Slashdot Mirror


From GNOME to KDE and Back Again

Slashdot's own Roblimo has an interesting introspective on what makes us so prone to liking one window manager over another. More than likely it's just the inherent laziness of most users that precludes change. "I used KDE as my primary desktop from 1996 through 2006, when I installed the GNOME version of Ubuntu and found that I liked it better than the KDE desktop I'd faced every morning for so many years. Last January, I got a new Dell Latitude D630 laptop and decided to install Kubuntu on it, but within a few weeks, I went back to GNOME. Does this mean GNOME is now a better desktop than KDE, or just that I have become so accustomed to GNOME that it's hard for me to give it up?"

32 of 369 comments (clear)

  1. KDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I installed Kubuntu as well and went back to Mandriva, Kubuntu has a long way to go.

    1. Re:KDE by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think my biggest problem with KDE is that it's everything I hate about Windows; cluttered, nonsensical and in a way, just plain ugly.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:KDE by mrsteveman1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      KDE3 is cluttered because it's unorganized, not because it has features similar to Windows.

      I'm not saying this is you in particular, but people spend far too much time trying to NOT be like Windows instead of just trying to do things well.

    3. Re:KDE by mirshafie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      (I'm sorry for the post above, it was supposed to be divided into paragraphs. I'm posting it again since it's pretty much impossible to read my last post.)

      All this article really manages to do is to explain that different applications are different. Linux users should already know that, but strangely many of them seem not to, so I guess there's a place for an article like this. (For example, the thing about Blowfish, gedit and Kate being different text editors that suit different people.)

      I'm a KDE user now. It took me a long time to get accustomed to KDE. I tried many different desktops at a quite regular basis but ended up going back to GNOME. The reason then was because it is so plain and un-cluttered. This was important because I had primarily used Windows before and everything from the architecture of the OS to the applications were unfamiliar to me. The problem is that as I became more and more accustomed to Linux I also wanted more from it.

      And KDE simply has much more to offer. Take for example the menu you get when you right click on the title bar of a window. Most desktops/WMs give you some very basic options. KDE alone gives you advanced options and the possibility to always apply certain rules for a window. Of course this might scare you off if all you wanted to do was to Close or Minimize the window, but still there can be no argument about how powerful KDE is.

      I don't think KDE is nonsensical in any way (above post). All the KDE applications have a similar structure in the File menu; something I hope other desktops will copy. Everything is well structured, take for example the Configure Shortcuts option that almost every KDE application has. It is the most neatly integrated desktop that I've seen.

      The argument about default looks in distros and desktops is valid, but scary. I don't like KDE's default look or behaviour, but the point is that I can easily change it. This is true for GNOME and other Linux WMs aswell. If people do not want to use this power, then maybe the problem lies with them and not the desktop. You can't expect anybody to give you a perfect default look since we all like different things. The best you can ask for is tolerable defaults and easy configuration, which KDE does have.

      It is true as the article claims that we dislike change (because it means we have to learn new ways to do things that we need to do). I think this will be less of a problem for KDE in the future, since many KDE 4 applications are being ported to other Windows. Perhaps in the future people that are already accustomed to using Konqueror or Amarok under Windows will find the transition to the powerful but cluttered KDE much easier than a transition to GNOME.

      Finally further down in the thread some people express that there is no point in discussing what we like/dislike about this kind of software. Which is weird because computer interfaces will play an increasingly important role in the lives of millions of people for the next few decades. Of course we need to have this discussion.

  2. That's the beauty of open source... by bagboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Choices! I find myself alternating every so often, but really prefer KDE (v4 is looking good).

    1. Re:That's the beauty of open source... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I thought that Konqueror service menus are the equivalent of Nautilus actions? (I'm just making sure that you know about these, if that is the reason why you moved to Gnome. ;-))

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:That's the beauty of open source... by Daengbo · · Score: 5, Funny

      OK. Now that I've read that entire article, I want to ammend my statement. The next Roblimo contribution doesn't need to be Vi vs. Emacs: he's already covered Kate vs. Gedit and Thunderbird vs. KMail. He even went so far as to drop into why he prefers Linux over Macs and Windows machines. Talk about trying to get 5 flamewars going at once ....

    3. Re:That's the beauty of open source... by Naughty+Bob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This whole article should be marked as flamebait.
      Does that mean we can't talk about this stuff?

      Sure, there will be some people who, coming from a different timezone and so freed from the need to be civil, start acting all shouty- that's why we have moderation. But I appreciate this as a record of one man's experience, and as an opportunity to talk about why one interface works for some, and others for others.

      I have Ubuntu (my main workstation), Mac OS Tiger (for my photographer girlfriend), and Win XP (for when I have no other option) machines at home.

      Each has their good points, and maybe discussing them will somehow show us where we need to be headed next, regardless of our preferences.

      I find especially insightful the suggestion that 'we like what we know', though for me, I made the switch from XP to Linux 2+ years ago because 'Familiarity breeds contempt'. There are some things I miss, but I usually - eventually - find that there's a way to do what I want, and that my initial frustration was borne of my lifetime's worth of Windows expertise.

      My GF finds her MacBook Pro to be a massively capable machine, but hell hath no fury like a woman who, in the face of an impending deadline, can't figure out how to do something simple, something that would have taken 5 seconds on XP. Her first reaction is always 'what a stupid fucking way to do that'. The next time, she just does it, and is happy to acknowledge that it's not so much a 'stupid fucking way', but a different way to that which she is used.
      --
      "Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
    4. Re:That's the beauty of open source... by Naughty+Bob · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fair enough. I think both Gnome and KDE have their share of good and bad points, and I can see why different types of user would better suit either one. Though I go for Gnome, I envy the slick default looks of KDE 4, and distrust the new-found motives of Gnome founder Anakin de Icaza.

      But the beauty of Linux is that I, and a bunch of like-minded fellows can compile or even write my own version, with none of the perceived compromises.

      --
      "Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
    5. Re:That's the beauty of open source... by WgT2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      ...I tend to use the CLI for non trivial tasks...

      Then how can you stand it when Gnome's GUI doesn't incorporate standard commandline (CLI) shortcuts, such as ^u, when you want to clear to the beginning of the text dialog?!? or ^k when you want to clear to the end of the text dialog?

      The ^u functionality is present everywhere I've tried it (so far) in KDE and I just cannot understand why Gnome, owing its heritage to the CLI, does not incorporate that functionality.

      It is the sum of little things like this that equate to a completely dissatisfying experience when using Gnome; it just takes the fun out of using *Nix, which absolutely owes its heritage to the CLI.

      Examples:

      • Open a session of Bash, type some text, then ^u (Ctrl+u). What happens to the text?
      • In the same shell, type 10 characters of text, then ^b five times, then ^k. What happens to the text?
      • Now, open Nautilus, create a new folder and, in the dialog to name it, try the two text manipulation steps above. What happens? (spoiler: nothing, the text is not manipulated)
      • Open Konqueror, and try the same. What happens? (spoiler: it behaves like the commandline)
      Here's where I first notices this huge deficiency:
      • Lock your Gnome session, such that you need to provide your password. Mistype your password... you could clear that mistyped password with ^u... if you were on the CLI... or in KDE.

      It wasn't until I learned the major shortcuts on the CLI AND just how pervasive they are, such as at the password prompt when logging in, that I really saw how friendly to users, at least those with knowledge of these things, KDE absolute is and Gnome is not.

  3. Don't think i matters all that much. by IANAAC · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Since both sets of libraries are available, you can easily run programs from both environments.

    I have mostly used Gnome, but since I got the EeePC, I've been using KDE, but I've set it up so it both looks and acts like Gnome. I'm pretty sure you can also do the same in the other direction.

    The actual desktop environment really doesn't matter so much as do the applications.

    1. Re:Don't think i matters all that much. by Dasher42 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Historically, KDE has been much more configurable than Gnome. All through the KDE 3.x days my first step on a fresh install was to reconfigure the toolbars to reduce clutter, set up the keyboard shortcuts so that I could reach for the mouse less, so forth - or of course, copying over the .kderc folder from a machine where I'd done this before. Doing this in Gnome is problematic, and often Gnome distros bundle applications that will pay no attention to your customizations. The KDE integration advantage really comes through here.

      Right now, Gnome is being so conservative about their interface that you actually can't "do the same in the other direction".

    2. Re:Don't think i matters all that much. by ajs · · Score: 4, Informative
      Thank you! I'm glad someone pointed this out. I'm really sick of people thinking that Gnome is a window manager (or KDE for that matter).

      A desktop is everything from the libraries to the UI specs to the systems gui tools, etc. Some of the most important features of Gnome, for example:
      • Internationalized text rendering capabilities
      • Application data exchange standards
      • HIG (Human Interface Guideline) specification


  4. Real brain-twister by SnoopJeDi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does this mean GNOME is now a better desktop than KDE, or just that I have become so accustomed to GNOME that it's hard for me to give it up?


    Neither.

    It just means you prefer GNOME to KDE. That's all. Saying something is more superior because you prefer it over everything else (without any other grounds) is something the Slashdot crowd should recognize from a mile away: fanboism.

    Personally, I prefer Fluxbox. Does that make Fluxbox superior? No, it just means that as a minimalist user, a more trimmed window manager does the trick for me.
    1. Re:Real brain-twister by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a bit like "For years I used to love Quarter Pounders, then I switched to Big Macs and found that I liked them. Recently I started to eat Quarter Pounders again, but switched right back to Big Macs. Does this mean that the Big Mac is better?"

      It's crazy what passes for front page news here these days.

  5. I'm looking by smittyoneeach · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...for gnome.el and kde.el, but not finding them.
    Are gnome and kde part of this new-fangled "X" thingy people seem to be on about lately?

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  6. Re:Icons on top... by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No, it's to give you two areas where you effectively only have to worry about accuracy in the X axis. Having it only at the bottom only gives you one. Twice as much space, for practically no cost.

    --
    <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
  7. Laziness by David7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most decisions of this sort are driven by laziness. We end up using the system/interface/whatever that allows us to get the most done with the least effort. Sometimes the multitude of options available in the default KDE setup allows a person to get to an application faster. Sometimes the uncluttered default GNOME setup gives you the feel of a more lightweight window manager without sacrificing most of the creature comforts. In either case, laziness is the underlying driver for our decision-making. It's the underlying driver for most software decisions.

    In fact, it's one of the reasons software was invented: So I can sit on my ass all day getting paid to turn my day-dreams into reality.

  8. It's that time, again by k-zed · · Score: 4, Funny

    Damn it. There are times when you just look at the article title and you know that a long, delicious, juicy flamewar is coming up...

    And I just lost my mod points, too. :(

    --
    we discovered a new way to think.
  9. It is a problem of Kubuntu. by xtracto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the article, the author describes several uses he had when using Kubuntu. I have had similar issues, but all is reduced to the fact that Kubuntu is a hack "KDE-patched" version of Ubuntu. When you use Kubuntu after using Ubuntu you can "feel" that it seems as they just threw the kde libraries and desktop into the Ubuntu distro. There are a lot of integrity issues. Particularly I have also had the wireless network issue, while it is working flawlessly in Ubuntu, Kubuntu is a complete mess.

    But that does not mean that KDE is better or worst than Gnome, if you use a KDE-oriented desktop (such as SUSE or Mandriva) which have KDE preconfigured out of the box, the experience will be different...

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  10. False dichotomy by Cultural+Sublimation · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you are making a false dichotomy here, and that at least a third option should be considered: Kubuntu might not be the best KDE desktop around. Bear in mind that Ubuntu was initially Gnome-only, and that to this day that's the desktop that gets most of Canonical's resources. Kubuntu doesn't get nowhere near the same level of attention, and that shows. Kubuntu mostly lacks polishing, ie, the "little things" that end up making a substantial impact on the user's experience. Moreover, there have been in the past a number of serious, potential data-loss bugs in Kubuntu that festered for *months* because there was just not the manpower to fix them. That is substantial evidence that Kubuntu is a second-class citizen for Canonical.

    While I find KDE overall a superior desktop to Gnome, I have to agree that Ubuntu is generally a better desktop experience than Kubuntu. However, I just wish people would stop equating Gnome==Ubuntu and KDE==Kubuntu, and therefore Gnome > KDE.

  11. Wow... just, wow.. by Moridineas · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I find very few statements from the "Windows and Mac: Not to my taste at all" section that I can agree with at all. I mean, obviously the taste part is fine, after all a lot of operating system/application choice is merely personal taste. (vi/emacs anyone?), however the overall section seems ... inane?

    I will say that it's interesting how even with longtime users like Roblimo, the "linux experience" is really becoming the ubuntu/gnome experience and the kubuntu/kde experience. From this review, it sounds like the base operating system could be FreeBSD, solaris, whatever, and Roblimo wouldn't have a clue. I think this is probably a very good thing, but also speaks to the changing skillsets of linux users.

    A few statements:

    even humble things like the closest application I could come on a Mac to my beloved Bluefish editor cost money, even though they were no better than -- and in many cases not as good as -- the free software to which I had grown accustomed. ... There are ways to fiddle some Linux apps into working on Mac OS, much as Wine can make some Windows apps run in Linux, but this is a lot of trouble. Ok, here's what I had to do to install bluefish (which I've never heard of / used before).

    open a Terminal window (I use csh) and type "sudo port install bluefish"

    That was it. I'm sure fink has a package as well. While X apps are slightly different under osx, I don't think comparing the experience or process to Wine is at all correct.

    And here's the funny thing: Windows feels a lot more Linuxlike to me than Mac OS. In many ways it seems as if it's a slightly clumsy knockoff of KDE. Yeah, you think WINDOWS is ripping off KDE? I'm not going to argue that windows is the king of originality, but I think it came about the other way around...

    Ditto the way you store and find individual files, for which Windows uses the same "folders and subfolders" metaphor as both KDE and GNOME, and Windows gives me a Linux-style horizontal list of open programs across the bottom of my screen, which Mac OS does not. Confused again. Mac doesn't use folders and subfolders? That's news to me. Horizontal list of open programs--that's called the dock. Ok, so it includes launcher buttons as well, but virtually the same thing.

    Backing up my data in Windows is lots harder than backing up a /home or /username directory in Linux, because Windows seems to scatter data all over the place. This is true, though for the past what...7-8 years (since 2k/xp) all of your files+personal registory should live under c:\documents and settings\username -- effectively the same as a /home directory. When you have roaming profiles on a windows network, your user directory gets copied back and forth.

    Windows is supposed to be less virus-prone than it was a few years ago, but the only way to keep malware off of Windows (that I know of) is to not connect it to the Internet This was MAYBE true once upon a time. I primarily use my OSX laptop now, but I've never gotten a virus on my PC (don't run software usually) and have never had a malware/adware infection either. Of course I've used firefox/mozilla for years. At my office I've certainly seen my share of adware/etc infections, almost always from people clicking things in email or webpages (and no infections in quite awhile) they shouldn't--which I would hope roblimo doesn't do!!

    and one from the next section...

    Except for one thing: as far as he knows, he doesn't connect to the Internet or use email software. He connects to AOL, which to him is the Internet. Including email. AOL is indeed the Internet. When you connect to AOL, you're on the internet, and you can ping, use firefox, etc to your heart's content.
  12. Re:question about GNOME ... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 4, Funny

    One thing I do like about GNOME is that they have a built-in emacs key-binding option, which I can't figure out how to get in KDE yeah, well KDE has a built-in vi key-binding option, so there.

    umm..

    That's probably not helping, is it.

  13. Re:Here we go again by wanderingknight · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Says the guy who's got a sig that mocks Mac users.

  14. Re:Interesting quotes from the article by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Get over it, Roblimo. Windows does have a /home/ equivalent, namely the My Documents folder. Almost every single application will by default use that directory as the default location for any files you use, so if you do want to back up your data, just backup that directory.

    Except that the /home/username directory in Unix stores a lot more than just data. It's also where configuration information, and even the applications themselves, go. In Windows if you back up only your My Documents folder, you get less than half the information you need. Program configuration is often critical, and when in files lives in at least 4 places, none of which are under My Documents. And then there's registry information, which isn't even in the filesystem. And then there's the chunks of the application that don't go into it's Program Files folder or wherever else you installed it, but go into Windows system folders. No, applications aren't supposed to do that. No, that doesn't stop them even in this day and age. Why do you think so many applications get heartburn under Vista (which is pickier about such misbehavior)?

    Basically, on a Unix system if I save a copy of my home directory tree I'm pretty much guaranteed to have gotten not only all my data but all the configuration information and other things I need to restore not just my data but my application environment. On Windows, if I save a copy of My Documents I'll lose the majority of my application environment.

  15. Re:No, he's right. by gambolt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is there a KDE user out there who doesn't change every single panel and menu around first thing? My impression has always been that the KDE devs don't care much about defaults because 1) That should be left to the distros and 2) The user is going to change it all around anyway. Criticizing the default UI for KDE is dumb. You're not supposed to use it.

    This is the polar opposite of the Gnome policy of assuming the user is too stupid to know how they work best.

  16. Windows and scattered data by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There are a few reasons for the impression that Windows seems to scatter data all over the place:

    1) Sloppy programming by application developers - not all applications use "My Documents". Not directly Microsoft's fault, but here Linux profits from its origins as Unix-like system:
    In the Unix world, it is taken for granted that the user may only write to /home/, and applications respect that. Windows still suffers a bit from its history as unsecured system, where everybody was administrator and could write all over the place. Some applications took advantage of that, and this behavior is not completely weeded out yet.

    2) Data redirection:
    A questionable methods on Microsoft's part to fix problems with 1) in Vista.
    See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc160980.aspx for an overview. In short, Vista will silently redirect attempts to write to "forbidden" places to a place in the user's profile. This prevents the application from corrupting the system, but has of course side effects. For instance, take a group of users who used the same application in older Windows versions and were used to sharing data through a common directory (for instance a subdirectory of the installation directory). Now user A cannot see the data of user B anymore, and I doubt an average user will understand what has happened here ;-)

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  17. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous+Crowhead · · Score: 5, Funny

    As long as we all agree that Captain Picard used Emacs while he spread all measures of awesome throughout the galaxy. That is in stark contrast to Kirk, who used Vi to compose love notes to alien whores in his quest to spread space AIDS to as many planets as he possibly could before being canceled.

  18. KDE user by AaronW · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I started with KDE back in 1999 since we were using Sun workstations and CDE was unusable. I managed to compile KDE 1.2 and added a Solaris sound driver to ARTS and have been using it ever since. I have tried Gnome on a number of occasions, but I always go back to KDE since it always feels like my hands are tied behind my back with Gnome. Yes, KDE is cluttered (much better in 4.0), but I often use a lot of that "clutter". There are a lot more menu options, but I've frequently found them useful.

    Some things in Gnome I absolutely detest, like their file dialogs. The KDE file dialogs are a lot more friendly and powerful, and I've found that the integration seems better. They're also consistent across applications and not limited to just local files, but http, ftp, fish, etc.

    When it comes to things like burning CDs or DVDs, I have yet to find anything that comes close to k3b, or for music, Amarok.

    I still use Thunderbird for email due to some issues Kmail has with IMAP, but I'll switch in an instant once those are fixed. For the web, I have found that Firefox has slowly adopted a number of features I've been using for a long time in Konqueror. Both Firefox and Thunderbird have some nasty issues still when your home directory is mounted via NFS. I.e. if I have Firefox open on one computer, I cannot open it a second time on another computer in the lab without killing it on the first.

    I've fallen in love with some of the features in Konsole, like searching the history, which it's had almost forever.

    I've also found DCOP to be extremely useful since I can script things or even control applications remotely. I.e. I needed to change some parameters on a remotely running ktorrent and was easily able to do that via dcop without having any access to the desktop.

    For file browsing I have also found Konqueror to be quite powerful, since I can use it rather seamlessly whether I'm browsing files locally, via FTP, fish, on my camera, etc. And if I click on different files, the part for displaying or editing that file is integrated. If I click on a PDF file, kpdf displays it. If I click on a text file, kate is integrated.

    Also, each time I tried dealing with the configuration of Gnome to tweak things I was always disappointed in the lack of options.

    KDE has also been fairly consistent with the menus.

    And lastly, I've found that the embedding of different applications to be quite powerful. For example, I am writing this in Akregator, but all it has to do is add a tab with a KHTML part.

    I may try Gnome again one of these days, but each time I do I'm left wanting for a lot of the features and options I take advantage of in KDE.

    It's like Gnome goes for simplicity and in the process discards functionality and caters to the most common needs, whereas KDE is much more of a swiss army knife of tools that can be combined together and tweaked to the hearts content.

    I might add that I've used the straight KDE distribution (for Solaris) and SuSE distributions.

    I won't say KDE is the prettiest environment out there, but I rather have functional over pretty, and some of the other themes for it are rather nice.

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  19. Re:GNOME and screen real estate by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are in this order?

    Cancel = Back (Left), OK = Forward (Right)

    Slightly off-topic: When the hell is /. going to update the reverse layout of the "older news"
        YesterdayDate | DayBeforeYesterday

    It should be:
        PrevDate | SelectedDate | NextDate

    And there sould be at least button of whitespace between Preview and Submit.

    Noob UI designers...

  20. That's exactly what I though with a sigh of relief by Gazzonyx · · Score: 4, Funny

    Damn it. There are times when you just look at the article title and you know that a long, delicious, juicy flamewar is coming up...

    And I just lost my mod points, too. :( If it makes you feel any better, you don't have the dilemma of trying to decide whether to mod a fanboy into the ground or light him up like a Christmas tree via posting a reply. Ironically, this pushes that very problem up stream to current mods. Right as they started doing 10 mod points, no less (when did that happen anyway?).

    Happy hunting! First one to get forcibly rejected from Slashdot gets a bottle opener key chain! Double points for a k-line, and Quad for a z-line.
    --

    If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

  21. Re:moving panels, menus, etc.. by bigdavex · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does anyone move into a room, office, flat and not think "that chair would look better there, we should have that colour for the walls and how about a pot plant?"?

    Yes.

    In the U.S., we refer to these people as "straight".
    --
    -Dave