KDE Vs Gnome - Business Enviroment

[curuxz]

As part of my work getting the open source business website setup, I wanted to know what you guys think....

Which is better for business use, KDE or Gnome? and why?

Personally I think KDE wins hands down, because of its integration between its applications and its ability to do things like go from Kolab >>> Kontact >>> to your mobile phone (cell).

I really need to know what the feeling is since for ease of writing documentation I want to chose a standard platform else each howto will have about 50 versions! :) IMHO Kubuntu would be the best distro for my new site to base its how to's on since, while it is the poor cousin, it has deb package management, ubuntu support and KDE's advantages for data management.

This is not to say which is BEST, simply which is better suited to the business environment

I think gnome is great on the home desktop, I just think it is not suited to business use IMHO...

[racoq]

Either way you are starting a flame war ;) Just don't say latter i didn't warned you :lol:

[curuxz]

I don't see if as a flame war, its a legitimate question, are there things in gnome that make it better for business or vis versa i wana hear peoples views.

Please please please say why your voting else its pointless :)

[LaRoza]

It doesn't matter, as long it is consistant in the business. I voted other, although I would choose GNOME, but only because it is what I like best.

KDE might work better for those used to Windows type menu's.

[sep1318]

I personally like KDE better than Gnome, and I think for business, where most people are used to being in a wind0ze environ, because most people just are (::fist::), the K-menu is a better set up in terms of familiarity than the different menus that Gnome gives you.

[racoq]

So here it goes...

For instance out of the box, i find the gnome approach easier to the end user, so in the enterprise environment people don't always have time do customize minor things, has we usually must do if we want a minized version of KDE, they just want things work as fast as possible, and they just want them easy to work. Many options just gives headaches to people who work in enterprises with less knowledge. Not to say that can be expensive because if an enterprise adopts a desktop envirnment more for medium/advanced users (i think KDE 3 is in this area), they also have to spend money in formation for they employees.

So IMHO, i think gnome must be the default choice for the majority of enterprises

[curuxz]

I personally like KDE better than Gnome, and I think for business, where most people are used to being in a wind0ze environ, because most people just are (::fist::), the K-menu is a better set up in terms of familiarity than the different menus that Gnome gives you.

Well thats one of the reasons I think writing about KDE is good for my open source business project because people don't want to waste time training people why the start menu has moved from the bottom to the top of the screen and stupid simple stuff like that you just know people will complain about.

Mainly though its the integration of KDE that gets it for me, I like data to move between things.

That said, i prefer synaptic, open office and firefox in my kubuntu install but its still not enough to make me want to use gnome when working! (I do use it on my laptop tho :) )

EDIT: found this http://enterprise.kde.org/focus/suse/ seems SUSE agrees with me, and as far as I know red hat have used KDE as default for a long long time. Gnome certainly does well on home users but there is just something about it that I find some much more productive. One of the cool things is the wizard when you make a new user and login for the first time that lets you go into unix, apple or windows mode (I think there is another one there, possibly risc) which is a really good way of welcoming new users :)

[sep1318]

[...] i prefer synaptic, open office and firefox in my kubuntu install but its still not enough to make me want to use gnome when working! (I do use it on my laptop tho :) )

I use/have installed Pidgin, Firefox, Thunderbird, OOo in my Kubuntu install. Mixing and matching is not a crime, it's a feature!! :)

[a12ctic]

How can you run a busniess with a cluttered backwards DE? How does KDE even have votes here?

[LaRoza]

How can you run a busniess with a cluttered backwards DE? How does KDE even have votes here?

Uh oh, I am starting to see flames...

[frodon]

I use linux for my job and i use almost only terminal and text editor so for me that don't really matter.
I choose other ;)

[curuxz]

How can you run a busniess with a cluttered backwards DE? How does KDE even have votes here?

In the interests of this discussion not ending up in the backyard :) can you explain why you think KDE is cluttered? it has only one menu bar opposed to 2 and a single application launcher instead of gnomes 3. Without meaning to provoke an argument surly the reverse is true and KDE is the least cluttered of the two?

[forrestcupp]

It doesn't really matter if you are asking a legitimate question that you'd like to know the answer to. People are just going to give their biased opinion of what they like without regard to what would be better for business.

In my personal opinion, both would work well in a business setting. I don't really think it would matter. You can run GTK apps and QT apps in Gnome and KDE.

[xen]

Might be interesting to see how this vote changes when KDE 4 becomes mainstream, I've never been so excited about a Linux development before in my life!

[curuxz]

In my personal opinion, both would work well in a business setting. I don't really think it would matter. You can run GTK apps and QT apps in Gnome and KDE.

Oh for sure, and I think that neither would be useful in business without using non-specific apps (I refer back to my comment that in my ideal setup openoffice would be the default along with firefox).

But on balance if I had to pick one, and unfortunately I DO have to pick one to base the site on it still remains KDE, no one has yet come up with a convincing reason for gnome to be better for business needs and konqueror and kontact really cant be beaten by nautalius and evolution for accessing lots of data at once and groupware functionality. PLEASE dont flame that comment, this research is valuable to me and I would like it to remain civil.

At the end of the day I think linux would benefit if it identified its markets better and perhaps gnome saying its for the home market 100% and vis versa for KDE would mean they could focus on trying to do what linux does best, and that is to be the best at 1 thing but have choice if you want to do something else. At the end of the day we are all the same side I just believe in the right tool for the right job :)

[DarkOx]

I don't think the desktop environment really matters -- the question boils down to what do people in the organization have to accomplish, and what software will allow them to do it?

If they're using a bunch of KDE programs (like, say, kdevelop or whatever) you may as well use KDE. If they're using a bunch of Gnome programs, you may as well use Gnome. If they're using an equal mix of both, pull out a coin and flip.

The cosmetic things, such as Kmenu being "windows like" while Gnome's isn't, can be changed either way (Gnome can have a single button menu too).

[curuxz]

I don't think the desktop environment really matters -- the question boils down to what do people in the organization have to accomplish, and what software will allow them to do it?

If they're using a bunch of KDE programs (like, say, kdevelop or whatever) you may as well use KDE. If they're using a bunch of Gnome programs, you may as well use Gnome. If they're using an equal mix of both, pull out a coin and flip.

The cosmetic things, such as Kmenu being "windows like" while Gnome's isn't, can be changed either way (Gnome can have a single button menu too).

you see I certainly agree with your argument about cosmetics being a moot point since they are so easily changed, I have seen someone make their gnome system look so convincingly like KDE that me (who has used KDE for 9 years now) did not even notice for over an hour till I was told! LOL

But if it boils down to which apps your using then which one has the better core business applications? if both had openoffice and firefox (as quite a few distros do have it for both) then it comes down to konqueror vs nautalis, evolution vs kontact etc and thats where I think gnome is fantastic for home users but NOT for business ones. I hope I'm not coming off dogmatic I simply want to perswade debate that does not go down 'party lines'

[EndPerform]

Either environment would suit a business just fine, really. What would *really* matter is the applications, and since you can run GTK / QT apps on either desktop, it shouldn't really matter, and most likely it may boil down to what the IT department feels it could better support.

[a12ctic]

In the interests of this discussion not ending up in the backyard :) can you explain why you think KDE is cluttered? it has only one menu bar opposed to 2 and a single application launcher instead of gnomes 3. Without meaning to provoke an argument surly the reverse is true and KDE is the least cluttered of the two?

The interface is ugly, the control panel sucks, the themes are garbage, everything is too big, nothing is intergrated as well, nothing looks as clean, everything feels cluttered, the "single" bar looks like there were way to many windows adware "toolbars" installed.

[g2g591]

They seem to both be fine, I just prefer the look of KDE better than Gnome, and most people would be more comfortable the Kde because its more like the windows menu. and I'm starting to see flames ^^^^^

[mike102282]

I like KDE better because it is easier to do the things i need and like to do.

[GeneralZod]

Interestingly, goverments/ councils in Europe seem to prefer KDE:

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ict/policy/doc/2006-11-20-flossimpact.pdf (page 29)

Not really surprising, given KDE's very flexible Kiosk mode allows a large amount of the clutter to be cut down, removing entire menus/ toolbars/ whatever centrally without changing a line of code - governments and businesses are an area where extreme customizability are real assets.

Since a12ctic is posting flame-bait with impunity, I guess posting this is OK. It has the benefit of being grounded in a real-life case study, too, rather than "Grrr I hate KDE and so everyone else should do grrr"-ism :)



Frustrations
The case study also detailed the many frustrations involved in approaching an unfamiliar desktop technology, including the discovery that key applications wouldn't run on Linux and usability problems with the original Gnome interface. At one point, realising that most of the usability issues were attributable to Gnome, which had taken three months to configure, staff ripped out Gnome and replaced it with KDE. The new interface was up and running within a week.


http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?newsid=7459

[a12ctic]

Well I odviosly have some gnome bias, I have been using it sense like 2000. I've always liked it more, KDE just seems like kiddie stuff to me.

[curuxz]

Thank you Zod a nice clear response, exactly what I was hoping for!

I wish a12ctic would tone down his responses, this is not an argument and neither is 'garbage' they are both very useful pieces of software.

Based on your links Zod I am further convinced that my open source business website should base its howto's on the kubuntu route. Kiosk mode is a great point that I overlooked, its stuff like this that makes me like KDE in a corporate environment.

KDE 4 is also only going to strengthen this. Since I am mainly setting up this project for UK and North American small businesses I am very glad that EU countries are on the side of KDE since the UK (my country) remains a very slow adopter of open source, maybe I could expand to deal with EU guides later (I'm only avoiding directly saying the project is for the EU because of not wanting to dilute the idea with additional languages until its up and running)

[LaRoza]

The interface is ugly, the control panel sucks, the themes are garbage, everything is too big, nothing is intergrated as well, nothing looks as clean, everything feels cluttered, the "single" bar looks like there were way to many windows adware "toolbars" installed.

Well, looks have nothing to do with productivity. You can make as many bars as you like, top or bottom and sides.

I personally have GNOME, Windows and KDE set up the same, so the general concept is the same no matter the DE. The colours are the same too.

[Erunno]

...

http://www.duckandcover.cx/forums/images/smiles/icon_salut.gif

[forrestcupp]

But on balance if I had to pick one, and unfortunately I DO have to pick one to base the site on it still remains KDE, no one has yet come up with a convincing reason for gnome to be better for business needs and konqueror and kontact really cant be beaten by nautalius and evolution for accessing lots of data at once and groupware functionality. PLEASE dont flame that comment, this research is valuable to me and I would like it to remain civil.

I agree that some KDE apps are better.

But it appears that you already had your mind made up and knew what you wanted. It appears that no matter what anyone says, you're going to want to use KDE. There's nothing wrong with your wanting to use KDE, but if that is the case, the only purpose of this thread is to prove a point.

That's called trolling.

[curuxz]

im not trolling, the research shows KDE is better, i wanted to see if anyone had an idea of why gnome would be better, but so far people have not seem to come up with any PRO gnome arguments only saying it does not matter but then i have to rely on research

[Sunflower1970]

I use Gnome at home (and XFCE), and love it. But in a business enviornment I think KDE is the better choice...from the look, the feel...it would remind a lot of people of Windows, which they're more familiar with and take less time training, IMHO.

[Adamant1988]

As part of my work getting the open source business website setup, I wanted to know what you guys think....

Which is better for business use, KDE or Gnome? and why?

Personally I think KDE wins hands down, because of its integration between its applications and its ability to do things like go from Kolab >>> Kontact >>> to your mobile phone (cell).

I really need to know what the feeling is since for ease of writing documentation I want to chose a standard platform else each howto will have about 50 versions! :) IMHO Kubuntu would be the best distro for my new site to base its how to's on since, while it is the poor cousin, it has deb package management, ubuntu support and KDE's advantages for data management.

This is not to say which is BEST, simply which is better suited to the business environment

I think gnome is great on the home desktop, I just think it is not suited to business use IMHO...

I'll agree that the integration of KDE apps is good, but gnome is arguably a more 'work based' environment with few frills to grab your attention.

[init1]

The business environment is about using what works. So I said other.

[Dimitriid]

Neither, most likely something like Fluxbox or icewm, if not so minimanistic then XFCE.

For business environments looks do not count if they are not helping increase productivity. A good interface is desirable, but cutting down on hardware costs is a much more cost effective idea, not to mention that with limited hardware employee's wont waste time on WoW and what not. gnome and KDE pack way too many extras even on minimal installs. Consider that many business desktops do not even have optical drives or even hard drives. Network boot to deploy the OS to RAM on something like say Puppy with just the essential apps needed for work ( word processing and office apps, internet exploring and emailing, thats about it right there, everything else can be done via web applications and what not )

Very basic interface, little or no customization options, no packages for anything other than work related stuff.

[juxtaposed]

Gnome seems more professional and business like to me. But there probably wouldn't be a big difference.

[Erunno]

Because we all know that a company has now choice but to roll out an unmodified KDE with upstream artwork, no lockdown and probably amarok, kaffeine and all other multimedia goodness installed, eh? ](*,)

I know that in these forums there's a prevalent obsession with looks because the desktop might get "boring" so there's always the desire for new "blink" but in a company environment you'll encounter more focus on customization, deployment, stability and costs on the adminstrative side. As long as you don't use a drug-inspired theme I doubt that most people will care a lot about how their working desktop looks like as long as it gets the job done.

[cmat]

I would go with more pleasing to the eyes. But also provide "to the point functionality". Like a nice up splash, GDM, wallpaper, and some visual effects wouldn't hurt to make working for 8 hours on end somewhat more enjoyable. I voted for KDE, even though I like gnome better. It provides a very good user experience, can be configured to behave like Windows to reduce the cost of retraining people and has some nice effects.

[BDNiner]

At my company I am trying to transition the help desk from windows to linux. I have tried several distributions as well as gnome and kde. We run a mostly novell network with some windows servers sprinkled here and there. The main problem has been all of our Novell management software loses a lot of functionality when moving from windows to linux. We cannot remote control machines anymore being the big one. (unless i install another remote client like PC anywhere) Where as in windows from console one i can perform all the user management tasks from one screen. we also use Novell to deliver applications to our users desktops, so their computers are thin clients and can be easily interchanged. I have not been able to deliver applications to ubuntu yet. I made some headway using Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop, but SLED was voted down.

But back to your topic, Gnome has by far been the biggest winner. people like the default simplicity it has over the sometimes convoluted menus that KDE has. I told them that this can be changed, i can make KDE look like gnome and vice versa. But we would have to make some wholesale changes to our environment to go with linux over windows, so i am still working on it.

PS i prefer gnome over KDE

[Erunno]

. We cannot remote control machines anymore being the big one. (unless i install another remote client like PC anywhere) Where as in windows from console one i can perform all the user management tasks from one screen. we also use Novell to deliver applications to our users desktops, so their computers are thin clients and can be easily interchanged. I have not been able to deliver applications to ubuntu yet. I made some headway using Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop, but SLED was voted down.

KDE has an application for accessing remote desktops called krdc. Due to my inexperience with Novell products I can't say if it's sufficient to replace the native Novell solution but if you should happen to give it a try I'd be interested in your opinion about it. And there's always administration via ssh logins for the daring ;-). I don't know any free software deployment solutions but there's bound to be some from Novell or Red Hat. But I'm a little surprised that your company decided against SLED since you're already working with Novell products. Care to elobarate?

[Eddie Wilson]

If we are talking about business. Its always better to keep it simple. If it looks like MS Windows they will treat it as such and then wonder why its not.:confused:

Eddie

[thisllub]

PCLinuxOS is KDE and I would put that into a workplace.

The flame part:
I admit I just don't get Gnome at all. To me the interface is no better than Windows 95 and Nautilus is terrible.

[awakatanka]

Strange thing that redhat and novel and some others are using Gnome as there Main environment. They selling there support to businesses so if KDE was the better one it would be logic to use KDE. So if KDE is the better one there choose is based on something else, could it be a QT versus GTK thing? QT forces you to pay royalty's if you don't use it for Floss apps, GTK doesn't do it. Is there choose based on that our is it because Gnome is the better one. I wanna know the background of there choose.

Btw i think KDE is the better one to but i'm not neutral because i like KDE more then gnome because it gives me control and doesn't take it away. Good thread and hope it stays friendly.

[curuxz]

Strange thing that redhat and novel and some others are using Gnome as there Main environment. They selling there support to businesses so if KDE was the better one it would be logic to use KDE. So if KDE is the better one there choose is based on something else, could it be a QT versus GTK thing? QT forces you to pay royalty's if you don't use it for Floss apps, GTK doesn't do it. Is there choose based on that our is it because Gnome is the better one. I wanna know the background of there choose.

Btw i think KDE is the better one to but i'm not neutral because i like KDE more then gnome because it gives me control and doesn't take it away. Good thread and hope it stays friendly.

I think your right in that the switch (since they USED to use KDE) was because of a fall out over QT versus GTK licences.

The remote admin tools on KDE are pretty cool tho personaly I prefer FreeNX :)

Seems to be a lot of voting along looks lines where as the desktop of computers I have used in business tend to be cut down and generic, the exeption being design compaines but I am mainly talking about getting the non-tech savy to switch on to open source in business.

Seems to be a lot of people don't like how kde lays out applications, personaly I quite like it but as I have said before I am a long time user of KDE (and gnome) but have never really felt like Gnome does 'it' for me the biggest turns offs being

- Natulis, can not for the life of me understand how this is suposed to stand up against the tabbed, split plain, custom toolbar heaven that is konqueror

- Evolution, I keep comming back to this issue, businesses are always going on about outlook, linux needs a better PIM system kontact is simply the best there is, that said said its still lacking big time, if there was a project I could get involved with programing wise (if I was any good at coding sofware since Im a web developer) then it would be Kontact, improving it would go a big way to business linux systems!

-Gnome system utils, its a real pain for me to have to load 10 diffrent programs to do admin tasks, its a little thing but I like being able to setup a single sudo short cut to system control on my KDE desktop and know that once I have typed in the password (ONCE) I am logged in and can do most common tasks. That said I still am yet to find out why Kubuntu choses to change from the standard KDE control panel while cutting loads of functions off.

There are other mostly small things but I think these are the biggies, I would really really love for someone to give me a reason to write about Ubuntu not Kubuntu because I know the resources and commuinty certainly favor Ubuntu's gnome but it would be gnome with konqueror and kontact and annoying admin plus lack of all the cool little utils i use in kde like the on screen ruler etc that would just mean I would get annoyed and I believe most system admins would too.

I again have to defer to the research (esp the stuff Zod mentioned) that says in the business enviroment KDE is easier to migrate to.

One little side note, I noticed that in the morning when I was on the EU day time KDE was winning but as the americans woke up durring the evening the balance quickly slid to gnome's favor. Zod's links also said it was the EU countires that were testing (and liking) KDE so could it be a country thing, without wishing to sound stupid, could there be a reason americans seem to prefer gnome?

[BDNiner]

KDE has an application for accessing remote desktops called krdc. Due to my inexperience with Novell products I can't say if it's sufficient to replace the native Novell solution but if you should happen to give it a try I'd be interested in your opinion about it. And there's always administration via ssh logins for the daring ;-). I don't know any free software deployment solutions but there's bound to be some from Novell or Red Hat. But I'm a little surprised that your company decided against SLED since you're already working with Novell products. Care to elobarate?

Remote Desktop doesn't offer the same functionality as remote control (Novell) or even pcanywhere. For instance i cannot restart a computer when using RDP. Also it locks the user's screen when i connect since most windows XP Pro machines only allow 2 sessions to be active at one time. So a user cannot show me the steps they took to get the error they are receiving in their application. Also there is no file transfer with remote desktop. The Novell remote control and pcanywhere allow me to transfer files of any size to and from any computer that i am remote controlling. This is without setting up an FTP server. Remote desktop is fine for our servers, that way no one can accidentally restart a server and corrupt a database.

SLED doesn't work with Novell products as well as windows does (I was shocked when i discovered this!!). There is no remote control/remote transfer/remote view. In windows i can right click on a user's login name and remote control their desktop. very easy. A lot of the server related plugins are not availiable in linux. So managing our Netware server still has to be done from a windows machine. (again suprising, both products from the same company). SLED only give you a month of free updates, after that you have to sign a service contract with them. The higher ups just see this as jumping from a hot fire (windows), to a slightly cooler one(Novell). The original aim of my investigation into linux was to find a way to eliminate all the licensing fees we have to pay per installed application on each computer to microsoft, symantec et al ever year. With the least amount of disruption to the company. I am not allowed to try a solution out on one of our remote locations; the server team like uniformity, so i have to use a small test environment i have made at work.

And one last gripe, i could not make the Novell login the initial login, so that way i don't have to login twice, once to the network and once into the computer. I am sure there are ways around all my problems. I just have to keep digging.

[Erunno]

The pole is not worth a lot since I doubt that many people who vote here are in a position to judge which DE is more suitable for a business environment. Most here will vote for their personal (home desktop) preference as can be seen by the the few arguments which deal with concrete administrative use cases and technology discussion.

[spier]

Neither, most likely something like Fluxbox or icewm, if not so minimanistic then XFCE.

For business environments looks do not count if they are not helping increase productivity.
...

Very basic interface, little or no customization options, no packages for anything other than work related stuff.

For business goals, I think you got the point!
BTW, what would the boss prefer: funny or serious stuff?

[Bloodfen Razormaw]

KDE wins for the same reason it has dominated home Linux desktops: its obviously more complete desktop experience that covers far more functionality, superior integration, and more capable business applications like Kontact. But really you don't even have to go that far. KDE wins by default anyway because GNOME is a non-option. In the end, gconf is too primitive to support an enterprise-wide security policy, in spite of recent moves in the right direction (finally), and it is lacking necessary accessibility features; and businesses won't take the legal risks of poor accessibility. Indeed, if you look at the large scale Linux rollouts, GNOME is a drop in the bucket. The only GNOME desktops I've seen in a business environment happen to be vendor-supplemented desktops, primarily JDS, which the GNOME fans here would almost certainly hate.

[curuxz]

The pole is not worth a lot since I doubt that many people who vote here are in a position to judge which DE is more suitable for a business environment. Most here will vote for their personal (home desktop) preference as can be seen by the the few arguments which deal with concrete administrative use cases and technology discussion.

I agree, there are very few people that have posted actual reasons (behond asthetics or personal choice) for one being better than the other.

I take the lightweight desktop point onboard but agree with the post above mine that its probably not viable for the same reason they don't think gnome is, it does not have the extended accessablitiy (at least as far as I know) that they have in KDE.

Its a shame that so many big compaines like Red hat are now running to gnome because of a licence distpute, maybe it will get resolved later on :)

[qiel]

i'd prefer gnome for myself...:lolflag:

[Erunno]

...

Thank you for taking your time and providing me with an insight into some problems companies experience when trying to move their infrastructure to Linux.

The lack of free coherent deployment and administrative tools seems to be a big stop sign for Linux in the business world unless you want to pay Novell or RedHat for their services. Linux will always have to be measured against Windows based solutions which seem to be very mature at the time of writing (judging from some articles I read), especially when it's not free of cost anymore (apart from the usual TOS discussions).


Its a shame that so many big compaines like Red hat are now running to gnome because of a licence distpute, maybe it will get resolved later on :)

Some 3 years ago Novell was talking to Trolltech about a friendly acquisition. This talks obviously failed in the end but I very much doubt that Novell would use GNOME as their default desktop these days if they were in control of Qt.

[curuxz]

The interesting thing about QT is that it forces open development. Now weather tolltech wanted this or simply wanted a share of commercial profits (either is fair enough I suppose) but what the have done, which scares off the big companies, is made it so KDE applications are all free and open, which from and end user point of view is great!

That said I still hope they follow sun's footsteps and open things up further :)

[Erunno]

That said I still hope they follow sun's footsteps and open things up further :)

Who? Trolltech? You can't get hardly more open than licensing your product under the GPL for non-commercial use although it doesn't encompass all of Qt as I believe some Windows related parts are only available in the commercial version. Once you want to use Qt commercially you'll have to pay them for a license, independent of whether you release your product as OSS or CS (as far as I understand). This solves the problem how to make money from a GPL product rather well and very fairly in my opinion. And KDE has benefited from Trolltech's business model for long time as KDE gets a free (as in speech), maintained and advanced development framework while Trolltech makes enough money to pay engineers to further develop Qt (and make some extra money for drugs and whores ;-)).

[curuxz]

Who? Trolltech? You can't get hardly more open than licensing your product under the GPL for non-commercial use although it doesn't encompass all of Qt as I believe some Windows related parts are only available in the commercial version. Once you want to use Qt commercially you'll have to pay them for a license, independent of whether you release your product as OSS or CS (as far as I understand). This solves the problem how to make money from a GPL product rather well and very fairly in my opinion. And KDE has benefited from Trolltech's business model for long time as KDE gets a free (as in speech), maintained and advanced development framework while Trolltech makes enough money to pay engineers to further develop Qt (and make some extra money for drugs and whores ;-)).

I agree its fair, and IMHO a really good way of making money from open source, after all if someone else is making money from your work you should get a share.

The only reason I would want to see it completely free is to lure back the big players like red hat who have fled to gnome

[kripkenstein]

Who? Trolltech? You can't get hardly more open than licensing your product under the GPL for non-commercial use although it doesn't encompass all of Qt as I believe some Windows related parts are only available in the commercial version. Once you want to use Qt commercially you'll have to pay them for a license, independent of whether you release your product as OSS or CS (as far as I understand). This solves the problem how to make money from a GPL product rather well and very fairly in my opinion. And KDE has benefited from Trolltech's business model for long time as KDE gets a free (as in speech), maintained and advanced development framework while Trolltech makes enough money to pay engineers to further develop Qt (and make some extra money for drugs and whores ;-)).

The GPL is an excellent (and Free) license for applications. But for a framework, a foundational system like a desktop, it is problematic. For example, the only way to use BSD code with Qt/KDE is to relicense it to the GPL. That at least works. But the Apache license doesn't work that way (Apache and GPL 2.0 are incompatible).

So Qt being GPL is not as free as it might be, and the consequence is that businesses (Red Hat, Novell, most mobile Linux initiatives aside from Trolltech's own Qtopia) prefer GTK+ to Qt, since GTK+ is LGPL, not GPL.

The Linux kernel is so popular because its licensing allows you to run GPL, BSD, Apache, and even closed-source code on it (but not in it!) completely freely. Sadly, Qt did not follow the same path, and GTK+ is benefiting from that.

[curuxz]

Simple facts are that study after study shows KDE being better for first time users and for business environments, I hoped someone would prove me/my research wrong on this but so far they have not, and there are three big factors here:

- KDE is currently rated the best for migration (according to research, if you want the links I can post them but its a lot of reading)

- KDE 4 is coming, looking at the list of specs and and ideas for it all I can say is WOW, its moving really close to a true synaptic desktop and finally tackling some long standing problems, the only thing I dont like is dolphin but thats personal preference I suppose

-The trend is open, over the years more and more companies including trolltech have lessened their grips on what they own and opened up their licences. While there maybe problems now I think in the coming years they will be resolved.

The big companies will go with gnome so they can force users to pay, but for what my project is about I think KDE and its 'forced to be free' principals will work best for small businesses.

[GeneralZod]

- KDE 4 is coming, looking at the list of specs and and ideas for it all I can say is WOW, its moving really close to a true synaptic desktop and finally tackling some long standing problems, the only thing I dont like is dolphin but thats personal preference I suppose


I'm not sure if the arrival of KDE4 is a plus point, to be honest - after all, it's going to be quite a while before KDE4 is suitable for enterprise use, and now development has shifted completely away from KDE3 - it's bugfixes only for the KDE3 branch from now on.

Although in a way I guess this could work in your favour if you use KDE3 in a business environment - no pesky new features to test every time there's a new release ;)

[Erunno]

So Qt being GPL is not as free as it might be, and the consequence is that businesses (Red Hat, Novell, most mobile Linux initiatives aside from Trolltech's own Qtopia) prefer GTK+ to Qt, since GTK+ is LGPL, not GPL.

The Linux kernel is so popular because its licensing allows you to run GPL, BSD, Apache, and even closed-source code on it (but not in it!) completely freely. Sadly, Qt did not follow the same path, and GTK+ is benefiting from that.

There's been heated discussions about the FSF's definition of freedom for years and I do not wish to sidetrack this topic further than it already has. Suffice to say, that the non-commercial version is free as defined by the FSF. Whether you agree with their definition or not is another battlefield. :)

Even the FSF encourages (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html) to license libraries unter the GPL if the same functionality is not easily available elsewhere under a proprietary license. One can discuss now whether Qt does suffficiently offer unique functionality which is not easily obtainable elsewhere to warrant licensing it under the GPL. But in the end the question remains why framework developer should use the LGPL. All it does is to help create applications that violate the Four Freedoms and if you're a FSF hardliner the goal of having a completely free software stack should be the ultimate goal.

By the way, since Qt is dual-licensed you can build closed source application with it as long as you pay Trolltech.

[kripkenstein]

There's been heated discussions
Even the FSF encourages (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html) to license libraries unter the GPL if the same functionality is not easily available elsewhere under a proprietary license.

That's true, and Stallman has purposefully called the LGPL the 'lesser' GPL because he isn't that much in favor of it. Still, GNOME is a GNU project, and they chose the LGPL, so that says something as well.



But in the end the question remains why framework developer should use the LGPL. All it does is to help create applications that violate the Four Freedoms and if you're a FSF hardliner the goal of having a completely free software stack should be the ultimate goal.

But it also allows coding apps using the Apache license, which Qt doesn't. So there are upsides and downsides.

By the way, since Qt is dual-licensed you can build closed source application with it as long as you pay Trolltech.
Yes, but as I and others said, since GTK+ is available for free, corporations simply prefer it over Qt, which is too bad for Qt (an excellent framework).

I think, again, that the best example is the Linux kernel. If Linus only allowed GPL apps to run on Linux, there would be no Linux today as we know it (and no Ubuntu either). Instead, he allows any app to run on top of Linux. Qt should do the same; just like the Linux kernel, Qt is a foundation, a platform.

[curuxz]

That's true, and Stallman has purposefully called the LGPL the 'lesser' GPL because he isn't that much in favor of it. Still, GNOME is a GNU project, and they chose the LGPL, so that says something as well.


But it also allows coding apps using the Apache license, which Qt doesn't. So there are upsides and downsides.

Yes, but as I and others said, since GTK+ is available for free, corporations simply prefer it over Qt, which is too bad for Qt (an excellent framework).

I think, again, that the best example is the Linux kernel. If Linus only allowed GPL apps to run on Linux, there would be no Linux today as we know it (and no Ubuntu either). Instead, he allows any app to run on top of Linux. Qt should do the same; just like the Linux kernel, Qt is a foundation, a platform.

I think in time they will, one of the big problems is that when people get spooked they run and that destroys market share and so they have to protect their market. If businesses stated using KDE en mass then trolltech would most likely get a lot more customers and then would not have to force commercial licences I again refer to the likes of Sun and IBM who have gone down this path.

Trolltech will come around, given time, they already have made big steps in recent years to open things up I can't see them stoping so long as KDE grows

[kripkenstein]

On this topic, see this article (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070807-handsets-with-limo-mobile-linux-platform-to-reach-market-by-2008.html), which summarizes the broad adoption of GTK on handhelds:


Version 2.10 of the GTK toolkit, which is part of the GNOME Mobile and Embedded platform, is a key component of the LiMo Application UI Framework.

[...]

GTK is used extensively on other Linux-based devices, including Nokia's N800 web tablet, the One Laptop Per Child project's XO laptop, FIC's Neo1973 mobile phone, the Access Linux Platform, and Intel's MID system. GTK was also chosen to serve as the basis of the user interface services specification of LiPS, another organization that is creating an open, Linux-based platform for mobile phones.

...if Qt were LGPL, this could have been them.

[curuxz]

On this topic, see this article (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070807-handsets-with-limo-mobile-linux-platform-to-reach-market-by-2008.html), which summarizes the broad adoption of GTK on handhelds:


...if Qt were LGPL, this could have been them.

oh i totally agree they SHOULD be LGPL but I think that just because they are not does not damage the fact that for SMALL businesses wanting to USE linux not make stuff for it KDE is the best system and there is lots of research to justify such a claim.

I really hope that soon Qt is made LGPL or at least 'more' open

[kripkenstein]

oh i totally agree they SHOULD be LGPL but I think that just because they are not does not damage the fact that for SMALL businesses wanting to USE linux not make stuff for it KDE is the best system and there is lots of research to justify such a claim.

I really hope that soon Qt is made LGPL or at least 'more' open

Yeah, I agree, KDE is an excellent platform. Well, hopefully they will change the licensing on Qt sometime...

[Majorix]

I use Gnome on all my computers but I still believe that KDE would be better suited as a business computer DE because it has less bugs.

[Erunno]

I still don't get what you mean with "opening up". Does this mean that Trolltech should allow usage of Qt for commercial applications without asking for licence fees? I could see a lot of companies profiting from such a measure except Trolltech themselves who would lose their main source of income while a lot of companies would use their excellent technology to earn money for themselves. And I have a selfish interest in the continued existence of Trolltech since Qt powers my desktop of choice ;-)

One of the points of the GPL3 was to be more compatible with other OSS licences and it's at least compatible with the Apache license now so instead of allowing a bunch of freeloaders to use Qt Trolltech should consider switching Qt to the GPL3 since it would also make life easier for some KDE folk (KDE can't be linked to GPL3 versions of Samba for instance due to Qt's GPL2 licensing for instance).

[kripkenstein]

One of the points of the GPL3 was to be more compatible with other OSS licences and it's at least compatible with the Apache license now so instead of allowing a bunch of freeloaders to use Qt Trolltech should consider switching Qt to the GPL3 since it would also make life easier for some KDE folk (KDE can't be linked to GPL3 versions of Samba for instance due to Qt's GPL2 licensing for instance).

Currently Qt is GPL2. It can't have apps written using Apache, nor GPL3.

If Qt is moved to GPL3, it can't have apps using GPL2 only (that is, GPL2 without the "or above" clause).

It Qt is licensed as dual GPL2/GPL3 (or "GPL2 or above"), then it can't be shipped with both Apache and GPL2 only apps at the same time.

So really the only good solution is to make Qt LGPL, I am afraid :)

[Hex_Mandos]

I'm torn. KDE is more familiar to Windows users (while I'm against Windows clones, I don't mind having a similar UI), but Gnome seems cleaner and more professional sometimes. I suppose I'd choose between KDE and lightwieght WMs for limited hardware.

[Erunno]

My phrasing was a bit awkward. What I meant is that the GPL3 is compatible with the Apache licence and therefore a viable alternative to the LGPL. And since the compatibility breakage between GPL2 and 3 was intended I for myself could live with some collateral damage (application developers which chose to remove the "and above" clause).

By the way, what would be the benefit of putting Qt under the LGPL? It's mostly interesting for closed source projekts which in turn are often commercial products which in turn require a licence from Trolltech. I fail to see how it would increase Qt's adoption if the licence fees are the biggest stumbling block as claimed repeatedly.

[bogolisk]

At work I spend all time in Emacs and a couple of terminals. The DE barely matters. As long as the DE has good support for keyboard binding then it's ok.

[kripkenstein]

By the way, what would be the benefit of putting Qt under the LGPL? It's mostly interesting for closed source projekts which in turn are often commercial products which in turn require a licence from Trolltech. I fail to see how it would increase Qt's adoption if the licence fees are the biggest stumbling block as claimed repeatedly.

Perhaps I don't understand what you're saying here (please explain again if so), but if Qt were under the LGPL, then as I said before, business would be using it, and all the mobile projects using GTK+ now might have been done with Qt. Gnome Mobile&Embedded is more attractive to someone like Nokia because they know they might need some proprietary apps on their new phone/tablet, and they don't want to end up paying Trolltech for that, when GTK+ is reasonable and free.

[Erunno]

Perhaps I don't understand what you're saying here (please explain again if so), but if Qt were under the LGPL, then as I said before, business would be using it, and all the mobile projects using GTK+ now might have been done with Qt. Gnome Mobile&Embedded is more attractive to someone like Nokia because they know they might need some proprietary apps on their new phone/tablet, and they don't want to end up paying Trolltech for that, when GTK+ is reasonable and free.

Let's take your example. If Qt was under the LGPL and not dual-licensed (since this would still prevent companies from using Qt for free in commercial products) I can see that Nokia might use Qtopia instead of GTK+ for whatever reasons. But my question is: What benefit would Trolltech as a company have from other companies using their framework for free? Widespread adoption is nice and dandy but it doesn't pay the bills nor the continued development of Qt. And without regular income I doubt that Trolltech would exist much longer and Qt would "degenerate" to a community project.

[kripkenstein]

Let's take your example. If Qt was under the LGPL and not dual-licensed (since this would still prevent companies from using Qt for free in commercial products) I can see that Nokia might use Qtopia instead of GTK+ for whatever reasons. But my question is: What benefit would Trolltech as a company have from other companies using their framework for free? Widespread adoption is nice and dandy but it doesn't pay the bills nor the continued development of Qt. And without regular income I doubt that Trolltech would exist much longer and Qt would "degenerate" to a community project.

You're right, it is harder to make a profit if Qt is LGPL. There are still ways, though - selling support for people developing on the platform, people paying for use of your trademark on products, keeping 'extra' parts GPL or you have to pay, that sort of thing. But yeah, it isn't as easy.

But - thing is, except for KDE - which is great - Qt looks like GTK might eclipse it soon. All the new mobile projects are using GTK, and even on the desktop GNOME is the default on all major distros. So the current strategy might not be working so well.

[vexorian]

I personally like KDE better than Gnome, and I think for business, where most people are used to being in a wind0ze environ, because most people just are (::fist::), the K-menu is a better set up in terms of familiarity than the different menus that Gnome gives you.
But it is just something that could be changed in gnome, to have a windows like layout by default, anyways.

[Erunno]

You're right, it is harder to make a profit if Qt is LGPL. There are still ways, though - selling support for people developing on the platform, people paying for use of your trademark on products, keeping 'extra' parts GPL or you have to pay, that sort of thing. But yeah, it isn't as easy.

Truth to be told I very much doubt that simple support contracts and the like would generate an income comparable to licensing. Qt's strength would become their weakness: With the excellent documentation there's hardly need for an experienced developer to pay Trolltech for support. In case of questions there are books and forums dealing with Qt.


But - thing is, except for KDE - which is great - Qt looks like GTK might eclipse it soon. All the new mobile projects are using GTK, and even on the desktop GNOME is the default on all major distros. So the current strategy might not be working so well.

That would be correct if their sole gole was to compete against GTK+ but in my opinion KDE is to Trolltech a great showpiece of what can be done with Qt and serves as free advertisement to attract paying customers. And judging from their customer list (http://trolltech.com/partners/seealso/customers) there are still enough companies who choose to pay for Qt instead of using GTK+ (or other toolkits like wxwidgets) for free.

[kripkenstein]

And judging from their customer list (http://trolltech.com/partners/seealso/customers) there are still enough companies who choose to pay for Qt instead of using GTK+ (or other toolkits like wxwidgets) for free.
Well, as KDE is on that list, they aren't all paying customers ;) . But yeah, they do seem to do good business.

[GeneralZod]

Sorry for the bump, but people interested in the licensing of Qt's Free Software Edition might be interested in this hot-off-the-presses news:

http://dot.kde.org/1186578575/



1) The right to use Open Source Licenses not compatible with the GNU
General Public License: You may link software (hereafter referred to as "Your Software") against the Licensed Software and/or distribute binaries of Your Software linked against the Licensed Software, provided that:

A) Your Software is licensed under one of the following licenses:


License name
Version(s)/Copyright Date
Academic Free License
2.0 or 2.1
Apache Software License
1.0 or 1.1
Apache License
2.0
Apple Public Source License
2.0
Artistic license
From Perl 5.8.0
BSD license
"July 22 1999"
Common Public License
1.0
GNU Library or "Lesser"
General Public License (LGPL)
2.0 or 2.1
Jabber Open Source License
1.0
MIT License
(as attached)
Mozilla Public License (MPL)
1.0 or 1.1
Open Software License
2.0
OpenSSL license (with original
SSLeay license) "2003" ("1998")
PHP License
3.0
Python license (CNRI Python License)
(as attached)
Python Software Foundation License
2.1.1
Q Public License
v1.0
Sleepycat License
"1999"
W3C License
"2001"
X11 License
X11R6.6
Zlib/libpng License
(as attached)
Zope Public License
2.0

http://trolltech.com/products/qt/gplexception

[kripkenstein]

Sorry for the bump, but people interested in the licensing of Qt's Free Software Edition might be interested in this hot-off-the-presses news:


Thanks for that important news. The following part of the new exception is important, though,


B) You must, on request, make a complete package including the complete source code of Your Software (as defined in the GNU General Public License version 2, section 3, but excluding anything excluded by the special exception in the same section) available to Trolltech under the same license as that granted to other recipients of the source code of Your Software.

I am not a lawyer, but this seems like it might (partially) remove the ability to distribute source-less binary BSD code, since Trolltech could always ask for the source.

[antisocialist]

I say gnome because neither of them are just like windows, and unless it is like a nerd business (nothing personal to any individual, but you know you are more of a nerd than that stupid neighbor who still uses windows) the people will want the easiest to use setup. having everything they need organized into categories is the best way to go, if I had never ever used windows before I might not think that the start button is how you turn off a computer, and the same concept goes for the desktop environment. if you have never used it before you will want it to be as easy as possible, when I tried out a kubuntu install on my lappy it took me 15 minutes to figure out where the terminal was, and it felt really cluttered to me. most people have a desk to get cluttered, it would be nice for them to have at least something clean.

another argument I have up my sleeve is that about 80% (just a guesstimate, don't hate me for it) of the ppl using *ubuntu are using gnome (shiny new ubuntu) rather than kde (plain old kubuntu) and so unless you plan to write all the howto's yourself, you may want to go with something more people know about, and can therefore help with. just my 2 cents, but as I am one of the guaranteed 5 my opinion is more important than everybody else's :D (haha jk; but still :D)

[Taino]

Never did say what business environment, office work, developer, etc.

Gnome for office work type environment.
KDE for programing dev environment.
Xfce for mobile business environment.
Fluxbox for researchers, (focused, less eye candy)

[hhhhhx]

i prefer gnome, it's simpler, and better organized, at least i think so, KDE bothers me, its too mush like windows or mac for my taste