The best desktop environments for business

Desk logos

In some articles we have described lists of the best GNU / Linux distributions for certain niches or for certain professions, what were the best distros for a company or for a certain task. But now we are going to go directly to the desktop environments that we have at our disposal in the GNU / Linux operating system and among which we can choose. Well, desktop environments have always been treated from the point of view of usability, graphics, configuration, etc., but ...

¿Which desktop environment would be friendlier for your company? Well, in this article we are going to try to describe some of the best desktop environments for companies by giving a brief description of what each one can contribute, whether for a medium, small or large company. And it is that in a company the values ​​by which we are guided in a domestic environment, such as simplicity or visual appearance, may not be the most appropriate in an area where efficiency and productivity are the order of the day.

  • KDE Plasma: for me it is one of my favorites because of the power and configuration capacity it has, although I am not free from having some drawbacks like everyone else. It may seem a bit heavy, but if your company's equipment has good hardware with sufficient resources, its configuration options could tailor the environment to your needs in a much more intimate way, which will save time in the long run, increasing productivity.
  • MATE: It may be a better option than GNOME, since it has the simplicity that GNOME 2 liked so much with modern functionalities that can be reclaimed from a modern desktop environment. It also features a lightweight, reliable environment that can work well on under-resourced computers. And if its features are not enough, you can always extend them thanks to its applets. And if what you are looking for is greater ease in terms of configuration without editing config files, the graphical control tools allow a lot of customization margin ...
  • XFCE: We already know that it is a very light environment, so it will work even on older computers or without so many resources, but a light desktop is not only important for that, but it will also leave more resources available for truly important actions, like the software that you are running in your company, making it go more fluid and does not take away as many resources. But it has a problem, and it is the difference of its applets and ways of presenting graphic elements with respect to other environments, so that an adaptation of employees to it if they are not used to it could be counterproductive.
  • Cinnamon: If you have an Ubuntu distribution or based on it, this can be a good desktop environment, since it was created specifically on Linux Mint, and although it works on all kinds of distros, the adaptation is not so perfect. A beautiful interface, super fast, and a traditional menu are its main attractions. Users coming from KDE can adapt well to it, although it is certainly not as configurable as KDE Plasma.
  • GNOME: I honestly liked Unity better, although if functionalities or aspects of it are integrated into the GNOME shell, we may have something better. It is honestly not the environment that I like the most, and I dislike its appearance in certain ways. But it must be recognized that it is powerful and provides a very good integration experience. On the other hand, like Plasma, you will find a large number of quite useful apps integrated into it.

But this is only an opinion, as I always say, the best product is always the one you like the most, the one you know best how to handle or the one that best suits your needs. Some people need a toolbox to do good things and others with a simple tool do wonders ... Do not forget to leave your comments or opinions.

The content of the article adheres to our principles of editorial ethics. To report an error click here!.

22 comments, leave yours

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.



  1. Responsible for the data: AB Internet Networks 2008 SL
  2. Purpose of the data: Control SPAM, comment management.
  3. Legitimation: Your consent
  4. Communication of the data: The data will not be communicated to third parties except by legal obligation.
  5. Data storage: Database hosted by Occentus Networks (EU)
  6. Rights: At any time you can limit, recover and delete your information.

  1.   Leo said

    I quote:
    «KDE Plasma: ... It may seem a bit heavy, but ...»

    I differ:
    I've been using KDE Neon (Ubuntu + Plasma) for a long time and on my modest computer (i3 + 4GB), after the login process, it consumes 460Mb of memory.
    Compared to the rest:
    XFCE = 520Mb
    MATE = 840Mb - 960Mb
    Gnome = 1,8Gb
    Cinnamon never tried.

    In many places I read similar comments about the KDE Plasma environment consuming too many resources, and I must say that this is not true.
    It depends on the distribution, the services activated by default and the applications installed on the system.
    I invite you to try and draw your own conclusions. KDE Plasma has a bad reputation that it doesn't deserve.
    I hope the comment will help you. Greetings.

    1.    Fran said

      Leo, you should give Manjaro a chance!

      1.    Original and Free Malagueños said

        I do not agree at all, I have Mate running on two computers with 2Gb of RAM and it performs very well, one of the best in that regard.
        And one of the teams is from 2002.

      2.    Leo said

        I did it. I loved. But Arch + KDE was better on my team. Manjaro adds many improvements and integration, which leads to a slightly higher resource consumption.

    2.    Fernando said

      I differ in the performance of Xfce, I use Mint Rosa with Xfce environment and when the system starts the Conky marks 270 Mb. The consumption you mention for Xfce is more similar to that of Unity, since when Ubuntu 16.04 starts the Conky marks 560 Mb. No I know where you got these values ​​from.

      1.    Leo said

        Install Xubuntu 16.04 32-bit with pae and yes, its consumption does not exceed 270Mb.
        Probe Xubuntu 16.04 64-bit and the consumption was from 520Mb to 830Mb in some cases.

    3.    Javier said

      On my 1gb ram matte Acer netbook it works fine and is very light, however I installed Kubuntu first and it was sooo slow. Then Ubuntu install KDE and in the same way very slow ... honestly for my KDE compared to Mate is the opposite of what you say ...

    4.    Ghost said

      Yes, it consumes little ram, but the amount of processes that it executes for something as simple as for example, opening dolphin, are ridiculously high compared to true light environments like XFCE or MATE. Just do the test and install dolphin in XFCE, run it and see the difference in execution speed (not to mention if we compare it with thunar or box). Plasma has improved its resource consumption a lot but it is still quite heavy for more limited processors, getting to suffocate the CPU as soon as the desktop starts. On the other hand, RAM consumption has to do mainly with background processes, and if you deactivate all the unnecessary ones you will realize that XFCE consumes around 250mb, only surpassed by LXDE that consumes around 180-200mb. By the way, i3-4GB is a modest team ?? that's a team with good features, friend, if we speak in general terms, all desktop environments will do well for you with those features. I have a Pentium Dual Core 2.4Ghz + 2GB of RAM and XFCE, MATE and LXDE fly, on the other hand Plasma and GNOME with their derivatives (Unity, Cinammon, etc) go like a turtle. You simply need a device with low performance so that you realize how heavy Plasma is and why it cannot yet be considered a light environment like XFCE or MATE. In an i3 + 4GB you will not notice the difference.

      1.    Leo said

        Friend, I did not say that Plasma is a lightweight desktop environment. I just said that my Plasma team consumes fewer resources than other environments.

        I did the test you asked for with dolphin: I opened a window and it consumes approx. 40Mb in 6 processes. In my view this is not a ridiculously high amount.

        I don't know why someone would install dolphin in xfce. Whoever does it, would have to know that dolphin depends on many KDE libraries and services, therefore the consumption of resources to run this application would be high compared to another, such as Thunar, which does not depend on these KDE libraries and services. It is not very difficult to understand. Try.

        1.    aoikanade said

          As it is!!

  2.   Rafa said

    Both at home and at work I use Linux Mint Cinnamon. At home 18.3 and at work 17.3. Both are perfect and give me zero headaches :-)

  3.   Rolo said

    As kde users like to fool themselves, hahaha. This desktop by default consumes as much or more than gnome, and for it to consume 500 of RAM they have to deactivate half of the functions, that is to say a kde capped.
    They put gnome as the last desktop to choose, when in reality it is the most chosen desktop.
    Kde is super configurable, it is great, but it requires a great knowledge of the desktop to be able to configure it, that is, it requires an advanced user. Gnome with a theme and 2 or three extensions is already configured and beautiful which does not require an advanced user.
    A good desktop to work with is one in which the user only has to specialize in the programs they work with and not on the desktop.
    and that is why gnome (and its derivatives) is the best option since it has the best balance between usability (simplicity) and consumption (actually an entrepreneur compares it to windows 10)

    1.    Leo said

      I am not self-deceived and am a user of several desktop environments, not just KDE.
      Here I give you a link so you can see 3 screenshots of the consumption of my system:

      It is not a KDE capped. It would be something like a minimal KDE, and in any case, optimal. And if, in your opinion, by doing a few clicks to configure the desktop one becomes an «advanced user» ... WOW! Well, I just found out that I am an advanced user! To celebrate!

      Excuse the sarcasm. Greetings.

    2.    Pauet said

      Buddy Rolo you should take the trouble to check things out before talking about it and before trying to liar anyone.

  4.   Pauet said

    I can corroborate what Leo says. My laptop is a Core ™ 2 Duo Processor P8600 2.40 GHz with 4GB of ram.

    I use kubuntu 16.04 with Plasma 5.5, I have tried KDE Neon and Mint KDE with Plasma 5.8, and now I write from Kubuntu 17.10 with Plasma 5.10. In all cases, the configuration is complete as it comes, plus the preload package installed, and with Dropbox installed.

    In these conditions, the consumption of Kubuntu 16.04 with Plasma 5.5 reaches 790 Mb at startup and Kubuntu 17.10 with Plasma 5.10 drops to 550 Mb at startup, Neon and Mint do not have them installed now but they were also over 500 Mb at the beginning. start.

    In all cases the desktop moves with ease, but in this aspect I have not had a problem with any other desktop that I have tried.


    1.    Javier said

      But here the thing is that Leo says that KDE is even lighter than XFCE or Mate which for someone like me than if you have a computer with very modest resources (Acer Aspire One Netbook of 1Gb in ram and an Intel Atom processor of 1.6 Ghz) KDE was a bad experience where the performance was soooooooo slow, but with XFCE or Mate (which I use now) the equipment is really fast and light. In other words, KDE is fast. I believe it on a 4 Gb ram computer (which I have with Linux Mint Cinamon) but with a computer with the resources of my netbook it is very heavy, a computer in slow motion ...

      1.    Pauet said

        Okay, but Leo and I already made it clear from the beginning which is our team on which we make the comparisons. Anyway I think there must be other variables because that is not my experience. Are we comparing 64 versions?

      2.    Leo said

        Javier, I didn't say that KDE is lighter than other environments. I said that on my computer it is the environment that consumes the least resources.
        There is a link with images that prove it. I did not invent anything.

  5.   Leo said

    Hey, to end the controversy, I only told my experience in the team that I am currently working on, and after testing many distributions, I chose the one that consumed the least resources in this one.
    Without the need to lie, exaggerate, or whatever comes to mind, the intention was to provide an interesting piece of information and at the same time end the myth "Plasma eats resources": It is not my case, and that is my contribution to you.

    I agree that in other teams with lower performance, Plasma, it may not perform well, but that is another issue, and I appreciate the comments.


  6.   Nazario said

    Well, now we are going to talk about the subject exposed in the article. We have already strutted about how good our KDE, GNOME, XFCE looks… about the equipment we have at the head of the bed now we are going to talk about the article topic. As we understand that company teams are not there to give them a playful use, what comes first is performance. So let's get out of bagpipes, programs included in the desktop environment that nobody uses, and stationery that only serves to waste time and waste valuable resources. We install a WM like Openbox with what is strictly necessary and ... let's get to work!

  7.   Puigdemont 64bit said

    You are a drama

  8.   Juan said

    XFCE at least in Opensuse goes to the movies, great and = that lxde, I don't know why, I don't know if my graphics card processor or that, since they went from version 4 to 5, I am very unstable, I don't like gnome and cinamon neither, it looks a lot like gnome