Slashdot Mirror
Attempting To Reframe "KDE Vs. GNOME"
jammag writes "Setting aside the now tired debate about whether KDE or GNOME is the 'better' Linux desktop, Bruce Byfield compares their disparate development approaches and asks, not which desktop is subjectively better, but which developmental approach is likely to be most successful in the next few years. 'In the short term, GNOME's gradualism seems sensible. But, in the long-term, it could very well mean continuing to be dragged down by support for legacy sub-systems. It means being reduced to an imitator rather than innovator.' In contrast, 'you could say that KDE has done what's necessary and ripped the bandage off the scab. In the short term, the result has been a lot of screaming, but, in the long term, it has done what was necessary to thrive.'"
In my opinion, despite Gnome's incremental approach, they are still highly successive in alienating their users.
Hey, I heard Slashdot is a write-only forum. So I thought I write something completely unrelated to the article, summary, title and comments I'm replying to.
I even tried to not relate it to the site and reality on/in which I am, but it's kinda hard.
Am I doing well in blending in?
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
This isn't your typical Simple Gnome vs Flexible KDE debate.
For lack of a better analogy, this is like comparing Apple's transition to OSX with Windows' NT-2K-XP-Vista transitions.
Windows has been mostly successful at maintaining backwards compatibility, but it is starting to resemble a millstone hung from the neck. It's holding them back and getting in the way.
Meanwhile, Apple broke backwards compatibility and now are not encumbered by obsolete paradigms.
You could say it is an Open Sores project. So to speak...
From the article you get the impression that KDE use radical changes whereas Gnome strive in little steps...
How in accurate. Both evolve in little steps and both occasionally make radical changes.
Gnome had a major remake for 2.0 which reduced the older clotted layout.
KDE had a major remake for 4.0 which vectorized most of the gui.
Otherwise, changes are small. For both.
.
Since 4.2, KDE4 has become quite usable. I already prefer it over KDE 3.5.
The real edge of KDE over Gnome has always been the tech, though. kioslaves vs. gnomevfs is one example, KParts another. Add Qt 4.5 to this, and it becomes obvious that KDE is vastly superior under the hood. But, this is not what users are interested in. I do think that KDE4 learned a lesson or two from Gnome about this. I just hope they don't start removing all options because they think the "user may be confused" (just like with the infamous printing dialog Linus Torvalds was so frustrated about).
This sig does not contain any SCO code.
I just tried out the Ubuntu and Kubuntu 9.04 betas earlier today, and I think my interest in both GNOME and KDE is just about worn out.
Both are really quite bloated. I've been on Debian and KDE 3 for years, but I think I'll be switching to a stand-alone window manager like fluxbox, or maybe Xfce, the next time I have to upgrade.
GNOME on Ubuntu felt as sluggish and amateurish as ever. No amount of new themes and rehashed icons can improve GNOME. As a KDE user I was looking forward to KDE 4.2 but christ, it's so damn cluttered. I think they've actually added more clutter since 3.5, not taken it away. Every damn UI element flickers and flashes with a mouseover effect as you move around; some kind of indexing service is hitting the disk in the background; there's a plethora of desktop views or applets or whatever they're called, none of which I'm interested in; there's a new K menu that looks like it was a reject from Windows XP, and which takes several clicks to hunt around for what you're looking for; the default widget theme has super thick borders, even the pull down menus have thick borders around the menu items. The whole thing is just over-cooked. I couldn't make sense of it, frankly.
Sure, I could turn off or tweak most of that junk. But I think what I saw today is what happens when you try to copy Windows and Mac too closely. You end up copying the bad as well as the good. You inherit the same limitations and the same performance standards. It's a poor form of competition, and I despair at how much programmer effort must have gone into creating all this bloated mimicry.
Having said that, I only just scratched the surface. I know how good Qt 4 is, and I'm sure developing apps with the KDE4 framework is much nicer than KDE3. It's just that the result on the desktop (both of them) is a bit of a let down.
>Incidentally, the fact that Windows is the most widely used OS, suggests that backward compatibility matters.
No, lock-in, monopoly and inertia what matters.
If you have those, you can force anything on your customers.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
One of the major effects KDE 4 has had on the free desktop has been to light a fire under the metaphorical asses of Xorg and driver development. There has been tons of work going on in Xorg since the split, but until KDE 4 came along and proved that stuff like Composite could have a real effect on user experience (Compiz came first, yes, but that was more or less just bling until apps started using composite), there was not as much pressure and expectation from free desktop users.
Turn on desktop effects on any system using KDE 4 and if you have Xorg with good drivers, the difference in experience is startling.
The rate at which Xorg and some of the drivers are getting better is exciting, as is Qt and KDE itself, and this is in part due to the expectations that KDE 4 has set in the minds of free desktop users. Kudos to the Xorg and FOSS driver devs for stepping up. The next couple of years are going to be fun.
What? That makes absolutely no sense. Lock-in means that you bundle two normally separated products to exclusively function with eachother. It can be the .doc format and MS Office Word, or Apple Itunes and the iPod, or even Half Life and Steam. The dependency can be a past, current or future product and whichever it is is irrelevant.
I am the lawn!
Appearance Settings > Desktop Activity Type > "Folder View" (4.2 or later) Very hackish... so hackish there's even an option to do so.
A CC-licensed illustrated horror novel