Desktop Environment / Window Manager Preference/Comparison Thread

[arthureggplant]

Interestingly, I left Mandrake for Ubuntu. I use KDE. Gnome has some nice things, but I'm used to KDE and it's what I prefer to use. I actually am not interested at all in the KDE vs. Gnome arguments- they both work well for some people. I happen to find KDE works better for me for what I do (kate and konqueror is my preferred way to do web app development). Ok, I probably could work my way up to an argument for KDE, but that's not all that I'm interested in.

When I started using Ubuntu a month ago, I went straight to to hoary and grabbed kde 3.3 out of universe. Haven't looked back and things work well enough to use for me. I'd be using a standard debain install, but frankly, what is most attractive about Ubuntu for me is the regular schedule of releases. The philosophy and design of debian is attractive, but I don't want to wait and wait and wait for new releases of software.

So here I am. I'm not a super linux head. I know macs much better, but I can stumble around enough in the dark to make things work. apt-get is a powerful enough tool to let relatively new people to linux get what they need. Which is why I like debian based distros. Mandrake, while nice in that recent software comes with it, leaves me a bit shaky. I much prefer apt-get to urpmi. There are some great things about Mandrake, but I was willing to leave it for apt-get. And I'm happy about that.

I guess my plug is for debian with a release schedule that includes the software I want to use. I love what debian is, I just get a bit impatient. So maybe one way to look at why people want to run Ubuntu is not just that it has a great implementation of Gnome (it does), but that it is a darn tootin nice install of debian.

[Wardhog]

Wow. The only reason I can give for preferring Gnome is the visual style of it.
I can see I need to fiddle with the desktop a lot to learn things and maybe then review my choice to remake it from a more informed POV.

Is there some kind of brief breakdown somewhere of the pros and cons of KDE and Gnome?

[akurashy]

Flame wars of Gnome and KDE are so childish.. It is stupid after all they are good, what you call opinion sometimes the other user think is a insult to KDE or Gnome and start saying crap... Anyway I like Gnome after all, decent look, friendly as ever and Gnome + Ubuntu is really the best choice ever done. If you like KDE go to to synaptic or terminal and apt get it. Doing a flame war is useless like I said, Both gnome and KDE have a purpose and they both good. But everyone have their opinion. And some people might not listen of what are you opinating completely and go mad and start cussing at you. Of course if you are talking to a Gnome fanboy or KDE fanboy that is immuture you really better run for it, those people are annoying like hell! *If someone is like that hope he don't get offended will ya!* Not saying that all Gnome or KDE fanboys are annoying is just like there some people with big mouths that don't even know what they talking about. Is sad I know

Anyway this is my 2 cents to this thread !

[Ironi]

Is there some kind of brief breakdown somewhere of the pros and cons of KDE and Gnome?

Not as far as I know. Basically, you use KDE if you want features and flexibility (excessively so). You use GNOME if you want visually appealing apps that hopefully get the job done (and if they're missing features that you need, well... you don't actually need them. The features, that is, not the app. You need the app).

[neighborlee]

Excuse my language, but that utter bs.
Qt is released under the GPL and it will always stay under a free license as it will automatically be under a BSD like license if Trolltech ever gets sold to an other company.

Why making money with their product and at the same time giving all the development made possible by that money back to the community is not entirely in that spirit also is beyond me.

Again, excuse my language, but this kind of uninformed FUD simply ticks me off. Gnome is a great desktop (as is kde imho) and one surely doesn't need FUD to justify why one uses it.

-----------
its not gpl for windows..check their site and you will see your info is incorrect. This does matter for those of us wanting to cross develop and for those of us finding relavancy in 100% free software.

its only NOW going to be gpl 'for windows' in quater 4 ( late 2005 ) and they do it to maintain they say a mindset of open source software. Gnome/gtk has been donig that for sometime now which is why I prefer gnome ( always will ) to this day. That does not mean I think kde is nasty just that I believe in 100% free software and gnome started out that way, and thats where my loyalty remains.

cheers
nl

[regeya]

Yeah, and I already have . It was a tough decision to make, and I hope when Hoary's out, I can come back again.

Wow, what I get from this thread is that Ubuntu is for everybody, but it's not for everybody.

It's a real shame that there are apparently people attached to the Ubuntu project that have a use-GNOME-or-get-out attitude. Note that I'm typing this from within Firefox on a GNOME desktop. But if something else comes along that knocks the socks off of everything that currently exists, what will happen--will Ubuntu change with the times, or will people just keep shouting "shut up and drink your whiskey"?

It's a serious question, and not intended to incite more flames (wow, I hadn't paid attention!) and the overall answers (from people who matter most, such as developer types) will determine whether or not I keep using Ubuntu, and my recommendation (or not) of Ubuntu to family and friends.

[nocturn]

-----------
its not gpl for windows..check their site and you will see your info is incorrect. This does matter for those of us wanting to cross develop and for those of us finding relavancy in 100% free software.

its only NOW going to be gpl 'for windows' in quater 4 ( late 2005 ) and they do it to maintain they say a mindset of open source software. Gnome/gtk has been donig that for sometime now which is why I prefer gnome ( always will ) to this day. That does not mean I think kde is nasty just that I believe in 100% free software and gnome started out that way, and thats where my loyalty remains.

cheers
nl

From a practival POV I agree with you, it would be nice to have it GPL'd on win32 too.

But morally speaking, win32 is a closed platform, so Free Software for it is a duality.
I can understand companies or people reasoning, if you are going to shell out cash for proprietary windows, we want a piece of it.
If you do it the Free way, all the way, QT is Free too.

If I maintained an OSS project on both platforms, I *might* also consider charging for the Windows version, just because I hate working on the mess Windows makes or consider dropping support for it.

[nocturn]

Please don't jdong. Its got to work itself out. Gnome and KDE people keep having to deal with each other (for now....xfce.....)......Ubuntu forces conflict on this now because one is chosen over another.

Yet the thruth is that Ubuntu "supported" KDE it would be weak at best (like Fedora), and not be what KDE people want. They should really go elsewhere. There are many options.

My girlfriend dislikes gnome, so I give her a distro with KDE (SUSE). I don't begrudge her opinion, and I'm glad she appreciates opensource.

Freedom is what you make of it. Some people see freedom in different ways. At least both sides can agree that the freedom of choice is the most important one of all.

The problem is that many of the KDE centric distros are walking the commercial path nowdays.

SuSE was the first distro I really liked (arround 1998). But I dropped them for not having ISO downloads, closing development on YaST and I do not like UnitedLinux.

After SuSE came Mandrake, but they are restricting there Open nature too.

So, I decided to limit my choice to distro's that had a social contract like Debian (altough stable is too old).
This moved me to Gentoo (too much compiling) and finally to Ubuntu.

Point is that there are not so many Free distro's using KDE, and some like MEPIS do not offer release cycles and security updates.

And although I'm running Ubuntu with Gnome (which I really like now, but I hated the 1. series), my wife is running Ubunutu with KDE, so will my parents.

I'm basicly happy with the level of support for KDE in Hoary (kubuntu) though.

[Zaphod_B]

Hello to all,

Even though I normally don't take part in discussions like this, I'd like to say, that I don't get the point.

I started working with Linux in 1994 using Suse, which was a Slackware those days, stayed with Suse until 1998 changing to Debian.

In October '04 I noticed the release annoncement of Ubuntu, working with Debian Sid and KDE. Frankly I did not take a look at Gnome for almost 3 years that time, but I downloaded each the live disc and install disc. I tryed the live cd on one of my workstations at work, looked at it for 5 minutes, installed it, ported my home directory from Sid/KDE to Ubuntu/Gnome and began to work with it.

Next, I ported my notebook at work Ubuntu and again started to work with it, feeling better every minute using it.

I also pushed Ubuntu as a distribition for install parties at the LUG, I am part of.

I migrated a friend of mine from Windows to Ubuntu and guess what, he felt good with it and is now migrating his second station to Ubuntu. He does not even know about the differences between Gnome and KDE, he just uses it and does not miss Windows at all.

But, at home I still use Debian Sid with KDE and I feel fine about that, too, even though I migrated my wife's notebook from Debian to Ubuntu. But I have much fun using my Sid/KDE every day at home.

So, what is the problem in using Gnome or Ubuntu, why not use both or one of them with applications from the other DE or even a complete different DE/WM.

Let's sum this up, I like using Ubuntu at least 8 hours a day at work or if I'm on the road with my notebook, and when I come home starting Debian and KDE I'm happy starting to play with it and have fun.

Why do I feel good using both of them any time I want to? Because it is Linux and I've got the freedom of choice.

Try thinking about that, this is much about what Linux stands for. What Linux is not about is flamewars.

Have fun,

Marcus

[machiner]

I don't make the distro - so I've GOT NOTHING TO SAY!