Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 21st Mar 2008 21:49 UTC
Editorial "I used KDE as my primary desktop from 1996 through 2006, when I installed the GNOME version of Ubuntu and found that I liked it better than the KDE desktop I'd faced every morning for so many years. Last January, I got a new Dell Latitude D630 laptop and decided to install Kubuntu on it, but within a few weeks, I went back to GNOME. Does this mean GNOME is now a better desktop than KDE, or just that I have become so accustomed to GNOME that it's hard for me to give it up?"
Thread beginning with comment 306088
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Challenge yourself
by elsewhere on Sat 22nd Mar 2008 04:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Challenge yourself"
elsewhere
Member since:
2005-07-13

In the future, once KDE 4 matures a bit, KDE will have the far more solid framework. KDE also has no mono dependencies, and KDE is licensed as GPL v3, so it has far less patent risk than GNOME.


Agree about KDE4's framework.

Disagree about the v3 thing, this has been beaten into the ground too many times. v2 and v3 have the same patent provisions, the only difference is that v3 uses about 10,000 extra words to clarify them in no uncertain terms.

And neither Gnome or KDE have mono dependencies, but they both have C# interfaces.

I prefer KDE too, but let's keep the arguments away from cliches and FUD... We can simply bask in the fact it's a better performing, superior framework with multi-platform capability... ;)

...this means that KDE is the way to go of the future, without doubt.


That, I can't argue with... ;)

Now if we could only convince Mozilla & Sun of that truth, so that Firefox & OpenOffice both gained better integration with the KDE desktop.


Firefox's integration with Gnome is weak at best, it uses it's own toolkit framework just as OOo does. And convincing Sun, who have their own vision of what a multi-platform application framework should be, to endorse Qt, which has an alternate vision for what a multi-platform application framework should be, won't happen any time too soon... ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Challenge yourself
by lemur2 on Sat 22nd Mar 2008 11:11 in reply to "RE[2]: Challenge yourself"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"In the future, once KDE 4 matures a bit, KDE will have the far more solid framework. KDE also has no mono dependencies, and KDE is licensed as GPL v3, so it has far less patent risk than GNOME.


Agree about KDE4's framework.

Disagree about the v3 thing, this has been beaten into the ground too many times. v2 and v3 have the same patent provisions, the only difference is that v3 uses about 10,000 extra words to clarify them in no uncertain terms.
"

The main difference is in Microsoft's apparent attitude to GPL software ... Microsoft seem to believe they can FUD about GPL v2 and they also believe they have found a "wedge" within v2 they can use to split up the FOSS community.

And neither Gnome or KDE have mono dependencies, but they both have C# interfaces.


Strictly, this is correct. However, on a KDE default install you could quite likely find no mono libraries at all, but on a GNOME desktop you would "take out" a number of desktop utilities if you removed mono libraries.

I prefer KDE too, but let's keep the arguments away from cliches and FUD... We can simply bask in the fact it's a better performing, superior framework with multi-platform capability... ;)


I however think it is valid enough to warn people that going with a GNOME desktop is more likely to see them end up in mono-derived hot water.

...this means that KDE is the way to go of the future, without doubt.


That, I can't argue with... ;)

"Now if we could only convince Mozilla & Sun of that truth, so that Firefox & OpenOffice both gained better integration with the KDE desktop.


Firefox's integration with Gnome is weak at best, it uses it's own toolkit framework just as OOo does. And convincing Sun, who have their own vision of what a multi-platform application framework should be, to endorse Qt, which has an alternate vision for what a multi-platform application framework should be, won't happen any time too soon... ;)
"

Herein lies a problem, then.

Would it be ethical and advantageous perhaps for KOffice 2 to fork some of the legacy input filters for MS Office from the OpenOffice codebase?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Challenge yourself
by elsewhere on Sun 23rd Mar 2008 04:53 in reply to "RE[3]: Challenge yourself"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

Would it be ethical and advantageous perhaps for KOffice 2 to fork some of the legacy input filters for MS Office from the OpenOffice codebase?


It's a natural question, and it's come up in the past. Certainly it would be advantageous and would be within licensing guidelines. Ethical? I'll let the philosophers argue that point, other than to say I don't think it would be unethical.

But from what I gather, the devs have run into two core problems with the OOo2 source; first, it's somewhat of a spaghetti mess of code that is difficult to work with, some of it dating back a decade or more, and second, that the nature of the way OOo2 manages document formats is structurally different from KOffice, and would require a major refactoring (basically a re-write) in order to adopt the MSO compatibility. So they've looked at it, but determined it's not feasible.

This does suck, because I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place. I vastly prefer KOffice to OOo2 because I find it much "lighter" and far better integrated with KDE, but yet the minimal MSO compatibility is a deal-breaker since I have no choice but to deal with MSO files at work. Yet OOo2 I find to be a very clunky and somewhat dated app to use, though with more useful functionality than KOffice. The worst part is that neither works well enough for what I need, so I'm stuck with VirtualBox and Office2003. Would that it was otherwise... ;)

Reply Parent Score: 4