What's the point of LXQt while LXDE exists? Lubuntu's

lxde is pretty bad too

>what's the point
The point is to have a desktop environment whose core components are utilizing the Qt toolkit, idiot.
Most of the things you mention have nothing to do with its core principle and are merely bugs regarding software. Some of the things are just plain wrong like "no icons" (icons are system wide and they respect your system icon theme, except if there are maybe a few panel specific icons which are hardcoded).

Lxde as a project is quite dead, but LXQt is interesting as it could use KDE framework to improve itself. Also as Dolphin exist, why care abouf other FM

I'm keeping an eye on it. I tried LXQt the other day and was not impressed, but maybe Lubuntu can bring it up to a bearable state at least.

>>57496285
You could say the same about LXDE. LXDE is inferior in every single way compared to XFCE, in fact LXDE is so shit it relies on some of the components from XFCE. I can't really imagine someone being in a situation where their computer can handle LXDE but not XFCE.

>>57496580

What does LXDE even provide on its own? A terminal emulator, panel, a session manager and a file manager. They don't ship their own window manager (rely on Openbox) and they use Xfce's power management I think.

>I can't really imagine someone being in a situation where their computer can handle LXDE but not XFCE.
Not just that, but it applies to pretty much every desktop environment. As long as you turn off fancy things like effects and compositing, you can get the same experience. Of course that assume you run it under the same environment (same background processes running and same component types).

>>57496285
>What's the point of LXQt while LXDE exists?

the clue is in the name, people suffer through lxqt to avoid using the cancer that is gtk, not that qt is any good but if you are of the position that gtk is nice you'd be using *any* other desktop environment because the only major des/wms to use qt are kde and lxqt

however as far as lxqt versus lxde goes, lxde's development was stalling until they decided to incorporate the lxqt fork into the project, and as far as quality goes lxde was always pretty subpar so it's no surprise lxqt is too but at least lxqt isn't yet another low quality lightweight gtk based de

>>57496285
why can't LXDE have nice icons?

>>57496716

LXDE can have any icons any other desktop environment has.

>>57496682

>look mom, i'm pretending to know what i'm talking about by using obnoxious metaphors like "cancer"

Unless you're a developer working with GTK software, you are in no position to call it bad. Chances are any issues you have with it are issues with the programs themselves and not with GTK.

>>57496635
I think I dislike the direction these "minimal" DEs is that they don't make more efficient software, they just make it do less. And I don't really see who they appeal to in that regard.

I use a T60 with a 1.8GHz Duo and 2GB of RAM (dedicated graphics, 64MB) and I've had Cinnamon and KDE on it, and it's really no worse than XFCE (what I have at the moment). It uses a few hundred more MB of RAM but I've never even broken 1.5GB no matter how much shit I have going.

So if hardware is so limited that you're counting the resources you'd do better to not have a DE at all and just have a WM with command prompts for options.

>>57496285
Show me that filepicker.

>>57496285
But lxqt is the successor of lxde. So no, lxde doesn't exist anymore. It's like trying to use kde3. Just fork it and maintain it if you want it so bad.

File: JlWFgr5.png (35KB, 564x449px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 564x449px

>>57496760

wow way to try and act superior on an anonymous anime image board, I guess I can't express my subjective opinion unless I meet your subjective criteria, that'll show me :^)

qt has traditionally been hell to develop for in for years, do you know why people are flocking to it in droves though? it's because gtk devs lost their minds with gtk 3 and while there may be valid reasons to make some of the decisions they have made, it's directly affecting software that uses gtk which directly affects end users

pcmanfm, the file manager used in lxde and lxqt, was only ported to qt because the developer decided that porting it was easier than fixing broken compatibility, without gtk3 sucking there wouldn't be lxqt

or how about audacity developers having to submit patches to fix gtk issues they were experiencing with gtk moving to client side decorations because gtk/gnome consider non-gnome environments niche? it's surely the software's fault that pic related looks the way it does, totally not the toolkit's fault

hell, how about the 13 years of no thumbnails in the file picker because gtk devs at the time couldn't see why anyone would need such a feature? a "bug" that was only resolved through independent patches? a bug that still persists because big software projects are slow to update and constant breaking of backward compatibility in the api through minor version releases makes it hell for developers, yeah, firefox is surely to blame for that one

the issue of gtk devs shifting the blame onto developers, refusing to acknowledge community requests, among other things, was even discussed at length in a talk by an employee of intel, not that gtk are the only gnu/linux project that are guilty of these cancerous attitudes of refusing to acknowledge other users and developers use cases, and don't kid yourself, cancerous is a perfectly apt description

but you're right, I'm clearly the obnoxious one :^)

>>57497477

and because I can,

>using the smiley face with the caret nose

guess you can dismiss my post now :^)

>>57496760
>Unless you're a developer working with GTK software

Developer formerly developing with GTK here; it's shit.

The good news is that it is better documented than Apache Portable Runtime but the bad news is that it's worse documented than your average js newfegframework of the week.

>>57496285
Both are unpolished and shit.

>>57496285
the point is to provide a normal Qt5 based DE that wont be a complete clusterfuck like kde.

File: 7BIlFccT.jpg (17KB, 400x327px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x327px

>>57497477
>being this triggered
Holy shit you nerds are fucking retarded

>>57497477

>gtk moving to client side decorations
Stopped reading right there. GTK has nothing to do with obligatory client side decorations, that's a GNOME thing which they chose for their. You can create GTK software without them.

None of the other things you mentioned are actual, first hand arguments. You're just parroting things you've seen others say. Just to point one thing out, regarding that file-dialog. You're praising Qt, but take a look at their file-dialog. It's even worse.
Even I as a layman can tell that you have no idea what you're talking about. One can only picture how an actual, informed person would tell you that you have no real technical arguments.

>>57497575

Sure, I'll take your "it's shit" for granted.

>>57499151
>that's a GNOME thing
nowadays the entire GTK is a GNOME thing

>>57499151
You've clearly got no idea what the fucking fuck you're talking about, just go away. I'm right, you're wrong, just deal with it you piece of shit.

>>57499217

Nice buzz-phrase, or howver that exaggeration or misinterpretation can be called.
He made a ridiculous claim, the claim was refuted. That only proves with that type of person you're dealing with. What does he get out of that? With "that", I mean pretending to have a deep knowledge of something when they don't. As already mentioned, even I as a layman, can tell he's full of bullshit. What does he expect will happen? One day he's bound to run into someone who can actually dispute him and call him out on his pathetic and embarrassing bullshit.

>>57499278
Yeah? And you're a nigger.

File: 2016-11-13-18:39:32.png (7KB, 311x229px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 311x229px

>>57499262

>>57498146
>getting this triggered
holy shit you nerds are fucking retarded

>>57499349
>copying me
Wanna make out?

>>57499338
Nobody cares m8

The Qt file picker has no icons unlike gtk, at least the gtk one has icons the size of ants

>>57499151
>Sure, I'll take your "it's shit" for granted.
Good for you. It will save you a lot of pain in the long run.