Hello,

here's my dilemma: I've been using KDE and like it best in Tree View---similar to MS-Windoze Explorer. I choose

and create a profile for my Tree View. To switch to that profile, I go to

But there doesn't seem to be an easy way to do this by putting an icon somewhere in KDE; at least, not without command line. Is this type of stuff easier done in Gnome?

Thanks for any replies.

I think you are referring to the browser/file manager (Konquerer)....although I can't find the menus as you describe.

Here's at least a clue. If I look at properties for the panel icon for the Konqueror web browser, it shows the application as: "kfmclient openProfile webbrowsing". From this I infer that I could make another icon, and substitute a different profile name.

I found the profiles here:
/home/mherring/.kde/share/apps/konqueror/profiles

Presumably, you can have several different file manager profiles

Thanks pixellany,

I see what you mean now. Someone else and I spent several days trying to make sense of the menu and profile management setup. We found it to be atrocious!

Maybe I'll get brave and try Gnome

Cheers!

you can also just do 'konqueror --profile <profilename>' and konqueror will load with the specified profile. 'konqueror --profiles' lists the available profiles and of course you can make buttons and menus whereever you want with this command. Within konqueror you can make as many profiles as you like and you could also place a button in the toolbar, which lets you choose the profile. See 'man konqueror' and the kde docu.

I can't see how this could be easier or would even be a reason to kick KDE for the minimalistic gnome ...

You can drag the konqueror icon from the menu to the tool bar and add the --profile argument in the execute entry.

Isn't it possible to even set the current profile as the default profile (such as in Konsole)?

You can save over the profile definition for the profile that that icon loads by default. The "Home" and "Konqueror Web Browser" icons load different profiles but are actually the same program.

What makes you think Gnome is "minimalistic" - your ignorance, maybe? If you've never really used Gnome, don't go throwing stuff like that (some newcomer might actually believe it and dump the barked-at software for that and lose the chance of trying out the alternatives to find the best).

If you couldn't find another way to get past a "problem" like this, you could always create an icon to launch a script to do whatever you like. It's good it's as easy as creating a launcher for konqueror --profile, but even if it wasn't, it was hardly much more difficult to create a small shell script to wrap the thing up and make your day.

OP: as this is really not a thread about KDE vs. Gnome, but about Konqueror profiles (it seems), you should re-consider the topic. Is it appropriate? No. Maybe change it?

That's just my opinion (and certainly not only mine). I have used gnome for some time due to stability issues with kde and the minimalistic configuration dialogs of the gnome (core-)apps as well as their very "basic" functionality have drawed me away pretty quickly.

Some things I still remember: There was no way for me to customise nautilus the way I wanted it to be. For example I couldn't find a way to make it show hidden files by default (does this work now ?). Of course the OP's problem with the profiles would be solved with gnome - because nautilus doesn't have profiles at all.
When I made a dock bar in gnome and chose to let it vanish after 3 seconds (so I can use the whole screen) it wouldn't vanish completely but only to 90% which is very ugly.
Gnome baker didn't let me create video projects or bootable cd's (does this work now ?). There is no application which let's me fetch video out of my dv-cam and do some basic cutting and so on ...
In the end I found myself using almost only kde-apps in gnome, so what's the point in using gnome.

Of course this is a matter of preference and minimalism is not necessarily a bad thing as long as it can do what you want. For me, it couldn't do what I wanted in many cases, but that shouldn't be a reason for you to act like a religous fundamentalist ...

Thanks for the comments Almatic and others...

The differences between KDE and Gnome interest me, and Almatic's summary is helpful. For now, it's mainly the profile-related stuff I'm curious about, but the other stuff Almatic mentioned is good too---that'll be my next foray. In hindsight, I should have labeled this thread "KDE vs.Gnome--profiles and menus", but I can't seem to change it now. At this point, I'm not motivated to writing configuration scripts. Maybe I'll do that later, after I've figured out lower-level stuff.

At this point, I have a pretty good system figured out: I open KDE, and then I hit alt+s+v+[myprofile] to launch my profile. It works reasonably well, but it took many hours to make it work. I'll comment more once I get the system running and can access KDE (I'm doing some maintenance now).