Linux Desktop Environment evaluation report collation

Pantheon of Elementary OS

The first thing to clarify is that this evaluation report is for the Pantheon desktop environment rather than the elementary OS itself.

But this set of circumstances did surprise our assessment expert. Pantheon with its own concise and neat experience in the competition to stand out. For example, its Application Launcher lets Bryan experience the true meaning of the word "practical":

"This app launcher is not intended to act as a music player or to search for users on Amazon.com," he said. It's just doing its job, helping users find and start the apps they need, and then completely disappear into our sights. Most desktop environments today, including Linux and other operating system types, suffer from severe functional bloat-which can cause the system to run slowly or even a series of bugs. We can call this kind of scenario the ' trouble ' operating system. However, Pantheon does not have such a problem. In the Pantheon environment, each of its design links exactly meet the user's usage expectations ... And that's it, there's no other redundancy set. This excellent feature covers all default applications such as system settings, text editors, video players, and so on. ”

Its Application launcher is only a microcosm of the whole set of environments, but it is enough to highlight the Pantheon style. The operating system is easy to learn and use, and Bryan recommends it to those novice users who have never been in touch with Linux systems before, or to Linux experts who have long experience but only want to be able to achieve clear operational goals quickly and efficiently.

Ubuntu Unity

In this review, Bryan needs to face the--unity of a Linux desktop environment that once forced him to turn to other alternative solutions. This set of circumstances limits customization, and in particular prevents the user from moving the dock from the left side of the screen to another location, which forces Bryan into the embrace of other system environments.

After returning to the Unity platform, Bryan found a welcome boost to its usability, both in terms of running speed and reliability. Although he insists that unity does not feel as good as any other environment in terms of speed, such as enlightenment and mate--, he admits that the speed difference is not intolerable and that his use of the process is not always in a state of collapse. In particular, the Unity dash function, which is responsible for providing tag groups to launch applications or access target files, is indeed very practical.

However, custom restrictions and poor design (at least as compared to the GNOME shell and the elementary OS) still deeply plague Bryan. He did not make it clear that unity was a good environment, but stressed that unity could be quite limited to users who like to tinker with their Linux desktop environment.

Equipped with aura and ash ChromeOS

The review does not intend to Chromebook as the user's preferred PC device-though Bryan had made such an attempt before-and merely recorded his aura hardware acceleration display system on top of ChromeOS and the Aura Shell (ASH) The actual feeling of the desktop environment.

Because it allows users to manage windows and has a "very traditional" navigation bar design for application access operations, Ash is widely seen as a good set of desktop system standards. The navigation bar is located on the right-hand side of the screen, which includes the status identification for the functions such as volume adjustment and Bluetooth switch, and is "extremely obvious and intuitive" from the simplicity of the function. The following is an assessment of Bryan's overall use of the environment:

"This is the most glamorous feature of ash--convenient and exquisite." It provides users with sufficient functional options to start the desired application (or open the Web page) and, after completing the task, "Brush the clothes". The whole process was very fast and very elegant. ”

When it comes to the ChromeOS, Bryan says it is ideal for users who want to easily find and start a target application in their desktop system, and that the system boot mechanism will completely fade out after the application is started. For this reason, Bryan says he will consider the environment as one of the most outstanding operating systems he has ever used.

The only real drawback is that Ash cannot handle Linux applications running in a standard desktop environment--such as GIMP and LibreOffice. If he had this ability, Bryan thought he would probably use it as the preferred operating system for the day.

Android is the desktop environment

After a week-long test of ChromeOS, Bryan entered the new area of Android, the desktop.

In its default settings, a set of options can be seen as an important bright spot, and can be a serious drag, depending on the type of device you are using. Android uses a single Window interface, which means that users who always use a single application in Full-screen mode can improve their productivity by ensuring that they don't get distracted by the presence of multiple windows or labels.

But if you need to use two apps at the same time, this setting can be extremely frustrating and even furious--for example, when you're reading a document and entering data into another spreadsheet. Bryan also found that every time he received an instant message he needed to start a Full-screen communication interface, which was really hard to bear.

Overall, Bryan admits that as long as it overcomes the short boards, users will find that "Android is actually a desktop environment with excellent usability, easy learning, flexible operation and a relatively good appearance".

Lxde

Although the desktop environment is worthy of "speed" and "extreme Lightweight design", Bryan still believes it lacks the core highlights necessary to capture customers ' eyeballs.

This is not to say that Lxde lacks practicality--bryan said its default appearance and use feeling really "poor"; Its File Manager performance in file management is perfect, but the design style is somewhat outdated; Its interface uses the "basic style of a common desktop environment".

In conclusion, the above factors are enough to make LXDE a useful desktop environment, especially for those users who do not attach much importance to the design effect. And, as Bryan says, Lxde may be "best suited to the lightweight resource equipment for education, such as Raspberry Pi." ”

Cinnamon

It should be noted that Bryan once criticized the cinnamon system severely, saying that it was "a waste of time". But this time the review changed Bryan's view, saying that while there was "nothing to be overjoyed about", the desktop environment was "really good".

From a traditional user experience perspective, Cinnamon has nothing to stand out from the other desktop environments-including Linux and Windows. But using cinnamon really helped Bryan to give full play to his strengths.

I found that after about a week of use ... I began to like the system environment. Its appearance and use feel very exquisite. I rarely encounter errors during use (even if there are no vicious bugs ...). Mostly minor ailments), and their performance--even if not surprisingly--is at least "very abundance". I never found myself needing to wait for Cinnamon's response in sit. When I click on an object, it can respond immediately. Very good, very strong.

The configuration options provided by the system are also quite extensive. It includes almost any customization that enriches the user experience, including closing/shrinking/other shortcut buttons in the title bar. This great flexibility has made me deeply immersed in it.

And finally won my approval.

Bryan could not help pointing out the similarities between the mate and the two, and he thought the two were moving in tandem with the speed and lightness of the performance. But he still cheers for the Cinnamon development team's success, saying it created a "high quality and radiant" desktop environment.

Ratpoison

Please read Bryan's assessment directly and determine what kind of mental experience he has experienced in the week with Ratpoison:

Generally speaking, I will publish the article to share my experience with you after the whole experience process is over. But this time I can't do it. I believe we all see it ... It really makes me upset. No, "hate" is not enough to say how I feel. My little heart is filled with anger and even hatred, as it burns under 1000 suns. This heinous operating system should be sent to the International Court of the Hague to accept its due trial for crimes against humanity.

First of all, a friend accustomed to the traditional keyboard and mouse operation will not be able to tolerate its design, because the Ratpoison only support keyboard control (hence the name of the Ratpoison, meaning ' rodent medicine '). Bryan found that simply using the shortcut key combination to operate is like putting people into a construction site on the construction machinery, the huge contrast is simply impossible to do. And even more frightening is that the system environment does not provide a clear and detailed shortcut key operation instructions.

As a result, Ratpoison is worth a try for a friend who is willing to experience a hard life without a mouse in a desktop environment. But if you don't have the patience to use it, ask the listener for Bryan's advice--wave goodbye to it.

KDE Plasma

As a resource-intensive system environment, KDE plasma is indeed beyond Bryan's expectations in terms of speed and performance-but its poor visual design is disappointing.

The KDE Plasma 4.13 version is highly rated for its reaction rate, which is widely believed to be far superior to the original version-at least on laptops with 8GB of memory (which, according to Bryan's theory, could shrink on devices with smaller memory capacity).

However, some of the default mechanisms in the design are still very frustrating, from the default "flash" effect in the active window to the meaningless white space in the toolbar. This set of environment has the ability to customize, but the above design level of small problems let it completely farewell to the "excellent use experience" this evaluation.

Awesome

Awesome appears to be a desktop system tailored for Bryan-a lightweight and easy-to-use environment that offers a wide range of customization options.

But it is this customization that makes our evaluation experts feel a bit confused. Awesome uses the LUA programming language in its functional components and themes, a powerful language, but with a lot of work to do to create its own customized parts. Comrade Bryan was repeatedly frustrated in the course of the experiment, and eventually led to the removal of all the functional parts of the problem.

But after removing it, Bryan found that awesome finally presented himself with a very practical side. So essentially, awesome can be an excellent desktop system for those who have the confidence and ability to play in the LUA programming language-even those who intend to enjoy the convenience of unpacking-but from a layman's point of view, it is really too difficult to use.

Enlightenment (E17)

The first of the series is aimed at E17, which is also the second-most new version of the Enlightenment family. The E17 version is chosen because the stability is better than the E18 that is still in the development phase.

Bryan found that the design and layout of the E17 system was "quite gorgeous" and that the system was able to respond well when he used the touch-screen device. In addition, E17 also provides a set of "the most eye-catching terminal" program, its level is to evaluate all the competitors to date the absolute King, and in the start-up performance is also very fast.

E17 also promises to offer a variety of customization features, but Bryan has encountered some obstacles in this regard. As he was annoyed by the need to resize the window by "a small, incredibly small area in the lower right corner", he decided to start revising the subject. But it turned out to be a very difficult task, and he ended up with a direct choice from other available topics.

The above problems that are exposed in the evaluation process do not seem to matter, but for those who are willing to customize the system environment, this is a really important factor to consider.