KDE as a distribution?

DeusExLinux · 06-12-2006, 02:08 PM

and as I said before.. You can create/use a distro that uses only KDE/kde Apps, by only installing KDE.

Most distros give you a choice as to what softwaer you install, I was just saying that there's much more to a Linux distrobution than the GUI, most of the cores are pretty universal (using Bash, although I know not everyone uses bash).

But, you can only install KDE apps, I beleive Linspire comes pretty close to this.

prozac · 06-12-2006, 10:54 PM

Linux is all about choices and here people are talking about cutting down those choices. What do we gain?

tkedwards · 06-13-2006, 12:54 PM

Interestingly I think Kubuntu would be one of the closest to what the OP is asking. I've never understood Ubuntu/Kubuntu's policy of not installing (by default) apps just because they are written with the 'other' toolkit or desktop environment. In most distros like Mandriva, Suse, Fedora etc. even if you only install KDE you'd still get for eg. Gimp installed by default as there is no qt or KDE-specific application that comes close yet. But when I tried Ubuntu it doesn't install K3b, I'm assuming because its not a GTK or Gnome app.

Seems to me that its blind desktop religion over practicality, functionality and ultimately user friendliness.

DeusExLinux · 06-13-2006, 02:33 PM

I agree with you there.

I use many qt AND gtk apps. It is the choice that's the most important

V!NCENT · 06-13-2006, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slackhack

i don't think it's a stupid idea at all. i think it's a great idea, actually. it would be a distro more like windows and less overwhelming for linux beginners. since windows installs as the sole, monolithic desktop with so few programs, i think it would feel more natural for someone who had never used linux to boot into a KDE desktop and have only KDE applications to use, albeit a whole lot more than you get with windows. once they were used to that, they could branch out more into the other free software options.

You just pointed out the very reason why I started this topic. I see KDE hackers creating all sorts of 'basic' apps that Windows also has after a fresh install. I wanted to compare the KDE to the Windows experience.

Why I said it would be stupid was to avoid getting flamed by other people saying program ABC is much faster and stable then program XYZ and program XYZ lacks features, etc...

EDIT: I have not used Klax yet... I need Windows for homework the next 2 weeks and I totally screwed up my hdd with partitioning. I will however post my personal expierence on Klax after 2 weeks...

reddazz · 06-13-2006, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V!NCENT

You just pointed out the very reason why I started this topic. I see KDE hackers creating all sorts of 'basic' apps that Windows also has after a fresh install. I wanted to compare the KDE to the Windows experience.

Why I said it would be stupid was to avoid getting flamed by other people saying program ABC is much faster and stable then program XYZ and program XYZ lacks features, etc...

EDIT: I have not used Klax yet... I need Windows for homework the next 2 weeks and I totally screwed up my hdd with partitioning. I will however post my personal expierence on Klax after 2 weeks...

Klax is a live cd, so you don't have to install.

V!NCENT · 06-14-2006, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reddazz

Klax is a live cd, so you don't have to install.

That is ofcourse nice, but it would lack the 'real' KDE performance since it is not installed on the hdd. So to compare the difference between Windows and KDE it requires Klax to be installed on the hd