In 2002, both KDE and GNOME released their last major revisions; KDE released KDE 3.0 on 3rd April, while GNOME followed shortly after with GNOME 2.0 on 27th June. For the Linux desktop, therefore, 2002 was an important year. Since then, we have continiously been fed point releases which added bits of functionaility and speed improvements, but no major revision has yet seen the light of day. What's going on?
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
There has been said a lot of bullshit about lack of consistency - especially from Thom and Eugenia, and neither have been factual correct in most of their critique
In an article not too long ago I actually PRAISED GNOME for its consistency. PLEASE get your facts straight.
I have NEVER said Windows has a highly consistent interface. Prove me that I did.
Member since:2006-11-15
gnome apps are consistent with kde apps? what about gnome apps with gnome apps
http://img234.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot34ji.jpg
Member since:2005-10-02
Well, Gnome and KDE apps are not that consistent, but yes, they are quite consistent, though there are differences.
What's the problem with the image? The apps are very consistent. The Toolbars are different, but not that much, and only because the applications are very different.
It's quite obvious that the toolbar of a mail application will be different than the toolbar of a textwriter, but more important is the same look and feel (behaviour) in all applications.
Now, try WMP, MSN Messenger, Office XP and IE7 and see how different they are in look and feel (behaviour)
Member since:2006-01-09
Member since:
2005-10-02
Actually it's quite good. Ever used Photoshop on Mac? Probably not, since you cannot see the similarities with the real Photoshop
There is a very high level of UI consistency in Gnome and KDE. Probably higher than on Windows or Mac OS X. There has been said a lot of bullshit about lack of consistency - especially from Thom and Eugenia, and neither have been factual correct in most of their critique (like Eugenia claiming that X.org doesn't have a native tool kit... puhlease...)
Take a look at IE7, MS Word 2003, Publisher 2002/XP, Visio 2007 and WMP and MSN Messenger 7 (or Live Messenger).
Now that's what I'd call inconsistency.