Today I talk about why I'm finally ready to settle down. Why did it have to be Gnome though?👇 PULL IT DOWN FOR THE GOOD STUFF 👇Patreon - https://patreon.co...
No, KDE Plasma 5.6 or 5.3 (5.27, my bad, edit) I think (whatever was before 6 launched) , tested last year on a fresh Debian 12 Stable install. It had GARBAGE performance. Turning off compositor and all animations made a massive difference, but it made KDE look and feel almost worse than LXQt.
XFCE looked a lot better while having screaming fast performance, compared to a neutered KDE.
Mind you, this is not a toaster machine. This is i5-7200U ThinkPad with 12 GB RAM. GNOME, XFCE and LXQt run extremely fast on it. And fresh installation with nothing else added.
KDE is not simple. Powerful? Absolutely. It has extreme customisation but for people who want to use computer as a tool to get the job done, it acts as a minus point. GNOME has less customisability and is restricted, but gains advantage with stability and feature minimalism. GNOME is a bit like stock Android with extensions acting like OEM features, whereas KDE is like a full blown custom ROM where you need to setup everything, and is just a hassle.
KDE Plasma 5.6 is not ancient by any standards. Plasma 6 is the current iteration, and 5.6 existed when Debian 12 launched last July. If it did not work on 7200U, it will not work well. Other DEs worked perfectly, so KDE is at fault.
Edit: well it seems I was misremembering. Debian 12 provides KDE 5.27 version. I used that. I do not know their version number system.
I’m very sorry it felt sluggish for you but that’s likely down to your specific hardware configuration, drivers, GPU vendor + display server combo, etc.
I did not know that the most popular laptop CPU for many years, i5-7200U, with no GPU, is a rare combination of hardware, specific drivers, GPU (lol) vendor, display server (ThinkPad standard 766p LCD) is such a problematic configuration for KDE. You are just a KDE fanboy.
Also I installed Debian 12 Bookworm last July. It installs KDE Plasma 5.27 from the installer. KDE 6 never released until last winters, thereby making KDE itself ancient. Also, it was KDE 5.27, not 5.6. So my mistake there. KDE was far newer than I thought, still it could not support a mere common CPU laptop. I have no clue about their release nomenclature, because GNOME is easy, 40, 41, 42…
My ThinkPad is working extremely well for almost 7 years now, and currently mass downloading files using JDownloader Flatpak on Debian 12 GNOME.
It works with every DE, but KDE eats my CPU alive at 70%, and without compositor and eyecandy, 15% idle. XFCE and LXQt had 0.5% CPU idle, and GNOME stays around 0.5-1% idle. Heck, even my 13 year old dinosaur desktop with 2nd gen i3 works perfectly with Debian 12 GNOME, exact same setup.
Maybe, maybe KDE is at fault?
Look, I wrote a Linux/Windows computing guide. I consider myself stupid, but I am not THAT stupid. https://lemmy.ml/post/511377
I called you a fanboy because you cannot fathom how poor KDE performance can be. 7200U is a modern laptop CPU, and one of the most famous CPUs ever to be used by masses, so the optimisation argument for it and its iGPU Intel HD 620 goes out of the window.
Uh huh. No fanboying on your part at all. Projection?
No, just facts over feelings. GNOME is widely regarded as far more professional than KDE, and the polished end result shows everytime. GNOME2 was peak Linux back in the day, and now GNOME 40+ is peak Linux if you actually want to get work done and have a simple interface with the best workflow.
Because I feel like with childish statements like the one above, you’re not exactly being 100% truthful. But I can back up my argument with evidence.
This comment section, as well as on Reddit and other “community” places like 4chan are filled with toxic KDE fanboys shitting on GNOME, while GNOME users never say anything. KDE deserves to be shat on for being an unprofessional hacky mess, because GNOME has proven its might time and time again in that regard.
Also I tested multiple DEs last year, so I know I am not lying. Maybe you missed that guide there. KDE runs like crap on most machines. GNOME is just too well optimised with all the eyecandy.
I do not need you to benchmark those for me, because I did it for myself thoroughly, and have enough experience to teach both Linux and Windows users how to do computing. Maybe do not try to teach a teacher?
No, KDE Plasma 5.6 or 5.3 (5.27, my bad, edit) I think (whatever was before 6 launched) , tested last year on a fresh Debian 12 Stable install. It had GARBAGE performance. Turning off compositor and all animations made a massive difference, but it made KDE look and feel almost worse than LXQt.
XFCE looked a lot better while having screaming fast performance, compared to a neutered KDE.
Mind you, this is not a toaster machine. This is i5-7200U ThinkPad with 12 GB RAM. GNOME, XFCE and LXQt run extremely fast on it. And fresh installation with nothing else added.
KDE is not simple. Powerful? Absolutely. It has extreme customisation but for people who want to use computer as a tool to get the job done, it acts as a minus point. GNOME has less customisability and is restricted, but gains advantage with stability and feature minimalism. GNOME is a bit like stock Android with extensions acting like OEM features, whereas KDE is like a full blown custom ROM where you need to setup everything, and is just a hassle.
deleted by creator
KDE Plasma 5.6 is not ancient by any standards. Plasma 6 is the current iteration, and 5.6 existed when Debian 12 launched last July. If it did not work on 7200U, it will not work well. Other DEs worked perfectly, so KDE is at fault.
Edit: well it seems I was misremembering. Debian 12 provides KDE 5.27 version. I used that. I do not know their version number system.
deleted by creator
I did not know that the most popular laptop CPU for many years, i5-7200U, with no GPU, is a rare combination of hardware, specific drivers, GPU (lol) vendor, display server (ThinkPad standard 766p LCD) is such a problematic configuration for KDE. You are just a KDE fanboy.
Also I installed Debian 12 Bookworm last July. It installs KDE Plasma 5.27 from the installer. KDE 6 never released until last winters, thereby making KDE itself ancient. Also, it was KDE 5.27, not 5.6. So my mistake there. KDE was far newer than I thought, still it could not support a mere common CPU laptop. I have no clue about their release nomenclature, because GNOME is easy, 40, 41, 42…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onPUaAKoGIM
KDE 6 release is very recent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1_NpFtNtPk
deleted by creator
My ThinkPad is working extremely well for almost 7 years now, and currently mass downloading files using JDownloader Flatpak on Debian 12 GNOME.
It works with every DE, but KDE eats my CPU alive at 70%, and without compositor and eyecandy, 15% idle. XFCE and LXQt had 0.5% CPU idle, and GNOME stays around 0.5-1% idle. Heck, even my 13 year old dinosaur desktop with 2nd gen i3 works perfectly with Debian 12 GNOME, exact same setup.
Maybe, maybe KDE is at fault?
Look, I wrote a Linux/Windows computing guide. I consider myself stupid, but I am not THAT stupid. https://lemmy.ml/post/511377
I called you a fanboy because you cannot fathom how poor KDE performance can be. 7200U is a modern laptop CPU, and one of the most famous CPUs ever to be used by masses, so the optimisation argument for it and its iGPU Intel HD 620 goes out of the window.
deleted by creator
No, just facts over feelings. GNOME is widely regarded as far more professional than KDE, and the polished end result shows everytime. GNOME2 was peak Linux back in the day, and now GNOME 40+ is peak Linux if you actually want to get work done and have a simple interface with the best workflow.
This comment section, as well as on Reddit and other “community” places like 4chan are filled with toxic KDE fanboys shitting on GNOME, while GNOME users never say anything. KDE deserves to be shat on for being an unprofessional hacky mess, because GNOME has proven its might time and time again in that regard.
Also I tested multiple DEs last year, so I know I am not lying. Maybe you missed that guide there. KDE runs like crap on most machines. GNOME is just too well optimised with all the eyecandy.
I do not need you to benchmark those for me, because I did it for myself thoroughly, and have enough experience to teach both Linux and Windows users how to do computing. Maybe do not try to teach a teacher?