2009 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice AwardsThis forum is for the 2009 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards.
You can now vote for your favorite products of 2009. This is your chance to be heard! Voting ends on February 9th.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
It reminds me of Windows, which I am not a very big fan of.
It is slow, at least on my computer.
I dislike the K-- uniformity. I prefer diversity.
The UI takes a few seconds to a minute to fully initialize.
GTK is far better than Qt
It isn't now, but it once had a much more restrictive license.
It is bloated, and offers too many useless options, thereby unnecessarily complicating otherwise simplistic options
Has idiotic idiosyncrasies, like a slow menu, and difficulty doing otherwise mundane tasks.
The only time I can get KDE to be even close to fast is when I installed Arch Linux and a minimal install of KDE. *sigh* Still too slow.
I like GNOME because;
Simple, and easy.
Fast UI initialization; instantaneous even.
Diversity of programs. Is not uniform.
It gets the job done. Won't get in the way.
GTK. Themes too.
Isn't bloated; in fact a bit minimal.
It reminds me that I am not using Windows.
I have used it for 4 years, and it was my 1st Desktop Environment.
GNU and open-source beginning.
The only reason I dislike GNOME is because of Gconf, which resembles the registry editor in Windows. I'm not a particularly big fan of string data as a means of customization.
This is my opinion of course. I just can't get used to KDE no matter how hard I try. *sigh* I will faithfully stick by GNOME until KDE gets a bit faster, and loses the annoying, bloated, uniformity.
XFCE. It has most of the features that are available in Gnome and KDE without all of the bloat. XFCE just keeps getting better and better in the time I have been using it.
I like to keep my system as beautiful as possible. KDE was really awesome. I tried gnome also. it's like just an old movie. I know that, we can get good looks for gnome also. but it is waste of time. by default KDE giving nice features.
Distribution: ArchLinux / Source Mage GNU Linux (test branch) / openSUSE
Posts: 130
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoogieHowser
rox
kde4 gives me diarrhea from just looking at it.
What an intelligent comment. It implies that you do not posses the ability to change a default theme. Or, conversely, you are weaker than average people, been unable to confront a simple and easy desktop theme. Very sad for a public confession...
I used to prefer to use KDE (I grew up with a lot of "KDE" distros...Mandrake, Mandriva, dabbled in PCLinuxOS, when I installed Gentoo, I got KDE)...but when I got into Linux Mint, I really got into gnome.
And when KDE 4 came out, I anticipated liking the look and feel, but it didn't seem very usable. I have no doubt that I didn't spend enough time with it, but it was such a chore.
I like xfce a bit too, but for some reason I've never mainly used it.
Distribution: Solaris 9 & 10, Mac OS X, Ubuntu Server
Posts: 1,183
Rep:
How about none? Does none work for you?
I typically install minimal systems with no GUI components at all, and I really don't like installing or activating web management interfaces either. CLI is sufficient for all my Linux/BSD/Unix boxes. But, then, my desktop is a Mac. One GUI to rule them all.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.