Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50

Thread: Fedora 11 Preview

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    We'll see how things will look in the future, because Gnome is full of old and legacy crap. KDE guys have clean path to improve their DE thanks to new KDE 4 which is written from scratch (I suppose).
    Not really, GNOME just uses another development model. While you haven't seen much of it from a user point-of-view, GNOME was thoroughly cleaned up over the last major releases. A lot of old and deprecated libraries have been removed, a lot of subsystems replaced by something more modern, etc. The difference is that it didn't happen in one big chunk (and with a lot of hype). Now GNOME 3 will be all about making the user experience better, I suppose. Of course there's still some old cruft in GNOME 2, but the preparation work done so far will make the transition smoother.

    BTW: In fact, much of the software that makes using a Unix desktop worthwile and is also used by KDE (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) is more or less from the GNOME camp. I don't have anything against KDE, but it's not as innovative as the hype makes it out be, and GNOME sure isn't "obsolete". Stop trolling.
    Last edited by greg; 04-29-2009 at 05:38 AM.

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    BTW: In fact, much of the software that makes using a Unix desktop worthwile and is also used by KDE (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) is more or less from the GNOME camp. I don't have anything against KDE, but it's not as innovative as the hype makes it out be, and GNOME sure isn't "obsolete". Stop trolling.
    To not trolling I shouldn't mention Gnome uses legacy stuff? You said a lot of old and deprecated libraries have been removed, but not all. Here's nice article:

    http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osr...-Advantage.htm

    If KDE 4 isn't innovative Gnome isn't at all. Btw. Firefox, GIMP (not sure about this one), Thunderbird, OpenOffice aren't Gnome.

    @Susikala

    KDE maybe bloated in Kubuntu, because there are some scripts which make it sluggish. Try KDE in Arch Linux it's way faster.
    Last edited by kraftman; 04-29-2009 at 06:45 AM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    BTW: In fact, much of the software that makes using a Unix desktop worthwile and is also used by KDE (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) is more or less from the GNOME camp. I don't have anything against KDE, but it's not as innovative as the hype makes it out be, and GNOME sure isn't "obsolete". Stop trolling.
    Let's look on new things in gnome 3.0 (taken from Gnome 3.0 site wiki):

    Gnomeshell = plasma

    Changing the way we access documents (via a journal, like GNOME Zeitgeist): having to deal with a filesystem in their daily work is not what makes users happy -- on the contrary, they generally just want to access their documents and not to browse their hard disk. Providing new solutions to this problem (using timelines, tags, bookmarks, etc.)
    =
    NEPOMUK

    Some obvious examples are 3D effects (with Clutter) = KDE4 has compositing and 3d efects in kwin too ...

    Geoclue = Marble


    So the difference here is that KDE uses already existent code (D-Bus, HAL, network-manager, *Kit) and have nothing against it if it's a good technology. Gnome guys will reinvent the wheel in places where KDE already has a stable and ready technology ? Maybe they just have allergy to anything with Q or K in name or from that camp ?
    Last edited by val-gaav; 04-29-2009 at 06:59 AM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    122

    Default

    GNOME doesn't reinvent the wheel -- KDE's components simply are too KDE-specific to be useful outside of the KDE/Qt world.

    And Clutter and Desktop compositing are two things you can't compare.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Radoboj, Croatia
    Posts
    155

    Default

    As I can see from screenshots, you've used your laptop for fedora preview installation.

    Since your laptop has a similar graphics card to mine (Mobility Radeon X1400 and mine is X1600), what was the graphics 3D performance? And even more important: how long was the battery life?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greg View Post
    GNOME doesn't reinvent the wheel -- KDE's components simply are too KDE-specific to be useful outside of the KDE/Qt world.
    Nepomuk is not at all KDE specific yet gnome guys refuse to use it. That's a fact.

    BTW just because GNOME devs refuse to use Qt4 doesn't mean they are not reinventing the wheel for technologies such as plasma. They are because they are going to do exactly the same but in GTK+.
    Last edited by val-gaav; 04-29-2009 at 08:07 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    258

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    KDE maybe bloated in Kubuntu, because there are some scripts which make it sluggish. Try KDE in Arch Linux it's way faster.
    This is hardly a good answer. One shouldn't be forced to change their distro of choice just because some desktop environment allegedly doesn't work with it well. One of the reasons I use Linux is flexibility.

    That said, the latest distrowatch issue did quite prove XFCE runs much faster on Debian than on Xubuntu, but that is mainly due to all the bloat *ubuntu puts in. Again, distro-related thingy.

    What I'm trying to say is that I'm sure that in comparison, GNOME is faster to load and use on Arch Linux too. If anyone prove me wrong, then I take back my accusations.

    There are other considerations, too. Qt is partly proprietary, and it just gives you a crappy feeling to use something backed by a large company. Well, gives me.

    And Opera (/Qt stuff) looks shit on GNOME. Which is one of the main reasons I don't use it.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by susikala View Post
    This is hardly a good answer. One shouldn't be forced to change their distro of choice just because some desktop environment allegedly doesn't work with it well. One of the reasons I use Linux is flexibility.
    Did it even cross your mind that it's distro that should make it work right ? Ubuntu is a gnome centric distro so GNOME in it will always be more polished then KDE. They used KDE 4.1 tagged as for "early adopters" and many users were flustrated. Would they do the same for Gnome ? I guess not ... Fedora is also gnomecentric and they went ahead and switched to kde 4.0 even though upstream clearly said that 4.0 is a release for developers not for users ... What do you expect KDE to do then ? jump up with a stick and punish evil distros ? They can do nothing about it really ...

    What I'm trying to say is that I'm sure that in comparison, GNOME is faster to load and use on Arch Linux too. If anyone prove me wrong, then I take back my accusations.
    FYI KDE4 seems faster for me on debian, while debians Gnome seems the same to me as ubuntu one. Then again I'm not intending to run any benchmarks about it so take it as just "the feeling" I had.

    There are other considerations, too. Qt is partly proprietary, and it just gives you a crappy feeling to use something backed by a large company. Well, gives me.
    WTF ? Qt4 is LGPL , GTK+ is LGPL ... There are lots of large companies backing up open source ... You have anything particular against Nokia ? OK, but Qt4 is not partly proprietary it is fully free software or open source whatever you prefer to call it.

    And Opera (/Qt stuff) looks shit on GNOME. Which is one of the main reasons I don't use it.
    Ekhem :
    http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2008...logs-in-gnome/
    http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2008...ow-part-of-qt/

    If anything QT apps since a while look exactly the same on your GNOME desktop as your gtk+ apps... even file dialogs and the Cancel| OK buttons.

    The other way around though you cannot get as great integration of gtk+ apps under KDE, and when I asked GTK+ devs about it they basicly said "Code it yourself" ... If anything that was the most unfriendly contact with devs I ever had.
    Last edited by val-gaav; 04-29-2009 at 09:16 AM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by val-gaav View Post
    Nepomuk is not at all KDE specific yet gnome guys refuse to use it. That's a fact.
    Fact?!? Huh?
    http://trueg.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/xesam_vs_nepomuk/
    http://pvanhoof.be/blog/index.php/20...r-future-plans

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    573

    Default

    Hey guys, calm down I didn't want to flood this thread... I was just joking with my post. I have nothing againts GNOME and I'm happy it exists.

    KDE and generally speaking QT may be technically more advanced, but who cares? We all love freedom don't we?

    Let's all say it: W GNOME, W KDE, W GTK and W QT. And most importantly, W GPL!

Posting Permissions

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