On Wednesday 19 April 2017, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
Am 19.04.2017 um 12:32 schrieb Vojtěch Zeisek:
I liked very much the idea that installer should somehow "check" the hardware and if it is too weak to run KDE/GNOME, the installer should as default promote e.g. XFCE and/or notify user KDE/GNOME would require more CPU, memory, whatever. I have no idea how difficult would it be. I think everyone can imagine frustration from running terribly slooooooow system. Especially when some more lightweight DE would run fast on very same HW.
While this might seem like a good idea at first, imagine a user (not necessarily a newbie) doing three installations on three slightly different machines, doing exactly the same every time and getting three totally different results.
Not good.
I see it the same way. We should simply add some performance dependent hints to the DE descriptions. Moreover regarding "randomized installations". I don't like that selecting different DEs may also affect the rest of the system. Why do we get a random display manager, dependent on the installation order of the window managers? Here I would wish we had more sane global defaults. DE maintainers should not be allowed to push their personal favorite DM. Regarding the topic of this thread. I don't care much which desktop selection is the default. But I would keep a pre-selected one. Since I'm a conservative guy who doesn't like changes at all I would simply keep KDE as default. But only if sddm is either fixed or replaced by something which works for more use cases. cu, Rudi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org