KDE or GNOME?

[berVi]

Hey guys, its just a little poll, and perhaps will be useful to consider the future of gnome on pcbsd.

Which one do u prefer? Pls people, vote! :-)

[DrJ]

Not to quibble, but which environment one likes and what PC-BSD ships are two different things. Your poll seems to confuse these.

I use Gnome, but I think PC-BSD should stay with KDE, and only KDE, for now. So no vote from me.

DrJ

[berVi]

Not to quibble, but which environment one likes and what PC-BSD ships are two different things. Your poll seems to confuse these.

I use Gnome, but I think PC-BSD should stay with KDE, and only KDE, for now. So no vote from me.

DrJ
agree, im gonna modify it...
now i cant.
then imagine that the question is, that which should be shipped with pcbsd!;)

[Dingens]

i don´t know gnome. what are the advantages for them? or is it a religion question?

[berVi]

i don´t know gnome. what are the advantages for them? or is it a religion question?
i donno, you may try it on a distro. both of these has a flavour.
some screenshots:

http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slide ... creenshots (http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=363&slide=1&title=fedora+core+4+gnome+screenshots)

http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slide ... creenshots (http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=296&slide=8&title=gnome+2.10+screenshots)

[sblevin]

Dingens

There semms a lot of residual animosity about over KDE for many reasons.

WARNING - EXTREME BIAS AREA - EXTREME BIAS AREA

1) Some people like Gnome. Thats a simple one and there is often no real reason for a personal choice. A few right clicks on the menu bar and you nearly HAVE gnome anyway.

2) Thank GOD normal and real people are using linux these days! The hysterically flapping rabid unrealists I'm about to talk about seem to have all but dried up and vanished these days.

In the early days the tiny number of "linux lunatics", the shieking fools who were the only ones ever heard, but who represented no-one and nothing except to a zombie gaggle of easily infulenced newbs who needed something to hate once they stopped using windows, people who found it offensive that someone might actually want to make a living from selling their code, used to say that KDE's use of the QT widgets and it's license, meant that KDE must be reviled and destroyed, because someone who starts making money off their code should sling some money back to the people who write the widget set and dev tools.

3) KDE has higher system reqs, and people are using really LOW end boxes had issues getting KDE to feel in anyway responsive - that seems to make Gnome a "last resort" in my mind. KDE has however really improved it's speed and has continued to do so for ages now. They also claim that the upcomming QT4 implementation will give a real leap in performance. I personally have no issues with it.

4) As soon as you start adding helper apps people start screaming BLOAT! BLOAT! KDE has always had a bunch of little utilities. Why don't the bloat people just right click and remove the icons that offend them so? Most of the "bloat" is actually tiny, and I find it nealy all of it comes in handy at some point.

5) Ponder on this for a while : )

Let's Call The Whole thing Off
Fred Astaire
(words by Ira Gershwin; music by George Gershwin)
Introduced by Fred Astaire and Ginger rogers in the film "Shall We Dance?"

(verse)
Things have come to a pretty pass,
Our romance is growing flat,
For you like this and the other
While I go for this and that.
Goodness knows what the end will be;
Oh, I don't know where I'm at...
It looks as if we two will never be one,
Something must be done.

(refrain)
You say eether and I say eyether,
You say neether and I say nyther;
Eether, eyether, neether, nyther,
Let's call the whole thing off!
You like potato and I like potahto,
You like tomato and I like tomahto;
Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto!
Let's call the whole thing off!
But oh! If we call the whole thing off,
Then we must part.
And oh! If we ever part,
Then that might break my heart!
So, if you like pajamas and I like pajahmas,
I'll wear pajamas and give up pajahmas.
For we know we need each other,
So we better call the calling off off.
Let's call the whole thing off!

You say laughter and I say lawfter,
You say after and I say awfter;
Laughter, lawfter, after, awfter,
Let's call the whole thing off!
You like vanilla and I like vanella,
You, sa's'parilla and I sa's'parella;
Vanilla, vanella, Choc'late, strawb'ry!
Let's call the whole thing off!
But oh! If we call the whole thing off,
Then we must part.
And oh! If we ever part,
Then that might break my heart!
So, if you go for oysters and I go for ersters
I'll order oysters and cancel the ersters.
For we know we need each other,
So we better call the calling off off!
Let's call the whole thing off!


From: Gloria "Montcomags" <Montcomags@mclinc.org>

[Sparkfist]

I'm personally a KDE person. Found it more comfortable then Gnome and I used Gnome for most of the time I was in my Linux classes.

I know this is going to be going out there. But what about Fluxbox? Its light small and I find it great when I'm using a slow computer then 2GHz for KDE. Even if its not put in a final release for the OS default install, is it possible for a .pbi?

i didnt mean it about the libraries, or speed.
the libraries used by kde are free now (as far as a know, but correct it if im wrong), so its really not the point i think.

speed... on the mass of pc's it shouldnt be a problem, both of them should work fast, and we shouldnt ever recognise high delays.

i personally used kde for a long time, and didnt even wanted to try gnome. but then i tried it, and i think its really nice. i dont say i hate kde. all two's fine.

everybody gonna find its choice.

and probably pc-bsd wont ever switch to gnome anyway...

[berVi]

i didnt mean it about the libraries, or speed.
the libraries used by kde are free now (as far as a know, but correct it if im wrong), so its really not the point i think.

speed... on the mass of pc's it shouldnt be a problem, both of them should work fast, and we shouldnt ever recognise high delays.

i personally used kde for a long time, and didnt even wanted to try gnome. but then i tried it, and i think its really nice. i dont say i hate kde. all two's fine.

everybody gonna find its choice.

and probably pc-bsd wont ever switch to gnome anyway...
it was me
edit: i'm just curious about what do people think

[youlle]

i personally prefer, KDE from a Package maintanence point and personal preference, GNOME's dependancy tree is giant, where as KDE has a tree consisting of 4 components only.

KDE is more complete at the moment.I am a Gnome user but always had the opinion that KDE could realy shine if configured on a stable platform. PC-BSD has this down.

I think the focus should be on applications, applications, applications.

Gnome can come later.

PS: PC-BSD ROCKS

[munkymonkjr]

i am a gnome flamer for 1 reason and 1 reason only: SPEED. no matter how many distros i try GNOME has always and i mean ALWAYS been faster than KDE. Even if the distro is totaly the same, like on my Ubuntu install i had Gnome and KDE installed, and guess what, gnome was a hell lotta more sponsive and popped up applications like no other. KDE on the other hand took it's time to launch the apps. and my laptop is not slow (AMD64 3200+, 128mb ati 9700, 1gb pc2700 ram, 60gb 7200rpm hdd).

i really hope the next version of KDE does improve on speed. Furthermore, Konqueror is SLOW. It is possibly the worst and slowest browser i had ever come accross.


and yes, fluxbox is quite nice

[DrJ]

To harken back to a nearly-original question, yes, the choice between Gnome and KDE is largely a matter of religion. You will find lovers and detracters for each.

When you choose one or the other, you buy into a host of applications that are taylored for the window manager. For better or for worse, the applications that run under each will become part of your world. Yes, you can run Gnome applications on KDE (or the reverse), but it is a lot easier to run the native ones.

For my part, I like the email client Evolution, which is now supported by Novell. Email is important to me, and the email client is certainly a personal choice. Evo works well for me, and I enjoy using it. The Gnome/GNU spreadsheet also works well.

I don't think it is THE major decision to choose KDE or Gnome. Either will work well enough, though you will end up using different applications.

DrJ

[Vinegar Joe]

Window Maker.

[Icehat]

KDE as default, and Gnome somewhere in 'advanced options (-> optional)' in the installer...

[berVi]

KDE as default, and Gnome somewhere in 'advanced options (-> optional)' in the installer...
what the hell... "Old Site (for IE only)" :?: :?: :?: :D
anyway, it seems (as it was expected) kde is the winner :)

Dingens

In the early days the tiny number of "linux lunatics", the shieking fools who were the only ones ever heard, but who represented no-one and nothing except to a zombie gaggle of easily infulenced newbs who needed something to hate once they stopped using windows, people who found it offensive that someone might actually want to make a living from selling their code, used to say that KDE's use of the QT widgets and it's license, meant that KDE must be reviled and destroyed, because someone who starts making money off their code should sling some money back to the people who write the widget set and dev tools.

From: Gloria "Montcomags" <Montcomags@mclinc.org>

I believe the objection to QT and its non-gpl license was not a "religious" objection, but rather reflected the uncertainty this introduced in an otherwise open source project. What if TrollTech revoked their license as they could have at anytime. The rug would have been pulled out from under the entire project.

Also, I think you and others still confuse the issue of "free" as in speech and "free" as in beer. The FSF's GPL license is not about making money out of software, its about the rights of the consumer to "own" the software. So noone at the FSF objects to people running businesses or making money out of software, they just want people to make money out of selling the software, rather than renting it (proprietry software is never really owned, even though you payed for it - the original vendor retains ownership).

[Icehat]

KDE as default, and Gnome somewhere in 'advanced options (-> optional)' in the installer...
what the hell... "Old Site (for IE only)" :?: :?: :?: :D
anyway, it seems (as it was expected) kde is the winner :)

[off-topic]
The first homepage I created was on Windows with MS Word,
so it worked only on IE...
My main OS stays Windows, it's used at school, at work and at home.
I can't switch to Linux as main OS until my studies are done!
I'm working on a new site for almost every browser and I use linux at my other PC's, so please don't flame me. Thanks.
[/off-topic]

[on-topic]
I think we must offer Gnome for users who want to use it,
but we must offer it as an advanced and optional feature in the Installer.
I'll always use KDE, but IMHO: PC-BSD must be an OS for everyone!
[/on-topic]

[Solarin]

Well... strictly speaking Gnome is already offered as an advanced and optional feature. Just download and install it from ports.

[Icehat]

Well... strictly speaking Gnome is already offered as an advanced and optional feature. Just download and install it from ports.

It's good for now...
But at later time, IMHO, it should be integrated in the installer...

[berVi]

[off-topic]
The first homepage I created was on Windows with MS Word,
so it worked only on IE...
My main OS stays Windows, it's used at school, at work and at home.
I can't switch to Linux as main OS until my studies are done!
I'm working on a new site for almost every browser and I use linux at my other PC's, so please don't flame me. Thanks.
[/off-topic]
easy, i didnt mean it, there's the smiley, too, pal :wink:

anyway, its for every1, yeah, and not every1 can use ports.

[1000k]

There are also other Desktop Environments (XFCE...) and a bunch of Window Managers (Fluxbox, FVWM, IceWM, Window Maker...). We can't integrate them all in order to please everybody.

IMHO PC-BSD installer shouldn't give a choice between KDE and Gnome and whatever. First because newbies don't even know what KDE and Gnome are. Secondly because we have to keep things easy. But users who want Gnome or Fluxbox should be able to install it anyway, from ports or .pbi, without breaking the system.

Kris have chosen KDE for PC-BSD. It could have been Gnome. I like Gnome too, I'm using it on my Linux distro, with some KDE apps, 'cause Kaffeine and Amarok are much more better than Totem and Rhythmbox :lol:
But for PC-BSD it will be KDE (waiting for Kamel), and "experienced" users are still able to install whatever DE or WM they want.

After all we're free :wink:

[Icehat]

[off-topic]
The first homepage I created was on Windows with MS Word,
so it worked only on IE...
My main OS stays Windows, it's used at school, at work and at home.
I can't switch to Linux as main OS until my studies are done!
I'm working on a new site for almost every browser and I use linux at my other PC's, so please don't flame me. Thanks.
[/off-topic]
easy, i didnt mean it, there's the smiley, too, pal :wink:

anyway, its for every1, yeah, and not every1 can use ports.

it's nothing :)

[DrJ]

Compile Gnome from ports? Heavens! That is one of only two programs where I download the binaries. The other is OpenOffice. Both are just too d*** large to compile. Please use pkg_add -r for these!

DrJ

[DrJ]

I'll say this again: in my opinion, PC-BSD should stay with KDE at the moment. There is a lot of work to do to get things stable enough and useful enough for a 1.0 release, and the desktop environment is one of those things where you cannot please everyone. This is a personal choice, and as it has been mentioned, there are ways for those who know about these things to get other window managers or desktop environments installed.

But take this opinion with a huge grain of salt: I run on naked FreeBSD with Gnome.

DrJ

[Solarin]

Compile Gnome from ports? Heavens! That is one of only two programs where I download the binaries. The other is OpenOffice. Both are just too d*** large to compile. Please use pkg_add -r for these!

DrJ

Heh, good point. It'd probably be a lot easier to use the binary and avoid all that compilation time :oops:

Maybe you could offer many ISO's? One with Gnome, one with KDE, one with Enlightenment, and one with Fluxbox. For new users, you could have a description beside each.

KDE (similar to Windows, most popular)
Gnome (insert description here)
Enlightenment (really cool UI, more description)
Fluxbox (super-light, etc.)

[berVi]

Maybe you could offer many ISO's? One with Gnome, one with KDE, one with Enlightenment, and one with Fluxbox. For new users, you could have a description beside each.

KDE (similar to Windows, most popular)
Gnome (insert description here)
Enlightenment (really cool UI, more description)
Fluxbox (super-light, etc.)
i think it would be great, but it required A LOT of work, to get everything to work on each desktop... i dont think so its (currently) manageable.

My choice is KDE. It is faster and has a lot more of UI improvements than GNOME.

Gnome is nice, but its widgets and standards change a lot between applications.

Omar

Dingens

In the early days the tiny number of "linux lunatics", the shieking fools who were the only ones ever heard, but who represented no-one and nothing except to a zombie gaggle of easily infulenced newbs who needed something to hate once they stopped using windows, people who found it offensive that someone might actually want to make a living from selling their code, used to say that KDE's use of the QT widgets and it's license, meant that KDE must be reviled and destroyed, because someone who starts making money off their code should sling some money back to the people who write the widget set and dev tools.

From: Gloria "Montcomags" <Montcomags@mclinc.org>

I believe the objection to QT and its non-gpl license was not a "religious" objection, but rather reflected the uncertainty this introduced in an otherwise open source project. What if TrollTech revoked their license as they could have at anytime. The rug would have been pulled out from under the entire project.

Also, I think you and others still confuse the issue of "free" as in speech and "free" as in beer. The FSF's GPL license is not about making money out of software, its about the rights of the consumer to "own" the software. So noone at the FSF objects to people running businesses or making money out of software, they just want people to make money out of selling the software, rather than renting it (proprietry software is never really owned, even though you payed for it - the original vendor retains ownership).

that is SOO right..im glad to see someone GETS it..I prefer gnome/gtk exactly because it is 100% free unlike qt which clearly is not...maybe that makes me a zealot but to me its about 'free' not just semi free...im a open source advocate..its just my philosophy and I think that is what linux is all about.

guest101\

Well... strictly speaking Gnome is already offered as an advanced and optional feature. Just download and install it from ports.

It's good for now...
But at later time, IMHO, it should be integrated in the installer...

I agree totally..why make kde default when clearly BOTH are equal to each other more or less..the 'user' should have a choice no ?

thx
guest

There are also other Desktop Environments (XFCE...) and a bunch of Window Managers (Fluxbox, FVWM, IceWM, Window Maker...). We can't integrate them all in order to please everybody.

IMHO PC-BSD installer shouldn't give a choice between KDE and Gnome and whatever. First because newbies don't even know what KDE and Gnome are. Secondly because we have to keep things easy. But users who want Gnome or Fluxbox should be able to install it anyway, from ports or .pbi, without breaking the system.

Kris have chosen KDE for PC-BSD. It could have been Gnome. I like Gnome too, I'm using it on my Linux distro, with some KDE apps, 'cause Kaffeine and Amarok are much more better than Totem and Rhythmbox :lol:
But for PC-BSD it will be KDE (waiting for Kamel), and "experienced" users are still able to install whatever DE or WM they want.

After all we're free :wink:
but does installing gnome break any part of pcbsd ??

thx

[sblevin]

heheheh - how funny to revisit that mindless rant I made (quoted in the post by "Guest" above this), and here I am trying to make a gnome PBI atm, or at least evaluating the possibility of it : )

If I DO make one though ... it's a one way trip. It goes IN and stays there, and I have no idea how to update it .... but it seems to be working : )

I'm not sure I'm prepared to release something like that though.... the PBI basically pkg_adds' all the binary packages from the current version in one hit. But it can't be removed safely, it just can't for reasons of the PBI architecture. I'd have to .... ummmm ... I know ... I'd have to tell it NOT to record the installation even in the FreeBSD package database to PREVENT it's removal, in case it stripped stuff that other PBI packages need.

How do you update THAT?

Any ideas?

[DrJ]

I wish I had some brilliant ideas on how to handle updating of Gnome. At the moment, it is done most easily through source, and it can be rather messy and time consuming. You also usually have to follow an upgrade script, rather than making use of a simple portupgrade.

One comment: Gnome 2.12 is in its first beta release, and the "real" release should be coming out in a month or so (as best I can tell). If you really can't pull it back out of the system (which I fully understand) then it may be prudent to wait for 2.12 before unleashing it. I don't think the pkg_add commands will change much, so I think most of your work will apply directly.

I must admit that I have wondered how to handle the Gnome stuff through .pbis. If each Gnome application has a reasonably complete set of libraries, then the system will get HUGE very quickly. Gnome is a terribly intertwined and tangled system. Some of it is worse than others. GIMP, for example, might get rather large: look at the dependency list!

One last thing to watch for: some of the Gnome binaries don't include help files. Those are often in different locations. So please make sure that you get everything to make it functional. I include documentation as part of that.

DrJ

The problem with these Desktops (KDE, Gnome) is how to define exactly what they are. They go far beyond being a simple desktop, offering in addition a suite of applications, that tend to be lumped in with the whole.

Problem is that rarely are all the applications from one family (e.g. KDE or Gnome) necessarily either "good" or the ones you might like best. Some Gnome apps are great, some not so. Same with KDE. So what does it really mean to say "i prefer KDE to Gnome or visa versa.

I personally like K3b the so called "KDE" burning app, but really apart from the "K" in the name the only connection with KDE (the bundle) is QT, the widget engine. Gnome apps use the GTK+ widget engine. Which widget engine is best - thats another question, and probably one to be answered by developers who must write the code for them, not the users who I doubt would know or care how the widgets are produced.

I think it will be unlikely that all applications written to use QT will always be better than applications written to use GTK+, so to say Gnome apps are better than KDE apps, as if the widget set made all the difference, is nonsense.

The Desktop itself comes down to the taskbar, control centre perhaps, and the file manager, with the file manager being the most important. Is Knonqueror better than Nautilus rather than "is KDE better than Gnome" is probably the question you should be asking.

I think just make sure both the Gnome and KDE engines are installed so that you can run apps from either "family", and run KDE or Gnome depending on which file manager/taskbar you like the best.

[password]

Just stick with KDE right now except allow it to be removed and replaced by another Desktop (Gnome, Fluxbox, XFCE etc) and make it easy enough to replace. Put up warnings and make sure that the average user can't accidentally be left with no desktop.

That or do the other method if it's not too much bother :

ISO 1 - Gnome Desktop. ISO 2 - Fluxbox.

etc

Gnome seems to be more in line (from a license perspective) with the BSDs than KDE (GPL vs LGPL), but Gnome is hard to build and thus a lot of young distros tend to package KDE first.

I also think that in the long term Gnome has a lot more momentum because companies like Novell, RedHat, Solaris, and Ubuntu are putting resources into Gnome.

Frankly, I can't ever see KDE being anything other than an "alternative" desktop because of its reliance on the dual-licensed Qt toolkit.

But I'll agree that its wise to focus on one desktop

[sblevin]

Aren't licensing issues bizzare in a way. Like, it's such an issue in *nix land, but for what is probably well over 95% of users it's just not an issue. Of any kind. Not even thought of. People just sit down and use a computer and never have to even think about it.

I'm not having a go, picking a fight or trying to dump on anyone .... I'm just commenting that it's interesting that something that most of the software using world have no interest in, can seem like it's completely absorbed the smallest part of the software using world.

Does anyone really care whether they own the software, or "only" own a license to run it, as long as they can shoot each other up or look at the web with it?

Do the people at the top of the worlds largest software companies rub their hands together, giggling in glee "hehehe Licensing confusion will keep them crippled for-EVERRRrrr mwuhahahaha...", only to stick their head out the door from time to time to wail, "Open source is cancer, it's killing everyone", then pull their head back inside and chuckle "hehehehe That will give them enough hope to squable over the importance of it for another 5 years ...mwuhahahahahaha".

[DrJ]

The reverse is also true: many computer users need things that programmers simply are not aware of.

For example, I crowed recently about my ability to fill out and save PDF forms. Anyone who deals with the US National Institutes of Health knows exactly why this is important. Actually, not just important, but critical.

Most programmers -- unless they are really into PDFs -- are not even aware of complete Acrobat -- they think you are talking about the Reader. So how is the F/OSS community going to put out a program for a need that they are not even aware of?

DrJ

I agree in that commercial apps/oses will exist for the reason you stated. Mainly businesses are there to fill someone's needs in exchange for money. There is no activity on behalf of OSS devs that probes the market asking folks what software they want next. It's usually those who can code that decide what's available thus the userbase is held hostage to the devs.

[Plaristote]

Kris have chosen KDE for PC-BSD. It could have been Gnome. I like Gnome too, I'm using it on my Linux distro, with some KDE apps, 'cause Kaffeine and Amarok are much more better than Totem and Rhythmbox

I'm thinking exactly the contrary o_o !
I like KDE because Gnome is just so ugly...
But Gnome apps are better than KDE apps : Kaffeine is not stable enough and is less appropriate for lambda users than Totem. Rhythmbox interfaces is much more better than Amaroks one...

I'm for a KDE with Gnome apps.

[BlackBox]

My choice would be Gnome... KDE4 is mostly ok, but after trying it out for a while I was very happy to finally be able to install Gnome. I just can't get used to the desktop objects with that silly transparent background and their right-side toolbar. That bouncy cursor when you start programs also annoyed me.
With limited resources though I understand that the project may want/need to focus on one DE. Since the creator/s of PC-BSD prefer/s KDE, so be it. It would be nice though to be able to easily install other systems, such as Gnome, XFCE, etc.