Which is better KDE or Gnome desktop?

techie

What's your take, which is better? I have used both, still uncertain which I prefer even after several years.

curious john · Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 1252

A pox on both of them, both are just bloated eye candy meant to compete with windows. And whats worse they lock up bunch of affiliated, software like K3B and KPPP under KDE system for example, where you at least have to have bunch KDE libraries installed to use them. Well not KPPP so much, somebody on Puppy Linux forum got it working with just QT library (not a KDE library), it complains a bit when started when it doesnt find KDE stuff but runs. K3B however needs enough KDE libraries to make it like 60mb to install on a non-KDE system. A total basic Puppy Linux install isnt all that much bigger in comparison. Its worth it however as K3B by far best burner gui software for linux out there. It just works and works well as good as any windows burner software. K3B is really only absolute must have out of all the KDE and Gnome affiliated software IMHO. KPPP is handy but usually GKdial or WvDial will work as well, if not necessarily as easy to configure.

As to alternatives, there are several lighter window manager/file manager combinations that boot instantly unlike KDE and Gnome which are in the XP sort of time to boot. Xfce is a light weight desktop system with lot eye candy simular to KDE/Gnome but faster to load. Puppy however uses very light weight JWM window manager and ROX file manager. JWM (Joe's window manager) is sort of a plain win95 looking desktop but quite functional. ROX is instantaneous as file manager where as say Konqueror under KDE (think they call the file manager version something else now) or Nautilus under Gnome lag a bit. Of course with any linux, adding ROX is trivial and changing window managers is doable though its a pain to redo menues. Some disagree, but I still say ROX is best file manager out there on any operating system I've experienced. Course if you love the old 2 pane list type file managers, you probably will hate ROX. Some peoples brains work different and so one or other seems more comfortable to them. Konqueror is probably more simular to Windows Explorer in windows system. Konqueror is also a web browser much like simularity of windows explorer and IE in windows.

plodr · Administrator Joined: 12 Apr 2001 Posts: 7411

I can use either. My eeepc, in Easy Mode, uses Icewm and that's been fine. I've enable Advanced desktop (KDE) but I've only booted into it once.
Since my husband isn't familiar with linux and isn't a techno-geek (um, like me), I want the icons so he can just click and have something work like web browsing, writing a document, creating a database, or reading a pdf. That's what he mainly does. I've had him programmed from day one to never save files to the computer. That way, if one computer dies, he can grab his files and use another computer in the house. So putting his files on a flash stick won't be something he has to learn.

R Vijay · ๑۞๑ Joined: 12 Jun 2001 Posts: 4539 Location: Canada

I used to also belong to the those against the bloat group. However, after seeing the benefits of simulators, I am encouraged to consider more powerful PCs/software. Google for comparisons of KDE Vs Gnome. I am sure that since both are ongoing efforts, there will be opinions on both sides that will change.

Personally, I am happy with KDE.
_________________

curious john · Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 1252

plodr wrote:

I can use either. My eeepc, in Easy Mode, uses Icewm and that's been fine. I've enable Advanced desktop (KDE) but I've only booted into it once.
Since my husband isn't familiar with linux and isn't a techno-geek (um, like me), I want the icons so he can just click and have something work like web browsing, writing a document, creating a database, or reading a pdf. That's what he mainly does. I've had him programmed from day one to never save files to the computer. That way, if one computer dies, he can grab his files and use another computer in the house. So putting his files on a flash stick won't be something he has to learn.

Cant remember if it was ice or what but Puppy 2.15CE (community edition) used some non-jwm window manager and it was quite attractive, loaded just as fast. Anyway here is desktop on generic new install of Puppy 3.01 with JWM window manager, the icons courtesy of ROX file manager. Personally I dont like the generic (supposedly idiot proof) approach and usually relabel the icons to actual programs used and replace some of the generic icons with icons for those specific programs. I also usually use my own favorite photos as background instead of default. One thing with Puppy setup, you cant download files to the desktop like in KDE or windows, you need to download them somewhere else like /root/my-documents.

R Vijay · ๑۞๑ Joined: 12 Jun 2001 Posts: 4539 Location: Canada

Is eye candy important or not important ? Let us all, including windows users share this discussion.
_________________

Boz · Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 15:53 pm Post subject:

To me, not. I have set all of the Vista (2) and XP (4) computers that I use to Classic Start Menu and have set Performance Options to Adjust For Best Performance.
_________________

......

........

digger · ๑۞๑ Joined: 29 Mar 2001 Posts: 2656

curious john wrote:

you need to download them somewhere else like /root/my-documents.

or perhaps

/home/myNameIsNotRoot/downloads

Booting off a CD is no reason to form bad habits.

As far as eyecandy, it is useless. That isn't the point of things like KDE and Gnome. The point is that they define common conventions for application design and provide libraries and tools to help developers follow those conventions. If you install a new KDE or gnome application, it will look and behave the way you expect. These kinds of issues are beyond the scope of a window manager.

curious john · Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 1252

digger wrote:

That isn't the point of things like KDE and Gnome. The point is that they define common conventions for application design and provide libraries and tools to help developers follow those conventions. If you install a new KDE or gnome application, it will look and behave the way you expect. These kinds of issues are beyond the scope of a window manager.

That might be good for commercial uniformity, but ends up just turning linux into a unix version of windows. Its just a big nuisance for those of us wanting our operating system à la carte. There just isnt any real reason that if the only K program I want is K3B that it has to be 60mb install. Better lot of choices, each made individually as small and efficient as possible.

digger · ๑۞๑ Joined: 29 Mar 2001 Posts: 2656

Do you realize that 60MB costs less than 2 cents on magnetic media? If developers worried about trying to save you two cents of hardware they wouldn't have any time to create anything useful.

blsJason · Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 23:43 pm Post subject: Re: eye candy

60 MB is also over 3 1/2 hours of downloading on dial-up, if you're lucky.

BTW... "eye candy" is only worth it if I personally like it. If I think it's ugly, than that's going to be a turn-off for trying the product.
_________________
Poetworld subscriber 2002-2012. Frown

Don't buy Clearwire!

curious john · Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 1252

blsJason wrote:

60 MB is also over 3 1/2 hours of downloading on dial-up, if you're lucky.

I am not lucky, try closer to 5 and half hours..... but I do have occasional broadband access via wifi at library so the download isnt the thing, its that it SHOULDN'T take 60mb for burner software.

K3B is only a gui frontend for commandline burner programs that already exists. Its just a very convenient and reliable frontend. The bloat isnt even from K3B itself, its that they tied K3B into the whole KDE system so bunch of KDE libraries that probably contribute very little to K3B have to be installed to make it work.

I havent tried it but couple people on Puppy site have made their own burner gui called Pburn. Its 28kb. Slight size difference. Probably not as slick as K3B but if its easy and reliable and does what I want fairly well, then ..... Maybe this is incentive to finally install and try it, it certainly is a trivial download.

Just cause you have huge computer capacity and speed, there is no reason to use more of it to accomplish a job than you have to. Nobody remembers it anymore, but the old engineers motto was KISS [Keep It Simple Stupid]. I think it still applies or at least should apply.

plodr · Administrator Joined: 12 Apr 2001 Posts: 7411

If you run gnome, this burner is small (under 1.5MB)
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=127397
I don't know how well it works because they aren't up to version 1 yet.

curious john · Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 1252

The key thing you mention is IF you run gnome. It most likely has the same problem as K3b for those of us that dont use either KDE nor Gnome. There are other burners namely Graveman and Gcombust and X-CD-Roast, they just arent being developed much. I am just not fond of them. There is also a linux version of Nero, but it isnt free and from what I heard it doesnt do anything more than K3b and some things not as well.

I still havent got around to trying Pburn.

Some time back I tried running SilentNightMicroBurner in WINE. It ran ok, but for all my fumbling, it couldnt find my dvd burner through WINE. Its my favorite windows burner program, small and efficient and simple exe file, no registry entries. It together with WINE are less than 10mb. WINE has progressed, ought to try it again just for heck of it.

techie · Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 20:42 pm Post subject:

Currently I have been running Ubuntu, which uses the Gnome desktop. I have figured out how to add KDE and Xcfe. I'm only running Xcfe and KDE in single instances as I have been able to customize my desktop to my likes with Gnome. I can now revert to which ever desktop that I may want to in Ubuntu without running a complete install of XUbuntu or KUnbutu. As for me this gives me the option of testing each desktop and really seeing which will work the best for me. It as well gives instructions on how to uninstall them as well. Cool

For instructions on how to add differnt desktops in Ubuntu, go to here:

http://www.debianadmin.com/install-kde-desktop-in-ubuntu.html

http://www.debianadmin.com/install-xfce-desktop-in-ubuntu.html

The only thing I have found in order to revert back to your Gnome desktop, you need to restart.

I know some about Linux, but in all of different testing I found Debian to be to my likes. I think with the next Ubuntu series which uses Debian as a base, will really give Windows a hard run.

I know hardcore Linux users want the run commands, etc,, but in order for Linux to become mainstream the development is going to have to become much more user friendly for file and program installations.

Using root is like using the old MS DOS file system, after you learn the commands, you can setup as you like.

plodr · Administrator Joined: 12 Apr 2001 Posts: 7411

Have you looked at PCLinux? It comes in gnome or KDE
http://desktoplinux.wordpress.com/2008/03/...-the-hype/

techie · Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:15 am Post subject:

It looks like a decent system. I have used and tested a number of Linux systems. At this point I prefer Gnome over KDE for overall layout. I do like some of the KDE options as well. With previous versions of Redhat and Mandrake I basically experimented.

Truth is I run LINUX as a dual boot system. I'm using Ubuntu because I wanted the 64 bit version. Mainly I'm not using it as a primary system, only using it as a test system. Right now I can run Gnome, which I have tweaked up to match my preferences, and have KDE applications access from within Gnome without switching operating systems. Xcfe is nice and fast, but I prefer the eye candy, I don't like square box system displays. Out of the three systems, KDE seems to be the slowest system.

This is an experimentation of what I can and can't do with the system.

plodr · Administrator Joined: 12 Apr 2001 Posts: 7411

dual boot is the best way to learn. When you get frustrated trying to do something in linux either because you don't know how to do it or there isn't an equivalent program to do exactly what you need to do, then you switch to windows and get it done or go on the internet and see if you can find a program that solves the problem.

There are some windows programs that I wish they'd port over to linux: IrfanView (I know everyone says GIMP is great but it does way more than my simple needs so it isn't the right program for me) and AdMuncher (although AdBlock Plus and the filterset g works okay, it doesn't have the polish of AdMuncher).

digger · ๑۞๑ Joined: 29 Mar 2001 Posts: 2656

plodr wrote:

IrfanView (I know everyone says GIMP is great but it does way more than my simple needs so it isn't the right program for me)

Irfanview and gimp are in two completely different categories. If you want an irfanview replacement, you should be looking for an image viewer. XNview has a linux version available, although it is a few revisions behind the windows version.

techie · Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am Post subject:

digger wrote:

[..]

Irfanview and gimp are in two completely different categories. If you want an irfanview replacement, you should be looking for an image viewer. XNview has a linux version available, although it is a few revisions behind the windows version.

Either Irfanview or Gimp Image Editor both can be used to view and edit photos or images. Confused

http://www.gimp.org/features/

http://www.irfanview.com/

Gimp however does have more features overall, but the base photo editing exist in both programs.

You can get XNview here, it is a simpler program with base phot options:

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/pierre.g/xnview/enscreenshots.html