GIMP is a bit notorious for being a bit weird to use with odd defaults, though. Krita is worth checking out as an alternative. It's very powerful, and even has animation features.

I still use GIMP more just because I'm used to it and its oddities already.

Mr. Rokytnji, thank you.

"Easy to me usually depends on user effort.
Not the make of the product being used."

I visited a friend a few months ago. He had Mint Xfce installed on his machine. I did not ask any question, simple started using the computer for emailing and watching YouTube. I noticed both Firefox and Google Chrome were installed on that machine, and many icons on the screen just like Windows. Is there an Ubuntu version be so ease to use as my experience?

Mr. Frankbell, thank you.

"...recommend Ubuntu MATE for persons new to Linux."

The reasons for such a recommendation?

The choice is yours. My recommendation to test KDE Plasma is so you can see what an advanced user interface looks like and can do, even if you do chose MATE or Cinnamon. The main point behind my recommendation is that it would broaden your horizons to know a more complete set of options. If you look on Odysee or, even worse, YouTube, you can find Brodie Robertson's very recent comments on KDE under the vlog segment titled, "Why Isn't Every Linux Distro Shipping KDE?" where he gives a quick overview of KDE.

However, that aside, reasons to use KDE are that according to usability evaluations it passed Windows in general in ease of use some 20+ years ago. KDE is certainly more flexible and capable, and it has a lot of very useful tools. Krita was mentioned already. Calligra is another. Be that as it may, you can always mix and match and take the best from each a la carte.

As for the VM you probably can run the legacy system in Qemu or VirtualBox with a Linux host. You might even be able to point the VM at the legacy system's partition on the hard drive. That would allow you to keep the legacy system dormant yet still be able to call it up without disturbing your main system.

In its default configuration, I'd say yes it is. I've not used XFCE much, but I think that KDE is much closer to Windows.

Hey, I must defend both KDE and XFCE after such disparagement. I have found the defaults for all the desktop environments including XFCE and KDE exceptionally annoying but, aside from GNOME, they are super easy to fix and change to a much more sensible layout and functionality. Over time, on a 16:9 display, I've really settled in with XFCE and have one very thin panel at the top and a thicker left-side dock containing a tray of icons, most nested, many of which launch custom scripts ranging from simple to complicated. Oh, and there are eight virtual desktops to keep projects separate but when I can I scale back to six.

KDE Plasma can also be tuned¹ to much improved over its default. The defaults for most (all?) the desktops probably (I dunno, I don't use Windows²) imitate the UI mistakes of Windows to help with familiarity for new adopters. However, once one is working with a DE, it is easy in all the non-GNOME UIs to move things around for greater efficiency of movement and add custom actions and icons, panels, and trays/docks.

Yet another option would be to just run a Window Manager and forget about a full Desktop Environment, since in many cases it is not needed, especially if you like a simple, distraction-free work space.


¹ There's one must-have Widget in XFCE which wasn't in KDE Plasma when I last checked, though overall KDE seems more customizable.

² The last Windows exposure was when I had a game machine with NT on it but got fed up with maintenance and asked myself back in late 2001 why it could not be easy to maintain like the systems at work. Then the light bulb went on and the next day I brought an installation CD home from work containing a popular GNU/Linux distro and set about wiping the HD. Never looked back.

I've settled on (K)Ubuntu. Coming from Windows it will be a bit more intuitive than Gnome (Ubuntu). Also you can switch the menu to 'classic' which I prefer.

Mint (Cinnamon) also good when coming from M$ Windows.

Take your pick. I've tried most the DEs over the years. At the point KDE works best for me.

2 members found this post helpful.

The thing I really love with XFCE4 is that I can have a Windows 9x style taskbar, but rotated 90 degrees on the left (or right) edge. This works really well with widescreen displays, and the rotated text lets me see what window button I want to click on. Sideways text on the clock is also nice.

Why don't other Desktop Environments or even Windows 11 or MacOS do rotated text on vertical taskbars? It's great!

This discussion makes me curious about KDE, though. I used KDE2-3, but KDE4 got off to a rocky start and that's when I switched away (to GNOME2 and then XFCE4). I just don't understand what is supposed to be so cool about KDE.

What's something cool that I can do in KDE that I can't in XFCE4? I dunno. I'm missing out on something obvious, maybe.

But then ... maybe there isn't anything for me. I was pretty satisfied with the UI in Windows 98, and that's still pretty much how I use XFCE4 (with the additions of Workspaces and rotated taskbar). I guess I'm just not looking for anything particularly fancy?

My road was same as I was a KDE fan 2-3... Then they broke KDE with 4 and I moved on to XFCE, LXDE, and then Cinnamon Mint for quite awhile, back to LXDE and probably the last 5 years back on KDE as it has matured nicely. BTW it supports workspaces too. I usually have four of them. Just does what I want it to do. Gnome just never fit my work flow or way of thinking.

probably relevant:
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

1 members found this post helpful.

Mr. Frankbell.

Thank you.
"Then you need to meet the GIMP." Gimp is the main difficulty blocking me from learning Ubuntu.

Mr. Isaackou, thank you.

"GIMP is a bit notorious for being a bit...." When I tried to learn Ubuntu in 2007 or 2008, Gimp was the difficulty pushed me our off Ubuntu group.

Thank you, Mr. Turbocapitalist.

Appreciate your recommendation and KDE Plasma does sound great. I shall stay with something simple and suitable for me. I am just a very very common PC user, and my mean basic need of a computer is to editing my photographs and visiting websites and sharing my photos with people of the same interest. Software greater than what I need is a burden to me. So, I'll with something of Ubuntu or Mint. Again, thank you very, very much.

Than you, Mr. TB0ne.

"In its default configuration, I'd say yes it is. I've not used XFCE much, but I think that KDE is much closer to Windows."

Mr. Turbocapitalist recommended KDE Plasma and introduced many great features of KDE Plasma. I just replied to him that I wont try KDE Plasma because it is too great for me and that becomes a burden to me.

Now you are saying KDE is much closer to Windows. This interests me to lean it. BUT, still, I have a question: It looks like Windows, does not mean that it is as easy to operate as Windows. I do not know, but its my question. Take Windows for example, there is Home and there is Ultimate. I have never used Ultimate. From the beginning of using Windows, I always use Windows Home. The only reason is Home is enough for all of my needs of a computer.

I'll try KDE Plasma if its desktop like Windows and if it is easy to use as Windows.

Thank you, Mr. Rclark.

"I've tried most the DEs over the years. At the point KDE works best for me."
Will you please explain a little bit more WHY it works the best for you? Because it is easy to use? Or, because it has many great features and provides many great options?