I'm sorry. It sounds like I worded things poorly, and I apologize for the
misunderstandings I created.
>> why do you play with Unity if you don't like it?
I like trying new desktops, and, until I tried it, I liked Unity. That may not
make sense, but I hadn't given Unity much thought until I saw how pretty it
looks. After trying it, though, Unity is not for me.
>>XFCE as in Xubuntu lut Lubuntu would have worked too.
I like XFCE, too, as well as ICEWm, Fluxbox, and FVWM2. If I had more time to
play with it, FVWM2 would have been my favorite, but I just didn't invest the
time in learning how to tweak it. Enlightenment seems to be more welcoming when
it comes to that, though.
>>Nobody at Ubuntu forces you to use a desktop you don't
>>like.
This is what I was trying to get across. There is an awful lot of drama over
desktops whenever one undergoes major changes, when we don't have to worry about
any changes that we don't want. Or, if we want to change desktop managers, it's
not like we are using Windows, where the DM is welded to the kernel. Whatever
we use for a distro, we can be sure that we have plenty of Desktop Manager
choices. I have a half dozen or so installed on my PC, although I've been
sticking with Enlightenment lately.
>>If you aren't able to switch desktops you are for sure
>>unable to tweak a Debian install or to compile programs
>>for a Red Hat based distro with a very limited
>>repository of programs (and usually several revisions
>>behind).
Although I've been corrected by several people that know why this is a bad idea,
I do like the ability to quickly get to the session manager screen with
ctrl-alt-backspace in non-'buntu's. Even though restarting the X-server that
way might be crude and simply a bad idea, it is convenient.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
