I wrote, in the story that this comment thread results from, that Xfce is the oldest Linux desktop. I stand by that, but I welcome correction if someone has evidence: citations.

Compare:

"The VW Beetle is the best selling car of all time." "No, the Honda Cub sold twice as many!" "Maybe so, but irrelevant. The VW Beetle is a car. The Honda Cub is a motorcycle." "But the Cub sold 100 million! The Beetle only sold 50M!"

This may be true, but it is comparing different things. Yes, the Cub outsold the Beetle. But I am talking about cars. I'm not talking about motorcycles. I am sure you are right: the Cub sold more, but it's not a car, so it is irrelevant.

"You are being unfair! The VW came first!"

I am sure it did. But the VW Beetle is a car. I said, best selling car. Not motorcycle.

Xfce is not a window manager. These is an Xfce WM. It is part of the product. But it is not just a WM. It is a desktop.

Desktops came later than WMs. WMs are an older tech. But a desktop is not a WM, and a WM is not a desktop.

There absolutely are older desktops, but they are not Linux desktops. They originated on other OSes and were subsequently ported to Linux.

There absolutely were older desktops that were proprietary, the companies behind them are defunct, and they are gone now. That means they are not older, because they are dead.

I am older than Christopgher Marlowe. He was born long long before me, but he died at 29. I am 55. Yes I was born later but I'm alive, and he is dead.

There absolutely are older WMs, but WMs are not desktops.

I do not really understand why you and @jeroen79 want to argue about this.

I am not talking about all desktops on all OSes. I am not talking about WMs. If I were, these arguments would be valid.

Is there a currently-maintained Linux-native desktop environment older than Xfce?

Not a bare WM. Not something long dead. Not something from another OS.

If yes, I am happy to admit I was wrong.

If not, I stand by it.