There is a controversy in the Linux world. It doesn't have to do with Microsoft, or anything overtly technical. It may seem, to the outsider, the open source equivalent of the question, "Boxers or briefs?" But it's much more serious than that. More here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-06
And you can't have that with KDE? Wow, that's news to me. My KDE installation on openSUSE has almost no applications besides the basic stuff. Basically every app has its own package. Sometimes YaST bitched about dependencies when I removed certain KDE applications from the default openSUSE installation, but I had ignored them and I still have a stable desktop. If you have experienced that each KDE package installs a huge number of apps then it's a packaging problem with your distro.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-06
IMHO it's the distributor's responsibility to configure KDE in a sane way. I use KDE 3 on openSUSE 10.3 an I prefer it over GNOME, even though I'm mainly a Mac user and OSX & GNOME are supposedly designed in the same spirit.
Maybe I had different thoughts about KDE if I only knew KDE from another (unpolished) distribution.
Member since:2006-01-19
Well, the default settings of KDE seem to be sane ones.
When I installed Debian 4.0, I had no gripes with KDE at all, it was clear and concise. What probably brings problems into KDE's usability is the "gnomification" RedHat did in the days of RHEL3 (I don't know if they still gnomify KDE nowadays).
So probably the Distributors should try to NOT configure KDE too far away from it's rather sane default settings (because these dafault settings often already have quite some user feedback included).
And for KDE's clutter: No matter in which mode Konqueror works, it never displays more than 10 Icons (3 more than Firefox 1.5.x), but it has 10 times more possibilities. I can live with 3 Icons more when it means that I no longer have to encounter a missing feature.
But the most severe lack I encounter when using GTK applications is the "file save as" dialogue. It just is not made for my way of orienting myself in the file system. Probably I am especially dependent on visual representations of locations, but i badly need a tree view. And KDE does just that, it shows me a tree view. GTK insists on not remembering that the last 100 times I had to "save as" something, I every time had to click on the "show folder browser" button (or whatever it is called in English) to orient myself.
I don't know what the GTK usability guys where thinking when they decided to hide the tree view, but it seems they wanted to force people to build up the image of the tree view in their brains during the reading of the path line, instead of just saving the users this work by simply displaying a tree view.
Member since:2006-01-28
If the only thing anyone can find fault with KDE is its looks, and you will find words such as cluttered or "not polished" being thrown around, then I would say that it is doing quite well.
KDE is simply a very mature set of technologies. Each network transparency is unmatched as is its speed or the richness, depth and variety of applications.
But hey, keep saying things such as it's too cluttered if it helps you internalize the choices that you have already made.
Member since:2005-07-07
Indeed, that happens a lot ;-)
Sure, KDE 3.2 was quite a mess, but that's also quite some time ago... KDE 3.5 has seen much usability work, and while that work certainly isn't done, KDE doesn't fare worse than MS Windows. Combined with the familiarity many windows users seem to experience with KDE, I don't see how anyone can say it's not the best choice for ppl willing to switch OS.
And did I mention KDE is the future of the Free Desktop [1] ;-)
http://nowwhatthe.blogspot.com/2007/10/on-vision-and-future.html
Member since:
2005-07-05
I use Gnome because I can't stand KDE. Gnome shows me only what needs to be there to get the job done. KDE shows me every option under the sun, and I hate that. Gnome is there managing my windows for me and KDE is constantly jumping up and down in my face reminding me that it is there.
Gnome looks clean and KDE looks cluttered. KDE 4 looks a little better, so I'll give that a try at some point.
I don't like KDE's file manager either. Nautilus suits me better.
To each their own.