Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktops?

Off-Topic discussions about science, technology, and non Debian specific topics.
Message
Author
Deb-fan
Posts: 1047
Joined: 2012-08-14 12:27
Been thanked: 4 times

Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktops?

#1 Post by Deb-fan »

When it's painfully clear Openbox is the only graphical interface gnu/Linux could ever need? :)
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 14114
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: London, England
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 132 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#2 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

Does a plain openbox "desktop" have full accessibility support for visually impaired users?

How would a non-technical user go about installing an openbox desktop? I don't think they would have the faintest clue how to deal with a bare TTY system and no Debian ISO image provides such a desktop.

And how do you propose to handle new user configuration for elements such as the panel, volume control utilities and suchlike?
deadbang

Deb-fan
Posts: 1047
Joined: 2012-08-14 12:27
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#3 Post by Deb-fan »

All of such things are trivial. Visually impaired people only need be told that they have Openbox and they will be happy. Deaf folks can still see, so they'll know they have Openbox and shall be same. The main thing to consider here is all the energy which has been dumped into this when graphical perfection has already been achieved by Openbox and these resources could've been devoted to other areas which still require much work. Basically Openbox = mission accomplished, nothing further need be done and people involved in open source must learn to prioritize better.

3 guesses whose bored? Though as with Openbox there should really only need to be 1 required. :P
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 14114
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: London, England
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 132 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#4 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

Deb-fan wrote:Visually impaired people only need be told that they have Openbox and they will be happy
Until they actually want to do anything with their desktop. Do screen readers even work in openbox? I was looking at adding a11y support to SharpBang but in the end I decided it just wasn't worth the effort because GNOME does that so well.
deadbang

Deb-fan
Posts: 1047
Joined: 2012-08-14 12:27
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#5 Post by Deb-fan »

^ If not out-of-box then it's got to be PEBCAK because Openbox knows no equal and cannot be matched. Sheesh I did mention I'm pretty bored here. Came to the point where enough is enough in terms of tweaking this system. Of course Openbox does play a major role in this though. Very lil left to dork with which could justify the time involved. For me, the ulltimate state of gnu/nix operating system configuration has been reached I'd like to thank many people, the Openbox devs for sure among those. :)
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *

tynman
Posts: 131
Joined: 2016-05-03 19:48
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#6 Post by tynman »

The question "Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktops?" caught my attention. I'm not 100% sure what you even mean by "developing desktops". I assume you mean the effort in developing the software. But maybe you meant the effort we users spend choosing them and tweaking them. :(

Looking at the "View Active Topics" view of the Debian User Forum, I see that most of the topics have between a handful and a few hundred views. Two topics stand out: The topic "What Does Your Desktop Look Like?" has 2.2 million hits. The topic "What does your non-Debian Desktop Look Like?" has 585 K hits. There appears to be a big demand for the perfect desktop - whatever that means.

Without much effort, I can think of about a dozen Linux "desktops", i.e., Gnome, KDE, i3, Openbox, XFCE, etc. A few are pretty stable and don't receive that much attention (e.g., Openbox), while others are very active (e.g., Gnome). Overall, I would agree there is a pretty big amount of effort directed to this segment of software development. If I was king, I would temporarily redirect 75% of that effort to improving Wine until it could support the handful of applications (e.g., Quickbooks) that I still run inside a VM running Windows. (Running Win 7 in a VM on my Linux box works fine, so I am thankful for that. IMHO, KVM and VirtualBox are amazing. But it bugs me I need to do this. I would prefer to be free of Windows.)

Deb-fan
Posts: 1047
Joined: 2012-08-14 12:27
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#7 Post by Deb-fan »

^ Real point of this is that imma dork. Though now that you mention the effort involved from the end-users perspective, yes, that just worsens how many human resources have gone into this topic, when everyone could simply install Openbox and have graphical Nirvana.

With all this time now I must find something to fill it. This thread brought something worthwhile to mind. Think I'm going to fork Openbox, not going to change any code. In fact everytime I've ever even attempted to learn about programming my eyes cross in 3mins or less. So no code fiddling, am just going to fork it so I can rename it to something more befitting. How does Perfectionbox grab people?

Signed, really bored dork. Additional appropriate Openbox fork names welcome. :)
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 14114
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: London, England
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 132 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#8 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

Deb-fan wrote:Additional appropriate Openbox fork names welcome
How about "obsoletebox" — Wayland ftw! :mrgreen:
deadbang

User avatar
wizard10000
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 557
Joined: 2019-04-16 23:15
Location: southeastern us
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#9 Post by wizard10000 »

TBH I was pretty skeered of *box until I started running Crunchbang Waldorf - building an openbox desktop from scratch can be kind of a daunting task :)

Even after I got comfortable I still ran fluxbox for awhile because I was allergic to XML config files - but I got better. openbox makes me happy but it took me quite awhile to get everything configurated the way I wanted :)
we see things not as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin

Deb-fan
Posts: 1047
Joined: 2012-08-14 12:27
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#10 Post by Deb-fan »

Despite the OB raving in this my heart isn't set on Openbox. It's a hangover from Crunchbang dys here too. Never bothered becoming an OB guru. Needs are simple for me one workspace and a bottom panel with all running apps to keep oriented. Recently got more amored with fluxbox also. Couple silly nagglings got in the way. Irritating how difficult setting a simple color scheme in it appeared and what truly annoyed me I like to have a pop-up for tabbing through running apps.

Still evaluating lightest weight stacking wm's for real. May well get around to replacing Openbox anyway. Keep tint2 or offload it for something lighter. Probably retain tint2 for all it can do just can't see getting much better. Always have always will be a fanatical minimalist. That harks back even long before gnu/Linux dys and isn't subject to ever change. Though #! of course left a lasting impression. How can doing more, more efficiently with less ever be a bad config?

Dirty, dirty ... dirty pool @Head_on. Ye bad lil monkey ye! Ah the next big Redhat/ibm shocker. Wonder what heavy handedness they'll employ to speed up adoption of Wayland. Kid gloves have certainly come off nowadays in terms of what, when and how quickly upstream sets the direction gnu/Linux is going take and on what time table it seems. As to this one not much worried regardless. Though when comes to outmoding all the junk which may get turned second class software citizen without being Wayland natively supported unless relying on some bloated compatibility deal = Xwayland, in this I will heartily resist to a greater extent. Overall like systemd so not so much a biggy to me. Not so sure about Wayland + sway.

Might go so far as to freeze vs any weird attempt at quasi fork like Devuanish claim to fame. In other words meaning I could happily take Debian and the kernel as they stand today and keep right on using them and xorg for years and years. May or not embrace Wayland but in this it'll totally be on my time frame. Not prompted or sped up by anything upstream dictates. Wayland when ready or Buster and 5.x kernels-etc for as long as I like.

Any good recommends for lightest stacker ? Thought of doing an absolute minimal Fluxbox theme, no toolbar, no slit and just using tint2 with the thing but meh lighter still as long as it's decently visually appealing and functional doesn't much matter to me. Suggestions welcome fellows.
Last edited by Deb-fan on 2020-02-18 17:46, edited 2 times in total.
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 14114
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: London, England
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 132 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#11 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

Deb-fan wrote:Not so sure about Wayland + sway
It's the future, I've tasted it :mrgreen:
Deb-fan wrote:Any good recommends for lightest stacker ?
https://packages.debian.org/buster/cwm

Part of the OpenBSD base system (so audited by their devs) and keyboard-driven. Very nice.
deadbang

Deb-fan
Posts: 1047
Joined: 2012-08-14 12:27
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#12 Post by Deb-fan »

Thanks always appreciate your input Head_on. Certainly seen you mention Wayland + Sway. Still won't be made to get in any hurry as regards adopting anything or abandoning anything either. Am content to wait until ready in this thing. Another awesome thing about compulsive tweaking and minimalism. All the principles, techs etc I've amassed are universal. After adjusting for hardware, base config never need change I'm good to go pretty much forever when it comes to personal computing. If can easily make a 10yr old dualcore laptop blaze, for minimal cost hardware, minimal component upgrades if wanted will always be readily available and will pretty much always have top notch performance here. Pretty much indefinitely if just opted to keep using Debian as it stands right now.

Though still plenty of refinements and ever something more to learn and tweak. At this point it's mostly just to pass time and for the sake of it. Still an optimization area here and there I need to keep prodding at o course, shrugs. Though upstream and Wayland can go defecate in their head gear. I've got nothing but time and won't be having any compelled choices from anyone.
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *

User avatar
wizard10000
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 557
Joined: 2019-04-16 23:15
Location: southeastern us
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#13 Post by wizard10000 »

Deb-fan wrote:...Any good recommends for lightest stacker ? Thought of doing an absolute minimal Fluxbox theme, no toolbar, no slit and just using tint2 with the thing but meh lighter still as long as it's decently visually appealing and functional doesn't much matter to me. Suggestions welcome fellows.
fluxbox comes with a panel but IME openbox + tint2 uses about exactly the same amount of RAM as fluxbox with its integrated panel. Also, fluxbox hasn't been upgraded since 2015 :(

I found a really great tint2 readme - https://gitlab.com/o9000/tint2/blob/master/doc/tint2.md - it helped me to build a pseudo-pager with tint2.
we see things not as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin

Deb-fan
Posts: 1047
Joined: 2012-08-14 12:27
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#14 Post by Deb-fan »

Fluxbox with just included themes running on it uses about 1/3rd as much ram as OB + tint2. No doubt could strip the thing down further too. Like just a solid color full screen image and run tint2 or a comparable panel. Still trying with which way to go, definitely going to give Head_on's suggestion a go, again likely just keep tint2 with whichever is settled on. The overhead for what all it can do is really hard to beat. Much more if any effort for any resource savings is getting to the point of being pointless here. Wow, a whole 6mbs on a 4gb laptop. :)

Have better areas yet to focus on but fully endorse what a one time #!/Archer named Awebb once said. People spend 99.3% of the time using a computer looking at an app or browser, so who gives a crap what's underneath that? So my take is lighter = better. I just need a clock, panel and convenient way of keeping track of what's running and toggling through them. Proud of the fact my preferences and config tastes could run decently on a 1gig-mem lower speed dualcore proc and barely or not even touch swap or lag in 2020. Part of criteria being a fully modern browser with 8-10 tabs open or streaming video at a reasonable resolution. All the rest is just gravy. Often times would like to stack this os on this crusty pc up against much better specced hardware running the monstrousity known as win10. Would bet cash it'd more than hold own in side-by. Gnu/nix has plenty of tools itself. Ie: hybrid suspend vs fastboot, if someone were to want to resort to such junk, blah blah. 115mb @boot idle and almost no cpu-load on a 64bit os in 2020. Not too shabby.

So a bit more fiddling with Windows managers and panel choice I guess. Then calling such more than good enough.
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *

wino
Posts: 22
Joined: 2019-09-26 20:04
Location: North

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#15 Post by wino »

For most people the desktop envirnment is the 'vehicle' that gets them to use linux.

User avatar
oswaldkelso
df -h | grep > 20TiB
df -h | grep > 20TiB
Posts: 1490
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#16 Post by oswaldkelso »

To answer the question.
1. Because it's fun.
Just look at custom cars and motorbikes. People like to make things their own and people like to learn.
2. To suit your needs.
Try running Gnome on a atom. It's like having your nails pulled out then some twerp trying to put them back in. I'm sure it runs great on better hardware but it's a lot of bucks for little or no bang.

As I'd finished playing with TWM I had a go at a light desktop. Building a good desktop is like building a good football team. It's not just the players, it's the correct mix of players that make a good team, and the back room staff (dependency's) to get to your chosen goal.



This gives a very light but fully functional and easy to use desktop.

#Base
Private + Shared = RAM used Program
224.0 KiB + 53.0 KiB = 277.0 KiB mouseclock
196.0 KiB + 47.0 KiB = 243.0 KiB fittstool
332.0 KiB + 91.0 KiB = 423.0 KiB evilwm
348.0 KiB + 217.5 KiB = 565.5 KiB simpleswitcher

#Bling
332.0 KiB + 61.0 KiB = 393.0 KiB wp.sh #wallpaper switcher
484.0 KiB + 99.5 KiB = 583.5 KiB wmbubble #date, clock, CPU indicator, memory (but not working correctly for me).
664.0 KiB + 57.0 KiB = 721.0 KiB xcompmgr #Bling mostly for opacity in simpleswitcher
324.0 KiB + 53.0 KiB = 377.0 KiB workspace.sh #workspace indicator


you can add xbindkeys but it's very Heavy for what it does and not really needed.
2.0 MiB + 61.5 KiB = 2.1 MiB xbindkeys

Runner has a run history and can list all executables. Great when you can't recall application names. It doesn't seem to be running as a daemon so as soon as it launches something it closes.
1.1 MiB + 403.5 KiB = 1.5 MiB runner

fittstool takes care of launching applications, volume control etc

simpleswitcher gives a run dialog and workspace indicator (but just for occupied workspaces)

mouseclock provides a super lights time indicator

I love wmbubble the bang for buck is huge


944.0 KiB + 398.5 KiB = 1.3 MiB wicd-monitor
2.3 MiB + 410.0 KiB = 2.7 MiB wicd
3.1 MiB + 497.5 KiB = 3.6 MiB bash (4)
7.8 MiB + 258.0 KiB = 8.1 MiB Xorg
-----------------------------------------------------
31.6 MiB
=================================

For me it's not just about how low you can go, it's about how much crap I can remove and still enjoy using the damn thing.

cwm is just a evilwm clone :wink:
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
My oldest used PC: 1999 imac 333Mhz 256MB PPC abandoned by Debian

User avatar
wizard10000
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 557
Joined: 2019-04-16 23:15
Location: southeastern us
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#17 Post by wizard10000 »

Deb-fan wrote:Fluxbox with just included themes running on it uses about 1/3rd as much ram as OB + tint2.
That hasn't been my experience but I compared both when also running compton and conky. I have had OB + tint2 under 100MB at idle on an Atom netbook, though. My current setup (4th gen i7 laptop) runs OB + tint2 + compton, conky and tilda and uses ~325MB of RAM at idle. It's a little bit fat for openbox but still leaner than almost all DE out there :)
we see things not as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin

trinidad
Posts: 290
Joined: 2016-08-04 14:58
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#18 Post by trinidad »

4th gen i7 laptop) runs OB + tint2 + compton, conky and tilda and uses ~325MB of RAM at idle
New kernels and systemd have improved idle RAM and boot times immensely. 300 to 500mb RAM idle ranges are common these days. Kubuntu LTS (KDE) on kernel 5.3 is at 384mb RAM idle on my 4core AMD, and Linux Lite (XFCE) on kernel 4.15 about the same. My much bigger Debian 10 gnome (48gb file system) idles at about 900mb (though this is not really an idle reading as many things are backgrounded including debsecan and a security layer) To get the best performance on old hardware one could build a trimmed down hardware specific kernel and build a QT5 DE from scratch on wayland/weston and probably get extremely low RAM idle numbers. You could also use systemd to build in suspend except for active applications. RAM idle usage and threading is not particularly important anymore because modern kernels can easily optimize it,

TC
You can't believe your eyes if your imagination is out of focus.

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 14114
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: London, England
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 132 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#19 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

I see roughly the same idle RAM usage for both openbox/tint2 and my GNOME desktop but I have masked lots of --user services and removed quite a few packages to trim GNOME's excesses.
deadbang

User avatar
wizard10000
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 557
Joined: 2019-04-16 23:15
Location: southeastern us
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Why is so much time and effort wasted developing desktop

#20 Post by wizard10000 »

trinidad wrote:Kubuntu LTS (KDE) on kernel 5.3 is at 384mb RAM idle on my 4core AMD
Just curious - did you disable akonadi and baloo to arrive at that number? I got close by doing that a couple years back but I've given up on KDE twice - I'm not a fan of their release management processes - new features (at least used to) seem to take priority over stability and TBH I find regressions kinda annoying :)
we see things not as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin

Locked