2004 Linux distro

[renato]

I also have an Mp3 player in my car, but it works with CD-Roms so I have a rewritable CD-Rom which I use as a sort of Cd Loader and I keep on erasing it and reloading it many times. And K3b is great for this task. I had no problem adding K3b (and other programs) to Gnome menu, and I also think Linux is a mater of choices. But if they want Gnome to be the Default desktop for the average Windows user, they should make some things easier, especially menu editing.

[nuopus]

LOL This KDE vs GNOME debate always starts a big thread! Anyway ... ya it is a matter of taste and I guess also depends on previous experience.

I think many people with LOTS of experience with MS Windows will want KDE. Me, I have never really went the Windows route ... I continued to run my BBS through Desqview 386 when others were moving to WFWG 3.11 . and it just continued to the BSDs from there ... then to every linux known to man and finally Gentoo and now Ubuntu. So, since I have never had the Windows experience really .... I hate its looks are prefer the simplicity of CDE, XFCE or any of the NeXTish window managers. The way Ubuntu did GNOME is tasteful with the no desktop icons thing. I absolutely HATE things on the desktop.

[adbak]

I agree, Ubuntu should be the Linux Distro of 2004. It shot to the Top 5 according to DistroWatch's page hits for 1 month, soon to surpass SuSE into the third spot. Any distro that can do that in the first few months of being released is certainly in the running.

I first started out with Linux with Knoppix. I couldn't stand KDE. It just looked repulsive. I'm so glad that I found Gnome and in such a great distribution.

[im_ka]

I also have an Mp3 player in my car, but it works with CD-Roms so I have a rewritable CD-Rom which I use as a sort of Cd Loader and I keep on erasing it and reloading it many times.

yea, same here

[Sorin Paliga]

Hi to all,

1. Correction: Ubuntu is, I think, the only ppc linux distro which installs smoothly and easily, that's what I meant. Besides, it runs OK, that's what I meant too. The other Linux ppc distros have always put a problem, major or minor. Hat off to Gentoo, if it were simpler, or at least with a clearer read-me file. As a constant mac os user, I think that simple and clear read-me files are the best way to success.
2. Gnome or/and KDE? I do not know... Rumours say that some guys are considering Aqua as a possible Linux UI. Well, I do not think this is possible immediately. Perhaps Looking Glass will give an impulse. Basically, I would be inclined for Gnome, if last version of KDE were not indeed better, at least in easily configuring additional keyboard layouts (we use a lot of languages here, and that's important).

Generally, I do understand the basic philosophy of both KDE and Gnome: do it as close to Windows as possible, with the naive credo that this would make users hasten to adopt Linux. In my mind, a COMPLETELY NEW UI in Linux would be (would have been) a more attractive alternative than a Windows-like UI. Maybe I'm wrong...

[asimon]

I do understand the basic philosophy of both KDE and Gnome: do it as close to Windows as possible, with the naive credo that this would make users hasten to adopt Linux.

Sorry but I think you neither have a deep understanding of the philosophy of KDE nor of Gnome because they both don't have the philiosophy you say.

EDIT: If you by philosophy mean the basic Windows/Icons/Menus/Pointers-interface then you're right. But that is because there isn't yet a better working interface. But the aim of the KDE developers is not to immitate an other system. The aim is just to develop an usable and effective interface. That means if something has already proven to be usable and effective it makes sense to just take that. Also note that although you can configure KDE to look very similar to Windows you can also configure it in a way that it looks very different.

[FLeiXiuS]

Sorry but I think you neither have a deep understanding of the philosophy of KDE nor of Gnome because they both don't have the philiosophy you say.

No philosophy is needed, gnome is just better then kde ! In my perspective!

[jdodson]

No philosophy is needed, gnome is just better then kde ! In my perspective!

i wouldnt say kde is "better," though personally i prefer gnome to kde. i think originally it was because gnome looked more UNwindows that kde, though that is completley debatable

anyways in the long run, its whatever you like, you can use. which is why i love linux, you can choose. kde and gnome people should join hands and say "we have choice." we shouldnt toss up our hands in the air and scream, "YOU SUCK!" (i am not saying you said that btw).

i think it is cool so many hackers use gnu/linux.

rock on.

[jayclark]

"we shouldnt toss up our hands in the air and scream, "YOU SUCK!" (i am not saying you said that btw)"

Thats only valid in a Windows forum. I can't count how many times I said that when using Windows. But I do know of people who run it flawlessly but I'm not sure how. The good thing between Gnome and KDE is you can make it look totally different and have the features. Most default kde that come in distros are really put together poorly. Ubuntu is my first gnome distro some I'm not sure about other distros that use it as default. But I'm sure if Ubuntu went with KDE instead it would be just as good as Gnome.

[daniels]

We are totally committed to GNOME, and even if we wanted to move to Aqua, we couldn't. It's not free, nor is the code open, it only runs on PowerPC, and is deeply tied to the Darwin kernel.