I use KDE plasma because I’m new to Linux but also want something minimal system-wise. I love the programs and the interface. Maybe my opinion would be different if I spent more time with other DE’s or used it as my daily driver, but I’m sold on it now.
GNOME is definitely more user-friendly for someone who is moving over from Windows/Mac. I wouldn’t recommend KDE to someone who is just going to stick to using one-click apps.
The lack of even the most basic customisation of Gnome ia mind-blowing to me. Why do i need to install a gnome shell extension for even the most basic functionality that even MacOs has!?
Actually I tried out KDE Plasma on my grandmother’s budget laptop from about the same time. It was a little too slow with default settings, but once I killed the animations (can be done in Settings app) it ran pretty well. It ran a whole hell of a lot better than the Windows it came with.
I also tested KDE vs XFCE in my old gaming computer, and I actually managed to get slightly less RAM usage in KDE than XFCE, so long as no plugins were used.
Both systems were tested with Debian 12. On the gaming PC, I actually used the XFCE iso, so it was installed first.
So depending on how your distro ships the default KDE Plasma settings or how you set it up, it actually can be a lightweight option compared with XFCE.
It’s all relative. Ubuntu desktop is minimal compared to Windows, and I’ve found KDE to run much better than default Ubuntu. It’s lightweight for how much it offers.
Needing a GPU might be hyperbole, but no, it’ll still be slow on older hardware. It looks lightweight on neofetch since, at rest, the RAM will appear as low as XFCE’s, but it’s not nearly as snappy.
I use KDE plasma because I’m new to Linux but also want something minimal system-wise. I love the programs and the interface. Maybe my opinion would be different if I spent more time with other DE’s or used it as my daily driver, but I’m sold on it now.
GNOME is definitely more user-friendly for someone who is moving over from Windows/Mac. I wouldn’t recommend KDE to someone who is just going to stick to using one-click apps.
I don’t understand.
The lack of even the most basic customisation of Gnome ia mind-blowing to me. Why do i need to install a gnome shell extension for even the most basic functionality that even MacOs has!?
Kde is minimal now? Doesn’t it require a GPU? Aren’t there animations?
I remember trying it out a few years back on my laptop from 2012 and it was unusably slow. Like 10 seconds just to open the menu.
Xfce ran just fine though. That’s a minimal DE.
Actually I tried out KDE Plasma on my grandmother’s budget laptop from about the same time. It was a little too slow with default settings, but once I killed the animations (can be done in Settings app) it ran pretty well. It ran a whole hell of a lot better than the Windows it came with.
I also tested KDE vs XFCE in my old gaming computer, and I actually managed to get slightly less RAM usage in KDE than XFCE, so long as no plugins were used.
Both systems were tested with Debian 12. On the gaming PC, I actually used the XFCE iso, so it was installed first.
So depending on how your distro ships the default KDE Plasma settings or how you set it up, it actually can be a lightweight option compared with XFCE.
It’s all relative. Ubuntu desktop is minimal compared to Windows, and I’ve found KDE to run much better than default Ubuntu. It’s lightweight for how much it offers.
Needing a GPU might be hyperbole, but no, it’ll still be slow on older hardware. It looks lightweight on neofetch since, at rest, the RAM will appear as low as XFCE’s, but it’s not nearly as snappy.