why choose Gnome ?

[weasel fierce]

I was talking to a friend last night about gnome and KDE, and he is a rather staunch KDE fan. Im not overly worried about either type, I plan to try KDE at some point, just to toy around with it, when I understand Ubuntu a bit better.

However, what does Gnome do, that KDE doesnt ? Or in other words, why use Gnome ?

:)

[drizek]

nothing really. but i guess thats why people like it.

[Qrk]

There isn't much of a real difference between them... well actually that is wrong. There is a rather large difference between them, but they are both about equal in usability terms. KDE has some more eyecandy, Gnome has some neater functions as well.

If you like icons, KDE. If you like panels, Gnome.

KDE has a few applications that aren't as well mirrored in Gnome, like K3B. But then again, evolution is much nicer than Kmail (IMHO) And, of course, if you want K3B, just apt-get it and it will run just fine, (if a little ugly) in Gnome.

I don't know if I buy the whole Gnome=Mac, KDE=windows. I think if Apple continued to devolop OS 9, they might have got to Gnome. And if Windows had decided to beat Apple at their own game in eye candy, they might have made KDE.

But both are unique and complete. I personally use GNOME, because I like the interface. Just remember that whichever you use, it is still Linux underneath, so it isn't hard to switch from one to the other.

[matthew]

However, what does Gnome do, that KDE doesnt ? Or in other words, why use Gnome ?:)
The difference between the two is primarily in personal taste, not functionality.

I think you have the right idea. Start by installing with the Ubuntu defaults and as you get some experience and feel more comfortable/confident try out KDE. You might also enjoy trying some of the other window managers after that like xfce and fluxbox.

[aysiu]

Gnome can install themes more easily.
"Install theme."
That's it.

With KDE, I have to un-tar and copy files and folders into /usr/share/icons or /home/username/.icons.

[drizek]

Gnome can install themes more easily.
"Install theme."
That's it.

With KDE, I have to un-tar and copy files and folders into /usr/share/icons or /home/username/.icons.
lol, no you dont. if you want to install an iconset you just go into the icons thing in kcontrol and click "add package"(or something like that)

but you have to install styles/windecos from debs though. but its not a big deal.

[aysiu]

lol, no you dont. if you want to install an iconset you just go into the icons thing in kcontrol and click "add package"(or something like that) Maybe it's just the icon packages I download, then, but I've never been successful at installing icons in KDE that way. It's always an invalid format.

[drizek]

Maybe it's just the icon packages I download, then, but I've never been successful at installing icons in KDE that way. It's always an invalid format.
ive never had a problem with any. the only time that doesnt work is when there are only 4 or 5 icons and they arent a real set. but otherwise, sets like nuvola install very easily.

[benplaut]

gnome focuses more on usability, KDE tries to give you every option under the sun.

Usability=gnome
Tweakability=KDE

try both and generate your own opinion ;-)

also, KDE is a bit more resource intensive than Gnome... it's a bit sluggish on my PM1.5, 768mb RAM

[Galoot]

Gnome can install themes more easily.
"Install theme."
That's it.

With KDE, I have to un-tar and copy files and folders into /usr/share/icons or /home/username/.icons.
Interestingly, I've run into this same issue on occasion with Gnome. I think it's the package's fault more than the UI's.

[drummer]

Interestingly, I've run into this same issue on occasion with Gnome. I think it's the package's fault more than the UI's.
I've had to manually install a few things to do with different themes in Gnome, and this is often to a missing or incorrect 'theme.index' file in the tarball, or bad folder structure in the tarball.

[weasel fierce]

Thanks a bunch. I rather like the "feel" of Gnome, but I'll try out KDE along the way.

Could I install it unto my current installation, or would I need to reinstall ?
What about getting rid of it again, if I dont like it?

[Knome_fan]

Thanks a bunch. I rather like the "feel" of Gnome, but I'll try out KDE along the way.

That's the nice thing, you can choose between two really good desktop environments.



Could I install it unto my current installation, or would I need to reinstall ?
What about getting rid of it again, if I dont like it?
Should be no problem.
The best way to install it is to simply install kubuntu-desktop (and maybe kubuntu-settings, if it doesn't get pulled in automatically).

The easiest way I found to get rid of KDE again is to simply uninstall kdelibs-bin, as everything KDE depends on it.
Of course this will also get rid of KDE apps you might be using with Gnome, so you'll have to reinstall them.

Have fun! :grin:

[doclivingston]

As people have said, the best thing to do is install both and use each of them for a while (a week, a couple of weeks or whatever). After you've done that you'll know which you prefer, and you'll also have learnt more about them.

Whichever you choose, you can run applications desgined for both Gnome and KDE - it's just that running applications designed for the other desktop environment will feel a bit out of place.

[a-nubi-s]

Originally Posted by weasel fierce
what does Gnome do, that KDE doesnt ?
Gnome punishes its users with Metacity, KDE doesn't. End of story for me. :-P

[A-star]

I prefer gnome because KDE reminds me too much of Windows.

[agger]

Gnome punishes its users with Metacity, KDE doesn't. End of story for me. :-P

Hopeless n00b question: WTF is metacity (and what bad does it do)?

I'm happy running Gnome, but the main reason I use it is I'm running Ubuntu
and it has Gnome as default. If my first Linux distro had been Knoppix, I'd
probably be happy about KDE, too ... As a matter of fact, I have been running
KDE on my FreeBSD box once in a while, but then I'd already got used to Gnome,
and KDE seemed too "Windows-like".

apart from that, I understand that there are technical differences - between Qt and GTK - but I don't know of any technical reasons to prefer one over the other.

[drummer]

Metacity is what draws the windows/window borders in Gnome. I'm not sure what KDE uses, but Metacity isn't the fastest or most efficient app at rendering windows from what i've seen and read. Although i don't think we're being _punished_ as such with Metacity as per the post above. It does it's job ok and should improve with newer versions of Gnome and X.

[Stormy Eyes]

Gnome punishes its users with Metacity, KDE doesn't. End of story for me. :-P


sudo apt-get install openbox openbox-themes obconf
alt+F2
openbox --replace

Metacity sucks, Havoc Pennington wouldn't recognise good design if it held a sword to his throat, and it is possible to use a better window manager in GNOME. Any questions?

[Knome_fan]

Metacity sucks, Havoc Pennington wouldn't recognise good design if it held a sword to his throat, and it is possible to use a better window manager in GNOME. Any questions?

Yes. What exactly is so terrible about metacity?
I know there are a lot of people who really, really hate it, but I never really understood why.

[BoyOfDestiny]

sudo apt-get install openbox openbox-themes obconf
alt+F2
openbox --replace

Metacity sucks, Havoc Pennington wouldn't recognise good design if it held a sword to his throat, and it is possible to use a better window manager in GNOME. Any questions?

The screen shots for openbox look great. Is this "cairo" thing the reason openbox is not the default?

[frodon]

To be clear : KDE have a ugly interface, at the time based on proprietary libraries whereas gnome is based on the beautiful GTK libraries which are not proprietary since the beginning.

For me it's as simple as that.

[lao_V]

To be clear : KDE have a ugly interface based on proprietary libraries whereas gnome is based on the beautiful GTK libraries which are not proprietary.

For me it's as simple as that.

Are you referring to QT under KDE as being proprietary? If so you need to read this (http://kde.org/whatiskde/qt.php)

[frodon]

Are you referring to QT under KDE as being proprietary? If so you need to read this (http://kde.org/whatiskde/qt.php)Of course, but as your link show it,it's not the case now ! . But it's still one of the reasons which make me prefer the spirit of gnome, and i also prefer GTK design than QT.

But endeed gnome have a lack of some great apps that KDE haven't (k3b, amarok, ...), but we have to keep in mind that gnome is younger.

Therfore, objectively, both are good and for different reasons.

[Knome_fan]

Of course, but as your link show it,it's going to change ! even if there isn't free software license for the moment.
No, it's not. Stop spreading lies.
http://kdemyths.urbanlizard.com/viewMyth.php?mythID=10
http://kdemyths.urbanlizard.com/viewMyth.php?mythID=13



But it's still one of the reasons which make me prefer the spirit of gnome, and i also prefer GTK design than QT.
Feel free to prefer GTK, however I just hope you have other reasons apart from untruths.

[frodon]

No, it's not. Stop spreading lies.I just report what is written in the Iao_V's links, read it with care. (what i didn't [-X )

[Knome_fan]

I just report what is written in the Iao_V's links, read it with care.
I did and I still don't know what you talking about.

[lao_V]

I just report what is written in the Iao_V's links, read it with care.

And this is what it says there:

"Now that Qt is 100% Open Source (or "free software"), all possible licensing problems have pretty much vanished. This page, therefore, is no longer relevant or accurate."

[frodon]

Yep you're right, i make a nonsense reading the first part, sorry for that, i'will punish myself for that :smile: (english is not my first language).
So i'm going to edit my previous post.

Happy to know that QT became non-proprietary ! ;-)

[Knome_fan]

Yep you're right, i make a nonsense reading the first part, sorry for that, i'will punish myself for that :smile: (english is not my first language).
So i'm going to edit my previous post.

Happy to know that QT became non-proprietary now ! ;-)
On September 04 2000, to be precise. ;-)

[aysiu]

I prefer gnome because KDE reminds me too much of Windows. I hear this a lot, and I never know what it means. To me, Gnome and KDE are both "like Windows," in that they have a kind of Start Menu (either the foot or the K menu), and a bar on the bottom. They have a window list for switching tasks. If you're talking about sheer appearance in terms of themes--you don't have to stay with the default theme. I've got my KDE decked out to be quite Mac-like.

[Brunellus]

I hear this a lot, and I never know what it means. To me, Gnome and KDE are both "like Windows," in that they have a kind of Start Menu (either the foot or the K menu), and a bar on the bottom. They have a window list for switching tasks. If you're talking about sheer appearance in terms of themes--you don't have to stay with the default theme. I've got my KDE decked out to be quite Mac-like.
KDE's default is much, much closer to Windows than GNOME's default.

[Lovechild]

GNOME presents me with an interface that's tweaked for usability, there's a lot of thought going into not just providing new *bling* features but presenting them in a way that's natural for me to use. Whereas KDE is just one big mess, it might have a nice API but it's still a big mess from a usability pov.

GNOME has good defaults, when you use a GNOME application it works in a consistent manner with the general interface, looks basically the same as all other applications - the HIG is a good thing for real human beings.

The GNOME platform is welltested and development is steady, new features are added and old crufty design is removed without depriving power users of the choice to customize their interface.

There's a reason why the 4 major viable distributions ship GNOME by default (Fedora, Ubuntu, Novell Linux Desktop and Redhat Enterprise), it's a good desktop, it's intuitive and it's crafted with support for good translations, accessability and sanity.

*personal note*

I don't see what people have against metacity, it seems to work just fine for me, I could find ways to simplify it a tad but aside that Metacity is a decent WM.

[XDevHald]

KDE has to much to give and to much that you don't need to use. Really it's a butterface of windows. I'm not hating on KDE fans, but Gnome provides better optimizations and options are more clearer to use than KDE and it's not like you're going to run into any .core problems with gnome anyways ;)

[lao_V]

GNOME has good defaults

I haven't used GNOME for some time now but correct me if I'm wrong.

Isn't it the case that the default Nautilus window doesn't have the address/location bar and when you double click each folder it opens a new winodw and closes the previous one?

I know you can tweak it to have a "browser" style but shouldn't it have this by default? At least that's how I like to browse for files.

[Lovechild]

I haven't used GNOME for some time now but correct me if I'm wrong.

Isn't it the case that the default Nautilus window doesn't have the address/location bar and when you double click each folder it opens a new winodw and closes the previous one?

I know you can tweak it to have a "browser" style but shouldn't it have this by default? At least that's how I like to browse for files.

That largely depends on how you define your usage - spatial nautilus, I personally like it, not that I generally like file browsing - I think technologies such as beagle will obsolete it all together.

The default in breezy I'm told will be the navigational nautilus, I don't fully agree with this diverging from mainline but spatial is a heavily contested part of GNOME. I happen to think it's fairly intuitive but deep structure are frustrating, browser mode isn't entirely problem free either - it has problems with the bookmarks implementation and spaced paths (bug filed by yours truly).

[aysiu]

KDE's default is much, much closer to Windows than GNOME's default. In what ways? I'm serious. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'd just like to hear some specific examples, since, as far as I can tell, Gnome and KDE are equally similar to and different from Windows. Maybe I'm wrong, though--I'd just like to hear why.


KDE has to much to give and to much that you don't need to use. Really it's a butterface of windows. Can you please be more specific? I actually find a lot of KDE features quite helpful. For example, I don't have to download numlockx and manually tweak a config file to get numlock to turn on when I boot up. I can have mounted partitions show up on my desktop automatically. I can edit the KMenu without installing SMEG (granted, Breezy now comes with SMEG--Hoary didn't). I'm not saying KDE is "better" than Gnome. In fact, I'm quite torn between the two right now, but to say it has "to[o] much that you don't need to use" is just unsubstantiated projection.

[Knome_fan]

Here we go again... :roll:

[doclivingston]

One of the maxims that most gnome applications follow is that you shouldn't put in preferences for no reason. It's better to choose the thing that works for 99% of people, than ask the user to make a decision. The developer not being able to make a decision on what is best isn't a good reason to add a preference. Having less preferences if good for a number of reasons:

* Most users don't know what the best choice is, so they will get confused by all the options and choose the wrong one.
* Having all those different options means that there are more possible combinations, and a much greater potential more bugs that occur due to difference in preferences



I haven't used GNOME for some time now but correct me if I'm wrong.

Isn't it the case that the default Nautilus window doesn't have the address/location bar and when you double click each folder it opens a new winodw and closes the previous one?

I know you can tweak it to have a "browser" style but shouldn't it have this by default? At least that's how I like to browse for files.

That's one of those divisive preferences, that no-one can agree on what should be the default. Some people prefer spatial mode, some will prefer browser mode and others will just use whatever is the default.

[aysiu]

Here we go again... :roll: Sure it's been talked about in the past (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=60783), but I think people are being fairly civil for the most part. It hasn't turned into a flamefest, yet.

I, for one, like both Gnome and KDE. As I said before, I'm torn between the two (and I like XFCE as well). Like distros, desktop environments should be "to each her own."

[lao_V]

That's one of those divisive preferences, that no-one can agree on what should be the default. Some people prefer spatial mode, some will prefer browser mode and others will just use whatever is the default.

I haven't come accross anyone apart from Lovechild who likes that view. Doing a search on this forum will present you with numerous questions on how to change that view to navigational mode.

In contrast, I haven't seen a single question on how to remove the address bar from konqueror :-)

But I see your point. Its difficult to please everyone at all times.

[Knome_fan]

Sure it's been talked about in the past (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=60783), but I think people are being fairly civil for the most part. It hasn't turned into a flamefest, yet.

I, for one, like both Gnome and KDE. As I said before, I'm torn between the two (and I like XFCE as well). Like distros, desktop environments should be "to each her own."

I agree with your sentiment there.

It's just that blank statements like

Whereas KDE is just one big mess, it might have a nice API but it's still a big mess from a usability pov. really get on my nerves.
Now don't get me wrong, I would absolutely agree that improving usability should be one of the prime goals of KDE and luckily it is nowadays, but the sentence I just quoted simply sounds like smashing the project and I frankly don't like that.

I simply have a hard time to understand why people can't just enjoy the DE they prefer, but always feel the need to badmouth other projects. Amazing.

[aysiu]

I simply have a hard time to understand why people can't just enjoy the DE they prefer, but always feel the need to badmouth other projects. Amazing. I'm not sure what the phenomenon is called, but I think it's the opposite of buyer's remorse. If you bash what you don't use, it makes you feel better about what you do use: "I'm so glad I chose X because Y sucks and could never measure up."

[doclivingston]

I haven't come accross anyone apart from Lovechild who likes that view. Doing a search on this forum will present you with numerous questions on how to change that view to navigational mode.

Probably because the people who like spatial don't need to ask how to change anything. I'm fairly sure there'll be people who ask about it, after Breezy is released.

[XDevHald]

It hasn't turned into a flamefest, yet.


Let's not get it there either. Reason why I prefer Gnome over KDE is because of the color, and also options available in which I don't use and see no reason removing either. A lot of users have their own way of using a desktop for certain projects and myself don't find KDE to a project desktop for what I do.

Again, it's a users opinion, not a flamwar that is not needing to be started.

[Perfect Storm]

I'm not sure what the phenomenon is called, but I think it's the opposite of buyer's remorse. If you bash what you don't use, it makes you feel better about what you do use: "I'm so glad I chose X because Y sucks and could never measure up."

I'll sign that!

I don't mind people pointing out some issues in the diffrent DEs, but people should also have in mind that every DE have an Idea why they are as they are, what every DE are aiming at/to.
The other thing is what the user(s) are looking for. We're all diffrent with diffrent needs and thank god that there is diffrent DEs to choose to fulfill the diffrent tastes :)


.:=The AI Dude=:.

[Wolki]

I haven't come accross anyone apart from Lovechild who likes that view. Doing a search on this forum will present you with numerous questions on how to change that view to navigational mode.

In contrast, I haven't seen a single question on how to remove the address bar from konqueror :-)

Believe me, Lovechild is not the only one.

And if I could have spatial konqueror, I'd try it again :) The only browser-style filemanager i click with is Rox, Konqueror is too complicated and still doesn't do what I want it to do, and Nautilus --browser is horrible.

But don't worry, Browser mode is default in Gnome 2.12.

[Perfect Storm]

Damn! Then I have to turn it off...

<== Spatial Nautilus user.

[weasel fierce]

my apologies, but "spatial" ?

WHat does that refer to specifically ?

[XDevHald]

my apologies, but "spatial" ?

WHat does that refer to specifically ?
Spatial: Of or pertaining to space. "Spatial quantity and relations.

I think he meant in a different terminology as in "Special" but phrased differently.

[Perfect Storm]

Umm...I think you can also use the word "simple".

[weasel fierce]

my bad. I meant, what is it, in the gnome environment ?

[Qrk]

When browsing files, each new folder opens up in a new window (ubuntu keeps the same window, but the default gnome is different) and each window remembers where it was the last time you clicked on it. The idea is that the folders of files seem more like real things, because they are always in the same place.

Spacial browsing is great, if you don't have to go into many subfolders. To do that on gnome, its easiest to go into file browsing mode in nautilus, which is the "normal" way like on KDE or windows.

[cyclister]

I choose GTK beacuse I ride bikes simple as that, gnomes eat dust and dirt I love dirtbikes (in the mythologi).
K what ever the name is cant remember but cant eat a crap, and has surely not to do with acinent religuoshistory so I chose by gods.
Amen

[xequence]

They are quite differen in my opinion. I think gnome looks more mature and KDE looks childish, but, heh. Just my opinion.

I think gnome is much more customizeable and professional. KDE looks all hacked and pieced together.

ALso in my opinion KDE is slower.

In terms of what looks like windows and mac? Neither do to me, though I can get gnome to look like mac OSX after customized alot. KDE doesent look like windows...

In the end, to me, gnome is better in every single way except KDE is better at having the window list on two rows or more.

[bob_c_b]

This is my first foray back in to Gnome since Red Hat 8 and I like it far better than KDE at this point in it's life cycle. KDE feels cluttered to me, and while somewhat easier to tweak up and add tons of bling, I find it cumbersome. Not a knock, just my current take, nothing says 6 weeks from now I won't be playing with KDE or XFCE, part of the joy of Linux, total flexibility.

[aysiu]

They are quite differen in my opinion. I think gnome looks more mature and KDE looks childish, but, heh. Just my opinion. I think gnome is much more customizeable and professional. KDE looks all hacked and pieced together. You think this (http://www.osnews.com/img/8286/ubuntu1.png) looks more mature and professional than this (http://debianusers.org/albums/album01/kubuntu.sized.png)? You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I couldn't disagree more!



ALso in my opinion KDE is slower. This I can heartily agree with.



In terms of what looks like windows and mac? Neither do to me, though I can get gnome to look like mac OSX after customized alot. KDE doesent look like windows... Once again--right on.



In the end, to me, gnome is better in every single way except KDE is better at having the window list on two rows or more. Really? In "every single way"? How do you turn numlock on during bootup in Gnome? How do you get partitions to show up on the desktop in Gnome? Pre-Breezy, how do you edit the Gnome menu? These things can all be done, of course, but if those features are important to you, KDE's much better for those. KPackage also installs .debs graphically. I'm not saying KDE is "better," but you certainly can't argue it's worse in "every single way."

[Knome_fan]

ALso in my opinion KDE is slower.


This I can heartily agree with.

Hm, I'm currently playing around with KDE on Suse 10 RC1 and it's certainly a lot faster than anything I've seen with Gnome on Ubuntu.
Apps open almost instantly, it's amazing.

Haven't gotten around to playing around with Gnome on Suse yet, so I can't really comment on it, but I certainly wouldn't call KDE slow.

[gflores]

But endeed gnome have a lack of some great apps that KDE haven't (k3b, amarok, ...), but we have to keep in mind that gnome is younger.


This is one of the reasons why the idea of having two prevalent desktop environments is bad. It just seems to divisive because you'll have two good programs (say media players) but can only use one of them that fits your DE. Well, you can still install it, but it looks fugly...

KDE could definitely use some improvement (perhaps KDE Lite), but I seem to be more comfortable with it compared to Gnome.

[Lovechild]

But don't worry, Browser mode is default in Gnome 2.12.

What kind of crack have you been smoking?

Spatial is the default upstream, Navigational is the default in Ubuntu.

[Knome_fan]

What kind of crack have you been smoking?

Spatial is the default upstream, Navigational is the default in Ubuntu.

While we're happily passing around the crack pipe, afaik Ubuntu will default to browser mode:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=60851

[Lovechild]

While we're happily passing around the crack pipe, afaik Ubuntu will default to browser mode:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=60851

Which was what I said..

*rolls a big ass joint*

While we are doing drugs..

[Knome_fan]

Which was what I said..

*rolls a big ass joint*

While we are doing drugs..

Pass it on bro.
/me was getting all confused by the gnome simplification so that I thought navigational was something different from browser.

[xequence]

You think this (http://www.osnews.com/img/8286/ubuntu1.png) looks more mature and professional than this (http://debianusers.org/albums/album01/kubuntu.sized.png)? You're entitled to your opnion, of course, but I couldn't disagree more!


Uh, there are more windows open in the gnome one. But, yes. Are you trying to tell me gnome uses a whole bunch of different windows to change things, while KDE uses one? Maybe it does, I havnt really noticed yet.



Really? In "every single way"? How do you turn numlock on during bootup in Gnome? How do you get partitions to show up on the desktop in Gnome? Pre-Breezy, how do you edit the Gnome menu? These things can all be done, of course, but if those features are important to you, KDE's much better for those. KPackage also installs .debs graphically. I'm not saying KDE is "better," but you certainly can't argue it's worse in "every single way."

In every single way I can think of. I tried to put alot of "in my opinions" and "I think" in my paragraph so people wouldent be all "No, your wrong!" when its everyones opinion ;) How do I turn on numlock? Ubuntuguide says how, I really dont have much of a problem pressing numlock to log in. I was gonna do it one day but realised, heh, its not a big deal. About setting up partitions, ubuntuguide also says that, and it works great for me. No problems. I have a nice little "Safe" folder linking to my FAT32 partition that I keep things if my XP or ubuntu partitions ever mess up. Well, not anymore, as I wanted to try debian and I cant resize ext3. Editing the menu, im sure people need to do that, but I have smeg installed. I dont use it though since I havnt had a need.

[aysiu]

In every single way I can think of. I tried to put alot of "in my opinions" and "I think" in my paragraph so people wouldent be all "No, your wrong!" when its everyones opinion ;) "In every single way I can think of" would have been a lot better of a qualifier!



How do I turn on numlock? Ubuntuguide says how, I really dont have much of a problem pressing numlock to log in. I was gonna do it one day but realised, heh, its not a big deal. About setting up partitions, ubuntuguide also says that, and it works great for me. No problems. I have a nice little "Safe" folder linking to my FAT32 partition that I keep things if my XP or ubuntu partitions ever mess up. Well, not anymore, as I wanted to try debian and I cant resize ext3. Editing the menu, im sure people need to do that, but I have smeg installed. I dont use it though since I havnt had a need. I didn't intend for you to answer that question. I already know you can do all that stuff in Gnome... with some extra work. The point I was trying to make is that in KDE you don't have to do all sorts of extra stuff to get those things working. If those things are important to you, then KDE is better in those ways. If those things aren't important to you, then KDE isn't.

[Wolki]

What kind of crack have you been smoking?

Spatial is the default upstream, Navigational is the default in Ubuntu.

Oops, sorry. I thought I read somewhere that Gnome switched too. It's default in Breezy, but easily switched back to the normal behavior.

[chajuram]

Hi,

I personally use Gnome, but I have tried to dabble with KDE a little. First things first, I like both better than Windows (much, much, much better).

I use gnome partly because I started with it (lethargy) and partly becasue I prefer to have a simple desktop environment.

KDE looks are definitely good, it is also very intuitive. It is an interesting experience browsing through all the options that KDE has to offer. But at the end of the day I prefer gnome, I can't really find precise reasons. Perhaps it is like belief in God, you either do it or you don't, difficult to get talked into it. Also KDE seems just a tad slower than gnome.

One thing that has really impressed me about gnome has been the gdesklet applets. I absolutely love them. I am sure KDE has similar things (Karamba perhaps) but I have not used them. I think the gdesklets do add an oomph to the eye-candy that it is believed to lack.

Chajuram.

[chajuram]

Thanks a bunch. I rather like the "feel" of Gnome, but I'll try out KDE along the way.

Could I install it unto my current installation, or would I need to reinstall ?
What about getting rid of it again, if I dont like it?

sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop

should install KDE on your ubuntu desktop. You will be prompted whether you want KDM or GDM (KDE or Gnome login manager), choose which ever you like, you can change later. Also you will have the choice to booting into KDE or genome each time you log in. Look at this page for details. http://www.kubuntu.org/faq.php

You should be able to remove it using "sudo apt-get remove kubuntu-desktop", like you can any package. There are some nice KDE applications that you might actually like you use. I like amarok and kaffeine and kile as a latex front end.

Chajuram.

[phrozen]

You think this (http://www.osnews.com/img/8286/ubuntu1.png) looks more mature and professional than this (http://debianusers.org/albums/album01/kubuntu.sized.png)? You're entitled to your opnion, of course, but I couldn't disagree more!

for one there are like 3 windows open in gnome and only one open in KDE
evan tho i have yet to properly use linux, from what i have read i think gnome would me more to my liking, but then again, when i was introduced to linux i was intrduced with ubuntu running gnome, so that influences my decision as when i get my computer sorted out with linux i first dist a think of is ubuntu with gnome, not debian or anything else, well i had a think about freebsd for making a server set-up
MY personal OPINION is that gnome is better