[HN Gopher] Using IceWM and a Raspberry Pi as my main PC, sharin...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Using IceWM and a Raspberry Pi as my main PC, sharing my theme,
       config and some
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 250 points
       Date   : 2021-07-10 21:01 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (raymii.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (raymii.org)
        
       | LeoPanthera wrote:
       | I've been using lxqt on my Pi 400. It's the closest thing to a
       | "light" KDE that I can find, and I like it a lot. The only
       | problem is that the version on the Raspbian repository is quite
       | out of date. You can get a slightly less old version by enabling
       | backports. I wish there was a good rolling distribution for the
       | Raspberry Pi. openSUSE Tumbleweed is probably the best but it's
       | been glitchy for me and I haven't figured out how to netboot it.
        
         | nyanpasu64 wrote:
         | What issues have you had with Arch Linux ARM? I tried it for a
         | little while and things seemed to run fairly smoothly (though
         | many AUR PKGBUILDs didn't indicate support for ARM).
        
         | bitwize wrote:
         | Void Linux, dude! I've been running it on my Pi 2 since
         | forever.
        
       | swiley wrote:
       | I did this in college with FVWM but I also had a (less powerful)
       | netbook.
       | 
       | Computers are way cheaper if you know Linux.
        
       | brody_hamer wrote:
       | > Using noscript to disable javascript in Firefox has also helped
       | tremendously.
       | 
       | Id love to see a browser extension that disables JavaScript after
       | its consumed a set number of cycles.
       | 
       | A page wants to asynchronously load a sidebar, great. A page
       | wants to continuously resize and repaint an affixed element?
       | Nope. You're cut off.
        
         | noisy_boy wrote:
         | What I would like to see is a tree based handling setup.
         | Everything my bank opens (direct child or descendent): let it
         | through even if it is a usually blacklisted domain because, yiu
         | know, banking is kinda important for me. Same domain via a
         | website I couldn't care less about, blacklist away as per
         | rules.
        
           | tomjen3 wrote:
           | As a user of tab containers I would love if I could have
           | extensions work that way too.
        
           | artificialLimbs wrote:
           | That would be nice if it worked with tab containers.
        
             | noisy_boy wrote:
             | Indeed - if having such a facility requires me to setup a
             | container per top-level domain (e.g. one container for
             | www.xyzbank.com and everything that it opens), then even
             | that is worth it. Right now, with the combination of ublock
             | origin and other privacy plugins, I don't even try to do
             | financial transactions like banking/flight booking etc for
             | the fear of being left with a semi-processed transaction.
             | That is one of the main reasons of me installing Chrome (I
             | know that Chromium might also be a good alternative for
             | such scenarios).
             | 
             | I guess what I'm looking for is a "allow everything"
             | container setup without having to enable/disable plugins or
             | fiddle with white/blacklists.
        
         | artificialLimbs wrote:
         | Considering setting up another account to upvote this again...
         | 
         | Why does my machine, when the lid is closed with 1 browser tab
         | open, need to spin the fans at full blast? It's a no from me.
        
       | cpach wrote:
       | When I went to senior high back in the early 00s I shared a flat
       | with three friends. None of them had their own computer. I had a
       | spare IBM PC with an old Pentium processor which I lent to one of
       | my room mates. I installed Debian, IceWM and Abiword for her. She
       | had no previous experience with Linux, but with this setup she
       | was able to write her school essays and save them to floppy in
       | order to print them out at school. (We didn't even have a router
       | in the flat.) It worked really well and was much more stable than
       | Win 98/XP :)
        
       | bullen wrote:
       | I use TWM instead, it works very well, but requires some
       | adaptation time to the window focus and copy'n paste mechanics.
        
       | dysoco wrote:
       | There is something appealing about using a low-resource PC with a
       | limited selection of software installed in order to be free from
       | distractions that could otherwise stop me from being productive
       | and write some code or learn something.
       | 
       | I know the problem is mine from not having discipline and not my
       | modern desktop's fault for being able to run games, but still, I
       | almost want a separate PC for this.
        
       | war1025 wrote:
       | We've been using a Raspberry Pi400 (the computer in a keyboard
       | model) as a media center pc for a little over 6 months now. It
       | plays amazon and netflix videos fine, handles the netflix
       | browsing UI pretty well, but has been rather painful for
       | selecting shows on Amazon for a few months now. Not sure what
       | they changed because it worked great when we first got it.
       | 
       | I'm not sure whether it was the best choice or not, but we
       | figured we'd fall back to a regular pc if we needed to, and so
       | far we haven't been bothered enough to do that.
        
       | marcodiego wrote:
       | I used a Pi 2 as a desktop from 2017 to the end of 2019. Apart
       | from using window maker, I didn't made many changes to use it as
       | a desktop. Also, since it is an under powered machine by today
       | standards, using it as a desktop gave me the feeling of a 90's
       | workstation. I even compiled the latest available GTk 1.x version
       | and xmms for a better retro feel.
       | 
       | It is possible to use the modern web if you keep the number of
       | tabs low and switch heavier sites like gmail to the html mode. An
       | ad blocker is needed and Youtube is watchable if you use the
       | h264ify extension so it uses the hardware decoder and avoids
       | modern video compression codecs.
       | 
       | I could even run libreoffice with Portuguese orthographic and
       | grammatical checkers. It is slow, you can't run other tasks
       | simultaneously but it works.
       | 
       | Want to watch movies? If it is 1080p or smaller encoded with h264
       | it is totally doable. Even streaming in 720p is doable. You won't
       | be able to easily watch netflix though.
       | 
       | So, yes a 2GB Pi 2 is good enough for light browsing, light text
       | editing, listening to mp3, watching movies and compiling software
       | from early 2000's.
       | 
       | Things you can't comfortably do with it:                 -
       | Meetings: encoding and decoding with any codec that is not
       | supported by the hardware is just too slow to be usable.
       | - Video editing: same as above. Also not enough RAM.            -
       | Compiling large code bases: libreoffice and mozilla will probably
       | fail on anything with less than 8Gb RAM. I could compile OpenCV
       | on it, but it took hours.            - Keep many tabs open: you
       | can if the sites are wikipedia-like. Anything more complex and
       | the system starts swapping. Magic Sysrq-f is your friend in such
       | situations.            - Modern IDE's: no way. Try gnu-nano or
       | emacs/vi. Want to develop GUI apps? Use Lazarus-ide. Anjuta+Glade
       | probably work stably with recent Gtk+3.x versions.            -
       | Games: at the time I used it, the driver didn't support desktop
       | OpenGL. Emulators for old consoles ran great, emulation station
       | ran great, it is possible to run Quake but that is it.
        
         | msk-lywenn wrote:
         | I've been trying to use a pi4 as a desktop, with xfce, and was
         | a bit disappointed. It's usable but less than an old iPad. So I
         | was surprised you got by with a pi2! I'll have to give that
         | h264ify a go.
         | 
         | For games, I was super pleasantly surprised to rediscover old
         | open source games that I had completely forgot and actually
         | love: frozen bubbles, neverball and monsterz :)
        
           | marcodiego wrote:
           | My mindset goes like this: in the early 90's, if I had a Sun
           | SparcStation, I could do all this; a raspi2 is reasonably on
           | par with that, so I should be able to do the same with a
           | raspi2.
           | 
           | What makes it a bit harder is that some software that ran on
           | a SparcStation was carefully tailored to that machine while
           | Chromium is not actually designed specifically for a
           | raspi2... But you can go by with it. This thread gives some
           | hints that I didn't try at the time like changing the cpu
           | governor or using zswap. I didn't even overclocked it out of
           | fear to reduce its lifespan.
           | 
           | But you of course, you're limited by what you can do and how
           | you do it. I even began contributing to gnu-nano because I
           | needed some features that weren't available on it and never
           | got used to emacs/vim, but that is another story.
        
           | tomcooks wrote:
           | Dietpi allows you to improve performance, overclock the CPU,
           | etc
        
         | deckard1 wrote:
         | You can't really compare the Pi 2 to a 4. That's like comparing
         | a 486 or Pentium to a Ryzen.
         | 
         | The Pi 4 is a serious device. 1GbE, USB 3.0. It demolishes the
         | previous Pi devices across the board in performance. I think
         | this is where people get confused by others using the Pi4 as a
         | NAS or server or whatever. There is this misunderstanding of
         | just how equipped the Pi is today.
         | 
         | > Video editing: same as above. Also not enough RAM.
         | 
         | I wouldn't even do this on my Macbook Pro with 16GB of RAM.
         | Anything less than a workstation with gobs of RAM is just
         | asking for a headache. Unless you're just chopping together the
         | random video for the family once a year.
        
           | stavros wrote:
           | Unfortunately, the $100 price tag puts the Pi 4 in an awkward
           | place: Not cheap enough to be a hobbyist board, not powerful
           | enough for "serious" things. To me, that's extremely
           | unfortunate, because I think many, many more people need a
           | cheap, underpowered board they can tinker with than need a PC
           | with some exposed GPIOs.
        
             | MikusR wrote:
             | What are you talking about? What $100? It costs the same as
             | rpi3 rpi2 or rpi1.
        
             | fouc wrote:
             | It's worth noting there's also some solid competition for
             | Raspberry Pis by other companies making similar hobbyist
             | boards. I'm pretty sure there's one out there that might
             | fit your needs but I forget the name of it.
        
               | marcodiego wrote:
               | I got a RockPi4 instead of raspi4. Definitely not as
               | powerful but I don't regret it.
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | I heard that things like the Banana Pi (or similar) use
               | horrid chipsets that have very limited support, so they
               | might not actually be of similar utility. If you know of
               | any good ones, though, I'd be grateful!
               | 
               | Nowadays I use an ESP8266 for most things, but it'd be
               | nice to have a small, reliable Linux machine for things
               | like file servers at my parents' house.
        
             | jbotz wrote:
             | It's $75 for an RPi 4b with 8GB of RAM! And from my
             | experience it's quite powerful enough for a lot of "serious
             | things", including most casual desktop computing needs. And
             | it's only $35 with 2GB of RAM, which is all you need for
             | all sorts of headless server tasks.
             | 
             | So I really don't get where you're coming from.
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | Maybe prices are cheaper in the US, on Amazon.de I could
               | only find the 8 GB model for $100 and the 2 GB for $60.
        
               | bear8642 wrote:
               | Probably best to buy from official raspi reseller - form
               | at bottom of
               | <https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-
               | pi-4-model-b/> with links given specs
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | Good call, thanks!
        
         | jejones3141 wrote:
         | Amen about compiling large codebases. It took the better part
         | of a day to compile MAME. zram is your friend.
        
         | bear8642 wrote:
         | > but that is it.
         | 
         | The python demo games that come pre-installed are quite fun.
         | The list includes snake, 15-slide puzzle, and fun flood it
         | clones
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | Which could be easily coded on a ESP32, a device much better
           | than typical MS-DOS PCs.
        
           | marcodiego wrote:
           | I understand what you mean, but these games are not very
           | demanding. Weaker machines than a raspi could run these
           | comfortably.
           | 
           | I got some MSDOS games running well on dosbox, but you'll
           | probably have to compile it from source to enable dynarec if
           | you need more performance.
        
         | geokon wrote:
         | How do you handle multitasking? Do you shut down what you're
         | doing and then switch to something else? I feel this creates a
         | lot of friction. It could be good in a way b/c you don't get
         | easily distracted :)
         | 
         | I remember in earlier KDE5 version you could suspend activities
         | (in the KDE world this is sorta similar to a desktop - or a
         | group of running applications). This would free up a lot of
         | resources and could mean you can have a lot of applications
         | "open" at once, but they're all in a frozen state. At some
         | point this features was removed. I'm guessing it didn't play
         | nice with a lot of applications. But I haven't been able to
         | find anything equivalent.
         | 
         | You can sorta accomplish something similar by going into the
         | task managed and suspending a task, but it's not ergonomic.
         | Maybe someone has a good alternative?
        
           | marcodiego wrote:
           | My multitasking on such machine was limited to a few
           | terminals, Chromium and other utilities. With the terminals,
           | I had one with nano, another ocasionally compiling code and
           | another with mutt; when compiling code, the system slowed
           | down but I could still use nano. Chromium stayed with a few
           | tabs open for querying stack overflow, google or wikipedia
           | and when not using it its tabs were soon swapped out, so
           | switching back to chromium and switching tabs took a few
           | seconds after compiling something. With regard to other
           | utilities, it was mostly hexchat for IRC and xmms for playing
           | mp3. Not much, but I didn't need much more than that.
           | Raspbian is a reasonably quick distro.
           | 
           | For entertainment it was good enough for old games and h264
           | 1080p movies.
        
         | everdrive wrote:
         | > - Keep many tabs open: you can if the sites are wikipedia-
         | like. Anything more complex and the system starts swapping.
         | Magic Sysrq-f is your friend in such situations.
         | 
         | I ran a Raspberry Pi 3 as a desktop for a little while, and I
         | believe I ran into the same problem. In most of my Linux
         | installations, I format the drives without swap. I've never had
         | a problem with it. But, I didn't know how to disable swap on
         | the pi3.
        
       | rcarmo wrote:
       | I mostly just used OpenBox for a long time, but my 8GB Pi 4 is
       | running Ubuntu MATE and it works great as a desktop driving a 29"
       | ultrawide (1080p tall).
       | 
       | I'm actually running it from a Class 10 SD Card (external SSDs
       | require unwieldy cases for the place it needs to slot in), and
       | speed is fine for Firefox and VS Code use.
        
         | synergy20 wrote:
         | openbox indeed is light-weight and more popular than icewm
         | these days. I wonder what's the GUI stack behind each, some
         | code on top of X11 windows?
         | 
         | Neither supports wayland though
        
       | pygar wrote:
       | Years ago, as a kid, when the only computers I had access to were
       | cobbled together hand-me-downs and machines people would throw
       | away I used to do this kind of thing. Like the author, I settled
       | on IceWM after trying Fluxbox/JWM/FVWM/"Window Maker" and all the
       | various forks with minor variations.
       | 
       | It was fun to tinker, but it's questionable if I learnt anything
       | useful other then how to get hobby DEs working on ancient
       | hardware. I guess tangentially I gained an intermediate knowledge
       | of Linux command line tools and some networking concepts.
       | 
       | PuppyLinux [0] ended up being my choice for easy defaults after
       | DSL [1] stagnated. I'm glad to see it's still going and has
       | developed its own ecosystem. Even after I could buy reasonable
       | computers, for a while I took some pride in squeezing performance
       | out of budget computers but ultimately, now that I need to be
       | productive to get paid, it's nice to have computers that "just
       | work" with modern software.
       | 
       | [0] https://puppylinux.com/ [1]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damn_Small_Linux
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | an_opabinia wrote:
         | > it's nice to have computers that "just work" with modern
         | software
         | 
         | Yeah I never understood people who work with computers all day
         | economizing on their computers. Even from scalpers you'll pay
         | ~$6500 for top of the line parts and peripherals, which is
         | about the cost of a high school student's violin.
        
           | iforgotpassword wrote:
           | Yes, but it's also thanks to this mentality that a simple
           | text editor occupies 1 gig of ram and two cpu cores nowadays.
           | If the dev's machine is infinitely fast and has storage as
           | fast as other people's ram, they stop caring about
           | performance issues, because they never encounter them in the
           | first place. And I'm not talking about working on hand
           | written assembly for a week to get the last bit of
           | performance. I've repeatedly found silly things like O(n)
           | code calculating something that could be expressed as O(1),
           | hilariously complicated xpath expressions that in the end
           | just retrieved an immediate child and whatnot.
           | 
           | At one of my first jobs, when my boss got annoyed by some
           | software being slow, je always said that developers should
           | get the fastest hardware available, but as soon as they start
           | testing or using their own software, the machine needs to
           | magically turn into a 386 with your home directory on an NFS
           | share. Granted, that was 20 years ago so 386 didn't sound as
           | hilarious as it does now, but it was still a little extreme.
           | But that idea stuck with me, and to this day I do test
           | software on slow machines every now and then, looking for
           | obvious performance left on the table.
        
           | Avi0n wrote:
           | Wow that's pricy. I played 1st section violin through college
           | and only have a $2k one. My friend played first chair 1st
           | violin section through college and had a $4k violin and it
           | sounded amazing. Maybe we got lucky and found a really good
           | instrument shop? Another friend had a cello that costed well
           | over $15k though so there's that.
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | The $2k violin is a $3k+ violin in 5 or 10 years, unless
             | you drop it. The computer is generally not (especially if
             | you drop it).
        
             | an_opabinia wrote:
             | At least you're engaging with the premise. You could also
             | get a $980 with tax M1 MacBook Air. A Dell prebuilt - even
             | the Alienware, which does not have to pay scalper prices
             | and comes with a 3070 - is $2,611. These are all comparable
             | options. In the instrument world, a $6,500 computer is more
             | like a $30,000-150,000 violin and bow. Like the stuff
             | professionals use.
        
           | tomcooks wrote:
           | 6500 is a bunch of money, reason why you also don't see many
           | high school violin students
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | Easy, not everyone lives in countries where giving ~$6500 is
           | a possibility, and if they have access to such money they
           | wouldn't be spending it on computer parts most likely.
        
             | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
             | Even in the US $6500 is a lot of money for most people.
             | I've personally never spent even a third of that on a PC.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Yeah, indeed.
        
           | Stampo00 wrote:
           | I use a Raspberry Pi as my daily driver. I like it because
           | the hardware is cheap and easy to replace. It sips
           | electricity, which matters to me. It doesn't support Intel or
           | AMD. And as a developer, I can more acutely feel differences
           | in performance based on the algorithms I choose. If I can
           | make it run acceptably on a Pi, it should work okay on a non-
           | flagship phone or a 4+ year old office PC.
        
             | cpach wrote:
             | Kudos to you!
        
           | chucktingle wrote:
           | I'll give you two reasons.
           | 
           | 1. In many countries $6500 is enough to start a business. I'd
           | rather do that than pay for an overpriced piece of aluminum
           | with a piece of fruit etched on one of the sides. What if I'm
           | not the business type? That's fine. It's still probably
           | better to save that money.
           | 
           | 2. Modern computing is turning into a dumpster fire. It will
           | be pretty soon that the Intel platform will work in the same
           | way as the above-mentioned fruitty platform and you won't be
           | able to run whatever software you want on it. While I agree
           | OP is probably making his life extra miserable [1], I admire
           | people like him, since their efforts will give us the next
           | free/fun computing platform.
           | 
           | [1] I too run a Raspberry Pi at home, but I've long given up
           | on turning it into a desktop machine. There is an easier way
           | to run modern software on cheap hardware with a fraction of
           | the hassle.
        
         | ineedasername wrote:
         | You also gained a comfort level poking around in moderately
         | complex system that could break if you did something wrong, and
         | then force you to step through problem solving to fix it. This
         | is a very important skill. (Though it's also important to
         | understand when potentially breaking something, even
         | temporarily, is low stakes vs. something to be avoided at all
         | costs)
         | 
         | It's a skill I like to call a "video game mentality" that I
         | think was probably influential in the rise of technology: video
         | games gave players the ability to push buttons and experiment
         | in all kinds of ways with a technological system but in a very
         | low stakes environment.
         | 
         | I don't think I would have been nearly as comfortable poking
         | around and tweaking system variables in my first computers
         | running Windows 3.X and 95 if I didn't have years of experience
         | poking around in other pixel-based environments in the form of
         | videogames. I would break things, panic, realize that whatever
         | it was, it was fixable, go through trial and error, learn to
         | find other people and resources to help, fix the problem, and
         | do it all over again at some point.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | earksiinni wrote:
         | Wow, this took me down memory lane. Puppy Linux and its crazed
         | Windows 95-esque dialogue boxes (remember Puppy Unleashed?)
         | will forever hold a soft spot in my heart.
         | 
         | Not sure how it is anymore, but Puppy Linux circa 2008 was like
         | the GeoCities of operating systems, glorious in its own
         | unpolished way. Vector Linux, too, which I believe was Puppy's
         | ancestor.
        
         | LAC-Tech wrote:
         | > Years ago, as a kid, when the only computers I had access to
         | were cobbled together hand-me-downs and machines people would
         | throw away I used to do this kind of thing.
         | 
         | That was me well into my 20s :) Win2k broke, and I was broke,
         | so the only option was to install linux.
         | 
         | It paved the way for me to get into programming, not so much
         | shell scripts, but just the powerful idea that computer systems
         | were malleable things you could change - something not really
         | obvious for those of us who cut our teeth on MS Windows.
        
         | RuggedPineapple wrote:
         | >Years ago, as a kid, when the only computers I had access to
         | were cobbled together hand-me-downs and machines people would
         | throw away I used to do this kind of thing. Like the author, I
         | settled on IceWM after trying Fluxbox/JWM/FVWM/"Window Maker"
         | and all the various forks with minor variations.
         | 
         | I had one of those original EeePC's years ago, 900 mhz celeron
         | in like 2008, 800x480 screen, just woefully out of date. Ended
         | up running Fluxbox just because of ram usage. With an actual WM
         | it couldn't stream The Daily Show smoothly. I really do love
         | playing with low spec systems.
        
           | chapinou wrote:
           | Indeed. I too find optimizing and making things work on low
           | spec systems far more rewarding than brute forcing using the
           | latest hardware.
        
         | winrid wrote:
         | Same! Ubuntu 6.04 with Gnome worked surprisingly well on a
         | 450mhz PIII.
        
         | daniel_iversen wrote:
         | > it's questionable if I learnt anything useful other then how
         | to get hobby DEs working on ancient hardware
         | 
         | I did similar things, and on one hand I feel it's ok that it's
         | not all "useful" - it was a hobby after all, but on the other
         | hand I do feel it had benefits - you learned patience, creative
         | thinking, problem solving, and working on those projects for a
         | long stretch of time almost has a meditative effect I felt. I'm
         | sorry that a lot of modern kids probably don't get to
         | experience this as much as everything is pre-packaged, system-
         | on-a-chip, non-fixable etc. (And people are more careful of how
         | they dispose of computers due to privacy).
        
         | lelandbatey wrote:
         | Wow, Damn Small Linux, what a throwback! That was how I was
         | first ever able to run and interact with a Linux system back as
         | a teen. I had no computer with Administrator access, but I
         | found a zip file with DSL, a QUEMU.exe, and a .bat file which
         | would run QUEMU and boot DSL, cause I couldn't figure out how.
         | I never even got it to save to a persistent disk, I had to boot
         | and re-do all the changes I'd figured out the prior time. What
         | an amazingly educational little thing that was!
        
         | j4yav wrote:
         | I had the exact same experience, but a fairly clear flow into
         | my career. My own tinkering led to a job at a local computer
         | store fixing computers when I was about 15, and then a job as a
         | build engineer at 18. This was in the 90s so there weren't a
         | ton of college students with computer experience to compete
         | with, and I think there was more openness to non-traditional
         | candidates.
         | 
         | My last job was product director for a major CI/CD platform, so
         | there's a pretty clear breadcrumb trail all the way back to
         | tinkering with Linux on old hardware to now.
         | 
         | The Linux command line and scripting was part of it, but the
         | real deeper lesson was that computers are understandable and if
         | you are persistent you can fix or improve nearly anything, or
         | assemble something new and useful by building on what's
         | available to you.
        
       | jah wrote:
       | I ran into two problems when trying to switch to a Raspberry Pi 4
       | 8GB as a desktop replacement in mid-2020:
       | 
       | - A noticeably laggy screen update when running urxvt. Any action
       | which caused large amounts of text to scroll on the screen (e.g.
       | a file listing or paging through a man page) would cause a bit of
       | a visual stutter. I was running with with XFT fonts enabled, so
       | maybe that was a contributing factor. Web page scrolling also
       | seemed to lag a bit too if I recall correctly.
       | 
       | - Lack of gamma support for blue light filters such as redshift
       | or f.lux
       | 
       | I'm crossing my fingers there are improvements to these areas in
       | the future.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | andrekandre wrote:
       | C++ development (in CLion) is quite doable, although I prefer
       | plain old vim on this machine due to CLion being quite laggy.
       | 
       | how about kdevelop?
        
         | ahartmetz wrote:
         | Or Kate with language server plugin ;)
        
           | heavyset_go wrote:
           | I've been using this setup for about a year now and love it.
           | I haven't felt the need to open VS Code or a real IDE in a
           | long time.
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | Love the whole rasp eco-system. Major victory for for FOSS/nix
       | minded people.
       | 
       | I don't think people selling it as a daily driver are doing it a
       | favour though. It isn't meant as such and selling it as such is a
       | disservice to the wider *nix universe.
       | 
       | (and yes I understand that rasp as daily driver in rural africa
       | is literally the projects original goal. that's different though
       | from silicon valley crew attempting to daily drive a rasp though)
        
       | prvc wrote:
       | >KDE is my desktop environment of choice. KDE5 is rock-solid,
       | configurable in any way possible and works great. It treats you
       | like a responsible adult instead of a child like GNOME does these
       | days, and after XFCE switched to GTK3, the RAM usage is on-par,
       | more often than not a bare KDE install (Debian or Arch) uses
       | around 300MB ram. This is with Baloo (search indexer) and Akonadi
       | (PIM database backend) disabled.
       | 
       | The GNOME Foundation's supposed rationale for removing basic
       | functionality from its desktop is to help inexperienced users,
       | and international users. However, those are precisely the same
       | users who are more likely to have a shortage of computing
       | resources. GTK's bloat is really indefensible.
        
         | stjohnswarts wrote:
         | Yeah but if you don't like it, you can just leave it alone and
         | it's perfectly functional. That said I use Pop_OS! which is
         | gnome based and fine. I like the defaults just fine. I have
         | used all sorts of DE over the years, in the end I decided I
         | didn't really care :) . KDE is fine, Gnome is fine, xmonad is
         | fine.
        
         | andrekandre wrote:
         | its kind of ironic if you think about it, youd think removing
         | features and simplification should allow for more optimization
         | not less...
        
           | nyanpasu64 wrote:
           | Except GNOME rewrote GNOME Shell in JavaScript. I don't think
           | GTK3 requires GJS, so I'm not sure why it uses more RAM than
           | GTK2, maybe due to CSS? I know it's still Cairo-based, not
           | GPU-accelerated or DOM-like.
        
             | zxzax wrote:
             | I can't say for sure what the deal is with GTK3, but GTK4
             | apps are GPU accelerated and should be faster. Though it
             | may come at a cost of using more GPU memory, depending on
             | the app.
        
         | zxzax wrote:
         | I find it pretty disappointing that these type of articles and
         | the resulting comments like yours often can't seem to praise
         | something like IceWM or AwesomeWM without also bashing GNOME or
         | XFCE or something else because of "bloat." Who cares? Do you
         | even care? I don't think you do, you'll just delete that
         | desktop and move on and use whatever you want, and that's the
         | whole point.
         | 
         | Also, your characterization of GNOME's rationale is totally
         | wrong. The goal was never to make a desktop with no features,
         | it was more to make a desktop that is streamlined towards
         | certain functionality. If that's not for you, then use a
         | desktop that's more streamlined towards what you want. There's
         | plenty to choose from. What is the real problem?
         | 
         | Edit: I also want to address another common misconception that
         | I see -- the GNOME Foundation does not direct development in a
         | top down fashion and does not impose any rationale on the
         | project. If some feature was removed, it was probably because
         | an individual volunteer working on it decided that it wasn't
         | worth spending time on that anymore, possibly because the need
         | was better filled by a different project.
        
           | jrm4 wrote:
           | Nope. I will continue to bash GNOME because it's something
           | like "the opposing political party." I want Free Software,
           | and by extension, Linux, to gain ground on desktops, and I
           | genuinely believe that GNOME's "philosophy" is not a good one
           | and is detrimental to this cause.
           | 
           | Roughly, I'd characterize it like the following: I believe
           | that the best way for Linux to gain ground is to be a
           | serious, perhaps even a little boring, but definitely "grown-
           | up" desktop. Simplicity is very important, but tt should lean
           | toward configurability and techniness.
           | 
           | What it should NOT do is what GNOME is trying to do, which is
           | trying to streamline and appeal to everyone. This approach is
           | like trying to beat Apple at their own game, which is dumb --
           | given that beating Microsoft at their own game is _well
           | within our reach._ Heck, look at Windows 11, we 're like a
           | third of the way there already.
        
             | kstrauser wrote:
             | Gnome feels like what you'd get if someone read a lot about
             | macOS and wanted to emulate it, but had never actually used
             | it. Gnome makes it very easy for new users to get started
             | and very hard for experienced users to adjust it. Mac makes
             | it easy for new users, but still gives power users room to
             | grow.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | > Gnome feels like what you'd get if someone read a lot
               | about macOS and wanted to emulate it, but had never
               | actually used it.
               | 
               | I find this statement humorous because I've said much the
               | same thing about Linux Desktop GUIs in general. "It's
               | like they were made by someone who's only ever had a GUI
               | described to them in an email". Compared to a system like
               | the original Macintosh or RiscOS that thought hard about
               | how to abstract things for a graphical display and a
               | mouse, or even Windows that just copied as much of that
               | as they could get away with, it's really quite terrible.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Specially in the what concerns the developer experience
               | of macOS, regarding frameworks, IDE and languages.
               | 
               | On GNOME the documentation seems to have stagnated, then
               | we had Anjuta, now GNOME Builder (which tries to be XCode
               | like), a UI design tool that is being re-written from
               | scratch, the various frameworks don't seem to compose,
               | and then each binding does their own stuff, only adapts a
               | couple of Gtk tutorial samples to their own language.
               | 
               | Naturally being GNU/Linux, everything that falls out of
               | the UI only has POSIX or GNU/Linux specific C APIs to
               | refer back to, yet another experience completely devoid
               | of how things work on macOS (there is no Foundation,
               | Accelerate, Core...).
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | Gstreamer, Cairo...
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Depends on the year, if you haven't been paying attention
               | they are on their way out, and then we have again the
               | issue of documentation, tooling, language bindings,...
        
               | alisonkisk wrote:
               | Even Linus Torvalds and Debian stopped resisting GNOME 3
               | and agreed that it's manageable for an experienced user
               | to configure it or their needs.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Sorry to disappoint you but GNU/Linux is definitely not a
             | third of the way to compete with a Windows 11 desktop, and
             | the best it will ever manage is to run on top of Hyper-V.
        
             | alisonkisk wrote:
             | > I will continue to bash GNOME because it's something like
             | "the opposing political party."
             | 
             | This is a vice, not a justification.
        
             | zxzax wrote:
             | I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying or what
             | the point of your bashing is. GNOME and KDE and XFCE and
             | whatnot are not political parties and are not opposed to
             | each other. They're not really even close to being that,
             | they're open source projects that collaborate on a sizable
             | amount of things. If you believe there is a better way to
             | do something then just contribute to another desktop. The
             | existence of GNOME doesn't prevent you from doing that and
             | isn't detrimental to it, especially when you consider that
             | the cost of switching to another open source desktop is a
             | big fat $0. Please don't unnecessarily politicize things,
             | one of the benefits here is that you explicitly don't have
             | to do that.
             | 
             | To put it another way: maybe some specific mode of "Linux
             | gaining ground on desktops" with "configurability and
             | techniness" is your goal, but people working on any given
             | desktop (including GNOME) may not share that goal in the
             | same way you do, and it doesn't make any sense to expect
             | them to.
        
               | jrm4 wrote:
               | Obviously, I can't _expect_ them to. I 'm not paying
               | them. But I can absolutely encourage and discourage
               | different ways of thinking and doing, and I'm absolutely
               | free to express that. And yes, I would like to discourage
               | "the GNOME way."
               | 
               | To elaborate a bit about why I'm saying this; For quite
               | some time, onboarding people to Linux was pretty easy.
               | "Just use Ubuntu" was a really good answer. And then
               | Unity came along, with a) bloat and b) this new paradigm
               | that was ostensibly as simple as a Mac, but different
               | enough that people wouldn't recognize it. And this was a
               | terrible direction for Ubuntu to go, especially since XP
               | was on its way out.
               | 
               | And now, when people ask me, hey, how do I get started
               | with Linux, and they've heard of Ubuntu, I can't just say
               | "Yeah, go for it." I have to launch into a thing and name
               | 2 or 3 different distros, primarily due to the weirdness
               | of GNOME. I appreciate freedom and choice, but I'm also
               | quite free to say, I believe the following: I really wish
               | the GNOME people would more-or-less give up, because they
               | have mindshare not off of the quality of their current
               | interface, but because of the momentum of their old one
               | plus Ubuntu. I believe that (much like Windows, frankly)
               | if they actually had to compete in this space on the
               | merits, they'd lose out.
               | 
               | KDE (and LXDE and others) are doing a better job of
               | making a predictable useful interface.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | I don't understand what you're trying to discourage, what
               | you're saying doesn't follow. That has nothing to do with
               | "the GNOME way" and is mostly related to the decisions
               | made by Canonical, who decided to make their own desktop,
               | and then dropped it in favor of GNOME. Asking the GNOME
               | people to give up isn't going to make it viable for
               | Ubuntu to develop their own desktop again that is more to
               | your liking. Your issue is with them, not with GNOME. And
               | according to them, you seem to have it exactly backwards:
               | it was Unity that was not able to compete on merits, so
               | it was dropped in favor of GNOME.
               | 
               | But anyway it sounds like you just fixed that by using a
               | different distro, you can even just suggest the KDE or
               | LXDE spins of Ubuntu. Those still exist, and it's not
               | hard to use them. If you're already using them then it's
               | very hard for me to see what your actual complaint is or
               | what you're trying to discourage. It's true you're free
               | to express what you want, but please consider that what
               | you're expressing may not be something that was done with
               | having the full information. I've noticed there is a lot
               | of confusion about what GNOME is and a lot of people seem
               | to mix it up and equate it with Ubuntu or Red Hat or
               | something, which is understandable, but it's not true.
               | I'm only here to explain why.
               | 
               | And just to make it painfully clear: it is already hard
               | enough to maintain open source and fix all the issues and
               | improve the quality of the current interfaces, without
               | people constantly demanding that open source maintainers
               | give up and stop fixing bugs. If you want to get things
               | fixed, you really don't need to do this.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | > I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying or
               | what the point of your bashing is. GNOME and KDE and XFCE
               | and whatnot are not political parties and are not opposed
               | to each other.
               | 
               | They surely where born that way, GNOME only exists due to
               | the original Qt license.
               | 
               | Then Gtk+ was always the go to framework for C devs,
               | while KDE was embraced by C++ community on GNU/Linux.
               | 
               | Murray did a very good job for the C++ refugees on
               | GNOME/Gtk, but that has always been a minority versus
               | being on KDE land.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | I honestly haven't seen any real license drama about that
               | for like 10 years now. Qt and GTK are (mostly) the same
               | license.
               | 
               | Also I really wouldn't say that C and C++ are equivalent
               | to political parties, that's like saying the same thing
               | about coke and pepsi.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Everything that implies taking sides is politics, no
               | matter what.
               | 
               | You haven't seen any drama, really?
               | 
               | https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/05/qt_lts_goes_commer
               | cia...
               | 
               | C vs C++ flame wars have been a thing since C++ was born
               | at AT&T.
               | 
               | Since you aren't following up the news,
               | 
               | "CppCon 2015: Kate Gregory "Stop Teaching C"
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWhqhNdYyk
               | 
               | "We stopped teaching C"
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZUTJ2UNXxI
               | 
               | You can find similar stuff from C side, specially if you
               | back in time to GNOME mailing lists, Usenet archives from
               | comp.lang,languagex
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | I figured you would post that. I have heard no actual KDE
               | developers saying that's a problem. They don't use Qt
               | LTS. The "drama" there seems to be mostly confined to
               | unrelated internet forums.
               | 
               | As for your posts about C, I can give a personal
               | anecdote: I would agree with those sentiments, C has a
               | lot of really bad problems as a language. But yet, I
               | still write it a lot more often than C++. So It's not as
               | simple as you're making it out to be. Also I checked some
               | of those slides and I wouldn't describe anything there as
               | a "flame war."
               | 
               | >Everything that implies taking sides is politics, no
               | matter what.
               | 
               | If you really want to look at things that way, you could,
               | but this seems to not be strictly true. Just because
               | there is taking sides does not mean there has to be
               | fighting or politics.
        
           | jejones3141 wrote:
           | All I can say is that GNOME 3 seems to take Havoc
           | Pennington's famous essay about as far as it can go,
           | considering configurability a bug. I don't know exactly when
           | it started, but it definitely came to my attention bigtime
           | with the infamous gnome-screensaver.
           | 
           | Useful links: 1. https://ometer.com/preferences.html, the
           | subset of Mr. P's original essay that the original contains a
           | link to. 2.
           | https://www.derstandard.at/story/1313024283546/gnome-
           | designe..., an interview with Jon McCann.
        
             | zxzax wrote:
             | Yes, I would agree that a lot of GNOME developers still
             | view that as a design goal. But not all do, and even so,
             | having less configurability doesn't mean less features. If
             | you ask me, practically speaking, what it has meant is that
             | there is a larger collection of smaller apps to choose
             | from. So if the app you want lacks a configuration option,
             | you might be better served by trying to find a different
             | app that just works the way you want the first time.
        
           | imwillofficial wrote:
           | > "Who cares? Do you even care? I don't think you do"
           | 
           | > " The goal was never to make a desktop with no features"
           | 
           | Wow, your first paragraph you accuse people of lying at
           | worst, or capriciously taking a position that doesn't matter
           | to them at best. It gets better in paragraph number two where
           | you misquote GP and go boxing with that strawman.
           | 
           | So to address your first paragraph, I'd say people here care
           | a lot, and the bashing they do is not out of a place of
           | tribalism, but out of a place of constructive criticism. Most
           | of us here would LOVE to see improvement in
           | $ArchEnemySoftware, and the failures strike deep because this
           | stuff means so much to us. A mixture of disappointment with
           | the status quo, and/or poor judgement calls with design or
           | execution, rather than knocking a bit of tech that doesn't
           | appeal to us.
           | 
           | As for the second paragraph, GP didn't say "no features" in
           | reference to GNOME, but decried the basic features that were
           | removed, thereby rendering the software less useful to them.
           | 
           | I'd take a brighter outlook on discussions like these, if the
           | points land on the right ears, perhaps positive change might
           | happen in GNOME. We can hope anyway.
        
             | zxzax wrote:
             | I'm not accusing anyone of that and I'm not misquoting,
             | please stop with this hostility. In my experience, people
             | are happy to switch when it suits them. By "no features" I
             | was referring to those basic features. Sorry for the
             | misunderstanding.
             | 
             | I also didn't see any constructive criticism, if you have
             | any specific suggestions for positive change you'd like to
             | make, then please make them. I'm all ears. But for the
             | record, if you'd like to get involved in development,
             | places like HN and reddit are generally not a good place to
             | do it. The people who are most likely to listen to requests
             | don't visit here.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | So let me get this straight. According to you, I should
               | not criticize software that does not meet my needs lest
               | it be interpreted as bashing and ruin the party for those
               | who do use the software in question? That's my take,
               | please correct me if I'm not understanding your point
               | properly.
               | 
               | Also, no hostility here. I find these discussions
               | illuminating.
               | 
               | As for Reddit and HN, these places are excellent places
               | for such commentary. Often times the maintainers of
               | different packages heed complaints leveled here and
               | change their ways. That's a win for everyone if the
               | change is a positive one.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | > " I find it pretty disappointing" - Then you go into
               | the praise vs bashing.
               | 
               | What do you find disappointing? I guess that's what I'm
               | driving at. When somebody knocks MacOS, and it's a valid
               | point, I hope somebody from Apple is reading! Then maybe
               | it gets fixed. So why would that arrangement disappoint
               | you?
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | For me personally I find the endless "Linux desktop wars"
               | to be disappointing. It doesn't matter, this stuff is
               | open source, if you really want it to be fixed then just
               | go write a patch. But in my experience most people will
               | just take a few minutes to switch to one of the many
               | alternatives.
               | 
               | I'm just relaying what other people have told me, these
               | type of forums are full of uninformed comments, and are
               | not a good place to solicit feedback. You could hope that
               | maybe an Apple engineer would read it but they probably
               | won't. You would have better luck sending them feedback
               | through their official channels, where you know they will
               | read it. If you're giving feedback to a YC startup then
               | this would be a good place, but otherwise not so much.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | " these type of forums are full of uninformed comments"
               | 
               | Hacker News has solid representation from Big Tech, FOSS
               | projects, and Academia. What data do you have to back up
               | that this is a bad place to air grievances with software?
               | 
               | Whenever anyone mentions Amazon, my ears perk up. If it
               | is within my power to correct, I take action. So what
               | data do you have to support the assertion that HN
               | comments are uninformed, and that this is only a good
               | forum for YC startups?
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | That's just my personal observation, I haven't seen many
               | unfocused airings of grievances that ended in positive
               | change. Sure there are knowledgeable people here, but
               | they may not always be speaking within their area of
               | expertise; it helps to direct it at someone who is within
               | that area of expertise, in the case of HN, that area is
               | startups.
               | 
               | I've seen plenty of complaints about Amazon here go
               | unanswered. Amazon is a pretty big company, I'm guessing
               | you don't know everything about it and may not be the
               | right person to ask about many things. If I had a
               | question, I'd definitely ask you if it was something you
               | were an expert in, but I don't know what that is because
               | you didn't say.
        
               | alisonkisk wrote:
               | Have you even seen an Amazon issue reported here that you
               | had power to correct?
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | Yes
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | Thank you for doing that, it's really fortunate that you
               | are, but please understand that not all of your coworkers
               | do the same thing. I think it would be nice if they did,
               | but currently they do not.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | Yeah you're right. But I care about this stuff a lot. I
               | love tech, I love the life it has afforded me, and I want
               | people to have a good experience, even if it is something
               | as simple as billing software!
               | 
               | Obviously Amazon has some huge issues to overcome, both
               | culturally and policy wise. If you keep bringing issues
               | up, I'll do my best to get them in front of the right
               | folks.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | >According to you, I should not criticize software that
               | does not meet my needs
               | 
               | I have not said that, I just asked you for your specific
               | criticisms.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | I don't know what GP deemed as basic functionality that
               | was removed from GNOME. I use MacOS on the desktop.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | Well there you go, you switched to a Mac :)
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | So GPs opinion isn't valid because I switched to the Mac,
               | got it
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | No, not at all. If you do ever use this and you develop
               | an opinion on it, feel free to share.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | I find it really weird how you seem to think you're the
               | arbiter of how much people care, when they can share
               | their opinions, and what opinions are valid.
               | 
               | Perhaps you should keep those ideas to yourself and only
               | concern yourself with your own level of contribution to
               | the topic at hand. I don't need you to mind my comments.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | I don't think that at all, I'm just another person giving
               | my opinion, like you. Also, I don't understand why you
               | said that, but then asked me to keep my opinions to
               | myself.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | > Also, I don't understand
               | 
               | You've made that abundantly clear in this thread.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | If you have something you want me to understand, please
               | explain. I'm happy to listen to what you have to say.
               | Like everyone else, I'm not perfect, sometimes I don't
               | understand things and I need some help from people like
               | you.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | You have not argued in good faith. You have continually
               | claimed one thing and then declared the opposite a
               | comment later.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | >You have not argued in good faith.
               | 
               | That's not correct, as a show of good faith I've
               | explicitly asked for specific details on what the
               | complaint is. I can't help you if you don't provide those
               | details. If it seems I haven't done that, I apologize,
               | that was not my intention. I'll try to be clearer next
               | time. Let me know if there's anything specific you want
               | me to clear up.
        
           | prvc wrote:
           | >Do you even care? I don't think you do, you'll just delete
           | that desktop and move on and use whatever you want, and
           | that's the whole point.
           | 
           | For the record: I care.
        
             | zxzax wrote:
             | Can you elaborate? Is there something particular that you
             | need that doesn't work on an RPi? If it turns out to be a
             | small fix, then ultimately you may end up caring a lot less
             | than you think.
        
               | prvc wrote:
               | Also, telling an individual user to "just use another DE"
               | does not solve the problem, whose effects are widespread,
               | on a whole ecosystem of software, its users, and
               | developers.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | Could you please explain specifically what one or more of
               | these effects is? I may be able to offer suggestions on
               | how to mitigate it. When I was talking about using
               | something else I was specifically referring to the
               | article, which is talking about using a different window
               | manager, and makes a good case for switching, and may
               | even be able to help you deal with some of those effects.
               | I assume you agree with the article, if not then I don't
               | understand because it seems odd to me to single out this
               | one passing mention in a paragraph that otherwise goes
               | against what was just said, so please elaborate if you
               | can.
        
               | daptaq wrote:
               | I'm not sure what the other user was thinking about, but
               | I think that GNOME's push towards client-side window
               | decoration is annoying and imposing. Depending on your
               | WM, some applications become "useless", they waste space
               | on small screens and just reinforce a sense of
               | fragmentation. I get that it looks better on GNOME, and I
               | appriciate it when using GNOME, but as there seems to be
               | no system to remove the CSD on traditional systems, I
               | still think it is an overall bad move.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | Others may find that pushing towards server-side window
               | decoration is annoying and imposing, so this is
               | unfortunately an area where not everyone can be happy. In
               | any case you may be interested to try a patch:
               | https://github.com/lah7/gtk3-classic
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | lobstrosity420 wrote:
           | The people that characterize GNOME this way are desperate to
           | identify themselves with a certain sub group of Linux users
           | that prides themselves in doing things the hardest possible
           | way (such as recompiling your terminal every time you want to
           | change the font size) because it makes them feel 1337. Don't
           | sweat it too much, it's just a little bit of garden variety
           | internet tribalism.
        
             | anthk wrote:
             | Not leet. Gnome is unusable in any machine older than 2015.
             | Also, CWM flies on my 2007 netbook.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | I completely disagree, I'm using GNOME on a laptop from
               | 2008 now. It's working fine for me. I did tweak it a
               | little bit however.
        
         | zdragnar wrote:
         | > and international users
         | 
         | I might be mistaken here, but it seems to me that the
         | international users who want a simple experience are already
         | well served by smartphones (android or otherwise).
         | 
         | The international users who are going to install linux on a
         | laptop are the tinkerers and fiddlers and the self motivated
         | learners who aren't going to be motivated by a dumbed down,
         | inaccessible interface.
        
           | alisonkisk wrote:
           | you are mistaken.
           | 
           | smartphones have small screens, and terrible keyboards.
           | 
           | almost no one will creatw anything except simple photography
           | and tweets on a phone.
           | 
           | my phone can't even provide capital letters reliably.
           | 
           | self motivated learners aren't stopped by a simple UI; they
           | can use terminal and web apps.
        
           | csande17 wrote:
           | It's important to remember that GNOME is primarily
           | funded/developed by Red Hat, who are owned by IBM. Red Hat's
           | goal isn't to make something for the kind of person who would
           | install Linux on a laptop themselves -- they're trying to
           | make a clone of macOS they can sell in bulk to enterprise
           | customers. The intended user population is very different.
        
             | zxzax wrote:
             | I'm not sure where you heard any of that, but I have never
             | heard any Red Hat employees say anything to that effect,
             | ever. Fedora still exists, and to me that seems perfectly
             | fine to install on a random laptop.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Not necessarily with that line of thought, Red-Hat has
               | already acknowledged many years ago that there is no
               | money to be made on the GNU/Linux desktop (Mandrake, SuSE
               | and Canonical also found out years later).
               | 
               | https://www.computerworld.com/article/2536558/red-hat-
               | sees-n...
               | 
               | https://lwn.net/Articles/56947/
        
               | csande17 wrote:
               | It may surprise you to learn that Red Hat's primary
               | revenue stream is not Fedora, but a separate distribution
               | called "Red Hat Enterprise Linux".
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | Sure, but that shouldn't really matter to an ordinary
               | Fedora user, at least not to the ones I've heard from.
        
               | csande17 wrote:
               | If Fedora (or GNOME, for that matter) fits your needs,
               | you should feel free to use it! But if you're wondering,
               | like the grandparent comments, why projects like GNOME
               | seem to be moving away from fitting your needs, the
               | answer is that they're being designed for Red Hat's
               | enterprise customers first and any use you get out of
               | them is a happy afterthought.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | Again I'm not sure where you got that, I have not heard
               | any Red Hat or Fedora developers say that's the focus. In
               | fact if you follow GNOME development, there are various
               | other directions that people are pulling in. It might be
               | the case coincidentally for some things, but that could
               | be yet another one of those happy afterthoughts.
        
         | nextos wrote:
         | If you are reasonably experienced and constrained by resources,
         | a great option is to use a window manager without a desktop
         | environment.
         | 
         | That's my setup because it has fewer moving parts and lower
         | latency, as there are only a handful of processes running and
         | no compositor.
        
           | hpoe wrote:
           | That's why I now run i3 for my daily driver with emacs.
        
         | lobstrosity420 wrote:
         | The idea that the GNOME DE or GTK3/4 are resource intensive is
         | a meme with little basis in reality.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | GTK3/4 alone not really, as my Linux netbook is doing just
           | fine with XFCE.
           | 
           | Now having GNOME with its Javascript based shell and
           | extensions, making every click take a couple of seconds
           | longer and me wondering what it is doing, no thanks.
        
             | zxzax wrote:
             | The javascript is used mostly to drive the shell GUI, it
             | shouldn't be taking seconds off all your mouse clicks. If
             | there is really bad slowness, you should consider reporting
             | that as a bug, it may not be the javascript that's at
             | fault. The performance shouldn't be any worse than a
             | typical lightweight web app running in firefox. That is of
             | course if you ever end up using GNOME again for whatever
             | reason.
             | 
             | I don't understand why you have to wonder what it's doing,
             | the javascript is all self-contained and hosted locally.
             | It's not using npm or anything like that. And the
             | extensions are pretty much the same as any other app you
             | use that supports plugins.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | "Memory leak in gnome-shell JavaScript bindings"
               | 
               | https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3410651
               | 
               | "GNOME Shell Performance Improvements in Ubuntu 20.04"
               | 
               | https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/gnome-shell-performance-
               | impro...
               | 
               | "Boosting the Real Time Performance of Gnome Shell 3.34
               | in Ubuntu 19.10"
               | 
               | https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/boosting-the-real-time-
               | perfor...
               | 
               | When I complain about GNOME performance, I am not making
               | it up, learn that and bye.
        
               | zxzax wrote:
               | I don't understand what the issue here is or what you
               | want me to learn, those seem to all be bugs that were
               | already fixed. If there are additional unfixed problems
               | that others aren't aware of, and you're not making it up,
               | then please mention those, and maybe I can help you get
               | them reported.
        
           | Zababa wrote:
           | This site asks for 1.5 Go of ram https://ubuntugnome.org/,
           | Ubuntu 20.04 asks for 4 Go of ram. Compared to the 30 Mo for
           | IceWM in the article (apple to oranges, I know, but still 3
           | orders of magnitude), or the 300 Mo for KDE. The author also
           | notes that since XFCE switched to GTK3 they use more
           | resources. That seems to be plenty of basis in reality.
           | Perhaps you mean something else by "resource intensive"?
        
             | alisonkisk wrote:
             | What's Go and Mo?
        
               | Narishma wrote:
               | Gigaoctet and Megaoctet.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_(computing)
        
               | jejones3141 wrote:
               | o = "octet" (byte), so Go = gigabyte, Mo = megabyte.
        
             | csande17 wrote:
             | Keep in mind that the 1.5 GB number is the total amount of
             | RAM you need to have a good time using the operating
             | system, not the amount consumed by the window manager
             | alone. Even OP consumes just about a gigabyte of RAM with
             | all the programs on their Raspberry Pi.
             | 
             | That's not to say GNOME _isn't_ resource intensive -- it
             | is, especially when compared to desktop environments that
             | were either written to be lightweight or written 30 years
             | ago -- that just isn't the best way to measure it.
        
               | Zababa wrote:
               | > Keep in mind that the 1.5 GB number is the total amount
               | of RAM you need to have a good time using the operating
               | system, not the amount consumed by the window manager
               | alone.
               | 
               | That's why I said apples to oranges initially, but you're
               | right, I could have clarified that part.
        
           | badjeans wrote:
           | https://www.google.com/search?q=gnome+3+memory+leak
           | 
           | https://www.google.com/search?q=gnome+3+cpu+use
           | 
           | sure...
        
             | lobstrosity420 wrote:
             | https://www.google.com/search?q=a+google+search+doesnt%27t+
             | p...
        
       | sudhirkhanger wrote:
       | I feel like as soon as you start using Firefox and Chrome on
       | these highly customised low-powered machines the power/ram saving
       | customisation goes down the drain.
        
         | marcodiego wrote:
         | Firefox doesn't run well on a raspi. Chromium with an ad
         | blocker and h264ify is good enough to even watch youtube.
        
       | analog31 wrote:
       | Ask HN: What do you install this on top of? Do you just start
       | with the vanilla Raspbian installer, the bare bones installer
       | without GUI, or something else?
        
         | LeoPanthera wrote:
         | If you're not going to use the default RpiOS GUI (which
         | honestly is actually very good), you can start with RpiOS Lite
         | and then just add whatever desktop you want.
        
       | BasicObject wrote:
       | I've never needed more than IceWM. Great window manager. Easy to
       | configure too. Glad development has picked up on it.
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | My dumb, barely related question - how far away is VR/AR from
       | having the necessary pixel resolution to be able to have a fake
       | emacs/vim floating in space three feet from my eyes?
       | 
       | At that point there is a change in the ergonomics and location of
       | coding / most desktop work.
        
         | adius wrote:
         | SimulaVR is the leading project in that direction I think:
         | https://simulavr.com
         | 
         | With a Oculus Quest 2 - which has the highest resolution of the
         | affordable VR headsets - it's still a little too grainy for
         | prolonged coding sessions. But I think they'll get there in 1-2
         | generations.
        
         | clipradiowallet wrote:
         | I'm in the same boat - eagerly awaiting when I can have a VR
         | terminal experience. I chimed in just so you didn't think you
         | were a lone crazy holding out for that.
        
           | lifeisstillgood wrote:
           | We lone crazies need to stick together. Support meetings each
           | Thursday - we have cookies :-)
        
       | zz865 wrote:
       | I built a rpi for games and it was OK but never got any use. One
       | thing I ended up using it for was taking to the office and
       | plugging it into my work monitor. With a BT keyboard and phone
       | hotspot for internet.
        
       | euske wrote:
       | What kind of apps that a typical Linux programmer would need to
       | run these days? For me, they are
       | 
       | - terminal (shell, editor)
       | 
       | - web browser (email client, file viewer, etc.)
       | 
       | - clock
       | 
       | With these, I only need a bare minimum window manager (fvwm2 in
       | my case). In my view, KDE/GNOME are made not to scare away
       | beginners and there isn't much productivity gain in using these
       | environments. Once you're used to using Unix/Linux, you can
       | graduate them and start using a more lean setup (while you don't
       | have to, of course). One thing I can see might be handy is the
       | System Settings / Control Panels apps. Other than that (and
       | inertia), what are the reasons that people stick to these
       | environments?
        
         | herbst wrote:
         | I run atom and terminator (a tiling terminal emulator) in my
         | dev environment. Its rather heavy for 'just' development. On
         | the other side it runs without any issues on my T420. Which is
         | a cheap old laptop.
         | 
         | I also love Gnome. For me this is the best, not in your way,
         | desktop environment ever done. For me however :)
        
         | cortesoft wrote:
         | Don't you also need to run whatever you are programming? So a
         | compiler/interpreter, REPL, maybe a database, docker, k8s, etc?
         | I assume most devs still want to be able to compile and test
         | locally?
        
           | jude- wrote:
           | These things aren't really part of a graphical user
           | interface.
        
             | cortesoft wrote:
             | Oh right, I didn't fully read or understand the comment...
             | was thinking more about the minimal computer OP was talking
             | about.
        
         | swiley wrote:
         | I like to have dvcs and a terminal multiplexer in the VTE. I do
         | email over ssh and pdfs in mupdf which is way lighter than the
         | browser. I also mess with gEDA some.
         | 
         | But yeah, gnome etc is overkill if `sudo vim etc/blah` doesn't
         | scare you and you only speak english.
         | 
         | My gf _does_ freak out editing networks and such and also needs
         | her thai IME to just work so she runs gnome.
        
         | pjmlp wrote:
         | You just replicated my DG/UX experience with IBM X Windows
         | terminals in 1995.
         | 
         | Maybe we don't have to be frozen in time and rather use modern
         | tooling?
        
         | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
         | > With these, I only need a bare minimum window manager (fvwm2
         | in my case). In my view, KDE/GNOME are made not to scare away
         | beginners and there isn't much productivity gain in using these
         | environments
         | 
         | Yeah, everyone who just develops in C and/or web thinks like
         | this. It's one of the primary reasons nobody aside from them
         | uses Linux Desktop.
        
         | benhurmarcel wrote:
         | Probably add VSCode and Spotify nowadays.
        
         | bigpeopleareold wrote:
         | I use KDE now, but not much of it really. I do mostly the same
         | things - terminal/browser/some utilities/text editor. I used
         | lighter WMs in the past and they were interesting, but I didn't
         | have time to sufficiently get past the experimental stage with
         | them. Since I really don't do much, it's easier to just get
         | something with easy and stable defaults with only a few changes
         | I need for a setup.
        
         | jude- wrote:
         | I have the same question. The longer I've used Linux as my main
         | OS, the less I've needed a desktop environment. My setup for
         | the last half-decade has been basically the same as yours, and
         | I've found it to be _more_ productive than KDE /GNOME (or
         | Windows or MacOS) ever were.
        
       | squarefoot wrote:
       | What is the status of video acceleration on the desktop, wrt
       | surfing the web or playing videos from the browser or a player? I
       | used the various Raspberries as main media player with Kodi for
       | years with great results, but the desktop experience using
       | Raspbian+XFCE has always been awful, I mean the slugginess due to
       | lack of video acceleration when playing videos, which otherwise
       | is present and works great in Kodi; normal desktop usage was
       | fine. It should be related to the video acceleration being among
       | the closed blobs that not all distros include, but I thought it
       | had been already reverse engineered before. My last attempt at it
       | was about 6 months ago though.
        
       | gorgoiler wrote:
       | Raspberry Pi is a great form factor with popular, documented
       | hardware support for doing weird IO while consuming very little
       | power.
       | 
       | Browsing the web in 2021, on the other hand, requires Watts.
       | 
       | > _Using noscript to disable javascript in Firefox has also
       | helped tremendously_
       | 
       | It's this kind of thing that made me switch to a Lenovo M93p for
       | my desktop. It's a great form factor with perfect Linux hardware
       | support. You can also feel good about recycling someone else's
       | unwanted hardware.
       | 
       | I really wanted the pi to work out but it just couldn't handle
       | the JS heavy stuff I use in the day job (webmail, task-tracking,
       | information management / CRM.)
        
       | Syonyk wrote:
       | That's not the hard part of using a Pi as a desktop PC...
       | 
       | I've been using them for light to moderate desktop use for years
       | now. The important things in desktopping a Pi, as far as I'm
       | concerned:
       | 
       | - Fix the storage. The SD card is fine for a toy. It will not
       | withstand actual daily use, either in "delivering sane
       | performance" or "handling a lot of random writes without dying in
       | a year." Get a USB to SSD adapter and a cheap 32GB or 64GB SSD
       | from eBay - doesn't have to be fast, doesn't have to be new. It's
       | radically better than an SD card in any use case that resembles
       | desktop use. You can either boot straight from USB, or, to
       | improve compatibility with weird USB to SSD adapters, boot from
       | the SD card, mount root from the SSD, and use the SD card for
       | swap or something (see below).
       | 
       | - Enable zswap if you're not on a 4GB or 8GB Pi4. It should be a
       | module included in the Pi kernel now (I had to argue for a while
       | to get it included). This is _not_ zram - this is _zswap._ There
       | 's a huge difference. It's a compressed swap system that can
       | flush out old or poorly compressible pages to the actual swapfile
       | - which, since you're now fronting it with a compressed swap
       | region in RAM, can be over on the SD card. The bulk of the stuff
       | written to it will never be used again, unless you're just
       | massively overcommitting RAM, at which point nothing really will
       | help. I think around the 5.x kernels, z3fold starts working,
       | though I've not seen a real practical difference between z3fold
       | (up to 3 compressed pages per page of RAM) and zbud (only two
       | compressed pages), _as long as same filled pages are enabled_ -
       | that will crunch a page of 0s down into a  "Got it, all 0s,
       | done!" note and not bother wasting space compressing it.
       | 
       | - Set the governor to performance. 'sudo cpufreq-set -g
       | performance' The stock governor is really bad about ramping up,
       | and leads to lag in typing, especially if you're using the
       | atrocities that are modern "desktop" apps (Electron). Eventually,
       | the system will spin up and do something useful, but you improve
       | the performance and responsiveness rather substantially by just
       | pinning the cores to their fastest speed and letting them stay
       | there. I'm sure there's some measurable power difference doing
       | this if you're concerned about the absolute lowest power, but
       | it's not substantial, and "race to idle" solves a lot. If you're
       | using a Pi as a desktop, try it - you'll like the change.
       | 
       | - Use adblockers. It's amazing how much CPU time the internet
       | spends on stuff that is advertising, tracking, and generally
       | evil. Most websites behave a lot better once you remove that
       | garbage.
       | 
       | Otherwise... once you've done that, they're actually quite
       | capable little systems! The Pi4 with 4GB or 8GB is the best
       | option right now, and for most people I'm not sure the 8GB really
       | gains you much - I have one, use it fairly heavily, and rarely
       | see any RAM pressure past about 4GB. But it does make up for some
       | slow disk.
       | 
       | I've written about some of this more extensively over on my blog
       | over the years, if anyone wants more details - link is in my
       | profile.
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | With the Compute Module 4 and certain boards, you can use (and
         | even boot from) NVMe SSDs natively. Makes a world of difference
         | for so many things!
        
           | Syonyk wrote:
           | I should sit down and benchmark those one of these days.
           | 
           | The jump from USB2 to USB3, either with or without UAS (it's
           | nice, but doesn't lead to a huge jump in benchmarks) gets you
           | a ton of disk performance, and my gut feeling is that while
           | you could certainly measure the performance delta from USB3
           | to NVMe, it wouldn't lead to a practical increase in speed
           | for typical desktop use. Going from glacial SD cards even to
           | USB2 SSDs is a huge jump, but USB3 to NVMe seems like it
           | would be going from "Fast enough that it's no longer a
           | bottleneck" to "Even faster."
           | 
           | Though for reasons I don't understand fully, all the ARM
           | boards I've tested have very poor USB3 performance compared
           | to Intel. Same SSD, same USB adapter, and the Intel systems
           | absolutely crush the ARM systems (Pi4 and Jetson Nano) in
           | small sector IO performance.
           | 
           | The main problem with NVMe is that the various carriers that
           | support it aren't cheap, and often (at least in the past 6-8
           | months) aren't really available. You can get a USB3 adapter
           | and used SSD for $30, reliably, any time you want.
        
           | jandeboevrie wrote:
           | Jeffs case review of the argon one m2 case was the reason I
           | bought it. The pi boots directly from an SSD, much faster and
           | no more broken SD cards.
        
         | prox wrote:
         | Great tips! I have been using the internal SSD for a while now.
         | I do regular backups or just clone a new SSD.
         | 
         | In the article : Firefox uses 900Mb! How did we get to the
         | point that a browser needs 900Mb???
        
       | homerhomer wrote:
       | I have a Raspberry Pi 400 and it does a pretty good job as a
       | desktop. I also have a HP x360 laptop from 2017 with Windows 10
       | and it's HORRIBLY SLOW and constantly kicks on the fan. I'm
       | convinced that cahoots with the hardware manufacturers.
        
       | sprash wrote:
       | The general perception of IceWM as a minimalist Windows 95 clone
       | hides the fact that it is indeed a very powerful fully fledged
       | tool for window management. Just icewm-winoptions file and the
       | icesh program enable so much opportunities for automation, it
       | makes the average tiling window manager look tame and primitive.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-11 23:02 UTC)