Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Has GNOME Become LAME?

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the minus-one-flamebait dept.

GNOME 866

auferstehung writes "Nicholas Petreley (should that be KNicholas KPetreley) of LinuxWorld and VarLinux.org has taken his gloves off in the latest article in his KDE vs Gnome series. An unabashed KDE supporter, Petreley uses some choice fighting words in re-acronymizing GNOME as the Language Agnostic Morphable Environment (LAME) Franken-GUI. Despite the sensationalistic flamage throughout the article, several of his GNOME criticisms (Gconf, file selector, features) echo those already voiced within the GNOME community itself. A happy GNOME user myself, please someone...tell me it isn't so."

cancel ×

866 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yes (-1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412309)

It Has!!!

Re:Yes (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412377)

Gnome sucks and Linux is not as stable as preachers claim. I run linux. And with Gnome I can consistently reproduce crashing the system --the entire system. I can't do it under KDE.

For example: On one computer that I have, I install Linux Mandrake (CD#1 only --typical). Then I start a session with Gnome, without making any modifications (no name for computer by default). Gnome complains that I don't have a name for my computer and that this might cause problems. I open Netscape Communicator and attempt to "Edit Preferences". The entire system hangs. From Netscape to Gnome to Linux, the whole thing is gone.

Now the fact that Gnome crashes is one thing...fine, Gnome sucks, move on. But the thing that concerns me is that Linux was toast as a whole! I couldn't break out of the locked session.

Whether or not this is a Gnome specific problem, the fact remains, Linux was compromised at the hands of Gnome.

I cannot say that I can reproduce a blue screen on NT, nor a hangup. On my NT box at work I've never had a blue screen or a hang and it's been running since the millenium (mandatory shutdown for y2k). My other computer at home (more complex installation) might have had one blue screen this year --so few that I can't even remember.

So where is the stability advantage with Linux?

Re:Yes (1, Informative)

DopeRider (611535) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412438)

If you can consistently reproduce crashing, why don't you report the bug?.

Re:Yes (1)

Graspee_Leemoor (302316) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412465)

Did you have another computer available ? Normally if linux seems to hand you can still telnet/ssh in and analyse the problem, then shut it down safely.

graspee

Pre Redhat 5.3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412477)

I think it was pre Redhat 5.3 that I've been using gnome since, I do notice you said Gnome Sucks, maybe it's just how as you said "Mandrake" has packed it.

I've been using it within my own self build of Linux with no issues.

Remember you are using "Mandrake" as a desktop user / Newbie this is a great choice of distro. But common you can't say "So where is the stability advantage with Linux?" without trying others. It's like saying that home cooked food sucks, with out trying your mothers and grandmothers.

Linux is Linux, but distro's add patches and junk too.

Hey Michael... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412463)

...Not only did you wreck the censorware project, but......YOU'RE ALSO A JERK!

karma whoring (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412314)

In case the server gets Slashdotted, here's the article... Mod up!

Has GNOME Become LAME?
GNOME Posted by michael on Saturday March 01, @04:34AM
from the minus-one-flamebait dept.

auferstehung writes "Nicholas Petreley (should that be KNicholas KPetreley) of LinuxWorld and VarLinux.org has taken his gloves off in the latest article in his KDE vs Gnome series. An unabashed KDE supporter, Petreley uses some choice fighting words in re-acronymizing GNOME as the Language Agnostic Morphable Environment (LAME) Franken-GUI. Despite the sensationalistic flamage throughout the article, several of his GNOME criticisms (Gconf, file selector, features) echo those already voiced within the GNOME community itself. A happy GNOME user myself, please someone...tell me it isn't so."

Re:karma whoring (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412326)

Offtopic? Mod parent up!

Re:karma whoring (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412334)

Offtopic?... Moderators suck. It's very on-topic, just silly.

Has SLASHDOT Become LAME? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412315)

YES!

The only once inside the GNOME-community (5, Insightful)

GauteL (29207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412319)

.. that complains about GConf, is the ones that do not know what it means.

It is basically a configuration database that provides notification, and can use any backend, where the default is pure XML-formatted text files.

An LDAP-backend is also being worked on, something which should be a boon for network administrators.

The file-dialog is lame, and is being replaced.

This article is basically a troll. Use whatever you like. Some people like KDE, others like GNOME.

Re:The only once inside the GNOME-community (2, Funny)

GauteL (29207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412328)

"once inside"?

HA! The preview button is for cowards.

Re:The only once inside the GNOME-community (2, Insightful)

mbogosian (537034) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412417)

It is basically a configuration database that provides notification, and can use any backend, where the default is pure XML-formatted text files.

Can someone please tell me what the fsck is wrong with text configuration files (automatically created by the application or not)? And no, don't talk to me about XML...XML is not human readable and is fragile enough to be non-hand editable in a lot of cases. What ever happened to:

  • .emacs
  • .pinerc
  • .plan
  • .procmailrc
  • .profile (.login, .bashrc, .zlogin or whatever)
  • .ssh/...
  • etc.

What was wrong with this paradigm?

Re:The only once inside the GNOME-community (4, Insightful)

Yokaze (70883) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412440)

First, XML is human-readable. It is not readable by Jon Doe, but you won't see him sticking his nose into these files anyway. Those people who can't edit an XML file will most certainly be even less inclined to edit a .emacs file.

XML can be so fragile, that they are non-hand editable, but so can be a non XML-file.

XML is a syntax, nothing more.

With that listing, you have essentially shown yourself, what's wrong with the paradigm.

Each and every application has it's own file, where it stores its configuration (which is not a problem) and it it's own syntax.

The problem with each application it's own file is, that they aren't sharing common settings.

The interesting part behind XML is, you don't have to invent your own syntax and implement your own parser. As a result other applications can quite easily access your data, too.

Re:The only once inside the GNOME-community (3, Insightful)

FirstEdition (79762) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412448)

There's nothing basically wrong with this (.x) text file kind of configuration, but XML is more flexible in several ways:

* it has inbuilt validation (of a sort) via DTD files
* it is a format which lends itself to generation by other machines, eg many databases have native XML interfaces

Re:The only once inside the GNOME-community (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412461)

The real problems accure in multiuser environments. If two persons what's to change different settings for one application in a text file, the other persions changes might be overwritten.

In a database-kind-of-system, it is easyer to handle data on entity level, than in a pure text file. ..and

If your application wants to get configurations done in three other applications, it don't needs to know how to read three different file formats to do that. /mudFlap

The problems of GNOME (2, Insightful)

rseuhs (322520) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412429)

GNOME has a couple of problems:
  • It was created in a political effort (to replace (=kill) KDE.) and politics is still very involved in GNOME. I really acknowledge what GNU has done in the 80's and early 90's, but lately they have become a bunch of buerocrats and politicians. KDE vs GNOME is pretty similar to Linux vs. the Hurd. - Pragmatism versus Politics. It has improved lately, at least GNOME's primary goal doesn't seem to be killing off KDE anymore and they seem to even cooperate.
  • GNOME made the big mistake in listening to bashers. The bashers (= non GNOME users) said GNOME was too complicated so the politicians (see above) decided that many configuration options must go in Gnome2. That pissed off many real users but attracted not a single new user. (The drooling moron that was targetted by this decision doesn't use anything else other than what is preinstalled anyway. And even if he does (or it is preinstalled), he doesn't dig around config options anyway and uses the defaults, so any "complexity" doesn't hurt him.)
  • C. KDE/Qt/C++ programming is faster and more elegant. Again, this was a rather political decision. (Almost all GNU software is C-based, therefore GNOME has to be C-based, too) Yes, in theory many non-C language bindings exist, but in the real world none of them are used for any non-trivial project.

Re:The problems of GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412456)

All three of your points are nonsense. They sound like a mixture of hearsay and conjecture. Do a little research on each of these points and you will be a wiser person as a result.

desktop users.. fuck yourself!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412320)

what kind of ppl is it who discuss differencies between overbloated window managers... i use fvwm1 with my own configuration and it boot's up in less than 2 seconds.. THAT is a feature...

Re:desktop users.. fuck yourself!!! (-1, Offtopic)

deoz (525904) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412359)

you could use xfce, less ugly, more functional, easier to use, doesn't suck like fvwm

Re:desktop users.. fuck yourself!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412403)

anyone who says fvwm sucks should piss off back to redmond where they belong.

Re:desktop users.. fuck yourself!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412471)

fvwm sucked long before there were bluescreens from out of redmond.

OK, it's like this... (1)

inode_buddha (576844) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412321)

KNick has his preferences; you have yours, and I have mine. The moment I get Enlightenment going on Gnome 2.x, I'm not looking back.

That said, Nick has a point in a strange way: Most of the computing world seems to be expecting a UI similar to KDE on RH "Bluecurve", for desktop work.

Ah.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412322)

He may not worry -- they're (KDE and Gnome) both lame.

Mp3?! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412323)

Since when does Gnome encode to mp3?!

Lame Ain't an MP3 Encoder!

It's nice to see (1, Flamebait)

The Bungi (221687) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412325)

that Gnome and KDE are incorporating wonderful and exciting features... that are copies of stuff Microsoft was doing 4 years ago.

There's something to be said about innovation...

Re:It's nice to see (5, Insightful)

Nerant (71826) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412344)

So to use your analogy, if I was to design a car, I can't design one that uses wheels because someone else has done it before?
Microsoft has certain ideas that are sound in theory, but their implementation of it sucks in practice. There is nothing wrong with implementing GUI features in Gnome or KDE that have already proven to be useful in actual use.

Re:It's nice to see (4, Informative)

bonch (38532) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412436)

Bad analogy. Wheels are essential. That's like a mouse cursor or a basic window in GUI terms.

But KDE and Gnome also copy dialogs, start menus, taskbars, basic design conventions, and much more.

You can either copy forever in a futile attempt at winning the Windows crowd (yeah, let's give them half-assed clones of what they already have), or innovate and create something people will actually want to use.

You say Microsoft has good ideas that are poorly implemented. KDE and GNOME are just copying what's been done in that department, under the guise of making it more "customizable" (wow, I can move the taskbar and start menu around now).

Please, won't somebody create something new? The "killer app" I think Linux needs is a new GUI system designed from the ground up for desktop use. Don't give me "well, write it yourself," because I don't have the skill level, but more importantly, it's a ridiculous attitude to have to start with. Besides, if you want a graphic designer, I'm your man. Linux apps are always sorely lacking in the aesthetics department.

Re:It's nice to see (1)

DancingSword (412552) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412472)

Try http://www.xfce.org/ [xfce.org] , then, oh vast and ominoidal dude...

Re:It's nice to see (1)

hswerdfe (569925) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412452)

And MS is putting Features in longhorn that KDE had since 2.0 at least.

hmmm...

Re:It's nice to see (2, Interesting)

kigrwik (462930) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412469)

I often swap things from one server through ssh (fish://) to another one with samba (smb://) by drag-dropping from a vertically-splitted konqueror window from my desktop that sits on a third computer.

Do that with builtin Explorer functions.
For that matter, do that with Nautilus, too !

Re:It's nice to see (2, Informative)

Trurl's Machine (651488) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412479)

Gnome and KDE are incorporating wonderful and exciting features... that are copies of stuff Microsoft was doing 4 years ago.

...that are copies of Stuff Apple and NeXT were doing 8 years ago :-)

Re:It's nice to see (2, Informative)

kubla2000 (218039) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412481)

Bungi, you're such a troll.

Explain to me how the DOS cli wasn't a "copy" of the Unix cli? The trail for "originality" stretches back a long way.

And what's with the martyr like "-1 Pro Microsoft"? Stop trolling, start posting something insightful and you might get some respect.

I can't believe I've taken the troll bait... enough.

Re:It's nice to see (2, Informative)

BlackHawk-666 (560896) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412496)

Microsoft are not well known for innovation. They are well known for buying companies that are innovative or for fairly good implementations of someone elses innovation. Some examples might help here:

DoubleSpace/Stacker

DOS/CPM

Windows/X11/MacOs/Next

Excel/Visicalc/Lotus

Word/Word Perfect

IIS/Apache

IE/Netscape/Mosaic

There's tons more examples available for the interested. Also, Microsoft are well known for bad early releases (1.0-2.0) but getting it right the third time - hey, let's have some more examples:

Dos 3.0

IE 3.0

Word 6.0

Windows 3.0

See the pattern - all pretty suckful on first release (also all copies of someone elses IP) and yet all matured by version 3.0.

Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (3, Interesting)

bushboy (112290) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412329)

If all of what this article implies is a reasonable "comparison" between the way KDE and Gnome function, why is it that so many prefer Gnome over KDE ?

I've used both for years and have finally settled on Gnome as I find it faster, more intuitive and less "bloated" than KDE, yet the authour of the article finds pretty much the opposite to be true.

I'm no programmer, so what happens behind 'the scenes' is not something I can use to compare the different desktops.

All I know is that I much prefer Gnome over KDE.

Re:Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (3, Insightful)

rseuhs (322520) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412393)

Why?

Because it's backed by RedHat and Sun.

And it's no coincidence that RedHat users usually say that Linux isn't ready for the desktop yet while SuSE, Mandrake or Gentoo users say it is...

At least that's my observation, and it's also confirmed by statistics (in Germany (= SuSE territory) Linux marketshare is about 3-4 times higher than in the USA (=RedHat territory))

Re:Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (2, Insightful)

tempest303 (259600) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412410)

And it's no coincidence that RedHat users usually say that Linux isn't ready for the desktop yet while SuSE, Mandrake or Gentoo users say it is...

Perhaps this indicates that Red Hat users are more objective then, since Linux isn't yet ready for the desktop.

KDE is a complete mess of feature and preference overload, with little apparent thought given to design. GNOME has the design part down a lot better, and has a far more sane attitude towards preferences, but is lacking in some features, a few of them major. (No, I don't mean stupid sh*t like edge-flipping - I'm talking about stuff like a lock-down system for administrators, a must-have in office environments!)

Neither desktop is quite ready for Joe Consumer use - but I predict that one or both will get damn close this year, either by GNOME filling in a few feature gaps, or KDE getting serious about consumer-level usability.* We're not there yet, but we are damn close.

* side note to Mosfet-worshippers: "organization" will not save you - kontrol center is drowning in useless preferences. Some of them simply have to go

Re:Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (1)

nonmaskable (452595) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412473)

>I'm talking about stuff like a lock-down system for >administrators, a must-have in office environments!

Do you know about kiosk mode? What do you want to do that kiosk doesn't support?

Re:Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (3, Insightful)

rseuhs (322520) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412478)

Perhaps this indicates that Red Hat users are more objective then, since Linux isn't yet ready for the desktop.

Because you say so?

KDE is a complete mess of feature and preference overload, with little apparent thought given to design. GNOME has the design part down a lot better, and has a far more sane attitude towards preferences, but is lacking in some features, a few of them major. (No, I don't mean stupid sh*t like edge-flipping - I'm talking about stuff like a lock-down system for administrators, a must-have in office environments!)

There cannot be such a thing as "preference overload" because you only set preferences once, but use features daily. The maybe 10 seconds that it takes longer to find your preference in a preference-rich control-panel is irrelevant compared to the features you gain.

The drooling morons just use the defaults anyway and never use the control panel, so they are the least affected user group

Neither desktop is quite ready for Joe Consumer use - but I predict that one or both will get damn close this year, either by GNOME filling in a few feature gaps, or KDE getting serious about consumer-level usability.* We're not there yet, but we are damn close.

Nonsense. KDE and even GNOME (yes, I'm a KDE fan, but while GNOME isn't that great anymore for power users, it's still good enough for basic users) is technically ready for Joe Consumer.

All problems have nothing to do with KDE or GNOME itself:

  • We need Win32 application support. Hopefully Wine will get good enough this year to run most Win32 apps flawlessly, some Win32 apps with no equivalent on Linux are keeping a lot of people on Windows.
  • We need PC-makers to preinstall Linux. The best desktop in the world (which is IMO KDE) won't make an impression when it's not preinstalled. The Win32-compatibility will be of great help convincing PC-makers, too.
  • We need better marketing. At first the "Linux is too complicated" FUD has to stop (yes, I'm also talking about you), simply because it's no longer true. kcontrol may be complicated, but it's far easier to find something in it than it is to find the right tool in the Windows control panel. (kcontrol is organized in a tree, the Windows control panel is just a folder with tools thrown in) So if KDE isn't ready, neither is Windows. In reality both are good enough anyway.

* side note to Mosfet-worshippers: "organization" will not save you - kontrol center is drowning in useless preferences. Some of them simply have to go

Gooddamn, that's nonsense. You only need to set preferences *once*, so any time-gains are negletible and the so-called mysterious "average user" doesn't change the preferences at all, so using the "average user" as a reason to reduce kcontrol functionality is pretty moronic.

OK, now in all-tabs, otherwise you won't get it:

SHOW ME A SINGLE PROGRAM THAT IS SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE IT HAS REDUCED CONFIGURATION FUNCTIONALITY

Name one. Everyone *I* know, ICQ, Winamp, Photoshop, MS Office, etc. is loaded with configuration options, and every version more are added. MS Office alone probably has more configuration options than KDE in it's full glory.

Name a single program that has become successful because it has removed configuration options. Just a single one.

So according to you, MS Office can't be used by "Joe average", right?

You are dead wrong, sorry. I'm a Wordprocessing-newbie (well actually not really a newbie, I use them for several years, but only about once every 2 months, so I'm at the same skill level as a newbie, but I disgress) and I can get my work done using the defaults in OpenOffice. If I would use it more often, I would dig around and customize it to fit my needs - and I would be very happy to find the options I need.

Re:Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (1)

bushboy (112290) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412455)

Quote: Because it's backed by RedHat and Sun.

You make that sound like some kind of nasty conspiracy ! :)

I'm using Redhat 8.0 as my primary Linux Distro because I find the Bluecurve Theme for Gnome so elegant and pleasing to the eye and feel it's the best Desktop implementation I've yet seen for Linux.

I'm sincerely hoping that Mandrake 9.1 will make me switch back to Mandrake as my primary distro, as I was dissapointed with 9.0 which felt slow and scrappy compared to RedHat 8.0

Getting involved in a 'gnome is better' or 'kde is better' argument/discussion isn't anything I'm willing to do, I don't really care so long as I can do stuff easily and quickly - Gnome presently affords me more stability and useability than KDE.

I find that I mainly use Desktop Linux for watching movies, surfing the web, playing quake3 etc. so for Desktop entertainment use, it's perfectly adaquate.

I've also investigated using the RedHat on the Desktop in an office environment by doing several quotes in Open Office and saving/printing to a windows box - it was just as easy as windows, however, I encountered numerous incompatabilities when saving as an MS Word Doc, which is a problem considering how wide the MS Word userbase is.

Linux is most definately ready for the Desktop, or at least, this is the year it will prove itself.

Re:Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (2, Informative)

twener (603089) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412404)

> why is it that so many prefer Gnome over KDE ?

There are always some who don't share opinion or taste of the majority. For example have a look at the Gentoo Linux usage statistics [gentoo.org] . Adding all KDE installations compared to Gnome installations more seem to prefer KDE than Gnome. That's the tendency this statistic has in common with most web polls (which I in general wouldn't overestimate as being representative).

Re:Why do some many prefer Gnome then ? (1)

mbogosian (537034) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412446)

If all of what this article implies is a reasonable "comparison" between the way KDE and Gnome function, why is it that so many prefer Gnome over KDE?

Applications.

Seriously, you're never going to get rid of GNOME for (at least) one simple reason: GIMP.

I'm among the most disappointed with RedHat's choice to reduce desktop configurability to near zero (no, themes do not count as configurability...a real window manager with extensively modifiable behaviors does) in RH8.0. But what I *really* don't understand is why RedHat went with GNOME as the default base desktop (other than having invested a lot in GNOME with their custom apps).

I am a long time GNOME user and have to agree that one is constantly reminded of the vast inconsistencies among GNOME apps. Not so with the latest KDE. Of course you can always run KDE/GNOME applications side by side, but it can be really confusing for users without years of experience having to differentiate between the two. Even for experienced users it's a pain in the ass (why do I have to wait 10 seconds for the DCOP/MCOP/whatever server to start up when I run the first KDE app in a GNOME session; and then, after I quit the last KDE app, why does the server quit too even though my session is still alive?).

The sad thing is that unless GnuCash, GIMP, Galeon, Evolution, Red Carpet and the RedHat configuration/updates tools (e.g., the rhn applet) are rewritten for KDE, then GNOME is not going away (and don't tell me to use Konqueror or KMail).

If someone could come up with a way to make the look and (more importantly) the feel be configurable in both, and have a common behavior configuration interface (kind of analogous to what RedHat has with its GTK+/GTK+2 theme chooser), we'd probably be most of the way there (or at least be at the point of a passing grade).

Can't these kids grow up? (5, Insightful)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412331)

I am very tired of reading flame wars between Gnome and KDE. OK, I am a big supporter of Gnome, but that doesn't mean KDE sucks. It plainly does not. I would be the first to agree that there have been some terrible blunders made by some of the Gnome developers along the way, but the current 2.2 is very sweet. Every so often I try out new versions of KDE as they come up, and every time I abandon it because my desktop looks cluttered and Kalling Keverything Kfoo.Kbar Ketc Kgives Kme Kthe Kshits... :-) [/rant]

Re:Can't these kids grow up? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412382)

Ain't you forgetting the 'nice' emulated windowsness of KDE? Like horrible startup-sound by default and 'funny' questions about what you want to do [today|tomorrow]?

Re:Can't these kids grow up? (1)

hswerdfe (569925) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412443)

I am very tired of reading flame wars between Gnome and KDE


I agree, 100% both are excelent (but both could be better to) desktop environments to use, both have advantages, and I could see an argument for either one.

Personally I like kde (the Klipper does it for me) but hey I also like gaim, grip, & Glade.

Re:Can't these kids grow up? (1)

chadm1967 (144897) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412468)

I agree, as well. I use Gnome but every once in a while I'll use KDE for a couple of days to see what's new. What bothers me the most is the fact that there are authors that keep writing crap articles like this.

Re:Can't these kids grow up? (4, Funny)

rseuhs (322520) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412483)

I am very tired of reading flame wars between Gnome and KDE.

my desktop looks cluttered and Kalling Keverything Kfoo.Kbar Ketc Kgives Kme Kthe Kshits...

You don't seem so tired of flame wars at all...

How about (1, Funny)

SourKAT (589785) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412332)

if we all step on wet paint and then put a GNOME logo on his butt.

Who Cares? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412333)

Gn0me is irrelevant. It's just the bitch to companies such as Sun and RedHat.

KDE is the future. Let the hords of sexually repressed linux zealorts use Gnome.

Gnome's very problem (0, Troll)

Krapangor (533950) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412338)

is that it uses an linear object/message distribution sheme versus the highly nonlinear sheme used in KDE.

The Gnome developer say that the linear sheme is easier to analyze and therefore bottlenecks and instabilities can be easier discovered. This is indeed true. But on the other hand the growth of of linear systems is exponentially limited and the realignment rates to new configurations is very slow. That's a basic fact from systems theory. You can even prove that a continuous, linear system can only asymptotically realigned, but the discrete configuration space for Gnome gives convergence in finite time.
KDE uses a much more complicated nonlinear systems. While these system don't contain stable trajectories, it's nevertheless possible to get realignment by analysis of the system with chaos theory. Additionally nonlinear systems have supexponential growth, in fact any configuration can met in the fixed controll-access time eta_0. This explains KDE capability to react much faster at high load peaks. And you get even better stability than Gnome.

I don't think that Gnome will get very far unless the change the object/messaging system dramatically. Well, even Microsoft has learned that lesson.

Re:Gnome's very problem (1)

snofla (236898) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412349)

Are you talking about the development process behind KDE? In that case you're right! :-)

Re:Gnome's very problem (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412365)

+ References to obscure, technical sounding fields of study
+ Some vaguely accurate software engineering speak
+ No substatantiation whatsoever for any claims made

First class trolling, sir!

These evil geneishes... (1)

kyz (225372) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412373)

they sheme and sheme and sheme...

Re:Gnome's very problem (1)

asobala (563713) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412442)

As a GNOME developer, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Which technologies? Or are you just trolling?

Re:Gnome's very problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412476)

Congratulations!

First class example of pulling a Sokal [skepdic.com] on our ('Insightful' +4) Slashdot readership.

I've tried to use GNOME but always go back to KDE (2, Informative)

systemapex (118750) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412342)

From a pure user experience, I like GNOME's simplicity. But that simplicity, for whatever reason does not extend to its usability. I keep returning to KDE, though I sometimes find it tries to do too much and spreads its quality thin. GNOME simply does not do enough. There are just some things that bug me too much about GNOME that should be fixed immediately because it's just an embarassment to the project - the default file selector for gtk apps would be a good place to start.

who gives a fuck (1, Funny)

Herr_Nightingale (556106) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412346)

I used to care about these KDE vs. GNOME wars, but you know what? They're both equally useless, when it comes right down to it. Bloat is bloat is bloat. Who gives a fuck, really, when there are alternatives like Windows 2000 or Mac OS X? Come on, fringe users don't count.

Whoops. I think I just offended about .0001 percent of the population. Somebody mod me down!

Where's the flamage? (3, Insightful)

Isldeur (125133) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412347)

Nicholas Petreley (should that be KNicholas KPetreley) ...&&... Despite the sensationalistic flamage throughout the article,

So can you give examples of this "sensationalistic flamage"? I sure didn't find any. Why is there an immediate knee-jerk reaction when anyone ever criticizes gnome or kde? I personally think he has some very good points. Why can't people try and learn from constructive criticism?

If I could now lapse into a personal opinion: I've tried gnome and I try it regularly. And to be simply honest, I continue to get this "Is this all?" feeling every time I use it.

He's right about the dialogs. When I tried changing my background with one of the latest gnomes, I get this measly little window with three different picture boxes that don't help at all. I remember thinking how Spartan (?) this was back then.

Gnome just seems to be going in so many directions that it's turning into a mess. And no one wants that.

Re:Where's the flamage? (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412449)

"Why can't people try and learn from constructive criticism?"

Because they're so used to their command shells and Emacs sessions and idealistic FSF attitudes that they don't realize that sometimes, you have to drop the attitude and listen to the usability needs of a typical user if you want the success that Linux needs to completely topple the competitors.

That is, of course, if you want Linux to be more generally used than it is. There are those who wish it to remain amongst the elite masses as strictly a geek OS so that they can impress their IRC friends. Whatever.

KDE did have a headstart (3, Insightful)

nkv (604544) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412348)

Which is something to be said. I'm a GNOME user myself. KDE is definitely good and beats GNOME in lots of ways. But it does seem to be like the latter is getting there.

One thing I completely agree with is the removal of sawfish and the inclusion of metacity. A lot of the GNOME users I know loved sawfish. Removing it was a bad decision. Perhaps the developers had their reasons but.... *shrug*.

Sawfish (4, Informative)

steveha (103154) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412398)

My understanding is that they removed Sawfish because it is difficult to maintain. The original developer of Sawfish has moved on to other things, and he isn't working on it at all. Sawfish is lacking some major features (multihead support, accessability), and large parts of Sawfish are written in LISP. I guess the GNOME developers don't like working with the code base.

Metacity is simpler than Sawfish, and the theory is that it will be simpler to keep it bug-free.

I've switched to Metacity; I'm content with it.

The guys who get paid to work on GNOME are not doing anything with Sawfish. If its fans are dedicated enough, however, they could keep it going.

steveha

G.N.O.M.E. (-1, Offtopic)

$$$$$exyGal (638164) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412350)

Goofy
nicholas
offers
more
exhortations

--sex [slashdot.org]

Re:G.N.O.M.E. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412394)

Please put your sig in your sig space rather than in your posts.

No, it isn't so. (5, Interesting)

MS_is_the_best (126922) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412356)

This 'article' is definately flame in the sense that it points to problems in Gnome and doesn't mention problems in KDE or positive features of Gnome.

For example the Gnome fileselector. Yep, it's is a bit underfeatured. But Gnome developpers know this and decided it should be fixed on the GTK level. Such architecture changes take some time and you better do it good at once (ok twice).

The Gnome registry is critized a lot, because the Windows registry sucks. However, there are a lot of arguments for the registry implementation of Gnome, this article negates them.
At least you can change a lot of preferences here, (simply with vim/emacs) which cleans up the GUI. Why should you every preference be in the GUI (almost all MS windows/Mozilla user I know freak out on the Mozilla preferences)? Advanced preferences kept in the registry is ok with me.

Actually I think Gnome 2.2 with it's HIG is heading as the OS for new linux users and advanced (yup I changed this feature in Gconf or C) users and KDE for the equivalent of the people contantly changing all their skins in windows and "Tweak UI"-ed it to the max. Once you have grown over this and just want a usuable DE, use gnome (or a out of the box KDE). Also a lot of professional linux (ex-unix) people use Gnome. They just aren't posting to Slashdot about it..

Disclaimer: I'm an Ion [cs.tut.fi] user.

Re:No, it isn't so. (2, Interesting)

twener (603089) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412389)

> Actually I think Gnome 2.2 with it's HIG is heading as the OS for new linux users and advanced

There is a comprehensive Gnome HIG but does anyone obey it? Just examine different programs' menus, e.g. "About" <-> "About..." and other trailing ellipsis and different capitalization styles. Does the framework support/enforce common look? See this page [gnome.org] for a review pointing out how different toolbars look, how different are button distances to borders and so on. KDE 3.1 and apps have a lot more unified GUI than Gnome 2.2 and apps.

Re:No, it isn't so. (1)

MS_is_the_best (126922) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412405)

Nice page you are pointing to. The HIG does concern with a lot of topics, however. The writing of the HIG is a good thing, everybody honouring it much more difficult.

But at the mailinglists of a lot of Gnome applications there is discussion now about the GUI, because of this HIG. Coming to an agreement about such a topic is quite difficult beacuse of the nature of Free Software (but not impossible).

I do not believe that the Bloat/Feature discussion is non-existent in the KDE community (when I read the KDE news [kde.org] site there are always some people who like it the Gnome way.

Also I see a lot of differences in QT en KDE apps .

"GNU/Linux" (1)

red5 (51324) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412358)

RMS first started the "GNU/Linux" thing when Gnome came out. Since Gnome sux0rz can I just install KDE and call it "Linux" now?

Re:"GNU/Linux" (1)

kingkade (584184) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412495)

wo fizz hucf saf fa re vklj...since Gnome sux0rz can I just blah blah

Christ, you wrote 'sux0rz'. Congrats, you're officially a douche.

WHY? Your opinoin on WHY does gnome not do it for you should be more important than just stating that it doesn't as a fact.

can I just install KDE and call it "Linux" now

Anyway, you can call it whatever you like, since your a user, because you've most likely never contributed anything to it or it's availability of open software and just USE what other people so graciously give you, from their own sharing of skill and time, for free.
Time to check you mail. sorry i could substitute any numbers for letters in this post so you could understand it better.

I find both of them "lame" (5, Insightful)

g4dget (579145) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412360)

And that's not necessarily a bad thing: Gnome and KDE are competing with Windows and OS X for users, so they should look and behave roughly like what common users expect.

However, some of Petrely's remarks are just silly. For example, he thinks that KDE being "more feature rich" is a good thing. Sorry, but that's not true. Having lots of features and buttons and widgets may work for some users, others may prefer something simpler, and yet others may want a different set of complex features. And while some users get all pushed out of shape about inconsistent appearances, consistency just isn't a big deal to many users either.

But what makes Gnome/Gtk+ and KDE/Qt both really lame in my book is that they don't take advantage of the really powerful and useful capabilities of X11. Motif and Xaw, for all their many and fatal faults, had better support for remote applications, customization, and inter-application communication than either Gnome or KDE. And Gtk+ and Qt both make very inefficient use of the X11 APIs, giving X11 an undeserved reputation for being slow. The Gnome and KDE developers don't even seem to understand what they are not doing, they are just complaining with some regularity that X11 is more cumbersome than Windows (which it is, if you try to program it like Windows).

As I was saying, I think both Gnome and KDE are ultimately good projects for Linux. I'm glad I have something simple and pretty to install on PCs for use by friends and family, something that, for better or for worse, works just like Windows and MacOS. But I also view them both as about equally "lame" from a technical point, and the differences between them seem minor compared to their common limitations.

Re:I find both of them "lame" (1)

JimDabell (42870) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412414)

For example, he thinks that KDE being "more feature rich" is a good thing. Sorry, but that's not true.

Yes it is. Simplicity is a feature too. Or are you confusing "feature" with "clickable thing" like so many people who argue against "features" do?

And while some users get all pushed out of shape about inconsistent appearances, consistency just isn't a big deal to many users either.

If it isn't a big deal to those people, then they won't mind if everything is consistent then, will they?

Motif and Xaw, for all their many and fatal faults, had better support for remote applications, customization, and inter-application communication than either Gnome or KDE.

Remote applications? That's something built into X, not specific to Motif. Inter-app communication? Like DCOP and MCOP? Like embedding X apps directly into a QT application?

And Gtk+ and Qt both make very inefficient use of the X11 APIs, giving X11 an undeserved reputation for being slow.

Care to give an example? The QT percieved slowness is largely due to slow startup speed, something directly related to the GNU tools used to compile it.

I want my Swallowed App Back! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412362)

The "best" feature of gnome-panel was the Swallowed App, but it seems it's not to be in Gnome2... Now That's LAME!!

Re:I want my Swallowed App Back! (1)

Rolozo (22333) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412399)

# apt-get install libpanel-regurgitate

Talkin' 'bout a bad file selector... (1)

MonoSynth (323007) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412364)

...when KDE's own one has horizontal scrolling enabled *by default*! I mean, how blind can you be to copy one of the most irritating parts of the Windows UI into your desktop?

(but, okay, the Gnome file selector, ehm, needs some improvement too.)

Re:Talkin' 'bout a bad file selector... (1)

luther (112387) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412428)

(but, okay, the Gnome file selector, ehm, needs some improvement too.)

Which didn't make it in 2.2, but is scheduled for 2.4.

RPN is far from LAME (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412366)

5 divided by ( six plus 1), all sqaured

ALG: ( 5 / ( 6 + 1 ) ) sq = 11 keystrokes
RPN: 5 Enter 6 enter 1 + / sq 8 keystrokes

Why I use Gnome (5, Informative)

JamesGreenhalgh (181365) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412368)

When I upgraded to SuSE 8.1, I decided to give KDE another whirl since it had hit version 3. Pretty good, does a lot of stuff, appears to do it well aside from a couple of basic apps which would crash every time they were closed (not KDEs fault as such).

Why did I switch back to Gnome 2?

Speed. The two systems I was using KDE on were a dual p2-400 and a celeron 800. On both, there was an enourmous speed increase switching to Gnome - especially with lots of open apps. They definitely still have work to do, I like Metacity because it's nice+light+simple, but the configuration leaves a little to be desired. GTK2 based apps appear to run a lot slower than GTK1, but even then they're still much quicker than the QT based KDE.

Fortunately, with "big players" backing KDE and Gnome seperately, I don't see either going away - a good thing, although I do wish they'd agree on how drag+drop should work ;-)

Re:Why I use Gnome (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412386)

You may want to give KDE 3.1 a whirl. I was a GNOME user up until KDE 3.1 for the very same reasons as you, but KDE 3.1 provides a much necessary speed boost. I have a higher end system (P4 512MB RAM) but KDE 3.1 performs better now than GNOME 2.0 does for me.

well... (5, Funny)

Unominous Coward (651680) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412370)

my GNOME has always sat silently on my front porch. And now it's singing MP3s encoded with LAME?
Who would've though that open source software would lead to a singing GNOME?

What bugs me with all GUIs... (1)

niminimi (541436) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412375)

...is that the keybindings use the
full PC keyboard; navigation is done
with arrow keys etc.

That's inconsistent with the unix tradition,
vi & nethack and everything, wherein
one uses the letter keys for just about
everything.

I also hate it when UIs load the meta/alt key
with some weird-ass semantics; I use it
to type 8-bit characters, and that's what
the key is for.

KDE VS NOME (2, Interesting)

westyvw (653833) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412378)

I use gnome when I am root. As a user I like KDE. I am using Redhat 8 and I like KDE. I wanted to like gnome, I really did. I have upgraded it and KDE, and yes KDE is HUGE and its bloated big time. But so what, its linux, and its not like its gonna hit a swap file. Linux does what it does well, and on this laptop KDE is running smooth and sweet. I have eye candy, I have apps I use, and they work fine. Gnome just doesnt cut it when it comes to looking good. There are also several things in gnome that bug me. But the best part of all is that it doesnt matter, I also use Evil Entity and have been very intrigued with Enlightenment. When I get around to gentooing E17 as long as I get font antialiasing, I am going there and not turning back. Evil Entity Linux has shown me enlightenment and I am on board. How cool is it to double click the desk top and get a console? Very. How fast is it? Click and GO. So in conclusion KDE is huge, but has a reason to be, gnome? I dont know what your thinking. Its becomming more blurred every day.

Re:KDE VS NOME (1)

tunah (530328) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412464)

So in conclusion KDE is huge, but has a reason to be, gnome? I dont know what your thinking. Its becomming more blurred every day.

Are you drunk?

VS. (1)

Matrix2110 (190829) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412392)

Redhat choses to use Gnome while most of the "Pure" distros like KDE as do I.

In my opinion, Gnome is turning into the Frankenstein of the open sourced world.

I know that this is flamebait, but I totally belive it as true as a recent Linux adopter.

I burned Redhat in a hot second in a showdown between Mandrake and Redhat competing for hard drive space.

I needed more space for my Win98 system.

Before you flame me, Understand the fact that I refuse to run Windows XP on my system and I really like the open-sourced chances in this year.

I am slowly converting my system to Linux and if you want to flame me for that, go ahead.

Gnome vs. KDE is a matter of taste. (1, Insightful)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412401)

What i want is a slick empty GUI when i start setting my workstation up. Gnome is what suits me the best right now. I fleed bloat and tight integration in the windows world and im not going to just pickup different branded bloat from KDE. Someone else likes many buttons and for him KDE is better. Dont get me wrong, i love KDE to but it isnt what i want.

All in all i think the competition between KDE and GNOME is very healthy. What wee need to refrain from is mudslinging and bashing.

I still prefer GNOME (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412412)

I agree that development for KDE is much easier.
When I have to write something with more GUI
- I use Qt. But on my desktop I use GNOME
- it works much better for me - it is more intuitive and configuration is simpler for me
and I do not like KDE look. Of course it is Ximian GNOME.

So in the end I write Qt applications
that I run under GNOME. :)

A Computer Science Student's Take (1, Interesting)

Twintop (579924) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412418)

As a Windows-only user for nearly my entire life (minus the DOS/Win3.1 years), I was actually looking forward to being forced into using nothing but Linux in my Computer Science classes. Windows has so many things I hate, and I have heard such good things about Linux.

To my disapointment, when I went into the *UNIX side of the computer lab at the start of this semester, I had noticed that they had upgraded from some pure-UNIX OS to Red Hat 8.0. I figured "oh well, *nix is *nix." The first time I logged in to GNOME, my first reaction was, "Holy crap, this is windows!" Then it began to sink in, the GUI is too much like windows. This was good for all the Math Majors who are required to take CS202, but for everyone else--EE and CS Majors--it seems pretty useless to have such a developed GUI that discourages people from learning handy terminal commands (atleast in a timely fashion). Sure the GUI makes it an easy transition for me, but I know that 'an easy transition' isn't going to help me in the long run.

I don't get you people (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412426)

"Then it began to sink in, the GUI is too much like windows."

I don't get you people.
Many, MANY people complain that Linux on the desktop is dead because the desktops don't look enough like Windows and the transition is too hard. Some of them even demand to copy Windows entirely, including the underlying filesystem structure.

And now, YOU suddenly jump in and say the GUI looks *too much* like Windows? That it discourages people from learning "handy terminal commands"? People complain how "average users don't WANT to learn the terminal" and you complain about how this discourages people from learning the terminal?!

Make up your mind already!

Re:I don't get you people (1)

Twintop (579924) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412451)

You miss the point, I'm a CS Major, not the average user, and need to learn the terminal. By using such windows-like GUI, I think it's hindering how fast I'll progress through learning the terminal. For other people, ofcourse a GUI like windows is going to be a good selling point if you're going for the desktop-esque visual that everyone is familiar with, I don't disagree with you there at all.

Re:I don't get you people (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5412487)

I'm using GNOME2.x now, and I can say it is really similar to Windows. But that doesn't stop me from having half a dozen of terminals open to do my real work.

The GUI doesn't stop you from doing things like you would have using a terminal. The underlying system is still available if you wanted to mess with it. Don't blame your problems on the GUI.

Re:A Computer Science Student's Take (1)

tempest303 (259600) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412454)

Then it began to sink in, the GUI is too much like windows.

Really? In what ways? And why is this a bad thing? Cite examples - be specific.

it seems pretty useless to have such a developed GUI that discourages people from learning handy terminal commands

I will now quote from the book of jwz [jwz.org] :

But here's the thing that really struck me about this: command lines, as a user interface, really suck ass. Even if you use them, you know that's true. Somewhere, deep in your heart, you know what you're doing is ridiculous, and there's got to be a better way.
(this quote shamelessly lifted from: http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/bittybox.html [jwz.org] )

Yes, command line interfaces can be very useful and efficient for some tasks, but wow do they suck in so many ways. But regardless, Linux, whether in GNOME, KDE, or otherwise, has one very strong difference that will always seperate it from Windows, thus making the "It's just like Windows all over again! Wahhh!" arguments false: the very command line you mention. Linux will always have a variety of powerful shells available, with flexible command line tools, all available within that awful GUI you despise so!

Could someone draw me a map? (1)

Bender Unit 22 (216955) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412419)

I am working a lot with unix/linux,, whatever, but never with any GUI.
If you were to make a layered model like the ISO model for networks, how would it look?
5 gnome [a pretty package]
4 [some windows manager]
3 XFree
2 drivers?
1 hardware
(could not come up with 7 layers here :) )

Could someone enlighten me?(pun intended)

Re:Could someone draw me a map? (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412433)

I'll tell you this before you freak out: more layers does *not* equal bloat or slowness.

This is just a basic map. The real situation is more complex and different for every app.

Application
GNOME libraries
GTK+ (widget toolkit)
XFree86 (graphics manager)
Kernel
Hardware

The window manager is outside the map. It's a different process and is asynchronous.

Did something really go "wrong"? (4, Interesting)

dcuny (613699) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412432)

This is one of those "what went wrong with Gnome" articles. Obviously, if you love where Gnome 2.2, the isn't anything gone wrong.

I belong to the "something has gone wrong with Gnome" school of thought. I dearly want Gnome to succeed. It's got a different sort of style and sensibility than KDE and Windows, and there's a lot of great stuff there.

Love it or hate it, KDE feels like a unified desktop, while Gnome feels like a cobbled together set of unrelated tools.

The "Open File" dialog is a thing of shame, and I can't believe that it won't be until October until a replacement comes along. The fact that something so basic has been allowed to stay unchanged so long, in my mind, reflects the difference between KDE and Gnome.

I don't think that it's an organization issue, or even that one group is more clever than the other. My guess is that, at some level, Qt really is better than GTK. I don't know if it's C vs. C++, or KParts vs. Corba, Glade vs. KDevelop... Perhaps Nick's got it right, that it's the underlying objects. KDE doesn't seem to have suffered from having a C++-centric toolkit, and Gnome doesn't seem to have benefitted from having a C-centric toolkit.

The last release of KDE had some pretty cool stuff in it - I was eager to get my hands on it and play with it. In contrast, most of what I've heard about Gnome 2.2 has been about what it doesn't have in it anymore. It apparently won't even be featured in the next Knoppix release, since it's broken so badly.

But I wouldn't discount the future of Gnome. Maybe .NET/Mono will solve the problems (I wouldn't bet the farm on it). Maybe there are no problems at all - just a different desktop, with a different way of doing things.

But, gah... Please, fix that "Open File" dialog!

Excellent topic for discussion... (2, Funny)

gnovos (447128) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412445)

As a followup, I wonder if we can finally settle which religion is the one true faith and whether or not abortion should be legal.

Re:Excellent topic for discussion... (0, Flamebait)

tempest303 (259600) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412470)

HA! Mod parent up!

Both GNOME and KDE are LAME. (1)

Pornosonic (545722) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412457)

Actually, if you want to be technical about it, both GNOME and KDE are LAME; They are both uber-hyped window managers. This more-or-less follows directly from the Eliteness of the Console axiom.

The proof, which is left as an exercise to the reader, is more or less the same as one would use to proove the lameness of most window-managers. (Hint: Try to prove that it is LAME to have more than three applications taking up screen-share at once.)

Ratpoison [sourceforge.net] , due to its special properties that make it more like screen [gnu.org] than a window manager, is one of the few acceptably not LAME window managers under X11.

Question on licensing (5, Insightful)

Tyreth (523822) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412459)

I used to be a GNOME man myself, but have recently become sold on KDE, because it really does shine. Not that long ago, both projects were at a similar level. Now kde has shot ahead, and gnome is left unconfigurable, empty. But that's not why I'm writing...

Something concerns me with the Qt licensing. I'm asking people who likewise share a love for the freedom that free software gives us, not to those who don't really care.

Imagine 3 years from now KDE has overtaken the Linux desktop, and GNOME/GTK+ has faded to obscurity. The Linux desktop is beginning to look bright and we start to have many commercial applications made for us (free is always better, but commercial is necessary).
With GNOME or KDE it is possible to make commercial applications. With GNOME the developer merely takes advantage of the LGPL license. In KDE however, the developer would need to purchase a license from Trolltech for Qt.

Now I have no problem with making companies pay - it's an incentive to make free software. But what I don't like, is if Qt becomes the necessary standard, that we have a commercial company that is the controller of the fate of commercial applications. I don't like the thought of commercial apps for Linux being in the hands of another company - I'd much rather if the community controlled such a mechanism.

So I want to know if others think my concerns are legitimate or misinformed?

lets compare apps... (1, Interesting)

mdew (651926) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412467)

lets compare applications

Gnome/GTK vs KDE/QT

Web Browsing
Galeon
Galeon is better by default, it supports more since its based on Mozilla...and its fast. Konq's "tabs" are shitty, shitty when you compare galeon's tabs functions, and the speed shits all over konq.

Multi-media
Mplayer (gtk)
Nothing can touch this player, sure theres KDE frontends available, but the default is the GTK frontend, Arpi chose the better GUI toolkit.

IRC
Xchat
I've seen a few KDE IRC clients, they're either heavy bloated with shit (kvirc) or so featureless that its not usable.

News
Pan
Knode is trash, sorry to say, some attachments never quite work.

Email
Evolution
Kmail, see above...plus it cant thread my messages that well..Sure it looks like Outlook, big deal..Konq looks like IE.

Mame
gxmame or grustibus
You want ugly, QMamecat is *ugly*.

Music
xmms (gtk)
Noatun is so shitty, why do they bother even developing it? Using seperate tools for media playing, mplayer, and xmms for music...why is there a need for Noatun, there isnt. basically KDE try to make a KDE tool for everything, even if it sucks, even it crashes.



the only thing going for KDE is the actual desktop environment and Konq as a file manager, everything else is either gnome and/or GTK has the advantage. They simply offer better programs, more mature programs, less prone to crashing.

Gnome VS Kde and Linux (2, Insightful)

westyvw (653833) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412484)

Right now, and I am telling you this becasue you are geeks. No MATTER what I do, KDE, GNOME, Redhat, Mandrake, Evil, and all the others..........THEY BREAK! I have broken every installation possible, except maybe Knoppix, but thats in a class by itself. When I setup a SERVER I dont give a damn about the GUI interface. I want stability. And thats what I get. Redhat 7.3 on my servers. Redhat 8 with no gui on my firewall seems to work OK but is a pain in the ass. The point is that NO xwindows system has got it down cold. I want a review of the Xwindows server that knows my vid card, knows my sound card, knows that I have hardware graphics etc. My redhat 8 using KDE has become broke at my work. Sound card is busy. Always busy. Windows doesnt complain only Linux. Configure till my ass is blue and its still refusing to play XMMS. WTF. More important then KDE or GNOME is that linux gets its act together. Yes I know a new X is out. Sorry to say this but windows slogan was "where do you want to go today" and Linux under a graphical interface is "What do you want to break toaday?"

Depends what you mean by Gnome... (0, Flamebait)

haggar (72771) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412492)

I say that, because I know if I explain my complaints with Gnome, I will be criticized that "that's not the latest version of Gnome, you can't say anything about Gnome if you don't use the latest build". I use the Gnome that comes by default with RHAS 2.1. Not by choice, but for business evaluation of the default install of RHAS 2.1, and I must say, it sucks. Just a few examples: can't lock the screen! Yep, click on the lock button, and nothing happens. Furthermore, all the "Alt+something"shortcuts don't work. I noticed that they are defined with the metakey, but obviously, that doesn't work with our (finnish) keyboards. (AFAIK, RHAS 2.1 is roughly equivalent to RH Linux 7.1).

Another little annoyance is the Gnome terminal, that does not scroll when using the shift+arrow keys. It may, again, seem like a little problem to you, but we do so much work on the command line that this does annoy us. Expecially after being used to the friendlyness of Konsole.

What we are used is KDE that comes with RedHat 6.1. My humble personal opinion is that Kicker and the other components of KDE are much more polished, snappier and powerful, even in that relatively old version of KDE, than Gnome from RHAS 2.1.

Oh, now I see, I will be criticized that "hey, that's not Gnome, it's how RedHat packaged Gnome". Sorry, I thought that, if anyone, RedHat payed particular attention to how it packages Gnome. After all, it's the default choice in RHAS 2.1 installation! So you see, you still can poke holes in my complaint, because I have not bothered to download the latest Gnome, isn't it.

Need a new GUI paradigm (2, Interesting)

Kirby-meister (574952) | more than 11 years ago | (#5412498)

OS X goes for the simple desktop, Windows is becoming more menu-based but still keeps that hint of desktop, and the major GUI's for linux are cloning those desktops.

While it's nice Linux emulates these other OSes for "consistency" or such, why not develop a new "type" of GUI? Remove the desktop metaphor, the icons, the needless menues. Why not a simple GUI with no mouse where you cycle between things you want your computer to do? A circular node-based selection scheme, like the GameCube's OS except instead of moving around a cube you move around a sphere or circle, where the options are chosen by moving left or right in the circle and choosing things like "E-mail," "Write a paper," "Browse the Internet," "Write a spreadsheet," "Install something," or even "Have computer tune itself up" (so that it sounds easy to understand to a normal user, but it does all the stuff they don't care about like defragging the ol HD or updating virus protection - a technical support employee's dream - just name it something that makes it appealing for them to run it).

A friend of mine once said "If you could make something easier to use [than Windows], I'd buy it." Granted, he's not into computers, but the majority of people aren't "computer people" at all - they just want their computer to do what they paid $1000-2000 for it to do. And, being technical support for the freshmen in my hall, I can tell you that NOBODY who isn't into computers ever updates security packages, virus protection, or even software they're using, nor does anybody ever run defrag...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>