To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
GNOME is a much more usable desktop for me. The reason is that I'm interested in just getting work done, and am not too bothered with how much tweakability my desktop sports.
I don't like it how people always insinuate that those interested in configuring their desktop according to their preferences are not interested in getting work done but just playing around.
I did extensive modifications to my enlightenment and KDE configs and it definitely tooks some time to do so... years ago. There weren't any major changes to my KDE config since 3.0 and my ~/enlightenment is at least 5 years old.
You're reading way too much between the lines. My original comment is that "I'm interested in *just* getting work done..."
That does no imply that others who choose to tweak their desktops do not get any work done. The difference is that I am not bothered with how my desktop looks, only that it is functional for me with a minimal amount of tweaking. Don't read too much into my comment inorder to make it an insult to those who use KDE.






Member since:
2005-07-07
GNOME is a much more usable desktop for me. The reason is that I'm interested in just getting work done, and am not too bothered with how much tweakability my desktop sports. I'm happy with sensible defaults, and tend to just stick with what comes out of the box.
With most GNOME distributions, this works well and I'm happy with the environment as it is. I've never quite taken to KDE in the same way. The nice thing of course is that the choice exists. There are users like me who just like sensible defaults, and this is usually where GNOME shines. There are those who love to tweak everything to the max, and that where KDE comes in.