|List of Xfce applications was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 02 March 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Xfce. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.|
|Mousepad (software) was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 25 February 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Xfce. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.|
|WikiProject Linux||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Free Software / Software / Computing||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|This page was nominated for deletion on 12 February 2009. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.|
- 1 Pronunciation
- 2 Fedora Core 4
- 3 Xfld redirect
- 4 Mouse
- 5 Merging
- 6 Theme Engine
- 7 Screenshot?
- 8 WMs/DT-FMs Need some infobox
- 9 Transparency?
- 10 distributions list delete
- 11 CDE FTW?
- 12 "pronounced as if it were an acronym"
- 13 Parole Media Player
- 14 Midori
- 15 xfce svg logo
- 16 Mousepad
- 17 Newfound popularity
- 18 Debian 7 defaults Gnome 3.x desktop
- 19 typical Xfce 4.4 desktop movie
A lead search result cites the following: Thankfully, the project lead for Xfce, Olivier Fourdan, corrected me and wrote: "I just pronounce it like 'X-F-C-E' or 'X-F-See.' Also please note that the common spelling is 'Xfce.' 'XFce' was used for some time, but XFCE has been dropped since 1997 at least."
How do you pronounce xfce? --22.214.171.124 22:05, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I've always heard all the letters pronounced, as in 'ex-eff-see-ee'. --maru 16:44, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Fedora Core 4
Xfce is not included in the core of FC4, it's in the FC4 extras afaik. So, question is; should the page say that it's included as an optional component in FC? Also, I'd like to hear from a FC4 user what they think.
- I think it's fair enough to say that if you can install it from Fedora Core (with internet or copied packages), that it's optional. ¦ Reisio 14:09, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Is there any reason why "Xfld" redirects here instead of having its own article? --SuperTails92 15:24, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- ...because nobody's made its own article, maybe? Get to work. ¦ Reisio 16:32, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- Then I guess the next question is, why do we have a link at all? Angelo 18:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Completly stupid question: does the mouse have a name?--mimithebrain 04:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- The developers just refer to it as the "mouse logo".--Ktdreyer 16:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree on those points since Xfwm is an optional part in various distributions; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfce but only listed as the default desktop in Xubuntu. Therefore a separate entry for Xfwm will lessen duplication among other Xubuntu related entries. The second point is also good for Thunar and Xarchiver which are also mentioned. Gigapenguin 06:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I am removing the proposed merger from both articles, since I believe the consensus is to keep them seperate. Paul6743 12:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The old Xfce was modded to work on windows (libxfce) anyone know if an updated engine was every cross compiled? Liked to page from Gtkpref
Does xfwm4 really support full transparency? That looks like a Beryl/Compiz screenshot. In Xubuntu 7.04 the terminal won't even display with the built in compositor turned on, and I didn't think there was an option for full transparency of other windows, just of window decorations. But I can't check at the moment... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC).
- Yes it does. You should also realize that XGL brought virtually nothing new to X. Everything it does was already available in various forms - what's different is the implementation. ¦ Reisio 22:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- The caption states: 'A typical Xfce 4.4 desktop. Various Xfwm4 effects are visible (drop shadows behind windows, semi-transparent windows and panel).'. Now this is an Xfce screenshot, but certainly not a typical one. Today it still takes some technical knowledge and time before you can get actual transparency and desktop effects to work in X. Sure, for some it just works (lucky with graphics card, setup, etc) but for the majority of people it doesn't. So I would recommend either changing the caption, removing 'typical' or uploading a new picture, without the transparency (my preference). Let me know what you think. -thomasvk
Mmm, it's been built into X.org for a long while now... all you have to do is have a certain line in xorg.conf, IIRC - and that's probably only for odd distros like the one I use, for most it's probably autoconfigured. It's also an article on Xfce, not DE's or Unixes in general, and a typical Xfce properly configured has no problem with this. ¦ Reisio (talk) 01:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
The screenshot used for Xfce3 is wrong, it is actually a screenshot from Xfce 4.0 or 4.2, using Gtk+2. It doesnt reflect the fact that Xfce3 was in Gtk+1. http://xwinman.org/screenshots/xfce-default.jpg would be a better choice, if it could be added to Wikipedia | Landry, 23:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk)
WMs/DT-FMs Need some infobox
Would be extra nice if there were some specialized infobox and a general pattern (in text sense) for evaluating window managers and desktop/file manager environments, such as GUI qualities (f.ex. clickability/keyability), number of special plugins/docks, configurability (no vs. by config file vs. by special tool), versioning and approximate age etc. I'll study infoboxes and patterns a little by myself, then we'll see. Said: Rursus ☻ 10:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the screenshot shows each of the windows being partially transparent. For folks who have used this OS, does that make usage difficult/hard to read, and can the transparency be easily disabled? 184.108.40.206 (talk) 17:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's not hard to read as the transparency is easily adjusted and disabled. – Iggy Koopa (talk) 02:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
It's nonfunctional eye candy 90% of the time, but hey programmers get bored, and every now and then it's handy. Also, all modern desktop environments both support and promote such eye candy, including those of Apple Mac OS and Microsoft Windows, and all the other X Window System desktop environments (X supports it even if the window manager or desktop environment doesn't explicitly itself). If you really want to get work done, try a tiling window manager (and skip the translucency). ¦ Reisio (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
distributions list delete
What genious deleted the list of distributions that use XFCE. That list was really useful when it came to finding distributions that supported xfce. It should be put back in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 06:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- That would have been me. The list is now located in a nav box that is located at the bottom of the page entitled Operating systems that offer the Xfce desktop and is also on all the pages in that nav box, meaning that it is accessible from each of those articles, making the list much more widely accessible. Also the word is 'genius' not 'genious'. - Ahunt (talk) 12:37, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
XFCE is one of my favorite desktop environments, but the comparison to CDE is strange. I've used CDE for years on AIX and Solaris, and the real CDE has drop-in support for panel menus, i.e. you define an action script with an action editor, that can be dropped into a panel menu drop target. Also, the entire CDE is script-driven. Thunar does have some similarity to the CDE file manager, however. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 10:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that the unsourced sentence in the lead para adds nothing to the article and I have removed it. The sourced mention further down is more appropriete. - Ahunt (talk) 13:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
"pronounced as if it were an acronym"
This is confusing, since most dictionaries use Acronym to mean an initialism pronounced as a word, such as NATO or AIDS. Xfce is not pronounced as such (at least, not very easily!), so altohough the Xfce FAQ does indeed use the word, I've changed it to the more straightforward "pronounced as four individual letters". Loganberry (Talk) 19:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me that way! - Ahunt (talk) 19:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- As long as we avoid unnecessary IPA. --Cybercobra (talk) 19:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Parole Media Player
There's a new application coming out, and it looks a LOT like totem, however, the develoepr has said that he is not willing to clone totem. It is strongly recommended that this application be added to the list and expanded upon. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 16:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
xfce svg logo
Mousepad seems to be dead and removed from Xfce. The link in the article to the Mousepad app is broken. The Mousepad section should be removed, or at least state that it is there for historical purposes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- on Xubuntu at least, Leafpad is installed, but not Mousepad. Perhaps the features were merged back in, but it'd be great to have some refs. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Would it be appropriate to add a section on Xfce's newfound popularity in 2011, now that many experienced Linux users are abandoning Unity and GNOME3, and most seem to be flocking to Xfce? Art Cancro (talk) 20:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- It would if you can find a good reliable source for this I think. I'll also take a look around. (I actually upgraded a lab computer to 11.10 today and switched to xfce in less than 5 min myself). A13ean (talk) 21:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Debian 7 defaults Gnome 3.x desktop
Xfce is the default desktop environment of Debian 7. Rumor denied by Stefano Zacchiroli from identi.ca account @zack. http://identi.ca/notice/96386955