XFCE vs LXDE

[Oxwivi]

Both are advertised as lightweight DEs for Linux. What gives?

[cascade9]

They both are. Whats the problem?

[Oxwivi]

Let me rephrase that: what are the difference?

[Spice Weasel]

Xfce's aim is to create a desktop environment which is lighter than GNOME but has a similar interface and user experience. On most distributions it is actually heavier than GNOME because the distributors choose to include GNOME packages as well for some reason.

LXDE's aim is to create an easy to use lightweight desktop environment, with very simple and easy to use programs.

LXDE is lighter, but has less features.

[Oxwivi]

No wonder I didn't find much difference in DE behavior when I tried out Xubuntu during 10.04's tenure. But if it's lighter than GNOME but same features, why is it not more mainstream? Wouldn't it better to replace GNOME sections where their functionality are the same? It could improve GNOME that way.

What does GNOME aim to provide anyway?

[wojox]

Ditch the DE and go WM IceWM, OpenBox, Enlightenment...

[Spice Weasel]

GNOME is more dumbed down. Xfce's options are slightly more complex. GNOME aims to provide a complete DE with every program you could ever dream of, while Xfce provides the desktop and a few tools.

[Oxwivi]

Why should programs be part of DE? IMO, DE should just be a GUI in which we can populate it with the programs we're going to use. Or is what I just described a WM?

[wojox]

Why should programs be part of DE? IMO, DE should just be a GUI in which we can populate it with the programs we're going to use. Or is what I just described a WM?

You would have to do a minimal install and download gnome-core. Then you could populate it with whatever.

[Oxwivi]

You would have to do a minimal install and download gnome-core. Then you could populate it with whatever.
That I should try - if I get the time to. Thanks for the tip.

[cascade9]

Xfce's aim is to create a desktop environment which is lighter than GNOME but has a similar interface and user experience. On most distributions it is actually heavier than GNOME because the distributors choose to include GNOME packages as well for some reason.

LXDE's aim is to create an easy to use lightweight desktop environment, with very simple and easy to use programs.

LXDE is lighter, but has less features.

Xfce's aims are pretty much the same as Lxde-


It aims to be fast and lightweight, while still being visually appealing and user friendly.

http://www.xfce.org/about/

I wouldnt say that on 'most' distros Xfce is as heavy as GNOME. There some about (xubuntu/ubuntu is the most obvious example of that, PCLinuxOS is probably worse) but most of them in my experience are lighter than GNOME..as they should be.

I'd agree, Lxde is lighter than Xfce. I cant stand Lxde myself, and with the machines I have and what I use them for, its not enough 'lighter' for me to bother with Lxde.


No wonder I didn't find much difference in DE behavior when I tried out Xubuntu during 10.04's tenure. But if it's lighter than GNOME but same features, why is it not more mainstream? Wouldn't it better to replace GNOME sections where their functionality are the same? It could improve GNOME that way.

What does GNOME aim to provide anyway?


The GNOME project provides two things: The GNOME desktop environment, an intuitive and attractive desktop for users, and the GNOME development platform, an extensive framework for building applications that integrate into the rest of the desktop.

http://www.gnome.org/about/


GNOME is more dumbed down. Xfce's options are slightly more complex. GNOME aims to provide a complete DE with every program you could ever dream of, while Xfce provides the desktop and a few tools.

I've found that for me, Xfce is easier than GNOME. That could be a hangover of my dislike of GNOME though, I'll admit that.

AFAIK, a DE doesnt have to come wioth anything. If you check gnome-core (like wojox suggested) you'll see it comes with no programs at all (well, apart from the desktop stuff and nautilus).

BTW, you can do the same thing with xfce- if you install the xfce4 you get a fairly minimal program install. Worth a try if you want to see a more 'vanilla' xfce compared to xubuntu-desktop.

[Spice Weasel]

BTW, you can do the same thing with xfce- if you install the xfce4 you get a fairly minimal program install. Worth a try if you want to see a more 'vanilla' xfce compared to xubuntu-desktop.

Yeah, really recommend doing this. I was actually shocked after I installed minimal Xfce and compared memory usage to Xubuntu.

[koleoptero]

XFCE can be as light as LXDE, just look at crunchbang xfce. It's just that some distro's (xubuntu is one) make it very user friendly by including a lot of stuff from gnome as has been said.

[Gremlinzzz]

I chose xfce you can only go so light before you only have a Internet connection.I like having a full desktop environment.

[ubunterooster]

Can I change my vote to windows? I so chose the wrong one!

[smellyman]

XFCE can be as light as LXDE, just look at crunchbang xfce. It's just that some distro's (xubuntu is one) make it very user friendly by including a lot of stuff from gnome as has been said.

They all can be light. My Arch Gnome laptop boots at 109 megs of ram. Arch Openbox 41 megs....

[Simian Man]

On most distributions it is actually heavier than GNOME because the distributors choose to include GNOME packages as well for some reason.
With Ubuntu maybe. Fedora's Xfce spin is very light and comes with light alternatives whenever feasible eg Midori and Parole etc.


LXDE is lighter, but has less features.
Yes, using Xfce over Gnome is no real sacrifice. Using LXDE is however.

[Oxwivi]

Can I change my vote to windows? I so chose the wrong one!
I can't find the option to allow changing votes, sorry!

[3Miro]

Depends on how you define "light". People measure RAM usage on load time, however, if the RAM used by the DE is shared with he application that you will be using anyway, then low RAM usage at boot really makes no difference. For RAM usage during regular use, things like FireFox and Chromium will make far more difference than the DE. Then there is the responsiveness of changing workspaces and starting new apps. KDE can hardly be considered "light" due to the large amount of RAM that it used, however, it is very responsive. Quick loading a new apps has more to do with the actual applications that you are using and the window manager then the DE itself. You can easily use different WM for the different environments, Gnome + Open Box works very well, so does XFCE + Compiz. I use Gnome, but I still prefer Thuar to Nautilus. You usually mix and match to get the balance between resources, responsiveness and features.

Overall I will say that GTK apps and DE are somewhat faster to respond and lower on resources used. Gnome may be called heavier than XFCE and LXDE due tot he couple of extra daemons that it is running, however, I don't think there is a significant difference between XFCE and LXDE.