View Poll Results: What is the best desktop in your opinion?

Voters
315. You may not vote on this poll
  • Gnome

    182 57.78%
  • KDE

    86 27.30%
  • Xfce

    47 14.92%
Page 13 of 231 FirstFirst ... 311121314152363113 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 2301

Thread: Desktop Environment / Window Manager Preference/Comparison Thread

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Kingston, On
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread

    "But the licensing issue is FUD:"
    There is another thread decribing why you are wrong.

    " KDE seems fast enough for me. In fact, I've seen people claim that KDE is faster than GNOME. YMMV, I guess."

    Kde can be faster if you disable antialiased fonts and have a ton of memory. It sucks up even more memory if you run non-Qt. non-kde apps on top of that.


    "Meaning that anyone can fork it and continue development, as long as they abide by the rules of the full GPL. Were that to happen, we'd have a situation very similar to the current one with... wait for it... MONO (except that there is no ... patent problem ... surrounding Qt as there may be with Mono).

    BTW, let's not get into the legal uncertanties surrounding Mono and Miguel's plans to base GNOME around it, eh? After all, picking on KDE and Qt is so much easier than facing the harsh realities surrounding something that currently exists in its current state only because of Microsoft's failure to seriously oppose it... and remember who is said to be pushing very hard behind the scenes for software patents in the EU. How's that for FUD? "

    There are fundamental differences in your arguments. Mono is free software from the ground up. The only thing that threatens it is patents. That is not Gnome, Mono or Novell's fault. No one is ever planning on selling mono!
    The business model for mono is one that (so far, to me) will work. Make free software and let people use it. Make tons of money by supporting it.

    Trolltech want to sell free software. If you think that is is a right to sell software, fine. Do not go around calling yourself a supporter of the GPL and an open-source company. That is the difference.
    Last edited by az; March 1st, 2005 at 12:53 PM.

  2. #122
    ralph_ubuntu Guest

    Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread

    Many people believe that the spirit of the GNU project is that you should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that you should charge as little as possible -- just enough to cover the cost.
    Actually we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can. If this seems surprising to you, please read on.
    http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/...ing%20software

    And would you be so kind to at least link to the thread that shows that I'm wrong?
    Thanks in advance.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Kingston, On
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Why is KDE such a sore issue?

    "It's because of the law. I know of no land with copyright laws where a software can only be lisenced under one license only."

    Patents and spanking are legal, too.

    "But know I see the thorn in your side, you wan't all software free (that is okay), thus Qt is not good enough for you because it's also available under commercial lisence."

    That is correct. Sometimes, you need to be either black or white, since if you do not stand up for your rights, you lose them. What would prevent an eventual linux distribution to surpass Microsoft in popularity and then become proprietairy?

    "There are a lot of examples where propritary software exists which is much better than the respective free software but still people use the free one because it's free and good enough for them (Visual Studio.NET vs. MonoDevelop, Photoshop vs. Gimp, etc.)."

    Not quite a good example. You would have to compare the open version of one app with it's proprietairy version. You tend to get less support from a free version when the exact save software has a supported proprietairy version which satisfies everybody's need.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Germany, Old Europe
    Beans
    379
    Distro
    Kubuntu Jaunty Jackalope (testing)

    Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread

    I perfer KDE because I am more productive with it then I am with Gnome. For example I configured the KDE apps to use the keyboard shortcuts I want and am quite fast with them. With Gnome it would cost me some time to learn new shortcuts (configuration imposible) and get used to them and many things don't have keyboard shortcuts under Gnome at all.

    Another thing I like is that for example KDE's file and printing dialogs are more powerful than the Gnome ones. I actually use those additional features from time to time. A week ago I had to work on a Gnome desktop. I wanted to print out a PDF document 100 times. A double click later gpdf started and to my amazement this viewer had no option to print a document multiple times. Or take Gnome's session management. Gnome fails to restore non-Gnome apps like Firefox or Thunderbird (I know it's by design). Thunderbird is never restored, Firefox never on the right virtual desktop. Under KDE it just works. It's these small things I miss with Gnome.

    I absolutly dig KDE's configurability because it gives me more power to configure everything the way I like and thus improve it's usability for me.

    And as a developer it's just more fun for me to work with Qt and C++ then with C and GTK+ (but I like C#/GTK#).

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    /home
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread

    My point about the licensing is that they could pull their gpl'ed version and completely switch over to the one that requires licensing. And that's not FUD.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    /home
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Why is KDE such a sore issue?

    I'm referring to the version that requires licensing. They could pull the gpl version at any time and require licensing to use qt at all. That's not FUD.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Germany, Old Europe
    Beans
    379
    Distro
    Kubuntu Jaunty Jackalope (testing)

    Re: Why is KDE such a sore issue?

    Quote Originally Posted by panickedthumb
    They could pull the gpl version at any time and require licensing to use qt at all. That's not FUD.
    In that case we would have a BSD-licensed Qt.

  8. #128
    ralph_ubuntu Guest

    Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread

    Quote Originally Posted by panickedthumb
    My point about the licensing is that they could pull their gpl'ed version and completely switch over to the one that requires licensing. And that's not FUD.
    And your point is wrong, as you could have easily found out if you had actually read the link I provided.

    So it is FUD, FUD and nothing but FUD.

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bridgeport, CT, USA
    Beans
    3

    Talking Re: Attempt fo a SERIOUS KDE/GNOME thread

    Ever since I started my Linux experience I've used KDE... That was what I liked and pretty much hated GNOME... That was up until Ubuntu and I crossed paths, now I'm all about GNOME.

    The one thing I'm particular about KDE and I don't know if anybody else has though about it is the amount of applications that seem to come from the KDE side!! It seems that if there has to be an app to accomplish some task KDE has it...

    My 2/100

  10. #130
    ralph_ubuntu Guest

    Re: Why is KDE such a sore issue?

    I'm always asking myself if I should be amused or simply disgusted by these kind of discussion. Being amused is probably the better option, as the "arguments" of our beloved anti-kde trolls are simply to dumb to be really disgusted.
    But let's look at what they are trying to tell us.

    Qt is not free software
    This of course might come as a surprise to anyone who firmly believes that 1+1=2 in most instances, as Qt is licensed under the GPL and therefor free software.
    But our friends somehow want us to believe that 1+1=286 when it comes to Qt and kde. Now how are they trying to achieve such a feet?

    Simple, FUD and insults are the answer.
    First of all they claim that the licensing situation of Qt is somehow murky, which of course it isn't as Qt is licensed under the GPL.

    Ah, you hear them say, but Trolltech could change that if they want to.
    Ah, but that holds true for any software under the GPL, as the author is of course free to change the license. But hold on, that is true for almost any software under the GPL, except for Qt, as Qt will always be licensed under a GPL compatible license:
    http://kdemyths.urbanlizard.com/viewMyth.php?mythID=13

    But, but, Qt isn't really free software because it is not only licensed under the GPL but also under a commercial closed source license.
    It is of course true that Qt is also licensed under a closed source license, however that doesn't change the fact that it is also licensed under the GPL and therefor free software.
    If we'd apply the same "logic" our beloved anti-kde trolls use to, say, cars, we'd end up stating that a red Ferrari isn't really a red Ferrari, as there are also yellow Ferraris. Sounds incredibly dumb? That's because it is.

    But wait, all this doesn't stop our friends.
    Now you might ask, what possibly could they resort to next after totally embarrassing themselves so far?
    They use what I like to call the holier-than-thou approach.
    Now, what on earth is this?
    As Qt is not free software (of course it is, you and I know that, but that doesn't stop them from pretending it isn't) all the people that use kde and of course all the open source developers that devote their time and knowledge to kde don't care about freedom.
    Now this is of course not only wrong, as again, Qt is free software, but also an insult to all kde users and developers.

    But it even gets better.
    They, they proclaim, do care about freedom and therefor use Gnome/Gtk+. Now there is of course nothing wrong with using Gnome or prefering it over kde, however claiming that ones love of freedom is best expressed by using something that is licensed under the L(esser)GPL instead of something that is licensed under the GPL is ridiculous, to say the least.

    So where does that leave us, shouldn't we just simply ignore those obvious trolls and FUD slingers and be done with it.
    Granted, this solution really sounds tempting, but on the other hand, if you care about free software and especially if you have respect for the great work open source developers do simply letting all this FUD and insults go unanswered isn't an option.

Page 13 of 231 FirstFirst ... 311121314152363113 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •