I'd like to read opinions from people have been using either one of the two GUIs for quite a while.
What do you prefer the GUI you use?

Pls help.

Why don't you install them both, and see for yourself?
And why do you want to know?

Kind regards

You can also find comparison on google.

some comparison from google.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...p_environments

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/kdegnome

Nothing to help WITH. It's a matter of personal preference, and both have their strong/weak points. And there are MANY other desktop environments than Gnome/KDE. Sounds almost like a homework question, though....

I like them both for different tasks. I usually install them both, plus fluxbox, and sometimes I use XFCE even when I'm playing with Ubuntu. Gnome feels more tightly integrated which is nice for instance when I was trying to get my Iphone working (as an Ipod) under Slackware. It was relatively simple with Gnome and rhythmbox while with KDE I have never been able to get it to work. Having said that, I think that KDE apps are generally superior on a 1 to 1 basis and I tend to use them even when I'm in a Gnome environment. On the closest thing to underpowered hardware that I have, that machine is just a standalone server with neither kde or gnmoe (or a monitor, mouse or keyboard for that matter) installed. I choose fluxbox or sometimes xfce if it comes down to a matter of resource usage such as XDMCP sessions on my headless box.

I suspect that for everybody there are just a couple of things that decide the issue.

Since I'm usually word processing, I put my panel on the side of the screen. Since I don't wear a watch, I want a clock on the panel. Simple window managers either don't allow a side panel or won't display a sideways clock, so I want a full desktop. I really hate Konqueror, the KDE file browser, so I use Gnome.

As with most people, the choice had much more to do with me than with any merits of otherwise of the software.

My original computer had Xp pro installed and I first tried Ubuntu on a live disc. Ubuntu at that time was a no frills computing experience so Gnomes interface didn't strike me. The stoic style interface shadowed almost the whole experience. When I installed Mandriva it was euphoric. I was in awe at how Gnomes interface matched how I approached interaction with a computer. With windows I was always configuring myself to it because I had to. With Gnome I didn't have to configure myself. KDE is obviously meant to mimic Windows 95 and to ease the transition to Linux. To me Gnome is Linux and KDE is a windows replica. That's just the interface though and is just what is at the surface.





Gnome
1. Gnome you have more menus so you don't have to go in as deep into each one.
2.It's easier to associate with Gnome so you can just navigate through it and not have to relate or think.
3. You integrate with a computer how it is and not the impression someone wants you to have of it.

KDE
1. It's almost exactly like windows so if you actually were able to accept the interface you will not have to convert back over.
2. Your friends will think its the new windows 8.


It's like comparing IE to Firefox. Firefox has only what you actually need and no extra garbage to occupy your attention were IE looks like a christmas tree just to make it decorative. It's also comparative to the dash of a car. Most people want the speedo and fuel gage to be the easiest to read. If KDE designed one, the clock and the heater control would be the easiest to view.

You can use KDE applications on Gnome and with most distros you can change between desktops if you log in or out so there is no big deal there. It's not about choosing but which one allows you to integrate with an application without having to configure yourself.

I would not have had the motivation to struggle with Linux early on if I was not as impressed with Gnome in comparison to windows 95 as I was. Sometimes Gnome is too simplistic but usually not with the larger applications.

I like everything to be as complicated as is required to be to as functional as is desired. With KDE I feel like I'm being led down a longer path than necessary to pretty up the computer experience. They both make opensource a reality and that is the most important part.

kde like windows? Are you serious? I have no idea if you're using an older version of kde or what but there's no way kde is like windows. I think Gnome is alot like windows! lol.

I mean you got widgets all over the place with kde. It feels alot more like something you'd see on a macintosh system.

Gnome is alot more like windows. You got desktop icons and even a my computer icon on the desktop! The start menu is the same if not practically a clone of windows!

This is just my opinion but I still can't believe that someone said kde is like windows! Maybe kde3 but even that's kinda off...

three characters

The point is that with windows ;as installed, you have to go through the START menu to go anywhere else. Lets say we are driving a car and you want to steer with KDE you would have to press a putton called "choose direction" and then choose a left or right button.You can use desk top icons with either desktop as well. The KDE suite makes great stuff no doubt so don't get me wrong on that.

1 members found this post helpful.