The latest simplified Linux Desktop Environment Competition

The latest simplified Linux Desktop Environment Competition
GuideFor a considerable number of Linux users, performance is always the ultimate goal. Whether the computers they use are too old, they need to discover their limited potential as much as possible, or they want to keep everything simple by carrying all the high-intensity task loads with their new high-performance systems. These are important prerequisites for achieving Performance Assurance. In Linux, we do not have much space to modify to reduce the load-but there is another solution to this problem, that is, to choose a concise desktop environment.

Some systems tend to provide only the necessary interfaces, just like the desktop environments that are super gorgeous but have high requirements for resources, such as KDE, so as to minimize system resource requirements. Today, we will learn about LXDE, Xfce, and MATE, three representative members in this field.

Prior to the discussion, I believe some Linux professionals have said there are more release options with more streamlined features. It is true that Openbox, Xmonad, Enlightenment (a very unique desktop environment), LXQt, and even i3 can all be included in this category. However, these desktop environments are either unfriendly to new Linux users or far from mainstream products such as Windows or Mac OS X in terms of desktop devices. Therefore, this comparison will not be included.

Therefore, I have made a choice from several popular "lightweight" Linux desktop environments, hoping to help you easily decide which desktop solution is suitable for you. In addition, Ubuntu also provides official support for these three desktop environments, so we can compare them as fairly as possible.

To objectively compare these three desktop environments, we will base on the following indicators, including:

• The start time of the Ubuntu image corresponding to the desktop environment, that is, the start time of BIOS loading and the start time of the operating system loading. The desktop is completely loaded and can be started as the end point. Of course, the length of time varies naturally in different systems. However, we will use the same system to run it to evaluate its load strength more accurately.
• Memory usage in each desktop environment when no program (except the system monitor) is enabled. This is another good way to judge the amount of resources used in the desktop environment. Although the three releases are still different from the desktop environment, we can use the same Ubuntu code library to maintain its consistency as much as possible, for example, you can use a Ubuntu-based release or a Fedora-based release.
• Overall response speed, including opening several programs. This evaluation is subjective to a certain extent, but I still take it into consideration, because sometimes the actual number does not explain the problem-if the response is not good, in this case, the comments will naturally be low.

1. LXDE

LXDE adopts Lubuntu testing, which is the official LXDE dedicated Ubuntu version. Different from the other two, this release is not only extremely streamlined due to the choice of the desktop environment, but also removed the included programs. Compared with the common LibreOffice, we can find that it uses Abiword and Gnumeric as the tool for text processing and workbooks. From a historical perspective, LXDE is dedicated to bare metal devices and provides application starters and the bottom toolbar similar to the Start Menu.

The start time of Lubuntu is 26 seconds in total. Most of the time is used to load the operating system rather than the desktop environment. (According to other results, the time consumption between the two is quite different ). After the desktop is loaded, I immediately turn on the system monitor to check the current memory usage. Impressive, its memory usage is only 209 MB. This means that we can fully run Lubuntu on a system with only MB of memory-the premise is that you have to choose other lightweight applications, especially lightweight browsers.

After recording the memory usage, I started to start the multi-chuan application and clicked everywhere-including switching back and forth between different applications to maximize/minimize its window, drag the window back and forth on the screen and interact with one of the applications on the premise that a background program is running. Lubuntu has a very good experience, and each operation will receive a response, and my expected results will be immediately reflected. However, my system performance is strong, so I don't know how well it will be executed on outdated configurations-but in the final analysis, the response speed is indeed impressive.

2. Xfce

Xfce adopts the Xubuntu test, which is the dedicated release provided by Ubuntu. Xfce has always wanted to be one of the most streamlined desktop environments, but I think it is always a little different from the word "most. It can be seen that the interface is obviously more gorgeous than bare metal devices. In any case, Xfce still claims to be a very lightweight desktop environment, surpassing KDE, GNOME, and Unity in this regard.

The boot time of Xubuntu is about 28 to 29 seconds (because we often need to realize that the desktop has been loaded after one second, so I cannot say the result is too absolute ), this is a good result. Of course, most of the time is still spent on starting the operating system rather than starting the desktop environment. However, the startup time is still 2 to 3 seconds longer than that of Lubuntu. In addition, because the two run the same code library, it is expected that the additional time will be used to start the desktop environment. After loading Xubuntu, I checked the system monitor and found that the memory usage fluctuated from 7% to 8%. After calculation, the actual usage was between 286.72 MB and 327.68 MB. This is also an outstanding performance, and it seems that it is not much different from Lubuntu at the beginning-but after calculation, its usage is higher than Lubuntu's 50%, which is exaggerated.

Xubuntu has the same outstanding response results, but the performance is slightly inferior to Lubuntu. I often experience a latency of about 1/4 seconds during operations-this may be due to the animation effect, but it feels like everything. Therefore, although the response from Xubuntu cannot be smooth, I think Lubuntu is better.

3. MATE

MATE is tested using Ubuntu MATE, which is also a release specially provided by Ubuntu. MATE belongs to a fork version of GNOME 2. Later, the GNOME team gave up the environment and switched to GNOME 3. GNOME 2 is more streamlined than GNOME 3, so MATE's focus is also on users who are unwilling to move to GNOME 3 and still want to stick to the original solution.

The startup time of Ubuntu MATE is about 27 to 28 seconds, which is basically the same as that of Xubuntu. MATE does not have a clear bare metal style like Lubuntu in appearance, but friends familiar with GNOME 2 will surely find their original touch at first glance. After loading the desktop, I turned on the system monitor and found that the memory usage was 310 MB, which is basically the same as that of Xfce.

The response is similar to that of Xubuntu-excellent, but not as good as Lubuntu, at least intuitively. I also found that Xfce has always been regarded as a desktop environment that is more lightweight than GNOME 2, but in actual tests, the performance levels of the two are actually no different.

Content LXDE wins

So who is the final winner? LXDE seems to be a clear winner through two qualitative and quantitative evaluations. If you need to squeeze out resources from the system as much as possible, Lubuntu not only has outstanding performance, but also has very powerful functions and looks like the desktop interface. Of course, Xfce and MATE are also ideal options for lightweight desktops. However, LXDE naturally wins successfully because there is only one winner. Now I am looking forward to seeing what kind of simplified performance Lubuntu can bring after using LXQt to replace LXDE Based on GTK2. Maybe we will conduct other tests later to find out the answer to this question.

So what is the most favored lightweight desktop environment? Will you use these solutions in high-performance systems? Please share your opinion in the comment bar.

Address: http://www.linuxprobe.com/linux-desktop-pk.html