PDA

View Full Version : We Need to Kill GNOME



Pages : [1] 2

kadath
September 14th, 2007, 07:56 AM
I ran across this blog post tonight: We need to kill GNOME (http://hopachai.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/we-need-to-kill-gnome/)

I'm interested Ubuntu users' reactions on this, primarily because Ubuntu is heavily biased towards GNOME.

curuxz
September 14th, 2007, 08:06 AM
I would not sasy kill Gnome....ever, because its peoples personal choices. But I strongly agree that from a techincal stand point KDE is far far superieor.

lately a lot of focus is going on the future paths of the projects and I think this is causing a lot of concern, on one hand we have KDE 4 and the synaptic desktop of KDE and loads of people want to really get on board with KDE and on the other hand we have Gnome not getting the benifits of a mass upgrade like KDE 4 but instead further adopting mono which given its .net base is not exactly pleasing people in parts of the community.

This blog does seem to be stiring trouble a bit though!

PS: we are not all gnome baised here :lolflag:

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 08:09 AM
gnome/kde....those are choices and it should stay the same. the main problem is the one described in the first third of the article:

Although Ubuntu comes with a lot of (open source) applications, this should prove my point that hardly anyone is writing competitive proprietary software for the Linux platform, while they are doing it for the Mac platform, and that people is willing to pay more money for those proprietary applications, which means they are demanded.

There are three overused arguments to deny this is an issue:

1. Some people think that proprietary software is not the future and that eventually all of these applications should be replaced by open source alternatives, but even if you are one of these youíll have to admit that this isnít going to happen anytime soon, so it would be better to have that software available in Linux at the moment, so that we can have a good market share in the future.
2. Some people think thereís not interest in using this kind of software in Linux, but just take a look at the Wine project (a piece of software that lets you run some windows applications under Linux) and all the people using it.
3. The third option is that you are one of those positive thinkers that really consider The Gimp to be equal or better than Photoshop, in that case can you at least admit that some people like professional users will need proprietary software? You know, even if you go out of the way to use free software professionally, sometimes you receive files in proprietary format and you canít allow yourself the luxury of telling your clients to convert the files for you. There are also other features that you might not need but other people do.

Traditionally, Linux users have assumed that itís hard for Windows users to switch because they are used to a particular kind of system or there are concepts involved that are difficult to grasp such as ďoperating systemĒ. But people arenít as stupid! They are perfectly capable of understanding that they have a particular kind of computer and that they need to look for software packages with the Apple logo or the Windows logo, in the same way they do with the fuel of their cars. They are also capable of understanding that their ďkind of computerĒ may have some pros and some cons, they may even be willing to sacrifice some functionality in exchange for other things, and the growth of Mac OS X is showing all this.
.....

K.Mandla
September 14th, 2007, 08:13 AM
It's neither here nor there to me, because I don't use either one. If I had to, I'd pick KDE just because I think it looks better, and because I think Gnome treats users like dummies. But the fact that there's a choice is the most important thing, in my book.

I doubt there will or would be any mass migration from the G camp to the K camp, unless his (I'm assuming it's a him) predictions start to come true. In which case I think he might be right.

But my crystal ball is foggy, and no one's going to get me to install Gnome over my Openbox. :biggrin:

tbroderick
September 14th, 2007, 08:14 AM
The blogger is an idiot. All these Miguel de Icaza conspiracy theories are moronic.

Technoviking
September 14th, 2007, 08:18 AM
Killing choice is what the other guys do (Windows, Mac). Open Source is all about choice and I feel KDE can learn a lot from Gnome and vice versa.

mostwanted
September 14th, 2007, 08:26 AM
The blogger is an idiot. All these Miguel de Icaza conspiracy theories are moronic.

+1

There should be a tinfoil hat filter for Firefox in the same it way it has a malicious sites filter.

GeneralZod
September 14th, 2007, 08:27 AM
Killing choice is what the other guys do (Windows, Mac). Open Source is all about choice and I feel KDE can learn a lot from Gnome and vice versa.

I was going to pick apart the blog post point-by-point (until I realised how incredibly long it was!), but this post pretty much sums up what I think :)

kadath
September 14th, 2007, 08:44 AM
The blogger is an idiot. All these Miguel de Icaza conspiracy theories are moronic.

Regardless of whether or not you think Icaza is willfully tainting Linux with MS code, you have to admit, he does seem to have an infatuation with MS, and it's not healthy for someone that's supposed to be contributing to open source. All he's ever interested in these days is porting over MS technologies to Linux. Why?

The idea that GNOME might integrate Mono into its desktop is repulsive to me. Yes, yes, I can hear it now: "But Mono is an OPEN SOURCE implementation, blah blah blah..." Look, that's great, but should we really encourage people to be coding Linux apps in it?

I'll be frank about Silverlight: it's rubbish, and Linux needs it even less than it needs Mono.

misfitpierce
September 14th, 2007, 08:59 AM
I think its dumb on the fact that programs usually install the necessary gnome dependancies if required so running a KDE app in gnome is not a prob on ubuntu. Same for Kubuntu but in reverse. I also think its dumb to eliminate them. They have sprung out and both became beautiful pieces of software. Some prefer KDE and some Gnome. I say to each their own and choice is everything on linux! :)

ukripper
September 14th, 2007, 09:07 AM
Choice gives us freedom, GNOME is our choice and shouldn't be killed. Ranting won't kill GNOME so I have nothing to fear about.:)

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 09:11 AM
my impression is that the article it'is not just about gnome....

curuxz
September 14th, 2007, 09:19 AM
I don't want to get into a flame war here, but I am finding it really hypocritical and historically ignorant of the gnome users to just keep dismissing these questions about gnomes future as 'tin hat' conspiracies!

Take a second to remember WHY gnome was formed in the first place, because of the people behind it having the same kind of 'tin hat' theory's about KDE and Trolltech's QT licenses, which time has obviously proven them wrong as KDE is still going strong and has not been hijacked by propitiatory code!

Weather its right or wrong it deserves discussion not just the label of crazy calling people morons for questioning the mono craze is not going to make a better piece of software or a friendly'er community try keeping an open mind.

Pot meet kettle, now try not to call each other names

OoooMatron
September 14th, 2007, 09:22 AM
If i had to rely on the current form of KDE to keep my interest in Linux I would not be a happy man.

I'm not aware how either of them run under the hood from a coders perspective but KDE is truly ugly and I know from my experience that i don't get the "gnome kerash handler" up every 10 minutes.

I see a lot of fancy KDE screenshots and it looks great on the surface until you actually start using the apps. The standards in Gnome are much nicer and friendly and more professional looking.

I will be interested to see how the final version of KDE 4 pans out. When i first started using linux i liked gnome and then discovered KDE and wondered what the hell I'd been missing. That was before I started to actually use it and see it for what it really was. Wolf in sheeps clothing :D

We need more choice. Not uniformity into turning linux into another generic operating system. Linux makes more progress year after year and I don't care if the majority of people want to use Windows or Mac OS. Things are working nicely for this community as it is.

I don't need to be a Gnome guy or a KDE guy. I will use whatever gives me the best results at the time and right now that's Gnome. I hope the KDE project continues to thrive and improve as I hope Gnome expands in the same way.

bionnaki
September 14th, 2007, 09:25 AM
I would use KDE if firefox was better integrated. as of now, firefox on KDE really sucks.

ukripper
September 14th, 2007, 09:28 AM
I would use KDE if firefox was better integrated. as of now, firefox on KDE really sucks.

Swiftweasel is quick in KDE try that..I use kde sometimes and swiftweasel just fly.

curuxz
September 14th, 2007, 09:32 AM
If i had to rely on the current form of KDE to keep my interest in Linux I would not be a happy man.

I'm not aware how either of them run under the hood from a coders perspective but KDE is truly ugly and I know from my experience that i don't get the "gnome kerash handler" up every 10 minutes.

I see a lot of fancy KDE screenshots and it looks great on the surface until you actually start using the apps. The standards in Gnome are much nicer and friendly and more professional looking.

I will be interested to see how the final version of KDE 4 pans out. When i first started using linux i liked gnome and then discovered KDE and wondered what the hell I'd been missing. That was before I started to actually use it and see it for what it really was. Wolf in sheeps clothing :D

We need more choice. Not uniformity into turning linux into another generic operating system. Linux makes more progress year after year and I don't care if the majority of people want to use Windows or Mac OS. Things are working nicely for this community as it is.

I don't need to be a Gnome guy or a KDE guy. I will use whatever gives me the best results at the time and right now that's Gnome. I hope the KDE project continues to thrive and improve as I hope Gnome expands in the same way.

I really don't get why so many people here continually insult KDE as unprofessional when proper research shows its better for a business environment.

Additionally all this FUD about kde apps being bad, I can only speak from my experience but I have used Linux for 8 years, literally grew up using it as my main OS, I use it at least 40-60 hours a week and I only use KDE, gnome is only installed for the odd test. If it really had these kinds of flaws then why oh why would professional users like my self still be using it, it does not make sense. KDE has the most intuitive, customizable, stable desktop environment in Linux by miles and people can say what they want about KDE but I wish they would not make comments like unprofessional. Try using tabs in nautilus or multi-split plain ftp...oh wait you cant do either of those basic functions, i could spend all day listing the things that gnome cant do.

Its personal choice, why do people have to spend so much time saying they like something by slagging off its competitor. Sorry I know your post specifically is not that bad but its just 1 of 100000000000000000 that call KDE unprofessional or unfriendly when there is so much evidence otherwise. Just use what ever you want without putting down the stuff you don't use.

ukripper
September 14th, 2007, 09:38 AM
Iwhy do people have to spend so much time saying they like something by slagging off its competitor.

I guess human nature is that way to slag off anyone and everyone in spare time... :lolflag:

mostwanted
September 14th, 2007, 09:40 AM
KDE vs. Gnome flame war in 3, 2, 1....

sstusick
September 14th, 2007, 09:41 AM
I use to be a KDE fan when I was 'new' to Linux but since I started using Ubuntu I've grown to like Gnome and discovered it really isn't as bad as I thought. Now I actually prefer it to KDE. Long live Gnome!

jatos
September 14th, 2007, 09:55 AM
I personally detest GNOME, but thats just me.

One thing though: if there was one GUI api and not two, Linux use would be a lot higher. What would make more senese is GNOME and KDE devs to agree one API and use it for the desktop their desktop environments. However, I don't see that happening.

gotonpo
September 14th, 2007, 09:56 AM
xfce for teh win. :(

curuxz
September 14th, 2007, 09:56 AM
I guess human nature is that way to slag off anyone and everyone in spare time... :lolflag:

lol i think your right,

its like linux is good BECAUSE windows sucks donkey balls...personally i think linux would still be as good without windows.

"Gimp is nothing compared with photoshop!" yeah and word is nothing compared with adobe illustrator but just because you can put text in both of them does not make it a comparison.

"Gnome rules because kde sucks" or "kde rules because gnome sucks" or "both suck, they can compare with Xfce" or "all of them suck compared with macosx"

I mean come on, promotion though slander is not really showing something is good just that its 'better'

I think mostwanted is right about flamewar number 43549543-950-435-093458734956324902838243829034902349283423485 starting soon :(

misfitpierce
September 14th, 2007, 10:01 AM
I would use KDE if firefox was better integrated. as of now, firefox on KDE really sucks.

Integrated... yes would be nice....

sucks... No! It works the same as it did in ubuntu... Not 1 lockup or anything. So that is false.

newman
September 14th, 2007, 10:14 AM
Gnome is a bit too simple, and nautilus stinks, but it seems stable. Every time I've tried KDE, something crashes and the bug tracker or whatever that window is, pops up - very annoying.

Bothered
September 14th, 2007, 10:16 AM
Thereíre a lot of applications for Windows and Mac but thereís only one Linux product: Ubuntu

Am I misreading that? It doesn't seem to make any sense?

I would make a more detailed response, but it's a bit long and seems to have a bit of a "I know more than you do, so listen to me" feel about it.

Personally I would use Gnome, KDE, or Xfce for that matter, but ubuntu came with Gnome by default so I use that.

ukripper
September 14th, 2007, 10:30 AM
It doesn't seem to make any sense?


looks like person took oppurtunity to shoot through B*llocks in flame war..makes no sense at all m8..

fct
September 14th, 2007, 10:31 AM
Way to start a blog.

"Let's kill one of the most successful free software projects because I don't like its API and I'm (sincerely?) afraid of some dark MS connections based on a single individual. Plus Linus says it sucks!"

So it looks to me like the author would like Qt to be the standard GUI API in linux so he can reuse his Windows code and sell his proprietary applications in linux too. I seriously doubt he's using KDE (not Qt) libraries for the Windows applications he says he's developing.

And considering you must pay Trolltech for a proprietary development license, I see clearly where his bias is.

So here we have a guy with a proprietary development agenda spewing worn-off conspiracy theories against Icaza, who is a free software developer with a long history of contributions, MS related or not. This is ridiculous.

hessiess
September 14th, 2007, 10:58 AM
i like gnome, without it i would probaly go back to xp

curuxz
September 14th, 2007, 11:01 AM
really trying to keep away from the flames but increasingly it looks like Icaza is on the payroll of MS.

Gnome need to ask some serious questions about its leadership, I mean the great think about Linux is linus does not really have that much control so people are free to disagree but Gnome risks either being forked or getting forked (exscuse the bad pun) because of Icaza's recent actions towards Gnome being a Mono centric system

kanem
September 14th, 2007, 11:11 AM
The blogger is an idiot.
This summarizes everything perfectly.

fct
September 14th, 2007, 11:13 AM
really trying to keep away from the flames but increasingly it looks like Icaza is on the payroll of MS.

Gnome need to ask some serious questions about its leadership, I mean the great think about Linux is linus does not really have that much control so people are free to disagree but Gnome risks either being forked or getting forked (exscuse the bad pun) because of Icaza's recent actions towards Gnome being a Mono centric system

Currently de Icaza is totally involved in Mono and has no say in the Gnome project, which has a board of members, some of them working for different companies (including Sun, one of Mono's biggest opposers) that approves the project decissions.

Gnome's leadership is clearly and properly defined, and has been so for years. Read:

http://foundation.gnome.org/about/

GeneralZod
September 14th, 2007, 11:13 AM
really trying to keep away from the flames but increasingly it looks like Icaza is on the payroll of MS.

Gnome need to ask some serious questions about its leadership, I mean the great think about Linux is linus does not really have that much control so people are free to disagree but Gnome risks either being forked or getting forked (exscuse the bad pun) because of Icaza's recent actions towards Gnome being a Mono centric system

I don't really follow GNOME development, but is Miguel really in any kind of position to decide the future of GNOME? It seems to me that it is a similar situation to KDE: Matthias Ettrich founded the project, but nowadays has no hand in shaping its future - if any one person could be described as the "leader" of KDE nowadays, it would be Aaron Seigo. If this is the case, then it really doesn't matter whose "payroll" he's on, or how much he likes Mono: it won't affect the future of GNOME.

Besides the fact that a few easily replaceable apps use Mono, is there any evidence that he is intending to and succeeding in injecting Mono into the core of GNOME so that it becomes an unavoidable dependency?

Edit:

fct's post seems to answer that question nicely :)

zekica
September 14th, 2007, 12:00 PM
I personally use KDE, and I agree that it is miles ahead of GNOME under the hood. However, there is a problem with Trolltech's proprietary licenses, and because of that, most proprietary software is based on GTK, and this only adds to the complexity of writing software for Linux (this is based on my programming experience from maybe two years ago).

One thing that bothers me is that freedesktop.org standards take too long to be made, and that we have to wait for .2 release of KDE/GNOME/XFCE/... to implement it correctly. We have DCOP and DBUS that do similar things, but they are not the same. This is changing slowly, and KDE4 has more freedesktop standards that are developed by GNOME and others. For example let me quote one comment from:

http://dot.kde.org/1170892771/1171055296/ :
It seems to me that over the last several years, GNOME developers became disillusioned over developing new technologies under the GNOME umbrella because they feared that other groups, such as KDE and Mozilla, would not use the new technologies but develop their own equivalents. So, the GNOME developers began putting more and more energy in developing the technologies in independent places, such as freedesktop.org, where there was a better chance that KDE and others would use them and contribute to them.

This is the way all Linux development should be made, so that every software vendor can choose which framework they will use, and only use different API for the same system running on Linux.

KDE will have friendlier API (from my point of view), and they created kdelibs which will be "natively" ported to OSX/Windows. On the other side Gnome has GTK which is also ported (although it is not possible to use something as HAL on other systems, but you can use Solid for example). They also have Mono and Silverlight, but that is a little different story.

Tomosaur
September 14th, 2007, 12:10 PM
The real issue, like the article / blog states - is that you can only really develop FOR Gnome, or FOR KDE - and both have roughly equivalent numbers of users. There may well be some abstract way of coding for both using some extra toolkit which can use both GTK and QT, but this just isn't satisfactory, and would only make the dependency problems worse. The article is absolutely right in its criticism of the Gnome vs KDE debate - and we really DO just need to 'pick one' if Linux ever hopes to be as successful as Windows or Mac OS X. Choice is great and all, but Gnome/KDE is not just a choice in the sense of 'I like how KDE looks', but a choice in the sense of 'If I choose Gnome, I can use these applications, but if I choose KDE, I can use these'. Yes, you CAN use both sets of applications, but only if you download and install the dependencies for each - and even then you can run into obscure integration problems. This is just pure inefficiency and waste, and it's surprising that it's been allowed to go on for so long.

Either Gnome and KDE need to collaborate at a much deeper level, and make the differences between the two almost purely cosmetic, or someone needs to step up and say 'this is the reccommended Linux desktop environment'. I would say KDE is better suited for this, but even that needs a redesign. At the end of the day we have a variety of DEs which all have their flaws - this just makes it harder for people to develop for Linux - they end up having to make choices about which DE they want to support.

OoooMatron
September 14th, 2007, 12:28 PM
I really don't get why so many people here continually insult KDE as unprofessional when proper research shows its better for a business environment.

Additionally all this FUD about kde apps being bad, I can only speak from my experience but I have used Linux for 8 years, literally grew up using it as my main OS, I use it at least 40-60 hours a week and I only use KDE, gnome is only installed for the odd test. If it really had these kinds of flaws then why oh why would professional users like my self still be using it, it does not make sense. KDE has the most intuitive, customizable, stable desktop environment in Linux by miles and people can say what they want about KDE but I wish they would not make comments like unprofessional. Try using tabs in nautilus or multi-split plain ftp...oh wait you cant do either of those basic functions, i could spend all day listing the things that gnome cant do.

Its personal choice, why do people have to spend so much time saying they like something by slagging off its competitor. Sorry I know your post specifically is not that bad but its just 1 of 100000000000000000 that call KDE unprofessional or unfriendly when there is so much evidence otherwise. Just use what ever you want without putting down the stuff you don't use.

I'm only expressing my opinion in my experience. It's obvious that the debate is very split and one man's picasso is another man's raphael.

This kind of screenshot just represents to me what KDE is all about.

http://ktorrent.org/images/screenshots/KT-configure-plugin-manager.png

I'm sorry, but I have pretty good eyesight :lolflag: That whole screen is aesthetically unbalanced and needs a makeover. It's so obviously designed by programmers, not people with an eye for guis.

The whole look and feel to me is just big and clumsy and it's standard for layouts and settings panel just look horrific.

It's really down to the look and feel for me and little else.

Gnome is sleeker and sexy.

I am also a "professional" user and do programming work predominately. It's not that you can't do one thing or another that I find the problem, it's just that KDE feels so chunky. Look at the size of the toolbar compared to the entire desktop.

http://www.kde.org/screenshots/images/3.4/snapshot20.png

All this just makes me bulk.

Again, it's just my opinion and I am not pushing it to anyone. But Gnome gives me an environment I enjoy working in and KDE doesn't. The opposite is the same for many people.

iPower
September 14th, 2007, 12:54 PM
i don't realy like KDE

ukripper
September 14th, 2007, 01:03 PM
KDE4 Beta2 release addresses eye candy issues preparing for final release in Dec.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.ars/2007/09/04/testdriving-kde-4-beta-2-or-thereabouts

Swarms
September 14th, 2007, 01:14 PM
I tried KDE, didn't enjoy it so switched to Gnome which I liked.
But let people use what they want, "killing" alternatives is just a freaking stupid idea and the blogger is indeed an idiot like said multiple times by other users.

loell
September 14th, 2007, 01:18 PM
put it this way, i like gnome and i use gnome. but god, i couldn't help myself not to hate De Icaza, to me he's like a wolf in sheep's clothing.

apologies to miguel's fans but that's how i feel. :p

OoooMatron
September 14th, 2007, 01:27 PM
KDE4 Beta2 release addresses eye candy issues preparing for final release in Dec.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.ars/2007/09/04/testdriving-kde-4-beta-2-or-thereabouts

Let's hope so

http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.media/kde4-beta2-programs.png

Look at the size of those icons! What a waste of space. Do we really need buttons and side panel icons the size of an elephants head? I think not.

racoq
September 14th, 2007, 01:30 PM
The blogger is not only an idiot it's clearly an KDE fanboy, and yet another gnome troller.

Erunno
September 14th, 2007, 01:51 PM
I just wanted to highlight a small part of the blog post before the topic totally degrades into the typical "I LIEK TEH LOOK BETTAR!!11" discussion.


(And by technically I mean ďif you are not a coder you donít know what Iím talking aboutĒ so donít feel insulted please, in fact I find GNOME somehow more visually attractive in the user end but itís a mess inside!)

mcduck
September 14th, 2007, 02:05 PM
The day Gnome is killed would also be the day when I buy a mac and stop using Linux.. I hope it never comes.

I really, seriously, dislike KDE (Yes, I don't think KDE4 looks good either..I wouldn't use it.) and while XFCE4 is nice it still lacks too many things.

Anyway, the author of that article must be at least as stupid as those people who want to remove CLI from Linux. The thing I like best in Linux is that I can choose how to use my computer, and I don't want anybody else to restrict my options just because they don't like them.

Andrewie
September 14th, 2007, 02:06 PM
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/5046/gnomepranker9.th.jpg (http://img184.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gnomepranker9.jpg)

:(

Swarms
September 14th, 2007, 02:06 PM
I just wanted to highlight a small part of the blog post before the topic totally degrades into the typical "I LIEK TEH LOOK BETTAR!!11" discussion.

Having neatly written software doesn't have much to say when persuading the typical user the Blogger wants us to attract.

raijinsetsu
September 14th, 2007, 02:13 PM
I... don't know what to say about the article. I feel that either this person's 9th language is "poor English" or they rate low on the intelligence scale.


Killing choice is what the other guys do (Windows, Mac). Open Source is all about choice and I feel KDE can learn a lot from Gnome and vice versa.

I remember, not too long ago, when Gnome was the only user friendly desktop. KDE was buggy, had no GUIs for system functions, and couldn't run most programs without most of Gnome being installed with it.
So... People worked hard to improve KDE because they thought it was a good idea.
Maybe the Gnome development community got lax, I don't know. But it does appear that the rate at which Gnome improves has slowed to a halt, making KDE the choice for many (but not all).
In the end, if the Gnomers want their desktop to move ahead, it'll happen.
Don't forget though: there's also XFCE, Enlightenment, et al. as alternatives to both Gnome and KDE. People stand by these just as adamantly as others do with Gnome and KDE.

ukripper
September 14th, 2007, 02:24 PM
Do we really need buttons and side panel icons the size of an elephants head? I think not.

Again, I'd stress upon it as a choice not replacement.

Bladerunner71
September 14th, 2007, 02:24 PM
My proposal for users is: stop supporting GNOME. Even if you are a GNOME fanboy right now Iím sure you understand the concept of sacrifice. How cool would it be to act as an adult and say ďIím a GNOME fanboy but Iím gonna switch to KDE for the Linux futureĒ.


He might as well of said "I am a mindless zombie and will do whatever people tell me to do."

Personally, I have no issues with KDE, Windows, OSX or Gnome. I am currently using UBUNTU as my OS of choice and so far out of all the distro's I have tried, the GNOME based ones seem to be the more stable and I am happy with that. Not to mention my children are able to do their thing easily without having to ask how to do something. I think that it is cool that both of my kids prefer Linux over our Window's machine.

This may seem a little far fetched, but rather than bickering over the better of the two, shouldn't they be working with FULL interoperability with each other. I feel that if this can be accomplished, it will lead to a bigger and better future for Linux.

OoooMatron
September 14th, 2007, 02:33 PM
Again, I'd stress upon it as a choice not replacement.

Yes, you are right, i should have said "I" not "we".

ukripper
September 14th, 2007, 02:51 PM
Yes, you are right, i should have said "I" not "we".

Personally i use GNOME , seeing KDE development doesn't makes me hate gnome but makes me wonder what KDE has learnt from GNOME and what could be learned from KDE. It is essential that we have counterparts otherwise cycle of development slows down - Just an opinion.

raijinsetsu
September 14th, 2007, 02:54 PM
Personally i use GNOME , seeing KDE development doesn't makes me hate gnome but makes me wonder what KDE has learnt from GNOME and what could be learned from KDE. It is essential that we have counterparts otherwise cycle of development slows down - Just an opinion.

I agree... Proper competition can breed better alternatives for everyone.
If things need to be killed, they'll do the job themselves... Just looked at MS with Vista... *chuckle*

aysiu
September 14th, 2007, 02:57 PM
You'll never get the entire Linux community to agree to "kill" (or deprecate) KDE or Gnome. Both are too popular.

The only way one will come out ahead is through natural competition. If one is clearly superior to the other, users and developers alike will flock to that desktop environment and abandon the other one.

ComplexNumber
September 14th, 2007, 02:59 PM
I personally use KDE, and I agree that it is miles ahead of GNOME under the hood.
can you explain to me exactly what is so much more advanced in kde compared to gnome under the hood, please?

tech9
September 14th, 2007, 03:07 PM
Killing choice is what the other guys do (Windows, Mac). Open Source is all about choice and I feel KDE can learn a lot from Gnome and vice versa.

I couldn't agree more :)

raijinsetsu
September 14th, 2007, 03:09 PM
can you explain to me exactly what is so much more advanced in kde compared to gnome under the hood, please?

I believe that's still a matter of opinion. KDE is OOP, while Gnome is procedural (correct me if I'm wrong).
OOP is superior in terms of maintainability, readability, and extensibility. Whereas procedural methods are/can be (currently) more efficient.

saxuntu
September 14th, 2007, 03:09 PM
I like the look of GNOME and since i'm a user and not a programmer thats what i'm looking for. Why don't the two projects work together to make it easier on programers? What is OOP?

Spr0k3t
September 14th, 2007, 03:16 PM
Killing choice is what the other guys do (Windows, Mac). Open Source is all about choice and I feel KDE can learn a lot from Gnome and vice versa.

Wisdom to live by.

Spr0k3t
September 14th, 2007, 03:18 PM
I like the look of GNOME and since i'm a user and not a programmer thats what i'm looking for. Why don't the two projects work together to make it easier on programers? What is OOP?

Object Oriented Programming. It allows developers to create applications fast with multiple build teams. Do it right you can add and remove functions from a forked development in seconds.

bogolisk
September 14th, 2007, 03:21 PM
can you explain to me exactly what is so much more advanced in kde compared to gnome under the hood, please?

Maybe because it wrapped gnome^H^H^H^H^H uh... fd.o's technologies under the hood!:)))

http://dot.kde.org/1170892771/1171055296/


The new tech in KDE4 is indeed exciting, though much of it is built on top of freedesktop.org (and other free software) standards that GNOME has been very instrumental in building. Phonon, for example, is a high-level API that wraps lower-level APIs in a KDE friendly way; yet, it is not necessarily new tech in the sense that GNOME has access to the lower-level APIs, such as GStreamer, to which the GNOME developers contribute. Similarly, Solid wraps HAL, which is developed (in part) by GNOME developers. Decibel wraps Telepathy, which too is developed (in part) by GNOME developers.

bogolisk
September 14th, 2007, 03:42 PM
Object Oriented Programming. It allows developers to create applications fast with multiple build teams. Do it right you can add and remove functions from a forked development in seconds.

But on the other hand, C++ is an awful OO language! After 6 years writing C++ in the industry (from 95 to 2001) I finally saw the light. OOP without GC is just unmanageable in large-scale development. Coming back to C and use language like Scheme or Python was much more pleasant than C++.

curuxz
September 14th, 2007, 03:42 PM
can you explain to me exactly what is so much more advanced in kde compared to gnome under the hood, please?

Personally their programing approach is far superior, Gnome tries to make each application stand alone on its own, the one tool for every job approach which is completely anti to the windows and macOS successful application families approach and im all for if it aint broke dont fix it. In KDE data flows nicely between the applications, even more so in KDE 4 as we build up to koffice coming of age and finally being a viable alternative to MS office or openoffice (personally I use Oo but that may change with the next Ko). KDE has been designed so that all its applications work together and share data in a really 'cute' way. Gnome in comparison is frustratingly disjointed, just look at the difference between kcontrol and the admin for gnome. Its modular approach to programing makes it very very easy to reuse code, and its basis on QT4 means that soon it will be able to run natively on macs and windows computers which while may not be a good thing for linux per'say is a fantastic technological breakthrough to take the whole platform forward into being a true cross platform system. Saying that there is lots of room for improvement in KDE just its much more mature and stable as a working environment.

ComplexNumber
September 14th, 2007, 03:50 PM
curuxz
what you've mentioned doesn't make it more advanced under the hood. also, qt is distinct from kde. qt is not part of kde, in the same way as gtk is not part of gnome.

we've actually been through this several times before. kde is more advanced with its use of kparts and kio slaves, and is lagging behind gnome in all other aspects. kde 4 will address this and bring it onto a level with gnome. it is important that both gnome and kde embrace freedesktop.org standards. whilst gnome has embraced them fully, kde has been lagging behind. again, kde 4 will address this.

bogolisk
September 14th, 2007, 03:57 PM
we've actually been through this several times before. kde is more advanced with its use of kparts and kio slaves, and is lagging behind gnome in all other aspects...

Oh my, oh my, You've just made yourself a prime target for the kde-fanboys!!!:)

jdrodrig
September 14th, 2007, 04:01 PM
I think a point is missing here, "economies of scale"....the blog point is about collective -versus- individual decisions....we personally like something but could we improve collectively by all sacrificing a bit in personal freedom (Desktop Environment) in order to get a richer set Applications?....

His point is that the real choice is, beautiful windows and icons with ugly programs, or a more "standard" icons and stuff with beautiful programs.

Think about it, how did Microsoft "entice" all developers to write for the newest platform...I am not a developer so let me use vague statements...how they "convinced" developers to switch from Windows 98 API to Windows XP API to Windows Vista API? ....

From my view, the trick is that they "burned the bridges" to everything related to previous versions.....

The Linux community driven by individual freedom, is not designed to force that kind of drastic changes, it has benefits, but the blog points us to a one of its costs..

amano
September 14th, 2007, 04:12 PM
I guess human nature is that way to slag off anyone and everyone in spare time... :lolflag:

I guess that your are a human then... :popcorn:

bogolisk
September 14th, 2007, 04:15 PM
My view on this KDE vs Gnome thing:

KDE folks want to create a framework. IMO, they've built an excellent one. With KDE4/Qt4, it'd be possible to port KDE apps to other platforms such as Windows and MAC.
Gnome folks want to build a set of foundation libraries. Their goal is a bit different that the KDE folks is that it also included: helping the ISVs to port their existing Windows apps to Linux! That's right the Adobe and Nero of the world.

What's more important to you would depend on who you are! I double the Adobe and Nero of the world would like a framework. They've already been using a framework in their existing (windows) app.

Personally I like DE with dbus, originally written by gnome folks (the api is modeled after dcop to help its adoption by kde)! For the first time, information flows from the kernel to the desktop.

As an user, I don't care about the DE, I just want access to my hardware. When I plug in an usb key, I want an easy access to it, such as an icon on my desktop!

compiledkernel
September 14th, 2007, 04:23 PM
Kill Gnome? No. Probably not going to happen, it goes back to user choice.

Liscense and Registration Please.
Free vs Non-free. Trolltech/Qt's weird liscensing issues create a strange climate for application development. GTK clearly doesnt have these limitations. Qt, upon which KDE is based, is not Free, so the more GNU-type people refused to build anything with it, ergo GTK's popularity.

Birth of the Interface Nazi.
Gnome tries to give you exactly what you need. Or exactly what its developers think you need, the adverse to which KDE provides you a bunch of stuff, needed or not. We all know that Linus -- "Please, just tell people to use KDE," Torvalds concluded. Only for him to conclude later that the Gnome Devs are a bunch of Interface Nazis. But does giving a beginner KDE put too much control in the users hands? How easy would it be for a beginner to mess his box up by messing around with the umpteen thousand settings changes you can make within KDE. Certainly over the years its gotten better on the KDE side.

Kill Gnome. No, probably not. Be nice to see a fusion of the best of each though.

curuxz
September 14th, 2007, 04:30 PM
curuxz
what you've mentioned doesn't make it more advanced under the hood. also, qt is distinct from kde. qt is not part of kde, in the same way as gtk is not part of gnome.

we've actually been through this several times before. kde is more advanced with its use of kparts and kio slaves, and is lagging behind gnome in all other aspects. kde 4 will address this and bring it onto a level with gnome. it is important that both gnome and kde embrace freedesktop.org standards. whilst gnome has embraced them fully, kde has been lagging behind. again, kde 4 will address this.

I think it DOES technically make it more advanced under the hood since its embracing the modern idea of synaptic computing which is what all the web 2.0 hype is about...

can you define "behind gnome on all other aspects" please, and I agree with the freedesktop.org standards they should be adopted but then standards are nice only if everyone uses them

insane_alien
September 14th, 2007, 04:37 PM
if i had a pound for every "KILL GNOME"/"KILL KDE" idiot i've came across i'd have bought microsoft and released the source and patents and bought a nice car alongthe way(probably another vauxhall corsa but with a bigger engine, i love those cars.

it's just funny to see people who think you can kill an open source program. they're always going to be around, perhaps not getting developed but they'll always exist.

i for one am DE neutral. i alternate between fluxbox/gnome/icewm/KDE/openbox (Disclaimer: This ordering is purely alphabetic and does not represent my preferences or even order in which i cycle through them do not read anything into this list or you shall be forever classed as n00b of n00bs) regularly often only staying on one for a month or so. they ALL work and they ALL work well. i can even see a few merits in the windows environment.

can't we just all get along? you have the freedom to choose which to use and which not to use exercise that freedom but do not remove others freedom to do so in the process.

ComplexNumber
September 14th, 2007, 04:40 PM
can you define "behind gnome on all other aspects" please, and I agree with the freedesktop.org standards they should be adopted but then standards are nice only if everyone uses themyou've just partly answered your own question.
because both are moving towards interoperability, and gnome is more advanced in all these technologies under the hood. kde 3 has very few implemented, but kde 4 will begin to adopt them or has wrapped it's own API around what gnome already has. i struggled to find any areas where kde is at a more advanced stage other than kparts and kio slaves for areas that they will both share. see if you can(but note that differences in philosophy don't count. just concern yourself with the technologies such as dbus etc). kde needed a rewrite because lots of it are stale such as dcop and arts etc or not implemented at all.

Montsegur87
September 14th, 2007, 04:45 PM
xfce for teh win. :(
Roger That

digitalbenji
September 14th, 2007, 04:50 PM
Personally, I really dislike the way KDE tries to integrate everything. I don't want KOffice, KTorrent, or KAnything. I like my window manager to just to window management, and not be a bloated desktop environment. I personally like WindowMaker the best, but I also like Nautilus because it handles USB drives and the desktop really nicely. At some point I may see if I can make the two play together. I currently use Gnome, with Open Office, and never have any problems related to the window manager.

hessiess
September 14th, 2007, 04:54 PM
i thik we need to kill kde.

jrusso2
September 14th, 2007, 04:57 PM
Kill Gnome? No. Probably not going to happen, it goes back to user choice.

Liscense and Registration Please.
Free vs Non-free. Trolltech/Qt's weird liscensing issues create a strange climate for application development. GTK clearly doesnt have these limitations. Qt, upon which KDE is based, is not Free, so the more GNU-type people refused to build anything with it, ergo GTK's popularity.

K .

Where do you get the idea that QT is not free. The QT open source library is GPL?

http://trolltech.com/developer/knowledgebase/188

Jussi Kukkonen
September 14th, 2007, 05:18 PM
I believe that's still a matter of opinion. KDE is OOP, while Gnome is procedural (correct me if I'm wrong).

Ok. GTK and a lot of Gnome code uses GObject (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GObject). OO is entirely possible in C, it's just not very beatiful.


Where do you get the idea that QT is not free. The QT open source library is GPL?
He meant that you need a commercial license if you want to develop commercial applications. This is from the same knowledgebase: Any software developed with Qt without a commercial license agreement must be released as Open Source software.

wolfen69
September 14th, 2007, 05:19 PM
If i had to rely on the current form of KDE to keep my interest in Linux I would not be a happy man.

I'm not aware how either of them run under the hood from a coders perspective but KDE is truly ugly and I know from my experience that i don't get the "gnome kerash handler" up every 10 minutes.

I see a lot of fancy KDE screenshots and it looks great on the surface until you actually start using the apps. The standards in Gnome are much nicer and friendly and more professional looking.

I will be interested to see how the final version of KDE 4 pans out. When i first started using linux i liked gnome and then discovered KDE and wondered what the hell I'd been missing. That was before I started to actually use it and see it for what it really was. Wolf in sheeps clothing :D

We need more choice. Not uniformity into turning linux into another generic operating system. Linux makes more progress year after year and I don't care if the majority of people want to use Windows or Mac OS. Things are working nicely for this community as it is.

I don't need to be a Gnome guy or a KDE guy. I will use whatever gives me the best results at the time and right now that's Gnome. I hope the KDE project continues to thrive and improve as I hope Gnome expands in the same way.

ive tried various kde based distros, and something ALWAYS crashes, freezes, and glitches. (i install alot of distros) every time i use gnome, it works fine. if someone can explain this to me, be my guest. i build and fix pc's, so it's not user error. i think kde users know that kde is glitchy, and won't admit it. (see windows users)

ComplexNumber
September 14th, 2007, 05:25 PM
ive tried various kde based distros, and something ALWAYS crashes, freezes, and glitches. (i install alot of distros) every time i use gnome, it works fine. if someone can explain this to me, be my guest. i build and fix pc's, so it's not user error. i think kde users know that kde is glitchy, and won't admit it. (see windows users)
that's my experience too. it really left me with a bad taste in their mouth. 60% of the time it was konquerer.
i always had that feeling of "ok, should i save my work now or in 10 minutes time just in case it crashes". it happened with every distro and nothing has changed over the years regarding that.


i don't believe these conspiracy theories regarding miguel. they seem too far fetched, especially the one about miguel starting gnome after he was rejecting from MS.
whilst having both kde and gnome is good for competition and innovation(they can both learn from each other) and is great for choice(which is what linux is all about), it would still be better if there was 1 and only 1 desktop. in that sense, i agree with the article.
gnome has the greater adoption and has the better licence for enterprise, and i don't see that changing anytime soon. if one has to go, it should be kde. or at least, kde could provide a niche market for those who like it, whilst the mainstream and others use gnome.

bigbrovar
September 14th, 2007, 05:30 PM
am still a noob in linux just started using some 3 months back but it is now my default os...infact my vista drive is now used as storage and am considering wipng vista off my system all together cus i dont use it.. why is this the case a noob using ubuntu as he defalt main and only os..well i attribute it all to gnome..i never new how cool gnome was till i installed kde..oh my God i was lost..lost in a maze of options and customizations .. in the end i didnt know how to get my self up and about and had to switch back to gnome..i dont know why this is the case for me maybe i need a good guide for KDE something i never used with gnome..am not a programer nor would i discribe my self as a power uses..am just the average joe the uses computer to improve my everyday living and so are the billions of pple who still use windoze..for me gnome is more than capable..i would really love to be able to carry myself around KDE but everytime i try (and i really try) i find myself running back to gnome Heck i dont even know how to make a program startup with kde) all the superkaramber widgets i tried all crashed i can go on and on ..but then am just a noob :(

kteagan84
September 14th, 2007, 05:31 PM
I've used both KDE and GNOME and I must say that GNOME is a much better experience. I believe strongly in simplicity. GNOME can do pretty much everything that KDE can do if you're determined enough to do it. Also, KDE seems much more daunting for the beginner since there is SO MUCH there. It reminds me of when I first tried out Windows XP after being used to the Windows 98 desktop. There was too much junk to sift through to get it to do what I wanted when I wanted it done. It was a similar experience the first time I tried out KDE after being used to GNOME. Also, I give props to Ubuntu for making things simple for a default install (that goes for Kubuntu as well, everything is right there). Sure, KDE might *look* better, but it's a hell of a lot easier and quicker to get gnome to look just as good, if not better.



I really dislike the way KDE tries to integrate everything. I don't want KOffice, KTorrent, or KAnything. I like my window manager to just to window management, and not be a bloated desktop environment.

That pretty much sums up my opinion, too.

zenwhen
September 14th, 2007, 05:34 PM
I would rather there be a massive amount of choices than a massive amount of adoption. I don't think we need another locked down operating system on the market. If locking the desktop down to one choice is the only way to cause massive adoption of Linux, then massive adoption of Linux is a goal that is not worth obtaining.

smartboyathome
September 14th, 2007, 05:42 PM
I ran across this blog post tonight: We need to kill GNOME (http://hopachai.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/we-need-to-kill-gnome/)

I'm interested Ubuntu users' reactions on this, primarily because Ubuntu is heavily biased towards GNOME.

I could just as easily say kill KDE because it doesn't do very easy theming. It just doesn't make sense, now does it?

MarkLori
September 14th, 2007, 05:44 PM
I have used GNOME, KDE, ICEWM, and Evolution. I tnd to use GNOME just for ease of use. I think they all have great features but I agree that the freedom to choose is one of the great advantages of Linux. Why work so hard to be like MS where there is no choice? If you want standards, work on drivers, package management, gaming software, etc. Stuff to make it easy to use regardless of your desktop preference!

wolfen69
September 14th, 2007, 05:48 PM
I've used both KDE and GNOME and I must say that GNOME is a much better experience. I believe strongly in simplicity. GNOME can do pretty much everything that KDE can do if you're determined enough to do it. Also, KDE seems much more daunting for the beginner since there is SO MUCH there. It reminds me of when I first tried out Windows XP after being used to the Windows 98 desktop. There was too much junk to sift through to get it to do what I wanted when I wanted it done. It was a similar experience the first time I tried out KDE after being used to GNOME. Also, I give props to Ubuntu for making things simple for a default install (that goes for Kubuntu as well, everything is right there). Sure, KDE might *look* better, but it's a hell of a lot easier and quicker to get gnome to look just as good, if not better.




That pretty much sums up my opinion, too.

perfectly said. sifting through countless menus and options is not my idea of fun. it does not make my life any easier. i wanted to like kde because it looks cool, but in the end, i just want to get things done. it seems kde has too many submenus, which make no sense. linux with gnome is hard enough for noobs. a kde only desktop would turn off to many new users. if someone likes kde, fine. let's just keep it the way it is. i am pro-choice in this matter.

Bothered
September 14th, 2007, 05:48 PM
This may seem a little far fetched, but rather than bickering over the better of the two, shouldn't they be working with FULL interoperability with each other. I feel that if this can be accomplished, it will lead to a bigger and better future for Linux.

I completely agree

kteagan84
September 14th, 2007, 05:53 PM
i wanted to like kde because it looks cool, but in the end, i just want to get things done. it seems kde has too many submenus, which make no sense.

Yeah, the submenus thing does bother me. I like the way a default GNOME setup has the three divided menus up top. KDE's menus are too cluttered and confusing. It reminds me of the clutter of XP's "start" menu, which I always found to be unintuitive.

aysiu
September 14th, 2007, 05:54 PM
Here's another point in need of addressing.

Let's say a bunch of people reading this person's blog agree "Yes, let's 'kill' (or deprecate) Gnome." What practical steps could they take to do that? Wouldn't you have to somehow convince all the Linux developers and, indeed, the Gnome developers themselves to join you in order for that decision to have any practical effect?

I mean, come on. Almost everyone agrees about "world peace" and "ending hunger," but it's not so easy now, is it? And "killing Gnome" isn't even something all Linux users/developers agree on.

cmat
September 14th, 2007, 05:59 PM
I've tried KDE. It's effects can benefit gnome but that's about it. It crashed on me a few times and the interface was very clunky. I used it for a few days. Whereas my gnome set-up has been going crash-less since edgy. Killing gnome will get rid of choice, why not kill off XFCE and fluxbox and everyone can use KDE.

EDIT: Also Linus Torvalds doesn't speak for the whole open source community, since it extends to more than beyond just his kernel. Frankly, with everything else other than the kernel I don't care what he says.

Erunno
September 14th, 2007, 06:01 PM
I read it time and again so can we please get one thing out of the way:

freedesktop.org is not a standards body. (http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications?action=show&redirect=Standards) They're hosting some desktop agnostic technologies and other projects in the hope it will persuade developers to use them due to technical merits alone and not because they set up shop one and declared themselves an authority to what should be used on Linux desktops. That's a myth a lot of GNOME fans (seldom developers) like to spread to give their DE of choice a semblance of authority.

Nevertheless, I really don't care for the author's complaints. Surprising as it may sound to some but there are actually people who believe in this whole Free Software movement so I really don't see a point in supporting companies in making the Free Desktop a more friendly platform towards closed source applications. That's why the whole FUD spreading against Qt's insistence always annoyed me to a great extent. I don't want the Free Desktop to become an alternative for some Microsoft haters who don't want to shell out 400 Dollars every 3-5 years for a new OS.

But the author does have a point: If, for instance, KDE were to disappear next day all focus would flow into improving GNOME as a platform and the whole mess of having different interface standards would practically vanish. If that's good or bad in the long run is a matter of discussion.

Ah, remembered something just before I was about to hit the reply button as I have a small urge to heat up the discussion: Isn't GNOME the technologically superior platform which asks of its developers to copy and paste code frome some library called libegg in order to enable editable toolbars? That's state-of-the-art software engineering right there!

gundumfx
September 14th, 2007, 06:02 PM
that blogger is an idiot

dada1958
September 14th, 2007, 06:03 PM
Killing isn't that human ):P

Erunno
September 14th, 2007, 06:06 PM
Here's another point in need of addressing.

Let's say a bunch of people reading this person's blog agree "Yes, let's 'kill' (or deprecate) Gnome." What practical steps could they take to do that? Wouldn't you have to somehow convince all the Linux developers and, indeed, the Gnome developers themselves to join you in order for that decision to have any practical effect?

I mean, come on. Almost everyone agrees about "world peace" and "ending hunger," but it's not so easy now, is it? And "killing Gnome" isn't even something all Linux users/developers agree on.

Apart from that I find the whole idea ridiculous it would require the GNOME developers to simply stop, well, developing. After that it would only be really a matter of time until the last GNOME release becomes obsolete. It would also work the other way around: Abondon KDE and try to improve GNOME as a platform. Too bad there are so few toolkit developers in both communities.

23meg
September 14th, 2007, 06:08 PM
This may seem a little far fetched, but rather than bickering over the better of the two, shouldn't they be working with FULL interoperability with each other. I feel that if this can be accomplished, it will lead to a bigger and better future for Linux.

For the most part, the people who keep bickering over the better of the two aren't the people who can or have the willingness to work on interoperability, or anything else for that matter.

aysiu
September 14th, 2007, 06:28 PM
I think people often make the mistake of assuming that X Gnome developers quitting and Y KDE developers continuing to work would mean X+Y KDE developers. Correct me if I'm wrong (not being a developer or programmer myself), but aren't developers generally pretty specialized in what they do?

janga
September 14th, 2007, 06:32 PM
Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!

I just wanted to say that. Nevermind.

GeneralZod
September 14th, 2007, 06:36 PM
I think people often make the mistake of assuming that X Gnome developers quitting and Y KDE developers continuing to work would mean X+Y KDE developers. Correct me if I'm wrong (not being a developer or programmer myself), but aren't developers generally pretty specialized in what they do?

That's generally correct, yes, although it's not that a "specialised" programmer who has spent years perfecting A will be unable to do unrelated task B, but she will definitely be at a strong disadvantage to someone whose training or talent are focussed on B.

We see people commit the same fallacy very often in the open source world - the popular complaint "Why is the Linux community focussing on 'useless eyecandy' like Compiz when they should be working on wireless support?' embodies just this fallacy (and numerous others besides!)

afonic
September 14th, 2007, 06:40 PM
I just love it when people suddently discover what is "wrong" with Linux and start making blogs and forum posts.

Guess what, most people don't think there is anything wrong with it. They just don't make the same noise. :P

Erunno
September 14th, 2007, 06:46 PM
But I don't think that really applies to the proposal at hand. Both GNOME and KDE communities have a lot of developers who work in similar fields of work, be it media player development (i.e. Amarok, Exaile) or window managers (Compiz, KWin Composite, Metacity). There's a lot of overlap when it comes to interests and skills when looking at the two projects. A merger would be less a problem then, let's say, trying to unite a desktop environment project and a group of developers who only did assembler on micro devices for the last couple of years.

aysiu
September 14th, 2007, 06:47 PM
That's generally correct, yes, although it's not that a "specialised" programmer who has spent years perfecting A will be unable to do unrelated task B, but she will definitely be at a strong disadvantage to someone whose training or talent are focussed on B.

We see people commit the same fallacy very often in the open source world - the popular complaint "Why is the Linux community focussing on 'useless eyecandy' like Compiz when they should be working on wireless support?' embodies just this fallacy (and numerous others besides!)
That's what I thought. Thanks for the confirmation on that. Yeah, I suppose anyone with the willpower to learn could probably program anything, but if you're used to writing hardware drivers, you're probably not going to be suddenly equipped to creating GUI frontends for command-line programs. And if you're using to working with GTK, you may not immediately take to QT.

jrusso2
September 14th, 2007, 07:14 PM
I personally have been using KDE since it was beta software. When gnome came around I tried it but I never did learn to like it.

For me using KDE is second nature now. But I would not like to see gnome die as there are many fine applications based on GTK that I use.

I keep hoping one day gnome will become more configurable so it works more along the lines that I like.

But for now having two decent environments is not so bad.

chameleonkid
September 14th, 2007, 07:35 PM
I would use KDE if firefox was better integrated. as of now, firefox on KDE really sucks.

Thats funny because firefox runs 10x better on kde than it does on gnome for me. Firefox would crash at least once every 2-3 hours in Gnome, but hasn't crashed yet in KDE. To each (set-up) his own...

psusi
September 14th, 2007, 07:46 PM
Oh boy, where to begin the refutations? I guess at the beginning.


So why is Mac OS X able to provide an alternative and Linux isnít?

Simple... Apple spends billions on advertising and retail outlets. After being blasted by ads on TV, one day when they are fed up with windows they walk into the mac store at the mall and play with one for a few minutes, and decide to take one home. Linux simply does not show up on their radar.


Take a look at the top 100 software bestsellers in Amazon.

In that list (words in bold added because folks at Ubuntu forums were quoting this sentence out of context) thereíre a lot of applications for Windows and Mac but thereís only one Linux product: Ubuntu, which is in fact a Linux distribution and not an application.

Well duh, with less than 1% of the market of course you aren't going to see commercial linux apps in the top 100 sellers. They are out there though. Take a look at nero for linux, or cedega.

And let's look at some of those top 100 sellers for windows... on that list you will find a slew of antivirus, firewall, pc doctor etc applications that would not exist but to try and fix how much windows sucks. The absence of this kind of software on Linux that forces users to spend even more money to get what they just paid for to work correctly is not a bad thing.


Traditionally, Linux users have assumed that itís hard for Windows users to switch because they are used to a particular kind of system or there are concepts involved that are difficult to grasp such as ďoperating systemĒ. But people arenít as stupid! They are perfectly capable of understanding that they have a particular kind of computer and that they need to look for software packages with the Apple logo or the Windows logo, in the same way they do with the fuel of their cars.

No, they don't have that understanding, or even think about it. People do not think about what OS they use at all. They just use whatever came on the computer they got, and the only choice they make there is how much to spend, and to get a mac or a pc. Linux does not enter the picture because it isn't advertised and they can't see them at the mall.

And your example about fuel in their cars? Please... the VAST majority of people have NO IDEA what the difference is between the grades of fuel, other than one is more expensive, which a lot falsely assume means it is better. At least 95% of the general population has no idea that the octane rating of fuel indicates how volatile it is, and the higher octane fuel burns properly at a higher compression ratio, so which you should use depends on your engine's compression ratio, and nothing else.


Microsoft even writes a set of guidelines that all developers should follow to make applications consistent in its behaviour.

Which even they themselves frequently ignore.


In conclusion, as a developer, if you want to make a proprietary piece of software for Linux, you will have to face a support nightmare and in the end, for half of your users, the interface will be unfamiliar.

Yes, because gnome and kde are so vastly different from each other that were a user to start a kde application on their gnome desktop, their head would explode from the sheer confusion and stark terror.


But when it comes to Linux developers you have to choose between KDE developers, GNOME developers, pure X developers, etc. In the end Linux professionals have less experience in the desired field of expertise than their windows counterparts.

Yes, because all windows developers are equally expert in developing any kind of application on windows. They don't have a plethora of apis to confuse them... oh wait... they do.... there's pure windows api, MFC, GDI+, .NET... I could go on...


Technically, KDE was always superior to GNOME (And by technically I mean ďif you are not a coder you donít know what Iím talking aboutĒ so donít feel insulted please, in fact I find GNOME somehow more visually attractive in the user end but itís a mess inside!), so it would seem that people should have stopped using GNOME after that, but they didnít.

I am a coder and am familliar with both, and I could not disagree with you more. QT is deplorable because it forces you to learn a bastardized version of C++ which you have to feed to a special bastardized to C++ compiler before feeding it to the C++ compiler. It was also written with only C++ in mind. GTK was written in C for maximum performance, but with OOP in mind and bindings to it are available in any language.


ďI personally just encourage people to switch to KDE. This Ďusers are idiots, and are confused by functionalityí mentality of Gnome is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it. I donít use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long since reached the point where it simply doesnít do what I need it to do. Please, just tell people to use KDE.Ē - Linus Torvalds

Linus is known to rant and rave on a whim... this was just another example. His word is not gospel; he has been very wrong about things before. His point though, is that he disagrees with a design philosophy of gnome. He is entitled to his opinion, but a lot of people enjoy this philosophy. The "elite" crowd doesn't because they want loads of bells and whistles and blinking lights on every panel so they can feel cool because they can play with all the lights and switches. A lot of people prefer something simple that just works, without confusion and clutter.

I get the impression that Microsoft is in the "elite" crowd because over the years, they have added so many bloody esoteric commands to the menus of Word that they finally had to make it notice which ones you tend to use and hide the rest to avoid the confusion. 1000 features that someone, somehwere, someday might think about using just makes it harder to do your work most of the time because of all the clutter and bloat. It also leads to tons of bugs, crashes, and exploits.


My proposal for users is: stop supporting GNOME. Even if you are a GNOME fanboy right now Iím sure you understand the concept of sacrifice. How cool would it be to act as an adult and say ďIím a GNOME fanboy but Iím gonna switch to KDE for the Linux futureĒ.

About as cool as it would be for you to say "I'm a KDE famboy, but I'm gonna switch to GNOME for the Linux future". Why is it that those talking about sacrifice are always telling others to do it?

Nano Geek
September 14th, 2007, 08:03 PM
I'm sure that this has been said several dozen times before, but his article is ridicules.

He acts like the community can control what gets developed. Even if no one used GNOME, I guess that the devs would still work on it. Plus, its absolutely crazy to think that one DE is good enough for everyone. I've tried KDE, but I just like GNOME better.

So sorry, but I don't think that you are going to get your wish.

Artificial Intelligence
September 14th, 2007, 08:08 PM
+1 @ psusi

well said :KS

Nano Geek
September 14th, 2007, 08:12 PM
I think Gnome treats users like dummies.I'm somewhat surprised that you, as a member of the forum staff would say that. Everyone knows that when you say that GNOME is for dummies or that sort of thing, it always ends up in a flame war.

aks44
September 14th, 2007, 08:21 PM
Firefox would crash at least once every 2-3 hours in Gnome, but hasn't crashed yet in KDE.

Firefox crashes on Gnome? :shock: I thought it only crashed on Windows...

Granted, I'm a KDE user. :-\"



I'm somewhat surprised that you, as a member of the forum staff would say that. Everyone knows that when you say that GNOME is for dummies or that sort of thing, it always ends up in a flame war.

There's a big difference between "Gnome is for dummies" and "Gnome treats its users like dummies".
And indeed, removing some established feature because "it may confuse the user" is treating the user like a dummy IMHO. YMMV though.

chameleonkid
September 14th, 2007, 08:53 PM
Firefox crashes on Gnome? :shock: I thought it only crashed on Windows...


Apparently it didn't like digg at all.

ComplexNumber
September 14th, 2007, 08:59 PM
nd indeed, removing some established feature because "it may confuse the user" is treating the user like a dummy IMHO.that was merely linus torvald's view of how he believes the gnome developers see things. it has no current basis in fact. it's just an oft-quoted view, so it has stuck in people's minds and gets conveyed from one person to another as if it were fact.

Darkhack
September 14th, 2007, 09:07 PM
Both desktops/toolkits suck. Although in a perfect world GTK would be ideal simply for its LGPL license. I'd be willing to give up all of Qt's advantages just for that one. GTK is capable of becoming as good as Qt if developers work on it. That is much more probable than expecting Trolltech to put Qt under the Lesser GPL since that is basically their entire business model. I agree with the author in his points about the problem, but I disagree on his purposed solution.

KDE/Qt

- The author missed the absolute biggest point in his article. The point he was trying to make was that KDE would be better for proprietary applications. Little problem. Qt is under the GPL and in order to release non-GPL Qt software, you have to pay a bundle of money.

- Qt is based on C++. Even if you are the biggest OOP fan in the entire world, you have to admit that C++ implements it in a very poor way. It is overly complex and developers spend more time trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. Do you love hunting for bugs in your code for hours on end because you can't figure out exactly where the bug occurs? Then you're going to love C++!

GNOME/GTK+

- Repaint time is slower than Qt and overall appears to be buggier.

- Development of GTK+ has seemed to almost stop. It is going very slowly and although GNOME has plenty of developers, GTK+ is suffering from a lack of them.

- Controlled by the Free Software Foundation. Richard Stallman scares me. Who knows what crazy thoughts go on in his mind. He acts like all corporations are pure evil and that developing proprietary software is bad. For god's sake people, this is a man who wants it to be called GNU/Linux and believes that Free Software is a political movement while Open Source is for corporate sellouts. I have a very strong feeling that he is going to try to phase out the LGPL and get all GNU software on a pure GPLv3 license.

- Not as integrated as Qt. It is very possible to write an entire application using just Qt. Not so with GTK+ since other third-party libraries are usually needed to accomplish tasks. Having a single, standard, powerful API for everything would be nice.

Mr. Picklesworth
September 14th, 2007, 09:15 PM
I have only read read the first paragraph so far, so forgive me if there is a "twist" somewhere.
How the hell is killing GNOME going to help proprietary software? Last I checked, KDE is completely against anything that is not open, given that the Qt toolkit, around which it is formed, is licensed under the viral GPL. I think Windows has taught us that "technical superiority" is not all that matters. For one thing, GNOME has a really open, friendly and active development community. I see nothing wrong with it, and I find it nicer to get involved with GNOME than with KDE.

Yes, GNOME is a bit of a mess (and there aren't many comments in it), but it is an organized mess, with lots of standards that people adhere to. It could use some tidying, but I do not understand the doom and gloom: This is completely possible. The GNOME desktop is very modular, thanks to those standards; most official applications do single things well. Individual applications can be tidied, new solutions added and old solutions gradually phased out. It's a lot more pleasant than having a behemoth "everything manager" that takes care of half the user interface. (No, I'm thinking more Windows than KDE; I am not pointing any fingers at KDE, it's actually pretty tidy). Okay, I guess it would be a bit of trouble phasing out glib (which really needs to be done), but that is no reason to kill what hundreds of people have worked towards for over 10 years.

I guess my bias comes from how a lot of KDE's programs act in a way that is a pet peeve of mine. It is very extensible, but this is done by programs offering their own interfaces for a very broad range of extensibility. It would be more efficient, more tidy and more forward thinking to not have the extensibility powered by behemoth applications, but to have those extra services delivered at the top level, managed as they should be by the window manager and the kernel - rather than acting as top-level applications but being controlled by something else. Sorry, that was probably rambly nonsense. Think of it this way: What is better? Every program doing tabs in its own way, or a system that encourages consistency, where a window essentially means 'a single file being edited', and the desktop itself takes care of tabs (eg: Fluxbox).

I think MacOS was on the right track before the tabs craze came along, just because of how windows are arranged. WIndows are treated as independent from programs, where closing the window does not necessarily mean quitting the program. Kind of cool, combined with the menu bar at the top always having a bold menu header for the program being used, which contains Quit and Preferences. Because of that simple victory, MacOS is the only system I have seen with sensibly arranged menus. Everywhere else, we have Quit under the File menu, and program options over in Tools or Edit. WTF?!
My point is that, with individual windows detached from the program menu, and with quitting being consistently not clicking the X at the corner, programs tend to have a more tidy, coherent multi-windowed interface. The division between "the program" and "the document" is a lot more clear, both to the user and to the window manager.

As for GTK and performance, you guys have to look beyond that. GTK has a very strict, but also very smooth, way of arranging interfaces. That is, there are next to no applications in GNOME (or any GTK-based environment) using static positioning for anything. Not only does this ensure that programs look better (with everything lined up and well spaced), but it also means completely smoothly adjustable fonts and the ability to resize any window. For that reason, I always recommend GNOME for accessibility, because it has perfect translation support (perfect meaning that translators need not pay any attention to the GUI), and being able to read text with old eyes does not require a half-assed workaround such as MacOS's zoom function.
Think of this in a portable device. The iPhone, for example. In that system, it is possible to rotate the screen between portrait and landscape. One thing I have noticed, however, is that this often causes drastic changes to the UI. OpenMoko uses GTK, on the other hand, and it also has the ability to run in both Portrait and Landscape mode. (Note that applications all consume the full size of the screen). In its case, however, there are no actual changes to the UI; it just works, fitting with the orientation. That is very, very nice.

Yes, Qt does containers and has a way of setting widgets to be positioned dynamically by the toolkit (and most Qt applications do so), but the difference there is that the default - the first thing seen - is old fashioned, static positioning. That, in my opinion, does not cut it; one cannot assume whether a Qt interface will have relative or static positioning.




In September 2000, KDE finally started being released under the GPL, removing the restrictions, so now its usage was OK for any kind of Linux software.That did not help anything. Is the GPL really this hard to understand? You link to it, you must adopt it. The end. If KDE drops Qt, I will pay attention.
As it is, you cannot develop proprietary software for KDE without paying up to Trolltech.
...And I, for one, could not possibly keep a straight face paying up to a company that refers to itself as a "troll". It doesn't inspire much confidence, especially when they are acting just like trolls; blocking bridges, preventing freedom of developers to do what they want in KDE.
Actually, I don't really blame Trolltech, or hold anything against them as friendly commercial developers. Qt is cool. It's a portable toolkit built for cross-platform development, and it has licenses based on individual usages. They were even kind enough to have a GPLed version for people to use. Really, they aren't trolls; they have just been posed as trolls.
See anything fishy here? I do! KDE is using a toolkit designed for individual applications that want to exist on multiple desktop environments. Qt clearly is not for desktop environments, but for independent applications. That is why Google Earth uses it; not to fit in KDE, but to fit, in both Windows and MacOS, really easily.

This plays an interesting rhyme to the tune of that Microsoft connection the writer discusses. Trolltech actually has a much bigger finger on KDE than Microsoft has on GNOME. If KDE somehow takes over the world, Trolltech gets stinking rich; they become the unquestioned, unnoticed "benefactors" who earn from it all. I'm making it sound almost nice, but that would not be good: That would be just like developing a desktop environment in Windows. Microsoft still gets their money, their market share; using (or developing for) the environment means going through them. Trolltech isn't an evil corporation, but that doesn't make it sane, efficient or comfortable that they would have their individual influence so deeply nested in Desktop Linux. The goal here that is very consistently pursued is a distributed model of software, where no one company is on top. That usually happens with Linux, because we have all these different components being built by different groups, and many different distros to assemble them, and it is all very portable.

If everything to do with user interface eventually bubbles down to one single central corporation (Trolltech), it is a dangerous, tight situation no matter how peaceful they are. The recent worry around Google shows us quite clearly: Good intentions or not, if there is a 500 pound boar sitting on top of you, it is going to hurt.

RAV TUX
September 14th, 2007, 09:16 PM
I find it hard to believe that an Apple Fanboys blog post has started a Holy War against GNOME and KDE.

GeneralZod
September 14th, 2007, 09:31 PM
I find it hard to believe that an Apple Fanboys blog post has started a Holy War against GNOME and KDE.

An ant could sneeze in a desert 500 miles from civilisation and trigger a GNOME vs KDE flamewar ;)

RAV TUX
September 14th, 2007, 09:32 PM
An ant could sneeze in a desert 500 miles from civilisation and trigger a GNOME vs KDE flamewar ;)

I find it quite silly.

kteagan84
September 14th, 2007, 09:38 PM
An ant could sneeze in a desert 500 miles from civilisation and trigger a GNOME vs KDE flamewar ;)

Haha, how very true!

PartisanEntity
September 14th, 2007, 09:49 PM
I am one of those users who like GNOME, I am a minimalist myself so I like the simplicity and minimalism of GNOME, granted I have not used KDE much, but I do enjoy using GNOME.

ryno519
September 14th, 2007, 09:54 PM
Perhaps instead of deprecating an entire Desktop Environment and toolkit, rendering thousands of pieces of software useless and requiring programmers to reinvent the wheel many many many times, we could focus on fixing the minor issues which come up when running GNOME based apps on KDE and vice versa. That seems like a lot less work.

I don't think killing off an entire platform is going to solve anything when we've already come this close to complete interoperability.

bogolisk
September 14th, 2007, 09:55 PM
I find it quite silly.

What's the most annoying thing in those flamewars are the blanket statements made from both sides:

Gnome:
- Gnome fanboy: gnome is easier to use!
- Observer: give me an example to back up your statement!
- Gnome fanboy: Monkey can.., uh... I mean my mother-in-law can use it so it must be easy to use!

KDE:
- Kde fanboy: kde is technically superior!
- Observer: give me an example to back up your statement!
- Kde fanboy: it's written in C++ thus it's superior... I mean it's really superior... I means it's must superior... I means it's a fact that kde is technically superior... I means I've read on slashdot that's kde is technically superior so it must be true.

capink
September 14th, 2007, 10:02 PM
I don't mind having multiple DE but only if they use the same toolkit. I think that is the main problem for linux. Multiple DEs are OK, but multiple toolkits is not really helping anyone. Gnome and xfce both use gtk and I have no problem mixing thunar together with gnome-panel. But mixing qt programs with gtk programs is both ugly and slow.

I am currently using xfce4 mainly. I would like to switch to kde as in my experience qt is more responsive than gtk. But I cannot do this because I am dependent on two gtk applications: firefox and thunar.

Dolphin can replace thunar for me only if it had a solution like thunar custom actions (does it have one?). But I have always wondered why kde devs has not ported firefox to qt? Is it that difficult? I think a lot of users would switch if firefox is ported to qt? Can anyone explain what are the difficulties in porting firefox.

happysmileman
September 14th, 2007, 10:05 PM
What's the most annoying thing in those flamewars are the blanket statements made from both sides:

Gnome:
- Gnome fanboy: gnome is easier to use!
- Observer: give me an example to back up your statement!
- Gnome fanboy: Monkey can.., uh... I mean my mother-in-law can use it so it must be easy to use!

KDE:
- Kde fanboy: kde is technically superior!
- Observer: give me an example to back up your statement!
- Kde fanboy: it's written in C++ thus it's superior... I mean it's really superior... I means it's must superior... I means it's a fact that kde is technically superior... I means I've read on slashdot that's kde is technically superior so it must be true.

Most KDE users I know use the argument that it's making more progress, making more innovative ideas, which even if they don't work will pave the way for anyone else.

GNOME is fine, but when will we see a 3.0, and when 3 comes around, will it be as much of a leap forward as KDE 4 or just the same small improvements but a bigger number to look like they're progressing?

Nem1976
September 14th, 2007, 10:06 PM
While I havn't used KDE yet honestly I don't care which interface you use as long as it's not on a M$ Operating system then more power to the end user. Each interface is going to have it's pro's and con's. As long as they all run and work for what we want thats all that matters.

Stupid flamewars do nothing for the future development of either interface.

happysmileman
September 14th, 2007, 10:08 PM
I would like to switch to kde as in my experience qt is more responsive than gtk. But I cannot do this because I am dependent on two gtk applications: firefox and thunar.

Firefox runs just as fast for me on KDE as it did on GNOME (though still nowhere near as fast as Konqueror or Opera.

Thunar could be replaced by Dolphin in 99% of the time but you might need a certain feature, I'm sure running Thunar wouldn't be too bad if it'd work, you get the benefit of having mostly KDE/QT programs, one or two GTK programs wouldn't be that bad anyway in terms of speed I assume

RAV TUX
September 14th, 2007, 10:10 PM
I hope GNOME will always be the default DE for Ubuntu

RAV TUX
September 14th, 2007, 10:15 PM
What's the most annoying thing in those flamewars are the blanket statements made from both sides:

Gnome:
- Gnome fanboy: gnome is easier to use!
- Observer: give me an example to back up your statement!
- Gnome fanboy: Monkey can.., uh... I mean my mother-in-law can use it so it must be easy to use!

KDE:
- Kde fanboy: kde is technically superior!
- Observer: give me an example to back up your statement!
- Kde fanboy: it's written in C++ thus it's superior... I mean it's really superior... I means it's must superior... I means it's a fact that kde is technically superior... I means I've read on slashdot that's kde is technically superior so it must be true.

All the while the KDE & GNOME flame wars blaze on; the Apple & Windows Stockholders watch their profits rise.

jfdill_2
September 14th, 2007, 10:29 PM
If it comes down to it and people are really upset about what is happening to GNOME, the logical thing to do would be to create a GNOME fork, call it something else, and take out all the cruft. I remember when it seemed like the world was going to end when XFree86 changed their licensing, and it did take some time to recover, but eventually it all got sorted out and now we have Xorg. Ditto with egcs vs. gcc, but eventually people saw the light, and those projects were merged again. Yeah, it will be a lot of work, and on the surface it seems like a lot of wasted duplication of effort, but so be it if that's what it takes.

Frak
September 14th, 2007, 10:45 PM
He presents some interesting points, some I agree with, and some I don't.

But in the end, nothing will keep either one from developing and being used, its personal preference, i.e. Freedom.

P.S. QT can be used in a GTK environment

RAV TUX
September 14th, 2007, 10:45 PM
If it comes down to it and people are really upset about what is happening to GNOME, the logical thing to do would be to create a GNOME fork, call it something else, and take out all the cruft. I remember when it seemed like the world was going to end when XFree86 changed their licensing, and it did take some time to recover, but eventually it all got sorted out and now we have Xorg. Ditto with egcs vs. gcc, but eventually people saw the light, and those projects were merged again. Yeah, it will be a lot of work, and on the surface it seems like a lot of wasted duplication of effort, but so be it if that's what it takes.Much like what Debian has done with Firefox, with IceWeasel, Awesome idea!

maybe instead of GNOME it could be called GREMLIN?

Frak
September 14th, 2007, 10:49 PM
Much like what Debian has done with Firefox, with IceWeasel, Awesome idea!

maybe instead of GNOME it could be called GREMLIN?
I prefer GFDE (Gnome Forked Desktop Environment)

bogolisk
September 14th, 2007, 11:19 PM
I prefer GFDE (Gnome Forked Desktop Environment)

egcs folks wrote the code first, named the thing later. Actually, they came up with the egcs name because they couldn't get their patches into gcc's upstream.

Fbot1
September 14th, 2007, 11:25 PM
Much like what Debian has done with Firefox, with IceWeasel, Awesome idea!

maybe instead of GNOME it could be called GREMLIN?

That's a horrible idea. We don't need yet another toolkit and set of libraries for desktop GUI design. Having anymore than 1 open source DE is a waste of manpower.

Nano Geek
September 14th, 2007, 11:30 PM
My reasons for liking GNOME better that KDE.
No flames please, these are only my opinions.


From the start, GNOME looks smarter that KDE.
GNOME's menus are cleaner that KDE's, and its easier to find a program.
For me at least, GNOME gives me most all of the configuration options that I need, and if I want another option, I just look in gconf-editor.
Gnome-App-Install is a killer feature for Ubuntu
Unlike most people here, Evolution is my favorite E-Mail app.
You gota love that screen-saver app. ;)

Nano Geek
September 14th, 2007, 11:32 PM
Much like what Debian has done with Firefox, with IceWeasel, Awesome idea!

maybe instead of GNOME it could be called GREMLIN?IceWeasle is going nowhere right now. Only a few distributions actually use and and none of those are major players.

jfdill_2
September 14th, 2007, 11:39 PM
Much like what Debian has done with Firefox, with IceWeasel, Awesome idea!

maybe instead of GNOME it could be called GREMLIN?

Exactly. I don't get the whole "Us vs. Them" tone of that blog. It betrays a very "Cathedral" perspective where we are the victims and Miguel de Icaza is the alleged assailant, and boycotting GNOME is proffered as the only available solution, which is just silly. Turning this into a holy war between desktops distracts from the real issues and will only make things worse, not better.

halter73
September 14th, 2007, 11:49 PM
I don't mind having multiple DE but only if they use the same toolkit. I think that is the main problem for linux. Multiple DEs are OK, but multiple toolkits is not really helping anyone. Gnome and xfce both use gtk and I have no problem mixing thunar together with gnome-panel. But mixing qt programs with gtk programs is both ugly and slow.

I am currently using xfce4 mainly. I would like to switch to kde as in my experience qt is more responsive than gtk. But I cannot do this because I am dependent on two gtk applications: firefox and thunar.

Dolphin can replace thunar for me only if it had a solution like thunar custom actions (does it have one?). But I have always wondered why kde devs has not ported firefox to qt? Is it that difficult? I think a lot of users would switch if firefox is ported to qt? Can anyone explain what are the difficulties in porting firefox.
Check out these two articles about creating actions in Konqueror.

tuxmagazine.com/node/1000172 (http://tuxmagazine.com/node/1000172)
developer.kde.org/documentation/tutorials/dot/servicemenus.html (http://developer.kde.org/documentation/tutorials/dot/servicemenus.html)

It is not quite as simple as thunar's custom actions, but once you get used to it it's not bad. I'm not sure whether this functionality will be replicated in Dolphin, but I like the extra features of Konqueror anyway.

Fbot1
September 14th, 2007, 11:50 PM
My reasons for liking GNOME better that KDE.
No flames please, these are only my opinions.


From the start, GNOME looks smarter that KDE.
GNOME's menus are cleaner that KDE's, and its easier to find a program.
For me at least, GNOME gives me most all of the configuration options that I need, and if I want another option, I just look in gconf-editor.
Gnome-App-Install is a killer feature for Ubuntu
Unlike most people here, Evolution is my favorite E-Mail app.
You gota love that screen-saver app. ;)

These kinds of things are so annoying. The only things that are even part of the DE and not stupid are the last 2.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 12:00 AM
These kinds of things are so annoying. The only things that are even part of the DE and not stupid are the last 2.I'm sorry you feel that way.

However, you have to amit that there's nothing in KDE like Gnome-app-install.

But as I said, those are only my opinions. You don't have to agree with them.

Frak
September 15th, 2007, 12:04 AM
That's a horrible idea. We don't need yet another toolkit and set of libraries for desktop GUI design. Having anymore than 1 open source DE is a waste of manpower.
If it happens, it happens. Only Nobdy can change that.

(Odyssey readers would catch that)

p_quarles
September 15th, 2007, 12:05 AM
Emacs is a perfectly good operating system that only lacks a decent text editor.

er, sorry, wrong thread.

Mr. Picklesworth
September 15th, 2007, 12:05 AM
You gota love that screen-saver app. I know you are probably being a bit sarcastic, but I actually agree.

In my opinion, this configurationless screensaver idea is great! It fits Gnome's "Just work" idea perfectly. (The screensaver system itself could use some configuration options, though, such as better configuring the Random screensaver option without going into the gconf editor).

The only problem with this is the screensavers themselves. These screensavers, for the most part, do not fit the Gnome way. They are built to need configuration, because their defaults tend to be arbitrary and boring.

Gnome's screensavers should use colours from the current theme, they should pay attention to the user's desktop background and his icon set. Every time a setting from elsewhere could be used and gathered via consistent and standardized means, it should be used.

Screensavers are fun and they are nice ways to personalize one's desktop, but they should not be so obtrusive that they require bigger customization windows (and take up more space in gconf) than any program with actual usefulness.
In my opinion, every piece of data that a user creates or stores is personalized, so it should not be difficult for a passive thing such as a screensaver to reflect that. (If there was a way to mark sharable / private data, it would be very cool, since then a screensaver could safely pop up random things from the user's home directory, or from a shared data folder, achieving some really exciting personalization).

To achieve this, I think the existing screensavers should for the most part be removed, and Gnome's default screensavers should be started fresh, with a clean slate devoid of all the past screen saver cliches. (Yes, even the floating text and the flying toasters).
Screensavers have been the same beasts forever: Arbitrary, complicated and way too obtrusive. With that in mind, I think we could do with some real innovation here!
These are just little decorations that appear when the system is idle. They should not need so much fussing. Unfortunately, fussing over screensaver settings has become the norm, which is why this complaint about having no screensaver configuration exists at all.
Gnome's screensavers, just like everything else on this desktop, should be beautiful, elegant things that Just Work, in a way that is completely unobtrusive but pleasing, right out of the box -- no setup necessary.

Automatic customization may sound kind of silly, but think of Will Wright's Spore. That game is exciting because it really encourages creativity; many people really don't try to be creative, so they sit with the boring defaults. With Spore, everything you do plays out to creating a very unique world that reflects yourself. It isn't arbitrarily saying what a character should look like and what that character should be able to do; it is a seamless, flowing connection between function and presentation, that encourages creativity in a manner easily understood by anyone. Best of all, it is unobtrusive; there is no point to this visual screensaver, but it is a wonderful thing to see. Being a pointless part of the desktop, it should not act like OpenOffice by presenting a Bible-full of options; it should act as a game by flowing seamlessly, entertainingly and easily.

I think a system that quickly morphs around one's own wishes, without that person needing to spell out everything to it, is extremely cool - and very rare. GNOME is certainly pointing in the direction of that, and I think it is a very unique and exciting thing to attempt.

Frak
September 15th, 2007, 12:06 AM
However, you have to amit that there's nothing in KDE like Gnome-app-install.

Gnome-App-Install on KDE, solved.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 12:44 AM
I know you are probably being a bit sarcastic, but I actually agree.

In my opinion, this configurationless screensaver idea is great! It fits Gnome's "Just work" idea perfectly. (The screensaver system itself could use some configuration options, though, such as better configuring the Random screensaver option without going into the gconf editor).

The only problem with this is the screensavers themselves. These screensavers, for the most part, do not fit the Gnome way. They are built to need configuration, because their defaults tend to be arbitrary and boring.

Gnome's screensavers should use colours from the current theme, they should pay attention to the user's desktop background and his icon set. Every time a setting from elsewhere could be used and gathered via consistent and standardized means, it should be used.

Screensavers are fun and they are nice ways to personalize one's desktop, but they should not be so obtrusive that they require bigger customization windows (and take up more space in gconf) than any program with actual usefulness.
In my opinion, every piece of data that a user creates or stores is personalized, so it should not be difficult for a passive thing such as a screensaver to reflect that. (If there was a way to mark sharable / private data, it would be very cool, since then a screensaver could safely pop up random things from the user's home directory, or from a shared data folder, achieving some really exciting personalization).

To achieve this, I think the existing screensavers should for the most part be removed, and Gnome's default screensavers should be started fresh, with a clean slate devoid of all the past screen saver cliches. (Yes, even the floating text and the flying toasters).
Screensavers have been the same beasts forever: Arbitrary, complicated and way too obtrusive. With that in mind, I think we could do with some real innovation here!
These are just little decorations that appear when the system is idle. They should not need so much fussing. Unfortunately, fussing over screensaver settings has become the norm, which is why this bug exists at all.
Gnome's screensavers, just like everything else on this desktop, should be beautiful, elegant things that Just Work, in a way that is completely unobtrusive but pleasing, right out of the box -- no setup necessary.

Automatic customization may sound kind of silly, but think of Will Wright's Spore. That game is exciting because it really encourages creativity; many people really don't try to be creative, so they sit with the boring defaults. With Spore, everything you do plays out to creating a very unique world that reflects yourself. It isn't arbitrarily saying what a character should look like and what that character should be able to do; it is a seamless, flowing connection between function and presentation, that encourages creativity in a manner easily understood by anyone. Best of all, it is unobtrusive; there is no point to this visual screensaver, but it is a wonderful thing to see. Being a pointless part of the desktop, it should not act like OpenOffice by presenting a Bible-full of options; it should act as a game by flowing seamlessly, entertainingly and easily.

I think a system that quickly morphs around one's own wishes, without that person needing to spell out everything to it, is extremely cool - and very rare. GNOME is certainly pointing in the direction of that, and I think it is a very unique and exciting thing to attempt.Actually, I agree with you mostly. I would like to see the option to set what pictures the different screensaver show during picture-flip or whatever they call it.

But mostly I think that its a great little configuration tool (GLCT?).

I was mainly saying that because there have been so many complaints about it.


Gnome-App-Install on KDE, solved.Yea, you can do that, but I was talking about native features.

You can run kicker in GNOME, but you don't list kicker as a GNOME feature.

Andrewie
September 15th, 2007, 12:45 AM
people aren't reading the article it's the same old kde vs. gnome flame war :(

everyone post the same complants over and over again, don't you get sick of it. :confused:

aysiu
September 15th, 2007, 12:52 AM
people aren't reading the article In all fairness, the article is extremely long-winded.

ComplexNumber
September 15th, 2007, 12:57 AM
i wonder what else there is to say about the article? i think everything thats probably going to be said has already been said.

aysiu
September 15th, 2007, 01:04 AM
i wonder what else there is to say about the article? i think everything thats probably going to be said has already been said.
When you start people talking about KDE and Gnome, it's hard to get them to stop, even if "everything" has already been said!

Frak
September 15th, 2007, 01:05 AM
It'll end one day when people realize KDE created Gaia and Gnome liberated man :P

Mr. Picklesworth
September 15th, 2007, 01:26 AM
Oh dear --- now you've done it, Frak.
Here come the coexisting environments zealots. RUN!

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 01:41 AM
\Yea, you can do that, but I was talking about native features.

You can run kicker in GNOME, but you don't list kicker as a GNOME feature.

That's not even part of Gnome.

Bart_D
September 15th, 2007, 01:53 AM
Is there a side by side comparison , point form, showing the advantages/disadvantages of KDE versus Gnome?

RAV TUX
September 15th, 2007, 01:56 AM
I prefer GFDE (Gnome Forked Desktop Environment)

I do like this name better


That's a horrible idea. We don't need yet another toolkit and set of libraries for desktop GUI design. Having anymore than 1 open source DE is a waste of manpower.

OK, I agree bad idea.


IceWeasle is going nowhere right now. Only a few distributions actually use and and none of those are major players.

Debian, KNOPPIX, Elive Gem....

can't think of many more, I'm using IceWeasel now and it works just as good as Firefox.....strange isn't it?


Exactly. I don't get the whole "Us vs. Them" tone of that blog. It betrays a very "Cathedral" perspective where we are the victims and Miguel de Icaza is the alleged assailant, and boycotting GNOME is proffered as the only available solution, which is just silly. Turning this into a holy war between desktops distracts from the real issues and will only make things worse, not better.

I would like to see KDE and GNOME merge.


Is there a side by side comparison , point form, showing the advantages/disadvantages of KDE versus Gnome?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_X_Window_System_desktop_environments

Andrewie
September 15th, 2007, 02:03 AM
Is there a side by side comparison , point form, showing the advantages/disadvantages of KDE versus Gnome?

the only people who know enough to compare KDE and Gnome, also know that it's stupid.

23meg
September 15th, 2007, 02:09 AM
I would like to see KDE and GNOME merge.

How about Airbus and Boeing too?

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 02:13 AM
How about Airbus and Boeing too?

:-s

ComplexNumber
September 15th, 2007, 02:15 AM
:-s
he basically means that it is not likely due to the fact that they're in competition.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 02:17 AM
he basically means that it is not likely due to the fact that they're in competition.

Well they shouldn't be competing, it's unproductive.

ryno519
September 15th, 2007, 02:23 AM
Well they shouldn't be competing, it's unproductive.

In what way? I see the competition as a good thing.

Mr. Picklesworth
September 15th, 2007, 02:27 AM
I see the competition as a good thingIndeed, it keeps the fools out of one environment, and in the other :P

I kid, I kid!

23meg
September 15th, 2007, 02:27 AM
Well they shouldn't be competing, it's unproductive.

Same goes for Airbus and Boeing.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 02:28 AM
Well they shouldn't be competing, it's unproductive.Your right. We should give our code to Microsoft so we can be more productive working on the next version of Windows.

blithen
September 15th, 2007, 02:30 AM
Well I agree with some of these points. I however love Gnome. But I can't get KDE to recognize my ResierFS drive.

p_quarles
September 15th, 2007, 02:30 AM
In what way? I see the competition as a good thing.
+1 for that.

The flamewars, however, are unproductive. :roll:

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 02:37 AM
IDebian, KNOPPIX, Elive Gem....

can't think of many more, I'm using IceWeasel now and it works just as good as Firefox.....strange isn't it?Using IceWeasel is like using GNUbuntu. Only the people who want to use only completely free software would even look at it.

distroman
September 15th, 2007, 02:41 AM
I got a ticket to a Stallman session, I am willingly donating it to the blogger so he gets a chance to get in touch with his inner Stallman he needs it even more then I do.
:popcorn:

FuturePilot
September 15th, 2007, 02:43 AM
Sure, kill Gnome. And then you can also kill what Linux stands for. Choice!

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 02:55 AM
In what way? I see the competition as a good thing.

Competition isn't always good. If two people are stuck on an island they shouldn't compete. Also, I don't think you understand. There really is no reason to have 2 incompatible DEs.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 02:58 AM
Competition isn't always good. If two people are stuck on an island they shouldn't compete. Also, I don't think you understand. There really is no reason to have 2 incompatible DEs.They are not incompatible. You can use GNOME programs with KDE, and KDE programs with GNOME.

ryno519
September 15th, 2007, 03:01 AM
Competition isn't always good. If two people are stuck on an island they shouldn't compete. Also, I don't think you understand. There really is no reason to have 2 incompatible DEs.

They aren't incompatible. They both adhere to many common standards and the quirks are being worked out all the time. It would be MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH easier to work out the compatibility issues than to completely eliminate a Desktop Environment and toolkit. And I must have missed the part where GNOME and KDE were trapped on a desert island. Which one's Gilligan? ;)

In software, competition is usually a good thing. Look at IE6. It went ages without any major feature upgrade because it had no serious competition. Once Firefox came out and started bleeding market share away from IE6, all of a sudden Microsoft decided it might be a good idea to implement some important features. Without competition in the software world there is little reason to implement new, revolutionary features. As it stands now, GNOME and KDE not only compete, but can share features and help each other grow.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 03:05 AM
They are not incompatible. You can use GNOME programs with KDE, and KDE programs with GNOME.

I don't mean incompatible as in they can't run side by side I mean they don't work together in a way a DE should.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 03:09 AM
I don't mean incompatible as in they can't run side by side I mean they don't work together in a way a DE should.Can you explain in a bit more detail?
From what I've seen, they work fine together.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 03:10 AM
They aren't incompatible. They both adhere to many common standards and the quirks are being worked out all the time. It would be MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH easier to work out the compatibility issues than to completely eliminate a Desktop Environment and toolkit. And I must have missed the part where GNOME and KDE were trapped on a desert island. Which one's Gilligan? ;)

In software, competition is usually a good thing. Look at IE6. It went ages without any major feature upgrade because it had no serious competition. Once Firefox came out and started bleeding market share away from IE6, all of a sudden Microsoft decided it might be a good idea to implement some important features. Without competition in the software world there is little reason to implement new, revolutionary features. As it stands now, GNOME and KDE not only compete, but can share features and help each other grow.

This isn't the case with open source. People in Fossland program mostly because they want to (the exclusion of course being people employed to do it).

Frak
September 15th, 2007, 03:10 AM
Your right. We should give our code to Microsoft so we can be more productive working on the next version of Windows.
What's wrong with that?
As long as its better, isn't that all that matters? Plus, they already have our code, no need to coop unless they ask us first.

ryno519
September 15th, 2007, 03:14 AM
This isn't the case with open source. People in Fossland program mostly because they want to (the exclusion of course being people employed to do it).

Why isn't it the case? Do developers not care about market share unless they're raking in the cash? I for one don't like to see my projects fail miserably, so if somebody has a similar product I'm going to do my best to make mine better so it doesn't vanish off of the face of the earth.

With commercial applications, it may be money that is the key motivator, but with FOSS it's a combination of ego and pride. You don't want to put a lot of work into a project and see somebody else steamroll you. You're going to do your best to compete.

RedStar1916
September 15th, 2007, 03:14 AM
All hail Xfce!!

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 03:17 AM
What's wrong with that?
As long as its better, isn't that all that matters? Plus, they already have our code, no need to coop unless they ask us first.Its crazy for someone to say, "Hey guys! Were shutting down your project because we think that it would be better that way. You can code for us if you want."

That's essentially what that guy is doing.

You would be fine using a for-pay Windows over Linux?

Frak
September 15th, 2007, 03:20 AM
If its safer, faster, and efficient, but still conforms to my freedoms, I'll use it no matter how much it costs.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 03:20 AM
Can you explain in a bit more detail?
From what I've seen, they work fine together.

Can you use KDE libs in a GTK+ app? Can Gnome set KDE apps and gnome apps all nice like?

SIZABANTU
September 15th, 2007, 03:25 AM
gnome is beautiful and mature. I like kde too it has lost of great applications. but i dont like to see kde in gnome its all very ugly :mad:

ryno519
September 15th, 2007, 03:39 AM
Can you use KDE libs in a GTK+ app? Can Gnome set KDE apps and gnome apps all nice like?

Yes and yes, with the occasional minor issue.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 03:40 AM
Why isn't it the case? Do developers not care about market share unless they're raking in the cash? I for one don't like to see my projects fail miserably, so if somebody has a similar product I'm going to do my best to make mine better so it doesn't vanish off of the face of the earth.

With commercial applications, it may be money that is the key motivator, but with FOSS it's a combination of ego and pride. You don't want to put a lot of work into a project and see somebody else steamroll you. You're going to do your best to compete.

I don't really know for sure (and you probably don't either). Maybe we'll get some answers here:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=551225

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 03:41 AM
Can you use KDE libs in a GTK+ app? Can Gnome set KDE apps and gnome apps all nice like?So basically you are saying that they are incompatible because they don't look nice together?

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 03:42 AM
So basically you are saying that they are incompatible because they don't look nice together?

yes

loell
September 15th, 2007, 03:46 AM
huh? i seems we are only talking about theming here, they can look nice together if they have a uniform theme.

ev5unleash1
September 15th, 2007, 03:47 AM
I perfer Gnome, when I attmpted Kubuntu I sort of got lost and it took time to find out where things where. Where in Gnome it was simple to learn.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 03:50 AM
huh? i seems we are only talking about theming here, they can look nice together if they have a uniform theme.

Even then it would lack a lot of the DE niceness.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 03:51 AM
yesI wouldn't call that incompatible, all it needs is a clone of the Ubuntu theme for KDE and everything's solved.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 03:52 AM
I wouldn't call that incompatible, all it needs is a clone of the Ubuntu theme for KDE and everything's solved.

That all ready been done and it doesn't solve it.

ryno519
September 15th, 2007, 03:56 AM
Even then it would lack a lot of the DE niceness.

You're free to write the code that would solve the compatibility issues.

http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/gtk-qt

Read up and start re-writing. ;)

loell
September 15th, 2007, 04:00 AM
Even then it would lack a lot of the DE niceness.

i'm not sure what that means, aside from the drag and drop problem. theres nothing more about DE integration.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 04:00 AM
You're free to write the code that would solve the compatibility issues.

http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/gtk-qt

Read up and start re-writing. ;)

Hmm, well that solves it right there, lol.

ryno519
September 15th, 2007, 04:03 AM
Hmm, well that solves it right there, lol.

You scoff, but it would. :)

Samhain13
September 15th, 2007, 04:04 AM
I really don't get why so many people here continually insult KDE as unprofessional when proper research shows its better for a business environment.

Research != Real Life

Some people actually need to use computer applications for a living. And if you're a graphic designer, Krita almost always never works but the Gimp does-- it's a bit difficult but it really works.

Nothing against KDE as a whole, though.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 04:04 AM
That all ready been done and it doesn't solve it.I don't know what you would want anyone to do then. To me, it's just not that big of a deal.

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 04:14 AM
Research != Real Life

Ya know, The "≠" has been around for a very long time now...

loell
September 15th, 2007, 04:22 AM
Ya know, The "≠" has been around for a very long time now...

but.. it has not change and still is working ;)

p_quarles
September 15th, 2007, 04:22 AM
Ya know, The "≠" has been around for a very long time now...
Burrrrn!!!eleven1!

ryno519
September 15th, 2007, 04:22 AM
Ya know, The "≠" has been around for a very long time now...

But on the computer, '!=' has been around longer and is much easier to type. ;)

Frak
September 15th, 2007, 04:23 AM
Burrrrn!!!eleven1!
+1 :lolflag:

Samhain13
September 15th, 2007, 04:26 AM
But on the computer, '!=' has been around longer and is much easier to type.

My sentiments exactly. :D

Fbot1
September 15th, 2007, 04:26 AM
But on the computer, '!=' has been around longer and is much easier to type. ;)

I know but it always makes me think about factorials. :(

Dimitriid
September 15th, 2007, 06:34 AM
If gnome is so inferior why does XFCE manages to be as effective while based on GTK for example? In any case I think only a few guys got it right here: disregarding either DE would be crazy when we have very good interoperability already

I rather have Linux as an OS of True choice than attain mass adoption if it implies losing choices.

atbnet
September 15th, 2007, 07:07 AM
I started out in linux using KDE. Never really used Gnome nor knew much about it. Then I saw some screens and it looked a bit like the Mac OS so I decided to try it. I prefer it now because KDE looks too Windows-like to me.

DjBones
September 15th, 2007, 07:24 AM
i think weve all heard the whiny "theres no standard"
linux isn't obligated to take the market by storm.. it doesn't aim to destroy the competition and attract all user's, linux has bumbled along just fine with even less support and even less user base and look far weve gotten? just think what can happen now that we are attracting more users.

hes basically saying that we should limit choice so there is a standard (QT/KDE) and would help proprietary development..
i guess i dont have to explain why this arguement is something that really doesn't concern the linux community.

sstusick
September 15th, 2007, 07:38 AM
ive tried various kde based distros, and something ALWAYS crashes, freezes, and glitches. (i install alot of distros) every time i use gnome, it works fine. if someone can explain this to me, be my guest. i build and fix pc's, so it's not user error. i think kde users know that kde is glitchy, and won't admit it. (see windows users)I've experienced that as well while using SuSE 10.2... I got so ticked off after 5 months of that and went back to Windows. Within a month I got tired of Windows again and decided to try out Ubuntu, installed it and I haven't booted into Windows since. I wasn't too crazy about Gnome at first, but I grew to like it and prefer it to KDE. I have also noticed it is much faster and stabler than KDE. So gnome to stay on this desktop.

loell
September 15th, 2007, 08:41 AM
well, yeah , i noticed that glitchiness of KDE when i've used it since 2.x to 3.x ,
but since only few people from the KDE would talk about it,
whether they are on denial or something else, i just stop caring about it, cause I'm not a fan of Qt anyway.

SlayerMan
September 15th, 2007, 10:25 AM
I never experienced basic KDE to crash. What I experienced is that konqueror crashes maybe once in four months (mostly when viewing web sites). It's no problem though; one clicks the crash dialog away and just restarts konqi. I'm talking about Kubuntu Dapper here which I use on my main production machine (so the crashes might occur because of the Kubuntu modifications to KDE).

GeneralZod
September 15th, 2007, 10:36 AM
I never experienced basic KDE to crash. What I experienced is that konqueror crashes maybe once in four months (mostly when viewing web sites). It's no problem though; one clicks the crash dialog away and just restarts konqi. I'm talking about Kubuntu Dapper here which I use on my main production machine (so the crashes might occur because of the Kubuntu modifications to KDE).

Yeah, I've never had KDE crash. The apps I have had trouble with are:

kicker + kwin: maybe twice each in the three years I've been using it. Mentioned only for completeness :)

Konqueror - very, very rarely.

arK - frequently - awful app!

SuperKaramba - same as arK. SuperKaramba is a very poorly written app - single-threaded, and crash prone.

That's about it, really - I've seen some specific versions of apps crashing - for example, in Kubuntu 5.04, Konqueror would crash very frequently, and the default KDevelop that came with Dapper would often crash on start-up - but later versions cured this.

My other apps - Kontact (inc KMail, akrekator etc), Kopete, Kile, basKet, kget, Konversation, KTorrent, kdesvn, kile, kpdf/ kdvi, etc never crash. I find it annoying and not a little insulting that some people insist on a) seeing one or two KDE apps crash and coming to the conclusion that *KDE* itself is unstable and b) that those same people then insist that all KDE users live some terrible existence where every app they use crashes every 5 minutes and only "denial" ( :rolleyes: ) keeps them from switching to GNOME.

awakatanka
September 15th, 2007, 12:26 PM
For those KDE basher, You all say that KDE looks like windows so they made it the way windows users feel right athome with all those crashes. ;)

Never had many crashes and if it crashed it was mostly in kubuntu. Mepis is rock solid on the dapper base and most other kde distro's where much better then kubuntu. But kubuntu is getting mature and better.

I have the feeling those basher made kde crashes with some stupid thing they did them self. I have the same in gnome because i'm not used to it.

Stupid blog and does more harm then right for the linux desktop.

ukripper
September 15th, 2007, 12:39 PM
looks like original discussion regarding gnome has now shifted to kde..what next?

loell
September 15th, 2007, 01:28 PM
looks like original discussion regarding gnome has now shifted to kde..what next?

mud slinging between window managers

PatrickMay16
September 15th, 2007, 02:03 PM
I think there should be a development ceace in gnome for 6 months, where instead of adding new (or more likely removing old and useful) features, they work on fixing the glitches and slowness that gnome suffers from. If they won't do this, or if they won't at least try to fix the ridiculous freeze that nautilus goes through when you enter a folder with many images in it, then indeed gnome should be killed.

BTW, gnome panel sucks. I can't stand it. At some point it will ALWAYS end up crashing and losing all your settings. And yes, I have tried backing up ~/.gnome2/apps/panel (or whatever it was), that doesn't work.

Nano Geek
September 15th, 2007, 02:56 PM
I think there should be a development ceace in gnome for 6 months, where instead of adding new (or more likely removing old and useful) features, they work on fixing the glitches and slowness that gnome suffers from. If they won't do this, or if they won't at least try to fix the ridiculous freeze that nautilus goes through when you enter a folder with many images in it, then indeed gnome should be killed.

BTW, gnome panel sucks. I can't stand it. At some point it will ALWAYS end up crashing and losing all your settings. And yes, I have tried backing up ~/.gnome2/apps/panel (or whatever it was), that doesn't work.Here marks the start of the next great mud-slinging war.

bogolisk
September 15th, 2007, 03:15 PM
And yes, I have tried backing up ~/.gnome2/apps/panel (or whatever it was), that doesn't work.

:lolflag:

at least get the fact right before throwing mud!!!
:-({|=

Frak
September 15th, 2007, 03:37 PM
:lolflag:

at least get the fact right before throwing mud!!!
:-({|=
That isn't helping. Your only wasting server space with posts like that. You might help by suggesting a solution.

tehkain
September 15th, 2007, 04:02 PM
The 'you have to install a dependent package first' idea is what makes linux great. We reduce duplicate packages thus saving space and promote collaboration by doing things the way we do. Why are dependencies not an issue? Package Managers - This is why I love linux. I am one command, or a few clicks, away from a 28,000 apps. If the app is not in the repos I simply add their repo or download a deb.

I like KDE but I am a Gnome user - Choice is what makes our world great.

Mr. Picklesworth
September 15th, 2007, 04:03 PM
I think there should be a development ceace in gnome for 6 months, where instead of adding new (or more likely removing old and useful) features, they work on fixing the glitches and slowness that gnome suffers from. If they won't do this, or if they won't at least try to fix the ridiculous freeze that nautilus goes through when you enter a folder with many images in it, then indeed gnome should be killed.

BTW, gnome panel sucks. I can't stand it. At some point it will ALWAYS end up crashing and losing all your settings. And yes, I have tried backing up ~/.gnome2/apps/panel (or whatever it was), that doesn't work.

I thought that, too, but GNOME is always getting bug fixes. It did it with earlier releases, but the panel hasn't done that to me for the entire time that Feisty has been out; it is almost rock solid at this point.

aysiu
September 15th, 2007, 04:06 PM
I thought that, too, but GNOME is always getting bug fixes. Of course it is. The Gnome devs are just ignoring the ones that need to be fixed (http://ubuntucat.wordpress.com/2007/07/12/the-top-5-gnomeubuntu-usability-bugs-id-love-to-see-fixed/).

bogolisk
September 15th, 2007, 04:15 PM
That isn't helping. Your only wasting server space with posts like that. You might help by suggesting a solution.

I don't believe he was looking for help. His intentions were very clear. It'd only waste server space to post solutions in a kde-gnome flamewar.

original_jamingrit
September 15th, 2007, 04:34 PM
I've never had a problem with gnome panel, but then again I don't really try to do anything too tricky with it.

I'm not really a gnome fan per se, but I am a gnome user, and I do like the gnome project and what they are trying to do.

jfdill_2
September 15th, 2007, 04:45 PM
Having more than one computer language is too distracting and keeps proprietary software developers from writing any good code. We should all standardize on VisualBasic. Also it's a horrible waste of time and resources having developers working on both vim and emacs. vim and emacs should be merged. And what the heck is up with tcsh when we have bash available? I'm confused. I'm going to put on my tinfoil hat and go buy an Etch-a-Sketch and say to heck with all this computer junk once and for all.

capink
September 15th, 2007, 04:53 PM
gnome-panel is actually the thing I like the most about Gnome. I also like the way gnome looks. The thing I hate is having my applications split over two different toolkits. That is why I hope one of the toolkit will obsolete the other. I don't care which. In an ideal world, we would have one toolkit and multiple desktop environments. Sadly, I don't think that will ever happen.

RAV TUX
September 15th, 2007, 05:12 PM
I Love GNOME
I Love KDE
I Love XFCE
I Love Fluxbox
I Love Enlightenment 16
I Love Enlightenment 17

23meg
September 16th, 2007, 11:54 AM
Here's a very interesting spec for the DE killers:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kome

fdhdghdg
September 16th, 2007, 01:18 PM
Then KILL IT or SHUT UP

(and good luck with both)

What some GNOME-hating programming nerd needs to type on his blog and what the rest of the world needs to do is two different stories.

Frak
September 16th, 2007, 04:00 PM
Here's a very interesting spec for the DE killers:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kome
lol

But don't worry, I'm totally behind that idea ;)

Gordy
September 16th, 2007, 04:11 PM
I ran across this blog post tonight: We need to kill GNOME (http://hopachai.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/we-need-to-kill-gnome/)

I'm interested Ubuntu users' reactions on this, primarily because Ubuntu is heavily biased towards GNOME.

Let's kill Vista instead!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1:)

hessiess
September 16th, 2007, 04:44 PM
Let's kill Vista instead!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1:)

+1 :)

Old *ix Geek
September 16th, 2007, 04:46 PM
I'll admit to having not read the entire article, but the part that I did read I basically agree with. (Note that I use KDE, I don't like GNOME, I don't like the fact that almost all instructions assume the use of GNOME and give GNOME-specific steps to follow, etc.) I agree with Linus Torvalds that KDE is superior and should be recommended to all users--and I didn't even know he felt that way until I just read it in that article! I'm glad to know Linus and I feel the same way about GNOME. :)

Fixman
September 16th, 2007, 05:07 PM
I ran across this blog post tonight: We need to kill GNOME (http://hopachai.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/we-need-to-kill-gnome/)

I'm interested Ubuntu users' reactions on this, primarily because Ubuntu is heavily biased towards GNOME.

Shut up, Xubuntu

ukripper
September 16th, 2007, 08:02 PM
Here's a very interesting spec for the DE killers:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kome

I don't liek the name KOME..prefer KNOME..

loell
September 16th, 2007, 10:55 PM
that's what i don't like about launchpad , even total dreamers can post a non-sense spec :popcorn:

Nano Geek
September 16th, 2007, 11:01 PM
Here's a very interesting spec for the DE killers:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/kome
THIS NEW INTERFACE MUST BE MORE POWERFUL THAN VISTA'S 3D FLIP.Oh man. Do you think it's even possible? :)

earobinson
September 16th, 2007, 11:03 PM
I ran across this blog post tonight: We need to kill GNOME (http://hopachai.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/we-need-to-kill-gnome/)

I'm interested Ubuntu users' reactions on this, primarily because Ubuntu is heavily biased towards GNOME.
1 post = blog spam

Footissimo
September 16th, 2007, 11:20 PM
that blogger is an idiot

By far the most sensible comment in this whole thread.

Frak
September 16th, 2007, 11:22 PM
that's what i don't like about launchpad , even total dreamers can post a non-sense spec :popcorn:
Worse, 12 year olds can too ;)

loell
September 16th, 2007, 11:52 PM
i don't mind listening and learning from a 12 year old at all , as long as it is a sensible idea. ;)

so , genius kids, pls post at launchpad too :)

23meg
September 16th, 2007, 11:55 PM
Worse, 12 year olds can too ;)

Why shouldn't they? I know a couple of 14 year olds who are Ubuntu members and looking to be MOTUs, one of whom maintains some packages.

Frak
September 16th, 2007, 11:56 PM
It was a joke, but I guess I meant more of a 9 year old, like "Spaceships are cool, but rockets are better!"

loell
September 17th, 2007, 12:02 AM
Why shouldn't they? I know a couple of 14 year olds who are Ubuntu members and looking to be MOTUs, one of whom maintains some packages.

if someone could just write an article or more like an interview about these very young talented individuals, i am quite sure many will be interested to read this :)

23meg
September 17th, 2007, 02:21 AM
You'll probably see them interviewed in Behind MOTU (http://behindmotu.wordpress.com/) as soon as they become MOTUs.

loell
September 17th, 2007, 02:45 AM
thanks :) , i didn't know that there's a blog dedicated for MOTUs where abouts.

vexorian
September 17th, 2007, 04:25 AM
I ran across this blog post tonight: We need to kill GNOME (http://hopachai.wordpress.com/2007/09/14/we-need-to-kill-gnome/)

I'm interested Ubuntu users' reactions on this, primarily because Ubuntu is heavily biased towards GNOME.
Is it? I recall Shuttleworth stating the only reason he uses gnome is their more predictable release cycle.

Edit: When someguy states the GTK/QT dichotomy makes it hard for him to release apps for Linux, he is either lying or demonstrating he is an incompetent developer.

sstusick
September 17th, 2007, 05:00 AM
Let's kill Vista instead!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1:)
+1

mr.lee
September 17th, 2007, 05:41 AM
You'll probably see them interviewed in Behind MOTU (http://behindmotu.wordpress.com/) as soon as they become MOTUs.

sorry interupt for stupid question, (",)....what is MOTU?

Mr. Picklesworth
September 17th, 2007, 06:17 AM
Edit: Misquoted. Concealing my ignorance by erasing the quote. I hate to erase the below. May have to so it doesn't appear I am talking to an imaginary friend... :(
In other words, I didn't intend to repeat myself or continue poking at this. Honestly, I was tricked!


Oh? Please, explain to me how buying / adhering to a commercial license from these guys (http://trolltech.com/products/qt/licenses/licensing/qtlicensing) is somehow less trouble than not buying a license from these guys (http://www.gtk.org/).

I have nothing against KDE or Qt -- I really don't. KDE 4 has a fantastic implementation of desklets, which really quite impresses me, and a lot of its power does come from its UI toolkit. The KDE project has resulted in a lot of really great stuff, such as WebKit.
However, the fact remains that GNOME was created for a reasonable purpose, it continues to serve that purpose, and it does a much better job of serving that purpose than KDE: GNOME, unlike KDE, uses a non-viral license.

KDE apps may look out of place in GNOME, but it could be worse: Commercial KDE apps could look out of place in KDE, because they would take horrific workarounds ("cross-platform", out of place user interfaces that fit nowhere and 'work' everywhere) to avoid paying for a commercial Qt license.

KDE was never meant to be the defacto Linux desktop standard. I think the number of Ks involved, as well as the use of the free version of a commercial cross-platform toolkit (I think it's clear why this is), brings that point home: KDE's developer community mostly accepts it being a really good niche, and don't seem to take matters too seriously. KDE is a really neat place to go for a 99.9% open source desktop; that is what it caters to, and that is what it always will cater to. I do not want that part of KDE to ever die, and I think if it were to "kill GNOME", that part of it would die very quicky.
KDE succeeds at being unfriendly to proprietary / commercial software, and that is a powerful thing.
For a niche.

loell
September 17th, 2007, 06:45 AM
sorry interupt for stupid question, (",)....what is MOTU?

Masters Of The Universe (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU)

easyease
September 17th, 2007, 12:46 PM
I like gnome more than kde because it is no nonsense, kde looks nice to a kid's eyes but its just more stuff to go wrong. I'm not dissing kde apps because some are essential on my gnome ubuntu system, kaffeine and amarok have got media covered.
the kde app naming system is the stupidest thing about kde, it makes a joke out of the ubuntu apps menu...."k" in front of everything ffs! thats enough to scare new ubuntu users away.

acaby
September 17th, 2007, 02:56 PM
I do not think so. Why not use both. I have ubuntu 7.04 with Kubuntu-Desktop installed. I can switch back and forth between KNOME and KDE at my leasure at boot up and get the best of both worlds. By the way to the post I found here bashing firefox and KDE I use Firefox with the KDE Desktop and it works Flawlessly. I also Use the Fireftp plugin to upload to my websites, Also flawless.
Go Figure??

glotz
September 17th, 2007, 03:09 PM
Way to start a blog.

"Let's kill one of the most successful free software projects because I don't like its API and I'm (sincerely?) afraid of some dark MS connections based on a single individual. Plus Linus says it sucks!"

So it looks to me like the author would like Qt to be the standard GUI API in linux so he can reuse his Windows code and sell his proprietary applications in linux too. I seriously doubt he's using KDE (not Qt) libraries for the Windows applications he says he's developing.

And considering you must pay Trolltech for a proprietary development license, I see clearly where his bias is.

So here we have a guy with a proprietary development agenda spewing worn-off conspiracy theories against Icaza, who is a free software developer with a long history of contributions, MS related or not. This is ridiculous.Amen!

vexorian
September 17th, 2007, 05:45 PM
PS: Icaza is a sell out , anyone who actually promotes OOXML is against open source.

ryno519
September 17th, 2007, 06:09 PM
PS: Icaza is a sell out , anyone who actually promotes OOXML is against open source.

Yeah, he's completely against open source software. That's why he never releases any of his code under an opensource license.

ExSuSEusr
September 17th, 2007, 06:12 PM
I like gnome more than kde because it is no nonsense, kde looks nice to a kid's eyes but its just more stuff to go wrong. I'm not dissing kde apps because some are essential on my gnome ubuntu system, kaffeine and amarok have got media covered.
the kde app naming system is the stupidest thing about kde, it makes a joke out of the ubuntu apps menu...."k" in front of everything ffs! thats enough to scare new ubuntu users away.

I agree.

I used to use KDE exclusively, now I use Gnome 100% of the time. I like Gnome... but then again I've never had an issue with Evolution either! So maybe I'm just odd. :confused: