Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 21st Sep 2007 14:45 UTC, submitted by thebluesgnr
SuSE, openSUSE "OpenSUSE has been driving innovation on the Linux desktop, and in today's serial we'll be discovering just what has been happening on the GNOME front. Among other things, openSUSE 10.3 is set to contain, and be among the very first to have, the new GNOME 2.20. We'll see what new things you can expect from this version, what additional polish openSUSE brings to the desktop, and finally we'll be talking to JP Rosevear, an openSUSE and GNOME developer, to find out a little more."
Thread beginning with comment 273157
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
KDE?
by rx182 on Fri 21st Sep 2007 16:07 UTC
rx182
Member since:
2005-07-08

Too bad they didn't invest as much time on KDE. Anyway, wasn't OpenSUSE a more KDE-centric distribution (even if SLED adopted Gnome as its default DE)?

Gnome 2.20 looks nice (true). Unfortunately, the Gnome/GTK community fail to deliver rich applications for simple tasks like listening to music (Amarok) and burning cds/dvds (K3B). All you get are basic frontends to command line tools (duh).

Reply Score: 4

RE: KDE?
by starnix on Fri 21st Sep 2007 16:27 in reply to "KDE?"
starnix Member since:
2006-05-12

KDE takes on the philosophy of Windows in the apps department. Throw in everything and the kitchen sink and make it as complex as possible because that means it is good.

Gnome on the other hand sticks with the UNIX philosophy. Make small apps that do one or two things and do them well.

I much prefer quickly starting up a small app and doing what I need and then being done. With KDE you have to start a huge app (Rich?)and then configure it for your specific circumstance.

For music, whats wrong with Rhythmbox or Banshee or Listen or Exaile?

For CD burning I will admit that nothing beats K3b. But there are plenty of full featured tools for gnome that expand upon the defaults like Graveman or Gnomebaker or even NeroLINUX.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: KDE?
by shykid on Fri 21st Sep 2007 16:59 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
shykid Member since:
2007-02-22

I know this is likely going to turn into another GNOME v. KDE flamewar, but I'll just throw in my two cents before it gets too hot for me.


Gnome on the other hand sticks with the UNIX philosophy. Make small apps that do one or two things and do them well.

Not necessarily. What you're describing is more akin to Fluxbox or something similar. When compared to KDE, this might hold some water, but some GNOME-centric apps like Evolution have multiple functions. Hell, Kmail and KAddressBook and friends are also standalone programs in addition to offering integration into Kontact. Also, for some, not offering sufficient preferences or features means the app doesn't do its thing well.

KDE takes on the philosophy of Windows in the apps department. Throw in everything and the kitchen sink and make it as complex as possible because that means it is good.

KDE is a lot more complex and offers a lot more options compared to GNOME; however, they are usually intuitively presented (minus Konqueror, the panel, and the god-awful Kopete), unlike how things are in Windows. KControl does a reasonably good job of sorting the plethora of customizations available for KDE itself.

Each KDE app has its settings and customization dialogs in the same menu. While that's true for GNOME (Edit menu, IIRC) as well, it's not for Windows; I've seen Options dialogs stored in everything from File to Help. I prefer the dedicated Settings menu that lets you customize everything and the kitchen sink, to GNOME's minimalistic approach.

That's the thing, though: "I prefer". Neither elegant minimalism nor endless customization are better than the other. One may be better for certain people or certain circumstances, but one is not definitively superior for everybody. That's the beauty of having the two major desktop environments in Linux so contrasting in philosophy and approach.

Edited 2007-09-21 17:03

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: KDE?
by segedunum on Fri 21st Sep 2007 17:25 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

KDE takes on the philosophy of Windows in the apps department. Throw in everything and the kitchen sink and make it as complex as possible because that means it is good.

Nope, never really seen evidence of that philosophy. You'll get features that actually make using a Unix/Linux desktop useful over anything else, such as your middle mouse button being able to do something. Despite some better organisation being needed, I have never seen a feature thrown in that didn't turn out to be a gem at some point.

Gnome on the other hand sticks with the UNIX philosophy. Make small apps that do one or two things and do them well.

On the other hand, if you want to run an application as another user like every other desktop can do, or if you actually want to make your middle mouse button do something like all Linux/Unix desktops have traditionally been able to do then you're going to have to turn to something else.

With KDE you have to start a huge app (Rich?)and then configure it for your specific circumstance.

Hmmm. I'm not entirely sure how I had to configure Amarok the last time I used it, other than adding the location of my music collection and letting it add away. I also have great stuff like album covers, support for lyrics, Magnatune and other things that are great if I want, but don't have to configure.

If your favourite application just simply doesn't have the features, it's always easy to use simplicity as an excuse ;-).

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[2]: KDE?
by Luminair on Fri 21st Sep 2007 18:26 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
Luminair Member since:
2007-03-30

That is some serious philosophical perversion you're promoting there!

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: KDE?
by cg0def on Fri 21st Sep 2007 19:18 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
cg0def Member since:
2006-02-12

apparently you know absolutely nothing about application development and what kde does. Noone makes you use the kde libraries if you don't like them and as far as the qui is concerned you can just used qt and skip the other stuff. As far as OS/DE design goes both KDE and Gnome provide libraries only gnome is written in plain C with structures that behave much like object ( gobject ) while KDE is written in C++ with all the benefits that come from using a newer language with a higher degree of abstraction. But there are ways of using other languages than the basic ones and especially with gnome you see a lot of stuff like that.


Also I really fail so see how openSuse has a better and more polished gnome distribution than they do kde. Both are quite polished and pretty much look the same. I personally like the KDE start menu better and also KDE has a lot better front end to beagle and every configuration tool ( at least the major ones ) is integrated into yast. The same cannot be said for the gnome version. Overall I find both the KDE and the gnome versions to be of equal quality which is a surprise for people coming from ubuntu.

Most notable feature in 10.3 is that the update manager works a lot faster than in 10.2 and now is on eaqual speed to aptitude. A welcome and much awaited change if I might say so.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: KDE?
by ghostX on Fri 21st Sep 2007 20:51 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
ghostX Member since:
2007-09-13

Best combination ever Gnome WM + a lot of KDE Applications + CLI

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: KDE?
by Chipper on Fri 21st Sep 2007 23:54 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
Chipper Member since:
2005-12-27

I don't know anything about Banshee, Listen or Exaile, but for me, Rhythmbox doesn't cut it. Close, but not there.

First, one can't sort a playlist. You can sort in the library, but not the playlist. I have a long playlist I like to listen to but I want it sorted so I can add new songs without duplicates, or to find a song in it.

Second, I couldn't figure out how to create a playlist on an iPod. I would like to think it is there, but I couldn't do it. I also had to copy the songs to the iPod and then move them to the playlist for it to work.

Amarok makes both of these simple. Even though I typically use almost all Gnome applications, I still have to install a KDE one.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: KDE?
by dagw on Sat 22nd Sep 2007 20:38 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

For music, whats wrong with Rhythmbox or Banshee or Listen or Exaile?

I can't speak for everyone, but I'll tell you what I think is wrong with them. They're kind of a worst of both worlds approach. On the one hand they're more complex and cumbersom than an mp3 player needs to be (think winamp 2), on the other hand they're lacking some features of the more rich and complex players. If you're going to try to be feature complete then be feature complete, if you're not then try to be a simple clone winamp. As far as I'm concerned they fall into some kind of limbo.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: KDE?
by SlackerJack on Fri 21st Sep 2007 16:33 in reply to "KDE?"
SlackerJack Member since:
2005-11-12

Whats wrong with Banshee, rhythmbox and all the other music players for GTK/GNOME?, K3b is a frontend to cdrecord.

I dont understand where you get this idea that SUSE dont invest time in KDE, kickoff menu, YaST, kontrol with Yast built in. Infact it's GNOME that SUSE left without much new and only the lest few releases have seen new GNOME features.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: KDE?
by bornagainenguin on Fri 21st Sep 2007 17:01 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

I dont understand where you get this idea that SUSE dont invest time in KDE

People say that because time was SuSE was known as being the KDE distro with Gnome only getting basic support, much like Red Hat has become known as being a Gnome distro...

It's also worth noting SuSE never put much effort into Gnome until they purchased Ximian....

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: KDE?
by shykid on Fri 21st Sep 2007 16:35 in reply to "KDE?"
shykid Member since:
2007-02-22

Too bad they didn't invest as much time on KDE. Anyway, wasn't OpenSUSE a more KDE-centric distribution (even if SLED adopted Gnome as its default DE)?

To me, it seems like they're going both ways and supporting both GNOME and KDE equally. A lot of improvements have also been made to the KDE side of openSUSE (which I'm still wanting to call 'SuSE'--old habits die hard).

GNOME's just getting all of the attention because, in the opinions of many (including myself), GNOME support on SUSE has been abysmal at best. Sure, GNOME was there and worked just fine, but it wasn't as polished as KDE on SUSE.

Reply Parent Score: 5

v RE: KDE?
by Super King on Fri 21st Sep 2007 16:45 in reply to "KDE?"
RE[2]: KDE?
by leos on Fri 21st Sep 2007 17:10 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Gnome's applications are arguably better at doing their designed "simple tasks" than Amarok and K3B are.


The keyword here being arguably. But lets not denigrate this into another KDE/Gnome flamewar.

What I really don't understand though is the GTK frontend to Yast. Yast, a system tool that you really don't use often. Why does there need to be a GTK frontend? What a colossal waste of time to develop this, and in the future, even more waste of time maintaining it. This philosophy of "everything in the system must be GTK" is insane. It goes both ways of course, kynaptic is a good example of stupid cloning using Qt. Some apps, like Exaile, even blatantly state that fact. "like amarok, but for GTK".

I think distro's should force people to install both the qt/kde and gtk/gnome libs. Then people will have less of a phobia of "if I install this app, I'll bring in tons of libraries!" Who the hell cares! Since when is disk space at a premium? How about we don't waste time making two copies of every application and instead make those applications BETTER.

Of course, I am a hypocrite, in that I try to use all KDE applications. With a bit more work into integration, I wouldn't be so adverse to GTK apps. The most important part is the open/save file dialogs. I find the Gnome/GTK dialogs incredibly crippled, and can't bring myself to use them. If the apps used native dialogs depending on the environment it would be much nicer. Can't be that hard, Openoffice does it very well.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: KDE?
by melkor on Sat 22nd Sep 2007 05:19 in reply to "KDE?"
melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

I was thinking the same thing. This is a direct result of Novell owning Suse, and Novell employing lead Gnome developers. Favouritism? Yes. The same thing is happening at Suse as what has been happening at Redhat for years, and more recently at the recent darling of all things Linux, Ubuntu - blind favouritism of one particular desktop.

I prefer a Linux distro to include them all, tweak them all to be as good as possible, and then let the user choose. That's choice. Linux is supposedly about choice, but when you get a bunch of distros all favouring one desktop environment, that's bad imho.

I have a bone to pick with Debian 'etch' as well (slightly off topic) - it seems you cannot install KDE and XFCE together, at least not without removing several key components of KDE. Not very good, and what I consider a major bug. Said machine is not connected to the net, so it's only stuck at the DVD versions, so don't tell me to update it ;)

I used to like Gnome a long time ago, but circa v1.2 they lost the plot in all honesty, and with the advent of KDE 2.2 I started leaning in KDE's direction. KDE 3 just confirmed to me that KDE was heading in the right direction even more. I'm hoping that KDE doesn't screw KDE 4 by trying to copy the Gnome philosophies to appease potential Gnome converts etc.

Dave

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: KDE?
by sbergman27 on Sat 22nd Sep 2007 06:11 in reply to "RE: KDE?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""

I prefer a Linux distro to include them all, tweak them all to be as good as possible, and then let the user choose.

"""

I would disagree with that point. I prefer to see distros choose a desktop and run as far as they can with it, focusing their resources on making it the best it can be. We still get diversity, because other distros pick the other major desktop and do the same. And some others might pick lesser known desktops, or a newcomer.

Choices are great when those choices are upstream choices. But the downstream distributor should focus the QA efforts on a select set of components. In my opinion, of course. QA efforts are a scarce resource, and should be conserved. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: KDE?
by mwtomlinson on Sat 22nd Sep 2007 10:45 in reply to "KDE?"
mwtomlinson Member since:
2005-11-06

Personally, I find my needs serviced quite well by Rhythmbox and Serpentine/Nautilus-CD-Burn. Simple apps for simple minds, I guess...

Reply Parent Score: 1