So I decided to try KDE out...

[PatrickMay16]

Ever since I first installed Ubuntu, most of the time I just used GNOME because it came with it and was the default and so on. It always seemed OK to me, though I didn't like how GTK1 and qt applications would stick out unattractively amoung the other GTK2 applications. Since there were no GTK2 alternatives to these programs (Linpopup, Rosegarden, Kmid, in case anyone was wondering) I had no choice but to have an inconsistant look between applications.
With KDE, I notice that the colour scheme you choose gets applied to GTK1 and GTK2 applications as well as the KDE applications. This was what annoyed me the most about GNOME. Also, you can change the colours of different things manually, like you could in Windows 2000.

The KDE control center is very nice, with many important options in easy to find places. It was a snap to get it all configured to my liking. No looking through some "configuration editor" to find the advanced details to make something nicer, like disabling the minimise animation when you minimise a window, or how you want some part of the file manager to behave.

Konqueror is great. You can have tabbed windows, and it's faster than Nautilus. One thing that really made me happy was when I first used it to view my pictures folder. I have a large collection of images, and nautilus would always freeze for several seconds when I opened this folder. With Konqueror, it stays responsive, even with my largest folders.

Now I've tried it out, I find that I prefer KDE over GNOME.
KDE/GNOME users... Which do you prefer? Also, why do you prefer it? No arguments or fighting or anything, just wondering why.

(also, sorry if it seems like I'm pitting the KDE people against the GNOME people.)

[el3ktro]

It was the other way round for me. I've been using KDE for years, first with Mandrake, then with Gentoo, then Kubuntu. The I tried out dapper and at first actually accidently download ubuntu instead of kubuntu, but I've been so impressed about Gnome that I decided I want to switch - which I now did. I just much more prefer Gnome's simplicity & cleaness. This is what I always wanted, and I always spent hours of configuring KDE to make it someone easier & cleaner - but Gnome now just is as I want & need it, so I'm happy with it.

Tom

[Jucato]

Hmm... open invitation for a flame war? Hehehe! :D
I started with KDE (Kubuntu) because I liked the color blue. No really, that was one of my primary reasons. :D I also heard that it offered lots and lots of configuration options up front. Coming from Windows were a lot of things are hidden/not customizable/not configurable, that was something I was looking for. So I tried it out. Sure, there have been a lot of settings to plow through, but that's exactly what I wanted. I wanted the mass of options available to me, letting me decide what I want or do not want to use. The reason that I love KDE is the same reason other people don't like it. :D

Then I tried out the Live CD's of Ubuntu (5.10 and Flight 5). I have not had enough time to try it out, though. 1 or 2 hours running the live CD. My first impression was "Hey! Where's the...." Some of the stuff that I presumed should have been logically found where they should have been were not there. Then I recently went on a "friendly" argument about Nautilus "drawing" the desktop and discovered some fundamental differences in the way KDE and GNOME interpret some things/words/features. I guess my biggest issue with GNOME is that it has decided for me what features they think are unnecessary.
Having said that, I actually have a great respect for GNOME. It's clean looking, not entangled by license problems, and has the full support of GNU/FSF. But, it just doesn't work for me. :D

[benplaut]

read down the forums a bit... i'm a new WM user ;)

[Kersus]

Is there a way to have both KDE and Gnome and simply to choose which one you want on each bootup - maybe with one as the default?

[erikpiper]

Yes. If you are on ubuntu, install kubuntu-desktop. Then on your login manager press the "sessions" button. (Just look..) Then you select the WM. You DONT need to reboot to switch WM's.

[mstlyevil]

KDE is just too busy for me. I like the simplicity of Gnome and I find it much easier to theme to my liking.

[awakatanka]

KDE is just too busy for me. I like the simplicity of Gnome and I find it much easier to theme to my liking.
I have the feeling i can theme more to my wishes with KDE, The simlicity and restriction Gnome has as default i dislike, i want to have easly to find option to turn something on our off and KDE gives me that freedom.

But luckly all people have other needs and feelings and linux give us the choose to use what we like.

[ComplexNumber]

PatrickMay16
everyone says what you say when going from gnome to try out kde for the first time (or the first time in ages)......but i can guarantee that it won't last. they say "yeah, i'm really digging kde with all the configuration options and all that. i can't believe what i've been missing". a month or two later, they're usually back with gnome. just like gnome, kde also has its ugly spots, and you will discover them soon enough. like i say, you will be back with gnome when the rose tinted glasses have been removed :D. just see it as being your honeymoon period.

[mstlyevil]

PatrickMay16
everyone says what you say when going from gnome to try out kde for the first time (or the first time in ages)......but i can guarantee that it won't last. they say "yeah, i'm really digging kde with all the configuration options and all that. i can't believe what i've been missing". a month or two later, they're usually back with gnome. just like gnome, kde also has its ugly spots, and you will discover them soon enough. like i say, you will be back with gnome when the rose tinted glasses have been removed :D. just see it as being your honeymoon period.

Sounds exactly like my experience with KDE. Were you reading my mind? :-k

[ComplexNumber]

Sounds exactly like my experience with KDE. Were you reading my mind? :-k not that i know of :D. its because so many people have said exactly the same thing about kde and gnome. he's on his 'kde honeymoon' at the moment where he'll see the best bits of kde first. i found that the ugly parts of gnome are more easily work-around-able than those of kde.

[aysiu]

For the first eight months I used Linux, I kept trying to pick a favorite, and I would keep switching back and forth--KDE, Gnome, XFCE.

After using each of them for months at a time, the only conclusion I can come to is that I like all three equally, and I just keep rotating. Right now, KDE is doing it for me, but probably in a week or two, I'll be back on Gnome. Then I'll be using XFCE, and the cycle will start all over again.

[Jucato]

It's just a matter of personal preference. All DE's and OS'es have their "ugly spots" and if you base your decision on those, you'll end up not using anything at all. Some GNOME users who try KDE return to GNOME after a while. Some don't. The same for KDE users trying out GNOME. Who knows, I might even become a GNOME convert myself. Or you might become like aysiu, who uses GNOME, KDE, and Xfce depending on what he likes to use for that day. :D

GNOME, KDE, Xfce, Enlightenment... it all boils down to what works for you, which sometimes does not work for others.

[virgule]

In short: KDE apps 'run' faster for me once loaded. Loading time is annoyingly, stupidly, uncomprehensibly and chockingly LONG in here (12 seconds to open ksnapshot anyone, 8 seconds for ktips as exemples) It sure seam waaaay below potential) While GNOME stuffs will open quicker its performance goes downhill very easily. They both suck in the end. Its either nice but slow and bloated, or fast but ugly and feature-less. I might cry soon.

[Jucato]

In short: KDE apps 'run' faster for me once loaded. Loading time is annoyingly, stupidly, uncomprehensibly and chockingly LONG in here (12 seconds to open ksnapshot anyone, 8 seconds for ktips as exemples) It sure seam waaaay below potential) While GNOME stuffs will open quicker its performance goes downhill very easily. They both suck in the end. Its either nice but slow and bloated, or fast but ugly and feature-less. I might cry soon.

Maybe you could try out Xfce. It's GTK+ based so your GNOME stuff will work well. And I heard it's lots faster.

[bailout]

I can't get that excited by either of the to be honest. I do like the simplicity of gnome, at first, but then its limitations start to annoy me. As someone has already said I don't like the way the head gnomes have decided everything for me.

But mostly my choice to only install kubuntu dapper instead of kubuntu, ubuntu and xfce as I had in breezy is mostly down to apps. I just found that I mostly preferred k apps over the gnome equivelent and it seems to make sense to run kde if I use mostly kde apps.

Chief among these was konqueror which I love as opposed to nautilus which is appalling. I have used powerdesk pro on windows for several years and nautilus is like going back to windows explorer. As konq doesn't seem to run that well on gnome and I couldn't find a decent alternative to nautilus kde makes more sense. Other than that k3b, kmymoney, kontact, amarok are all better than gnome apps. Other kapps seem to be shaping up nicely with seemingly rapid development, ie koffice - very fast and does 90% of OOo and now has open format support, digikam is excellent and krita is obviously very early in its development but already has 16-bit support whereas gimp just keeps talking about it.

The main problem with kubuntu dapper so far is Adept :mad: - very dissappointed to see this so useless at this stage in dapper's schedule. I haven't tried connecting up my printer yet but if printing is as bad as it seems from the forum then perhaps I will have to swap back to gnome :(

[psychicdragon]

I can't use Gnome or KDE anymore.

KDE is a pain in the *** to configure to my liking. I always see shots of sweet looking KDE desktops, but when I try it out I end up pulling my hair out trying to get Konqueror to behave the way I want it to.

Gnome just gets in the way. I also can't stand Nautilus.

[Wallakoala]

I really like gnome. I tried KDE once, but it just seemed too much. It is sort of hard to explain. I like how gnome is very simple, but very usable. KDE is very usable, but not as simple as gnome.

[ComplexNumber]

ie koffice - very fast and does 90% of OOo
more like about 10-15% ;). try out kspread and kword to see what i mean. linux format reviewed them and said "a disaster area waiting to heppen".

[virgule]

more like about 10-15% ;). try out kspread and kword to see what i mean. linux format reviewed them and said "a disaster area waiting to heppen".
Just like everything Linux. sorry.. don't hurt me. I have Xfce4 installed. I don't use it much the fonts make me itch. Not talking about the colors.. pastel? Changing themes crash the whole thing. QT stuffs are TOO BIG while GTK are damn small. I dont bother anymore adjusting them they will look even more funked up if back in GNOME or KDE. That much inconsistence is killing my love and faith in Linux. To me, be it GNOME, KDE, XFCE or whatever, Dapper is better be SUPER HOT or I just might totally trash anything Linux and buy a wintel machine so be it.

[ComplexNumber]

Just like everything Linux. sorry.. don't hurt me. I have Xfce4 installed. I don't use it much the fonts make me itch. Not talking about the colors.. pastel? Changing themes crash the whole thing. QT stuffs are TOO BIG while GTK are damn small. I dont bother anymore adjusting them they will look even more funked up if back in GNOME or KDE. That much inconsistence is killing my love and faith in Linux. To me, be it GNOME, KDE, XFCE or whatever, Dapper is better be SUPER HOT or I just might totally trash anything Linux and buy a wintel machine so be it. sounds to me like nothing more than a few bad experiences colouring your judgement in an unrealistic way.
you just haven't found your niche yet :).

[aysiu]

more like about 10-15% ;). try out kspread and kword to see what i mean. linux format reviewed them and said "a disaster area waiting to heppen". KWord works just fine for me, and it's one of the few applications that can import and export (i.e., edit) PDFs.

[l0c0dantes]

You should try one of the *box WM's, Great fun once ya know what your doing :D

[potrick]

Happy e17 user here. I managed to find an icon set that exists in KDE and Gnome, changed the themes to look alike and now I can barely tell the difference between the two kinds of applications. So I have the freedom to pick and choose which applications I like on a sort of neutral territory.

[chemaja]

After using each of them for months at a time, the only conclusion I can come to is that I like [KDE, Gnome and XFCE] equally, and I just keep rotating. Right now, KDE is doing it for me, but probably in a week or two, I'll be back on Gnome. Then I'll be using XFCE, and the cycle will start all over again.


They both suck in the end. Its either nice but slow and bloated, or fast but ugly and feature-less. I might cry soon.

So I'm not alone?!? Oh god, I THOUGHT I WAS ALONE!!! </shamelessBillHicksImpersonation>


GNOME, KDE, Xfce, Enlightenment... it all boils down to what works for you, which sometimes does not work for others.

For me: yea, but not really. I end up just getting frustrated and wasting time doing the "desktop dance", in search of Desktop Nirvana, but never finding it. Such is the fate of the FOSS Desktop Purist ;-)

IMHO, KDE and KDE-based applications are definately where it's at in terms of pleasing power users such as myself. Gnome is addictively "way cool", but unfortunately, extended use makes me claustrophobic.


Happy e17 user here. I managed to find an icon set that exists in KDE and Gnome, changed the themes to look alike [...] I have the freedom to pick and choose which applications I like...

Just curious potrick, could you please specify exactly which themes and icon sets you're using, and also your most used (favourite) applications?

---
FYI, I'm writing this in a KDE session in Dapper Drake, after switching away from the default Gnome setup for various performance, quality and usability issues.

[GeneralZod]

In short: KDE apps 'run' faster for me once loaded. Loading time is annoyingly, stupidly, uncomprehensibly and chockingly LONG in here.

A surprisingly large amount of blame can be placed on the C++ linker, here (GNOME is mostly C, KDE is almost 100% C++). I can't work out how to link to it directly, but see aseigo's blog " "slow launch times? blame drepper." here:

http://aseigo.blogspot.com/

Compiling KDE with -fvisibility=hidden should help matters, but I don't know if Kubuntu does this or not.

[Jucato]

A surprisingly large amount of blame can be placed on the C++ linker, here (GNOME is mostly C, KDE is almost 100% C++). I can't work out how to link to it directly, but see aseigo's blog " "slow launch times? blame drepper." here:

http://aseigo.blogspot.com/

Compiling KDE with -fvisibility=hidden should help matters, but I don't know if Kubuntu does this or not.

Feels so weird that they're (KDE) having problems with speed because of C++, which is the language they chose to be based on (Qt), which is also one of the favorite slogans of C users (C is faster than C++), on which GNOME is based on (GTK+). Now I'm even more confused on which Language/Toolkit/DE to stick to, if and when I plan to do some coding. :confused:

I wish there was a DE that had KParts/Kioslaves and a good composite manager but used GTK+ and is as fast as Xfce... I'll be sure to dance around that. :D

[eMuNiX]

Using Kubuntu Dapper under GDM so that I can easily use XGL/Compiz, without Compiz running KDE is dog slow, fire up Compiz and it flies :) Prefer KDE, it's what I started with and it suits the way my mind works. I like Gnome but it takes me longer to do what I want it to do than KDE does. :-k

[GeneralZod]

Feels so weird that they're (KDE) having problems with speed because of C++, which is the language they chose to be based on (Qt), which is also one of the favorite slogans of C users (C is faster than C++), on which GNOME is based on (GTK+). Now I'm even more confused on which Language/Toolkit/DE to stick to, if and when I plan to do some coding. :confused:

I wish there was a DE that had KParts/Kioslaves and a good composite manager but used GTK+ and is as fast as Xfce... I'll be sure to dance around that. :D

It's not so much the C++ language that's at fault, but the way Linux's linker deals with C++ libraries/ apps - it's so bad that I've heard people claim that starting up WINE + the Windows version of OO.o is faster than starting up the native Linux OO.o - which is absolutely mind-boggling if true :) The same goes for Firefox (another C++ app that has near-instantaneous startup on Windows, but pretty slow startup on Linux), too allegedly.

I tend not to be swayed by "C is faster than C++" claims - comparing e.g. Metacity to KWin and gnome-terminal to konsole shows that there are far, far more influential factors on performance than the language an app is written in ;) Honestly, with modern compilers, then difference between C and C++ for ordinary desktop apps is becoming more and more neglibile.

[Jucato]

Oh I thought seigo was suddenly having a C epiphany (not the browser). :D
Might try out installing OO.o in WINE. I just hate the way it starts up so slow. KOffice starts up fast, but I find the 1.5 beta 2 version very buggy for now (maybe I should downgrade to the stable version).

[zi99y]

I've been looking for a thread like this to air my thoughts, as I recently was hooked on KDE until I got annoyed with some obscure crashes and loading times were bothering me.

What I like about KDE:

Konqueror and KIO slaves
Kontact with Akregator - can display the web page in the akregator window
Amarok - miles better than any other fully-featured media player I've tried


What I don't like about KDE:

App loading times gets me down
Loading the DE and restoring desktop is slow too
Over complicated integration can lead to instability/program crashes


What I like about Gnome:

Faster load times
More stability
Fast program menus


What I dislike about Gnome:

Nautilus needs tabs and more features
Window theme inconsistency
Not as good applications


So basically I have gone back to using Gnome, but still use Kontact and Amarok. Not sure if this is wise but it seems to suit my requirements now, and I'm not depressed by nasty crashes and slowness.

Thinking of trying the new version of Gnome which has some nautilus improvements and other stuff.

[bugmenot]

A surprisingly large amount of blame can be placed on the C++ linker, here (GNOME is mostly C, KDE is almost 100% C++). I can't work out how to link to it directly, but see aseigo's blog " "slow launch times? blame drepper." here:

http://aseigo.blogspot.com/

Compiling KDE with -fvisibility=hidden should help matters, but I don't know if Kubuntu does this or not.
This doesn't seem to be the problem here.
If I understand the OP correctly, he's using kde apps in other DEs.
If you do that, kdeinit has to be loaded when you start a kde app. As this almost translates to starting a full-blown kde session, start up times will suck.
Solutions:
Use KDE. Startup times are great in the latest releases.
Loade kdeinit in the background on login when using many kde apps in an other wm.

[zi99y]

I forgot to mention the big thing that puts me off of Konqueror - there's a bug that resets your view to icons every time you go to system:/ and some other places. Very annoying.

[ComplexNumber]

Feels so weird that they're (KDE) having problems with speed because of C++, which is the language they chose to be based on (Qt), which is also one of the favorite slogans of C users (C is faster than C++), on which GNOME is based on (GTK+). Now I'm even more confused on which Language/Toolkit/DE to stick to, if and when I plan to do some coding. :confused:

I wish there was a DE that had KParts/Kioslaves and a good composite manager but used GTK+ and is as fast as Xfce... I'll be sure to dance around that. :D gnome will not tie you in to using C++ like KDE/QT does. sure, there are binding available for QT for java perl and python, but these are crap, at best. C++ is tedious to produce bindings for. also, the C++ that qt uses is non-standard. so unless you want to be stuck with C++ now and at all times in the future, gnome is the way to go for coding. the C++ bindings are always 99% up to date and their is the mono framework and the superb and up to date python bindings.
gnome has an equivelent of kio called gnome-vfs.
also, gtk is attractive whilst qt is not. you'll need to compress, at the very least, 69,000,000 unecessary buttons, 12,000 unecessary bevels, 29,000 lines, and 5,000 unecessary frames in your interface to ensure that it sticks to the striKt Kde Klutter guidelines :D

[bugmenot]

gnome will not tie you in to using C++ like KDE/QT does. sure, there are binding available for QT for java perl and python, but these are crap, at best.

Wrong, dumb and insulting to the guys putting a lot of work into providing the great kde bindings.



gnome has an equivelent of kio called gnome-vfs.

In a way, but a lot less powerful.



also, gtk is attractive whilst qt is not. you'll need to compress, at the very least, 69,000,000 unecessary buttons, 12,000 unecessary bevels, 29,000 lines, and 5,000 unecessary frames in your interface to ensure that it sticks to the striKt Kde Klutter guidelines :D
This has nothing to do with qt or gtk. You can write gtk apps with thousands of unecessary buttons, as you can write qt apps without any button. And calling the KDE hig klutter guidelines just once again shows that you don't have a freaking clue about what you are talking about but are probably simply a 15 year old jerk sitting in his parents basement who thinks flaming a great and successful open source project is a good idea, as he prefers an other project.

Really, get a life.

[ComplexNumber]

Wrong, dumb and insulting to the guys putting a lot of work into providing the great kde bindings. well you try and 'use' them then. if you're feedback is different from the norm stated above, then you're not telling the truth.



And calling the KDE hig klutter guidelines just once again shows that you don't have a freaking clue about what you are talking about but are probably simply a 15 year old jerk sitting in his parents basement who thinks flaming a great and successful open source project is a good idea, as he prefers an other project. that just goes to show how little you know, and ties in nicely with your naive comments above.
have a nice day.

[bugmenot]

well you try and 'use' them then. if you're feedback is different from the norm stated above, then you're not telling the truth.

What's the norm supposed to be? Your uninformed FUD?



that just goes to show how little you know

Does it?
What exactly does and how exactly does it?
Or do you think spewing FUD like KDE is the klutter is something even remotely resembling an argument?

[Jucato]

Guys, no flames please... let's keep things civil. Just because we don't agree on things or prefer other things doesn't mean we have to fight over it.

@ComplexNumber: can it actually be possible for you to say I like A because A is good, without saying B sucks?
@bugmenot: let's not presume people's age based on what they know (or what they show they know)

[bugmenot]

@bugmenot: let's not presume people's age based on what they know (or what they show they know)
You are right. My appollogies to all 15 year olds that I might have offended with my post.

[ComplexNumber]

Fenyx
maybe you should have worded it in a different way :). for the latter part, i was only joking.



You are right. My appollogies to all 15 year olds that I might have offended with my post. rather than apologising to imagined 15 year olds, i recommend that you make more use of your dictionary in future. the only person who you've offended is yourself.

[bugmenot]

rather than apologising to imagined 15 year olds, i recommend that you make more use of your dictionary and left hemisphere in future. the only person who you've offended is yourself.
Oh, I'm sorry, I'm not a native-speaker, I hope you forgive me massa.
And as you didn't seem to get it, I was not apologising to you.

Edit:
And while we are at it, spreading FUD about open source projects is not exactly my idea of a joke and simply stating that you are right still doesn't make you right, so how about backing up any of your claims? (And no, the existence of simplekde does not mean any of your FUD is true. After all, there were also forks of Gnome and I doubt you would consider this proof that any FUD you can find on the web about Gnome is true, or would you?)

[Joshuwa]

I just installed KDE to test it out again after a year or so of not using it.

I could only take it for about 3 minutes before removing it.

Its apparent speed is the only thing I liked about it. It just seems too blocky and 1990's to me (not sure why).

To each his own though.

[Jucato]

sure, there are binding available for QT for java perl and python, but these are crap, at best... also, gtk is attractive whilst qt is not.
Well, I was referring to that Kuote. If that was a joKe, I just Kan't komprehend. :D

Will you two guys just please stop fighting? :(

[joflow]

I went from KDE to Gnome. I used KDE primarily with Mandrake 9.1-9.2 and I have also tried Kubuntu.

I don't like KDE because:

All those options give me an headache.

There seems to be no logic/rational behind where options are located so finding one option out of the millions gave me an even bigger headache.

The default look is horribly ugly.

Changing the look is horribly complicated.

I really hate the icon set.

I hate the way QT apps look (by default)

I like SuperKaramba. Its better then gdesklets. KDE generally has better apps (its insane how much better amarok is then banshee and rhytmbox). I like BasKet (though I'm now starting to get used to Tomboy).

I admit that KDE is more feature rich.

And I'll admit that editing configs (like Gnome forces you to do) is lame in this day and age (but Ubuntu is addressing this issue slowly but surely)


I'm siding with Gnome for now. I'll have to reevaluate my stance when KDE 4 is out.

[virgule]

There is only one absolute fact about KDE and GNOME: These two will never be seen in the same bed... but miracles may happen... :D

[awakatanka]

There seems to be no logic/rational behind where options are located so finding one option out of the millions gave me an even bigger headache.
Its all under kcontrol, every distro has his own control center with there own set of options the promote, but kcontrol has all.




The default look is horribly ugly. personal prefference, i have the same with other distro's and ubuntu. But thats why themes are there


Changing the look is horribly complicated. Try kcontrol and theme manager.

I really hate the icon set. personal prefference again , theme manager is youre help.



I hate the way QT apps look (by default)
huh??

Think you need to try and learn abit more to realy know how kde is working, Mostly all complains are personal prefference. Try to build the critics better then this.

[ComplexNumber]

awakatanka
i think i know what he means because i think the same way. i think he means that the default icons(ie crystal) in the applications aren't to his taste. those can't be changed no matter what icon theme is selected.
as for the default look, i think he may be referring to the number of buttons, bevels, etc on a typical application, together with the default icons etc.
its a look thats either to peoples taste or its not. i came to the same conclusion - no matter how i theme it, i can't get it to look attractive in my eyes....and i've tried about 50-100 different colour schemes, about 25 styles, and about 25-35 theme manager themes (ie all the ones that are available on kde-look). so its not for lack of trying.

[awakatanka]

awakatanka

as for the default look, i think he may be referring to the number of buttons, bevels, etc on a typical application, together with the default icons etc.
its a look thats either to peoples taste or its not. .
Can you explain that a little deeper maybe with some screenshot examples because i realy don't understand that part? Icons are in some apps replaced and some apps not. But don't think that is kde fault. Most icons are replaced at my kde. Number of buttons and bevels sorry don't understand that.

[ComplexNumber]

Can you explain that a little deeper maybe with some screenshot examples because i realy don't understand that part? Icons are in some apps replaced and some apps not. But don't think that is kde fault. Most icons are replaced at my kde. Number of buttons and bevels sorry don't understand that. which part exactly? here (http://www.kde.org/screenshots/images/3.4/snapshot27.png)is a screenshot of a typical kde app that encompasses a lot of what i was saying above. i forgot to mention also now i look at those screenshots - kde is too bright and glaring for my taste.
compare that with this (http://art.gnome.org/images/screenshots/gnome214/GNOMEWithShadowsBySmurfd.png). which is the easiest on the eye? athough the gnome screenshot has just as much 'activity', it is easier on the eye and is easier to see though to the important points without being unecassarily distracted. i don't know if i've explained that so that you understand.


no, thats not kde fault at all because its the same in gnome. but from my point of view, i like the default icons in gnome whereas i find the default crystal theme to be distasteful.

[awakatanka]

which part exactly? here (http://www.kde.org/screenshots/images/3.4/snapshot27.png)is a screenshot of a typical kde app that encompasses a lot of what i was saying above. i forgot to mention also now i look at those screenshots - kde is too bright and glaring for my taste.
compare that with this (http://art.gnome.org/images/screenshots/gnome214/GNOMEWithShadowsBySmurfd.png). which is the easiest on the eye? athough the gnome screenshot has just as much 'activity', it is easier on the eye and is easier to see though to the important points without being unecassarily distracted. i don't know if i've explained that so that you understand.


no, thats not kde fault at all because its the same in gnome. but from my point of view, i like the default icons in gnome whereas i find the default crystal theme to be distasteful.
Sorry but that isa webdesigning program that has always have many button, like bluefish has also. Kubutnu's dapper 5 is more pleasant to the eye than that screenshot you showed me, but that's personal tast and everyone has different tast. And in quanta my icons are changed to to the icon theme i use ( crystal clear atm that is different then crystal ). so it depends also on the icon theme builder if he has changed those icons to.

I'm glad both has differences so we have chooses to change to the thing we like.

[bailout]

awakatanka
i think he means that the default icons(ie crystal) in the applications aren't to his taste. those can't be changed no matter what icon theme is selected.


The icons in applications certainly can be changed. It depends on how full a set of icons are in the theme you load. If the loaded set has icons for that button then they will be used, if not, then the default is used.

Here is my current konq setup with nuevoXT icons

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/7200/snapshot36rq.th.png (http://img230.imageshack.us/my.php?image=snapshot36rq.png)

Edit: also the screenshots you posted are hardly a fair comparison. The kde one is of a complex application with lots of buttons/menus etc whereas your gnome screen has four basic boxes from completely different types of applications and are doing very little.

[ComplexNumber]

Sorry but that isa webdesigning program that has always have many button, like bluefish has also. Kubutnu's dapper 5 is more pleasant to the eye than that screenshot you showed me, but that's personal tast and everyone has different tast. And in quanta my icons are changed to to the icon theme i use ( crystal clear atm that is different then crystal ). so it depends also on the icon theme builder if he has changed those icons to.

I'm glad both has differences so we have chooses to change to the thing we like. ok, i'll try a different tack. here (http://www.gnomefiles.org/shots/nvu.png) is nvu which is a more capable web design program than quanta........blaming bad design on the type of application is not a valid excuse IMO.
also note that kubuntu is a lot different to typical kde.


bailout
thats certainly the cleanest konqueror i've ever seen. see my link in this post to compare like with like.

[awakatanka]

ok, i'll try a different tack. here (http://www.gnomefiles.org/shots/nvu.png) is nvu which is a more capable web design program than quanta........blaming bad design on the type of application is not a valid excuse IMO.
also note that kubuntu is a lot different to typical kde.


bailout
thats certainly the cleanest konqueror i've ever seen. see my link in this post to compare like with like.
We could say the same about gimp to, krita looks much better in my opinion. Much more ordered.

But still it comes to how the programmer designs it. Still doesn't show how bad/good kde our gnome is.

Its still personal taste wich of the 2 is used.

Btw isn't the head sponsor of nvu linspire and isn't the site registered by linspire www.nvu.com, isn't linspire a kde based distro that used a gtk app? So that doesn't say anything about kde/gnome it just say some programmers aren't designers. For every bad app of kde there is a gnome app to.

http://www.linspire.com/lindows_products_license.php#ope

[htinn]

I tried KDE for a while. It definitely wins hands-down in certain areas: shiny, configurable, good default keyboard settings.

I find that most GNOME applications seem to be more steady and reliable. This is ultimately what tilted me back to GNOME. This is good set of priorities for a desktop, IMHO:

1) Reliable
2) Useful
3) Fast
4) Configurable
5) Smooth (*not* shiny)

I've used a lot of different file managers, and I'm starting to lean back toward Nautilus. I admit it really ticked me off with its default approach, but with a little tweaking it works pretty nicely. They just need one more thing:

--> Configurable Tool Bars

It seems strange that they haven't implemented this yet, but I hear they're working on it.

[ComplexNumber]

We could say the same about gimp to, krita looks much better in my opinion. Much more ordered.

But still it comes to how the programmer designs it. Still doesn't show how bad/good kde our gnome is.

Its still personal taste wich of the 2 is used.

Btw isn't the head sponsor of nvu linspire and isn't the site registered by linspire www.nvu.com (http://www.nvu.com), isn't linspire a kde based distro that used a gtk app? So that doesn't say anything about kde/gnome it just say some programmers aren't designers. For every bad app of kde there is a gnome app to.

http://www.linspire.com/lindows_products_license.php#ope wasn't this started before gnome even existed? i think you'll find that it did. krita isnt exactly a joy to use or easy on the eye.

[resolutioncenter]

wasn't this started before gnome even existed? i think you'll find that it did. krita isnt exactly a joy to use or easy on the eye.
Not really. You are right though that there was an app called krita for a long time, but it didn't work very well and got nearly no developement.

This changed some time ago and since then krita really has become a whole new app with an amazing development speed that is very nice to use and at least imho very easy on the eye.

[asimon]

1) Reliable
2) Useful
3) Fast
4) Configurable
5) Smooth (*not* shiny)

Funny how perception goes, these are the very reasons I use KDE. ;-)

[ComplexNumber]

Not really. You are right though that there was an app called krita for a long time, but it didn't work very well and got nearly no developement.

This changed some time ago and since then krita really has become a whole new app with an amazing development speed that is very nice to use and at least imho very easy on the eye. i meant that gimp was started before gnome was started. gnome was started in 1997. gimp was started in 1996. i had a look at krita in suse 10, and thats where i was basing my comments about krita on.

[awakatanka]

wasn't this started before gnome even existed? i think you'll find that it did. krita isnt exactly a joy to use or easy on the eye.
As resolutioncenter already said it has more development now :

http://www.koffice.org/krita/

For some info.

Maybe you have to retry kubuntu and get some updated critics ;) seems youre info is a little outdated.

Not as flame intended.

edit :wasn't gnome started in 1997?
gimp was 1995 and 0.6 version was made gtk

damn you beat me with the post ;)

[ComplexNumber]

As resolutioncenter already said it has more development now :

http://www.koffice.org/krita/

For some info.

Maybe you have to retry kubuntu and get some updated critics ;) seems youre info is a little outdated.

Not as flame intended.

edit :wasn't gnome started in 1997?
gimp was 1995 and 0.6 version was made gtk

damn you beat me with the post ;)
well, the thing is, i don;t really want 2 office programs on my PC. one is ample, and considering that OO is vastly superior to koffice in all departments, i have no need to install koffice. i can't see the point of koffice because it just seems like the typical kde 'we will do it our way' (ie the usual reinventing the wheel) approach. the speadsheet and wordprocessor in koffice alone are diabolical. koffice is just desktop baggage.
and if i didn't use OO, i would use the gnome office equivelents(eg abiword and gnumeric) which are also vastly superior to koffice.

[awakatanka]

well, the thing is, i don;t really want 2 office programs on my PC. one is ample, and considering that OO is vastly superior to koffice in all departments, i have no need to install koffice. i can't see the point of koffice because it just seems like the typical kde 'we will do it our way' (ie the usual reinventing the wheel) approach. the speadsheet and wordprocessor in koffice alone are diabolical. koffice is just desktop baggage.
and if i didn't use OO, i would use the gnome office equivelents(eg abiword and gnumeric) which are also vastly superior to koffice.
Again please update youre critics because krita is installed seperatly in kubuntu, yes you can install it seperatly. Every distro chooses it own base list of apps in gnome and KDE, they not always following the standaard install of kde / gnome.

[ComplexNumber]

Again please update youre critics because krita is installed seperatly in kubuntu, yes you can install it seperatly. Every distro chooses it own base list of apps in gnome and KDE, they not always following the standaard install of kde / gnome. krita is installed seperately in suse too. like i say, while OO is vastly superior in every department, koffice remains to be nothing more than desktop baggage.

[Gijith]

HUh? I've installed kubuntu 3 or 4 times. I've never seen KOffice. It comes with OpenOffice only.

[awakatanka]

krita is installed seperately in suse too. like i say, while OO is vastly superior in every department, koffice remains to be nothing more than desktop baggage.
Sorry but youre trolling and you don't find any good critism what make looks kde realy bad.
All critics are countered with examples that are within gnome our kde and other examples you hade are simply not true becuase the outdate our a lack of experince of kde.

I realy think you never tryed kubuntu, and make critics based on a 1 minute try of a other distro in the past. Find some real critic and come back and we discuse a little more.

[Jucato]

i can't see the point of koffice because it just seems like the typical kde 'we will do it our way' (ie the usual reinventing the wheel) approach.

And what's wrong about that? If everything that seemingly "reinvented the wheel" was ignored, half the open projects existing would be shelved. I agree that KOffice needs still a bit of polishing, but it's not as terrible as you say it is. For one, it starts up much faster than OO.o, at least in KDE. Also, KOffice is able to import and export PDF files.

OT: Really ComplexNumber, is it at all possible for you not to flame KDE while saying that you prefer GNOME?

[ComplexNumber]

Sorry but youre trolling and you don't find any good critism what make looks kde realy bad.
All critics are countered with examples that are within gnome our kde and other examples you hade are simply not true becuase the outdate our a lack of experince of kde.

I realy think you never tryed kubuntu, and make critics based on a 1 minute try of a other distro in the past. Find some real critic and come back and we discuse a little more.
i never said that i have tried kubuntu. and no, i'm not trolling - if you look back through the thread, i merely replying.


Fenyx
i'm just saying that koffice is surplus to requirements given that i have OO. loading speed is neither here nor there and has no importance whatsoever for me.

[Jucato]

Oh, he's not trolling. That's just his normal way of responding, really.
You have not tried Kubuntu, but I do presume that you have tried other KDE distros, so that's not an issue for me.


i'm just saying that koffice is surplus to requirements given that i have OO.

Then, why the need to say this?


the speadsheet and wordprocessor in koffice alone are diabolical.

And this:

because it just seems like the typical kde 'we will do it our way' (ie the usual reinventing the wheel) approach.
implies a view that if someone has done something before, doing it another way is "reinventing the wheel", an idiomatic expression that means "pointless". And by saying so, you have discredited/insulted not just KDE, but almost every "duplicated" open source projects out there. Why? Because it is in your opinion that those projects that you prefer are "vastly superior" to others out there or that it's pointless to make something that has been done before.

You say that:

loading speed is neither here nor there and has no importance whatsoever for me

But for others, it is. And others, even OO.o lovers/users mostly agree that KOffice loads faster than OO.o on KDE, or that generally, OO.o startup is slow (slower than OO.o in Windows even). And there are features available in KOffice that are not found in OO.o

So this statement

and considering that OO is vastly superior to koffice in all departments

is a false statement. A statement meant to do what?

I'm not saying that your preferences are wrong. It's your preferences. But what I really don't like is how you tend to justify your choice by ridiculing or downplaying other options.

"I like apples because I think they are good/better than oranges or because I simply like apple's taste."
"I like apples because oranges are diabolical and an excess baggage to vegetative life"

So which one are you saying?

[Adrian]

i can't see the point of koffice because it just seems like the typical kde 'we will do it our way' (ie the usual reinventing the wheel)

Yes, you quoted an article (http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=13974&page=4) in another thread (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=142147) about KDE reinventing the wheel. I told you that the author was wrong, but I guess you chose not to listen.

In that article he says:


As a side note the KDE developers seems to also spend time re-inventing the wheel. Gimp is already there yet Krita is heavily developed these days. OpenOffice is alive and kicking, yet Koffice reminds us that KDE needs everything to be done the KDE way.


Since you once again bring up the "reinventing the wheel" statement, I'll quote some of the comments to that very same article:



The author's jabs at Krita and Koffice are unfounded. Krita is NOT a gimp clone. Yes it has many of the same (and many more advanced) features, but it has been designed more for artistic painting, not raster image editing. The difference to those that aren't familiar with graphics programs may seem silly, but it does make a big difference to those used to professional tool sets. While Krita can and is used for image editing, that isn't its primary purpose, and to claim that it is merely reinventing the wheel does a great discredit to the hard work of Boudewijn Rempt and all the other contributors.

As for koffice, it preexisted the open sourcing of openoffice by a couple years I believe, and as of now, it is maturing into a very capable, lightweight (as in doesn't take 2 minutes to star up) office suite.




Krita is not even aimed at the same crowd as Gimp. Gimp is aimed at the photoshop crowd, while Krita is aimed at the Corel Painter crowd. Krita also offers 16bit support, which is still absent from Gimp (and GEGL is still in the early stages even after all these years)

As for KOffice, it began long before Sun open sourced OO.o. In addition, OO.o's codebase is almost impossible for an outside contributor to understand, which means Sun is still responsible for most of its development. KOffice is much cleaner than OO.o and some of its concepts (the DTP-infused Kword) are novel compared to OO.o, which is basically a MS Office clone.


Also, I find this criticism quite humourous. People are praising Listen in this (Amazing Gnome Amarok equivalent: Listen) thread, with the name "Amazing Gnome Amarok equivalent: Listen". I didn't hear anyone complain about them "reinventing the wheel". Why not just use AmaroK? You know the answer, so I don't have to tell you...

[ComplexNumber]

Why not just use AmaroK? You know the answer, so I don't have to tell you...
you would have a point there, but ubuntu is a gnome-only distro, so its better to seek out other gnome/gtk apps rather than installing and loading in all the kde libraries just for the sake of one application. gnome works a lot faster if the kde libs don't also have to be loaded, hence the reason for Listen.

[Jucato]

so why not prefer abiword instead of OO.o Writer, since it is the GNOME/GTK word processor? so it's perfectly ok to reinvent the wheel, if it's going to be for GNOME's benefit?

I don't think OO.o is a GNOME or a GTK project. In fact, it uses C++!! (I just remembered you hated that language).


gnome works a lot faster if the kde libs don't also have to be loaded

Then, KOffice and Krita are also not reinventing the wheel since both load faster than non-KDE apps. or are they reinventing the wheel because they are just KDE apps?

[ComplexNumber]

so why not prefer abiword instead of OO.o Writer, since it is the GNOME/GTK word processor? because OO write is better. plus, OO sits quite snuggly into gnome.



I don't think OO.o is a GNOME or a GTK project. In fact, it uses C++!! (I just remembered you hated that language). it uses c++ and java. i only hate C++ if i'm forced to program in it, so what language OO is written in has no bearing on me.



Then, KOffice and Krita are also not reinventing the wheel since both load faster than non-KDE apps. or are they reinventing the wheel because they are just KDE apps? personally, i don't bother installing any parts of koffice for the reasons that i've stated. OO provides everything that koffice has and more. also like i say, the loading time is neither here nor there.

[bailout]

Unfortunately I think complexnumber is just one of those rabid gnome fanatics that unfortunately seem to show up on ubuntuforums quite regularly. He is not content simply to use his choice of de and apps but feels the need to attack kde at every opportunity with false info like his claim to have tried everything at kde-look without getting the kde icons to change.

It would be nice to just ignore people like him but unfortunately they come into these threads and post nonsense when people are looking for information.

[ComplexNumber]

bailout
i'm not a fanatic by any stretch of the imagination. i don't know where you conjured that idea up from. if you're looking for fanatics, best for you to look closer to home. its no surprise that people who accuse others of this or that character trait are more often than not the ones who are guilty of it themselves
also, stop misinterpreting things that i've said to try to validate your own claims.

[Jucato]

because OO write is better. plus, OO sits quite snuggly into gnome.
So abiword also reinvents the wheel? Or you just make it an exception because it is GNOME? Why not say that abiword is excess baggage? (btw, Kubuntu does not have KOffice installed by default)

OO also sits quite snuggly into KDE. In fact, one of the official KDE icon artists has made an icon set for OO.o that fits in nicely with everything.


it uses c++ and java. i only hate C++ if i'm forced to program in it, so what language OO is written in has no bearing on me.
my bad. Just wanted to say actually that OO.o is not GNOME, not GTK, not C. Then I just remembered that you hated C++ (if forced to program in it :D)[/QUOTE]


personally, i don't bother installing any parts of koffice for the reasons that i've stated. OO provides everything that koffice has and more. also like i say, the loading time is neither here nor there.

Again, I'm not bothered by your reasons why you prefer OO.o or GNOME. What bothers me is that you have to almost insult other choices/options to justify your choice. OO.o has everything you need (it doesn't have everything I need, one of the PDF import/export). loading time is not an issue for you. Just because it does what you need doesn't mean that others are "diabolical" or "reinventing the wheel".

I use/like/prefer KDE. But I don't think GNOME sucks, is diabolical, or is reinventing the wheel (remember your history, KDE came before GNOME). I like KDE because it has what I want, does what I want it to do. But you don't hear me saying anything bad about GNOME. Sure I had some issues understanding Nautilus, but in the end I said that it's a design decision affected by how the devs interpreted/implemented things.

Just learn to respect others (or other apps?) when you give out your opinion. Or at least say it in not so insulting words. I could rewrite almost everything you've said previously without insulting anyone/anything.

EDIT: @bailout: he's not a fanatic. He's just feels the need to "insult"/"attack" others while defending himself. I'm sorry ComplexNumber, but I've yet to see you defend your self without throwing back another insult. I can pretty well defend my point of view without falling into my attacker's game.

Let's stop the name calling, shall we? If ComplexNumber continues to behave/act like that, let him be. We've (at least I have) said what I wanted to say. If he prefers to go on like that, it's beyond me. As long as he has not violated any rule in this forum (you haven't, right?) then let him stay and say as he pleases.

[ComplexNumber]

So abiword also reinvents the wheel? no, because abiword was there first. abiword is also excess baggage to me. i don't ever install that or gnumeric.



I use/like/prefer KDE. But I don't think GNOME sucks i don't think kde sucks either. i have never said that. i use kde almost as much as i do gnome. like i have said, its a case of poor interpretation. i never said kde sucks. just like gnome, i said certain aspects of it do.

Fenyx, will you please stop making out that i'm some sort of ogre who has "attacked" people and their point of view. i think you'll find that i haven't.

[Jucato]

I didn't say you said KDE sucks. I was just using it as an example. And though you have not directly or explicitly said that word, you have made some degrading remarks on some parts of KDE (not KDE itself, though): Qt bindings are crap, KDE icons are hiddeous, KDE's mentality of doing it their way (hey! that's a direct reference to KDE. By the way, it was GNOME who wanted to do things their way at first), KOffice as diabolical, etc. And IMHO, I have not misinterpreted your words. In fact, I might have taken some too literally.

Regardless of what you explicitly, directly, or exclusively said, my beef with you is your attitude. That's just it. Now, I'm not a mod here to tell you what to do, so I can only advise you. Respect others (that includes other apps) the way you want to be respected. And don't fight back if someone calls you a 15 year old. Only 15 year old people (or those with 15 year old minds) fight back in a name calling war. :D

Ok I've said my piece. Time to go to sleep! Tomorrow I install GNOME! Who knows, I might get converted and become the next ComplexNumber. Hehehe! :D

EDIT: Ok, you're not an ogre, and you don't attack people. You just bite back. :D Don't let them get on your nerves. Good night! (it's night in this part of the world. oh, wait, 2 AM, actually... :neutral: )

[joflow]

awakatanka
i think i know what he means because i think the same way. i think he means that the default icons(ie crystal) in the applications aren't to his taste. those can't be changed no matter what icon theme is selected.
as for the default look, i think he may be referring to the number of buttons, bevels, etc on a typical application, together with the default icons etc.
its a look thats either to peoples taste or its not. i came to the same conclusion - no matter how i theme it, i can't get it to look attractive in my eyes....and i've tried about 50-100 different colour schemes, about 25 styles, and about 25-35 theme manager themes (ie all the ones that are available on kde-look). so its not for lack of trying.

Yes, Thanks for clearing that up ComplexNumber.

I don't like the way KDE looks out of the box and changing its look is difficult (from what I understand).

For instance, changing window decorations require compling themes from source (or installing from .deb or .rpm).

While in Gnome it only requires using the theme manager.

I don't like the way Gnome or Ubuntu looks out of the box either but changing themes is easy plus I have xgl/compiz working :-D

Also, I find Kcontrol confusing. I'm sorry I can't be more detailed as I haven't used KDE in a while so I'm not familiar with everything but I remember changing an option and then a few minutes later trying to change the same option and having to search around and dig to find it.

I don't think either KDE or Gnome is perfect. I have issues with both. Both have strengths and both have weaknesses, IMO. For my computing habits/needs/taste/perferences, Gnome works better for me right now. I'm not trying to insult the other DEs. I love KDE apps (just dont like how they look :) )

[awakatanka]

Yes, Thanks for clearing that up ComplexNumber.

I don't like the way KDE looks out of the box and changing its look is difficult (from what I understand).

For instance, changing window decorations require compling themes from source (or installing from .deb or .rpm).

While in Gnome it only requires using the theme manager.

I don't like the way Gnome or Ubuntu looks out of the box either but changing themes is easy plus I have xgl/compiz working :-D

Also, I find Kcontrol confusing. I'm sorry I can't be more detailed as I haven't used KDE in a while so I'm not familiar with everything but I remember changing an option and then a few minutes later trying to change the same option and having to search around and dig to find it.

I don't think either KDE or Gnome is perfect. I have issues with both. Both have strengths and both have weaknesses, IMO. For my computing habits/needs/taste/perferences, Gnome works better for me right now. I'm not trying to insult the other DEs. I love KDE apps (just dont like how they look :) )Sorry but try to use before giving critics, theme manager is in kcontrol it uses .kth files and it install all that is in the theme file. There many ways to change a theme but kde has a theme manager than can be used easly.

In the past i also give to fast critics without realy try to understand somethings, now i try it a little longer before giving critics.

Don't give critics based on things you nearly used our used a longtime ago

[ComplexNumber]

Sorry but try to use before giving critics, theme manager is in kcontrol it uses .kth files and it install all that is in the theme file. There many ways to change a theme but kde has a theme manager than can be used easly. what he's saying is still relavant as of kde 3.5. the themes/icons/sytles/windecs are not made available system-wide when they're installed in kcontrol...only to the user that installs them. to make them system-wide, one has to know all the locations of where they're stored...and thats quite tedious even for someone like me who knows the linux system. also, the majority of the styles and windecs have to be compiled from source. this can be quite a pain, especially considering that many of them fail to compile (on all my systems that i've tried, at least). many of the icon themes contain a install.sh and/or a png2svg file that the user has to run from the command line in order to either install them or convert from png to svg (for which inkscape is a required dependency. they won't run without inkscape being installed).

[joflow]

Sorry but try to use before giving critics, theme manager is in kcontrol it uses .kth files and it install all that is in the theme file. There many ways to change a theme but kde has a theme manager than can be used easly.

In the past i also give to fast critics without realy try to understand somethings, now i try it a little longer before giving critics.

Don't give critics based on things you nearly used our used a longtime ago

I know you can change them from kcontrol, I'm talking about installing them.

http://www.kde-look.org/index.php?xcontentmode=20

All the window decorations here come as either source, deb, or rpm but maybe you know something I dont. As I've said, I haven't used KDE in many months.

[awakatanka]

I know you can change them from kcontrol, I'm talking about installing them.

http://www.kde-look.org/index.php?xcontentmode=20

All the window decorations here come as either source, deb, or rpm but maybe you know something I dont. As I've said, I haven't used KDE in many months.
You can install themes there, The can choose to use theme manager to make a kth file for a deco to and easly install it, i dunno the deeper reason why they choose to make rpm deb our a source.



@Complexnumber

Maybe my wife and my childeren like a different theme.


But i stop replying from now because it goes way offtopic.

Everyone has his own opinion, but don't say something that isn't true. hint complexnumber.

[ComplexNumber]

@Complexnumber

Maybe my wife and my childeren like a different theme. you seem to have misunderstood. what i meant was, when the themes/styles/icons/etc are installed via kcontrol, they are ONLY made available to that user. for example, if you install the 'beauty of darkness' theme manager theme in kcontrol, ONLY you can use it. if your wife and children want to use that theme too, they have to seperately install it via kcontrol in their own directory. and thats the hassle. to install them system-wide so that everyone (ie you, your wife and children) can use them, you must install them system-wide.....and thats where the problems start. one has to know all the places where that particular theme is implemented. by the way, you are talking to someone who has done just that for almost all the themes/icons/styles/windecs that are available on kde-look. many of them failed to compile and/or didn't work.
there is nothing that i've said that is untrue. hint hint, awakatanka.

[awakatanka]

You can install themes there, The can choose to use theme manager to make a kth file for a deco to and easly install it, i dunno the deeper reason why they choose to make rpm deb our a source.


I correct myself deco's are not packed with it it needs seprate install like you said. Sorry for my faulty info.

@complexnumber for youre other replys was the hint.

[Jucato]

May I just insert some corrections regarding KDE appearances and themes? It's kind of my cup of tea.

Window Decorations: You do not need to compile these all the time. what you do need to compile/install the .deb file are the decoration engines that do not come with KDE (things like Crystal, deKorator, and IceWM, although Crystal is now built-in in Dapper). You do not have to add all these engines if you don't want to. And after you have installed (compile or through dpkg) them, installing the decorations is just easy and does not nead any compilation. It's as easy as pointing to the .tar.gz file and hitting a few buttons (in deKorator's case, just 2 buttons).
You don't absolutely need these engines. You only install them if you like the a decoration theme that uses them. and you install them only once. Icons are perhaps

In KDE, there are two ways to change themes and looks. The first one is by individually changing the parts that you want to customize (window decoration, icons, color scheme, etc.) The second one involves just changing/adding a theme in the KTH (KDE THeme) Manager. Just make sure that you have the proper window decoration engine installed for it. But there are KTH that just use the built in window decorations. I'm not sure how things are done in GNOME, but if I were to judge things basing on GNOME-look.org, there isn't even a way to install new window decoration engines? Or color themes (Maybe you can chang colors, but not install color themes?) I don't know. I didn't get into that when I tried out Ubuntu.

System-wide changes: Why should a user be able to make system-wide theme changes if he was not running as root? You are not installing an application. You are installing a configuration. Now tell me if the configurations you make as a regular user, for example changing how an app is displayed, are supposed to affect the whole system, regardless of user.
You want to install a window decoration/theme/icon set for the whole system? Easy. Install it as root. kdesu kcontrol or kdesu systemsettings (take your pick). No need to track down the folders for it.

Anything else?

[ComplexNumber]

Window Decorations: You do not need to compile these all the time. what you do need to compile/install the .deb file are the decoration engines that do not come with KDE (things like Crystal, deKorator, and IceWM, although Crystal is now built-in in Dapper). You do not have to add all these engines if you don't want to. And after you have installed (compile or through dpkg) them, installing the decorations is just easy and does not nead any compilation. It's as easy as pointing to the .tar.gz file and hitting a few buttons (in deKorator's case, just 2 buttons).
You don't absolutely need these engines. You only install them if you like the a decoration theme that uses them. and you install them only once. Icons are perhaps i will share my expereinces. many of the windecos (based on dekorator) didn't work. it was hit and miss. some did, some didn't. about 35-40% of all the window decorations on kde-look use dekorator. however, they seem VERY picky about which version of dekorator is installed. for the dekorator themes, you don't point to any tarballs......you point to the buttons, frames, and masks where the particular theme is located via kcontrol.
about another 40% of them required compiling from source. the rest needed installing via an install.sh script.
btw window decorations don't have engines (apart from dekorator). styles have, though. they go in various places in /usr/lib and /usr/share.




In KDE, there are two ways to change themes and looks. The first one is by individually changing the parts that you want to customize (window decoration, icons, color scheme, etc.) The second one involves just changing/adding a theme in the KTH (KDE THeme) Manager. Just make sure that you have the proper window decoration engine installed for it. But there are KTH that just use the built in window decorations. I'm not sure how things are done in GNOME, but if I were to judge things basing on GNOME-look.org, there isn't even a way to install new window decoration engines? Or color themes (Maybe you can chang colors, but not install color themes?) I don't know. I didn't get into that when I tried out Ubuntu. the point to note about the theme manager themes is that, the relevant icons/windeco/style need to be installed too.
in gnome, everything is much more straight forware - icons go in /usr/share/icons and gtk/metacity themes go in /usr/share/themes. nothing could be more straightforward. just unpack the tarballs and place in their respective directories. of course, thats the most "complicated" way of doing things. one can just had a gtk/icon/metacity theme using the theme manager via drag and drop (same as how its done in kcontrol), but i prefer system wide themes/icons. colour schemes are in the gtk theme. colour schemes as they are in kde will be available in gnome as from gtk 2.10.




System-wide changes: Why should a user be able to make system-wide theme changes if he was not running as root? You are not installing an application. You are installing a configuration. Now tell me if the configurations you make as a regular user, for example changing how an app is displayed, are supposed to affect the whole system, regardless of user.
You want to install a window decoration/theme/icon set for the whole system? Easy. Install it as root. kdesu kcontrol or kdesu systemsettings (take your pick). No need to track down the folders for it. because they are often more than 1 user - thats the reason for employing system wide themes. if you have a lot of themes as i do, then i really really really do not want to compile and install all the themes for each and every user.
note that the themes are installed in the users own directory if you are installing them via kcontrol. therefore, they are not available to any other user.
sorry, your theory about installing themes as root doesn't work. that merely entails that the themes installed by root are ONLY available to root. the reason being is that it installs them in roots home directory (yes, there is one in ubuntu). ithey have to be installed in all their many respective locations for them to be employed system wide....and thats a complete pain in kde.

[Jucato]

many of the windecos (based on dekorator) didn't work. it was hit and miss. some did, some didn't. about 35-40% of all the window decorations on kde-look use dekorator. however, they seem VERY picky about which version of dekorator is installed. about another 40% of them required compiling from source. the rest needed installing via an install.sh script.
btw icons don't need engines. styles do, though. they go in various places in /usr/lib and /usr/share.
- I'm not sure if your figures are correct, but anyway. It's true, deKorator themes are a bit picky with the deKorator engine version you are using. But why would that be not normal? Later versions implement features/fix bugs that are missing/present in older versions.
- I have not yet seen a deKorator theme (not the engine) that needed to be compiled or installed with a script. Maybe I'll see some later. But as far as those deKorator themes that I have download, it's just easy as 1) click on install theme and point to the tar.gz file, no need to unpack, 2) click on set theme paths, and 3) click apply.
- I don't remember saying icons needed theme engines.


the point to note about the theme manager themes is that, the relevant icons/windeco/style need to be installed too.
in gnome, everything is much more straight forware - icons go in /usr/share/icons and gtk/metacity themes go in /usr/share/themes. nothing could be more straightforward. just unpack the tarballs and place in their respective directories. of course, thats the most "complicated" way of doing things. one can just had a gtk/icon/metacity theme using the theme manager via drag and drop (same as how its done in kcontrol), but i prefer system wide themes/icons.

- I don't get it. You're saying that KDE THeme Manager is cumbersome because you have need to have the relevant icons/windeco/style to be installed, yet you also say that you have add a gtk/icon/metacity theme using the theme manager. What's the difference? They both need the relevant icons/style/deco installed before they can be used. Unless I'm mistaken and clicking on a GNOME theme automatically installs the relevant parts if they're not installed.
- You also don't have to unpack the tarballs in the directories. KControl does that for you, just point it to where the tarball is. Also just an added note: you can change icons/windecos/colors/styles,etc in the individual KControl modules, or you can just launch the KDE Theme Manager which has buttons to direct you to the appropriate KControl modules.


colour schemes are in the gtk theme. colour schemes as they are in kde will be available in gnome as from gtk 2.10.
Color schemes can be installed separately or can be included in a KTH file



because they are often more than 1 user - thats the reason for employing system wide themes. if you have a lot of themes as i do, then i really really really do not want to compile and install all the themes for each and every user.
note that the themes are installed in the users own directory if you are installing them via kcontrol. therefore, they are not available to any other user.
Anything that you compile or install through dpkg is installed system-wide. so once you install the deKorator engine and the widget style that you want, it can be used by any user. And, because you only have to point to the appropriate tar.gz files, using icon themes and color schemes are not that hard.


sorry, your theory about installing themes as root doesn't work. that merely entails that the themes installed by root are ONLY available to root. the reason being is that it installs them in roots home directory (yes, there is one in ubuntu). ithey have to be installed in all their many respective locations for them to be employed system wide....and thats a complete pain in kde.
You're right sorry about that. Haven't tested it out completely. So you mean in GNOME, if you add (not install) a Metacity theme, that theme gets added to the whole system, making it available to other users? Then you run the GNOME theme manager (or whatever it is called) with root privileges? AFAIK, only root users have the ability to make system-wide changes. And if GNOME is allowing a normal user to do that, there isn't there something wrong? Forgive my ignorance a bit. It's one part of GNOME I haven't completely tested out. That's why I only present how KDE does its thing. I'm only taking my GNOME knowledge from you.

[awakatanka]

Behind a gnome ubuntu system now.

sudo ln -s /home/<insert your username here>/.themes /root/.themes (gtk theme decoraters )
sudo ln -s /home/<insert your username here>/.icons /root/.icons ( icons )
sudo ln -s /home/<insert your username here>/.fonts /root/.fonts ( fonts )

Al have to be installed manauly : http://doc.gwos.org/index.php/Desktop_EyeCandy


A metacity theme is just the colors , adjusting of button and some icons.

It just as difficult in my eyes as kde's decorater, also does thememanager of kde much more changes and decorater has also much more options to change the decorater to youre feelings.

That is just a short learning i did on the gnome machine, so i clould be wrong on some points.

But why do that difficult if you don't like kde use gnome our if you don't like gnome use kde. Stay out of positive threads like this it isn't called bitch kde/gnome thread.

[ComplexNumber]

- I have not yet seen a deKorator theme (not the engine) that needed to be compiled or installed with a script. Maybe I'll see some later. But as far as those deKorator themes that I have download, it's just easy as 1) click on install theme and point to the tar.gz file, no need to unpack, 2) click on set theme paths, and 3) click apply.

you have misunderstood. i wasn't referring to dekorator themes. if you cast your mind back, i said that 40% of them are dekorator themes, 40 of them are compiled, and ther rest depend upon a install.sh script.


- I don't get it. You're saying that KDE THeme Manager is cumbersome because you have need to have the relevant icons/windeco/style to be installed, yet you also say that you have add a gtk/icon/metacity theme using the theme manager. What's the difference? They both need the relevant icons/style/deco installed before they can be used. Unless I'm mistaken and clicking on a GNOME theme automatically installs the relevant parts if they're not installed.
the difference is considerably less work with gnome themes. get it now?



- You also don't have to unpack the tarballs in the directories. KControl does that for you, just point it to where the tarball is. Also just an added note: you can change icons/windecos/colors/styles,etc in the individual KControl modules, or you can just launch the KDE Theme Manager which has buttons to direct you to the appropriate KControl modules.
you don't have to unpack the tarballs for gnome themes/icons either if you isntall via the theme manager.



Anything that you compile or install through dpkg is installed system-wide. so once you install the deKorator engine and the widget style that you want, it can be used by any user. And, because you only have to point to the appropriate tar.gz files, using icon themes and color schemes are not that hard.
yes, but the dekorator themes and colour schemes etc have to be made available for every user unless you place them in a 'central' location.





Behind a gnome ubuntu system now.

sudo ln -s /home/<insert your username here>/.themes /root/.themes (gtk theme decoraters )
sudo ln -s /home/<insert your username here>/.icons /root/.icons ( icons )
sudo ln -s /home/<insert your username here>/.fonts /root/.fonts ( fonts )

Al have to be installed manauly : http://doc.gwos.org/index.php/Desktop_EyeCandy


A metacity theme is just the colors , adjusting of button and some icons.

It just as difficult in my eyes as kde's decorater, also does thememanager of kde much more changes and decorater has also much more options to change the decorater to youre feelings.

That is just a short learning i did on the gnome machine, so i clould be wrong on some points. when you install gnome themes and icons via the theme manager, they go into the users home directory. however, if you want to have them system wide, there is only 2 directories to concern yourself with - /usr/share/icons and /usr/share/themes. nothing could be more simple. contrast that with the range of directories where kde themes, styles, icons, and windecs have to be placed.

a metacity theme does not determeine the colours except some of the colours of the window decorations. the colours of everything are largely detemined by the gtk theme.

[awakatanka]

@Complexnumber

In kubuntu the icons are also in /usr/share/icons. But every distro can have his own directory stucture they use. Like suse has them in /opt/kde3 and that counts for gnome to it could be in a different map if the distro chooses so.

And for the decorater it simple install.sh our /configure with the right prefix so it can find the dir that the distro uses.

The dekorater is it already adopted by the kde team? Can't find any info about it so i presume its not.

So where you have to copy icons to set them systemwide you can do the same with kde. Tryed it myself and it works.

And a normal decorater theme isn't that hard also. For the cli people.

Some info about the icon thing http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-look&m=112362100620557&w=2

It also says that a systemwide install of the icons is possible, so it looks like kubuntu is doing some strange things our its the sudo thing.

But i have only little knowledge of linux so i can be wrong, but i try to find info our try it out myself. Maybe some guru can explain it beter.

But it seems you only bashing kde because you love to argue and don't say sorry if you where wrong, where some of us did when we where wrong.

[ComplexNumber]

In kubuntu the icons are also in /usr/share/icons. kubuntu is unique in that respect because, apart from suse, thats where gnome icons are stored on every single other distro(including ubuntu). for kde, default is in /usr/share/apps/icons



The dekorater is it already adopted by the kde team? please expand on what you mean?

[awakatanka]

kubuntu is unique in that respect because, apart from suse, thats where gnome icons are stored on every single other distro(including ubuntu). for kde, default is in /usr/share/apps/icons

please expand on what you mean?


And try to read the link there someone of the kde team explains it deeper.

Appilication specific icons are stored under that link

Can you blame kde if its a user made app that isn't officaly adopted by kde and getting no offical support from them?

[erimar77]

i honestly like both.. i spend about 3 or 4 months with each, learning all the new features.. i used a powerbook as my primary laptop for about a year and a half, so that really got me used to the gnome layout.

[auroraborealis]

I just don't like how KDE is all big and bubbly. It doesn't work when you only have 1024x768 on a laptop.

[aysiu]

I just don't like how KDE is all big and bubbly. It doesn't work when you only have 1024x768 on a laptop. What do you mean by "big and bubbly"? It works fine on my 1024x768 desktop monitor. You can adjust the size of the taskbar, you know.

Edit: Here's a screenshot of my KDE desktop (and it's 1024x768)--See? Not too big and bubbly.

[awakatanka]

I just don't like how KDE is all big and bubbly. It doesn't work when you only have 1024x768 on a laptop.
works great on my laptop. here a screenshot of it in other thread.
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=137914&page=26

Problem is on youre side not kde.

[hinachan]

Just my two cents' worth....

I can't stand GNOME. Sorry, but that's my opinion. KDE is better looking, and easier for me to use because it's more like ******* (which I'm accustomed to, but I refuse to upgrade b/c of Micro$oft's totalitarian policies). I have sensitive eyes, and GNOME causes me a lot more eyestrain than KDE does...which is important when you have a neurological problem, as I do. :(

I DL'ed the Ubuntu live CD, but I get the feeling I won't be using it as much as I do my Knoppix CD, because of the GNOME environment. I tried to DL Kubuntu for this very reason, but apparently you can only have that CD shipped to you, and I wanted to try a version of Ubuntu right away. :)

[asimon]

I tried to DL Kubuntu for this very reason, but apparently you can only have that CD shipped to you, and I wanted to try a version of Ubuntu right away. :)
You can also download Kubuntu at Kubuntu.org (http://kubuntu.org/download.php). The live CD is called kubuntu-6.06-desktop.