What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
135 Comments
- cptchaos, on 10/12/2007, -18/+49"One of the most common questions people new to Linux ask is "Should I use KDE or Gnome?" Unfortunately, the answers are usually useless--anything from "Just try each one to see what works for you"
I honestly fail to see why this answer should be useless?! Of course the easiest approach to decide what Desktop-Environment fits your taste is to just try both and then decide. Its not as if its a big problem to install and run them both on any Linux-Distro. You just install them (some distros like suse even have them both preinstalled) and then choose one at login... certainly easier than reading through dozens of articles and flamewars and be none the wiser afterwards!
By the way: GNOME IS BETTER ;-) - XVampireX, on 10/12/2007, -6/+33I vote for both, they are both good.
- subgeniusd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26KDE works just fine for me and has never "frozen" in the 14 months I've been using Linux. Gnome looks cool but as long as KDE covers my personal needs I see no reason to change.
BTW (an off-topic note)---this is precisely the sort of Linux debate that causes so many Winusers' eyes to glaze over and stick with what they know. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18"
BTW (an off-topic note)---this is precisely the sort of Linux debate that causes so many Winusers' eyes to glaze over and stick with what they know."
Yeah, I'm sure it is..Hey,sometimes this sort of topic makes *my* eyes glaze over as well. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20 I've always used KDE, so it's what I'm used to. I'm sure if I'd started out with Gnome,I'd be feeling the same way about it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15"this is precisely the sort of Linux debate that causes so many Winusers' eyes to glaze over and stick with what they know."
I'm a Windows user who has knowledge of Unix and has previously installed and used Linux for some time, and I can tell you this: Linux users LOVE sweeping issues under the carpet and then whistling that it's either not a real problem, or that it's not difficult to overcome it. They work overtime like this on issues that Windows users in particular would find quite important to them.
So, let me just tell you that it's REFRESHING to see an article about Linux that both targets newbies and discusses draw-backs and problems with any aspect of the "Linux experience". When I read that, to install KDE themes, the author had to edit numerous configuration text files, my eyes didn't glaze over. Instead, I nodded to myself and thought, "At least he's not pretending like this is not a problem."
The problem with computer evangelists is that they will routinely try to pretend like there are no problems, ESPECIALLY when talking to newbie users.
"Oh yeah, just try it, you'll love it! Problems? Nah, it's not that bad! Just try it! It's very easy now! It's simple!" - 0siris, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22I have 2 gnome computers and one kde, and i have to say the kde is nicer looking and a little more modern, but it seems bloated and a little counter intuative. Its kinda like saying which is better "windows XP theme" or "classic windows"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Linus Torvalds encourages everyone to use KDE also.
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=12956
I use Gnome precisely for the reasons he says you shouldn't though. :) - nixdoctor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Moreover, I find it extremely distressing when people say GNOME "versus" KDE. It's as if they're in a boxing ring! Linux gives you a "choice" - a choice to choose... not to fight! Ideally, we should see it as "GNOME and KDE" rather than "GNOME versus KDE".
- nixdoctor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12It's like saying crunchy thin crust pizza is better than ultimate deep dish pizza. Dude, everyone has different tastes and preferences, and there is nothing like "better" that works for everyone! I like GNOME too, but it's not "better" for everyone. It's a fact.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12You know I've switched to Ubuntu right when Dapper Drake came out and I'd have to completely disagree with you. Even my mostly computer illiterate (yet VERY smart) girlfriend liked using it so much that she wanted me to put it on HER PC as well. She's using it full time now also.
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18I don't use KDE for 2 reasons:
1) Most of the apps I run are GTK.
2) The UI just isn't my thing. Too many icons, buttons, etc. I like a clean UI that doesn't distract me with an abundance of options I'll probably never use anyway.
GNOME isn't perfect but it's a lot closer to what I'm looking for. - atdigg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16When I tried Gnome I spent 1 hour to make it look like KDE, then I thought why bother? I also think that Gnome default theme is horrendous, I hate the roundish widgets and the icons are plain ugly. I also miss KIO servers that are so useful in KDE, most of the programs that I use are KDE programs except for GAIM.
I'm sure both are pretty good, I prefer one, somebody else might prefer the other one, this is the best sign that both are needed. Long live freedom, long live choice! - HarryBauzonia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9They're both too much alike to say that one is better than the other. You can use KDE applications in Gnome and vice-versa.
I use Konqueror as my file manager no matter which GUI I'm using. I also use GQview and Gftp regardless of whether I'm using Gnome.
There would be many more pro/con points to make by comparing one of the two to XFCE or Blackbox. It's not like the GUI you choose to use on any session is a permanent decision anyway. - supriyadisw, on 10/12/2007, -14/+23I vote for Gnome! :D
- HerbertScrunge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8" So, let me just tell you that it's REFRESHING to see an article about Linux that both targets newbies and discusses draw-backs and problems with any aspect of the "Linux experience". When I read that, to install KDE themes, the author had to edit numerous configuration text files, my eyes didn't glaze over. Instead, I nodded to myself and thought, "At least he's not pretending like this is not a problem."
The problem with computer evangelists is that they will routinely try to pretend like there are no problems, ESPECIALLY when talking to newbie users. "
Indeed.
As an extra bit of info: The article was written by ubuntuforums.org powerhouse "aysiu", an English teacher who is very well respected on the forums due to the truly prodigious amount of help - in the form of posts on the forums answering questions and "beginners" articles - he has provided during his stay, and the fact that he is more than happy to "tell it like it is", as it were, when it comes to Linux's shortcomings as a desktop environment. I imagine you'd admire him even more in light of this thread he made which agrees very strongly with the sentiment in your final paragraph:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=259479 - atdigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8How is that, when you click on the icon the program doesn't start? when you click on the "x" button the program doesn't stop?
- sailor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9GTK apps will run in KDE
and the number of icons/buttons is determined by the user...I am not sure I follow your logic...never had a problem with too many features, but I do have a problem with a lack of features. :) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8fortunately you dont
i run gnome, but have a handful of qt apps that run fine in it, i also ran kwin under Xgl for a while so i could have a decent window manager for switching between 3d desktop and games (thats no longer nessisary though) - HerbertScrunge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8"The war is mostly between developers"
On the contrary; the "war" is mainly a product of the users. The devs themselves view each other (nowadays) more as friendly competition. As Zack Rusin said on his LUG radio interview (roughly paraphrased) - "But amongst the devs, it's all love!"
"they would have easier collective lives if the OSS community would settle on one widget set (GTK+) or the other (Qt)."
This will never happen and not so much out of pride or warlike-ness than simple practicality: both DEs are so inextricably tied to the toolkits they use that to "switch" to the other would necessitate a total re-write.
Happily, there's things like gtk-engines-qt that help make the breach less obvious.
"Really, I agree; a single coherent API for GUI widgets would make developing for Linux far more attractive. Me, I pull for Qt, as I feel it's simply more polished. For some reason, GTK+ programs, unless they've been skinned (like Firefox), just look ugly to me."
I'd also opt for Qt as Qt4 seems to be faster, more memory efficient (these last two are vaguely subjective, I guess) and has much better cross-platform support than Gtk. It won't happen, however, and as someone who wants both desktops to stick around and share (or steal!) ideas from one another and goad the other into progressing, I'd go as far as to say that it *shouldn't* happen. - evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10My vote is for Enlightenment also.
Yes, Enlightenment DR17 is pre-alpha and in heavy development. That's why you use DR16, which has been stable and highly functional for years. - Fordi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"In Gnome, when you choose to rename a file, only the actual name of the file gets highlighted for editing. In KDE, the entire name, including the extension gets highlighted for editing. I prefer usually to rename only the file, not the extension--though, you can always highlight the extension in Gnome, too, should you choose to do so; it just doesn't happen automatically."
This must be configurable in KDE, as my experience is that KDE behaves the way gnome is described to here. - sailor, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11I use KDE most of the time (I have both installed) I compare them as follows:
*KDE can look like anything you want, Gnome has fewer customization options.
*both are pretty equal in speed, although I feel that KDE might be a tad faster.
*KDE has far more applications and addons than Gnome (kde-apps.org, kde-look.org)
*I don't like some of the apps that come with it, for example, Nautilus (spatial windows is a option? who would want that?)
I use Fluxbox on my old slow machine or in virtual player. - tropican8, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I thought I was the only one who did that! It took me an hour too. I then went back to KDE. I bet a lot of people have also tried to make KDE look like Gnome, now that I think about it.
- tgone, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10@skyshock21,
I always hear dudes talk about how their girlfriends use Ubuntu. She can use it because you configured it for her, right? Did she install Ubuntu, configure Flash, RealPlayer, MP3 support and the other essential consumer stuff? The only reaosn why my family uses Ubuntu is because I set all those things up for them... - baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -15/+22if i had to choose one and remove the other i would keep KDE and remove gnome...
- DarkStalker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8It's pretty clear that this essay is quite old. For example, when the author says:
"In Gnome, when you choose to rename a file, only the actual name of the file gets highlighted for editing. In KDE, the entire name, including the extension gets highlighted for editing."
That hasn't been true in KDE for quite a while... at least six months from what I remember off the top of my head. I've also never had a freeze or crash of KDE since maybe the 3.2 days.
Maybe the author's using Debian Stable?
Looking at the date, it's over a year old. No wonder. Buried. - drizek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7i started off with kde and switched to gnome for s little while with ubuntu. However kde 3.5.4 in kubuntu edgy is awesome, way better than ubuntu IMO. It is very sexy and is much cleaner than it used to be. Very good job by both the kde and kubuntu devs.
cant wait for kde 4 - jcaino, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Funny thing - I started out with KDE with RedHat and then later on in SuSe.....however, since Ubuntu, I'm pretty hooked on Gnome....
*shrug*
at work it's windowmaker
b/c sometimes you just need to get things done and not look at eye candy. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10If you need a ***** "essay" to pick between Gnome and KDE, you probably shouldn't be using X Window in the first place.
- vicaya, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I used to think KDE is bloated, then I realized that It's fairly easy to configure a minimalist KDE environment that's small and fast. KDE/Qt based apps (like Akregator, Amarok and Krita) in general seems to be more polished (in looks, functionality and integration) than Gnome/gtk based apps.
It's easier to develop for KDE/Qt than Gnome/gtk too. There are plenty of good reasons why Apple picked KHTML over other alternatives as the base of their webkit (for safari and other i* Mac OS X apps) - Fordi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The war is mostly between developers; they would have easier collective lives if the OSS community would settle on one widget set (GTK+) or the other (Qt).
Really, I agree; a single coherent API for GUI widgets would make developing for Linux far more attractive. Me, I pull for Qt, as I feel it's simply more polished. For some reason, GTK+ programs, unless they've been skinned (like Firefox), just look ugly to me. - GnuTzu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I like to load all the window managers and occasional give each a test run.
I think its very educational to see what other concepts of windowing are out there.
For slow machines, I like IceWM. For a fast loading and small memory footprint, I use something without menu bars and eye candy. Otherwise, I use Gnome. - jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9KDE to me is the clear winner and everytime I give Gnome a go, just to dip my fingers in and see if I feel any different, I eventually switch back within a week.
I'm not trying to say that Gnome is crap. It's not.
But KDE has:
- more polished apps (and the reason I suspect this is so is because of Qt)
- killer apps to add to that (krusader, amarok, yakuake, kate, quanta, k3b, digikam, akregator, etc)
- a more intuitive desktop (for anyone, not just Windows users, which is commonly said)
- looks much better
- and a friendlier community.
KDE may be faster in the benchmarks, but it is marginally so and would hardly be noticable in most scenarios, TBO.
Traditionally, though, KDE and Gnome were of two mindsets and so people would debate over these things. KDE was more integrated, while Gnome was more simple and cut-to-the-chase. Now, Gnome has been adopting more and more of KDE's ism's, so such an argument is getting more narrow as time progresses and Gnome tries to adopt all the good features from KDE.
The problem with Gnome is, it is a desktop without a soul or direction. I don't mean this litterally, but in terms of the developer communities approach to Gnome in the future and defining a Gnome desktop metaphore. There isn't really any. It's a constant battle between "Well, that button looks better there. This menu item should be here" and this seems to take up most of the communities time, when you follow the mailing lists. This is without concern for the overall picture, but merely being content and debating the details.
For one, Gnome doesn't look great. Let's be honest. It's not hideous, but it hasn't changed much in a long time. And I'm not saying KDE is perfect - it's not, but its a sight better looking. Plus, there have been no new ideas. Gnome needs to re-think and radically improve the interface it works on to give more power for the user to customise his/her desktop and to develop ideas for UI for a new generation in computing.
The KDE team is currently trying to do that (and I'm really excited to see what they come up with).
Gnome has found a niche though, which has helped it gain success in one area, and, ironically, it is the dullness of Gnome that has helped it find that success. And I'm talking about commercial support. A desktop that limits the complexity is easier to support in a corporate environment, right?
Perhaps so, but it is also a limiting factor for Gnome, because now there are commercial interests in where development should head, and that in turn will cause resistance and reluctance to change. Whereas the KDE team are free to come up with bigger, better ideas that might work.
In general, I like KDE. It hasn't let me down yet, while Gnome makes me feel cramped, claustrophobic and un-inspired. But who really cares? There are plenty of other Window Managers to suit your particular needs and it's all seperated from the underlying Windowing layer, so anyone can use Gnome apps in KDE and visa versa. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8AMEN BRUDDAH.
Gnome user here for those reasons exactly. And I dig the Human theme for Gnome the Ubuntu distros come with now. - imsoclever, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Thats pretty cool, I sometimes go outside to see the sun and other times go socialize with friends.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5gconf-editor. I know it looks like Windows regedit* but the tool is fully functional and lets you configure to your hearts content.
*regedit isn't why the registry is bad anyway. The fact the keys are labelled awfully and the fact that its one huge blob with no standards whatsoever are what make it awful. - sashmit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Gnome is also a english word, not just an desktop environment-- I think that affects search results. AFAIK, KDE has always been more popular than Gnome (not that it matters).
- guice, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6GNOME vote here simply for simplicity.
I used KDE for several months before I converted to GNOME. I hadn't looked back. KDE just seems like "too much." Their options are utterly packed. Icons everywhere. Very full menus, etc. KDE feels most like an attempt to Copy Win95/98.
I like GNOME cause it's simple. You can get to what you need easily and you're not bogged with 10 option groups in your options with an added 3-5 tabs per option group. - endgame, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7KDE PWNS U All
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4If you bought a machine preinstalled with Linux it would likely be the same. If you installed a copy of Mepis you'd have codecs as standard anyway. Remember Ubuntu != all of Linux, there are other distributions that have different (maybe better for you) defaults.
- bigtomrodney, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@tgone
Wrong. You can't play DivX or any DVDs on Mac or Windows. And until WMP9 you couldn't rip to mp3 without paying for an add on.Mainstream formats? PDF in Windows?
So what's Microsoft's solution? Try to surplant it with it's own version of the format in Vista by pushing pdf into the background.
So Windows plays wma and mp3 out of the box. Doesn't mean you don't have to go pay another $150-200 for an office sweet to make it usable. - metalhead3767, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8I like KDE. I just think it looks better. One of the reasons that I didn't like linux when I first tried it was the ugly gnome theme in ubuntu. I swiched to KDE and suse. I like it more then windows.
- baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3xfce is gnome done right, or what gnome should have been...
runs & hides :p - thebairyhum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@tgone ...Nor do you offer any evidence to back that up. Welcome to Web 2.0. Yes window's GUI is in the kernel whereas desktop managers from linux are not that is the reason why windows is moving Vistas out. So now let's get into the argument of why you shouldn't have a GUI in the kernel...
I wonder why the writer of the article dualbooted between Kubuntu and Ubuntu when he could have just ran either one from one install :/ - NTolerance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Fordi
Agreed, I also think the GTK widget set is just plain ugly. It reeks of Windows 95. The part that bothers me the most is that there is no mouseover highlighting on the main program toolbars. Windows XP and KDE both include full, uniform mouseover highlighting on everything, but GNOME mysteriously leaves this out and the desktop feels less reponsive to me.
All this being said, I still use GNOME because I can't get away from using GTK apps. - subgeniusd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So you are absolutely opposed to the expansion of Linux into the Winuser collective - right? KDE is simply a tool that works quite well for "daily drivers" on the information highway and getting all religious about the subject is absurd.
And Gnome obviously works just fine too. - wfmk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's not the window manager, but the distribution which is important. And by important, I mean important for the individual user's needs.
Gnome works well with desktop apps in Ubuntu, but KDE is more useful for the power users of Slackware and Gentoo. - Patented, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4When KDE first came out, it was a godsend to those of us trapped in the FVWM95 hellhole. Granted, Enlightenment was out there, and Windowmaker (which I eventually used predominantly), but KDE was exceptional when it released. The last time I tried to use it, it was way too busy and un-elegant for me to deal with.
After rolling my own Black/Fluxbox for a couple years, I was pretty happy with it. I have to admit that I just run XFCE now... no major config headaches, no text files, and it looks clean and works. - h3r3j3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3yes, it's brown... but it's easy to change that!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 135 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is