digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Linus versus GNOME

desktoplinux.com — In a recent series of postings to the Linux Foundation's Desktop Architects mailing list, Linux founder Linus Torvalds went into more detail as to exactly why he prefers KDE's approach to the desktop, to that of GNOME.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -7/+28This bit from the article pretty well what I don't understand about Gnome:

    ""In GNOME I think we've done a very good, and somewhat painful job, of creating something that's very simple and very usable for someone who sits down in front of the machine," Blizzard continued. "I say painful because we've had to remove a lot of things that people were very used to in order to get a base experience that's pretty good." How does taking basic abilities that people actually use make the desktop more usable and not less?
    • 0crabby0, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1I say we have a Linus vs. GNOME wrestling match...

      One fall, no disqualifying, hardcore, No GMA No RIAA LOSER LEAVE TOWN WRASTLING MATCH!

      And this time - it's for real....
    • emehrkay, on 10/12/2007, -18/+2when i was playing around with linux a few years ago, i too preferred kde to gnome. from what i remember, it was more windows-like
    • FreakyT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30I've noticed them doing things like this, and it baffles me as to why. For example, take preferences dialogs. In several cases, I've seen functional preference dialogs stripped down to about one or two options, with the help files telling me that I should "use GConf Editor" to edit the preferences. Now, I'm all for user friendliness, but, IMO, removing almost every configuration option from a program's UI makes that program HARDER to use.
    • InetRoadkill, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8I used gnome for a long time, but I switched to KDE. Both are fine desktops. But what caused me to switch was all the problems I ran into trying to upgrade Gnome from an earlier version. Geez, what a nightmare. I never did get it to work right -- at least not fully, and I'm a long time linux user/programmer.

      The problem with gnome is that its dependency list is as long as your arm now. It's gotten to be a real bastard to satisfy all the external dependencies. KDE was much easier to deal with.
    • chedabob, on 10/12/2007, -9/+17Linus being the father of linux and all, should be proud of everything people are doing with Linux. He may not like some of the things, but the least he could do is concentrate on the positives (like Gnome is far easier for newer users) instead of being a total dick towards Gnome.
    • ISIfunded911, on 10/12/2007, -10/+13The Gnome GUI devs are very religious (i.e. mentally ill): they believe configuration menus are the devil! They could very well put a line like this one in every menu: + expert
      But no. It is taboo. Like sex! They should talk to a shrink!
    • mabhatter, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20I'll jump on this one! I've run both KDE and Gnome on my linux install, but I keep coming back to Gnome because I hate the constant fidgeting with the KDE settings.

      For example on the Knoppix CD there are 4 seperate control panels and 3 lists of programs on the start menu!! Trying to remember to use the Knoppix control panel, KDE settings, KDE control panel, or some other place is fustrating. Let's take simple configuration of the screen...IF you want to change the wallpaper that's one place, toolbars eyecandy and menus are another, the resolution is in a different program, and adapters are somewhere else. Worse, none of those control panels link to any of the others (which is what Linus was complaining about in Gnome by the way) Something as simple in Windows or mac as right-clicking on the desktop to change stuff has 4 different places in KDE.

      In the default Human Ubuntu setup, there's only 1 place for each system change. They may not always make sense coming from other OS or DE but once you learn where something is at you only have to go there. They stay away from haveing 4 control panels with similar names to not confuse new users. Of course this is coming from the same guy that thinks breaking binary compatiblity in 2.6 kernel to add new features in stable is just fine when that's not been the case for 10 years before... It's the difference between USING the system and FIDGETING with it looking busy.

      I do agree, some things in Gnome still need the little control panels built to work the "Gnome" way. KDE rules in terms of configurability... you can tweak it to act or look like darn near anything.. control panels to match all the major OSes... but just adds CONFUSION to new users, particularly older users. Gnome is trying to be very approachable and judging from my household habit of leaving strange OSes on the computer for days it seems to do better at the "wife and kids" test when they're in a hurry to do something and dad has goofy stuff going on.
    • smellinator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@chedabob:

      I am thrilled that Linus is being vocal. My somewhat recent experience with Linux, having been away from it for years: Pick a distribution. Whoa, there are dozens or hundreds. I don't really have the time or patience to "see which one's right for me". So I rely on the experts and the market. Narrowed it down to Fedora, Ubuntu, and Suse. A little research, and I decided on Fedora.

      Then I'm faced with DOZENS of decisions on the install. Disk partitioning, application selection, blah blah. I just want to "take the defaults" and end up with something decent. Of course one of the options is to select your desktop manager.

      Well one question that I see debated all over the 'net for years is Gnome vs. KDE. And if I recall correctly, one had some issues a few years back about not being Free-Open-Source-Software. I can't remember which (I think KDE), but I wanted to stay away from that if it were still an issue. I don't have the patience to research all this stuff. I WANT someone that I trust to tell me the best way to go. (I ended up with Gnome at the time, for a few reasons.)

      Well.... now after a few years of playing with linux, I have a couple Gnome machines, a couple KDE machines. Fedora, Ubuntu, and Debian on various machines. But it's pretty intimidating for the newbie, especially if you only have one machine, and you want to get it right the first time. I appreciate the input of the experts.

      Incidentally MY recommendation (and I am no expert!!!) is that if I were doing it all over (having little linux experience, and installing a fresh copy over an old windows machine, for learning purposes), I'd start with Ubuntu. But the best thing about the FOSS market is that you have choices. Complement that with opinions, and it's very powerful!
    • smellinator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2shoot.... I wasn't fast enough on my edit. -- continuation / clarification of the previous message from me --

      ...I'd start with Ubuntu, and take the default desktop that they give you. That happens to be Gnome. After learning a but about Gnome and Linux, I personally would switch to KDE (after working with both), because I like it better after working with it, and because some of the experts say so. But I like defaults, and Ubuntu comes with a great, easy default setup.

    • saralk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think the fact that such open discussions can take place is a good reason for why Linux is so great. Such and argument about two developers within Microsoft or Apple would never be made public, and so the public's reaction would never be considered.

      Not to mention the fact that the developers would never be able to voice their opinion against the lead developers so publically in MS or Apple.
    • ArchonSG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually I prefer to set my mouse to single clicks to select and double click to launch in KDE, the defualt single click to launch sometimes launches things I don't want it to. Anyways its just a simple matter of going to the hardware mouse control and select double click to luanch and no more single clicky irritation.
    • pointfivezero, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0settings:/Peripherals/Mouse


      I personally believe its *too* easy to change the settings in KDE and thus find myself with a desktop that suits my personal style. My like the OS its run on.
    • ubuwalker31, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Perhaps GNOME needs multiple levels. The regular setting could be a very simplified GNOME desktop. An intermediate setting could be a more complicated and feature rich. Advanced and Expert and Guru settings could be made as well. I like both GNOME and KDE, but I like using GNOME better, because it feels cleaner to me. However, I'd appreciate some more options.
    • Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5I guess Linus just prefers KDE's giant, over-abundant icons, single-mouseclick launching and big, unecessarily bold fonts everywhere as oppossed to the professional-looking GNOME interface.
    • EbilPhish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I can understand not wanting to overwhelm new users with 100's of options but there should probably be an advanced button or something.

      Also the majority of Linux users are not the kind of people to get overwhelmed by choice, granted there are a whole load of new generation Linux users that Ubuntu and other easy to use distros have spawned but I still think that the majority of people are fairly computer literate.

      One thing to note, if you look in the Gnome Control Center, there are 48 configuration icons in 6 categories to choose from, probably a majority of these could be merged into one more complex dialog. Things like window borders, cursors, art manager, screensaver and backgrounds etc. would do better in one appearance config dialog.

      Might be worth implementing the functionality into the core gnome, then having 2 sets of configuration tools that can be installed, one for grandma without the extra functions and another for Linus.
    • xgunterx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Of course KDE lookes bloated to the Gnome-users.
      Hell, even Emacs looks bloated compared to Gnome and it sits in just one window.
    • nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8KDE has 100 options for things I will never care about, and they get in the way of the few that I do care about. I am a programmer and a BS comp sci student so I am no novice grandmother. The options aren't confusing, they're just pointless _for me_. Apps like amarok are great. I don't think amarok suffers from typical KDE-isms though.

      I'm a fluxbox and Xfce guy myself, but I prefer Gnome to KDE any day of the week. Until Gnome 2.x I was a fan of KDE, so I have no bias. I think KDE4 looks very cool so maybe one day I'll use KDE again. Things change fast in the OSS world and every year or so it's good to give the other guys a chance again. Xfce 3 and KDE 2 were nice in their own way, but not exactly steak, and Gnome 1.x was an atrocity. In several years I think both Gnome and KDE are going to be really top-notch. Think how they were several years back.
    • veracon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Let's all use Xfce simply to avoid this discussion. Yay.
    • HerbertScrunge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"I guess Linus just prefers KDE's giant, over-abundant icons, single-mouseclick launching and big, unecessarily bold fonts everywhere as oppossed to the professional-looking GNOME interface."

      Or maybe he doesn't, and he took 30 seconds to change them to the way he likes them.
  • saturn5, on 10/12/2007, -27/+3The Linux community is entertaining at least. The founding father hates the most popular desktop environment, the one that's the default on the most popular distro. You have to love it.
    • hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29>KDE devs are just as bad. Want double-click behavior? Sorry, KDE thinks they know better than you, and they refuse to include double-click behavior by default. Swim through their horrid configuration options for 20 or 30 minutes...you'll find the option eventually.

      If that is true, then KDE devs are not just as bad. Want a behavior with Gnome? There are no configuration options to wade through, and you will not find the option eventually. The option is never there.
    • hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6NOTE: My experience with Gnome has been with the varient installed on Ubuntu Edgy Eft

      "I say painful because we've had to remove a lot of things that people were very used to in order to get a base experience that's pretty good." would seem to suggest that Gnome was more customizable in the past.
    • Me1on, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18>> "The founding father hates the most popular desktop environment"

      According to the 2006 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards, KDE is the most popular by a fairly large margin: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=514945
    • mkaylor, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Hackwrench, M$ patent double click a long time ago. KDE can't give it to you as a default. Where have you been?

    • bobbob1016, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8To hackwrench:
      From ubuntuforums.org, and I quote aysiu:
      "In Nautilus (the file manager), go to Edit > Preferences > Behavior > Single-click to activate items."
      http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=333382&highlight=single+click
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Maybe your distribution just likes the default KDE settings, but a default install of KDE has a configuration utility if a new user starts KDE." A lot of distros already do this
    • fyanardi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@me1on

      Even KDE always wins from the beginning of linuxquestions member choice awards (6 consecutive years), and GNOME second. But this proves that GNOME will always exist and there will always be people prefer GNOME over KDE.
  • schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -21/+38IMHO, Linus must get off his high horse and be polite to those who make his kernel so attractive. I use KDE, but whenever I read these remarks from Linus, it's just embarrassing.
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -7/+43If Linus needs to get off his high horse, so do the the Gnome Devs.

      I decided to look at the mailing list myself instead of relying on Bloggers and other media on the web.

      http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2007-February/001119.html

      "¿Quién es el NAZI?

      Nada más, esto para LINUS para que piense.

      LINUS, NO SABES LEER ESPAÑOL, ¿A VER SI VAS A SER IDIOTA TU TAMBIÉN?"

      Run through the Google language tool, it means " Who is the NAZI? Nothing else, this for LINUS so that it thinks. LINUS, YOU DO NOT KNOW TO READ SPANISH, TO SEE IF YOU ARE ALSO GOING TO BE STUPID YOUR?" Yeah, I know the last sentence doesn't quite make sense as written. I think it just means "Linus, you don't know how to read Spanish, are you also stupid", even though Linus never said Gnome users are stupid. (And they're not, being smart enough to look at alternatives to Windows)

      On his next post, after being called a Nazi, Linus himself was remarkably calm

      http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2007-February/001121.html

      On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Marcos Pérez López wrote:
      >
      > Yo también soy idiota. No se configurar la mayor parte de las opciones
      > del escritorio, y si he podido empezar a usar linux es porque Gnome me
      > lo facilitó.

      There is a _huge_ difference between "being easy to use" and "_only_ being
      easy to use".

      "Being easy to use" is important, because it means that there isn't a very
      high learning curve. That's _good_.

      "ONLY being easy to use" is bad, because it means that once the initial
      learning curve is over, maybe you know the program, but you can't actually
      do what you WANT to do. And that's *bad*. That's *really* bad. It's
      actually much worse than being hard to use to begin with, in many ways.

      Game designers know about this. You don't want to make your games too
      challenging, because if you do, people never get "into" them. But if you
      don't give people challenges along with the game, and don't allow them to
      "grow" with the game, the game sucks. It migth be as easy as making things
      just "fall faster" (Tetris), or it might be giving the person new
      capabilities ("bigger guns").

      Gnome people seem to think that once you "got into it", you never want to
      do anything more. Not true.

      Linus

      In fact, Linus' daughters use Gnome. Also in the same post he proposes other solutions:

      http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2007-February/001135.html

      *nix geeks do get on high horses. But I think the media is actually portraying Linus to be on a higher horse than he really is, meanwhile some of the Gnome devs are being utter assholes.
    • captaineuphoria, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38OMG Linus voiced his opinion! Surely this man must be part of the nazi movement.
    • democracysucks, on 10/12/2007, -15/+6KDE devs are just as bad. Want double-click behavior? Sorry, KDE thinks they know better than you, and they refuse to include double-click behavior by default. Swim through their horrid configuration options for 20 or 30 minutes...you'll find the option eventually.

      How about chatting while away in Kopete without sending your away message to the other user every single time they message you? How about getting rid of the kiddy-looking default look? How about getting all those lame options which most people will never use off the main UI and include some more relevant options instead?

      KDE thinks throwing 50,000 options at you right on the main panel will make you happy. What they don't realize, however, is that the one option you actually *want*...isn't there. That's where Gnome tends to get it right. Not many options...but you wouldn't want them anyway. Not that Gnome doesn't need to get its act together, as well.

      Point is, jumping on the to Gnome-developers-suck bandwagon is stupid. KDE developers are just as retarded. I started on KDE, and keep trying to go back, but it's just too unstable, inconsistent, glitchy, ugly, etc.
    • SeBBBe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14KDE and Gnome have different approaches to how they think a desktop environment should work, and the visions are different from each other. KDE is more suitable for some people, Gnome is more suitable for some people. And you can choose which one you want from those two, or another desktop environment. That's why Linux is so great.
    • stonecrest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"On his next post, after being called a Nazi, Linus himself was remarkably calm"

      Linus first referred to GNOME developers as "interface nazis". The post you quoted pokes fun at that characterization. For what it's worth, Linus has historically been quite aggressive in his language towards GNOME.
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3" Swim through their horrid configuration options for 20 or 30 minutes...you'll find the option eventually." It takes you 20 to 30 minutes to go to the Control Center, Peri
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Ack! What I was trying to say is that you just go into the Control Center, notice where it says Peripherals (the mouse is a peripheral, after all :p ) and select the Double Click. This hardly takes 20-30 minutes.

      Why should KDE enable double clicking by default though? KDE users are used to single clicking and suddenly changing that to accommodate users that switched over from Windows yesterday would be a bad thing. Yes, they can fix it as easily I just mentioned, but it would be annoying.
    • HerbertScrunge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@democracysucks

      Firstly, I'd like to give you props for actually cutting down on the laundry list of complaints that you copy-and-paste (http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/Linus_fires_latest_shot_in_GNOME_Wars#c5281076) into these discussions after darkstalker's rebuttal (http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/Linus_fires_latest_shot_in_GNOME_Wars#c5282729), and for your restraint in actually posting it just the once in the same topic (http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/Linus_fires_latest_shot_in_GNOME_Wars#c5282072).

      Secondly, I'd like to point out that KControl has a search function, and typing in the first few letters of "double" (as in, "I want to open files on double-click, damn it!") very rapidly brings us down to this:

      http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kdedoubleclickkr5.png

      Thirdly - actually, I agree with this one, kinda - if there's one thing that really exemplifies the difficulty with KDE's configuration organisation, it's the utterly surprisingly location of this setting.
    • bkor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"If Linus needs to get off his high horse, so do the the Gnome Devs."

      That is not a GNOME developer, but just a subscriber to that mailinglist. See also http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct for the guidelines we try to follow.
    • loconet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@sanguinemoon

      eh, you are taking that quote from the gnome reply out of context. If you read the whole message* you see that a) the reason the reply was in Spanish was to illustrate that just because Linus may not read Spanish it doesn't mean he's an idiot as he himself implied about users confused with functionality. Was it a good example? I don't now. And b) the message was replying to Linus calling the users idiots. However, I agree with the spirit of your post. Both sides need to relax and discuss things without coming off as being childish. Although as already pointed out that person replying to Linus was not a developer


      * original message
      Linus escribió:

      > This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of
      > Gnome is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will
      > use it. I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long
      > since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do.

      Yo también soy idiota. No se configurar la mayor parte de las opciones
      del escritorio, y si he podido empezar a usar linux es porque Gnome me
      lo facilitó.
      No creo que todo el mundo que se tenga que sentar ante un ordenador
      tenga la obligación de ser un "super programador". Hay mucha gente que
      necesita usar el ordenador para tareas sencillas y no necesita saber
      configurar hasta el último rincón de su escritorio.
      Por eso precisamente Windows está en la posición que está, porque
      entre otras cosas se preocupó por hacer un sistema operativo sencillo
      de usar para la mayoría de la gente.
      Yo no digo a nadie que use Gnome, pero GNOME ES BUENO porque es lo que
      le hace falta a una parte importante de la sociedad, y quien quiera
      más cosas, pues que no use Gnome pero que no lo critique.
      A mi no me gustan los plátanos, ¡pues que exterminen los plataneros!

      ¿Quién es el NAZI?

      Nada más, esto para LINUS para que piense.

      LINUS, NO SABES LEER ESPAÑOL, ¿A VER SI VAS A SER IDIOTA TU TAMBIÉN?
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2programmer

      Ok, so he's not actually a Gnome dev. My bad. I thought he was, my goal in reading the mailing list was to get at the real truth and this is a new truth that I learned. Bloggers and other media distort the truth badly ("Why Linus Hates Gnome", for example. I think he doesn't like to use it, but I doubt he hates it) But when you translate the rest of the post, it become even almost even sillier. I just used the Google Language tool again.

      "I also am stupid. Not to form most of the options of the writing-desk, and if I have been able to begin to use linux he is because Gnome me facilitated it. I do not believe that everybody that must seat before a computer has the obligation of being a “super programmer”. There is much people who need to use the computer for simple tasks and she does not need to know how to form until the last corner of its writing-desk. For that reason indeed Windows is in the position that is, because among other things it worried to make an operating system simple to use for most of people. I do not say to which uses Gnome, but GNOME IS GOOD because it is what it needs to him to an important part of the society, and whoever more things, since does not use Gnome but that it does not criticize it. To my I do not like bananas, since they exterminate the plataneros!"

      You don't need to be a super programmer to use KDE by anystretchh of theimaginationn Linus is, I'm not. From some of the lamenting about how difficult KDE is, I wonder how some of these people even use Windows. Seriously. There's a guy commenting on this article that claims it takes 20-30 minutes to enable double clicking in KDE; if it takes him this long to navigate Kcontrol, how does he even manage to use the Windows Control Panel? How will he be able to navigate that new control panel in Gnome? But I digress out of frustration with people that make silly claims about KDE.

      Google probably butchered the Spanish even worse than I think it did, but Marcos seems to be making a point that a lot of people use the computer for simple tasks and this is true. But in KDE prevents this? To browse the web, at the very least you can just go into the K menu and under "Internet" just click your choice of web browser, to write a letter just to go to the "Office" section and click on your choice of word processor. For myself, I have icons of the apps the I need everyday in the Kicker (Firefox, Opera, Gaim, Amarok, Krusader); and I know that I can put those same icons in the Gnome Panel if I like.

      The translator mangled the last two sentences to badly for me to make a fair comment on them.

      When Linus said "This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of Gnome is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it." I still can't read that as Linus actually calling the users idiots. It's more along the lines of the Gnome devs are acting like they are. If Linus said, "Gnome users are all stupid idiots" I would disagree with him vehementaly, but I don't see that happening.
  • dramatools, on 10/12/2007, -15/+6While I respect Linus the man and embraced Linux the kernel long ago, this is a case of somebody overstepping his bounds. Anything that distracts Linus from the kernel is a disservice to the kernel. Anything that is a disservice to the kernel is a disservice to everything the kernel has inspired, including Linus' beloved KDE. While KDE and Gnome are available for other systems, they perform best on a GNU/Linux platform. Ever try running Gnome on Solaris? Not pretty, even with Sun's own binaries. I plan to abandon my OpenSolaris fileserver once FUSE has a mature zfs implementation.

    Both the Gnome and KDE projects have common goals, and both have made UNIX-type operating systems more accessible to the end user. I remember running plain-vanilla X11, then embellishments like FVWM95 and early versions of Gnome and KDE (both worthless, by the way). I personally dislike a lot about KDE, from its overuse of tabs to those stupid little bouncing icons that mess up the pointer when you launch an application. Konqueror as a file manager is a bad Windows Explorer knockoff, and I'd rather use Firefox for web browsing. That said, if I were rolling out a server to provide desktops for thin clients, KDE would be the way to go. KDE has accessible management and policy tools that are a pleasure to use, compared to the hodgepodge of skeleton files needed to provide a managed Gnome desktop. I've also had better luck making KDE look like Windows to ease the switchers along.

    A user's desktop environment is a personal choice. Mr. Torvalds certainly is entitled to his opinion, but doesn't he have more important things to attend to than starting a pissing contest over Gnome and KDE?

    Linus, good sir, STFU and GBTW.
    • haffe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Mr. Torvalds is indeed entitled to his opinion. However, the weight of his opinion should not be affected by what he previously has done.
    • snowboarder04, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6So because Linus focuses on the kernel he doesn't deserve to air his opinions on any other aspect of the overall linux project?
      IMHO it's you that needs to STFU and GBTW, oh and GTFOY (get the f*** over yourself).
    • darkchild, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I don't see how Linus pointing out what he thinks are flaws in a particular piece of software thats not kernel related a disservice to the kernel. He actually seems to know a bit about GNOME development because he submitted patches within a few hours which goes to show that he has used GNOME before and is quite familiar with the development process. Its a well known fact that in the past Linus has contributed code to various opensource projects that are in no way related to the Linux kernel but this has never affected kernel development.
  • diggsIt, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19I may or may not switch to KDE, but I learn something every time Linus speaks. He can say whatever he wants about Linux distros and packages. He's earned it.
  • thecheatah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5From the discussion, I think linus cares about gnome. It is not that hard to switch to kde and ignore gnome problems. Linus probably liked gnome more then kde and other available desktops, but had trouble with that one issue.

    What I see as the common goal in most linux applications is complete user control. I have wanted features that, to me would seem to trivial to include in an application, were available from command line in the tool. Mplayer is a good example. The gui is great, but sometimes I use the command line to place indexes on unindexed clips.

    What linus is saying is that have the features available. Keep them separate from the gui developers. Basically have two teams. One develops the application, the other develops the guis.

    This way if their is a demand for advanced guis, their would not be a problem implementing it without having to argue with the application developers to include features.

    I think linus knows what he is doing. It is true that gnome developers can do what they feel fit for their application, but what linus is trying to say is to stick to programming practices that dont end up shooting your self in the foot. Especially in community projects. You can never decide what is the "best" for the community.
  • shanesemler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25They both have good points. I'm a Gnome user but I'm really pissed off they removed something simple like the the xscreensaver configuration dialogs. WTF for??? Linus is right, it IS a disease. The Gnome developers have succeeded in creating a desktop with easy, sane defaults (that's good) but totally destroyed power user capabilities (that's very bad). On the other hand, KDE is a mess and in my PERSONAL experience, not as fast or stable as Gnome. The gnome developers are right. Linus is more right. Gnome developers: listen to the man.
    • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Exactly, and we could all sit here posting thousands of features that have appeared in Gnome and been removed, including wanted, needed or liked features.

      It wouldn't be so bad if they actually *said* it needed fixing, rewriting or additions they weren't prepared to spend time and effort on, but all you get is "we completely gutted this part of Gnome to make it more minimal" "everything we do is perfect and the best technical decision".
  • doctorweird, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3Who let Torvalds out of his cage?
  • xero8472, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Gnome and KDE both have their ups and downs.

    Personally I still haven't decided which I prefer, because an issue or two that frustrate me in Gnome may not be as much trouble in KDE, but KDE may piss me off with a different issue which Gnome simplifies.

    If only there were a 3rd main desktop environment that combined the GOOD qualities of both Gnome and KDE.
    • redxii, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1That would have to be an open source port of Explorer. Simple, but all settings are in the GUI including a "Device Manager".
  • korteenea, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Last I checked, Linus was a programmer, not a GUI designer. Gnome's done an admirable job of making Linux easy to use for newcomers, and I count myself among those who learned to use Linux *because* of Gnome. I also happen to be a designer, and when I look at the KDE environment the first thing I feel is a bit of nausea! If Gnome can be blamed for providing too few options for configuration, then KDE is to be blamed for providing far too many. For me, that's the more heinous offense.
  • briman4031, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4I personally struggle with any linux distro. I'm a PC/MAC user and I tried installing xubuntu, fedora, and recently settled on ubuntu. Ubuntu was the only one to recognize my wireless card right after installation. Unfortunately linux is such a learning curve for me that I still can't get the wireless card to work even after loading the drivers w/ NDISwrapper and buying a $40 ubuntu instruction book. I'm not ready for linux and linux isn't ready for me.
  • weefs, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1gnome isn't so bad for beginners. once you've outgrown gnome there's kde or whatever bleeding edge *****. but if you want to grow the user-base, it would bode well for linus to quit acting like a baby with his mentality that we're born into computing as gearheads. some people have to ease into linux. gnome or not, it's still far more difficult and cumbersome than windows or osx.
  • AquaFox, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I wouldn't hate to see a Desktop Enviroment by Linux Torvalds.
    • drizek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Hes working on one, heres a screenshot:

      root@desktop:~#
  • DigitalPig, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3GNOME and KDE, which one is better? I think that isn't the problem. The main point is, we can have choices. If you just want to operate machine, you can choose the one which is easy to learn and play. If you want to be a geek, you can come to the program which has huge options. The most IMPORTANT thing is, there are many available for us to choose. It's useless to talk about which one is better. Everyone has his favorite. But we need to provide the choice to everybody, which is the meaning of the freedom in Linux world.
  • lnostdal, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19one of the most annoying things about this debate is all the morons (yes, you) who do not understand what's going on:

    1. gnome want simple sane defaults
    2. linus want simple sane defaults ... yes; the _same thing_
    3. ..but linus also want options that power users can access _if they want to_

    think of it like this; you can have the benefits of the simple gnome _and_ the benefits of the more flexible kde _at the same time_ .. it's not impossible to imagine, morons
  • ronaldst, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7OSS fanatics = Drama queens. Perfect for TV.
  • higi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1dj50 im with you. I personally prefer GNOME, but I used KDE in the past. I think it's all about choice, and that is a very good thing.
  • Sneakernets, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Gnome= easy to use for the average joe but not for experts
    KDE= great for experts but too much power to the average joe,

    too much power to average joe= broken system
  • Apreche, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I've been using Linux for 6+ years, and I stand firmly with the Gnome camp. My first desktop environment was KDE1, then KDE2. Then after short stints of using XFCE, fvwm, fluxbox, ion, etc. I'm now just happy using the default Ubuntu Gnome. Sure, it's not perfectly customizable. There are hundreds of options available that Gnome offers no access to. If I actually wanted to access all those options, I would go back to using the 100% customizable fvwm.

    As someone who actually wants to use my computer to do things, Gnome works. I can launch my applications. I can move them around. I can have multiple desktops. I can access things through menus. I can change the theme and layout of my desktop. What more do I need? I'd probably still be using XFCE if it properly supported dual monitors like Gnome does.

    As a former KDE user I must say that KDE offers excellent applications. KWrite, KDevelop, Amarok, K3B, etc. are often far superior to the equivalents in Gnome land. But there's no reason I can't use Gnome and also run Amarok. In fact, I do it now! The reason I don't use KDE anymore is because it does exactly what Linus seems to want. It offer a GUI interface for almost every option you could possibly want. As a result you have incredibly long and complicated menus. You have cluttered dialog boxes. You have a control panel with about a million checkboxes all over the place. Sure, there might be 2 or 3 of those checkboxes I wish I had. But when you start putting in the checkbox for everybody, you get a mess. I'm willing to sacrifice the few options I want if it means I don't have to be bothered sifting through thousands of options that I don't want. At least fvwm has a text configuration file instead of a cluttered gui. That's really the only reasonable way to provide the level of customization that Linus seems to want.

    It's great for him if his preference is KDE. Everyone is entitled to their personal likes and dislikes. He just has to realize that there are a lot of people out there who have the opposite likes. Most of us don't going around insisting that KDE should change to our philosphy. That's why we have choices! If Gnome became more like KDE as Linus wants, that decreases diversity. That's the opposite of what makes the open source world great. Every project does what the community around that project wants to do. If you don't like it, there is another project somewhere else that does what you want. Use what you want and who cares what other people do?
  • fzammetti, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I've read all these posts with great interest, and I have to say, I see Linus coming across as a real assclown here. He seems (and this is something I've noted in the past) to have an air of arrogance about him when he speaks, like his words are canon and everyone else should just follow. Oh, he does a fine job of playing the politics right and putting in the words that attempt to give just the opposite impression, that he respects all opinions, but he always seems to have an underlying tone that is just the opposite, and it tends to be the more powerful force.

    But, putting that aside for just a moment...

    He clearly has a ton of clout, more than most others, and for very good reason. No one can deny his accomplishments, and those accomplishments lend weight to what he says, That is only proper. But, he has to recognize that and be even more careful how he throws his weight around, to turn a phrase. The bottom line is that he has to realize (and I fully believe he does) that he can sway people just by opening his mouth. I believe when you are in such a position, you have to be extra careful not to do so when your stated goal is freedom and open exchange of often contradictory ideas.

    He can be a politician if he wants, which means he can have his strong opinions and he can get people to follow him into hell if he wants based on them. That's one option. When you've been saying all along though that you stand for freedom in software, I think it's doing just the opposite to advocate one piece of software over another. I'm not saying he should shut up with regard to the flaws he sees... on the contrary, he very much should express his opinions... but not in such a manner that he pushes his own personal agenda.

    So, while I'm not commenting one bit on the merits of his arguments about Gnome, I *am* commenting on what I see as irresponsible and contradictory behavior on his part, based on nothing more than his past stated motiviations for everything he has done. When you have so much influence over people, you have a responsibility to do so carefully and with the right intentions. Pushing your own agenda when you are someone whos name is synonymous with choice brings into question those intentions, and certainly indicates less than careful wielding of ones' power.
    • feed, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You are one of those people who believe that anyone with a well though out, supported, and thoroughly researched opinion can't have it because they have too much power and influence to give it. This is complete nonsense. I ask you what agenda Linus is pushing? How is he acting irresponsible in *any* way? You can step back a try to be Mr. Objectivity but this is more of a Troll post than anything else. You contradict yourself and place Linus in a position within *your* personal framework that does not allow reasonable discourse and argument. This is pathetic and should be called what it is: A TROLL.

      There is one agenda that Linus is pushing and it's very simple. He wants what's best for Linux and what best for the *user*. He supports this argument very well. This is about quality and usability as always when it come to software in Linus's world. He makes that very clear as he always has. So I support his *agenda* and *philosophy* and you should too because it has been enormously successful.
    • user98887, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@feed

      >> He wants what's best for Linux and what best for the *user*.

      How about letting the users decide. If Gnome doesn't cut it for them, and KDE might - use KDE or some other window manager.

      @fzammetti arguments are well structured and make a valid point.
    • fzammetti, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1In reply to feed...

      His agenda, which to his credit he outright admits at least, is to dissuade people from using Gnome. He flat-out said that, so this isn't me interpreting anything. It seems to me that someone in his position, with his obvious sway over people (witness your defense of him as an example) shouldn't be trying to do that... he should state his reasons for not liking things (which he has) and then get out of the way and let people decide. I'm glad you want him deciding what's best for all of us. I don't, and I don't want anyone doing so.

      I never said someone in a position of power can't have an opinion and can't state it. Just the opposite in fact: he is clearly a leader of men, and therefore should never shy away from offering his thoughts. Where I have a problem is (a) what I perceive as an air of superiority in his statements, and (b) whether that's really the case or not, him attempting to make decisions for people.

      Oh, and one other thing... I should support his agenda and philosophy because you say so? Yeah, ok. You want to call me a troll, that's your right... but it seems to me that I'm not the one that can't handle a contradictory opinion, it is you my friend. Someone says anything remotely negative about your fearless leader and it's a call to arms for you! That's great. Talk about a contradictory post buddy,
    • feed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"His agenda, which to his credit he outright admits at least, is to dissuade people from using Gnome. He flat-out said that, so this isn't me interpreting anything. It seems to me that someone in his position, with his obvious sway over people (witness your defense of him as an example) shouldn't be trying to do that... he should state his reasons for not liking things (which he has) and then get out of the way and let people decide. I'm glad you want him deciding what's best for all of us. I don't, and I don't want anyone doing so."

      So you understand that his agenda is to promote what he thinks is best. Which in this case is to dissuade people from using Gnome because he feels it's inferior. Why shouldn't he persuade people to do what he thinks is best? What's the problem with that? He states his case and reasons... you admit to that. He never forces anyone to do anything, so I don't understand why you think he has that kind of power. No one makes you or anyone else use or believe anything so I'm not sure what the problem is with any of this? I'm stumped with this whole paragraph. I'm incapable of grasping anything unreasonable going on here. I stand on the principle that Linus has conducted himself well in this case, not that I'm blindly out in his defense.

      "I never said someone in a position of power can't have an opinion and can't state it. Just the opposite in fact: he is clearly a leader of men, and therefore should never shy away from offering his thoughts. Where I have a problem is (a) what I perceive as an air of superiority in his statements, and (b) whether that's really the case or not, him attempting to make decisions for people."

      I'm completely at a loss as to how this paragraph makes any sense. You seem to be admitting that he has some kind of responsibility here in offering his thoughts. He does and he backed them up with support. He talked to developers about issues. If you think he's acting superior.... well that's you're opinion. I can't argue that. I just don't agree. Also, again, I'm incapable of seeing where he is making a decision for you or I or anyone else for that matter.

      "Oh, and one other thing... I should support his agenda and philosophy because you say so? Yeah, ok. You want to call me a troll, that's your right... but it seems to me that I'm not the one that can't handle a contradictory opinion, it is you my friend. Someone says anything remotely negative about your fearless leader and it's a call to arms for you! That's great. Talk about a contradictory post buddy,"

      You shouldn't support anyone's agenda based on what I say. And if you read my post again you'll *clearly* see that I didn't say that. You should support his agenda if you have the same beliefs in software design as Linus does. If you agree with his metric of quality and usability you should support his philosophy and agenda. If you don't, then don't support him. I simply agree with him on his points about Gnome. Currently, and in the past, Linus has been enormously successful in creating good software. Rather than call him arrogant (especially when he's gone to such great pains to support his position), I would rather try and understand why he believes this. Just my take on it.

      Last thing. In general, I don't see anything contradictory in anything I've said. I've read it again and again and I just don't see it. But what the hell, I'm a scientist and tend to focus on facts rather than feelings about things like calling someone arrogant or irresponsible. I should be clear. I called you a troll because one of the hallmarks of trolling is to inflame with feeling (calling people names like arrogant and irresponsible) and to contradict yourself in statements. You say one thing and admit another in the same line. This happens again and again throughout your statements. Hence, you are a troll. And I've taken the bait by feeding it.
  • MrTea, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I think that gnome could just easily solve the problem with a "Beginner" and "Advanced" theme configuration; the "Advanced" could add the options that Linus is fighting to include while "Beginner" could be the same ol' same ol'. I personally like both GNOME and KDE, but I would love for GNOME to have all of those customization options without having to go into the source.
  • nixfu, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2All these posts and not a single person here notes that the whole reason that GNOME even EXISTS TODAY is because the QT toolkit that KDE was built on was not GPL. It IS GPL NOW, so the reason that GNOME was created and needed is NOW GONE. There is ZERO REASON for Gnome to exist and create this division between the desktops.

    KDE was ALWAYS THE BEST desktop available for Linux, and it has been around much longer than GNOME. GNOME was created in a knee-jerk response by a bunch of GPL-only zelots.


    Its time to put this project to rest, and roll the best parts of it into KDE and stop wasting resources. KDE/QT is GPL'ed now and GNOME no longer needs to exist.



    • HerbertScrunge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The large number of people asserting their love of GNOME and indifference to/ dislike of KDE suggests to me that there is in fact *every* reason for GNOME to exist.

      GNOME has outgrown it's original raison d'etre as a Free alternative to Qt - now it has an entirely new set of reasons to exist, and it is still very much needed and wanted.
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'm not gonna go that far. The licensing issues with QT at the time where a potential ticking time bomb, so it was rational decision to try to create a desktop based on entirely FOSS tools. I read somewhere that now KDE is "more" free than Gnome, licensing wise, ironically enough. But I'll support the right of Gnome to continue to exist. The competition can actually wind improve both desktops. Throw XFCE into the mix and Gnome can take notes on how to build a light GTK+ based desktop.

      Gnome is no longer about trying to be more free, and now its about being simple and usable. The trouble is just that they go so far that it appears they think their users are idiots that can't use a web browser or a print menu. For myself, I hate to use Gnome and find it insulting. But I don't hate the Gnome project itself, or its devs (despite some of their behaviour toward Linus) or the users.
  • Soapdish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I don't know why people complain about KDE being so difficult to use without configuring anything.

    I recently installed Gentoo with KDE on a computer for my mom (I'm happy to install any software for her when she asks). The process of acquainting her with KDE (and the computer) was faily simple:

    1. Here's your user name and password
    2. Press this button to start any app you want from the menu.
    3. Look! You can have multiple desktops!
    4. Turn off the computer by clicking "Log out..." and then click "turn off computer"

    Wow, that was hard. Everything on that machine is KDE defaults except that I switched to a left-handed mouse for her.
    • xutopia, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4"I recently installed Gentoo"

      That's where I stopped reading. From experience most Gentoo users are power users who care more about playing with their tools than using them.
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7So you completely missed that his mom, (presumably) a non-power user, has no trouble using KDE?
  • feed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3The Linux Questions Annual Choice awards choose KDE 2 to 1 over Gnome. I've always been right in line with Torvalds on this one and so are most other Linux users. KDE *is* a better environment for Linux to hang it's hat on. He couldn't be more right.

    I've always been impressed with Gnome development because they threw it together so fast in the early days. But KDE *will* end up being the future. Users expect more features in later releases of *any* software, not less. They expect *more* capability as time progresses, not *less*. Gnome is going to die on this hill top of idealism. *All* software programs die when they stay on this hill top. One only has to remember other competing kernels in the early days to see this effect. The Linux kernel is *more* complex with each release, but also more capable. It keeps getting better and so does KDE. I don't recommend Gnome to anyone because Linux is more capable than anything else out there and you don't see that when using Gnome. You really see it when you use KDE. Most users agree on this point which is why Gnome and KDE aren't 50/50 in users anymore.
  • aibotca, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I have used both Desktop Environments over the years. I like them both. I like GNOME for its simplicity and polished looks, I like KDE for it's broad range of applications and support base. I currently use one everyday for the past year, I won't say which one because who gives a crap ... I switched from Mac to Linux years and years ago when I learned about open source and benefits, one of them was choice to do what you want.

    All these 'Windows vs Mac vs Linux' wars were stupid enough, once I herd about this even stupider (not a word but wherever ...) GNOME vs KDE thing, I was shocked. With Linux you have lots of choice, if someone wants to install GNOME, let them, if someone wants to install KDE, let them.

    Who gives a crap about what has more options, what is more simplistic ... the user installed that Desktop Environment because it fit THEIR needs, whatever it may be. No need to start some stupid debate/flame war.

    Linus is entitled to his opinion, weather you like it or not, the Internet is not a 'nazi/facist' controled government, there is freedom of speech, so live with it.
  • deathguppie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I really don't understand people having a difficult time finding config options in KDE control panel. After all there is a "search" option at the upper left of the window, if you don't know where to look for something.

    The biggest thing for me with KDE, is that once you get used to using tools like KIO-slaves or right click on image >> change image format.. to switch from a png to a jpg.. or right click compress files or folders in one fell swoop. I just like the simple easy options for doing day to day tasks that take opening an app and then finding the file then opening the file performing the task and then closing the app in Gnome.

    I also can't stand the fact that Gnome open file dialog does not do previews.. that means that I have to open a separate app to view the file and then find it again by name in the Gnome open file dialog.. that is just a pain.
  • -Chi.0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I think Linus feels this way is bc Gnome does not really support the spirit of Linux & open source. I feel this way is bc the beauty of Linux is that you can make it what you want & you should be able to config every thing down to the last bit, pixel or button. This is why I use Linux & thats why a lot of peeps are drawn to it. We are not stuck w/ what ever the default setting are, we can just change it on the fly. Personally i have used both KDE & Gnome as well as other desktop environments. I have choesen to go down the KDE path bc I love the huge setting menu bc i have learned it & like being able to just change it or mod a confing file w/ out having to do research to see if i will break it. If you think about it even Microsoft is changing their ways on configuring the desk top & usability. Which means that even the most computer eliterit person still whats to have control over their computing experience. Really this does show something. The reality is that it does not need to be what you want be default & that does take all the fun out of playing w/ you computer for weeks on in just so you can press one button to do 5 things or what ever.

    Sorry about the last blurb of death, but i did have put down some deep real feelings about this subject.

    You all are here bc you believe in Linux & the values it holds dear to your harts. The truth is that I can respect all the pros & cons for both desktops as well as the others out their. This is really a touchy subject bc Linux really has become more then a operating system or a way to compute. It have Evolved in to a way of life and or Religion. We can sitt and have a pissing match about which is better or not but the we really need to sitting down and see if we just join the two desktops or should we leave them be.

    Linus rebuttal is just saying that Gnome is just not supporting the Linux way by taking freedoms form the user & that it's not right for Gnome to take that away from the users bc it should be the user to decide what they want not some one else.

    Bc Gnome has gone this direction that is why I use KDE on a usability level & on LinuxOpen source way of live level. I have been using Linux it seems forever & not so long. but every time I boot up I feel just a little better I made my choice to switch.

    I now this was longer than hell & fell free to flame me, but deep inside we all fell how we feel about Linux & It's you right to choose you Computing experience.

    LinuxOpen source for life & thank you for your time.
    -Chi.0 out.
  • Hindu_Wardrobe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Why can't everyone just get along?
    I'm a proud GNOME user, but I don't think it's Godly and that KDE is evil, etc etc etc.
    I just think that instead of having flamewars, Linus should actually do something about it, which he is (didn't he submit a patch?)

    Just remember, Linux is about choice.
  • dragazis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"I want something very simple: I want to configure my mouse button window events," explained Torvalds. "That doesn't sound so bad, does it? Everybody else can do it, gnome does not. My laptop has a two-button mouse, which means that I want the right button to do something more useful than show me the menu that I never use."

    I definitely see where he is coming from as a user of both Gnome and KDE. Although KDE's simplicity isn't nearly as much as Gnome's is, the functionality to get the two button mouse on a laptop working is there and accessible. I said it in another digg article on KDE and Gnome, and I'll say it again, Gnome makes me feel like I'm in elementary school and using a computer for the first time with it's big buttons and menu bar icons, menu organization and accessibility (you don't need a menu for each thing like a mouse, keyboard, accounts, etc...a preference pane would have been much better) and more.

    With this in mind, this is why I'm eagerly waiting for KDE 4's release. I know it will be easier for the user to navigate around the system, set preferences, enable certain functionality and more with out it being too simple so the user feels stupid.
  • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I use Linux because I like to control what my computer does.

    When I use a GUI, I want to be able to control how it looks, and control how it behaves, and for me, that's the KDE/gnome debate over *as it stands right now*, because only KDE offers about 70% of the desktop stuff I like.

    For instance, I like something where I can control it *all* with a proper GUI and where I can find everything in that GUI - kcontrol gives me lots of control and it has had a search bar like amarok's for yonks so every setting it offers is one click away.

    I also want discoverability - I understand interface design myself so I expect, in the GUI, for simple things to be simple and complex things to be possible. KDE offers this, but Gnome falls short on the second point. This is where the "limited" sensation people talk about comes from.

    if you design a desktop which works in one way and does it well, you'll fall foul of the reality - only about 10% of people will ever be with your way of thinking, and all the rest will be trying things that won't work because those things you think "nobody uses" are usually just widely used features YOU never use.

    If/when Gnome offers this more than KDE at some point, I will change to Gnome, tbh. Some Gnome apps are the best for the task, I use those, I don't see why anyone would use anything but the one with the best features for them right now.
  • frontbrain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I have mostly used GNOME, but because of this discussion of kde having more options I think i may give it a shot again. I have been somewhat frustrated with gnomes lack of options in the print dialog for example... maybe kde will have what I am looking for. I have used KDE in the past but never really took the time to look into the options to get some basic visual things the way I wanted them.
  • user98887, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Wasn't all this crap argued about the other day in a similar story - I checked this story out thinking it had some more info (an epilogue you might say), but nope.

    Same KDE vs Gnome.

    A Window manager/Desktop provides a GUI to browse files and start programs, they both do that.

    If you spend all day adjusting settings or tweaking it - your playing with it.
    (For most of the 12 year olds who post on Digg, you will understand that reference in a couple of years)
    • jackkerouac, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1BWAAAHH!
    • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You see, one person's meat is another's poison.

      I work with a computer all day, day in and day out, and to me, If you don't require a decent print dialog, file manager, common file dialogs, networking support or fast configuration tools in a GUI you're playing with it.
  • protogenxl, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1As with all tech flame wars one thing always holds true with both sides

    PEBKAC
  • Robstah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Anyone else have an issue with the Gnome menu editor? Half the time, it doesn't want to delete/hide/move a menu item until you closed out of the program, killed the gnome-panel to force a restart of it, and then reopened the editor. It's very dirty to use and definitely needs improvement. So far, that is really my only pet peeve with Gnome as a GUI.

    Gnome reminds me of Windows 2000 and KDE of Windows XP. Some say the default them in Gnome sucks, I beg to differ. I like the layout of Gnome over KDE as well. That is why Linux is so great, you DO have a choice.
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4At least Gnome even has a menu editor, now. When I tried a version, possibly 2.08, they had taken the menu editor out because appearanly the ability to edit the menu was too confusing. When I was thinking, "Ok, this Gnome isn't as ***** as the last one, I'll give it a shot. Wierd, this app didn't appear in the menu. I'll just add it.....WTF?!? You can't edit the menu?!? Back to KDE"
    • bkor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@sanguinemoon

      You state that the menu editor was taken out because it was difficult for new users. That it is not true. The way the menu worked was changed to support a freedesktop standard (basically what KDE did with .desktop files). The (then) existing way of editing the menus relied on the old standard. Nobody ported it to the freedesktop way of working, so it wasn't ported over and the whole menu editing was unavailable (as it just did not work). IIRC one/two release(s) later someone made a very simple menu editor that (basically) couldn't do anything. That was included so you at least have something again. In another release alacarte was included (much better than that previous one).
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@bkor I've heard of that before, but I still don't understant it

      If I'm looking at the right thing:

      Menu editing
      To implement menu editing, the intent is that a per-user file is created. The per-user file should specify a with the system wide file, so that system changes are inherited. When the user deletes a menu item, you add foo.desktop. If the user adds a menu item, you use foo.desktop.

      If the user moves a folder you can use elements to represent the move. elements used for menu-editing should always be added to the most top-level menu to ensure that moves are performed in the order in which they are specified; moves specified in child menus are always performed before moves specified in a more top level menu regardless of their location in the menu file.

      To delete a folder, simply append the element.

      When adding a new folder or moving an existing folder, menu editing implementations are advised not to re-use the menu path of a previously deleted folder.

      Menu editors probably need to do some kind of consolidation/compression to avoid an XML tree that grows infinitely over time.

      .7 - 1.0 of the spec all read about the same. I'm sure how the absolutely required the removal of the menu editor.
    • sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Crap typo. I meant that I'm not sure how the specs absolutely required complete removal of the menu.
  • booc0mtaco, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1The only reason I don't use Linux and other window managers (when I am forced to use Linux) is due to the overwhelming configurability of it all. Personally, I would rather not be presented with endless configuration files, and options to configure my gui. I want to have something familiar, easy, and straightforward.

    This is the general problem with linux altogether; whenever someone has a desire, they 'add' and do not incorporate. What results is a list of features, not necessarily incorporated in the best manner, which is confusing to the novice and experienced user after a point. And, I don't enjoy my time configuring a computer. I just want to use it.

    Linus is a great developer, but short-sighted in this regard. Stick to the kernel, I say.
    • g2g591, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Why are you confusing the kernel with distribution and window manager? they are all very separate terms, sir please learn a bit more about what your are talking about before you speak
  • alexanderGQ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm gnome user, but I extremely agree with Linus. You may create advanced dialog for setting 'expert' things, but please dont ask me to digg into gconf. I had enough headache with windows's registry =
  • 5plic3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Both Gnome and KDE suck. I prefer Gnome to KDE, but only by a small margin.
  • decoherence, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0nice remarks by blizzard at the end there.

    Linus; You've picked on one aspect of GNOME to dislike. I recommend KDE people switch to GNOME when they tell me their linux computer is slow or overwhelming. So you either live without that feature or you move on to a desktop environment that does. You don't use your out-of-proportion influence to try and effect GNOME development, which is exactly what you're doing.

    Which brings me to my next point: Why the hell does everybody care what Linus Torvalds thinks so much? He's a kernel developer; that doesn't make him an expert on anything but kernel development. The guy gets seriously way too much credit for his tactless spouting off. It's bad for the community.
  • HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm a bit confused as to what makes Gnome easier to use than KDE. They both have simple default environments with all the same base conventions as any other GUI, and the only big difference that comes into play is when you want to *change* something. But even then, whats "hard to do" in KDE due to clutter is "not there to do" in Gnome due to complete lack of customization features in the GUI itself.

    How hard is it to rate the importance of various features and customization, and have the first and foremost customization be to have a slider determine how wide a range of features to include in GUI config options, or to allow the user to say "show me more" when the config available isn't enough?

    I believe that's a route KDE should consider as well, particularly with regard to offering even more obscure options, which could for example offer way more customization to how mouse wheel events are handled/what is done with them. I've for a long time wanted to "scroll" through tasks on the taskbar, a feature which itself would need many control options. A simple 2-tier split on GUI stuff is in my opinion not enough. There at least needs to be several discrete levels of complexity for the user to chose from, and a continuous slider may not be a bad idea either. With floating point ratings of obscurity vs importance, discrete step distinctions could still be used for organization of features, but scaled to the level of obscurity desired, with the rest cut off and hidden from the user.
  • poxoe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Doubtful info... Rubbish.
  • g2g591, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I'm afraid I have to agree with Linus on this one, I used gnome for the 1st week of using linux (ubuntu) not knowing anything about desktop environments, and I found the configuration downright confusing and hard to follow, KDE does configuration much better, especially the slightly modified version of Kcontrol that ships with Kubuntu (kcontrol itself is still better than gnomes confusing and limiting options)
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.