What features would I be losing if I switched to GNOME?
What features would I be losing if I switched to GNOME?
I don't mean for this to become a KDE vs GNOME post. I'm looking at switching to Fedora (because Arch is a pain), and it seems that GNOME is more supported. I use KDE on Arch. What features would I be losing if I were to switch? (ex: toolbar management, KRunner, etc.)
You're viewing a single thread.
I don't really use KDE, and if I forgot some really crucial information thanks to correct me.
You can use the KDE spin version of Fedora with plasma 6, or if you love the rolling release of Arch you can try openSUSE Tumbleweed with KDE (you choose you desktop environment at installation).And for what you going to loose if you go to GNOME :
- HDR (you can enable HDR experimental on mutter but not working for me).
- VRR (it's experimental on GNOME and work for me).
- You need extensions to customize your desktop, its not really a problem but some people don't want to many extensions (like me).
- Customization in KDE that you don't find in gnome, even in extensions.
- For Krunner you can use
metabutton to open gnome overview and start typing to find app.
And if you want to try GNOME try to stay the most "vanilla" possible. Some extensions I use :
- Blur my Shell
- Just Perfection
- Rounded Window Corners (need to do some search for each gnome release to find the new version)
I've got 20 extensions enabled. There's no drawback so far. PaperWM is probably the most important one for me.
I find that certain extensions (gsconnect, for instance) lag my Gnome shell. Extensions don't often cause problems, but they certainly can.
That info is better than "install as few extensions as possible".
What I meant was that if he wants to try out Gnome, he should install only few extensions to have a vanilla experience. Then he can install the extensions he wants. I would have said the same thing for KDE or any DE.
"Try first without tweak and when it's work and you like it, try modify" something like this.