 It's time for another tier list video. You guys like it when I do these kinds of tier list sort of videos where I break down a particular group of programs into five different tiers. I've done this with terminal emulators, I've done this with text editors, I've done this with tiling window managers, and I've had people request this particular video, hey DT, can you do a tier list on the desktop environments available on Linux? And I thought, yeah, I could do that. It actually sounds rather interesting because there's so many desktop environments on Linux, many of them I've actually used. I wouldn't say extensively because I'm not really a desktop environment user. Typically when I use these things, they're typically either in test of virtual machines on test equipment or typically friends and family computers. I typically install different Linux distributions with different desktop environments on those friends and family members machines. So I do get to play with a lot of these different desktop environments. And there's some that appeal to me more than others. So let's break it down into tiers. So I've chosen a list of 13 desktop environments that I feel comfortable ranking here today. I'm going to be ranking Budgie, the common desktop environment, CDE, Cinnamon, the deep end desktop environment, DDE, Genome, KDE, LXDE, LXQ, Lumina, Mate, Pantheon, Trinity and XFCE. Now keep in mind these kinds of rankings and tier list videos that I do. This is all subjective, right? This is my opinion. This is which of these desktop environments are right for me, which ones of them are not right for me. For example, I'm going to I'm going to favor desktop environments that have plenty of customization options. I'm I'm typically going to penalize desktop environments that don't have much customization available. I'm also going to give bonus points to those desktop environments that are more forward looking rather than those desktop environments that are more backwards looking. Again, this is just for me, my subjective opinion. Many people are going to have really the opposite of opinion on many of these. And that's fine. Again, this is just DT's tier list. So let's quickly go through these in alphabetical order, Budgie. The Budgie desktop environment is one of my favorites, if not my favorite desktop environment currently available on Linux. It's a GTK based desktop. It's it's not really a fork of GNOME, but it's kind of it was built in response to GNOME when GNOME 2 died about 10, 12 years ago. And you know, GNOME 3 came out, everybody hated it. It was slow. It was buggy. GNOME 3 was a mess. That's when you actually had a lot of these desktop environments down here were created in response to GNOME 3. And Budgie was one of those. And honestly, it was so good. It was so it had a traditional panel and menu system, but it had a lot of forward looking stuff. It had a lot of modern design elements, really nice, you know, transparent panels and bars. It looked good at that slide out Raven side menu. And it's just a really, really nice comfy desktop environment. If you're looking for great Budgie Linux distributions, Solus is still around. Solus OS is actually the creator of the Budgie desktop environment. Ubuntu Budgie is a really nice Budgie Linux distribution as well. So Budgie definitely goes in my great tier. Next up is the common desktop environment CDE. Now, many of you guys have probably never heard of CDE because it has not been in development for 20 years or better. Right. This was a common desktop environment on Unix like operating systems back in the 90s. And because of the fact that it has not been in development for a long, long time, I still get people asking me to take a look at it. I've never taken a look at it on camera. I'm going to put it in the category. And the reason I'm going to put it in the category is nobody really should be running this thing. It hasn't been developed in many, many, many years now. It is very 90s looking, which, you know, is not a problem. It was built in the 90s, right? So it's a very retro kind of desktop environment. But in the 90s, actually, it was actually very modern looking. I think the CDE, the desktop environment, the common desktop environment on these Unix like operating systems in many ways was more advanced than what was going on in windows. What was going on on the max? But the problem with CDE again, it hasn't been under development. There are security holes in it now at this point. And at least on Linux, like when you go to the ArchWiki and read about the common desktop environment, they actually warn you, please don't install this thing. It's full of security holes. Nobody should be running this. And that is the reason I've never actually showcased it on camera, even though people have asked me, hey, wouldn't it be cool to go take a look at the old school CDE desktop environment? I don't want people running this thing if it's full of security holes. I would feel responsible for that if I showed it off on camera and get people interested in it. And then I'm going to have people going and trying it out. And just again, for me doing the responsible thing, I'm going to put it in the category and I'm going to warn you guys you probably shouldn't be running CDE. Next up is the Cinnamon desktop environment, which was created by the Linux Mint team in response to the creation of Genome 3. So it's very similar with, you know, Budgie being created by Solis in response to Genome 3. Cinnamon, right? And the Cinnamon I'm going to put in the OK tier. Now, Cinnamon's got a lot of positives for it. For one thing, it's very traditional looking. It looks essentially like your traditional Windows 7 kind of desktop environment with the bottom panel on the start menu. If you're a Windows user, you're going to be really comfortable with Cinnamon, I will say, though, or a modern desktop environment. Even when it was created about 10, 12 years ago, you know, it still looked it had a dated kind of look. It still looked like a older desktop environment than what it was. It still, to me, it's not the most attractive desktop environment. It does have plenty of customization options, plenty of theming options. So that is a positive. Honestly, for me, the only reason it goes in the OK category instead of something higher is because it's a GTK based desktop. There's several here on the list. And I just don't think Cinnamon really does anything to to outshine some of the other desktop environments. We're going to take a look at today. So that's why I'm only going to put Cinnamon in the OK tier. Next up is the Deepen desktop environment, DDE. And people may throw shade at me. I'm going to get eight comments here on this video. But you know what? The Deepen desktop environment is really, really good. This may be the most gorgeous, most attractive desktop environment available anywhere on any operating system today. And I'm not even kidding. The Deepen desktop environment looks gorgeous. And it's it's so nice because of the customization options because you can quickly choose between different layouts for your deepen desktop environment, whether you want it more kind of like a windows kind of look or a Mac kind of look. It's got some really neat transparency and blurring effects. Now, some of those blurring effects, they do come with a cost because you're going to use a little more CPU to have some of the fancy animations and blurring and everything with the deepen desktop environment. But when we talk about something that's just aesthetically pleasing, something that you just look at and go, my God, I want that desktop deepen more than any other desktop on this list. Is that desktop environment? Next up is GNOME. And if we're doing the tier list and I'm breaking it down on these desktop environments, by the way, in their current states, what version they're currently on, I've got to be honest. GNOME, it's currently on version 43 and it's good. Right, GNOME is so good. Now, if we would have done this a year ago and we were still on some of the later versions of GNOME 3, honestly, GNOME would have been probably OK or even meh. If we had done this in the early days of GNOME 3, it definitely would have been yuck. But right now I'm just going to be honest. Is GNOME a good desktop environment? Absolutely. GNOME is fresh. It's modern looking. It doesn't have a ton of customization options. That's the only reason I'm going to knock it. Also, some of the apps it ships with the GNOME suite of software. Some of those programs are not my favorite. So I have to dock it a little bit, but just a little bit. I still think GNOME in its current state, the GNOME 40 series is really a good desktop environment. Next up is KDE and we're talking about the latest versions of KDE Plasma and we're talking about the five series, right? And KDE is definitely in the great tier. It basically everything I could say about GNOME, KDE is the same. But KDE does have much more customization options. It's much more flexible, especially for somebody like me. And again, this is my list, my subjective list. I like to tinker. I like to hack on things. I like to be able to customize my desktop environments and window managers, sometimes to extreme levels. KDE Plasma allows that where GNOME does not. I also like some of the KDE applications that ship with, you know, the KDE suite of applications a little better than the GNOME suite of applications. I will say both KDE and GNOME, one of the things that makes them good and great is both of those desktop environments are good as far as accessibility. So people with especially visual disabilities, GNOME and KDE are really the only two desktop environments that do a good job in that department. So if you're one of those people with accessibility needs, I would definitely take a look at GNOME and KDE for those needs. Next up is LXDE. And we might as well talk about LXDE and LXQT, LXQT at the same time because they're very, very similar. One of them is a GTK based desktop. And one of them, obviously, is a QT based desktop. LXDE is the older project. It has been around since the beginning of time. And it was a very popular desktop environment on our Linux distributions. But I would say about five years ago, it kind of died. It doesn't really see any development. And everyone that was using LXDE as far as Linux distributions, for example, Lou Buntu was the LXDE spin of a Buntu. They have long since moved from LXDE to LXQT. And because LXDE really doesn't see much development, I'm going to put it in the mech category. It's got to be docked, the fact that it's really not saying much work done on it. And also, it's not the most customizable desktop environment, even when it was being work time. You know, I would say the people that loved LXDE were the people that kind of had to use it because LXDE was a very lightweight desktop environment that used the open box window manager. And I love open box, but I like open box, the window manager. I really didn't like the other components to the desktop environment. The panel is OK. The menu system was OK, but it had kind of like a Windows 98 kind of look and feel to it that honestly, again, it's not forward looking at all. It was more looking back toward the past. And that's why LXDE is going in the mech category. Now, LXQT, I'm also going to put in the mech category for different reasons, though. LXQT, believe it or not, I am a fan of it. I actually like it and I enjoy every time I take a look at the latest releases of LXQT, but it's still kind of a new desktop environment. It's not as fleshed out as really any of the other desktop environments I'm going to talk about today. And because of that, it gets docked a little bit. I think eventually LXQT is probably going to get to the point where it would be in my OK or even good tier. But right now, as far as the development of it, I would say it's just lacking in a lot of areas, much like I didn't care for the panel and menu system in LXDE, same thing with LXQT. I also don't like some of the applications that typically ship with LXQT distributions. One thing I do like about LXQT is the fact that it is not tied to one particular window manager. It can use OpenBox like LXDE did. And most LXQT users probably do use OpenBox with it because it's lightweight. But if you wanted to, you could switch out OpenBox for any other window manager you like. I know a lot of LXQT users switch out OpenBox and use KDE Plasma's K-Win window manager inside LXQT because K-Win these days is not that heavy. So you still get a kind of a light, fast, cute based desktop environment using K-Win as your window manager. But you get the LXQT stuff, you know, the other parts of the desktop environment around it. So that is a nice option. Next up is the Lumina desktop environment. If you're strictly a Linux user and you typically don't wander off and look at any of the BSD operating systems, you probably never heard of Lumina because it's very rare. You see a Linux user using this thing, but it is available on Linux. I know I can install it on Arch Linux if I wanted to. But Lumina, the reason you don't see it much on Linux is because it's horrible. This may be the worst desktop environment I have ever used in my life. Every time I take a look at a BSD operating system, some of them actually use Lumina out of the box. And it's horrible. Now, why are these BSD operating systems using such a horrible desktop environment? Because it lacks any features. It looks ugly. It looks horrendous. It's got a bad looking panel and menu system with bad looking fonts. It looks looks like it was made 25 years ago. But it looks like it was made badly 25 years ago, you know, where CDE looks like it was made 25 years ago. But in a good way, like it really stood out 25 years ago. Lumina wouldn't have been popular 25 years ago. It looks that bad. It lacks any features at all. It's really stripped down kind of minimal desktop environment. The BSD distributions or BSD operating systems that ship Lumina, they typically do that for one reason and one reason only. Lumina is licensed under a BSD license where most of these other Linux system environments are licensed under things like the GPL. BSD operating systems typically fear the GPL or they have ideological philosophical opposition to the GPL. They don't want GPL software out of the box on their BSD operating system. So Lumina license under the BSD license will just ship Lumina by default. But really, Lumina is garbage. I really and I don't want to say that because it's an open source project. I know people probably work on it. People put in a lot of work, but it really is bad. It's not something I recommend anybody taking a look at as far as you're not going to like it. I'm just going to straight out say that 100 of you guys can go install this thing. I promise every single one of that 100 of you guys that would try this out would hate it. So I'm just saving you the heartache and the pain. Don't worry about Lumina. Next up is Matei and Matei, a GTK based desktop environment that was, again, built in response to GNOME 3, basically. Again, we've got so many of these that were essentially created because GNOME 2 died and GNOME 3 was horrible. Matei was one of those. Matei really, I can say a lot about Cinnamon and Matei is very similar as far as they're more, they have a dated look. Now, Matei has a dated look because it was actually trying to be a straight up fork of GNOME 2. So it still looks like GNOME 2 back when GNOME 2 died, you know, 10, 12 years ago, and that's why it looks dated. We're Cinnamon, but yeah, I find it looking dated a little weird because it's not trying to be dated. It just happens to look that way. Matei has that traditional GNOME 2 look with the top and bottom panels at the same time, although they have layout tools where you can switch it to a more traditional Windows look or a Mac OS look or even an old school Ubuntu Unity look. So Matei really does have good customization options, plenty of customization options, but really just because it looks kind of old and dated. It doesn't look as polished. It doesn't look as well put together as any of the desktop environments that I'm going to rank above it. Again, I'm creating a tier list, so, you know, I've got to split some hairs here. So that's why I'm going to dock Matei on those points there. Next up is the Pantheon desktop environment, which of course is the creation of elementary OS Pantheon. You know, I'm going to put Pantheon in the good category because I do think it is very aesthetically pleasing. I think it's polished, well put together, maybe more so than Cinnamon and Matei, for example, even though I think Cinnamon and Matei probably do have more customization options. You can do a little bit more with those desktop environments than Pantheon. Again, I do want to award points for things that are a little bit more forward looking rather than backwards looking. And if we're factoring in some of the programs that ship with these desktop environments, the default suite of applications, for example, on elementary OS with the Pantheon desktop environment, most of those custom applications I find rather good, the text editor and, you know, all of those applications, calendars and everything, I find those applications are actually well built, well put together. I find them on par with something like many of the GNOME suite of applications. I find them a little inferior to things that I find in KDE's suite of applications, but again, I'm putting it in the good category, not the great category. So I think that's an appropriate spot for Pantheon. Next up is the Trinity desktop environment. Sometimes abbreviated TDE, but I just called it Trinity here. Trinity, I'm going to put it in the OK category. I thought about putting it in the MEG category, but Trinity is really a great desktop environment. What this is, this is a fork of KDE 3.5. Now it is backwards looking because of that. I almost wanted to put it here, but it is because it's a fork of KDE 3.5, which is a very good version of KDE from many years ago, like 15 years ago. Plenty of customization options, looks good, still is attractive to this day because KDE even 15 years ago was more forward thinking kind of desktop environment. So Trinity, if you're a Windows 7 user, you like that traditional Windows 7 paradigm. You're going to love Trinity because not only does it follow that same kind of paradigm with the bottom panel and the start menu and everything, it actually almost looks a little bit like the Windows desktop environment because Trinity is a fork of KDE. You can use the KDE suite of applications in Trinity. They're all cube based applications. So that's nice. Trinity, when it was forked, it was so much lighter than what became KDE 4 with the 4 series. So a lot of people use Trinity rather than the newer versions of KDE back in the KDE 4 days is because KDE 4 was slow, heavy, kind of bloated. But KDE 5 Plasma has really slimmed down as far as system resource usage to where the difference between just modern KDE Plasma and Trinity as far as system resource usage is it's not as a bigger difference as it used to be. So because of that, really the need for Trinity to exist, I don't think is as great as what it was when it was originally forked because of that. I'm going to only put Trinity in the OK category. And last, I've got XFCE. So XFCE, I think, deserves to be in the good category. Now I'm going to dock it a little bit because XFCE doesn't see a lot of development. It sees development, but they're not really like adding new features or doing anything fancy with XFCE. It has a older kind of dated look to it. But I will say it does have a ton of customization options and you can kind of make XFCE look and feel like you want if you want it to look more like a Windows kind of look. You can make that happen. You can make it kind of look like Mac OS. If that's more your thing, I will say XFCE. It's not as forward looking as far as like GTK development, you know, with the move from GTK 2 to GTK 3. Now to GTK 4, for example, you're not getting any of that support just yet in XFCE. And by the time they have support for GTK 4, GTK probably be on GTK 5. So it's always lagging in that department. It's lagging way behind things like GNOME and even things like Budgie, for example. I also have to dock XFCE a little bit for its suite of applications. I don't really like its plain text editor mousepad. The terminal is just another terminal emulator. There's nothing special about it. Really, I don't like any of the default XFCE applications. I'm always going to switch them out to other things. You know what? The more I talk about XFCE, it probably should be in the OK category. So that is the ranking of the 13 desktop environments. I originally planned to do in this tier list, but I realized I missed one because honestly, if we're going in alphabetical order, there is a you desktop environment, the Unity desktop environment. How did I miss that? Well, the reason I missed it is because I originally didn't even think about Unity because Unity, I got it in my head that Unity is a long dead desktop environment. But really, in the last year, Unity has seen some development. There is now an Ubuntu Unity edition. The Unity desktop environment now is also available on arch based distributions as well. You can install Unity on things like a Manjaro, for example. So because of that and because I have actually taken a look at the recent releases of a Ubuntu Unity, especially, I am going to rank the Unity desktop. And you know what? And since I moved XFC down, I'm going to put Unity in the good category because honestly, I think it belongs there. Even though it still looks the same as when it was created 10 years ago, the Unity desktop environment still looks very fresh, very modern. I love the layout. I love how ergonomic it is as far as how it minimizes mouse travel as far as where everything is on the screen. Everything tends to happen on the left hand side of the screen. Typically, the left hand side of the screen and up. You typically your mouse is just in this area of the screen. It never has to travel. And that is nice, especially for you point and click users. If your hands always on the mouse, you're going to love Unity. Unity does have some customization options and you can you can theme it a little bit. It's not crazy with customization options like KDE Plasma, for example. But it's got enough customization to that that I find it rather appealing. Unity, actually, back whenever it was the default desktop environment on Ubuntu was actually one of the desktop environments I would have considered using if I wasn't a tiling window manager user. Unity on laptops, especially, I found rather nice. It really fits on those small form factor laptops, especially. So there you have it, my ranking, my tier list of 14 desktop environments that are available on Linux. Of course, I know a lot of people are going to disagree with everything I just ranked here. So if you have disagreements, fine, let me know in the comments down below. Let me know what you think are the best desktop environments available on Linux. And if you want to, let me know what you think are the worst desktop environments available on Linux. All right, guys, before I go, I need to thank a few special people. I need to thank the producers of the show. Gabe James, Matt Maxim, Mimit Mitchell, Paul West, while you bought on me, Alex, Harmer Dragon, Chuck, Commander, Rangory, Diokai, George Lee, Marsdrom, Nadar, Yon, Alexander, Paul, Peace, Orchard, Vador, Polytech, Realitease4Less, Red Prophet, Roland, Steven, Tools, Devler, and Willie. These guys, they're my has tiered patrons over on Patreon. Without these guys, this tiered list of desktop environments would not have been possible. The show is also brought to you by each and every one of these fine ladies and gentlemen. All these names you're seeing on the screen. These are all my supporters over on Patreon because I don't have any corporate sponsors. I'm sponsored by you guys, the community. If you like my work and want to see more videos about Linux and free and open source, subscribe to DistroTube over on Patreon. Peace. TrueOS might still be around had it not shipped Illumina out of the box.