View Poll Results: Which windowmanager are you using?

Voters
147. You may not vote on this poll
  • KDE

    77 52.38%
  • Gnome

    58 39.46%
  • Others

    12 8.16%
Page 12 of 21 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 201

Thread: KDE vs GNOME

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,927

    Default

    There is certainly a strong connection between GTK and GNOME, just like there is a strong connection between Qt and KDE, but I still think it's going too far to call Skype a KDE app, or to call GIMP a GNOME app.

    And you're right, there are free libraries and frameworks out there that can do much of what KDE libraries can do, and they can be combined into a free desktop, as shown by GNOME. But I still find that it goes to far when people call OpenOffice or Firefox GNOME apps.

    My issue is not with the libraries, but with the very political and opportunistic GNOME direction changes and the lack of cohesiveness. Quite frankly, KDE has always been ahead at most technical issues, and still is. Now that there is no sane reason left to kill KDE (which was why GNOME was started), I am interested to see how it continues to develop. Is such a loosely-knit community where many important parts of the puzzle don't consider themselves a part of the GNOME project strong enough to catch up? It will be interesting to see.

    Because all KDE apps can use GStreamer trivially (even the ones not based on Phonon, like Kaffeine and Amarok), just like they can use Cairo trivially. Or switch between webkit and KHTML trivially. Or use gdesklets or whatnot. So these technologies might be used by all GNOME apps, but they can just as easily be used by KDE apps. So I wonder again what GNOME brings to the table.

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,725

    Default

    well, gnome hindered kde when trying to make dbus completly gnome centric.
    same with pulseaudio
    and hal

    seriously? There is still a big 'we do this and when it hurts KDE even better' problem in gnome's population.

  3. #113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Nice. My 11 (now 12) year old cousin loved Gnome on first sight. It was an enlightening exprerience watching him learn his way around an unfamiliar system (damn, these guys have it too easy nowadays - we grew up on the commandline, where having the "up" key rewind the command buffer was considered a killer feature).
    Good to hear there are some more Linux newbies I grow up using C64 and after some Windowses I jumped into Knoppix - my first distro.

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saist View Post
    KDE 3.x here. 4.2 still hasn't caught up on feature parity, and from various reports, still has issues with performance.
    I've been running KDE 4.x since 4.1 without any major issues. Only minor cosmetic things essentially.

    Which is the feature parity you long for?

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat
    I guess you're new to this, no offense. Gnome Do's oldest release is from 2008. KRunner has existed since the earliest KDE versions
    Your point being?

    To quote http://introducingkde4.blogspot.com/...2/krunner.html (note the date), "It's the "run command" dialog of KDE, it was already available for KDE 3.5.x, but it got a new appeareance and functions [...]".

    KRunner is (or at least was) closer to the gnome-terminal-launcher applet or windows' address toolbar (shudders). Gnome Do is a recent app that takes a familiar concept and evolves it beyond any of those implementations.

    KRunner and Gnome Do are directly comparable, according to lwn:

    "KRunner and GNOME's Do are both descendants of the Run tools that have been part of desktop environments for years. [...] Do works in approximately the same way as KRunner, differing mostly in the details."

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyatt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar
    ...they *are* using GTK, a part of the Gnome stack...
    Were I not in a library, I'd be laughing really hard right now.
    and
    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat
    GTK is much older than GNOME. It is a part of the "GNOME stack" like X11 is a part of the "GNOME stack". This is like saying that Skype is a KDE app, or that it uses the "KDE stack" just because it is based on Qt.
    Quoting Wikipedia: "GNOME is based on GTK+, meaning that GNOME programs use GTK+".

    That's the very definition of a programming stack.

    So no, Firefox is not a GNOME app. However, it *is* using GTK+ which means it integrates much better on GNOME than on KDE desktops. Same with Chromium.

    Edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman
    Good to hear there are some more Linux newbies I grow up using C64 and after some Windowses I jumped into Knoppix - my first distro.
    I think I still have my 700page installation manual for one of the first Red Hat releases... (a gift from an open source advocate)
    Last edited by BlackStar; 08-18-2009 at 01:33 PM.

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,725

    Default

    Blackstar - the point is, gnome is copying from KDE and then claim this and that.

    But nice, that you just support that. KDE is first, gnome are the copycats.

    Gnome was founded to copy windows95. Now gnome is a mixture of Windows ME and bad copies from KDE.

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar
    Your point being?
    My point is that KRunner is not a "poor imitation of Gnome Do". In fact, it's older.

    This doesn't mean that Gnome Do is bad, in fact, I've never used it. But it does show how people argue emotionally without checking the facts.

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    My point is that KRunner is not a "poor imitation of Gnome Do". In fact, it's older.

    This doesn't mean that Gnome Do is bad, in fact, I've never used it. But it does show how people argue emotionally without checking the facts.
    KRunner's extended features may well be a (poor/good/better) imitation of Gnome Do. KRunner of a few years ago was just an application launcher. Gnome Do itself is an imitation of Apple's Spotlight.

    But I'd argue that the who-was-first is a non-issue.

    Wikipedia says that GNOME-Do was inspired by Quicksilver for Mac OS X. Judging from the screenshot, that seems accurate. But I find it similar to Spotlight too.
    Last edited by Remco; 08-18-2009 at 02:19 PM.

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    155

    Default

    I don't really see the point in the "G was there first" or "K has done it before". Open Source is about getting inspiration from others and that's very good that both desktop inspired each other, they both became better that way.

    I don't have used Gnome for years now so comparing would be a bit ridiculous. I've always prefered KDE because it was highly configurable and could be set up the way I want. And this has become even more the case with KDE4.

    For instance, using Activities linked to virtual desktops, I can not only have different wallpapers but different widgets altogether on each virtual desktop (I use 4 : work, play, system, office). Each one has a specific folder view with quick access to the appropriate directories for the activity, a quick launcher with appropriate apps, several widgets like a post-it in the work activity or a calculator. So each virtual desktop is really organized for the task I want to do with it and I can switch from one to the other using the Show Grid compositing effect with just a wave of the mouse.
    This is particularly useful on my laptop which has a small screen.
    I also like the new 4.3 Air widget style very much. It's stylish but still light and works well with all kind of wallpapers.

    Finally, KDE4 is very solid for me. I've noticed that people complaining about crash are very often using Ubuntu based distros, while people using OpenSuse, Mandriva or Arch (or Slackware from my part) don't seem to have these issues.
    So, if I can be a bit sarcastic, I think it's a bit cynical to choose a Gnome-centric distro and spit at KDE because it doesn't work well on it. :-)

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,927

    Default

    KRunner of a few years ago was just an application launcher.
    Not in 2007, when the betas of KDE 4.0 were out.

    This obviously doesn't matter, but since we're talking about KRunner being an imitation of Gnome Do, it has to be said

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •