Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 17th Mar 2003 22:49 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces So many operating systems and so many graphical desktop environments... This article is a comparison of the UI and usability of several Desktop Environments (DEs), that have been widely used, admired and reviled: Windows XP Luna, BeOS 6 (Dano/Zeta), Mac OS X Aqua and Unix's KDE and Gnome. Read on which one got our best score on our long term test and usage.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
@makkus, @eugenia
by oGALAXYo on Tue 18th Mar 2003 22:40 UTC

First sorry, I was using Links to write this text so no Paragraphs. I like to add one line that I think is important as well. Look the past couple of weeks how much effort from GNOME developers was spent to get KDE into an unification process it went that far that Havoc Pennington (for sure a respective person but I have hard time with his ideas and visions) asked KDE to unify the CORE bottom layers of the framework, this causes KDE to change a lot of code and that's what pissed me off again. As if it wasn't enough for the responsible ones totally crappyfying GNOME the same persons want to do it with KDE. This for my own personal opinion will bring KDE and the Desktop back for another 1-2 years because of radical changes (And I spent carefully time reading all sorts of Mailinglists) after you read all the various mails from various people you gonna understand the full situation and with a bit of programming skills you realize that talking about this is for sure honourable but changing this in practice is insane. That's why I started my argumentation some days ago here and got flamed for it just for expressing my very own opinion. KDE has a stable framework. There is no and I mean absolutely no need for them breaking their framework up for the requested changes from the GNOME camp. I mean why is GNOME going from one technological idea to another ? Why not settle down to what's there already and concentrate into making a working and really usable Desktop ? Why does it have to adopt one shit after another ? At the end it doesn't even reflect into a usable Desktop or more or better applications. Even YET many applications doesn't really use 100% of the functionality that GNOME offers today such as full use of Bonobo or Corba. Fragmentation is the key, even GNOME seem to realized it that's why they got the idea working together with KDE on a new framework with sharing bottom libraries so both can rapid progress and use one bottom layer. For the GNOME side this is good, for the KDE side this is bad (because they need to trash a lot of their components). I don't simply speak about DBUS here. I speak about ATK, GLIB, new VFS layer, GStreamer and so on and even that retarded GConf crap. Now you understand why I personally hype KDE these days a) because I'm sure it's far ahead (specially after reading Miguel de Icaza's mail which gave me the last kick to say 'now is the time'), b) because of the own made investigation that KDE has a good plattform, good apps, integration, easy use, windows'ish look and well a lot of other things mentioned by other people as well. I think KDE is successful and will dominate the Desktop no matter if a bunch of kids hype GNOME from a technical point and from a programmers point KDE dominates. Trashing the bottom framework is plain stupid and we should do everything to protect KDE from doing this. See in 2 years again, GNOME still patches and glues stuff together while KDE offers a more integrated Desktop, once again better apps and so on.

End of communication.