista anyway.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (3, Interesting)

markdavis (642305) | about a year ago | (#42158755)

Well, you might want to skip MS-Windows 8 too, then. I messed with it for a few hours on my new touchscreen ultrabook Lenovo Twist before blowing it away to install Fedora.

All I can say is that Win8 is absolutely hideous. It is pretty at first, until you have to actually try and DO something, then it quickly throws up dozens of barriers. I can't imagine being forced to have to use such a monster on a regular basis.

The Twist only comes with 128MB SDD and almost *HALF* of it was completely consumed by the Win8 *BEAST*. And that is with almost no crapware and very few useful things installed at all.

In contrast, Fedora 17 just *FLIES* on the machine, everything worked out of the box (even the touchscreen) except the card reader (which I had to compile a driver). After installing thousands of packages- KDE, LXDE, games, browsers, test editors, multi-media tools and editors, graphics manipulation, several productivity apps, full dev system, etc, it used 5GB.

I am curious to see if KDE can incorporate a tablet-like interface that can co-exist with a real desktop-like interface with auto-switching on the fly (kind of the whole point of the Twist). They have all the components and probably the best environment to make it happen....

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

osu-neko (2604) | about a year ago | (#42158851)

Well, you might want to skip MS-Windows 8 too, then.

It seems Windows follows a Star Trek like release schedule -- you should skip every other version. 98 was good, ME was bad, XP was good, Vista was bad, 7 was good... waiting for 9/Blue/whatever...

Re:Alternative: XFCE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158973)

The Twist only comes with 128MB SDD and almost *HALF* of it was completely consumed by the Win8 *BEAST*.

Your mommy will punish you for posting bullshit on slashdot.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (1)

Teun (17872) | about a year ago | (#42160031)

For on the fly changes to the interface you should look at KDE's activities manager.
It enables you to have radically different desktop layouts at the click of the mouse, swipe of a finger.

Re:Alternative: XFCE (2)

Verunks (1000826) | about a year ago | (#42160573)

Win7 gets better battery life with composition because it offloads to the GPU instead of using the CPU. Vista had a lot of issues with RTM, not sure how SP3 is doing, but most people I know skipped Vista anyway.

that's not true, the dwm in both vista and 7 uses gpu acceleration, that's why you couldn't enable it on older version of vmware

Re:Alternative: XFCE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158703)

Seems to me Linux is trying to emulate WIndows XP days where there is tons of ways to do everything and it changes all the time and is total unintuitive.

So true.

Options (5, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#42157839)

I just switched to KDE because the developers aren't against the idea of me configuring and theming it as I please. It's also faster. Games are now an added bonus.

Strange behavior with LXDE (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42157865)

A week or two ago I tested LXDE and KDE to see which one would run the best with the new Serious Sam and Unigine. With the Nvidia 304 driver, LXDE was always slower than KDE with or without compositing. This issue went away with the Nvidia 310 driver, LXDE and KDE without compositing were just about the same speed.

I have no idea what caused the slowdown, however it shows that the game's FPS does not necessarily improve with a "light" DE. Compositing however made a difference.

Re:Strange behavior with LXDE (1)

gagol (583737) | about a year ago | (#42158485)

Something seems to be very wrong with LXDE... on my XFCE netbook I see no noticeable performance hit with compositing and battery life is very similar in both cases. Have you submitted a bug report to LXDE?

Re:Strange behavior with LXDE (2)

del_diablo (1747634) | about a year ago | (#42159157)

Compositing shouldn't case any problems with LXDE and game performance unless the GPU has issues. Are we by random chance talking about a Intel laptop of a earlier chipset?

Good for windows, too (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42157951)

I'm using KDE with Windows 8 RT (Microsoft surface). It's the best of both worlds -- the rock-solid NT kernel and the KDE desktop. iPadders look a little jealous when they see a real desktop on a tablet.

Re:Good for windows, too (1)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about a year ago | (#42158123)

Is it of decent quality? Last time I checked it was alpha quality only. Please share insights.

Re:Good for windows, too (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158177)

What is of decent quality?
Serious Sam works, though a lot slower than under Windows.
Unigine is just as fast, maybe slightly faster under Linux.

the 310 driver works too. had no issues so far.

Re:Good for windows, too (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about a year ago | (#42158229)

I'm using KDE with Windows 8 RT (Microsoft surface). It's the best of both worlds -- the rock-solid NT kernel and the KDE desktop. iPadders look a little jealous when they see a real desktop on a tablet.

How did you go about installing KDE on it? They do not provide any binaries or instructions for that. In fact I smell bullshit here,but I'm not gonna mention what mistake you did until you respond.

Re:Good for windows, too (2)

armanox (826486) | about a year ago | (#42158699)

Never tried on W8, but surely you're aware of http://windows.kde.org/ [kde.org] ?

Re:Good for windows, too (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about a year ago | (#42159305)

Never tried on W8, but surely you're aware of http://windows.kde.org/ [kde.org] ?

Yes, I am. However, you should notice that they do only offer x86 - binaries while Windows RT is ARM...

Re:Good for windows, too (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#42159693)

By KDE, did he mean KDE Desktop, or Plasma Active? Plasma Active can be installed on Android, but I'm not sure whether a version exists for Windows.

Re:Good for windows, too (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158719)

I'm using KDE with Windows 8 RT (Microsoft surface).

Sounds totally gay.

My experience switching to KDE4.8 from Gnome3 (2, Informative)

luckymae (2691983) | about a year ago | (#42157953)

I just want to say that KDE4 is awesome. When I switched to openSUSE 11.2 last month, my first impression is: I love Amarok, the Dolphin file manager is 100 x better than Mac's Finder and Gnome Nautilus and Windows Explorer altogether. The default setup is pretty annoying though, I had to turn off quite a few eye candies. At least it's configurable, unlike in Gnome. I didn't regret one bit converting from Ubuntu (12.04) to SuSE (11.2) with KDE. It's stable, rock solid. In Ubuntu, my other PC's Radeon often locks up, but not the case with opensuse. Very stable. Moreover, now Ubuntu is an adware.

Re:My experience switching to KDE4.8 from Gnome3 (1)

countach74 (2484150) | about a year ago | (#42158277)

Ewww.. SuSE... But yes, KDE 4.8+ is very good. I do prefer the Debian flavor, myself. :)

Re:My experience switching to KDE4.8 from Gnome3 (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about a year ago | (#42159549)

heh yea, I rather spend time using my computer rather than configuring it

Or, you know... (2, Informative)

akiwiguy (1113293) | about a year ago | (#42157997)

There are other DEs/WMs out there. XFCE, LXDE if you want a somewhat complete DE, WindowLab [nickgravgaard.com] if you want something minimal but like your mouse, i3 [i3wm.org] if you like tiling (or xmonad if you swing that way).

KDE's sure to use more memory than some of the other competition, and if you're like me and only have 2GB of RAM in your primary machine, that's important.

Re:Or, you know... (2)

captjc (453680) | about a year ago | (#42158667)

Only 2 Gigs? KDE runs fine on half that. I only have 2 Gigs and even with the visual effects it runs great. Sure, you can run a Window Manager that runs on a Pentium 1 with 256 Megs, but don't do it just because you think KDE requires some monster machine with like 64 Gigs and an i7 processor.

LXDE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158003)

Having used everything from Gnome3 w/ Unity to Enlightenment I always go back to LXDE. It is simple looks great and still lets me do what I want.

Choice quote from TFA (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158031)

This also means that we would not gain anything from requiring compositing. [...] Nothing inside the window manager really depends on the compositor. That means it would be more work to get KWin requiring compositing than to keep supporting the non-composited mode.

Smart design decisions are smart.

MSI Nvidea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158073)

With my graphic card you can't run KDE4 without turning off compositing. Unfortunately KWin does not autodetect it.

Anyway, I believe Razor Qt and KDE are the future. But quality improvement is necessary. I am a bit dissatisfied that KDE still does not cross compile for multiple platform although that was promised for KDE4. Ports are only alpha quality. Now we see QT5 advance...

M assumption is that portability leads to more robust code.

Why? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158083)

Why run a window manager which is so bloated you have to turn it off to actually use your GPU? It's meant to draw rectangles with little titles at the top for God's sake.

Re:Why? (1)

Ziggitz (2637281) | about a year ago | (#42158601)

Because if you're not running low end gear like some user tend to have a hard on for it's actually nice to have a pretty interface. If you're only wasting memory and cycles on it when your machine is at rest and it's a pitiful amount of resources for the system you're on then there's no harm in it. Why does every single XFCE user need to come into every Unity and Plasma article and and squeal with indignation like there's a catastrophic world wide memory shortage. If you're running XFCE, LXDE or any DE designed for low end hardware you're probably not playing games.

Qt framework (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158103)

Qt framework -___-) no!

SVG icons (1)

watermark (913726) | about a year ago | (#42158135)

That article a few days ago about scaleable icons sent it over the edge for me. We equate high resolution with small icons, it doesn't have to be that way. I hate squinting at my screen just because I want high res graphics.

Re:SVG icons (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158415)

That article a few days ago about scaleable icons sent it over the edge for me.

Don't want to cast aspersions here but if you use KDE purely because it has SVG icons then you are a complete moron! Last time I looked they were transparently rendered and cached as bitmaps anyway. You could downscale high resolution PNGs but they'd never look as good as icons designed to be displayed at a specific size.

And what of it? With XFCE, openbox or OSX I have my panel / dock set to autohide anyway. I'm sure both an average Linux desktop and Mountain Lion could run in under 500MB of RAM by removing shit those of us who push computing power for work don't need or want.

Re:SVG icons (5, Informative)

bmo (77928) | about a year ago | (#42158593)

>Last time I looked they were transparently rendered and cached as bitmaps anyway.

When was this, in the 3x days?

Open dolphin. Grab the slider. Watch as the icons in Dolphin magically resize as you move the slider back and forth at to completely arbitrary sizes that aren't limited to powers of 2.

Go back to 4chan /g/.

--
BMO

Re:SVG icons (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42159447)

Go back to 4chan /g/.

Slashdot nowdays is FAR worse than that.

Re:SVG icons (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#42160223)

of course they're "transparently rendered and cached as bitmaps", in different sizes. doing it any other way makes no sense, directly keeping rendering the svg to screen makes no sense at all as aproach to blitting something that doesn't change to the screen.

Uses RAM, bad at running games (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about a year ago | (#42158139)

Games frequently require large amounts of RAM, so the fact that the desktop uses a lot makes it somewhat bad for games.

Somehow the game makers got stuck in the 32 bit era though, which means that if you have more than 4GB of ram, you won't have a problem.

Re:Uses RAM, bad at running games (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158255)

If we're taling Linux/FreeBSD, most games can be compiled 64 bit no problem. Also, ram is cheap...the only truly ram constrained modern platform that isn't an embedded system would be something like the atom with some chipsets or implementations unable to support more than 2gb of ram. Graphics are usually a larger bottleneck than ram for games anyway...this 2gb netbook has more trouble with rendering than swapping, and that's running a live os.

Re:Uses RAM, bad at running games (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158829)

Games frequently require large amounts of RAM

False.

Re:Uses RAM, bad at running games (1)

Swarley (1795754) | about a year ago | (#42159453)

Sounds like you just killed your own argument. As you said, games hardly ever use more than 4GB of RAM. 4GB of RAM is not "large amounts of RAM". Ram is so cheap now, and even insanely cheap and small machines like the Zotac Zbox computers will support up to 8GB. I really don't see how this could possibly be a problem for anybody who would want to play games enough to even care that it's a problem.

0.1% of users know what "Compositing" is (-1, Troll)

Gothmolly (148874) | about a year ago | (#42158157)

And this is why 2013 won't be the Year of the Linux Desktop

Re:0.1% of users know what "Compositing" is (4, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year ago | (#42158387)

For those who don't know, compositing is when you throw your food scraps and lawn clippings in the green bin.

Re:0.1% of users know what "Compositing" is (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158597)

that is composting

Re:0.1% of users know what "Compositing" is (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about a year ago | (#42159153)

But 99.9% of game developers know what "Composting" is, and the users never have to know what it is. This will not be one of the reasons if 2013 is not the Year of Linux Desktop.

Would rather just game with compositing on (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158183)

I reject the idea that gaming requires compositing to be off. Why cripple multitasking?

Also on the subject of multitasking, why, now, in 2012, almost 2013, do we STILL have linux games that eat your entire keyboard and axe all window manager shortcuts? Ridiculous, and shouldn't be allowed by the WM. Windows doesn't let this happen and never has. I exit these games immediately and uninstall them. I'd have to say it's probably been around 60% of the games I've tried for linux.

Re:Would rather just game with compositing on (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158479)

In a nutshell, this is why I always run my games in windowed mode if possible.
Because the people who make the Linux versions think hogging the input devices is a bloody brilliant idea!

It's SDL 1.2's modus operandi, if SDL 2 handles this in a sensible way it simply cannot be released soon enough.

Re:Would rather just game with compositing on (1)

reve_etrange (2377702) | about a year ago | (#42158791)

Plenty of Windows games crash if you minimize them or switch to windowed mode. The recent Bethesda RPGs for example.

Re:Would rather just game with compositing on (1)

reve_etrange (2377702) | about a year ago | (#42158803)

But the keyboard shortcuts still work.

Re:Would rather just game with compositing on (1)

mikael_j (106439) | about a year ago | (#42160529)

Yeah, sadly this is one of those things that work much better on Windows than OS X or any Linux setup I've tried (Sure, if you want to get picky about it you could write your own patches to deal with this, perhaps even introducing a new abstraction layer, but for an average user this is hardly an option).

Plasma is CRAP (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158395)

Amongst the many sins of KDE4, Plasma represents probably the worst.

Before the Great Stupidity that gave birth to KDE4 and Gnome3, components from both environments were interchangeable. I could run one piece of KDE under GNOME and vice-versa.

But enter fucking Plasma and the abortion known as KDE4. Suddenly key components are written for "Plasma" which means they ONLY run in the KDE environment.

The only PEACE we had between the warring tribes on the Linux desktop front was that the bits and pieces of each could actually work together...as someone back in the day once said, "it's the libraries, stupid." But Plasma flashes the middle finger at this and makes it all KDE only. What bullshit.

So yes, let's continue to applaud the sinking ships of GNOME and KDE. Fucking idiots...the users have been screaming at both and they continue to live behind their walled gardens with their fingers in their ears.

The desktop environment wars are OVER. It was a Mexican standoff and both idiots shot each other in the head. But hey, Enlightenment is back...too bad it tries too hard to be a god damned Mac.

KDE still not required.... (3, Informative)

julian67 (1022593) | about a year ago | (#42158449)

Xfce allows the user to switch off compositing in the settings GUI or, more usefully for scripts and launchers, with a command:

Compositing off: "xfconf-query -c xfwm4 -p /general/use_compositing -t bool -s false"
Compositing on: "xfconf-query -c xfwm4 -p /general/use_compositing -t bool -s true"

A KDE dev pretending that Gnome 3 or Unity are the only other options makes him seem slightly desperate way.

Re:KDE still not required.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158765)

I'm on a lowend machine (Athlon XP 3800+, 2Gigs of memory and an Nvidia 9600GT) and last I tried Unity/KDE etc. didn't really run even basic games without a hitch, no matter what I did. So I've switched to Xfce which imo looks and works better than the other "lightweights".

Re:KDE still not required.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158911)

Wtf... just ran

sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop

to test things, installed 300MB of stuff and now when I run

sudo apt-get remove kubuntu-desktop

I get a spiffy 50Kb to be removed, kthxbye! Leaving me with a lot of KDE-based junk to manually sort through.

Re:KDE still not required.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42160179)

apt-get autoremove ?

Re:KDE still not required.... (2)

osu-neko (2604) | about a year ago | (#42158935)

A KDE dev pretending that Gnome 3 or Unity are the only other options makes him seem slightly desperate way.

There are dozens of desktop alternatives for GNU/Linux/*BSD/etc. That a fan of one of the dozens of minor ones is complaining that a KDE dev only mentioned the major alternatives and didn't mention his favorite of the dozens of others makes him seem slightly butthurt...

Re:KDE still not required.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42159113)

Eh... KDE fanboi thinking that popularity should override critical thinking makes him seem retarded. No matter how you slice it and dice it KDE with or without compositing which will take more resources and longer to start than Xfce, all of that is away from what you actually want to use your computer for. But sure, let's compare KDE to only failed ideas.

Re:KDE still not required.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42159637)

I don't care because I have good hardware..

What is that crazy idea Linux should only be run on old, slow and memory low systems?

KDE is more than fast enough on a i3-2100 with 4Gb memory, and gaming is fast enough even with my old and trusty GTX285..

If you do not like the plasma desktop it is easy to switch to a more "classic" desktop, by simply right-click in the desktop anywhere, choose "desktop settings", and set the "activities" to "folder view". Simple and effective..

You can switch off compositing bling-bling to speed up your desktop (and if you don't like bling-bling) by unchecking "enable desktop effects" in system setting->Desktop effects.

So two little tweaks and you have a classic and fast desktop..

Re:KDE still not required.... (0)

Osgeld (1900440) | about a year ago | (#42159919)

"I don't care because I have good hardware.."
my 1986 mac can go from dead cold to excel in 8 seconds ... see how that works?

"KDE is more than fast enough on a i3-2100 with 4Gb memory, and gaming is fast enough even with my old and trusty GTX285.."
if you like it, fine, doesnt change the fact that KDE is and always has been heavy

"If you do not like the plasma desktop it is easy to switch to a more "classic" desktop, by simply right-click in the desktop anywhere, choose "desktop settings", and set the "activities" to "folder view". Simple and effective.."
Doesnt shut stuff down, just changes the presentation mode, good that you only go on looks, ought to net you a real good relationship one day

"You can switch off compositing bling-bling to speed up your desktop (and if you don't like bling-bling) by unchecking "enable desktop effects" in system setting->Desktop effects."
Or one could avoid it without manually shutting it off for certain application performance issues

"So two little tweaks and you have a classic and fast desktop.."
Its also slower and eats more resources for stuff you cant see ... brilliant

Re:KDE still not required.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42160581)

Nerd rager should go back to his nerd masturbation. People use different shit than you, because they don't want your shit. People are not you. Get over yourself, and stop trying to turn everybody in you. We don't want to be you.

Re:KDE still not required.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42160597)

It's something to do with that massive forearm you've got on your dominant side...

Re:KDE still not required.... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42159311)

1. He pretends nothing of the sort.
2. KDE requires no such modification.
3. A complete gentleman, Graesslin devotes an entire closing paragraph to not criticizing other projects for their choices.

Ride your strawman outta here.

Re:KDE still not required.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42160139)

Kde: shift + alt + f12
And you can switch between a plain wm behavior good for intensive games, or fancy but configurable effects.

nope (0)

JC61990 (2653877) | about a year ago | (#42158461)

I still wont switch to KDE. I just don't like it. Gnome 2.X is still my favorite or just keep it simple with LXDE.

Why not? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158525)

If you're gaming, then you've already got a PC with a decent graphics chip. Why not have it doing something with those extra processing cycles?

Distro recommendation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42158647)

Does Kubuntu still suck for KDE at 12.10, or is that era finally behind us?

If not, what's the nicest KDE out there? Mageia? Please spare a brother some distro-rolling. Who's doing it right these days?

Compositing is slow? (1)

aaron552 (1621603) | about a year ago | (#42158749)

This is the first I've heard that a decent compositing window manager (ie. not early Compiz builds) actually significantly affecting 3D fps. Windows has used a compositing windows manager since Vista (dwm) and, if anything, FPS got better for windowed apps, and vsync is "free". The worst I've ever seen compositing affect fps (in non-alpha Compiz, GNOME3 or Unity) is in the single digits.

Re:Compositing is slow? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42159075)

With nvidia, any compositing at all halves framerate.

Without nvidia, forget gaming on linux.

Re:Compositing is slow? (1)

aaron552 (1621603) | about a year ago | (#42160165)

I'm reporting my experience with the open source Radeon drivers. And compositing has next to no noticeable impact on Windows, so my guess is it's nVidia's fault here.

Separate X > any of the above (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42159799)

IMO, the best "Linux gaming solution" is: any desktop environment you like + separate X server for games. This solution may be very handy in situations such as game hang, and it can compensate lack of Alt+Tab functionality.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...