Newbie here

There are no bugs in KDE. That’s a fallacy! :rofl:

3 Likes

If you’re going to install KDE plasma, don’t install any other desktop.

XFCE is the same desktop you have when you’re using the live ISO image. If you like it, you can go with that, but Plasma is clearly superior :wink:

2 Likes

second bullet I dodged. thnx!

2 Likes

What is the hardware you are installing to?

inxi -Faz | eos-sendlog
1 Like

it is a x86_64bits architecture

Welcome to the land of penguins.

When you are new to Arch-based distros, the first step is to get a good understanding on pacman (Arch’s default package manager), specifically on the dangers of running a partial upgrade.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/pacman

Read that article alongside this post:

3 Likes

Welcome aboard! :smile:

All desktops work well with a terminal. And there are several terminals to choose from.
As well as there are several desktops and window managers to choose from.
Note that you can use EndeavourOS without a DE as well.

If you like terminals even more, then any of the available WMs might be worth trying.

Anyway, to get the idea of various features of the DEs and WMs, you might want to try any or all of them in virtual machines. VirtualBox is an example of a nice virtual machine manager.
When you find your favorite alternative, then simply install it natively into your machine.

2 Likes

@Kresimir I appreciate the suggestion for KDE plasma and it did look the most appealing. However, my colleague convinced me to use I3 WM if I truly wanted to get away from the windows-like GUI environment that spoiled me for decades. After about 3 rebooting due to careless changes made to the i3 config file, I have finally created a barebone desktop configurations

2 Likes

Technically, you can still get KDE plasma to behave like a tiling window manager via a KDE add-on called “Bismuth” (that’s the thing about using Linux—you have a lot of freedom to tweak the behavior of your environment)

However, I myself use i3 because it is lightweight, blazingly fast, and that it allows me to do most of my computing without taking my hands off the home row of my keyboard.

P/S: Bismuth can be installed from the AUR, if you are still interested.

1 Like

Any desktop or window manager can be the best choice, it just depends on your preference. Plasma is a fine choice. I would avoid advice that shames you into making a choice based on someone else’s preferences. The Windows 95 desktop paradigm is still popular for a reason, namely, that it works well for most people because it follows solid UI principles. The Windows 95 desktop paradigm is also the inspiration for most of the desktop environments used in Linux. There is no need to feel inadequate for using the most popular desktop environment paradigm.

2 Likes

Windows 95? :scream:

A panel that includes a application menu/launcher, pinned application icons, running tasks icons, indicator icons, and a clock - all elements that were brought to us with Windows 95. Sure, each of those elements had predecessors, we all know MS stole their ideas from somewhere, but the paradigm was propagated most successfully by MS with Windows 95.

2 Likes

Spend week 1 reinstalling and trying all kinds of different stuff. Once you get a sense of what you might like spend week to getting setup, stabilized, more familiar, and ready for prime time.

Oh, and WELCOME!

Actually, the X Windows system came before Windows 95. However, if I’m not mistaken, Windows 95 was the first to introduce the concept of a “taskbar,” which is still in use in almost all modern desktop environments.

The taskbar (and the Start button by extension). That was the only original idea in Windows 95. Everything else already existed prior to Windows 95’s release.

I’d like to emphasize once again the importance of learning how to use pacman and yay properly first. That’s the first priority when it comes to using Arch-based distros.

Understanding pacman is the key to understanding how rolling-release distros work.

True. But the X windowing system was not a desktop environment in and of itself. CDE, the Common Desktop Environment, was initially developed in 1993 and standardized in 1994. One could argue that CDE contained many of the desktop elements that MS popularized a couple years later. But CDE was only available on very expensive Unix workstations and was not a mass market consumer product.

MS combined the taskbar with integrated start menu, application launcher icons, status and indicator icons, and clock, along with a floating window manager interface, gui configuration tools, live, customizable desktop, and gui file manager into a cohesive product available on mass market commodity hardware at consumer friendly pricing. That is why I give credit to MS for popularizing the UI paradigm released with Windows 95.

In other words, Windows 95 made the desktop GUI accessible to the public.

Well, the Apple Mac did that 10 years before MS. But the desktop did not function in quite the same way. What we are used to came from MS. My first computer I purchased was a Mac in 1993 and it had most of the elements MS would roll out in Windows 95, just not exactly the same.

MS had a lot of predecessors to copy from! :stuck_out_tongue: Where they succeeded is in becoming the dominant supplier of computer operating systems, hence, making the paradigm what it became.

1 Like

Found an article on the history of GUIs, if you’re interested.

1 Like