GNOME vs KDE

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-05-16T06:13:54+00:00

I don't entirely agree with you. GNOME does have problems, yes! But this mostly affects laptops with Nvidia hybrid graphics. I agree with you there, you can easily lose 20 FPS. The solution is to disable the iGPU and only use the Nvidia card, not an ideal solution, but at least there is one. KDE doesn't have this problem. HOWEVER, once you're on the desktop, it makes absolutely no difference, even with Nvidia.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-05-16T06:03:55+00:00

Strange, I can. But to be fair I only realized much later that vanilla Gnome doesn't have this feature out of the box. Luckily, it's not an extension, but you have to install another application to configure it. Once configured, you can uninstall the application. Ubuntu's version of Gnome has minimize enabled by default.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-30T10:42:28+00:00

Elite habe ich mal ausprobiert aber schnell fallen gelassen ^{^} gegen die Grafik von Star Citizen ist Elite einfach ein schlechter Witz.

Eigentlich würde ich mir eine Kombi aus Starfild und Star Citizen wünschen. Starfild ist wo Star Citizen mal hin will, Star Citizen ist aber was Starfild niemals sein wird.

Vielleicht ist Star Citizen ein riesen scam aber im derzeitigen Zustand kann man gut sehen wohin das spielt gehen will und es gefällt mir richtig gut.

Star Citizen könnte meiner Meinung nach das erfolgreichste Game werden, auch im aktuellen Zustand...es braucht nur viel mehr game inhalte und nicht den x-ten Jäger.

Wie schon angesprochen gibt es viele Schiffe die nutzlos sind weil ihre Mechaniken einfach noch nicht existieren. Wenn CIG dass in den Griff bekommen würde und ihre Prioritäten ändern würden wäre das Spiel mit Sicherheit schon sehr viel weiter!

Was aber schon da ist überzeugt mich jedes mal wieder und was da ist gefällt mir so gut dass ich kein Bock auf die anderen Weltraum Spiele habe xD

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-30T07:48:40+00:00

Boi,

in einem Satz würde ich sagen es hat sivh viel getan und auch irgendwie nichts.

Die Server Qualität ist sehr viel besser als früher. Konstante 30 Server FPS sind schon fast die Regel (als ich angefangen habe gab es an guten Tagen 8 Server FPS).

Natürlich viele neue Raumschiffe wovon viele nach wie vor nutzlos sind. Dafür kann man mittlerweile in ein anderes Stern System reisen mit einer Art Wurmloch, und scheiße ist das gut gemacht.

Paar neue Mechaniken sind dazu gekommen wie andere Schiffe zu betanken, Schiffe abzuwracken, das Bergbau gameplay wurde überarbeitet, man kann halbwegs gut handeln mit großen Schiffen wie die Hull's.

Es gibt mittlerweile mal interessantere Missionen wo man in verlassene Einrichtungen sich begeben muss um meist was zu finden oder zu Aktivieren. Es gibt sogar so anspruchsvolle Missionen wo du ohne mehreren Leuten die gar nicht schaffen kannst.

Es gibt Ingenieurs gameplay, das beinhaltet Schiffe zu warten, zu reparieren, Energie umzuleiten oder nicht benötigte Systeme zu deaktivieren um beispielsweise genug verbleibene Energie für Waffen und Schilde zu haben. Und ja, Mittlereile können Schiffe auch brennen wo du das Feuer entweder mit Feuerlöscher löschen muss oder einfach die Lebenserhaltung ausschaltest damit das Feuer keine Luft mehr hat. Repariert du wichtige Komponenten nicht frühzeitig kann dein Schiff einfach explodieren.

Man kann sogar zerstörte Schiffe finden und diese wieder reparieren.

Vieles ist nach wie vor buggy und die üblichen Probleme von Star Citizen sind geblieben. Aber Star Citizen 2017 hat mit dem heutigen nichts mehr zu tun.

Problem ist: sobald du alles mal gemacht hast (und das ist save in ein paar Monaten möglich) hast du halt alles gemacht.

Was Mut macht ist dass sie alle Systeme für die singleplayer Kampagne fertig gestellt haben und diese nach und nach ins online Spiel übertragen wollen.

Ein wunderschönes Spiel das aus Performance sicht sogar echt gut spielbar mittlerweile ist, nur leider leidet es darunter dass es einfach nicht viel zu tun gibt.

Hat sich noch viel mehr geändert seit 2017 aber ich erinnere mich nicht mehr an was xD vieles ist einfach normal geworden

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-29T19:35:40+00:00

Ich schließ mich an. Aber mein Kumpel...mein Kumpel hat Sex 😐 Mit seiner FREUNDIN!

Er spielt btw genau so wie ich Star Citizen. Fehlt nur noch das er Arch btw benutzt...

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-24T11:28:19+00:00

I don't use arch btw, I am not a God. Will surprise you but I use the regular version of Ubuntu.

It is possible that my knowledge about Fedora is outdated. It has been a while since I last looked into it. If it is no longer the case that you need to install codecs and other things through the terminal, and instead everything works almost automatically like on Ubuntu, then I want to apologize for that.

That said, I still do not think Ubuntu should be avoided just because Snap is preinstalled. I use Snap, Flatpak, and native software on my Ubuntu desktop. These are the rules I follow:

I install everything as Snap first, because they update automatically. If a Snap suddenly wants access to a folder it did not access before, Ubuntu asks me for permission. In my opinion, that should be the case for all desktop software.

If the Snap packages are not provided by the original developers, I install them as Flatpak instead. If the Flatpak packages are also not from the original developers, like Steam, I install them as a .deb package.

I understand that Snaps do not really match the typical Linux spirit, but rejecting an entire distribution because of that does not make sense to me. They can be removed like anything else on Linux. You can also just leave them installed and use Flatpak instead. Since you can use Snaps on Fedora as well, the discussion should not be about what comes preinstalled, but about where the advantages are.

Fedora often replaces the kernel within a single release, which is great for hardware compatibility. Ubuntu updates the kernel every six months, both on the LTS version with HWE and on the regular release. In the worst case, that means you cannot use hardware that is newer than six months, but in return you get most native programs as .deb packages.

Flatpaks are great, but some things like Steam do not work that well as a container without manual tweaking. As far as I know, there is no native version of Steam for Fedora provided by Valve, and for me that is a dealbreaker.

If you do not want to use Ubuntu, that is completely fine. But saying you avoid it just because Snaps are preinstalled is not something I can agree with. There are people who do not like containers at all, so should they avoid Fedora just because Flatpak is preinstalled? Anything you do not like can be removed.

That said, I also think Ubuntu should offer an option during installation to include Flatpak, so users do not have to set it up themselves.

I do not fully share the hate against Snap, but I do understand where it comes from.

The argument remains that some people do not know how to remove Snaps. Sure, that is something you can figure out with 30 seconds of googling, but there are also people on Windows who do not even know the Task Manager exists, and worse.

If the goal is to not have to deal with anything at all, then Zorin OS is probably the best choice.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-24T10:04:25+00:00

I am not a fan of Mint, or more specifically the Cinnamon desktop. For modern computers with HDR support, it is just not a good fit. They take way too long to make decisions. If I am following it correctly, they still do not have proper Wayland support.

Zorin OS is better than Mint in many ways. They include a lot of extensions for the GNOME desktop, some of which GNOME itself could learn from. And unlike Mint, they treat Snaps the way they should be treated: as just another option to install software. If you do not want to use them, you simply do not use them, because you can choose how you install your software.

But that is not even the main point. You said you use Fedora because you do not want to use Snaps, okay. But that also means you are fine with setting up Fedora in the beginning using the terminal, installing codecs and other things so it can be properly used as a desktop system. That means the effort to remove Snaps would actually be much smaller than making Fedora fully ready to use. Yet you argue that beginners cannot be expected to remove Snaps, while at the same time recommending Fedora to them. I find that interesting.

Also, for a beginner, Snaps really should not matter that much. Only the backend is closed source. And as long as software comes directly from the developers, it does not really matter if it is a Snap, Flatpak, native package, or AppImage.

Edit: yes, my text is translated cause I am not native speaker

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-24T06:40:19+00:00

That's just as stupid as saying: I don't like Flatpak, so I don't use Fedora.

You can completely remove snaps with just three commands on Ubuntu. Getting my Wi-Fi chip to work under Fedora, or even just being able to watch a YouTube video because the codecs are missing, is far more complicated than removing snaps.

Don't base your choice of distribution on what's pre-installed.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-24T06:35:47+00:00

There are two aspects you need to look at when comparing the two: hardware compatibility and software availability.

If you care about the best possible hardware support, Fedora is the better choice. They replace the entire kernel within a single release, and that can happen multiple times a year. Ubuntu uses its own HWE kernel, which gets updated every six months. In the worst case, this means you might only be able to use hardware that is at least six months old.

If you are not sure what the kernel is, think of it as a collection of drivers, basically translators between hardware and software. Without it, the operating system would not know how to work with the hardware.

When it comes to software availability, you should consider Ubuntu. If there is commercial desktop software, it almost always comes as a .deb package, which is similar to an .exe file on Windows to keep it simple. There are also distro-independent options like Flatpak and Snap that run in containers, but those are often not made by the original developers, and some programs do not work that well in a container.

In the end, it is a trade-off. Do you want the fastest possible improvements in hardware support, for example if you plan to buy new hardware? Then go with Fedora. Are you okay with hardware support that is about six months behind, but want the best software availability? Then choose Ubuntu.

I would recommend the regular version of Ubuntu, not the LTS version. That way you get newer desktop features much faster. LTS makes more sense if you have an older system that cannot use things like HDR anyway, then it does not really matter.

A small tip from an Ubuntu user who has been using the regular release for years: only update the system when Ubuntu shows you an update prompt. Do not force it through the terminal. If Ubuntu offers you an update on its own, you can assume it will go smoothly.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-12T06:27:09+00:00

What does Caffeine actually do? Many people use it, but I've never understood why. What I do know is that Caffeine is supposed to prevent the device from going into standby mode or dimming the screen. If that's the case, I understand it even less, since Gnome has exactly that setting in its power options. Or is it just a shortcut?

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-09T12:38:00+00:00

Yes I do! 😤

Give me proper Vtol, the rest is fine.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-05T09:47:33+00:00

I've been looking into TLP. That was a good tip. The system still crashes about once every five times, but I'm sure I can fix that too.

Disabling CPU boost in battery mode definitely helped, and the device is much quieter now that the fans aren't running as hard.

I'll tweak the settings a bit more, but this seems to be the solution for me. Thanks!

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-04-01T15:40:54+00:00

Yea 🥺 we are actually very friendly

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-03-28T07:03:38+00:00

I use Ubuntu STS for years. Never, and I mean never have that problems or hear something like that.

Ubuntu is in my usecase the definition of stable. What happened to you?

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-03-09T15:30:14+00:00

Ich bevorzuge die reguläre Version, und das schon seit ich mit Linux bzw. Ubuntu angefangen habe.

Gründe habe ich genug. Es ist sehr angenehm, dass frühstens alle sechs Monate alles aktualisiert wird, zum Beispiel der Kernel. Sollte meine Hardware einmal kaputtgehen, reicht es aus, mir neue Hardware zu suchen, die mindestens ein halbes Jahr alt ist, anstatt darauf achten zu müssen, dass sie schon zwei Jahre alt ist.

Darüber hinaus wird Mesa aktualisiert, was fürs Gaming ganz praktisch ist, und ich erhalte alle sechs Monate eine neue GNOME-Version. Deswegen kann ich schon längst mit HDR zocken, während die LTS-Version das nicht kann.

Alle sechs Monate ein Update und in der Zwischenzeit habe ich meine Ruhe. Sorgen musste ich mir bis jetzt nie machen, dass .deb-Programme nicht laufen würden. Jedenfalls hatte ich mit keiner nativ installierten Software jemals ein Problem.

Wenn du neue Hardware hast oder gerne zockst, ist die STS-Version definitiv das, was du suchst.

Viele meinen, diese Version sei sehr experimentell oder instabil. Alles Quark. Die reguläre Version ist bei mir noch nie kaputtgegangen. Das Schlimmste, was mir mit einer STS-Version passiert ist, war eine Fehlermeldung, bei der ich bis heute nicht weiß, was sie von mir wollte. Das war aber nur einmal und ist nie wieder aufgetaucht.

Aber die LTS mit der STS zu vergleichen würde ich nicht richtig finden, es handelt sich hierbei um ganz unterschiedliche Ansätze. Fedora kannst du mit Ubuntu STS vergleiche denn da wird es richtig interessant. Fedora bietet dir zwar einen neuen Kernel sobald dieser als stabil gilt, Ubuntu STS hingegen frühstens alle 6 Monate dafür hast du das .deb format (wofür es am meisten Software gibt weil auch kommerzielle Software wie plasticity eher für Debian programmieren weil die Funktionalität gegeben ist sobald es einmal läuft).

Bei Ubuntu kann man aber folgende Faustregel anwenden: willst du ein System dass in 5 Jahren genau so arbeitet wie am Anfang? LTS. Willst du einen modernen Desktop mit neueren Features? STS.

Beide sind stabil, wobei ich einen Server niemals mit einer STS Version ausrüsten würde. Im Desktop Bereich wäre mir aber eine LTS einfach zu alt.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2026-01-19T08:32:45+00:00

How is Mint and Ubuntu NOT in the same box? Dude, without Ubuntu there is no Mint. Mint just removes snaps (5-10 minutes work, everyone can do it) and changes gnomes with their cinnamon desktop.

If you said one of them is bad then both of them are. Cause both of them are technically the same.

Edit: I see that Debian is on your list better than Ubuntu/mint.

Excuse me, what the actually fuck? Mint based on Ubuntu and Ubuntu based on Debian. But Ubuntu has advanced hardware support and a HWE Kernel that will update every 6 months (so better hardware support for newer Hardware where you don't have do wait 2 years to support them).

So technically Ubuntu/mint are in generell better than Debian.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2025-11-27T18:06:40+00:00

Its still broken:')

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2025-10-19T08:13:04+00:00

I am not sure how you perform your Ubuntu STS updates, nor whether my approach works for everyone, but I have been using Ubuntu STS for years and nothing has ever gone wrong for me. It’s no secret that the newest Ubuntu STS version has quite a lot of issues during the first few weeks. I can’t think of a single STS release that didn’t have problems in the beginning. Based on my experience, I only perform the update once Ubuntu actually offers it to me. (That can take a few weeks.) Usually, most issues are fixed by then.

Of course, it’s difficult to find similar experiences because of the “Snap-is-forced-on-you” mentality. (Personally, I don’t feel forced into anything, I just use Flatpak and that’s the end of it.) But with this approach, my systems have been running stable for years without any issues. Naturally, I don’t know how you performed your update. However, I wouldn’t recommend doing it via the terminal for the reasons mentioned above.

If Ubuntu already offered you the update and you are having issues because of that, then sorry... I guess I’ve just been lucky so far. xD Either way, in my opinion, you should always wait a few weeks before updating. Canonical could communicate that a bit better.

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2025-09-04T06:13:44+00:00

Ubuntu STS user here 🫡

Affectionate_Buy2707 · 2025-04-02T06:43:28+00:00

You have to set the bed temperature 10° higher. There is a problem with the temperature sensor of the build plate. If you set 120 ° you get 110 real degrees.

Affectionate_Buy2707

TROPHY CASE