What the GNOME Desktop Gets Right and KDE Gets Wrong
An anonymous reader writes: Eric Griffith at Phoronix has provided a fresh perspective on the KDE vs. GNOME desktop debate after exclusively using GNOME for the past week while being a longtime KDE user. He concluded his five-page editorial (which raises some valid points throughout) by saying, "Gnome feels like a product. It feels like a singular experience. When you use it, it feels like it is complete and that everything you need is at your fingertips. It feels like the Linux desktop. ... In KDE, it's just some random-looking window popup that any application could have created. ... KDE doesn't feel like cohesive experience. KDE doesn't feel like it has a direction its moving in, it doesn't feel like a full experience. KDE feels like its a bunch of pieces that are moving in a bunch of different directions, that just happen to have a shared toolkit beneath them." However, with the week over and despite his criticism, he's back to using KDE.
Can we discuss systemd vs init next?
All power to you if you like GNOME Shell and KDE. Personally, I find them both to be bloated and buggy. KDE comes with a lot of crapware (my apologies if you actually do use Calligra Suite, but everyone everywhere I know of uses LibreOffice or MSOffice), and its colors & icons are very gaudy and dated. GNOME Shell is even worse--it's like if Windows 8's unintuitiveness had a drunken affair with Unity, and their bastard offspring refused to dress in anything but dark, depressing colors laden with stupid, random shapes.
Why should there be a debate?
Because my preferences are fact, and anyone who feels differently is stupid.