Reasoning Behind The KDE League
Nerds writes: "Chris Schlaeger wrote a letter to explain to the KDE community at large why the KDE League was created. He explains why trying to compete with GNOME is a waste of time and mentions that Red Hat and VA Linux are still considering joining the League."
KDE can claim 70% of the desktops (where do they get this figure anyway), in the end they're yet another desktop, and people are welcome to use it.
For me, until there are bindings for Perl (their Web site claims there are, but only Qt is supported, and it's 6 months old) or C, I'll stay away from developing for it. To the rest of you who choose KDE: good for you! At least we've moved beyond the day of Motif/CDE and other such crap. KDE is much more of a modern desktop which earns my respect if not use.
But you got to remember, those tech columnists/"the average desktop user" doesn't want choice, they want everything to work together like some sci-fi fantasy world. Where you can check your email from a snack machine or a bus station that looks and works exactly the same way as your home computer.
For geeks, differences are good. We try out different DE's and OSes to try to find what we individually feel is "best". They think differences are bad. They learn one interface, and that's what they stick with. Generally they just want to check their email, chat with friends, surf the web, write a document, etc. To switch from Windows to GNOME, KDE, AfterStep or whatever wouldn't be worth it to them. They don't want to take the time or effort to learn something new, when they have something that works fine for them.
That's probably the biggest reason Linux/(Any desktop env.) doesn't take users away from Windows. You could show them the greatest Linux setup, with all sorts of bells and whistles, show them that it's stable as a rock, never crashes, runs everything that they're going to want to do, etc. Unless they are incredibly impressed, they're probably going to say something like "Why? I have something that works for me. So what if it crashes occasionally? If I install this new stuff, I have to take the time to learn it, to install it in the first place, install everything, etc."
To the average person, it's about ease of use. Something they already know how to use is automatically easier for them to use.
Someday, maybe that will change. People may start realizing that there are better alternatives, and that really, learning to use them IS beneficial. But until the general populace thinks that way, it may be awhile before Windows (desktop) users switch to something else. For now, we can only hope and dream.
The KDE League, from their secret base in the dormant volcano, uses all the technology at their disposal to defeat the minions of GNOME....
If I hear another "Stability" argument I think I'll scream. I've had many problems with the stability of Xfree86, and I've had it lock the system quite hard.
But even if it doesn't lock my system, my work is still lost.
Even if I got X working solidly, Netscape is more stable under Windows than under Linux. And IE is more stable under Windows than Netscape.
Ditto for Wordperfect under Linux, all Wine applications etcetrea. And I've tried Staroffice, I was not impressed... the import filters are as limited as import filters have ever been. You basically have to re-write any complex documents. Useless for document interchange, and the UI is definately lacking.
My NT system at work is running a 67 day uptime, and this is not uncommon. The last reboot was due to an upgrade of the JRE. OTOH, my Linux box last rebooted about 80 days ago... there was a power outage.
Linux has its strengths, but I just don't see them on the desktop. In addition to "stability" not being a desktop argument, think about 3d support, printing, cut-and-paste, keyboard based usage (yes, I could conceivably do everything without X, but that's comparing apples and oranges.)
There's little I can do in Gnome which I couldn't do in fvwm, and there's a lot I can't do in Gnome which I could do with Windows on 4MB of Ram and a 386 since 1993.
As a server, linux makes the impossible possible and every-day tasks easy. As a desktop, Linux makes the possible impossible and everyday tasks difficult.
Hello, statistics people. Five people does not a representative sample make. Especially when they all know each other. Your post is basically 100% content-free.
A ZDNet comentary critiques the GNOME Foundation and KDE League, and compares it to the infighting among brands of UNIXes. The commentary postulates that forking of DEs will occur, and further fork OSS OSes.
The Windows community and Tech press don't seem to get it, choice is good. Microsoft has dominated so completely, for so long, that people have forgotton that, choice is good and drives competition. Just my $0.02 FWIW.
"Open code, in other words, can be a check on state power." -Lawrence Lessig
On the other hand, Gtk, the Gnome toolkit, isn't remarkably good. Just so-so, reminds me of Motif.
I would be absolutely neutral in the window manager wars, if it weren't for Kdevelop and Qt. For a C/C++ programmer these rock, man, gimme KDE anytime!
"The one disturbing thing I found about the letter was the paragraph where he talks about not competing with GNOME. I don't know if its just me, but it seemed like he was saying that they weren't trying to compete with GNOME only because there weren't many GNOME users, and that if there were more, they'd do everything possible to steal them away. As I said, its probably just me, but that paragraph still sounds somewhat odd."
What I got out of reading that, was that KDE would rather expand their userbase by pulling new users from present Windows users. KDE has essentially defined their competition as Microsoft, rather than GNOME. I'd rather see M$ userbase get smaller, than GNOME's. Seems to me they are compeeting against the right opponent. Just my $0.02 FWIW, YMMV
"Open code, in other words, can be a check on state power." -Lawrence Lessig
Either way you look at it, it is a laudable effort to convert more Windows users. As a happy Gnome user I think the 70% marketshare among Linux desktop users is a bit of a bold claim, but nonetheless I think the KDE project is a laudable effort. And it is definitely true that there is much more to be gained by converting Windows users than by competing for a relative minority. Not that this competition hasn't been fruitful after all, it is to be doubted that either Gnome or KDE would have gotten this far without this competition. It is good to have a bit of choice.
-- Spelling and grammar errors tend to be a sign of erroneous thinking.
A very good writeup indeed. It seems to address all the major issues in a very balanced fashion. I'm not a KDE user myself (I can't stand some of the interface elements), but I think that publicity will be good for the project. Especially since KDE (from what I've used of it) seems similar enough to Windows to attract Windows users but doesn't replicate too many of the little things that makes Windows so irritating to use (yes, almost every Windows user I've talked to has found something, and often many things, about the interface to be almost painful). Hopefully, the KDE League and the GNOME Foundation will be able to work together on promotion and such, to inform people that the world outside of Windows has options other than the command-line.
The one disturbing thing I found about the letter was the paragraph where he talks about not competing with GNOME. I don't know if its just me, but it seemed like he was saying that they weren't trying to compete with GNOME only because there weren't many GNOME users, and that if there were more, they'd do everything possible to steal them away. As I said, its probably just me, but that paragraph still sounds somewhat odd.
Anyway, that's really a small detail. Good move on the part of the KDE guys, and hopefully this will alert people to the number of interface options available to Linux (and other Unix-style OSes, of course). And more options are always good.
-RickHunter