PDA

View Full Version : I am TOTALLY confused about KDE and Gnome



AnimateDeath
October 5th, 2007, 12:55 AM
Ok, I am officially confused. I have read so much about KDE vs. Gnome, and posts about Linus bashing Gnome, and all of that stuff that i am in complete overload. I am usuing Ubuntu 7.10 (Gnome). I just don't understand what the difference between Gnome and KDE is.

Ok, so they look different to me. Big deal. I can make Gnome look exactly like I want it, and with compiz-fusion in the 7.10 I can do way more than I would ever need to.

I see that there is software differences between the two DE's, but so far anything that I have installed, be it KDE stuff or Gnome stuff, has worked just fine in Gnome. Almost everything I read is pretty much just an opinion on what DE is prefered and I am not seeing any actual facts of the differences between the two DE's.

Frankly I am sick of reading about it and not getting any real answers. Is it really just a matter of preference between the two DE's? or is there more to it than that? Is the difference between Ubuntu and Kubuntu just the DE's??

Please, if you respond to this I ask that you don't point me to yet another post about opinion on the two DE's (I have read enough of that). I just want the facts. Why one DE over the other, because if the difference is just cosmetic than I really don't care about it. Disk space means nothing to me either.

EDIT: I just read through that and I sounded like a complete ***. I really am not meaning to sound that way, just a little frustrated LOL

Incense
October 5th, 2007, 01:03 AM
It really is about what you prefer. I use KDE because I like using it. I like the default apps, and I like the way it looks and feels. As you already discovered you can run KDE apps in Gnome, and gnome in KDE. Some people will say the KDE apps run faster in KDE because the libs are already loaded, but I don't see a difference. Use what you like. There is XFCE, fluxbox, E17, ICEWM and many other environments to chose from. Play around with them, and use what YOU like.

llamakc
October 5th, 2007, 01:03 AM
It's merely opinion. Some are familiar with one and comfortable with it. Some are familiar with both and are comfortable with one or the other.

For starters they use different toolkits to draw the widgets on the screen, so folks comfortable with coding/developing/hacking up a certain toolkit may have a preference based on that.

The difference between Ubuntu and Kubuntu is the installed-by-default Desktop Environment. You are correct.

Using FOSS and GNU/Linux allows you to make this decision yourself. Try them both and make up your mind as to what suits you for the reasons you yourself design.

Enjoy the freedom to try and choose whatever you want. Cheers.

nowshining
October 5th, 2007, 01:04 AM
well KDE is supposed to be more customizable than gnome, take up less resources than gnome, Linus is supposedly the God of linux, Gnome hearing about it is not following what he wants so he cries like a little baby, etc..

Gnome is less customizable than KDE due to it's suppose to be more for Starters, etc.. than KDE which is suppose to be for professions, etc.. Yes many apps run in gnome from kde due to the library files, etc.. I myself am using Kppp do dialup which is a KDE application, etc..

In the end tho it's more about:

KDE
Less resources
For the Pros
More customizable
Tries to Get away from the Windows GUI

Gnome
Uses more resources
For the Newbies
Less Customizable
Tries to look like the Windows GUI

............

Anyone can correct me if I myself am wrong on some things.

rfruth
October 5th, 2007, 01:04 AM
If you use & like Ubuntu (Gnome) either install Kubuntu or try the live CD, ya my be a KDEr and not know it ! (if already done that never mind) I like Gnome myself but some of the 'KDE' apps are better IMO (Ktorrent etc.)

llamakc
October 5th, 2007, 01:07 AM
I'm an OpenBox/Gnome user but I LOVE K3B. Great burning app.

holiday
October 5th, 2007, 01:07 AM
It really is a matter of taste. Some people have strong feelings about their tastes and get all uppity about those who don't share them. Ho hum!

It sounds like you're happy enough with Gnome so be happy with Gnome. Let the KDE people be happy with KDE. Some KDE people will dismiss you, but you can just dismiss them right back, or better still - I think - just think maybe they should get over it.

Maybe sometime when you feel like exploring, install the KDE and give it a run. You might like it. So what if you do or don't. Like what you like.

Peace, Brother.

weezerisrock
October 5th, 2007, 01:19 AM
In the end tho it's more about:

KDE
Less resources
For the Pros
More customizable
Tries to Get away from the Windows GUI

Gnome
Uses more resources
For the Newbies
Less Customizable
Tries to look like the Windows GUI

............

Anyone can correct me if I myself am wrong on some things.

Lol just to prove its a matter of taste the main reason I don't like KDE is because the default interface reminds me too much of windows. But I don't think there is any kind of performance difference between the two.

AnimateDeath
October 5th, 2007, 01:21 AM
So it does really jsut boil down to preference. I can do everything on Gnome that I can do on KDE and since I care not about disk space then there is no need for a change. That is all i was really looking for. :) Thanks for the responses.

santiagoward2000
October 5th, 2007, 03:17 AM
As everyone said, it's just about your taste. Personally, I don't like either... I love my XFCE!! :guitar:

kevdog
October 5th, 2007, 05:10 AM
If you got the space just install both the gnome and kde desktops and their you have the best of both worlds. KDE has a lot of other helper apps associated with the window manager which I like, but I like the uncluttered look of the gnome desktop better. OK so big deal. I run the gnome desktop, and with the kde desktop installed, I can run the kde apps within gnome. No loss here.

p_quarles
October 5th, 2007, 06:25 AM
Yes, it's a matter of taste.

I recently switched to KDE just because I really like certain apps (Amarok, Akregator, Krusader) that just run faster in their native environment. The Gnome equivalents of these apps are perfectly usable, but IMHO not as elegant.

Ultimately, I think, it boils down to which applications you use the most, and whether or not your system can handle more than one toolkit without performance issues.

AnneFtl
October 9th, 2007, 08:33 AM
NEWBIE !!! Looking at the ubuntu web page I see several packages to download, some derivatives I understand, others leave me lost, like kubuntu.

Could some one tell me the difference between Ubuntu and Kubuntu ?? I guess the better question might be ... what is gnome and KDE, and if there has to be separate ubuntu versions to support gnome or KDS, I guess the other question is What is the benefit or advantage of each and WHY.

I have been a pc user since the altair and a windows user since the beginning so I am totally new to linux systems ...

Thanks in advance for the help..
Anne

skymera
October 9th, 2007, 08:45 AM
one is on the Gnome desktop.
http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktopedition

and one is baseed on the KDE envirnoment
http://www.ubuntu.com/products/WhatIsUbuntu/kubuntu

in my opinion, Gnome is best

Circus-Killer
October 9th, 2007, 08:50 AM
to answer your question more thoroughly, gnome and kde are bot desktop environments. (there are many many more)

basically, the Xwindows environment is very ugly and plain on its own, with very little functionality. both the gnome and kde add a decent user interfaces along with their own set of applications.

its hard to explain fully the differences between the two, the best idea is to try both, so you can see how the two differ and the choices you can make. most ubuntu users prefer gnome, and stick with ubuntu, but there are those who do prefer kde and use kubuntu.

as said, there are many others. but if you dont want to try both right now, i would recommend ubuntu, as i find it's the easiest for beginners.

misfitpierce
October 9th, 2007, 08:50 AM
Gnome is more simplified and very nice while KDE is more sleek an intense. I like both but what is really catching my eye is that KDE4 coming soon. It looks spectacular. :)

Sef
October 9th, 2007, 08:52 AM
Read Psychocats (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/whichbuntu) take.

If you are just starting out then Ubuntu is better since most people in this forum use it. Hence you will tend to get your problems resolved more quickly

It has been widely discussed in Communty Cafe. (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=11)

Incense
October 10th, 2007, 03:00 AM
I have to agree with Sef on this one. I'm a big KDE fan, but Ubuntu is Gnome, and it runs best in it's native DE. Kubuntu still feels like a work in progress compared to Ubuntu. I'm hopeful for Kubuntu Gutsy though.

vishzilla
October 14th, 2007, 05:02 AM
KDE has its perks, the apps are just wonderful. GNOME on the other hand provides simplicity. GNOME is a good way for a novice to start with Linux. Moreover, its boils down to preference. Best way to make a choice is to try out both, no harm in it. I have tried out KDE on the live CD but never installed it. With Gutsy, I may try out KDE.

Rightly said by Incense, I guess Ubuntu is more popular than its KDE counterpart.

RAV TUX
October 15th, 2007, 04:49 AM
Ok, I am officially confused. I have read so much about KDE vs. Gnome, and posts about Linus bashing Gnome, and all of that stuff that i am in complete overload. I am usuing Ubuntu 7.10 (Gnome). I just don't understand what the difference between Gnome and KDE is.

Ok, so they look different to me. Big deal. I can make Gnome look exactly like I want it, and with compiz-fusion in the 7.10 I can do way more than I would ever need to.

I see that there is software differences between the two DE's, but so far anything that I have installed, be it KDE stuff or Gnome stuff, has worked just fine in Gnome. Almost everything I read is pretty much just an opinion on what DE is prefered and I am not seeing any actual facts of the differences between the two DE's.

Frankly I am sick of reading about it and not getting any real answers. Is it really just a matter of preference between the two DE's? or is there more to it than that? Is the difference between Ubuntu and Kubuntu just the DE's??

Please, if you respond to this I ask that you don't point me to yet another post about opinion on the two DE's (I have read enough of that). I just want the facts. Why one DE over the other, because if the difference is just cosmetic than I really don't care about it. Disk space means nothing to me either.

EDIT: I just read through that and I sounded like a complete ***. I really am not meaning to sound that way, just a little frustrated LOL

Good question, why one over the other?

I don't know why anybody would want to limit themselves to just one DE, unless they simply have an old computer.

I use both GNOME & KDE, I also use XFCE but I use e17 as my default session of choice.

I could never use just one DE, I use all that I choose to and I simply restart-X(Ctrl+Alt+Backspace) to log into my desired session of choice.

__________________


http://ubuntuforums.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=46333&d=1192382949

lespaul_rentals
October 16th, 2007, 06:56 PM
well KDE is supposed to be more customizable than gnome, take up less resources than gnome, Linus is supposedly the God of linux, Gnome hearing about it is not following what he wants so he cries like a little baby, etc..

Gnome is less customizable than KDE due to it's suppose to be more for Starters, etc.. than KDE which is suppose to be for professions, etc.. Yes many apps run in gnome from kde due to the library files, etc.. I myself am using Kppp do dialup which is a KDE application, etc..

In the end tho it's more about:

KDE
Less resources
For the Pros
More customizable
Tries to Get away from the Windows GUI

Gnome
Uses more resources
For the Newbies
Less Customizable
Tries to look like the Windows GUI

............

Anyone can correct me if I myself am wrong on some things.

No offense, but in my experience comparing the two I'd have to disagree.

KDE is more resource-demanding. KDE is designed to be very attractive and customizable, all while being user-friendly. It is closer to the Windows GUI. The applications it supports by default tend to be more high-tech (K3b, Amarok, etc.) because it uses C++ as its default script language.

Gnome is light-weight and simple. It is intended for the noob in mind. It is customizable, but it never has that same "sexiness" that KDE has. It is based in C, and the applications that come default with it tend to be annoyingly simple.

az
October 16th, 2007, 07:55 PM
C++ is not a script language and that has no bearing on whether the apps are of better quality than ones written in C.

The history of the GNU/linux desktop in a nutshell:

In the beginning, everything ran from the command-line. As the hardware evolved, the X server was created. In many cases, you needed to *buy* a proprietary X server in order to use accelerated 3D hardware. Since it was not practical to have to recompile your whole software stack in order to run a new application that used your X server, the X server became modular. The freely licenced X server became predominant and basically killed those proprietary X servers.

The first widget toolkit (libraries that make windows and dialog boxes) that was available for GNU/linux was Qt. You had to pay for it. Soon after, it became free-of-charge, but not yet free software.

Some developers got sick of being tied to non-free software and decided to write their own widget set - they created GTK.

GTK apps looked like crap. A redesign was done and some guidelines were created (The Gnome Human Interface Guidelines). For a time, Gnome apps were much better - they were more intuitive because the Gnome developers focused on usability. At the same time, KDE design was pretty awful.

Ask Jono Bacon about that.

Today, both KDE and Gnome focus equally on usability. Both the Qt and GTK+ toolkits offer the same features. So it's a matter of preference, and not a matter of one being better than the other.

So, to answer the original question, both have different histories. In the day-to-day differences, Gnome focuses on not having the user guess what they should do to get the task done, whereas KDE will endeavour to find a way to offer the user a few more options, at the risk of cluttering up the screen.

GeneralZod
October 16th, 2007, 08:36 PM
KDE is more resource-demanding.

The difference is so small that it's hardly worth mentioning:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=2015680&postcount=1235

I don't think calling GNOME "lightweight" compared to KDE is really justified, though.

Lord Illidan
October 16th, 2007, 08:42 PM
The difference is so small that it's hardly worth mentioning:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=2015680&postcount=1235

I don't think calling GNOME "lightweight" compared to KDE is really justified, though.

I agree. Both are quite bloated compared to other DEs like XFCE. (Although even that is bloating up somewhat).

My take on this is :
If you got the space just install both the gnome and kde desktops and their you have the best of both worlds. KDE has a lot of other helper apps associated with the window manager which I like, but I like the uncluttered look of the gnome desktop better. OK so big deal. I run the gnome desktop, and with the kde desktop installed, I can run the kde apps within gnome. No loss here.

This is the best approach, in my opinion. I too like GNOME better, because..I dunno, I just like it. KDE is not bad neither, and has some really good apps like AmaroK.

It's your choice, run them both, and don't listen to flamewars! You get burnt!