OSNews

Some of us use KDE because we want to get a desktop that is not stuck in the early 90's. Like, fe., a thumbnail view in the open dialog that can even show thumbnails of videos.

Gnome not only doesn't show video thumbnails in the open dialog, it doesn't even have a thumbnail view. You're forced to use this completely stupid and user-unfriendly "select a file in order to preview it" method. With gnome you're stuck with a vertical list view that doesn't even allows to order files by *size*

Yes, KDE is not the most usable desktop, but you know, at least has the basic functionality to compete with 00's desktops.

Gnome not only doesn't show video thumbnails in the open dialog, it doesn't even have a thumbnail view. You're forced to use this completely stupid and user-unfriendly "select a file in order to preview it" method. With gnome you're stuck with a vertical list view that doesn't even allows to order files by *size*

This is misinformation. I really don't know when last you actually took the time to look at Nautilus, but I can assure you that KDE's file manager view sucks eggs in comparison. How does a comment like this get modded up to 5?

This whole discussion seems to be more about the KDE desktop manager Vs. the default Gnome desktop manager- rather than a debate about the various merits or demerits of the opposing application frameworks.

I agree to much of what Linus says on the subject, and yes, he is my hero too. However, it seems to me that too much weight is being given in this discussion to the subjective and biased views of fanboys.

Whether or not a particular app in the Gnome suite is dropped, or another fails to meet the needs of a particular user is hardly an accurate reflection of the goodness of Gnome. As someone said previously, the success and popularity of Ubuntu is a far better (and more objective) measure.

For myself, I cannot ignore the ubiquitous benefits brought by the antialiased Pango fonts, the sterling graphics provided by the Cairo vector graphics library (soon to be used for Firefox rendering as well), The close kernel integration and device transparency provided by DBus/HAL and the most amazing overall user experience brought to us by the Gnome developers.

If it's configurability you're after, simply replace the default window manager with XFCE. If it's KDE apps you need, load both frameworks at startup time. If you really don't like the XFCE file manager (which really sucks IMHO), replace it with Nautilus.

This is Linux, not Windows. You have a choice.

Yes, KDE is not the most usable desktop, but you know, at least has the basic functionality to compete with 00's desktops.

So does Gnome. Personally I don't miss the option of sorting files in size order in the Open File dialogue.

The Open File dialogue is meant to open files, not acting as a file manager.

If you want files in arbitrarily sorted order use Nautilus.

The Open Dialogue in KDE is a disaster UI-wise compared with Gnome. The KDE-open dialogue is a poor ripoff from Windows 95 - almost pixel by pixel copy from Windows 95. Video thumbnails does not make it any better - au contraire!

Hilarious!!

A KDE-troll is modded up to 5 for claiming the old Windows 95-style open dialogue is superior to the Gnome 2 open file dialogue.

And that's despite evidence for the Windows 95-style dialogue to be much slower in use due to lack of bookmarks.

And all of that because of video thumbnails?

*LOL*

I have noticed this too, all my friends which switched from windows tend to use KDE

I always thought KDE was for people that really liked windows but didn't want to pay for it.

I came to Linux from Mac OS X, and I still prefer KDE. Yeah, it's a bit cluttered, but it's a logical clutter for the most part, and I DO like the configureability. And I like the K-apps as well.