StephanG
January 16th, 2012, 08:57 AM
ey guys,
I've recently been thinking about the different approaches behind KDE and Gnome. With KDE using underlying infrastructure like phonon, while Gnome writes the complete functionalty into each of their apps.
Now, don't get me wrong, this post has NOTHING to do with the quality of the software, as that's a lot harder to judge, with some people prefering simplicity, and other features, and some experience serious bugs, while others don't.
But, what I am curious about, is that there seems to be a general conscensus that KDE's method results in them being able to put more programs and functionality into their software without using too much more hard drive space. But, Gnome also shares its libraries with it's apps. So, I wondered... How much of a difference does KDE's approach make? Is it enough to justify the massive amount of libraries that non-KDE users would have to install to use something like Amarok?
So, what I did, was just to make a list of what functionality is included by DEFAULT on both the Ubuntu, and Kubuntu CDs. The idea is to see if KDE provides significantly more functionality for the same storage space.
APPS/FEATURES THAT BOTH UBUNTU & KUBUNTU PROVIDE
(Apps with significantly more features than their Gnome/KDE counterpart marked with a "+")
- Web Browser (+Firefox/Rekonq)
- Email Client (Thunderbird/Kontact)
- Music Player (Banshee/+Amarok)
- Video Player (Totem/Dragon)
- Libre Office
- Package Manager (Did Ubuntu 11.10 ship with Synaptic, can't seem to remember if I installed it or if it was always there)
- Software Center (+Ubuntu SC/Muon SC)
- Calculator
- Torrent Client (Transmission/+Ktorrent)
- Disc Burning Application (Brasero/+K3B)
- File Manager (Nautilus/+Dolphin)
- Terminal
- System Monitor
- Instant Messenger (Empathy/Kopete)
- Compression App (Archive Manager/Ark)
- Solitaire
- Virtual Keyboard (Onboard/Kvkbd)
- Password Manager
- Printer Setup/Settings
- Image/Document Viever
- Photo Manager (Shotwell/?What do you guys think, does Okular/Gwenview count?)
- Screenshot App (Screenshot/KSnapshot)
- Text Editor (Gedit/Kate)
- Partition Editor (GParted/KDE-Parition Manager) *Can't remember if I had to install either one or both.*
- System Settings (Gnome SS/+KDE SS)
- RSS Feed Reader (Part of Thunderbid/Akregator (Part of Kontact))
- Bluetooth Management
Ubuntu = 2 '+'ses.
Kubuntu = 3 '+'ses.
APPS IN KUBUNTU THAT DON"T HAVE COUNTERPARTS IN UBUNTU
(Significant inclusions marked with "+" or "++")
- IRC Client (Quassel)
- KInfoCenter (What is the Gnome equivalent?)
++ Desktop Indexing (Nepomuk/Strigi)
- KNotes
++ Widgets
- Also includes +/- 30 widgets that do various tiny things like monitor CPU. (Too lazy too count)
+ Activities
- Window Tabbing
- Window Tiling
Total = 9 features that are not in Ubuntu of which 3 are significantly large. (Widget Functionality and indicidual widgets counted seperately.)
APPS IN UBUNTU THAT DO NOT HAVE COUNTERPARTS IN KUBUNTU.
(Significant inclusions size-wise marked with "+" or "++")
- Gwibber
- Disk Usage Analyzer
+ Cloud, UbuntuONE
- Games
- GBrainy
- Mahjongg
- Mines
- Sudoku
+ Backup Utility
++ Several Wallpapers
Total = 9 features/apps not found in kubuntu, of which 3 are significantly large)
CONCLUSION: So, KDE makes extensive use of common libraries, but it seems that the difference between a default install of Ubuntu and Kubuntu are fairly similar as far as features and apps goes. But, I would like to mention that this quick little comparison did NOT take quality into account. It is a bit of an insult to compare Firefox with Rekonq with rekonq for example. But, the subjective "good vs bad" apps was a can of worms I didn't want to open right now.
It should also be noted, that the default install of both are fairly limited and that results may become more (or less) prominent as one goes about installing various apps like Krita, Gimp, Digikam, F-Spot, etc.
But, it looks to me, that the main gain in using common app infrastructure like Phonon is does not lie in saving HDD space. And, presumably RAM. So, that would probably mean that the chief gain is in the integration between apps.
LASTLY: What do you guys think? Did I miss any obvious features or apps? And do you think it's fair for me to completely disregard the quality of the apps?
I've recently been thinking about the different approaches behind KDE and Gnome. With KDE using underlying infrastructure like phonon, while Gnome writes the complete functionalty into each of their apps.
Now, don't get me wrong, this post has NOTHING to do with the quality of the software, as that's a lot harder to judge, with some people prefering simplicity, and other features, and some experience serious bugs, while others don't.
But, what I am curious about, is that there seems to be a general conscensus that KDE's method results in them being able to put more programs and functionality into their software without using too much more hard drive space. But, Gnome also shares its libraries with it's apps. So, I wondered... How much of a difference does KDE's approach make? Is it enough to justify the massive amount of libraries that non-KDE users would have to install to use something like Amarok?
So, what I did, was just to make a list of what functionality is included by DEFAULT on both the Ubuntu, and Kubuntu CDs. The idea is to see if KDE provides significantly more functionality for the same storage space.
APPS/FEATURES THAT BOTH UBUNTU & KUBUNTU PROVIDE
(Apps with significantly more features than their Gnome/KDE counterpart marked with a "+")
- Web Browser (+Firefox/Rekonq)
- Email Client (Thunderbird/Kontact)
- Music Player (Banshee/+Amarok)
- Video Player (Totem/Dragon)
- Libre Office
- Package Manager (Did Ubuntu 11.10 ship with Synaptic, can't seem to remember if I installed it or if it was always there)
- Software Center (+Ubuntu SC/Muon SC)
- Calculator
- Torrent Client (Transmission/+Ktorrent)
- Disc Burning Application (Brasero/+K3B)
- File Manager (Nautilus/+Dolphin)
- Terminal
- System Monitor
- Instant Messenger (Empathy/Kopete)
- Compression App (Archive Manager/Ark)
- Solitaire
- Virtual Keyboard (Onboard/Kvkbd)
- Password Manager
- Printer Setup/Settings
- Image/Document Viever
- Photo Manager (Shotwell/?What do you guys think, does Okular/Gwenview count?)
- Screenshot App (Screenshot/KSnapshot)
- Text Editor (Gedit/Kate)
- Partition Editor (GParted/KDE-Parition Manager) *Can't remember if I had to install either one or both.*
- System Settings (Gnome SS/+KDE SS)
- RSS Feed Reader (Part of Thunderbid/Akregator (Part of Kontact))
- Bluetooth Management
Ubuntu = 2 '+'ses.
Kubuntu = 3 '+'ses.
APPS IN KUBUNTU THAT DON"T HAVE COUNTERPARTS IN UBUNTU
(Significant inclusions marked with "+" or "++")
- IRC Client (Quassel)
- KInfoCenter (What is the Gnome equivalent?)
++ Desktop Indexing (Nepomuk/Strigi)
- KNotes
++ Widgets
- Also includes +/- 30 widgets that do various tiny things like monitor CPU. (Too lazy too count)
+ Activities
- Window Tabbing
- Window Tiling
Total = 9 features that are not in Ubuntu of which 3 are significantly large. (Widget Functionality and indicidual widgets counted seperately.)
APPS IN UBUNTU THAT DO NOT HAVE COUNTERPARTS IN KUBUNTU.
(Significant inclusions size-wise marked with "+" or "++")
- Gwibber
- Disk Usage Analyzer
+ Cloud, UbuntuONE
- Games
- GBrainy
- Mahjongg
- Mines
- Sudoku
+ Backup Utility
++ Several Wallpapers
Total = 9 features/apps not found in kubuntu, of which 3 are significantly large)
CONCLUSION: So, KDE makes extensive use of common libraries, but it seems that the difference between a default install of Ubuntu and Kubuntu are fairly similar as far as features and apps goes. But, I would like to mention that this quick little comparison did NOT take quality into account. It is a bit of an insult to compare Firefox with Rekonq with rekonq for example. But, the subjective "good vs bad" apps was a can of worms I didn't want to open right now.
It should also be noted, that the default install of both are fairly limited and that results may become more (or less) prominent as one goes about installing various apps like Krita, Gimp, Digikam, F-Spot, etc.
But, it looks to me, that the main gain in using common app infrastructure like Phonon is does not lie in saving HDD space. And, presumably RAM. So, that would probably mean that the chief gain is in the integration between apps.
LASTLY: What do you guys think? Did I miss any obvious features or apps? And do you think it's fair for me to completely disregard the quality of the apps?