Did give it a go a few months ago, but was a bit congitively heavy with lots of menus and reading.
If you like clicking I think it's pretty nice with everything in reach + more.
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
51 points (91.8% liked)
Linux
7932 readers
415 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system
Also check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 14 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Hate to say it but no, hyprland really is unless you need a windows like experience/don't want to configure anything.
A love Hyprland, but KDE Plasma does so many things for you and saves time. If you want to change screen resolution in Hyprland, you need to check the wiki or man. In Plasma, you simply use the settings app. Each environment has its own purpose, and Plasma’s is for general purpose use.
"Unless you don't want to configure anything"
KDE Plasma has proven to be one of the most customizable desktop environments available. Theming is easily achievable with the versatility of QT, (which is technically on Hyprland but more versatile in a full QT desktop), as well as the versatility of panels that can be moved and modified to whatever you wish for them to be. External plugins or programs like Latte dock, or the Plutonium tile manager further expand on Plasma’s capabilities. Hyprland is also customizable, but almost only through external sources, making Plasma much more accessible and seamless. Of course there are reasons behind this, but each to their own. Feel free to state your own opinions communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz, but since this is an IMO post (basically opinion of the OP), I think we’d all appreciate it if you were more civilized and detailed as to why you felt the need to shoot down the OP. Also, maybe research your claims before commenting.
It is very customizable, that does not counter my claim and I never claimed it wasn't, but if you're going to get deep into customization a basic wm or compositor will usually be better, simply because they are modular and hyprland is absurdly feature rich.
i don't know why you're saying I didn't research this, or I was uncivilized, I just gave my counter opinion. You are clearly misunderstanding me or reading into things I did not say.
Remember about cognitive effort, window managers are for people looking to invest time in learning keybinds and new workflows, Plasma and Gnome do a better job of satisfying a bigger userbase and most workflows are easy to port to another desktop environment.
In my opinion that makes Plasma and Gnome the best desktop environments, no matter how much I prefer standalone window managers.
That's why I said "if you don't want to configure anything"
Well yes, but my point is that one can intuitively can use regular DE's and be productive, the same is not true for window managers. Regardles if one configures or not.
The beauty of linux is there is options!
Different people prefer different things and you can freely choose between all the things!
[–]
communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)
(1 children)
Of course, I recommend kde to people who don't want to configure anything and want a windows like experience, but when saying something is the best, as they claim, these qualifiers become important.
best for what?
He means the best in desktop experience when it comes to desktops with the best adoptability.
Hyprland is a compositor, not a desktop environment.