Frustrated

[KezzerDrix]

*Sigh* I am not trying to start a holy war but it seems that KDE is more advanced than Gnome

http://developer.kde.org/development-versions/kde-3.4-features.html

I used Ubuntu for a while but always felt like I was missing out on the richer featured KDE. I also tried Kubuntu, but read that it was missing some of the features that I liked about Ubuntu such as auto notifier and a couple other things it been a while, right at the beginning of 5.04. Plus kynaptic froze on me EVERY time I tried to use it. With both Ubuntu/Kubuntu I had sound issues and my tv card didn't work I asked for help but NO one had answers. I then switched to Mepis and It works great but seems a little outdated compared to Ubuntu/kubuntu. So I am at a catch 22 not happy with either. So my questions are

Is KDE more advanced than Gnome? Does Gnome have all or most of the same features?

If not should I retry Ubuntu and then synaptic in the Kubuntu desktop?

Does kubuntu have the same sound issues as Ubuntu. I need to explain here, when playing games I had to open a console and do a "sudo killall -9 esd" or the system would freeze or no sound would be heard. Someone stated after I had switched to Mepis to go into the gnome controller and switch the primary sound driver to "alsa" and that would fix the problem? To late at the time to help me, but I am curious as to if anyone else had this problem and if that fixed it for them. If so did doing it break other things?

The reason I am asking is that I am considering giving Ubuntu/kubuntu another try. I can live without a functional tv card. I just can't seem to find a linux version for me. All I want is the latest desktop manager and a system that works. I don't mind tweaking and fixing but I don't want to spend all my time doing it.

[dave9191]

I've got to say that KDE is more advanced the gnome in terms of features, functionallity and desktop intergration (hides as people throw stuff at me). But gnome tends to be slightly more polished around some of the edges. I have used both for extended periods of time and I like both. But which ever one I use, I end up missing out on the little things from the other. But I always seem to end up using KDE. And how can you not like KDE 3.4 :)

Sound issues are still bouncing around. If you try to run a program that doesnt support the currently running sound system and wants to take control of the sound card itself, it will most likely crash. But you can force the programs sound to be directed to a running sound server. For instance with KDE you can run an app

artsdsp app_name

and it will force it to use the Arts sound system. There is an equivilant command for ESD, but I dont know it off the top of my head.

As for kynaptic, you can avoid using it and use Kpackage instead, or just use the command line apt-get commands. Or if you prefer synatpic and KDE, then you can install KDE onto an Ubuntu install. Also that way you will be able to run Gnome apps in KDE.

I really like Kubuntu because it just works with my system with minmal tweaking. If I was installing again, Id probably install Ubuntu and put KDE on that as Kubuntu seems a little rough around the edges with a lot of Gnome/ubuntu stuff left in that shouldnt be there (eg. acpi commands to control xscreensaver that isnt on Kubuntu, CUPS gnome referance).

Hope that helps a bit.

Dave

[Segovia]

KDE certainly has 98374983749583 options (most of which I do not use). I don't like it, but rather prefer gnome. I'm not sure what you mean by "Advanced". Gnome does everything I need, and is far more polished/stable, in my view.

[GarySaved]

I have used both KDE and Gnome.

KDE has been around longer than Gnome. There was an argument about some libraries KDE used that did not comply with the GNU license. That has been cleared up, but now we have both.

KDE has more bells and whistles, but I like the way Gnome works.

Gary

[dave9191]

KDE certainly has 98374983749583 options (most of which I do not use). I don't like it, but rather prefer gnome. I'm not sure what you mean by "Advanced". Gnome does everything I need, and is far more polished/stable, in my view.


Advanced features would include being able to fullscreen any app, get rid of the window border. Transparent menus. A menu editor, lovely KnewsTicker on the panel. DCOP control for kde apps, excellent for scripting :D More options for more customistation in the control center. Generally being able to change the way KDE behaves to suit you. The list does go on for a while :)

But then gnome has some thing polished of far more like the calendar with todo list and appointments when you click on the clock. Neater and nicer applets for the panel like frequency scaler, weather app looked nicer than the KDE 3.2 one, battery monitor is lovely (KDE one is kina sucky looking).

Best thing to do is to try them out and see which one you prefer. I am near the middle between the two leaning towards KDE.

Dave

[Segovia]

Advanced features would include being able to fullscreen any app, get rid of the window border. Transparent menus. A menu editor, lovely KnewsTicker on the panel. DCOP control for kde apps, excellent for scripting :D More options for more customistation in the control center. Generally being able to change the way KDE behaves to suit you. The list does go on for a while :)
See, that's the thing - I'm sure many people do use these things, but I don't. Very often I'll try them for a few days, then realize that they're just cluttering up my view and making it harder for me to work.

I prefer a rather spartan interface that *only* includes the items that I use all the time. I keep everything else hidden. It just clutters up my screen, and my mind. Even my web browser - the only buttons visible to me are: Back, Forward, Refresh, and Home.

A menu editor could be useful, however it's fairly rare that I even use the menus. All the apps I use frequently are in a drawer on the panel.

I don't use anything transparent. It's sort of neat at first, but I find it harder to work with to be honest. It's more difficult for my eye to distinguish the different windows when they're transparent.

To me, more is not better. It's usually worse. KDE, to me, equals clutter and confusion. Nothing feels cohesive or thought-out. It feels like they just added every possible option as they came along, without any mind to organizing it, or even whether or not it's useful.

Regardless, everyone has their opinions on such things...

[jerome bettis]

I prefer a rather spartan interface that *only* includes the items that I use all the time. I keep everything else hidden. It just clutters up my screen, and my mind. Even my web browser - the only buttons visible to me are: Back, Forward, Refresh, and Home.

have you tried xfce?

[Segovia]

have you tried xfce?
No, I've never tried it. The only DE's I've really ever used are KDE and GNOME