PDA

View Full Version : The future of Gnome



conphara
August 10th, 2007, 12:42 PM
This is not an attempt to start a flamewar between KDE and Gnome, I've read too much about that and it's starting to become quite a bore.

I really am looking forward to Gutsy and like the new features mentioned in Tripe 4, which I read about yesterday, and hope will be part of the final release.
My problem is, pure and simple: what's the point of using Ubuntu if Gnome has no future?
Personally I have used Kubuntu since april, and since the Gutsy version of Kubuntu will (still) have 3.5.7, there's roughly not much new. Of course there's Xorg 7.3 (mainly just for unplugging monitors), maybe OpenO 2.3, and that's about it. So my plan was to install Ubuntu (Gnome) on my laptop and change back to Kubuntu in April next year, if KDE4 will be a part of that release which it probably will.

Now what's the consensus in the forum. Will we see more downloads and shipit of Kubuntu this October, because I have a feeling that many, many users are abandoning Gnome (Ubuntu) in favor of KDE. People are just too focused on speed and responsiveness. Most people migrating from Windows are used to speed and responsive using XP, while others are feeling a relief using Ubuntu compared to Vista, while some are still complaining about speed.
People who say Gnome uses more ressources than KDE have probably read the old benchmark of DE's.http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html.

Many people seem to believe this benchmark like it's a fact of life. The benchmark was based on older versions of both Gnome, KDE and XFCE. Versions which were part of 6.06 - a long time ago, well just a year ago.
It has been stated many times. Gnome is slower than KDE. Fact? Because of slower rendering (GTK vs. Qt), FACT. Gnome uses more memory - plain desktop and using apps - apps aren't sharing like in KDE, FACT.

I read something on Slashdot yesterday and users wrote: "...compared to KDE 3.5.6, I think Gnome 2.18 is significantly slower. Evolution is far more heavy-weight than KMail. Nautilus takes longer to display directories. I have one directory with about 15000 photos in it. Nautilus crashes when viewing it, while with Konqueror I can easily scroll through the thumbnails within about a second."
"Maybe it's just a quality control problem with GNOME. While I don't follow the development mailing lists very closely, I've heard from co-workers that GNOME is suffering from some pretty serious organizational issues. Low-quality code is being accepted into GTK+ and GNOME itself, and many people are noticing a decrease in its quality as of late."
"Nautilus is in dire need of a code audit, just to ensure that everything in there is up to par. Hells, if I were in charge at GNOME, I'd probably stop developing new features in Nautilus and work on the audit for the next cycle. Honestly, though, the one thing that hurts GNOME the most is the six month release cycle. If they'd even just use a single one-year release cycle, just to clean things up, they'd be in much better shape."

Again this shouldn't lead to a flamewar, just state your opinion on where the development of Gnome is. Almost dead => Ubuntu will merge with Kubuntu and focus on KDE once KDE4 will "take over the desktops" (read: compatible with Windows and Mac).
Or "Gnome is not dying." Developers will start working on a rewrite of the code and you can expect a revelation in Gnome 3.

Lastly. Even though I'v using KDE for now, I love Gnome. I love the principle (Simple, clean, one app for one purpose etc). I love how easy the base apps are (to the point, highly usable for basic/modest needs) and also the look. It resembles OSX right out-of-the-box, while KDE resembles an altered state of XP. And which of the two interfaces do most computer users have respect the most respect for?

What I don't like about Gnome is the fundamentals. It's memory management, CPU usage with almost now apps/features turned on, GTK's rendering (try moving a window around the desktop compared to KDE: not the same). Though this happens in Windows as well, of course depending on drivers. Too much code in Gnome, while KDE uses a simple technology: sharing.
Just a question, has anyone ever tried benchmarking Gnome and KDE in terms of AC power usage? Because if memory and CPU usage is higher in Gnome, shouldn't it be better to use KDE on both laptops and desktops if you're concerned about electricity bills?

Will KDE4 change the whole infrastructure in Ubuntu, making it the default DE? Some users have written that Mark Shuttleworth himself is starting to use KDE.
I know this is a long and maybe stupid post. But I just need to share some points/issues with you people. I really want Ubuntu to be a contender on the desktop, Gnome or no Gnome. Because Ubuntu isn't just about Gnome.

xopher
August 10th, 2007, 05:40 PM
This would probably fit better in the sub-forum: Desktop Environments ;) Just a thought..

asmoore82
August 10th, 2007, 05:46 PM
I've always found KDE to be slow and too hungry.

:p You'll take away my GNOME when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. :lol:

igknighted
August 10th, 2007, 05:50 PM
Gnome is in no way going to die, but it DOES need a major overhaul. Technologically it is far behind KDE and needs to do something about it.

wieman01
August 10th, 2007, 05:56 PM
But friendly competition is more than welcome and should keep both development teams on their toes. Ultimately users will benefit from it, no matter what environment they prefer.

stchman
August 10th, 2007, 06:36 PM
I actually find KDE to be slower than Gnome when I tried Kubuntu. Kubuntu is a bit more polished looking IMO.

You can make Gnome look very much like KDE by customizing the toolbars and such. I don't see Gnome going away anytime soon.

Look how long vi has hung around and it sucks bad.

asmoore82
August 10th, 2007, 06:52 PM
Look how long vi has hung around and it sucks bad.

Dude, that statement could get you shot/stabbed/stretched/hanged/drawn&quatered on a programming forum.

And then they would really hurt you :p !

vim is impossibly agile and powerful, but you have to read up on it a great deal to even get it to do anything.


Vi is a good example of software deliberately created for a user who already knows how it works
...
So whilst vi has an interface that is hideously unfriendly to new users, it is still in use today because
it is such a superb interface once you know how it works.
...
So it is that in most "user-friendly" text editors & word processors, you Cut and Paste by using
Ctrl-X and Ctrl-V. Totally unintuitive, but everybody's used to these combinations, so they count
as a "friendly" combination.

So when somebody comes to vi and finds that it's "d" to cut, and "p" to paste, it's not
considered friendly: It's not what anybody is used to.

Is it superior? Well, actually, yes.

With the Ctrl-X approach, how do you cut a word from the document you're currently in? (No using the mouse!)
From the start of the word, Ctrl-Shift-Right to select the word.
Then Ctrl-X to cut it.

The vi approach? dw deletes the word.

How about cutting five words with a Ctrl-X application?
From the start of the words, Ctrl-Shift-Right
Ctrl-Shift-Right
Ctrl-Shift-Right
Ctrl-Shift-Right
Ctrl-Shift-Right
Ctrl-X

And with vi?

d5w

The vi approach is far more versatile and actually more intuitive: "X" and "V" are not obvious
or memorable "Cut" and "Paste" commands, whereas "dw" to delete a word, and "p" to put it back
is perfectly straightforward. But "X" and "V" are what we all know, so whilst vi is clearly superior, it's unfamiliar.

asmoore82
August 10th, 2007, 06:53 PM
Gnome is in no way going to die, but it DOES need a major overhaul. Technologically it is far behind KDE and needs to do something about it.

could you please elaborate?

zero244
August 10th, 2007, 06:56 PM
I use gnome and in all due respect I don't really think it needs a major overhaul. It may not be as flashy as KDE, but Gnome and beryl with some nice themes is a pretty functional desktop environment.

igknighted
August 10th, 2007, 07:11 PM
could you please elaborate?

Sure.

First, look at the GUI toolkits. QT is quicker than GTK and the new QT4 has many goodies.

Next, the subsystems. KDE has phonon (a sound API), strigi (desktop search) and many more high tech back-ends that make the desktop simpler and easier to use than ever before. I think that this is the area where KDE is farthest ahead.

Controls. KDE's control panel was easy to use, well integrated, and useful. Gnomes isn't as useful and the apps are a hodge-podge of programs that don't have any coherence.

Apps. By and large, KDE has better applications (this one is more opinion, but I hear it a lot). Amarok > Rhythmbox, Kontact > Evolution, k3b > Gnomebaker (ok, thats a fact, not opinion), KOffice is awesome, Krita is young, but right there with GIMP (better in some ways... it does true CMYK for example). I could go on, but with apps you really need to try out and see what you like.

stchman
August 10th, 2007, 11:59 PM
Dude, that statement could get you shot/stabbed/stretched/hanged/drawn&quatered on a programming forum.

And then they would really hurt you :p !

vim is impossibly agile and powerful, but you have to read up on it a great deal to even get it to do anything.

I still maintain that vi sucks. Nobody is ever going to change my mind. I am sick of the babble "it is the only text editor that is guaranteed to be on every Unix/Linux system". I have used vi before and it sucked.

A text editor is supposed to be easy to use, vi is not. Yes most text editors have shortcuts, but you can still use the File, Edit, etc. menu bars. I use nano for safe mode text editing. It has the shortcuts right on the bottom.

To me vi has been a little Unix elitist thing, like "I can use vi and you cannot". My thing is if you wnat and love vi....GREAT. I hate it and that is the way it is.

bodhi.zazen
August 11th, 2007, 12:07 AM
This would probably fit better in the sub-forum: Desktop Environments ;) Just a thought..

Done ...

Ubuntu comes in several flavors K/X/Ubuntu

Pick your your favorite & let others do the same.

Distrowatch HPD (Hits per Day)

Ubuntu 2703

Kubuntu 475

Xubuntu 285

The numbers speak the community preferences ...

To all : Please keep the discussion civil

aysiu
August 11th, 2007, 12:10 AM
This would probably fit better in the sub-forum: Desktop Environments ;) Just a thought..
Actually, since this isn't a support request, it's more appropriate in Community Cafe--that's where I've moved it.

bonzodog
August 11th, 2007, 12:26 AM
It's also worth noting that Ubuntu will always be the Gnome Poster child as some of the Ubuntu Devs are part and parcel of the Gnome development team as well, and Mark himself contributes to Gnome Development. Mark started out as a Debian Developer working on the Gnome side of things, and Gnome needed a Poster child distro, and out of it, somewhere, came Ubuntu.

So, no, in short, Ubuntu will never become a KDE based Distro -- we have Kubuntu for that, just as we have Xubuntu for Xfce, although the Xfce Poster child distro is Zenwalk Linux, which I use on my Desktop machine.

racoq
August 11th, 2007, 12:52 AM
It's also worth noting that Ubuntu will always be the Gnome Poster child as some of the Ubuntu Devs are part and parcel of the Gnome development team as well, and Mark himself contributes to Gnome Development. Mark started out as a Debian Developer working on the Gnome side of things, and Gnome needed a Poster child distro, and out of it, somewhere, came Ubuntu.

So, no, in short, Ubuntu will never become a KDE based Distro -- we have Kubuntu for that, just as we have Xubuntu for Xfce, although the Xfce Poster child distro is Zenwalk Linux, which I use on my Desktop machine.

Agreed Ubuntu is suposed to be THE Gnome distribution. If anybody, doesn't want to deal with it, use the other ubuntu flavors, or even another distro. I agree with the distrowatch facts. And thats simply not true that KDE is lighter than Gnome, they pretty much use the same requirements. I find many GTK+ really lightweight. Compare for instance Exaile With AmaroK.

Care to tell me which of those are faster?

Let me think....

That's right Exaile :D

lyceum
August 11th, 2007, 01:05 AM
The real future is FLUX BOX !!!

:popcorn:

tageiru
August 11th, 2007, 01:19 AM
Next, the subsystems. KDE has phonon (a sound API), strigi (desktop search) and many more high tech back-ends that make the desktop simpler and easier to use than ever before. I think that this is the area where KDE is farthest ahead.

This is ridiculous! You don't know what you are talking about. Phonon is a compatability layer so that KDE can maintain API stability. One of the backends for phonon is Gstreamer, which is a GNOME technology.

"more high tech back-ends". What utter <bleep>

happysmileman
August 11th, 2007, 01:31 AM
Distrowatch HPD (Hits per Day)

Ubuntu 2703

Kubuntu 475

Xubuntu 285


That's mainly because most people either don't know about Kubuntu/Xubuntu because they're hardly ever mentioned, or don't expect a page for Kubuntu as well...

In fairness I didn't even know Kubuntu had it's website until 2 weeks ago, yet have been using Kubuntu since 6.10

wersdaluv
August 11th, 2007, 01:33 AM
That's mainly because most people either don't know about Kubuntu/Xubuntu because they're hardly ever mentioned, or don't expect a page for Kubuntu as well...

In fairness I didn't even know Kubuntu had it's website until 2 weeks ago, yet have been using Kubuntu since 6.10

Yes. I believe, it is because of Ubuntu's popularity. You see the name, Ubuntu, on digg, slashdot, dell, etc. Just think about it. If KDE is Ubuntu's default DE, probably, the numbers would be different.

It's just that, I am not ranting about it. The Ubuntu community is made up of volunteers so I believe that no one has the right to force those volunteers (GNOME devs who only want to work with GNOME) to work on something that they do not love (KDE).

happysmileman
August 11th, 2007, 01:38 AM
This is ridiculous! You don't know what you are talking about. Phonon is a compatability layer so that KDE can maintain API stability. One of the backends for phonon is Gstreamer, which is a GNOME technology.


WOW, he got a front-end and a back end mixed up... That doesn't make him incorrect, and Phonon is something GNOME developers could only dream of for the time being...

Even if GStreamer is used as the backend (Xine is more popular among KDE users methinks), it was still KDE that made Phonon, which takes, IIRC, 5 lines of code to play a music file.

There's also Plasma, Decibel, Solid etc... All of which will either add much more user interface to KDE4 or make development easier...

Oh and as for
"more high tech back-ends". What utter <bleep>Why don't you try debating with him using actual facts, instead of just flaming him and refusing to accept that he has a point...

When you get to the point in a debate when you pick on little mistakes like someone mis-labelling a frontend(or API to be more accurate) as a backend and randomly cursing instead of actually trying to make a point you should just accept you've lost and let other GNOME users argue without you embarassing them.

ComplexNumber
August 11th, 2007, 02:44 AM
Nautilus takes longer to display directories.
Linux Format (issue 86(page 39)) compared konqueror to nautilus and found nautilus to be significantly faster in all speed tests apart from 1.

Montsegur87
August 11th, 2007, 03:40 AM
Go GTK+ ! Go XFCE !

smartboyathome
August 11th, 2007, 03:56 AM
Is there any program that can measure the speed of an OS? I want to install Kubuntu on one drive, Ubuntu on another, and (if I can find that disk!) Xubuntu on a third, and then compare how fast it boots, and how fast it runs certain apps.

Epilonsama
August 11th, 2007, 04:18 AM
Wow, i dont understand why so many ppl rattle in this petty arguments, saying "GNOME" is slower, "KDE is bloated" the matter of fact is that both DE are fundamentally the same, maybe kde is more flashy or Gnome is more streamline but in most cases they act the same way. Now we should try comparing these DE with the likes of xfce or other lighter de or wm to see how they par, also i personally think that of all the DE xfce has more future cuz is lighter and in most cases can do all the things that the other two big guys.

tbroderick
August 11th, 2007, 04:31 AM
Wow, i dont understand why so many ppl rattle in this petty arguments, saying "GNOME" is slower, "KDE is bloated" the matter of fact is that both DE are fundamentally the same, maybe kde is more flashy or Gnome is more streamline but in most cases they act the same way. .

+1

Hex_Mandos
August 11th, 2007, 04:34 AM
I like and use both DEs, but KDE4 has a bigger "drool factor" than anything I've seen from GNOME. I like GNOME, but it's default apps are generally worse than KDE equivalents (maybe the only GNOME apps I truly love are gedit and gnometris), and it lacks integration. GNOME looks cleaner than KDE to me, but sometimes I think fucntionality is going backwards (for example, I don't like how Pidgin is being dumbed down, I WANT to know what network my friends are in).

Finally, I don't want to see more mono integration in GNOME. I don't want MS technology to creep into my desktop (via Novell, no less...) KDE has its own problems (as QT is licensed under the GPLV2, making license compatibility difficult sometimes... I hope that'll change) but I think it has a better immediate future than GNOME.

donovan1983
August 11th, 2007, 06:08 AM
I prefer GNOME to KDE, since it just looks and feels more polished, although admittedly it doesn't look as cool. Konquerer is a really nice file manager and in some ways it beats Nautilus. I haven't tried KDE for over a year, though, and I may give it a shot again.

What I really want though is for the GTK and Qt toolkits to be able to share a common system theme because one of my biggest pet peeves is how you can always tell if you are using a KDE app in a GNOME environment or vice-versa, since they can't seem to use each other's themes. Although I do seem to remember KDE having an option to try to set the GTK theme to something as close as possible to the KDE/Qt theme.

Edit: On that last point, I just installed the kubuntu-desktop package and it does indeed have the option to set the GTK theme the same as the Qt theme, and it works pretty well. Now if only I could figure out how to set up the panels to be like they were in GNOME, or even get a second panel at all...

tbroderick
August 11th, 2007, 07:44 AM
What I really want though is for the GTK and Qt toolkits to be able to share a common system theme because one of my biggest pet peeves is how you can always tell if you are using a KDE app in a GNOME environment or vice-versa, since they can't seem to use each other's themes. Although I do seem to remember KDE having an option to try to set the GTK theme to something as close as possible to the KDE/Qt theme.

You could try qtcurve.

macogw
August 11th, 2007, 07:54 AM
I've always found KDE to be slow and too hungry.

:p You'll take away my GNOME when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. :lol:

I'm with you, plus KDE/Qt is butt-ugly and KDE apps have too much junk.

However, if there was a working NetworkManager applet for E17, I'd switch to using that full-time. It's gorgeous.

kripkenstein
August 11th, 2007, 09:06 AM
There is not enough hard evidence that GNOME is slower than KDE or vice versa. At different tasks different DEs do better. It is just like benchmarking CPUs, you often see conflicting results between different ways to measure performance (but DEs are far more complicated!).

KDE 4 does indeed sound excellent. But it isn't out yet. Will it be successful, or will it be a bug-ridden mess (as large code rewrites often are)? We don't know. Point is, there is no sense saying "GNOME is behind KDE" based on an unreleased, untested product.

Qt is an excellent product, I think we can all admit. And part of that may be due to Trolltech being a commercially-motivated company (pouring a lot of money into it). But this may be shifting now: Consider that virtually all the new mobile Linux ventures (including Ubuntu's :) ) are based on GTK+. GTK+ is fast becoming critical infrastructure for companies like Nokia, Intel, etc. In addition, Linux preinstallation on desktops and laptops is finally getting ramped up, with Dell and now Lenovo. Note that both are shipping GNOME-default distros (Ubuntu and SUSE). I therefore expect GTK+ to soon see more money on development than Qt. So no, GNOME isn't 'dying', quite the opposite in fact.

cb951303
August 11th, 2007, 11:15 AM
I believe Gnome is slower on Ubuntu then it should be. I tried Gnome in arch linux and slackware. Both were a lot *really a big diffrerence* more faster than Ubuntu. At first I thought it was the i686 optimized packages but then I tested Arch 64 vs Ubuntu 64 and the huge speed difference was there again... Anyone has an idea?

kellemes
August 11th, 2007, 11:43 AM
I actually find KDE to be slower than Gnome when I tried Kubuntu. Kubuntu is a bit more polished looking IMO.

You can make Gnome look very much like KDE by customizing the toolbars and such. I don't see Gnome going away anytime soon.

Look how long vi has hung around and it sucks bad.


Comparing optimized KDE and Gnome on one specific distro will show you there isn't much of a difference in performance. But you need to optimize your system to get it like you want.
And don't forget KDE is a lot more advanced and will obviously need a little more tweaking to get it just right for your system.
I use KDEmod and it's much faster as Gnome on Ubuntu.

You obviously aren't having too much experience with vi, otherwise you would speak with a lot more respect about it. (This doesn't mean it has to be your prefered editor)

rakku-toki telkio-kuuni
August 11th, 2007, 12:11 PM
Now if only I could figure out how to set up the panels to be like they were in GNOME, or even get a second panel at all...

Uhh... how about right-clicking on the main panel? ;)

insane_alien
August 11th, 2007, 12:39 PM
is there really any point to this. unless you're on a resource strained system both KDE and Gnome are fast enough so that the slowest bit is the person. if gnome is the slower then i can honestly wait the extra millisecond.

ComplexNumber
August 11th, 2007, 02:10 PM
there is no sense saying "GNOME is behind KDE"
ther is no sense in saying it now either ;). until KDE4 comes out, gnome is technologically ahead of KDE by quite some distance.




Consider that virtually all the new mobile Linux ventures (including Ubuntu's :smile: ) are based on GTK+. GTK+ is fast becoming critical infrastructure for companies like Nokia, Intel, etc.that is indeed correct. in fact, even trolltech are members of the Mobile Linux Initiative, who have chosen gtk as their primary toolkit. in other words, gtk is the standard toolkit for mobile linux.

igknighted
August 11th, 2007, 05:38 PM
This is ridiculous! You don't know what you are talking about. Phonon is a compatability layer so that KDE can maintain API stability. One of the backends for phonon is Gstreamer, which is a GNOME technology.

"more high tech back-ends". What utter <bleep>

No **** sherlock, but what if I prefer the xine backend and someone else prefers gstreamer... or if one of those projects goes under, or a host of other things. It is simply an API to create a common interface for KDE apps to any sound system (Including the windows sound system), which allows more nimble, easy to code apps. It also allows increased portability of applications, as phonon has support for many platforms, it doesn't need to be built into every application.

There, I was summarizing before, but indeed phonon has no equivalent in gnome.

hessiess
August 11th, 2007, 05:53 PM
kde has to mutch stupid eyecandy, and i seriasly hate the kde naming sceme

Erunno
August 11th, 2007, 06:59 PM
ther is no sense in saying it now either ;). until KDE4 comes out, gnome is technologically ahead of KDE by quite some distance.

Could you elaborate on this further (apart from SVG support, I'll grant you that)?

cb951303
August 11th, 2007, 07:12 PM
is there really any point to this. unless you're on a resource strained system both KDE and Gnome are fast enough so that the slowest bit is the person. if gnome is the slower then i can honestly wait the extra millisecond.

that's really not the case... as others in this thread already stated, nautilus crashes or take 30 seconds to open a directory with thousands of pictures... This is unacceptable, in KDE it took only 2-3 seconds for me to open the same directory. Also in Arch Linux (i686 optimized distro) nautilus took only 2-3 seconds to open the same directory (thumbnailing was open for all above). It may be just my system but it seems like Ubuntu's gnome works slower than other distros.

tbroderick
August 11th, 2007, 09:59 PM
that is indeed correct. in fact, even trolltech are members of the Mobile Linux Initiative, who have chosen gtk as their primary toolkit. in other words, gtk is the standard toolkit for mobile linux.

There is no standard. Just like there is no standard toolkit for the desktop.

stchman
August 13th, 2007, 04:58 PM
Comparing optimized KDE and Gnome on one specific distro will show you there isn't much of a difference in performance. But you need to optimize your system to get it like you want.
And don't forget KDE is a lot more advanced and will obviously need a little more tweaking to get it just right for your system.
I use KDEmod and it's much faster as Gnome on Ubuntu.

You obviously aren't having too much experience with vi, otherwise you would speak with a lot more respect about it. (This doesn't mean it has to be your prefered editor)

My point to my post was that I don't think Gnome is going to go away anytime soon. I have used both Gnome and KDE and I find Gnome to be a little faster and KDE to be a bit more polished looking.

I should "respect" vi? I don't think an ancient text editor is worthy of someone's respect. My reference was to that since vi has hung around for about 30yrs then Gnome will probably be around for awhile as well.

If you love vi then great, I don't.

ThinkBuntu
August 13th, 2007, 05:20 PM
The GNOME desktop isn't at all about the technical aspects. It aims to be attractive, clean, and usable. Software changes on the inside, so if it's a memory hog now, that can always be improved. Xfce is so much better in many ways, but its developers make some pin-headed usability decisions and leave off some essential features, which including others that nobody would even think of.

For example, I can control how my date and time is displayed with a fine-toothed comb in Xfce, but I can't do a thing about my Applications menu. This is insane.

Also, I think you should apologize to the Ubuntu devs after calling the latest development release "Tripe"!

ComplexNumber
August 13th, 2007, 05:41 PM
There is no standard. Just like there is no standard toolkit for the desktop.
according to this there is, and they chose gtk. LiPS stands for Linux Phone Standard.

Though Trolltech (http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3681051), the creator of the Qt open source GUI framework, is a member of LiPS, Qt is not part of the core LiPS 1.0 specification for the user interface. Instead, LiPS has gone the GNOME based GTK (GNOME Tool Kit) for its user interface specification. Trolltech's Qtopia, a mobile version of Qt, is being used by Motorola and others in their Linux-powered mobile phones.
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3682701


the got the gtk acronym wrong.

donovan1983
August 13th, 2007, 05:47 PM
You could try qtcurve.

Thanks for the suggestion. I found the Klearlooks theme for Qt, apparently based on QtCurve, and it worked great since I was already using Clearlooks in GNOME.

I did give a try to KDE for a little bit again, but went back to GNOME since GNOME just felt more polished and more refined, while KDE was flashier but didn't work as well for a few things and felt somewhat "toy-like". I used to like KDE more than GNOME since just a couple years ago GNOME still felt a bit primitive and paled in comparison to KDE, but I can see now that KDE has stalled a bit, although I am excited to see what KDE 4 brings.

Having these two major desktop environment projects is good overall for us since it encourages competition and gets us better software in the end.

donovan1983
August 13th, 2007, 05:53 PM
Uhh... how about right-clicking on the main panel? ;)

That is the first thing I did. And it was bizarre to me how there was no "New Panel" option in the main level of that menu. I did manage to find the option to add a new panel, but at first I couldn't even configure it since it didn't show up in the preferences pane for the Kicker and I had to delete it and re-add it a few times before it did. I think I have spent less time configuring and installing new kernels (which I haven't had to do yet on Feisty, finally!) than getting the Kicker to cooperate with me :p

igknighted
August 13th, 2007, 05:56 PM
kde has to mutch stupid eyecandy, and i seriasly hate the kde naming sceme

"stupid eyecandy", which some distros leave on by default and other give a wizard that lets you choose what exactly is on at first boot. Either way, you can re-run the wizard at any time or just open a config to turn off any piece of "stupid eyecandy" that you don't want. It's nice to have the option to use it available.

cb951303
August 14th, 2007, 12:04 AM
That is the first thing I did. And it was bizarre to me how there was no "New Panel" option in the main level of that menu. I did manage to find the option to add a new panel, but at first I couldn't even configure it since it didn't show up in the preferences pane for the Kicker and I had to delete it and re-add it a few times before it did. I think I have spent less time configuring and installing new kernels (which I haven't had to do yet on Feisty, finally!) than getting the Kicker to cooperate with me :p

there is a new panel option on the main right click menu of the main panel

LuisAugusto
August 14th, 2007, 06:46 AM
ther is no sense in saying it now either ;). until KDE4 comes out, gnome is technologically ahead of KDE by quite some distance.

Hahahaha, this is hilarious, and I won't even bother answering, you're too uninformed.

Just as a side note, GNOME is my primary DE, so I'm not bashing GNOME.

But come on man, just say that you like GNOME more than KDE, but please don't say incoherences xD

rakku-toki telkio-kuuni
August 14th, 2007, 08:28 AM
That is the first thing I did. And it was bizarre to me how there was no "New Panel" option in the main level of that menu. I did manage to find the option to add a new panel, but at first I couldn't even configure it since it didn't show up in the preferences pane for the Kicker and I had to delete it and re-add it a few times before it did. I think I have spent less time configuring and installing new kernels (which I haven't had to do yet on Feisty, finally!) than getting the Kicker to cooperate with me :p

For me it works alright - but I'm using 3.5.7 (are you?) It's true it crashes sometimes, but then it is automatically restarted. No major problem.

Sorry for the side talk, but this thread has turned into another flame war - just like the other ones.

b0ng0
August 14th, 2007, 09:05 AM
I think that GNOME is suited to the idea of Ubuntu (should be easy to use, even for people who don't understand some of the more complex bits of Linux) and it will probably stay that way.

I used to use Kubuntu until wireless stopped working in Feisty, so I changed to Ubuntu and I have to say I really like it. However, as for KDE being the default DE for Ubuntu I think that it is too complex as it stands (i.e too many customization options that aren't laid out in a very simple way, lots of useless programs that come with Kubuntu, etc.).
Although with KDE 4 coming out and nothing new happening with Gnome I think I will move back to a more full KDE install rather than just the kde-core I have at present.

Smu
August 14th, 2007, 10:53 AM
I started with GNOME and didn't like the look of it so I changed to KDE in a illusion that it would be easier and better to customize and get the way I like it. After a half year of KDE i changed back to GNOME thanks to Ubuntu Studio, now I've found out that GNOME actually is easier and better to customize than KDE.

I tried the KDE4 alpha release but it didn't convince me... But then again, I'm one of those who like the eye-candy and thinks that the look is a very important feature.

LuisAugusto
August 14th, 2007, 06:04 PM
I started with GNOME and didn't like the look of it so I changed to KDE in a illusion that it would be easier and better to customize and get the way I like it. After a half year of KDE i changed back to GNOME thanks to Ubuntu Studio, now I've found out that GNOME actually is easier and better to customize than KDE.

I tried the KDE4 alpha release but it didn't convince me... But then again, I'm one of those who like the eye-candy and thinks that the look is a very important feature.

I'm in a similar case, KDE is more customizable than GNOME, but it's hard to get it as you want, for example, writing a theme for KDE it's a pain, and I found it to be easy on GNOME.
I still (obviously) miss the great KDE applications, but most of the time I can live with the Gtk applications.

BTW: KDE was my primary DE, but when KDE 4 start to show some changes I migrate to it, to test and send bug reports (when they ask users to start sending them of course), so I don't have a KDE 3.5.* installation.

GNOME maybe is far behind technologies, but it's (from my point of view) far more advanced on usability terms.

However, If you look for eye candy I doubt GNOME will be your primary DE for too long
KDE 4 Aimed Look (http://www.nuno-icons.com/images/estilo/)

DjBones
August 14th, 2007, 07:34 PM
its just people complainin about the default brown theme in ubuntu,
gnome stay's the same for about 5 min ;]

xfce has made leaps and bounds!
if the ubuntu developers chipped in help with gnome like the Zenwalk people do for xfce im sure it would be alot "flashier" lol

forrestcupp
August 14th, 2007, 07:37 PM
I'm in a similar case, KDE is more customizable than GNOME, but it's hard to get it as you want, for example, writing a theme for KDE it's a pain, and I found it to be easy on GNOME.
I still (obviously) miss the great KDE applications, but most of the time I can live with the Gtk applications.]

You can use KDE apps in Gnome if you have the libraries installed.

Anthem
August 15th, 2007, 01:56 AM
The KDE in Ubuntu isn't nearly as polished as Gnome. That's not a KDE vs Gnome thing, it's an Ubuntu thing.

SUSE's KDE used to be far better than their Gnome implementation, until they bought the Ximian guys.

LuisAugusto
August 15th, 2007, 05:01 AM
You can use KDE apps in Gnome if you have the libraries installed.

I know that, but I prefer to use their respective apps to avoid the load of other libraries.

rakku-toki telkio-kuuni
August 15th, 2007, 10:38 AM
GNOME maybe is far behind technologies, but it's (from my point of view) far more advanced on usability terms. [/URL]

Interesting, but could you define it? What are "usability terms"? What is "behind" in technologies?

I mean, those DEs exist for one purpose. Comparing them should have those purposes in mind: can KDE do things Gnome cannot do, and vice versa? Are those things important? Or it's just a matter of doing it a different way?

For me, Konqueror is the definition of usability itself: internet browser, file manager and universal viewer. So, if Gnome doesn't have a similar application, I can say KDE is more advanced because it does what I want. And I can say Amarok is more advanced because, for example, it gives me more information about the artist, or whatever.

But it's still a matter of taste. In this kind of comparison, I think the most useful is to say things you like and things you don't, what is useful and what you miss. Otherwise, I could make a watch that can store the names of all plaster manufacturers in the world, and call it "more advanced"...

Anyway, I'm happy both Gnome and KDE coexist. "Constructive competition".

Edit: I was thinking... can I say a simple hybrid car is "technologically more advanced" than the latest "normal" off-road?

triptoe
August 15th, 2007, 11:44 AM
Here is a list of some nice improvements: http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2007/08/07/im-excited-about-the-future-of-gnome/

I think there is alot of hype around QT 4 and maybe for good reason... it doesn't seem as the direction of gnome has such grand goals.

What i would personally like to see is more bug fixing, rewriting of code to make it more efficient etc.... I heard that GTK itself was supposed to get rewritten.. it would be cool if they put some money behind it and made it all happen.

What I am really interested in though is the issue of the windowing system.

Here is what i am interested in mostly: http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=18433

I think they should get that feature which will be coming in QT .

awakatanka
August 15th, 2007, 12:32 PM
However, If you look for eye candy I doubt GNOME will be your primary DE for too long
KDE 4 Aimed Look (http://www.nuno-icons.com/images/estilo/)

If those picture are realy the way they are planning to go, i say kwel \\:D/[-o<=P~=D>

Oh boy looks very good.

misfitpierce
August 15th, 2007, 12:37 PM
I find Kubuntu to be more responsive to me for the one who said Gnome is more responsive... not starting a war though. It's preference of layout and look I suppose. Gnome and KDE to me are equally evolved and both have their up's and downs. I personaly prefer KDE now.

racoq
August 15th, 2007, 03:02 PM
However, If you look for eye candy I doubt GNOME will be your primary DE for too long
KDE 4 Aimed Look (http://www.nuno-icons.com/images/estilo/)

That sounds a cheap copy of vista and macosx look

DimitrisC
August 15th, 2007, 03:32 PM
I like GNOME a lot and I hope something will be done to keep up with KDE. I tried KDE some time ago for about a month but it wasn't for me. I hate the way all the apps are named with a K. I mean its kind of cute is OSX where you have iLife, iMovie and such but in KDE its just plain frustrating. I kept renaming the applications. Also I find GNOME to be a lot simpler than KDE. Of course many people like the choices and versatility of KDE but I find it overwhelming.

I have to be honest though. From what I've seen KDE 4 is going to be great and I think I will be making another switch soon. I will start renaming the apps again but KDE 4 looks like its going to be worth it :-)

vexorian
August 15th, 2007, 03:40 PM
People are just too focused on speed and responsiveness. Most people migrating from Windows are used to speed and responsive using XP,
None of the quoted statements is actually true.



Will KDE4 change the whole infrastructure in Ubuntu, making it the default DE? nah



Will we see more downloads and shipit of Kubuntu this October, because I have a feeling that many, many users are abandoning Gnome (Ubuntu) in favor of KDE
but it is not more than a feeling, is it? Go ask me, last year linux forums/communities were as full of people advertising KDE as they are now, that however did not change much, and Kubuntu is not gonna come with KDE4 in a while so expecting it to really make people switch to Kubuntu on 7.10 is too much...


My problem is, pure and simple: what's the point of using Ubuntu if Gnome has no future?
The question would be valid if it wasn't for the fact gnome got a future...

..
I think that the most threatening situation against gnome is not KDE4 but the fact the current leaders of the project are in bed with MS and plan to MONOficate gnome , this is the reason I am gonna switch to KDE4 now that I heard that you will be able to resize the icons in the desktop. Although it would have been awesome if it had emblems...


Silly reasons to pick a DE
- Default look: should focus on ease of customization instead.
- "better applications!": you can run gnome apps on KDE and KDE apps on gnome, so this is not important, really.
- Benchmarks: Whatever a benchmark shows X is 25% slower than Y, shouldn't mean anything to you, you should test yourself, the speed of Y might simply save you 30 miliseconds, and believe me, you will survive. In your computer, the responsiveness could be the opposite to benchmarks so it is always good to test speed yourself (reminds you of how Java does so well in benchmarks ...)

tigerpants
August 15th, 2007, 04:25 PM
Fluxbox!

jrusso2
August 15th, 2007, 04:35 PM
I am always amazed how many people won't use KDE because so many applications start with K

igknighted
August 15th, 2007, 05:06 PM
I am always amazed how many people won't use KDE because so many applications start with K

Agreed.

triptoe
August 15th, 2007, 06:34 PM
Ironically I think mono is actually one of the reasons why Gnome will win in the end. .Net is a superior platform... it is an open standard and mono is just an implementation. There is no danger of being sued and people keep trying to spread fud about it.

Just like QT gives kde an advantage... mono will give gnome.

the next KDE looks pretty nice... i think i will finally give it a try. I used it for like 2 minutes 3 years ago or something

DeadSuperHero
August 15th, 2007, 07:41 PM
It will be interesting to see how Linux develops in the next few years. Heck, KDE4's got some dandy looking features, and if the eyecandy is nice and lightweight, more people will switch to (K)Ubuntu by looks alone.
That said, Gnome with Mono will definitely be interesting. Does this mean that applications with Mono will be easier to port to Linux?
Regardless, both GNOME and KDE are excellent DE's.

Also, I do hope that KDE eventually stops using apps that start with K's. It's not that big of a deal to me, but it is a little bit annoying. They ought to make up inspiring, awesome names. (Though, it definately seems to be starting out that way with their underlying technology, at least)

basenvironment
August 15th, 2007, 08:54 PM
Yes, gnome is sooo far behind. Lets list all the things that KDE can do that gnome cant...
1 -
Well that about wraps this up. Next.

I realize that gnome doesn't have 50million configuration choices in the control panel - it is intentional.

gnome - when you get tired of fiddling with all those doo-hickys in KDE and just want to USE your system.

(next flamer please step up to the mic)

smartboyathome
August 15th, 2007, 09:02 PM
Yes, gnome is sooo far behind. Lets list all the things that KDE can do that gnome cant...
1 -
Well that about wraps this up. Next.

I realize that gnome doesn't have 50million configuration choices in the control panel - it is intentional.

gnome - when you get tired of fiddling with all those doo-hickys in KDE and just want to USE your system.

(next flamer please step up to the mic)

Your close. GNOME is meant to be FLEXIBLE, in other words, it is meant to do what the user wants, and doesn't TRY to hide the commands with GUIs. That is what KDE is for ;)

WishingWell
August 15th, 2007, 09:02 PM
I've always found KDE to be slow and too hungry.

:p You'll take away my GNOME when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. :lol:

That's funny because KDE uses less resources and is arguably faster than gnome when it's up and running.

I don't know in which direction Gnome is going, it would be hard to simplify and remove more from it than what is already done, i'd say Gnome would do best with a complete rewrite for version 3 just like KDE is doing and have done for major versions.

Don't get me wrong, i don't mind Gnome at all, it's easy, simplistic but the problem is that it has copied the worst part from Windows, the registry, Gconf.

For as long as i live i will never support that, simple config files with quotations has ALWAYS been the Linux way and the way KDE is doing it, so i'll stick with KDE until Gnome gets their head out of their **** and stop copying bad ideas from Windows.

smartboyathome
August 15th, 2007, 09:05 PM
For your information, Gconf will probably be replaced by Dconf. Also, KDE is for the "GIMME A G, GIMME A U, GIMME AN I, WHAT DO I WANT? GUIS FOR EVERYTHING" type of person.

Miguel
August 15th, 2007, 09:11 PM
I will regret writing this but... I'm starting to like gconf. Yeah. I'm being serious. All the instant apply functionality in gnome, from shortcuts to wallpapers to icons to everything else rocks. IMHO, the worst thing of gconf is using oh-so-many-so-little files, slightly degrading the performance. But a big single xml file would be far worse for reliability. A single xml file for app might do it, but I'm not really sure. Also having all your functionality there is good. As is being able to change your gnome settings via the command-line.

vexorian
August 15th, 2007, 09:15 PM
That's funny because KDE uses less resources and is arguably faster than gnome when it's up and running.

I don't know in which direction Gnome is going, it would be hard to simplify and remove more from it than what is already done, i'd say Gnome would do best with a complete rewrite for version 3 just like KDE is doing and have done for major versions.

Don't get me wrong, i don't mind Gnome at all, it's easy, simplistic but the problem is that it has copied the worst part from Windows, the registry, Gconf.

For as long as i live i will never support that, simple config files with quotations has ALWAYS been the Linux way and the way KDE is doing it, so i'll stick with KDE until Gnome gets their head out of their **** and stop copying bad ideas from Windows.
Hi, I, like anyone with minimal sensibility hate the windows registry with a passion, but gconf is not like windows' registry, it implements the configuration in files, XML files that you can edit yourself if you want, in fact it is just a way to organize the configuration files, it is not that obscure, evil thing the windows registry is.

bogolisk
August 15th, 2007, 09:16 PM
I will regret writing this but... I'm starting to like gconf. Yeah. I'm being serious. All the instant apply functionality in gnome, from shortcuts to wallpapers to icons to everything else rocks. IMHO, the worst thing of gconf is using oh-so-many-so-little files, slightly degrading the performance. But a big single xml file would be far worse for reliability. A single xml file for app might do it, but I'm not really sure. Also having all your functionality there is good. As is being able to change your gnome settings via the command-line.

Yeah, the best part is that: it's vi-compatible (well I would use emacs, due to its xml modes but you got the idea.) It has all the convenience of the registry plus the unix way of life: tweak configurations with favorite text editor!

Sayers
August 15th, 2007, 09:22 PM
KDE 4 isn't that great from what I've seen.

bogolisk
August 15th, 2007, 09:27 PM
The future of Gnome:

http://blogs.gnome.org/desrt/2007/08/07/im-excited-about-the-future-of-gnome/

LuisAugusto
August 16th, 2007, 06:11 AM
Interesting, but could you define it? What are "usability terms"?

I have my homemade researches, first, with my own experience and then with computer users, and at last with my father (he never learned Windows, so he learned to use a PC with Linux) I found that those 3 kinds of users (me, normal users, new user) find GNOME easy to follow, understand, configure, basely because of it's clean interface.

What is "behind" in technologies?

-GNOME barely integrate, KDE have stuff like Kparts that allow all apps to be perfectly integrate.

-Even is GNOME is easier to configure, the amount of possible configuration on KDE is bigger.

-Most GNOME applications aren't as developed as their KDE equivalents.

-Konqueror is a lot faster than Nautilus, and it has twice the functions, (I pointed this one apart from the earlier point because the filemanager is an integrate and very important part of a DE).

those DEs exist for one purpose. Comparing them should have those purposes in mind: can KDE do things Gnome cannot do, and vice versa? Are those things important? Or it's just a matter of doing it a different way?

That's somehow true, however, their have different points of view of what to get, there will always be things that you can do in one, a not in the other, maybe because one of them find that feature useless.


For me, Konqueror is the definition of usability itself: internet browser, file manager and universal viewer. So, if Gnome doesn't have a similar application, I can say KDE is more advanced because it does what I want. And I can say Amarok is more advanced because, for example, it gives me more information about the artist, or whatever..



Those aren't usability terms, those are features, and advance under the hood designed, however, from a usability point of view, Konqueror is quite a bad. Menus are a freaking mess, toolbars mix options from File Manager and Web Browser, etc.

But it's still a matter of taste. In this kind of comparison

No, you may like Gtk 1.0 more than Qt 4.3, however that doesn't change the fact that Qt 4.3 is light years more advanced than Gtk 1.0.


That sounds a cheap copy of vista and macosx look

Quit the stupid comments, it's better to stay quite than saying stupid things, Who do you think that looks bad with that kind of comments you or KDE 4?

bread eyes
August 16th, 2007, 06:55 AM
Here's what I'm guessing:

rakku-toki telkio-kuuni
August 16th, 2007, 08:43 AM
That's somehow true, however, their have different points of view of what to get, there will always be things that you can do in one, a not in the other, maybe because one of them find that feature useless.

Agreed, but those differences are basically in form, not in content. And form is a matter of taste.


Those aren't usability terms, those are features, and advance under the hood designed, however, from a usability point of view, Konqueror is quite a bad. Menus are a freaking mess, toolbars mix options from File Manager and Web Browser, etc.

Don't you get my point? You say "quite bad". I say "WOW". I find this way the most simple and elegant, that's usability. If I want to have a pdf, a text, a spredsheet, a file manager and some internet pages separated only by tabs, I call it usability. Don't call it "features" - as in "superficial" - just because you don't like it.


No, you may like Gtk 1.0 more than Qt 4.3, however that doesn't change the fact that Qt 4.3 is light years more advanced than Gtk 1.0.

Let's not be anachronic. This is the same thing as comparing a current Ford to a Volkswagen from the '60 (I don't know why I'm using those car analogies, I hate cars).

Please don't get me wrong, I have no intention of "proving I am right and you are wrong". In fact, my post was addressed to everybody rather than to you particularly - I just wanted to see a useful discussion better than another flame war. My point was: if you want to compare KDE and Gnome, you need to define the terms first: what is "advanced", what is "usability", etc.

Back to the main discussion, I think Gnome is well established enough: they will feel the hit from KDE4, they will shed some blood, and reorganize. I hope so.


Here's what I'm guessing:

XD

LuisAugusto
August 16th, 2007, 06:41 PM
Don't you get my point? You say "quite bad". I say "WOW". I find this way the most simple and elegant, that's usability. If I want to have a pdf, a text, a spredsheet, a file manager and some internet pages separated only by tabs, I call it usability. Don't call it "features" - as in "superficial" - just because you don't like it.

Features aren't superficial, don't you read me? I point Konqueror as an advantage of KDE ;)
But the interface is a mess, that why they redesigned it for KDE 4, it tend to confuse new users.




Let's not be anachronic. This is the same thing as comparing a current Ford to a Volkswagen from the '60 (I don't know why I'm using those car analogies, I hate cars).

That was the exactly point of my post, there are people that like Mustangs from 70s more than a Mustang 2007. Those that make the Mustangs from 70s advanced than a Mustang 2007?

No, much people like GNOME more, and that's fine, however, that doesn't make it more advance.


My point was: if you want to compare KDE and Gnome, you need to define the terms first: what is "advanced", what is "usability", etc.

I did it.



Back to the main discussion, I think Gnome is well established enough: they will feel the hit from KDE4, they will shed some blood, and reorganize. I hope so.


Indeed.

rakku-toki telkio-kuuni
August 17th, 2007, 07:22 AM
That was the exactly point of my post, there are people that like Mustangs from 70s more than a Mustang 2007. Those that make the Mustangs from 70s advanced than a Mustang 2007?

No, much people like GNOME more, and that's fine, however, that doesn't make it more advance.

But you were comparing Qt4 with Gtk1.0, that's not fair! I was talking about current technologies, when it's hard to define which one is better - and is personal interest decides, eventually. As in "hybrid vs. off-road".

But it's not me who is going to defend Gnome. I, too, prefer KDE. ;)

DjBones
August 17th, 2007, 07:57 AM
maybe gnome will lose prestige as it aims to be a more stable and solid environment as opposed to flash in the pan eye-candy that kde seems to be shooting for?
that seems like a reasonable goal in a multi-desktop-environment world.

i know the kde developers work hard on it, but i get the itching suspicion that 4 will be more like compiz fusion rather than something that belongs on debian.

DjBones
August 17th, 2007, 08:05 AM
i spent some time looking at the proposed pictures of what kde4 environment is supposed to look and function like, and admittedly i was impressed haha

although, i know that if i did use kde after a few moments of theming and fiddling it would look almost exactly like my gnome/xfce systems..
getting it to look my openbox system might take a bit more work. ;]

do you guys think all this fancy stuff is going to sacrifice the lead in performance that kde has been enjoying over gnome?

miggols99
August 17th, 2007, 11:30 AM
No. Qt4 is much faster than Qt3, so KDE4 will be much faster. It will probably be much faster than KDE3. I like that they're using SVG for a lot of stuff. Things also look a lot more smoother in KDE4 than in KDE3. Of course all these fancy effects can be turned off for low end systems. I like that KDE4 has decent compositing built in. Now I won't need an external program (Compiz Fusion) for nice graphical effects :)

GeneralZod
August 17th, 2007, 11:37 AM
No. Qt4 is much faster than Qt3, so KDE4 will be much faster.

Actually, I have seen absolutely no evidence to support this for general desktop usage, believe it or not, and plenty of anecdotal evidence to the contrary. Qt4 does have some very fast rendering algorithms for paths etc, but there are mainly useful in rendering snazzy effects. So basically - general application stuff may or may not be slightly slower; sexy effects should be faster.

I have, however, seen lots of evidence that Qt4 is slightly more memory-efficient, and with Qt4.4, the annoying "flicker" should be gone (http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2007/08/09/qt-invaded-by-aliens-the-end-of-all-flicker/) once and for all (plus another small memory reduction as a side-effect! :guitar: ).

DjBones
September 5th, 2007, 07:28 AM
i was reading in linux format that qt4 is supposed to give an increase in speed by 30%
and thats probably enough to off-set all the fancy applications and graphics that are being implemented, possibly with a little left-over.


well.. atleast theres always fluxbox/openbox haha

fdhdghdg
September 5th, 2007, 08:47 AM
I know this is a long and maybe stupid post.

Indeed.

triptoe
September 5th, 2007, 09:46 AM
The biggest reason why I haven't tried KDE is the name... yea i know its silly. but common why does every application start with the letter k.

Thats why i like Amarok.. the name is good... the k theme is okay but at least it doesnt start with K.

I don't think there will be any mass exodus to KDE from gnome personally. But i may actually be willing to give it a shot.

ive used gnome for years and never even tried KDE

frodon
September 5th, 2007, 10:12 AM
because I have a feeling that many, many users are abandoning Gnome (Ubuntu) in favor of KDE.It's funny that really often the GNOME vs KDE threads starts with post based on personal feeling rather than trustable statistics.

Both are good desktops and have a future, as for my personal choice i'm a GNOME lover, it just fits my needs.
All the the arguments trying to say that one is better than the other sound crazy to me because at this level it is really subjective

nrs
September 5th, 2007, 10:32 AM
ther is no sense in saying it now either ;). until KDE4 comes out, gnome is technologically ahead of KDE by quite some distance.


that is indeed correct. in fact, even trolltech are members of the Mobile Linux Initiative, who have chosen gtk as their primary toolkit. in other words, gtk is the standard toolkit for mobile linux.

I doubt you'll find many "serious" programmers that will claim the mix-mash of GNOME & GTK+ libraries are /technically/ superior to Qt or the KDElibs. Most amateur programmers who think pyGTK is useful for anything beyond simple applications will even concede this. The one reason GTK+ has such corporate backing is this: LGPL.

I bet for every 'pro' you could give GNOME/GTK+ libraries and I could give you twice as many for Qt/KDElibs.

Shoot3r101
September 5th, 2007, 10:38 AM
Gnome = AWESOME!

bruce89
September 5th, 2007, 08:58 PM
If you ask me, it looks as if KDE4 is just a load of fd.o stuff with different names, stuff which GNOME is using already.

Phonon = Gstreamer
Strigi = Tracker
DCOP = DBUS
Accessibility = AT-SPI

happysmileman
September 5th, 2007, 09:18 PM
Phonon = Gstreamer
For the 57384th time someone lacks a basic understanding of what Phonon is, it is an API/frontend to make it easier to program and set up sound adn stuff. It can use many backends, including GStreamer.

DCOP = DBUS
D-Bus will be used in KDE4, replacing DCOP, neither of these are dependent on any specific DE AFAIK, and therefore can't really be counted, but even if you did count them KDE still has it.

I don't know about Strigi or the other thing you posted, but considering I immediately spotted mistakes in both the things I knew about I don't think it looks good for them

EDIT: According to wikipedia Strigi is similar to Tracker, dunno how they compete with each other though

ComplexNumber
September 5th, 2007, 09:22 PM
If you ask me, it looks as if KDE4 is just a load of fd.o stuff with different names, stuff which GNOME is using already.

Phonon = Gstreamer
Strigi = Tracker
DCOP = DBUS
Accessibility = AT-SPI
of course. KDE4 is an attempt to catch up with gnome. gnome is much more compliant and mature when it comes to implementing freedesktop standards, so in addition to implementing such standards to the same maturity that gnome has reached, there was a large number of areas where kde was lagging behind gnome such as: search, SVG, sound server, DBUS(note: lots of kde advocates get confused and claim that DBUS was built off of DCOP. it wasn't. it was made similar for compatibility reasons), HIG, etc.
this is what KDE 4 is attempting to address.

happysmileman
September 5th, 2007, 09:26 PM
of course. KDE4 is an attempt to catch up with gnome. gnome is much more compliant with freedesktop standards, so in in addition to implementing such standards, there was a large number of areas where kde was lagging behind gnome such as: search, SVG, sound server, DBUS integration, HIG, etc.
this is what KDE 4 is attempting to address.

Wow, no matter what is being argued or where it's being argued, people still conviniently overlook flaws in their sides logic literally sitting right in front of them (AKA a post above theirs)

While other programs are just differnt implementations of GNOME programs and all, Phonon is not a ******* GStreamer replacement, and GNOME doesn't have it or a similar program, though this post will yet again probably be overlooked and Phonon will continue to be discredited as a cheap ripoff

ComplexNumber
September 5th, 2007, 09:30 PM
Wow, no matter what is being argued or where it's being argued, people still conviniently overlook flaws in their sides logic literally sitting right in front of them (AKA a post above theirs)

While other programs are just differnt implementations of GNOME programs and all, Phonon is not a ******* GStreamer replacement, and GNOME doesn't have it or a similar program, though this post will yet again probably be overlooked and Phonon will continue to be discredited as a cheap ripoff
excuse me. i never said phonon was did i? i know what phonon is. kde could have implemented gstreamer but was slow to do so, so it went it's own way with phonon which allows the developer to use gstreamer, xine, or whatever. they both accomplish the same things at the end of the day, but the kde devs seemed to have got a bit paranoid becasue of their experiences with the unmaintained arts, so that's the only reason why kde went down that avenue.
gnome doesn't have a phonon equivalent because it doesn't need it (see above).

happysmileman
September 5th, 2007, 09:36 PM
excuse me. i never said phonon was did i? i know what phonon is. kde could have implemented gstreamer but was slow to do so, so it went it's own way with phonon which allows the developer to use gstreamer, xine, or whatever. they both accomplish the same things at the end of the day, but the kde devs seemed to have got a bit paranoid becasue of their experiences with the unmaintained arts, so that's the only reason why kde went down that avenue.
gnome doesn't have a phonon equivalent because it doesn't need it (see above).

Misunderstood then, but it looked like you were agreeing it was from guy you quoted, and as for the "gnome doesn't have a phonon equivalent because it doesn't need it", I don't care whether it's needed, I've seen the code used to play a song in GStreamer, and I've seen the code used to play a song in Phonon, and I know which one I'd be inclined to program with, Phonon isn't meant to be that noticable to the end user (though the sound settings are apparently easer now), but to make it easier for developers.

Sain
September 5th, 2007, 09:38 PM
Im using GNOME, but when I tried Kubuntu I was amazed with how polished and modern KDE looks compared to GNOME. Still, KDE is not for me, I really like to keep things simple, and KDE has way too many small applications which I don't use, but it seems in better shape, and under heavy development, while GNOME seems half-dead to me.

GNOME developers are implementing new features little by little and they never make anything radically new. I think it cannot go like that forever, they'll have to make some major revision if they intend to stay competitive to KDE.

ComplexNumber
September 5th, 2007, 09:40 PM
I've seen the code used to play a song in GStreamer, and I've seen the code used to play a song in Phonon, and I know which one I'd be inclined to program withyou don't seem to have quite grasped what phonon is. it is nothing more than a mupliplexer for the various sound servers. on it's own, phonon doesn't play any sounds.

happysmileman
September 5th, 2007, 09:40 PM
Im using GNOME, but when I tried Kubuntu I was amazed with how polished and modern KDE looks compared to GNOME. Still, KDE is not for me, I really like to keep things simple, and KDE has way too many small applications which I don't use, but it seems in better shape, and under heavy development, while GNOME seems half-dead to me.

GNOME developers are implementing new features little by little and they never make anything radically new. I think it cannot go like that forever, they'll have to make some major revision if they intend to stay competitive to KDE.

I agree, it's ok for now that people can easily choose, but GNOME really isn't getting developed much, when will we see 3.0, or at least some major improvements, even if you don't like the way KDE is going, it's better going forward than staying still no matter how you go about it

happysmileman
September 5th, 2007, 09:43 PM
you don't seem to have quite grasped what phonon is. it is nothing more than a mupliplexer for the various sound servers. on it's own, phonon doesn't play any sounds.

It's also an API, and I'm aware it doesn't play sounds, but it's purpose is to provide a multimedia API that is independent of GStreamer/Xine, which it does, I agree it's not needed, but it is an attractive option for programmers, especially those who don't need much control and just want to play simple sounds

Visti
September 5th, 2007, 09:51 PM
I'm a Gnome user, mostly because I think it just goes nicely with the principle of Ubuntu (Though I prefer the default way it's set up in Mint). However, I'm going to give KDE a more serious try, but after taking some suggestions from people I know who say it's not as nicely integrated in Kubuntu as it is in other distros, I'm probably gonna try it in some other dist as well. Just to give it a fair chance. The few times I did try it, my first impressions were that it looks far more professional than plain Gnome and the art direction is of a higher quality and that does mean a fair bit to me. It just says something about the product as a whole. However, I'm just addicted to setting up Gnome in different ways. It's so fast and easy and that's what I like best. It takes just a few minutes and it looks exactly the way I want it to. Meh. But I really haven't tried KDE enough.

As for the future - I'll take it as it comes, but I'm a Gnome-guy for now.

LowSky
September 5th, 2007, 09:52 PM
I bet when the next LTS comes out so will the next best Gnome edition...

Also guys relax a little gnome should have a release this month as it has had last couple of releases.


Version Date Information
August 1997[16] GNOME development announced
1.0 March 1999 [17] First major GNOME release
1.0.53 October 1999 [18] "October"
1.2 May 2000 [19] "Bongo"
1.4 April 2001 [20] "Tranquility"
2.0 June 2002 [21] Major upgrade based on GTK2. Introduction of the Human Interface Guidelines.
2.2 February 2003 [22] Multimedia and file manager improvements.
2.4 September 2003 [23] Epiphany, accessibility support.
2.6 March 2004 [24] Nautilus changes to a spatial file manager, and a new GTK+ file dialog is introduced. A short-lived fork of GNOME, GoneME, is created as a response to the changes in this version.
2.8 September 2004 [25] Improved removable device support, adds Evolution.
2.10 March 2005 [26] Lower memory requirements and performance improvements. Adds: new panel applets (modem control, drive mounter and trashcan); and the Totem and Sound Juicer applications
2.12 September 2005 [27] Nautilus improvements; improvements in cut/paste between applications and freedesktop.org integration. Adds: Evince PDF viewer; New default theme: Clearlooks; menu editor; keyring manager and admin tools. Based on GTK+ 2.8 with Cairo support.
2.14 March 2006 [28] Performance improvements. Adds: Ekiga video conferencing application; Deskbar search tool; Pessulus lockdown editor; Fast user switching; Sabayon system administration tool.
2.16 September 2006 [29] Performance improvements. Adds: Tomboy notetaking application; Baobab disk usage analyser; Orca screen reader; improvements to Totem, Nautilus and GNOME Power Manager; compositing support for Metacity; new icon theme. Based on GTK+ 2.10 with new print dialog.
2.18 March 2007 [30] Performance improvements. Adds: Seahorse GPG security application, allowing encryption of emails and local files; Baobab disk usage analyser improved to support ring chart view; Orca screen reader; improvements to Evince, Epiphany and GNOME Power Manager, Volume control; two new games, GNOME Sudoku and glchess. MP3 and AAC audio encoding

ubuntukerala1980
September 5th, 2007, 09:57 PM
I love gnome. Kde is hungry :lolflag:

bruce89
September 5th, 2007, 10:00 PM
I retract the Phonon thing then.


I bet when the next LTS comes out so will the next best Gnome edition...

Also guys relax a little gnome should have a release this month as it has had last couple of releases.

It'll be here in 2 weeks' time. GNOME releases every 6 months.

happysmileman
September 5th, 2007, 10:00 PM
I love gnome. Kde is hungry :lolflag:

Uses less RAM than GNOME in every study I've seen and is faster in all but one(about 6, 3 of which i found on these forums).

Next myth?

ComplexNumber
September 5th, 2007, 10:01 PM
It's also an API, and I'm aware it doesn't play sounds, but it's purpose is to provide a multimedia API that is independent of GStreamer/Xine, which it does, I agree it's not needed, but it is an attractive option for programmers, especially those who don't need much control and just want to play simple sounds
phonon's only advantages is for the paranoid. i've already mentioned why this is a lot more necessary for kde because of their horrible experiences with arts. arts became unmaintained and so there was nowhere where the sound facilities could progress as they can with gstreamer. therefore, kde had 3 options: 1) develop its own like gstreamer , 2 go with gstreamer, or 3 develop phonen.
because of kde's horrible experiences with arts, they didn't want to tie themselves in with 1 sound system because they definitely don't want a repeat of arts, so the first 2 options were out of the question. the first option was definitely out of the question for reasons of compatibility with gnome.
if they had have gone with the freedesktop.org solution of gstreamer, they didn't want to find themselves being tied to that one in the case that it became unmaintained. and given that gnome and kde have to have some sort of compatibility (hence the freedesktop standards), they felt that it was best that they developed a system where they weren't tied in to any one system.
so at the end of the day, there is no real advantage of phonon whilst gstreamer exists and is the standard. in many cases. it may make things somewhat more difficult for kde developers because of the extra layer, but after kde's experience of arts, they are more than willing to put up with any disadvantages than having a repeat of arts. there may be an advantage to phonon in the unforeseen and distant future, but it's a big IF.
it's a decent enough solution for the time being, and will be reasonably future-proof.

bruce89
September 5th, 2007, 10:03 PM
It doesn't really matter anyway, as long as KDE uses fd.o stuff in the future. There is no point in standards if only one desktop follows them.

It'd be quite funny if as soon as KDE 4 is released, Trolltech decide to release QT 5. They're already up to 4.3. This is an issue that I can see, QT is divorced from KDE, so the KDE people don't control what happens to QT.

happysmileman
September 5th, 2007, 10:06 PM
so at the end of the day, there is no real advantage of phonon whilst gstreamer exists and is the standard. in many cases. it may make things somewhat more difficult for kde users and developers because of the extra layer, but after kde's experience of arts, they are more than willing to put up with any disadvantages than having a repeat of arts. there may be an advantage to phonon in the distant future, but it's a big IF.

Well it can't really put developers at a disadvantage because they can still choose whether or not to use it, I just think I'd prefer to use it that GStreamer since the code looks a lot more difficult, the GStreamer API is still there, it's also an API for video as well, so it also makes code a lot easier if you use both sound and video, since you can leave out the extra headers and video and music use similar classes and functions

cjnkns
September 6th, 2007, 01:22 AM
I recently checking out some of the new kde 4 screen shots and WOW .. they are really making the a sweet ride for kde users.

Is gnome going to fall behind here because it seems like it's just business as usuall.. i may have to jump ship to kde. While I do like good functionality it's also nice to have something pleasing to the eye...

bruce89
September 6th, 2007, 01:24 AM
Bye.
See http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=522144

cjnkns
September 6th, 2007, 01:32 AM
Thanks


I(bye)

-SpaZ
September 6th, 2007, 01:34 AM
It's all about what the user likes. I personally use KDE, Gnome, and Xfce on a regular basis. It all depends on what I am doing.

bone2006
September 6th, 2007, 02:00 AM
I've only been using linux for about a year and I actually have kubuntu installed in my office, I have ubuntu as my PVR/mythtv system and on my laptop I have Xubuntu, since xubuntu does seem to take less resources.

If linux users are 3-10% of the population, and we want more people to come over to linux, because the more people that come over the more developers will start to come over and as linux becomes more popular software should hopefully improve.

I think if the majority of people are coming from windows, that KDE is easier for them to adapt to and I think we do need some eye candy to an extent.

I think it's easier for windows users to use KDE to be honest, which would be a better desktop to use, the problem is that I think ubuntu is bundled with better software over all. I think a lot of KDE applications are much better like K3B, Ktorrent, Konqueror...etc

The problem to me is that kubuntu doesn't seem as stable as ubuntu, maybe it's because the majority of people are using gnome's default ubuntu.

I honestly think the ugliest thing to see is ugly black screen that comes with the default grub. It just seems like something that was written 20 years ago. I know people are more concern with functionality than looks, but when you are trying to show off linux to some people to get them to join, it just looks like they are taking a step back. You try to convince them that Linux is in fact better than windows, yet this ugly back screen that looks like the person is about to use DOS comes up, doesn't start off with a good start.

I honestly like Mepis and their grub bootloader was prettier, but guess what I had a lot of trouble getting a dual boot in a few systems. Do I want looks or functionality, wish I could get both......but I'll settle for the ugly boot loader instead of spending extra time figuring out why the pretty bootloader failed.

I wish that the community would have a stronger voice. I wish that the software that is being packaged would have a poll or something. I do believe most people would rather replace some of the software that's already in ubuntu.

But right now I still prefer KDE if I had to pick just one desktop. I think ubuntu is more stable than kubuntu, so I use ubuntu on a systems I keep up and use more resources. I use KDE on an office system I'm not on as much and for older systems I use xubuntu.

As if my opinion really matters though

bruce89
September 6th, 2007, 02:05 AM
I wish that the community would have a stronger voice. I wish that the software that is being packaged would have a poll or something. I do believe most people would rather replace some of the software that's already in ubuntu.

That's what popcon (http://popcon.ubuntu.com/) is for. I contribute statistics to it. (just to get Epiphany's count higher)

sloggerkhan
September 6th, 2007, 02:28 AM
I think gnome has problems, but I view xfce as a better alternative than KDE. And I still tend to use gnome.... because despite the minor annoyances, it does work overall. Most of the time I hate KDE apps... the only 1 care for is k3b.

Mud.Knee.Havoc
September 6th, 2007, 02:35 AM
Install them both. Problem solved. :D

LowSky
September 6th, 2007, 02:41 AM
new gnome should be out in a few weeks..6 month release cycles, just like ubuntu

cjnkns
September 9th, 2007, 02:18 AM
I have them both installed, but it seems that while running gnome the kde apps take longer than usual to start and/ or close.

Does anyone here have problems or success stores with using gnome and running kde apps?

Nano Geek
September 9th, 2007, 02:21 AM
This should be in the Cafe as it isn't a support question.

gn2
September 9th, 2007, 02:55 AM
Personally as a dedicated point-and-clicker who doesn't do any "fiddling about" I think Gnome has an excellent future.

One thing that may put folks like me off KDE and/or Kubuntu is that it doesn't do "Standby" or at least I can't (easily) get it to work.

No such problems with Gnome.

DjBones
September 12th, 2007, 12:31 AM
seems like alot of KDE people dislike GNOME quite a bit more than GNOME people dislike KDE.. haha
XFCE is really nice too, but i don't see many people putting it in the GTK camp with GNOME.. I love my Flux, an entire desktop environment is pretty excessive in my opinion lol

ComplexNumber
September 12th, 2007, 03:54 AM
seems like alot of KDE people dislike GNOME quite a bit more than GNOME people dislike KDE.. haha

not really. it's just that minority groups tend to shout the loudest, and ubuntuforums is predominantly made up of gnome users.

FuturePilot
September 12th, 2007, 04:03 AM
I'd say Gnome needs a bit of an overhaul. Not as drastic as KDE4 is, but just change it up a bit. Maybe add a few new things. And do something with those ugly brown Gnome folder icons](*,) I really like Gnome, it just seems there's never anything new in it.

Sain
September 18th, 2007, 08:54 AM
I'd say Gnome needs a bit of an overhaul. Not as drastic as KDE4 is, but just change it up a bit. Maybe add a few new things. And do something with those ugly brown Gnome folder icons](*,) I really like Gnome, it just seems there's never anything new in it.

Exactly! I wouldn't mind if they skip one release cycle, just so they have time to implement new ideas and revamp Gnome. Six months release cycle is heavy burden to them,..

Paqman
October 1st, 2007, 04:24 PM
I'm a little dissapointed they've had to break the Deskbar Applet for Gnome 2.2. You won't be able to have it display a text box to type in any more. Ok, so it's only another mouse click to get to the box, but I use it all the time, and found being able to type straight into the panel a really nice feature.

Hopefully they'll have that one working again for Gnome 2.22 (in Hardy maybe?)

23meg
October 1st, 2007, 04:42 PM
Alt + F3?

Paqman
October 2nd, 2007, 12:21 PM
Alt + F3?

It's putting an extra step in the process though, for no apparent reason. I also like the nice wide text box from a usability point of view. Big buttons are nicer than wee ones.

I understand they've been overhauling the applet completely, but this was a feature that should have stayed in IMO.

atlfalcons866
October 2nd, 2007, 08:36 PM
linus torvalds encourges people to use KDE. He hates Gnome.

This is what he said
"I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do."

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8745257437.html

maybeway36
October 2nd, 2007, 08:42 PM
He didn't encourage anybody. He just said what he uses.

happysmileman
October 2nd, 2007, 08:54 PM
He didn't encourage anybody. He just said what he uses.


I personally just encourage people to switch to KDE.

This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of
Gnome is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will
use it. I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long
since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do.

Please, just tell people to use KDE.

Linus

That enough encouragement? In particular read the first and last line of this 5 line quote

cyneuron
October 2nd, 2007, 09:23 PM
Linus's remarks are perfect in this regard....

keeping things simple is a good objective, but crippling user from doing things which he/she wants to do with his/her desktop is real problem GNOME poses to users......

Don't forget Linux is all about having freedon & choice....

if you are not able to do the things the way you wish, then whats the point of having to use Linux....Windows does work fine then on most tasks..... its all about having power to configure your desktop in your own hand......

GNOME is beautiful, works fine, but accept these plain fact :

1. GNOME cripples user in terms of configurability & options.... (Simplicity doesn't & shouldn't exclude these two important parameters....)

2. GNOME development though regular, but is slower than KDE....

3. KDE apps offer much more functionality than GNOME..... K3B is a prime example.....

I love GNOME, but i feel suffocated when i am unable to do the things i need to do with my desktop...

Having said that.... this is also true KDE is not very well integrated with Ubuntu in Kubuntu.....

Just see PCLinuxOS to know how fast & stable can KDE be...

Kubuntu should be made as refined as Ubuntu...

& GNOME developers should look into these issues soon, because i love GNOME.....

& above all i love Ubuntu.....

Artificial Intelligence
October 2nd, 2007, 09:36 PM
linus torvalds encourges people to use KDE. He hates Gnome.

This is what he said
"I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do."

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8745257437.html

OMG...

Because Linus says, we have to follow it

[lemming mode on]


Seriously, there's no right and wrong when it comes to DE and/or WM. Linus like KDE, kodus to him.
I like Gnome kodus to me ;)

23meg
October 2nd, 2007, 09:42 PM
It's putting an extra step in the process though, for no apparent reason.

What's the extra step?

Polygon
October 2nd, 2007, 11:31 PM
gnome does things better then kde
kde does things better then gnome

in kubuntu i just tried a week ago, it took me an hour to figure out how to enable double click and turn off the bouncing icon because the correct settings manager was not in the menu and the settings are scattered across the entire system

both can improve, but i like gnome personally.

angryfirelord
October 3rd, 2007, 12:11 AM
linus torvalds encourges people to use KDE. He hates Gnome.

This is what he said
"I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do."

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8745257437.html
Next thing he'll be telling us to use is FreeBSD.... :D

Erunno
October 3rd, 2007, 12:47 AM
in kubuntu i just tried a week ago, it took me an hour to figure out how to enable double click and turn off the bouncing icon because the correct settings manager was not in the menu and the settings are scattered across the entire system.

Okey, you picked some of the worst offenders ;-) The location of the double-click configuration must have confused generations of KDE users by now. And I don't agree with "scattered across the entire system" when there is kcontrol which aggregates almost all of KDE's controls rather nicely (the version that has not been stunted by Kubuntu).

I've been using openSUSE with GNOME 2.20 for some days now and I must say that it's a really nice release. Only really sore point has been Epiphany so far as I couldn't figure out how to set up different search engines (if possible at all) and adding RSS feeds to Liferea didn't work either (in fact, I didn't see an option to add feeds in Epiphany at all). Metacity is still rather lacking at best. I really like Tomboy but I wish it would be possible to pin the notes to the desktop like Knotes does. On the other hand linking different notes is rather neat at first look. And once again I can understand why people find GNOME appealing: Especially the widgets are very appealing to me.

Ah well, back to KDE on Thursday.

jacob01
October 3rd, 2007, 12:51 AM
whats bad about gnome that needs to be fixed and how does it have no future?

personally i like gnome better it seem more of a bare bones interface to me (which i like) and easier to use without all the little effects. (pisses me off when im listening to music then suddenly i hear some chime alerting me of nothing important lol )

but what exactly is the differance between the k window manager and gnome i know how they look but what else is different. is it the file browser like gnome has nautilus and kubuntu has... hmmm well what ever it has. what does it manage?

aysiu
October 3rd, 2007, 01:01 AM
whats bad about gnome that needs to be fixed and how does it have no future? Of course Gnome has a future. But there's also plenty that needs to be fixed. For more details, read The Top 5 Gnome/Ubuntu Usability Bugs Id Love to See Fixed (http://ubuntucat.wordpress.com/2007/07/12/the-top-5-gnomeubuntu-usability-bugs-id-love-to-see-fixed/)

FranMichaels
October 3rd, 2007, 01:06 AM
Of course Gnome has a future. But there's also plenty that needs to be fixed. For more details, read The Top 5 Gnome/Ubuntu Usability Bugs Id Love to See Fixed (http://ubuntucat.wordpress.com/2007/07/12/the-top-5-gnomeubuntu-usability-bugs-id-love-to-see-fixed/)

Hi, number 4 on your list is fixed. :KS

I love Gnome, and I'm glad there are things yet to fix, something to look forward to rather than just a release number bump. ;)

jacob01
October 3rd, 2007, 01:23 AM
yup and nice pic

Mr. Picklesworth
October 3rd, 2007, 02:23 AM
As far as I know, GNOME is currently in a bit of a transitional phase as many old technologies are eliminated in favour of unifying the existing infrastructure. For example, it is a goal to remove gnome-panel's Bonobo dependency for applets and move that whole deal entirely over to d-bus.

Oh, as for GTK vs. Qt, I still can't believe this is discussed. The two are fundamentally different: One is safe to use for free software that wants to avoid being tied down to a corporation that ultimately gains from everything. One is not safe from this, and thus the more prominent it becomes, and the more necessary it is for software to use it in desktop Linux, the more money its owner gains. This is fair from the point of view that Qt is Trolltech's property, but it is bad for free software since it ultimately comes down to very centralized business interests of a single party. It is a bit like building a free desktop environment in Windows, or (more accurately) building a community project with demo software. Scary, really: Given that KDE gets to the top, Trolltech has the power to hold the community hostage for Qt's availability to other developers. (They could boost the price of licensing to an incredibly number). With all the apps already using Qt, it would be impractical to swap libraries. The only choice would be that non-GPL developers either don't take KDE seriously, or they use a different toolkit. Either way, it is a loss for the environment and for accessibility.
Oh, and this already happens, by the way -- we're just lucky that KDE has an awesome community of free software developers and that Qt's licensing is only insurmountable to the small developers. It's just that there comes a point where non-GPLed stuff is the best or the only choice, and it just happens that, with the exception of KDE, every self-respecting desktop environment under the sun -- particularly the open platforms -- offers the ability to freely develop software because that environment wants a diverse community of developers, and it wants good software that works for everyone. Odd though it may sound, (what with its emphasis on freedom), KDE, with Qt, does not offer this.

A lot of the power of GNOME is accessibility. Sure, Qt does dynamically scalable widgets controlled by the UI toolkit, but the approach there is different.
With GTK, the only behaviour is the relative sizing / positioning with containers. If someone wants static positioning, he really has to work at it, or he has to do something dumb (a static position widget, which, I add, is still positioned dynamically).
With Qt, it is the opposite: The containers approach like GTK is available, but the default choice is static positioning.
Thus, while I cannot quite do the same for Qt, I can trust every native GNOME app to be completely scalable. I can expect to be able to change the font size and the language, and not have to give a hoot about the size of widgets. Everything just continues to fit perfectly. I can also expect any half-decent GTK app to have very accurately positioned widgets with consistent margins, without the distracting positioning errors that plague other ui toolkits. GTK's scalable widgets happen as a rule, whereas Qt's are more an option.

Sadly, many default apps used in Gnome-buntu happen to be out of place, not actually designed for the desktop, so people don't really get the full glory of that work. (For example, two very common programs: OpenOffice and Firefox).

The claim that GNOME has no future is pretty foolish. It is a fixer-upper, and could use a lot of tweaking (eg: Users & Groups admin is not as straight-forward as it could be), but that doesn't mean it is doomed in any sense! GNOME, just like KDE, is a really fun project to work on. I am definitely enjoying myself with my own little tweaks and adjustments, and while it may be using some weird little libraries, the whole thing works together really well.
There are indeed some oddities (such as the foot spinner in Nautilus, which is copied to other applications essentially by copy / paste), but these are really just opportunities to make some neat contributions that help move the project forward, bit by bit. Any operational desktop environment is a brilliant piece of engineering, and thus a joy to learn with and to work on.

aysiu
October 3rd, 2007, 02:24 AM
Hi, number 4 on your list is fixed. :KS

I love Gnome, and I'm glad there are things yet to fix, something to look forward to rather than just a release number bump. ;)
That's great to hear.

brokenstrides
October 3rd, 2007, 02:36 AM
Just read that the targeted release date is my birthday... What a great birthday this shall be! haha.

Incense
October 3rd, 2007, 07:18 AM
While I consider myself a KDE guy, I don't have a problem with Gnome. Load up a great theme (like the Ubuntu Studio theme) and I have a fast, stable, and great looking DE. I just happen to really like KDE apps a lot more then the GTK stuff. When the KDE4 hype dies down, I think we'll stop seeing so much worry about Gnome.

bonzodog
October 3rd, 2007, 09:58 AM
On top of all this is XFCE.

XFCE has been striving to make itself a complete DE lately, and does everything that Gnome or KDE can, and more. I am hearing more and more people moving to it. It's fast and light, and a complete DE.

XFCE uses the gtk tool kit for it's apps, but that's where the commonality ends. There has been a push of late to get away from using gdm as a login manager for xfce based distro's and thus work was pushed on SLiM- the Simple Login Manager, and that now handles session management in a more or less transparent way.

XFCE has Thunar for file management, it has XFmedia for it's media player (this needs work though -- it's underdeveloped), It relies on the mozilla suite for web and mail, it has applets now for a lot of things. It even has it's own compositor for the Window manager (xfwm).

So, don't hold your breath folks there really is a 3rd competitor in this now.

Erunno
October 3rd, 2007, 10:59 AM
As far as I know, GNOME is currently in a bit of a transitional phase as many old technologies are eliminated in favour of unifying the existing infrastructure. For example, it is a goal to remove gnome-panel's Bonobo dependency for applets and move that whole deal entirely over to d-bus.

You mean they are finally weeding out technologies which failed to gather around a sizeable community around them do to their alleged developer unfriendlyness (Bonobo, VFS)?



Oh, as for GTK vs. Qt, I still can't believe this is discussed. The two are fundamentally different: One is safe to use for free software that wants to avoid being tied down to a corporation that ultimately gains from everything. One is not safe from this, and thus the more prominent it becomes, and the more necessary it is for software to use it in desktop Linux, the more money its owner gains.

Okey, I'm not usually one to use strong words but this I call ********. Here's some new insight: GNOME is part of the GNU project and therefore should adhere to their ideals of Free Software. Maybe I've missed the disturbance in the force where Stallmann made a U-turn and now advocates closed source software for the sake of market penetration. Please, share your insight with me. Do yourself a favour and come clean: You don't like Windows and don't want to pay Microsoft for an operating system but don't try to cover behind the ideals of Free Software to give weight to your argument when you are actually proposing a desktop that is inherently friendly to closed source software and therfore denying the user his four freedoms. As inconvenient as it sometimes might seem Qt under the GPL license is a stronger advocate of Free Software than GTK+ right now.


This is fair from the point of view that Qt is Trolltech's property, but it is bad for free software since it ultimately comes down to very centralized business interests of a single party. It is a bit like building a free desktop environment in Windows, or (more accurately) building a community project with demo software.

Qt is released under the GPL, deal with it. Trolltech cannot pull back these versions and should Trolltech start to act funny everybody is free to take the last GPLed version and start a fork. Right now it's very convenient for KDE to use a toolkit which is constantly developed by a company to which they have a good relationship so they can concentrate on desktop tasks. Plus, Trolltech announced years ago that if one day they should go bancrupt they would release Qt under a BSD license.


Scary, really: Given that KDE gets to the top, Trolltech has the power to hold the community hostage for Qt's availability to other developers. (They could boost the price of licensing to an incredibly number). With all the apps already using Qt, it would be impractical to swap libraries. The only choice would be that non-GPL developers either don't take KDE seriously, or they use a different toolkit.

My question again: Do we really want to open up a desktop dedicated to Free Software to closed source software and thus denying us our freedoms?



GTK's scalable widgets happen as a rule, whereas Qt's are more an option.

In the end all you are saying is that a developer should know what he's doing. Got it.



Sadly, many default apps used in Gnome-buntu happen to be out of place, not actually designed for the desktop, so people don't really get the full glory of that work. (For example, two very common programs: OpenOffice and Firefox).

Yes, that is really unfortunate because you lose some integration (my favourite: system wide proxy settings) when using third-party apps. But sadly GNOME office simply is not an alternative to OpenOffice since it lacks one of the three major components of todays office suites: A presentation application. For occosional writing Abiword is already a very nice program and should be deployed more often. Even Epiphany is a really nice browser although I wish it had more extensions and some common functionality like different search engines.


The claim that GNOME has no future is pretty foolish. It is a fixer-upper, and could use a lot of tweaking (eg: Users & Groups admin is not as straight-forward as it could be), but that doesn't mean it is doomed in any sense! GNOME, just like KDE, is a really fun project to work on. I am definitely enjoying myself with my own little tweaks and adjustments, and while it may be using some weird little libraries, the whole thing works together really well.

Yes, the talk about GNOME dying is nonsense and not desireable. There has been a healthy competition between KDE and GNOME for years and in the end both profited from it in my opinion. For instance, now it's KDE turn to look at what GNOME did right with their HIG and try to port it their own system and design philosophy.


Any operational desktop environment is a brilliant piece of engineering, and thus a joy to learn with and to work on.

Amen.

Mr. Picklesworth
October 3rd, 2007, 05:20 PM
In the end all you are saying is that a developer should know what he's doing. Got it.Not just that, though. Using a GTK environment, it is very safe to trust that every application is extremely flexible, as it allows. However, with Qt, one must be more careful. An example I like to use is a handheld computer switching between portrait and landscape orientation. It is possible with both, there is a likelihood of some dumb programs messing it up with both, but with GTK that likelihood is definitely lower. (Or, it would be, if certain out of place programs did not become staples).


Erunno, I agree with you about the GPL there being a good thing for KDE's situation and goal. It is the 99% free desktop environment, and I don't think that will ever change, as it is a good thing for a lot of people passionate about the very free end of free software. The thing is that this puts it in a different place than GNOME; there are people who will not develop for KDE for this reason. Thus, the two choices will always coexist unless someone manages a less contageous version of the GPL. (Which would likely spark outrage).

I tend to word myself a bit wrong with that argument, being one who never quite understood the sanity of GPLing libraries. One reason being that, if it was a daemon with a d-bus interface doing the job instead of a library, the license would not be contageous. Doesn't make much sense to me, since the end result is identical. The contageous libraries thing seems almost like an accident -- an accident that causes license incompatibilities in piles of projects, wasting valuable time (and causing complications) for people pursuing the exact same goal with other OSI-certified free software licenses.
These licenses (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical) should work together, not against each other. The only licenses they should work against are the proprietary licenses; the ones we can agree to not like.

GNOME and KDE have never really been in "competition". They're two rivals pursuing different goals. They are both goals in the same place, but they are certainly not identical in their target audience. Sure, as they do, one wants to get there first, but when that happens, the clock keeps ticking.

Erunno
October 3rd, 2007, 06:35 PM
losts of words

I'm sorry if I sounded overly aggressive but I've encountered way too many hypocrites in these kind of discussions in the past who are yapping about Free Software in one moment just to complain about in the next moment that the GPL doesn't allow them to write closed source software.

I'm under the impression that there are people that want Linux to be more like the Eclipse platform, offering a freely extensible OSS platform and I can respect that but that's simply not what the FSF has in mind. I do not always agree with Mr. Stallman but I do respect his point of view. Nobody is forced to use GPL'ed libraries, it's not a god-given right and market penetration for the sake of it is not the end of all means. Personally I'm more interested in open and implementable formats specification than I am in Free Software but that's not a discussion suited for this thread.

And I've always thought of KDE and GNOME as competitors as they do in my opinion have the same goal: Being a general purpose, fully integrated desktop environment for different Unix platforms. They just chose to go different ways to achieve this goal with occasional certain urges to copy certain features and make them "better" than the other side :-)

cyneuron
October 3rd, 2007, 10:10 PM
may be this article explains why gnome still wins heart of so many people despite having far less options thatn KDE:

When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? (http://www.columbia.edu/~ss957/whenchoiceabstract.htm)

kadath
October 4th, 2007, 12:56 AM
On top of all this is XFCE.

XFCE has been striving to make itself a complete DE lately, and does everything that Gnome or KDE can, and more. I am hearing more and more people moving to it. It's fast and light, and a complete DE.

XFCE uses the gtk tool kit for it's apps, but that's where the commonality ends. There has been a push of late to get away from using gdm as a login manager for xfce based distro's and thus work was pushed on SLiM- the Simple Login Manager, and that now handles session management in a more or less transparent way.

XFCE has Thunar for file management, it has XFmedia for it's media player (this needs work though -- it's underdeveloped), It relies on the mozilla suite for web and mail, it has applets now for a lot of things. It even has it's own compositor for the Window manager (xfwm).

So, don't hold your breath folks there really is a 3rd competitor in this now.

QFT. Xfce is better than GNOME and KDE. :)

Fbot1
October 4th, 2007, 01:22 AM
may be this article explains why gnome still wins heart of so many people despite having far less options thatn KDE:

When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? (http://www.columbia.edu/~ss957/whenchoiceabstract.htm)

Meh, 6 is still a lot more than one. Besides that's not a very good experiment.

cyneuron
October 4th, 2007, 01:49 AM
Meh, 6 is still a lot more than one. Besides that's not a very good experiment.

Thats not a very good experiment, then read this article featured on Intel research website where author draw analogy from this article on success on various platforms available for making software designs to harness the power of multi-core processors:

The single most important paper for programming language designers to read came out in 2000. It wasn’t written by a computer scientist, mathematician, or physical scientist. It was written by a couple professors studying social psychology:

“When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire too Much of a Good Thing?” Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

Parallel programming environments: less is more (http://blogs.intel.com/research/2007/10/parallel_programming_environme.html#more)

Incense
October 4th, 2007, 02:06 AM
The nice thing about the DE choice, is that you really can't make a wrong choice. The libs generally play nicely in each DE, and if you want to see what's on the other side, it's only an apt-get/yum/ whatever away.

Fbot1
October 4th, 2007, 02:29 AM
Thats not a very good experiment, then read this article featured on Intel research website where author draw analogy from this article on success on various platforms available for making software designs to harness the power of multi-core processors:

The single most important paper for programming language designers to read came out in 2000. It wasnt written by a computer scientist, mathematician, or physical scientist. It was written by a couple professors studying social psychology:

When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire too Much of a Good Thing? Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

Parallel programming environments: less is more (http://blogs.intel.com/research/2007/10/parallel_programming_environme.html#more)

It's not the same though. It's not a "which of the 2 should I use to browse the web: Konqueror or Firefox?" type choice it's a "which of the 2 should I use to browse the web: Konqueror or Openoffice.org?" type choice. No one is going to think "Oh my! Should I move that bar thing or change the theme? Oh, what a dreadful choice to make!".

saulgoode
October 4th, 2007, 05:06 AM
One wonders about the level of satisfaction experienced by the 3% who chose from an offering of 24 options versus that of the 30% who made purchases from amongst six choices. Or shouldn't we concern ourselves with that?

awakatanka
October 4th, 2007, 09:45 AM
may be this article explains why gnome still wins heart of so many people despite having far less options thatn KDE:

When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? (http://www.columbia.edu/~ss957/whenchoiceabstract.htm)

People use what they get, at this point most big distro's use gnome standaard. Both have the same functions only if you want to change something then KDE offers GUI tools to change a lot. Lot of normal users don't change much on a system and then both are the same.

We are tweakers we think we know a lot and our choose is based on that. People on the workfloor will only change a background the rest they have no right to change, the system admins choose what to use for them.

Athome you do a little more but most users still don't change a lot. Only we tweakers do that.

Turin Turambar
November 29th, 2007, 12:49 AM
I just checked the pictures of KDE4.
Well, I couldn't believe it. It looks dated. I expected a whole new level.
Sorry, but if you want eye candy, see OS X Leopard. That's what I call a classy eye candy. It's the ultimate perfection in simplicity & beauty. I haven't seen an OS with that kind of style.

But for me, Gnome looks much more like OS X, in terms of menus and toolbars. KDE looks way too much windows like. I never liked its never ending menus, toolbar and I always hated digital clock. KDE icons are glossy, but kind of lame and big.

Indeed, I think Gnome was inferior to KDE 2 years ago... as far as I remember, it didn't even have a proper clipboard. But things are changed now. I don't know about you girls & guys, but my Gutsy Ubuntu is twice as fast as Feisty was, with compiz turned on (feisty used metacity)!
I'm very very very satisfied user of Ubuntu Gutsy. :)

bruce89
November 29th, 2007, 01:23 AM
But for me, Gnome looks much more like OS X, in terms of menus and toolbars. KDE looks way too much windows like. I never liked its never ending menus, toolbar and I always hated digital clock. KDE icons are glossy, but kind of lame and big.


Indeed, I think the Oxygen icons are awfully OS X like.

sloggerkhan
November 29th, 2007, 08:59 AM
may be this article explains why gnome still wins heart of so many people despite having far less options thatn KDE:

When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? (http://www.columbia.edu/~ss957/whenchoiceabstract.htm)

My problem with KDE apps and KDE and general usually isn't that there are too many options.... it's that I can't figure out where to find the options I actually want....

Epilonsama
December 1st, 2007, 05:07 AM
GNOME future is very dark as we seen GNOME is supporting OOXML, that abomination of a format that Microsoft created, therefore GNOME is supporting ooxml acceptance and ultimatley Microsoft plans to DESTROY Linux, and open source all together.

What's sad is that i really like GNOME but I think ill switch to kde4 when it comes out because I'm not going to support something that helps the destruction of Linux.

23meg
December 1st, 2007, 05:20 AM
GNOME future is very dark as we seen GNOME is supporting OOXML, that abomination of a format that Microsoft created, therefore GNOME is supporting ooxml acceptance and ultimatley Microsoft plans to DESTROY Linux, and open source all together.

What's sad is that i really like GNOME but I think ill switch to kde4 when it comes out because I'm not going to support something that helps the destruction of Linux.

Relevant reading: GNOME Foundation's statement on their involvement in OOXML (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=621547).

mrgnash
December 1st, 2007, 05:56 AM
GNOME future is very dark as we seen GNOME is supporting OOXML, that abomination of a format that Microsoft created, therefore GNOME is supporting ooxml acceptance and ultimatley Microsoft plans to DESTROY Linux, and open source all together.

What's sad is that i really like GNOME but I think ill switch to kde4 when it comes out because I'm not going to support something that helps the destruction of Linux.

A complete overreaction.

Nano Geek
December 1st, 2007, 06:02 AM
GNOME future is very dark as we seen GNOME is supporting OOXML, that abomination of a format that Microsoft created, therefore GNOME is supporting ooxml acceptance and ultimatley Microsoft plans to DESTROY Linux, and open source all together.

What's sad is that i really like GNOME but I think ill switch to kde4 when it comes out because I'm not going to support something that helps the destruction of Linux.You don't honestly believe that supporting a Microsoft file format is going to destroy the open-source movement do you? Should we remove any support of .doc, NTFS, and .wmv files from Ubuntu to?

adam.tropics
December 1st, 2007, 06:13 AM
You don't honestly believe that supporting a Microsoft file format is going to destroy the open-source movement do you? Should we remove any support of .doc, NTFS, and .wmv files from Ubuntu to?

When it all goes too far, all you end up doing is creating an isolated and in that sense proprietary platform, exactly what you're trying to fight against! We should support these formats. It doesn't mean we support the ethics behind them, just that our offerings are up to date and useful in mixed computing environments.

Incense
December 1st, 2007, 06:17 AM
When it all goes too far, all you end up doing is creating an isolated and in that sense proprietary platform, exactly what you're trying to fight against! We should support these formats. It doesn't mean we support the ethics behind them, just that our offerings are up to date and useful in mixed computing environments.

Well said.

gamma
December 2nd, 2007, 08:40 AM
I haven't read all the posts in this thread, but I remember reading something funny about kde and gnome (on OSnews I think, sorry whoever wrote this). But to summarize what they said:

Back in the day there was just KDE, but Miguel de Icaza and a few others thought an open source desktop shouldn't be released under such a restrictive toolkit (Qt, which was using a proprietary license at the time). Gnome was created to counter this proprietary link, to create a more open desktop.

Today the tides seem to have changed. Miguel de Icaza is pushing Mono, a controversial framework and is focusing his time implementing Silverlight, an open source version of Microsoft's "flash killer." Trolltech has redeemed themselves and Qt is released under the GPL license. Ironic, huh? :P

23meg
December 2nd, 2007, 08:59 AM
Today the tides seem to have changed. Miguel de Icaza is pushing Mono, a controversial framework and is focusing his time implementing Silverlight, an open source version of Microsoft's "flash killer." Trolltech has redeemed themselves and Qt is released under the GPL license. Ironic, huh? :P

Miguel de Icaza is no longer associated with GNOME; his pushing of Mono and Silverlight is his personal activity. Mono and Moonlight are free software, and GNOME isn't associated with them either.

If the person you paraphrase is talking about Miguel de Icaza, depending on their positions on software freedom and possible patent issues, I can understand how they see irony. But if it's a KDE vs. GNOME thing, I don't see it.

gamma
December 2nd, 2007, 09:00 PM
Miguel de Icaza is no longer associated with GNOME; his pushing of Mono and Silverlight is his personal activity. Mono and Moonlight are free software, and GNOME isn't associated with them either.

If the person you paraphrase is talking about Miguel de Icaza, depending on their positions on software freedom and possible patent issues, I can understand how they see irony. But if it's a KDE vs. GNOME thing, I don't see it.
I think he found the irony in the fact Miguel de Icaza wanted an open platform and he's working toward the opposite. I do agree KDE and Gnome are both just as open today so that really isn't an issue. Mono is slowly making it's way onto the desktop (Tomboy for example ships with vanilla Gnome) so depending on your thoughts with Mono it could lead to some ideological issues.

What's the controversy behind Mono again? I understand it's free and it's C# and Microsoft doesn't "own" the language I believe. Is it due to their implementation of WinForms that could cause some issues in the future? That's the only thing I can think of, but then at the same time why hasn't Microsoft sued wine for implementing Windows APIs?

happysmileman
December 2nd, 2007, 09:29 PM
That's the only thing I can think of, but then at the same time why hasn't Microsoft sued wine for implementing Windows APIs?

Because they aren't really implementing the WinAPI, they're reverse engineering it and making a similar one that tries to mimic it without ever using more than the details Microsoft makes available and their own debuggers.

There aren't patent problems because you can't patent the concept of that API or it's functions (ie. You can't patent a button because it's not specific enough, and if they patented the way it worked then they could program it a different way).
And there aren't copyright problems because they don't use any of Microsoft's code (and if you've worked with MS's code you probably wouldn't even be allow submit any code to WINE).

But back on topic, I'm not going to install Mono or Moonlight on my computer, and since Mono seems to be working it's way into a good few core GNOME apps, that means I won't install GNOME, that's one of my reasons for using KDE (The others being that I prefer QT and it seems better for developers). If there was an option to not support OOXML in KOffice then I'd not use OOXML, but I suppose I'll have to wait and see about that.

LuisAugusto
December 2nd, 2007, 09:51 PM
Because they aren't really implementing the WinAPI, they're reverse engineering it and making a similar one that tries to mimic it without ever using more than the details Microsoft makes available and their own debuggers.

There aren't patent problems because you can't patent the concept of that API or it's functions (ie. You can't patent a button because it's not specific enough, and if they patented the way it worked then they could program it a different way).
And there aren't copyright problems because they don't use any of Microsoft's code (and if you've worked with MS's code you probably wouldn't even be allow submit any code to WINE).



But they are violating Microsoft license, it clearly stated that you aren't allowed to make them reverse engineering, but what I personally believed is that wine developers are making reverse engineering to applications that doesn't state this, and, in that way getting a compatible WinAPI API.