For all you Gubers(the unofficial word for Gnome/Ubuntu users)why do you choose Gnome

[RAV TUX]

Just curious, a question to all you Gubers (being a recovering Guber myself), why do you choose to use Gnome? What functions do you believe that it has over KDE, Fluxbox, XFCE or E16?

What do you feel makes Gnome particularly special for you as a Guber?

Please give clear details and screenshots where necessary.

This request is particular for a well seasoned Guber who actively uses Gnome and has either migrated from or has extensive experience with KDE, XFCE, Fluxbox, E16, or other

(not really for the type of Guber who simply uses Gnome by default, or who has only casually been acquainted with KDE, XFCE, Fluxbox, or E16 )

For those of you who are Kubers, Xubers, Flubers, or Eubers,....what do you not like about Gnome?




*Gubers pronounced Gooo-bers

meaning a herd of Gubers, human Gubers who choose to use Gnome on Ubuntu.

[Quillz]

I just like GNOME.

[shareMenaPeace]

Lol "Gubers" made me laugh :)

well i had kde for a few weeks -- i installed it to test konqueror browser which i don't like so i uninstalled kde again and had 400 mb more disc space. I needed space so that been the main reason for me.

But i plan to install kde on my desktop computer to see what actually is diffrent.
Im very happy with gnome ... but please don't call me "Guber" :)

Maybe "Gnomers" ?

Cheers

[RAV TUX]

Lol "Gubers" made me laugh :)

well i had kde for a few weeks -- i installed it to test konqueror browser which i don't like so i uninstalled kde again and had 400 mb more disc space. I needed space so that been the main reason for me.

But i plan to install kde on my desktop computer to see what actually is diffrent.
Im very happy with gnome ... but please don't call me "Guber" :)

Maybe "Gnomers" ?

Cheers
ok, but Gnomers could be a blanket term for any Linux users, using Gnome in any distro....for instance if I restart X in Sabayon and resign in and select Gnome I am a Gnomer then....but Guber is a very special designation for a Gnome/Ubuntu user.

I use this quite affectionately I have a lot of good friends who are Gubers. Gubers is a worthy designation to achieve.

For all you Gubers out there I salute you, you are in a great place. To be a Guber naturally instills a bit of pride into your existential realization that you should know is a worthy endeavor.

I myself have Guber tendencies, of which I am quite proud of, when ever I start up my old computer, right behind me I instantly become a Guber again. I am not ashamed of my love.

Proud part-time Guber.

[Titus A Duxass]

I am a Guber and proud of it.
I use it because it's quirky just like me!

[shareMenaPeace]

ok, but Gnomers could be a blanket term for any Linux users, using Gnome in any distro....for instance if I restart X in Sabayon and resign in and select Gnome I am a Gnomer then....but Guber is a very special designation for a Gnome/Ubuntu user.


Ahh ok now i understand it, just it reminds me on "cucumber" somehow ... but well it makes sense at least :)

Im a Guber!

[pirothezero]

tried out gnome, came back cause mouse accel f'ed up on me and put it at the lowest setting so i couldn't do anything, alt-tab didn't work nor did any of my desktop switching, keyboard option in perferences kept crashing everytime i went to it.

xfce logged into it and have yet to get to the actual desktop, it just crashes on login, so back at kde where i haven't had any issues.

[ramjet_1953]

I have both GNOME and KDE installed and occasionally try KDE, but I can't really nail it down to a single thing why I prefer GNOME, other than it just "feels right".

Regards,
Roger :cool:

[pmj]

Don't we already have a 150 pages long topic on this? ;)

Anyway, I like Gnome because it's pretty to look at and generally works well.

[Engnome]

Just curious, a question to all you Gubers (being a recovering Guber myself), why do you choose to use Gnome? What functions do you believe that it has over KDE, Fluxbox, XFCE or E16?


Sometimes lack of feature can be a feature.

"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"

[mon_m]

Simply because of how beautifully simplistic and minimalistic it is.

[Tomosaur]

It's not that I like Gnome, i just don't like KDE. XFCE is alright, but I prefer Gnome over that. It's just the way I use the machine - I spend very little time actually using Gnome features. The programs I use most have quick-launch icons, and I rarely touch nautilus - since I prefer the command line for most things. Gnome keeps itself out of the way, and works on the rare occasion I need it too. I don't get that kind of 'privacy', if you will, from KDE - which seems to want to show me things any time I do anything. I'm sure I could make KDE just as unintrusive as I like Gnome to be, but I just really can't be bothered spending the time on it.

I also like e17, which is flashy, but it's still kind of unintrusive.

[manmower]

First off, I don't use Ubuntu anymore. But I fail to see why this question should be specific to Ubuntu users. Gnome is Gnome, no matter what distro. They are all this (http://www.gnome.org/) Gnome, and there is no other.


It's not that I like Gnome, i just don't like KDE. XFCE is alright, but I prefer Gnome over that. It's just the way I use the machine - I spend very little time actually using Gnome features. The programs I use most have quick-launch icons, and I rarely touch nautilus - since I prefer the command line for most things. Gnome keeps itself out of the way, and works on the rare occasion I need it too. I don't get that kind of 'privacy', if you will, from KDE - which seems to want to show me things any time I do anything. I'm sure I could make KDE just as unintrusive as I like Gnome to be, but I just really can't be bothered spending the time on it.

That about sums it up. Gnome is Zen. Other than that I just seem to tend more toward GTK apps rather than Qt apps. And generally prefer the look and themes of GTK.

[OrangeCrate]

Simply because of how beautifully simplistic and minimalistic it is.

I agree, it's aesthetically pleasing. I've tried them both, and I keep coming back to Gnome. Though I've tried several, I also keep coming back to the "Human" theme, and the burning bush, or whatever it's called. A nice color palette to my eye, and it blends well with all the trees I see from the window above my desk.

[RAV TUX]

First off, I don't use Ubuntu anymore.


Gnome is Zen. Other than that I just seem to tend more toward GTK apps rather than Qt apps. And generally prefer the look and themes of GTK.

just curious what OS(s) are you using?

If Gnome is Zen, then Fluxbox must be Nirvana which is what I am using right now.

[dickinsd]

I just like Gnome - I prefer it over KDE I think KDE looks like some kind of toy where as gnome looks like a toy for grown ups :p Seriously though - I just think gnome looks more 'professional' - however I do admit I've seen some very cool KDE setups - nothing default - the kind of stuff that someone has spent a lot of time on.

I've never tried any of the others - shame on me.

[hizaguchi]

I've got a fast enough computer that Openbox, Enlightenment, XFCE, etc. are not really any faster, so other than the minimal aesthetic, there isn't much reason for me to use those. That pretty much leaves me with KDE and Gnome. I used KDE up until recently, but most of the applications I use are GTK and I've slowly been replacing my few QT apps for a while now (Amarok --> Quod Libet, K3b --> Brasero, etc.), so KDE doesn't really make sense for me anymore. It also helped alot when I found this Murrina-Calla GTK theme, which makes Gnome even prettier than KDE, and then when I figured out how to get my touchpad to do Konqueror's horizontal scrolling in Firefox I switched immediately. :)

[hoagie]

No particular reason why not use it. I haven't tried anything else except Gnome and KDE (only for a day) but kde seemed to me very crowded, multiple submenus tons of apps that do pretty much the same thing. Gnome is not something special for me but it does what I want and it's there when it's needed. It's minimalistic and i can change everything in (this might also apply for other desktops). You might other desktop environments can do the same but why shall i care. Gnome works fines. As the ad in gnome.org says @Simply Powerful.

[Erunno]

I've seen GNOME developers being called simply "gnomes" by some KDE developers, same as they call Trolltech developers lovingly "trolls". :-)

[floke]

I like to try as many as I can get my hands on..

Gnome
KDE
E17(16.99999 etc..)
XFCE
Blackbox
Fluxbox
FVWM
Looking Glass (funny)
Metisse (currently playing around with this one)

By far and away the best is Gnome.

The reasons, sheer stability, simplicity, and enough customisation to do whatever I want (mostly)

KDE OOo crashes out from underneath me for no reason - I've never lost any work, but its a pain); E17's nice but the panel doesn't autohide (yes I know you can make windows cover it but its not the same) and doesn't have enough themes; XFCE can also crash when trying to change icon themes (and why would you use XFCE when you have Gnome anyway?); Blackbox, fluxbox and FVWM are too barren, Looking Glass is a javajoke, and Metisse is daft (but the novelty has yet to wear off).

I like Konqueror though (now and again), and you can't beat K3b. Thunar rocks too. But that's it.

The last time I used KDE was when I was experimenting with DesktopBSD - and it just make me feel sick ('here I am' 'here I am' 'here I am' 'I'm KDE - gottaloveme!!!!!!!').

So a Guber I am (although, lets face it, gconf-editor's a piece of crap).

[jethro10]

Because its safe to learn as Ubuntu is the biggest distro and it uses gnome by default. So thats me.
Also Gnome seems default in most of the other big distro's, so safety again.

Which is strange as i'm on linux here which is as niche as you can get.

hm....

J

[EdThaSlayer]

It isn't as "fat" as KDE. :)

[floke]

There is that too.
Although the DesktopBSD didn't feel fat - it was so responsive the menu's almost popped up before I clicked them!

I would have kept it around for a while but it didn't recognise by wireless card, which is a complete showstopper.

Anyway, slightly off topic - but you can get Gnome for BSD (apparently) as well.

[RAV TUX]

It isn't as "fat" as KDE. :)

so Gnome is "Phat"?

[EdThaSlayer]

so Gnome is "Phat"?
Lets just say that:
KDE=obese overweight type of fat
GNOME=comfortably chubby type of fat

[macogw]

I like it simple and I don't like the over-roundness of KDE UIs. I like the neat straight lines in GNOME and Fluxbox.

[tigerpants]

"For all you Gubers(the unofficial word for Gnome/Ubuntu users)why do you choose Gnome"

I only chose ubuntu because I was under the impression that it was made by gnomes. Imagine my disappointment when I first installed it, and there was a general lack of diminutive bearded dwarf folk on the desktop singing "hi-ho" at me.

[G Morgan]

It isn't as "fat" as KDE. :)

Benchmarks universally place the desktops as nearly equal. Most that I read put KDE as infront though it certainly used to be the case that GNOME was more efficient.

Currently I use GNOME on Ubuntu because it is better developed than Kubuntu (no disrespect to the Kubuntu team). Also the underlying architectural issues with KDE3.x are still unresolved.

When KDE4 comes out I will probably switch to that especially given that the APIs are even cleaner than they already were expanding what was already a KDE advantage (to load and play a song with Phonon it takes 4 lines in C++, it would take ~30 in Arts and 27, 35, 12, 17, 29 depending on the time of day in GStreamer ;) ). Especially if we see Java bindings for the API (with Java being much easier to read than C++).

Would like to see Enlightenment DR-17 get out of pre alpha but think it could give the HURD a run for it's money on that count.

[thelinuxguy]

I have used KDE before and I liked it. But when I started using Gnome, it felt better. There is nothing that I dislike in KDE but just that Gnome appeals more to me. However, I do use some KDE apps on Gnome like KTorrent.

Haven't given the others a try. Will do that someday.

[RAV TUX]

Lets just say that:
KDE=obese overweight type of fat
GNOME=comfortably chubby type of fat

My apologies "Phat" is American slang

from the Urban Dictionary:


1. phat http://static.urbandictionary.com/thumbsup.gif (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29) 1297 up, 291 down http://static.urbandictionary.com/thumbsdown.gif (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29)
1. cool
2. Pretty Hot And Tempting

except I think the expression is outdated.

[Sunflower1970]

I'm not too sure really. Gnome looks and feels more...simple? More aesthically pleasing to my eye

KDE, although I like some of the apps it has, it looked and acted too much like XP which I truly wanted to get away from. Also, I felt a bit overwhelmed when I opened up the menu in the lower left-hand corner and saw all hte apps. It was too much for me.

I also didn't like how thick the taskbar was in KDE. Yeah, I know it can be changed to be thinner, or add double ones, whatever, but when I have been playing around with the Kubuntu (and SimplyMepis) live CD's, that's the first thing I notice and I just find it ugly.

Maybe someday I'll switch over, but for now, for me, Gnome just "feels" right.

[spockrock]

dunno just like it.... what can I say..........

[happy-and-lost]

I use it because it's *not* KDE. I'm trying to switch to Xfce, but Gnome's (albeit unstable) panels always drag me back. I like transparent panels, which (currently) Xfce does not have :(

It just feels like home to me. It's the antidote to real life; simple, uncluttered, smooth.

[manmower]

just curious what OS(s) are you using?

If Gnome is Zen, then Fluxbox must be Nirvana which is what I am using right now.

I've been using Arch Linux full time since I first tried it a few months ago.

By Gnome being Zen I mean you learn to live without certain features in exchange for some peace of mind (in fact that pretty much sums up my entire Linux experience). With KDE there is always some clutter that keeps me wanting to tweak to no end, instead of actually enjoying my computer. Xfce strikes a good balance between the two and I love it as well.

Something like the *boxes, tiling WMs or fvwm might indeed be "even more Zen", guess I haven't reached that level yet. :) Fvwm is great in the right hands, I'm lacking time to learn it properly though. I'll admit Fluxbox is very complete in terms of features, close to the desktop environments, but the look and feel are what turn me off (purely subjective off course).

As this is all a matter of opinion I might look back at this post in a year and think "what a pile of nonsense", but it is the motivation behind my current preference for Gnome.

[G Morgan]

You realise that Fluxbox is totally configurable.

[sabitha]

i'm just like gnome because it's simple not like KDE to much menu that i don't need

[OldTimeTech]

KDE reminds me of *******.....YUK

gnome is restful, easy and minimalistic....don't want a bunch of stuff on my desktop...at least only if I put it there.

[steve101101]

I use gnome now because it always works and is completely functional. I was usuing e17 for a while, but its annoying getting crashing and setting up basic things that gnome does for you.

[bns]

I guess you'd call me a Kuber. I think it's interesting that so many people have said they think gnome is more professional-looking and clean. To me it looks like it's not done -- just a little bit more tweaking and it would have looked real nice. I like KDE for as little reason as most of these guys seem to like gnome. I tried both in the first few weeks of using Ubuntu, and I just liked KDE better. I think the icons on the gnome desktop are way too big and you can't move them (which is a really strange reason to not like gnome because I don't even have icons on my desktop anymore). I've gotten to like the KDE apps and I see no real reason to change.

Different strokes for different folks.

[DarkOx]

I used Gnome for awhile, but I found I preferred konqueror to nautlius, kopete to gaim, basKet to tomboy and amarok to exaile/listen/banshee/rhythmbox. Since I was basically using all KDE applications anyways, I figured I may as well use KDE and save myself loading all the GNOME libs I wasn't really using.

[karellen]

because I like it, suits my needs better

[FaceorKneecaps]

I think KDE would have been in a better position if the default design was better. Tweaking is alright but gnome looks some much better when first booted. The 4 workstations on the taskbar is the biggest turn-off for me. =;

[Raavea]

I like XFCE too, but I just like the packages that are part of GNOME, and I dig the transparent panels. It's the WM I first learned how to use when I came to Ubuntu, and to linux.. I can't stand KDE, it makes me shiver 'cuz it just reminds me far too much of Windows.

I did try E16 a while back, so sexy, but I can't really afford the hardware to use it to the effects I would like to, so I went back to good old GNOME.

...I've been looking at this fluxbox thing though.. Trying to find out if it's faster than GNOME, or what.. That's how I found this thread, see. :)

[tbodine]

Well, I really like GTK+, I highly prefer it over Qt.
I really like the themes and icons and stuff for KDE, it's a very "pretty" desktop environment in my eyes anyway.
I've always used window managers rather than desktop environments in every other distribution I've used, but Ubuntu really integrates so well into the GNOME environment that I've been persuaded by it to stay here, although I have tried other WMs.

[Baelfael]

Because Guber rhymes with Uber.

[SlayerMan]

Though I personally use KDE (or, on the PC I'm currently sitting at: IceWM), I think GNOME is a very fine desktop. It is "clutter-free", fast... what can I say... very nice... :)


What I don't like about GNOME:
- Lack of integration with non-gnome software
- The not-invented-here-attitude of many of its developers
- Why does GNOME use 3% CPU when idle, while KDE on the same machine has 0% CPU when idle? (not a major drawback, though)


;)

Kind Regards
SlayerMan

[dbunder]

I haven't used ubuntu since Dapper - had to run exclusively XP for dev work at a job. But I just installed Edgy. And I missed it.

Except gnome. Uggggh. There's *nothing* I like about it. I ran KDE on Dapper and it was pretty ok, but it seems to just have gotten more and more bloated. Nix.

Switching over to xfce tomorrow. I just wish there was a way to get desktop manager-like behaviour (desktop icons, etc) on top of fluxbox, cause fluxbox is my baby. Is there a way? I haven't checked in forever.

[RAV TUX]

.

Switching over to xfce tomorrow. I just wish there was a way to get desktop manager-like behaviour (desktop icons, etc) on top of fluxbox, cause fluxbox is my baby. Is there a way? I haven't checked in forever.
The beauty of Fluxbox is no icons....but check the sig. links of bodhi.zazen (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=89054) and Brunellus (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=9506), for great HowTo's on Fluxbox.

[dbunder]

The beauty of Fluxbox is no icons....but check the sig. links of bodhi.zazen (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=89054) and Brunellus (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=9506), for great HowTo's on Fluxbox.

Touche. But I do like having one icon - a link to a file manager in my home dir if I need to quickly browse for something. But I suppose it's easy enough (and almost as efficient) to add a fluxbox menu entry to do the same thing, eh? :)

[HeyItsMatt]

I'm still an Ubuntu newbie, but I recently installed KDE in order to try it as an alternative to Gnome. KDE was very interesting, and it definitely looked like it had more options for customization than Gnome (or at least I could find many of them more quickly).

However, within 10 minutes of playing with it I had a seemingly random crash error where my SCIM toolbar icon (foreign language input editor) detached itself from the toolbar and was inside some strange miniature window that basically just had a small title bar and some blank window space. I couldn't figure out how to fix that, and went back to Gnome.

Obviously that was only 10 minutes of use, and maybe it was just a fluke - I am planning to play with KDE some more in a little while - but I can't say that was an encouraging sign for me to use it over Gnome. I guess I should be fair and say that the SCIM program seems a bit "ghetto" even in Gnome... when I have the firestarter GUI loaded, there are two SCIM icons on my top bar, one of which is like a dummy icon that I have never figured out how to remove, although it doesn't interfere with functionality.

*EDIT - I apologize for raising a two month old thread. I was randomly perusing through the forums and totally forgot to check the age of what I was replying to. Hopefully thread necromancy isn't hated too much here :) *

[RAV TUX]

I'm still an Ubuntu newbie, but I recently installed KDE in order to try it as an alternative to Gnome. KDE was very interesting, and it definitely looked like it had more options for customization than Gnome (or at least I could find many of them more quickly).

However, within 10 minutes of playing with it I had a seemingly random crash error where my SCIM toolbar icon (foreign language input editor) detached itself from the toolbar and was inside some strange miniature window that basically just had a small title bar and some blank window space. I couldn't figure out how to fix that, and went back to Gnome.

Obviously that was only 10 minutes of use, and maybe it was just a fluke - I am planning to play with KDE some more in a little while - but I can't say that was an encouraging sign for me to use it over Gnome. I guess I should be fair and say that the SCIM program seems a bit "ghetto" even in Gnome... when I have the firestarter GUI loaded, there are two SCIM icons on my top bar, one of which is like a dummy icon that I have never figured out how to remove, although it doesn't interfere with functionality.

*EDIT - I apologize for raising a two month old thread. I was randomly perusing through the forums and totally forgot to check the age of what I was replying to. Hopefully thread necromancy isn't hated too much here :) *I have never had KDE crash on me.

[thisllub]

Even though it is allegedly unstable Enlightenment is far better then Gnome or KDE in subtle but significant ways.

I use 3 screens. Having to move the mouse 4000 pixels back to the panel is torture. In E17 the right mouse button and menu keys have my regular shortcuts.

Also in both KDE and Gnome a change of desktop changes all three screens. In Enlightenment even in Xinerama mode monitors and desktops are independent. I love that feature.

When Gnome or KDE crash - more likely a Firefox plugin problem, it is game over. E17 tells you it has crashed, restarts gracefully and nothing appears to change.

[walmartshopper67]

For me, convenience. I've been using Linux for about 8 years now, exclusively - I am Windows free - and I've used every window manager under the sun. They all have pros and cons, but I'm using Gnome right now because earlier this year in school I ended up ditching Mandriva and coming to Ubuntu land. It was during school though, and it was necessary as Mandriva 2006 SE was just DEAD on my desktop. Being pressed for time here at Rochester Institute of Technology (quarter schedule, fast paced) I just grabbed Ubuntu off of bittorrent and installed. It's been great - sure, I love KDE and Fluxbox, but I've got so much time and customization into gnome that I really don't feel like starting from scratch with KDE. Maybe over the summer, because yeah - KDE is cool.:p

BTW, that's not to say GNOME isnt cool too though, i've been able to give Ubuntu with GNOME to just about ANYONE and have them use it straight out of the box, some people dont need all the little customizations, and I dont need them asking me questions about them =)

[Tundro Walker]

Gubers?! Who dreams up these titles? I much prefer "Gno-buntu'er" (pronounced "no-boon-too'er")

[RAV TUX]

Gubers?! Who dreams up these titles? I much prefer "Gno-buntu'er" (pronounced "no-boon-too'er")

"Gubers" actually makes more sense because of it's African roots, Gubers is the original African word for peanuts, that are native to Africa. Much like Mark Shuttleworth, Ubuntu's founder.

[Ultra Magnus]

I've tried out kde and I just find gnome to look cleaner and quite refreshing after coming over from windows. Plus KDE has far too many apps beginning with "K" and its kind of annoying. - It could do with being a bit more customisable though, and needs a bit of a make over, I think the KDE menus looks abit better but I prefer the layout and simplicity of the gnome menus.

[Chilli Bob]

Gnome is just better to look at. It's a cleaner, more minimalist DE than KDE. It launches your apps then gets out of the way. KDE seems to jump in your face shouting "LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME". Things like that bouncy icon next to the mouse pointer when you open an app, and that ridiculously cluttered task bar are a deal breaker for me.

Xfce and Fluxbox are both nice. I use Xfce more and more, but they do have a poor-man's DE feel, at least with the default settings. Probably I will spend some time learning how to dress up Xfce and gradually migrate to that for my main DE.

[Fenryr]

Uhm, because that's what it booted to when I INSTALLED Ubuntu?

Seriously, I haven't gotten a clean install with KDE yet...When it WAS installed, I kept getting an error message regarding 'themes', and it would hang there until I told it to boot anyway...Got the SAME error message when I shut down...So I just got rid of KDE...

[wthanna]

I like trying all of the desktop environments from time to time... I tend to stick with gnome as the main one, as it "just works" for me and all that I need it to do.. KDE is nice but the whole naming everything with a K this.. K that.. is quite annoying and unprofessional looking in my opinion.. Have you ever tried to convert a business to the joy of using Linux? People start looking at the apps and menus... and see all of this K stuff and think it's a toy.. that is really my main gripe about KDE.... Stop with the Ks already!

[FoolsGold_MKII]

Uhm, because that's what it booted to when I INSTALLED Ubuntu?
Exactly the same reason as this dude.

I could have gone the Kubuntu route, but I trust Ubuntu enough and kinda prefer the standard interface. I could also have installed the entire KDE environment here in Ubuntu, but that would have been nutty. I figure Gnome is perfectly functional enough for my needs.

[sw1995]

In answering this question it seems I have really supplied why I don't use KDE, but here goes nothing. I have tried KDE on a couple of different distros, and have REALLY wanted to like it, but, alas, I just cannot. Here are my reasons, to whit:

First, the "K" theme feels way too much like a "brand" that is being shoved down my throat, constantly (i.e. "K-this, K-that, and K-the other"), whereas the simplicity of GNOME allows my DE to exist quietly in the background. This type of presence does not immediately reveal itself as easily reconfigurable. GNOME, on the other hand, always strikes me as a blank template perfectly suited for all types of personalization. In contrast, KDE feels like an obstacle that must be circumvented in order to have a unique desktop (and perhaps I am gearing this response from the perspective on a new user...I know each DE is limitless in its customization possibilities). I should add, too, part of why I mentioned that I "REALLY" wanted to like KDE was because I was interested in getting away from this focus on personalizing my desktop. I spend way too much time messing with eye-candy and kind of feel that perhaps KDE is the antidote. There is something about KDE that strikes me as the "let's get down to business" DE, but, as usual, I digress.

Also, and this is a personal preference, but I'm not one for gimmicks and attaching a K to everything may have been cool in 1995, but I cannot help but feel it is a bit dated.

Secondly, again, the "K" thing. When navigating throughout the KDE interface there is a deep seeded part of myself that constantly feels as though everything is spelled incorrectly. Navigating the menus is like trying to read some kind of bizarre pig-latin. KIt Kis Ka Kgiant Kpain Kin Kthe Krear Kend!

Other than that I am attracted to the graphic elements and some of the apps (yes, I cannot and will not live without Amarok!), but in the end, GNOME simply appeals to my personal sense of organization. It has nothing to do with laziness, but rather, I find the simplicity of GNOME quite sophisticated (less is more). It's a Zen thing. I can't explain it.

\m/

[Buendia]

Following this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2942893#post2942893), where I mentioned that Linux comes with amateurish look, this topic is a good question to answer. KDE seems to have the look of webpages trying to emulate win98 -- a confused desktop ehich has not yet chosen which way to go. In comparison, Gnome looks more original, calm and mature.

[samjh]

I prefer KDE over Gnome.

But for Ubuntu, I use Gnome because it is more polished, more up-to-date, and has better community support than Kubuntu. I have previously suffered - and continue to experience - minor instability and UI flaws in Kubuntu, which I do not experienced in normal Ubuntu.


Following this thread, where I mentioned that Linux comes with amateurish look, this topic is a good question to answer. KDE seems to have the look of webpages trying to emulate win98 -- a confused desktop ehich has not yet chosen which way to go. In comparison, Gnome looks more original, calm and mature.That's an interesting comment.

I don't think KDE is trying to emulate, or even appear trying to emulate, Win98. The basic KDE interface has been quite consistent, even before Win98 came out. And KDE has been around long before Win98. It's probably the other way around (Win95 to WinXP GUI paradigm having been slightly influenced by KDE).

On the other hand, I think Gnome vaguely resembles the Macintosh interface. Like KDE and Win98, the resemblance is only vague. But unlike KDE and Win98, the Macintosh GUI has been around for a lot longer than Gnome.

[deepclutch]

GNOME is the right one for me.its simplicity and the usability factor is much higher than in any wm's including kde.Kde seriously suffers from bloat,whether they admit or not.take me,i had tried kde for over an year(with GNOME also there!) even tried latest opensuse kde4 snapshot livecd,except from dolphin fm,i dont see anything new in kde.I simply cant work/stay in kde DE.one more reason is kde uses qt(whatever now it is licensed) which i personally hate.gtk2 is the way for me.
I and many GNOME users personally feel harassed when Linus Torvalds proclaimed that kde is the future.fsck for it,i dont give him a damn for that comment and feels sorry for his immaturity(that now con kolivas quit kernel developing because of Linus & co while colivas submitted a good memory subsystem replacement eventually rejected by thy company).Linus shud concentrate on kernel development rather than questioning the ideologies of projects such as GNOME which is for simplicity and bug fixings rather than each and every bloated things carried on as "features".
I feel troll tech is propagating FUD against GNOME in some ways.another GNOME bashers are http://tuxmagazine.com -these are id!ots defaming FOSS as a whole giving kde as the only DE and all gtk and GNOME sux.wow?now what is the difference btwn kde and M$?
Let GNOME rocks.GNOME sure is the best DE.:popcorn:

[Kilz]

I love the simplicity of Gnome. I started out using SuSE Linux with KDE. After a week or so I discovered Gnome could be installed. After trying it, I never started KDE. With the disaster that was suse 10.1 I went looking for a Gnome based distro, and found Ubuntu...
The simplicity is what I like . there are the settings I need, and not thousands of settings I will never change. Most of which can be changes in a text file if need be.
I think that as Linux users we all change the desktop in some way. The Gnome I use is nothing like the default install. The icons, wallpaper, controls, colors, and window border are all different. Some I have changed to my own needs.
:D

[RAV TUX]

I like e17 over all other DE.

[zoracite]

Sometimes lack of feature can be a feature.

"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"

*agrees* Couldn't say it better myself. :KS