Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
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.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
a "kde versus gnome" in the subject line is bound to start a war.
if you're a programmer, you'd probably prefer gnome because programming in kde is not free.
other than that, it's entirely a matter of personal preference. since its not too hard, just try them both out on your own an pick one. i'm sure you can find a lot of kde/gnome comparisons on the web, but you'll never be able to pick one for sure unless you try both.
Between those two I liked gnome better. I think it's more personal but I felt gnome left me with more to do and less standard stuff than KDE. IIRC gnome had a lot less programs I didn't need included which IMO is great as I hardly used the programs bundled with KDE. (Maybe this isn't a problem for you cause you compile it yourself so you might be able to choose more than debian packages. Don't know never used gentoo)
Also KDE was more resource-heavy which isn't a problem if you have a fast system but if I had to run a desktop environment again I'd use gnome. I also liked the look of gnome more.
I'm using KDE now after using Gnome on and off for a couple of years. KDE has a few more features and it is going to be default for Solaris.
Both were user-friendly and pretty enough. KDE seems a little nice if you get the right apps from kde-look.org.
I enjoy the transperancy and superkaramba(liquid weather) stuff. I run gtk as well. Gkrellm is quite nice and looks great for me in KDE.
I also liked enlightenment quite alot. It has more one click menus than anything I have seen and was graphically advanced but my wife wouldn't even log off if she saw that up, she'd hard boot the box
Went back to Gnome and now to KDE 3.2 and 3.3
KDE has better looks then Gnome, currently. However, due some QT licenses issues, many big companies around started to support Gnome better. Examples are Sun Microsystem (which has embraced Gnome for both Solaris and Sun JDS) and Novell (which owns Ximian Desktop, Evolution and now SuSE itself).
Now, I'm not saying that a bigger number of peoples supporting something is/will make it better. But it surely will spice up things a little for Gnome fans in the future .
Can't wait to see a nice integration by Novell of SuSE and Ximian in the future, since Gnome is pretty broken under SuSE. KDE is pretty good in SuSE though.
Originally posted by enigma Z Programming in KDE isn't free? I've got kdevelop (free) and it has options to make KDE-compatable programs using QT (whatever that is...)
looking at some sources on the web, i think that whole qt thing not being free is over:
Quote:
Two years ago, the KDE versus Gnome war was at its apogee : Gnome supporters criticized KDE over the Qt License (Qt is a graphical toolkit made by TrollTech used as a programming basis to KDE) which was not a true free license, and KDE supporters bashed Gnome because of their (seemingly) extreme devotion to Free-Software "purity" and because, at the time, GNOME had not yet released anything "significant".
I would have to choose Gnome over KDE, while KDE might be nicer looking, Gnome just seems much more customisable. Im sure you can tweak KDE just as much, but Gnome is just easier to do so. And KDE really is F'n resoure hog. Even with a powerful computer, you shouldn't have to use all those resoures just on a desktop. And your lying through your teeth if you say you dont love Wanda the fish. :P
Both have to much crap you dont need and too many dependencys that are just moronic on the system and hog harddrive space. Of couse im minimalistic most of my systems have small harddrives 2 or 3 gigs
But if i had to chose and honestly KDE im still not off the KDE habbit <-- 2nd so called server uses it
Only beef with gnome is that its diving into dependency hell and library hell if you dont install everything from the installation cd. KDE has a hell of alot less things to compile and get it working then gnome.
NOW MY KDE RANT
What the hell is up with arts <--- I hate arts i hate it with a passion cause its stupid and does not work right. Kde here is your rant Why ohh why kde do wee need to have all these retarted things installed for sound just to use plain ol alsa. Why do i need the enlightenment sound damon why do i need arts just use alsa pice of crap or oss directly. <-- I not a programmer but damn dude if i can play movies and play mp3's in my consol why do i need another stupid ass damon or program to do it in my windows manager ???
Fluxbox is something that I find to be a good place for me to be. I can do the menu of the stuff i want and it doesent requre much memory or space on my drive to work Plus i can use xmms in there without a stupid damon well execpt for alsa
Distribution: Mandriva 2006 & 2007 Power Pack Club
Posts: 178
Rep:
Traditionally I have found that KDE has been a lot less resource intensive then Gnome myself. I have been running a firewall on my cable modem for many years now. The original firewall was a 486 DX4 100Mhz and ran Mandrake 7 for i486. On that system KDE SMOKED Gnome. On my current firewall, its replacment this also holds true. That system is a PII 266 overclocked to a 333 and is running strong as a multi-purpose server with Mandrake 10.1 as the OS on it. Having all of the services that it does running on a limited system, hands down KDE has time and time again proven it. When I installed MDK 10.1 on this system I ran both for a period of time to see which would be more efficient on the system and to this day I will go with KDE.
KDE 0.8 or something like that was the first desktop I ever used - with MKLinux DR3 (a RH 5.1 clone running on PPC hardware and using a Mach Mikrokernel port of the Linux kernel)
Then LinuxPPC 1999 came out - with gnome - and it was like an Epiphany, so much better imho.
Neither KDE or Gnome are anything like they were back then - both have progressed by leaps and bounds. This may not be true anymore, but a few years ago - gnome ran much better on a machine with low ram than KDE did.
Mostly though I use gnome for the same reason that most people still use Windows - I'm familiar with it and it does what I need.
It would take some serious crappage in gnome for me to consider switching at this point.
Personally I just do minimal installs of both, selecting the apps that I like of each, and go into my window manager of the month. As far as things go though, I prefer gtk because of poor layout designs in most qt apps.
My current wm obsession would be Window Maker. It would be so nice if nextSTEP would progress at a faster rate.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.