Pjotr wrote: ↑
Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:54 am
Main disadvantage: I've heard that LXQt isn't as lightweight as LXDE....
Hoser Rob wrote: ↑
Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:10 am
Actually from my brief encounter with LXQt I'd have to agree.
I've used Lubuntu LXDE for a few years. I didn't upgrade to the LXQt version until a few days ago. I liked LXDE very much
. I don't need eye candy. But, as @smurphos suggested, apparently GTK2 is increasingly a problem. LXDE was becoming unstable for me. The desktop would crash, freeze. (GIMP was doing the same thing. It seemed related.).
Lubuntu LXQt is nice. More colorful. There's some things I don't care for. I don't know enough about these things to know how much is Lubuntu-specific themeing vs LXQt itself.
It's definitely not
as lightweight. After boot (nothing running except the installed OS & desktop): 306,628 bytes memory used. (If I recall, it was about 120,000 when I last checked 2-3 years ago when using LXDE.).
- EDIT: In a later post I mention that the above memory use was after install and customizing. Measured from booting the install media, it's 342,604. Also, I'm pretty sure I mispoke about 120,000 in the past. It was probably 220,000. In a later post I summarize the different distros I booted from install media.
There was a Lubuntu communication about a year ago saying Lubuntu's emphasis would no longer be on being lightweight (ex., now it includes LibreOffice). That's a valid direction, a larger community who wants it, etc. But, it seems odd to retain the name "L" (for lightweight).
I suggested at that time they rename it to Qubuntu and leave the "L" domain for anyone who might want to pick up that flag.
Now I'm downloading Cinnamon & Mate just to look at them again (since lightweight isn't what it used to be), I want to re-think my choices (see how things compare again). I haven't looked at that for 3 years.
There is a setting for how many lines the mouse should scroll. But, that applies to everything
. If you dial that down to make the filemanager behave normally, then everything else (Featherpad, Firefox, Chrome) scroll too grudgingly. So, there's something baked into the file manager to behave differently. It's not configurable.
I'm finding that to be difficult to learn to live with. Hopefully things like that are just part of LXQt's youthfulness, still developing.
Or, maybe I'm looking at it wrong and need to just use it longer, get used it. I don't know. My initial impression is that LXQt doesn't have a concrete direction like DE had. It seems nebulous (to me). Kind of lightweight, but kind of popular, kind of feature-rich, kind of heavy, kind of... It seems like the target is not clear (the priorities). It will be what it will be. Maybe "mission creep" is the term I'm looking for. It's probably popular. I read that Lubuntu's usage went up *a lot* after LXQt was implemented. So... if the direction is subject to seeing where it goes... I suspect it's going to become large. The natural tendency of all desktops to compete that way (features, eye candy). If that results in a larger, happier user base, that's fine. It's great that people will be happy.
But, I wish there was something in between Puppy and LXQt (in terms of conservative features, size.) the way LXDE has been. (I know there's Xfce. It's never appealed to me.). I think I've read that LXDE development will continue. Maybe that will have life (and not be prone to breaking as GTK2 is increasingly outdated.).