What's the difference between Gnome and KDE

jacatone · 05-02-2007, 08:23 PM

I've tried out both Ubuntu with Gnome and Kubuntu with KDE and they are different in the way they work. Apparently, Gnome is based on GTK and KDE is based on QT. Are these different programming languages? What are the advantages and disadvantages of either one. I'm currently trying out Puppy which isn't based on either of them. It's also much faster and easier to work with. Thanks.

osor · 05-02-2007, 08:41 PM

Those are different graphical toolkits. GTK is built on X, whereas QT is “cross-platform” and can interface with X. In terms of dis/advantages, see for yourself.

phantom_cyph · 05-02-2007, 08:44 PM

Gnome and KDE are desktop environments, if you use a window manager, which essentially is just graphics, and then Gnome is also installed or XFCE (or XCFE-can't recall), then it will run much faster. Take a look at Fluxbox or Blackbox for those.

jay73 · 05-02-2007, 08:46 PM

What is it that Puppy uses, XFCE or something like that? Yes, XFCE, Fluxbox, etc. would be a lot faster: they do not offer the same amount of eye-candy so they consume fewer resources (like RAM) and leave more for the user.

fukawi2 · 05-02-2007, 08:49 PM

Personal preference mainly... Choice

KDE is the "original" of the 2... Gnome was born out of some people's dislike of the license that QT was released under at the time, so they started Gnome using GTK (born out of the GIMP image editor, and adjusted to suit general graphic use). GTK has a "freer" license than the orignal QT licence. QT has since changed licenses.

There's a good article here about the differences and history behind them both:
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/feature.aspx?CIaFID=3446

fukawi2 · 05-02-2007, 08:50 PM

Puppy uses JWM

rob.rice · 05-02-2007, 10:02 PM

kde is alot slower than Gnome
kde also has a huge suite of software that comes with it
this huge suite of software makes kde alot more fun to use

this may not be the kind answer your were looking for
but this is what you would see sitting in front of the computer

reverse · 05-03-2007, 04:43 AM

Also Linus just tells people to use KDE, because Gnome devs are incompetent. Why would anyone listen to Linus in this matter? Good question.

IBall · 05-03-2007, 07:19 AM

Have a look at the "KDE v Gnome" comparison linked in my Sig.

It is an attempt at a non-biased comparison of a number of key features of both.

The short answer - use whichever you prefer.

As for system resources - on a modern machine, they are both comparable. I usually suggest that you pick the desktop that suits your application usage. Eg, if you normally use Koffice and Konqueror then use KDE.

--Ian

pixellany · 05-03-2007, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reverse

Also Linus just tells people to use KDE, because Gnome devs are incompetent. Why would anyone listen to Linus in this matter? Good question.

I'm not sure that he ever called the Gnome developers "incompetent". I thought he simply did not like some of their design choices--particularly the tendency to "dumb-down"

reverse · 05-03-2007, 09:24 AM

Actually he claimed FBSD devs are incompetent idiots. And yes, "he did not like" GNOME's "dumbing-down" attitude, saying the project is for people who like to be treated like idiots. *Or something*. It's too old of a matter to remember his otherwise irrelevant words.

ssarasin · 05-03-2007, 09:59 AM

In my opinion, I see KDE as being more "Windows-like" and Gnome being more "Mac-like".

I have tried both and I tend to prefer KDE over Gnome. I like some features of both, but KDE just gives me a little more control and tweaking ability.

I would suggest trying them both out and seeing which suits your preferences.