Well, I think having an option to install your own custom environment later
is of course very much wanted.
Not sure if we'd want separate 'spins' with different
environments/software, but imho the 'cleanness', minimalism though good
integration of LXDE make it a nice candidate for some of dyne:bolic's
applications.

The fact that it's slim and still has plenty of features you might expect
from a window manager and DE would make the release much more 'slick' imho.

@ Eric, I'm personally a fan of fluxbox, but any *box can tickle my
enthousiasm ;)
I just think that LXDE provides the desktop experience that many users are
expecting from an operating system.
And still be better equipped for low-end systems than Gnome and Xfce.

I agree that Xfce is 'easy to use' but imo it has a lot of clutter and
brings a lot of Xfce specific things that don't give it a very neutral
experience.
What I see dyne:bolic as is a system anyone is able to use and interact
with, is able to be customized to the users needs and not give too much
overhead.
Perhaps gnome is 'familiar', but it doesn't give the release the edge to
show what it can really do.

Lets just see what we can squeeze out of LXDE, I'm sure we can find a good
middle-ground

Alexander


ps; perhaps the full-dvd can have an option to select a particular
environment in the boot-menu?



On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:33 PM, El Evans <3l3vans@???> wrote:

> I like Xfce. It is easy to use for just about anybody, and if it's slower
> than openbox I hardly notice on my machine.
>
> The gnome 2 interface on this version of dyne was BARELY slower and it
> looks really good. I didn't notice any detriment in performance (when
> comparing it to my experience with Dyne II), except some applications were
> a little slower to load. I will bet that there are alot of "geeks" that are
> going to miss gnome2, maybe using it could attract more attention to
> Dynebolic III?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Eric Gunther <a59303@???> wrote:
>
> > just my 2 cents but I like blackbox for slim power. Although I think
> that
> > there
> > would likely have to be some *configuration and *tweaking.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dynebolic mailing list
> > dynebolic@???
> > http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/dynebolic
> >
> _______________________________________________
> dynebolic mailing list
> dynebolic@???
> http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/dynebolic
>