Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Mar 2009 18:43 UTC, submitted by elsewhere
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y Any discussion about GNOME vs. KDE is sure to end in tears. It's basically impossible to discuss which of these two Free desktop environments is better than the other, mostly because they cater to different types of people, with different needs and expectatotions. As such, Bruce Byfield decided to look at the two platforms from a different perspective: if we consider their developmental processes, which of the two is most likely to be more successful in the coming years?
Thread beginning with comment 355853
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk
by cycoj on Mon 30th Mar 2009 20:37 UTC
cycoj
Member since:
2007-11-04

I'm neither a Gnome nor KDE user, I use E17 here. However what annoys me about KDE is that KDE applications seem to be designed to only be running on a KDE desktop. Starting any KDE application usually takes forever on my machine, because of all the KDE libs that are being loaded. This makes me try to avoid KDE apps, although some are superior to the Gnome/GTK equivalents (e.g. digikam). Gnome apps on the other hand are quite different, for one it is not clear what is a Gnome and what's a GTK app, because although some GTK apps use Gnome desktop features they run fine without them.
This also brings me to my second point. Most applications which are not made for a specific desktop are GTK apps, why I get the impression that there's hardly any QT but non-KDE apps around. I'm actually quite interested in the technology behind QT and I believe it is currently a lot better than GTK but there's just no apps if I don't want to use KDE.

Cheers
Jochen

Reply Score: 3

RE: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk
by wanderingk88 on Mon 30th Mar 2009 20:59 in reply to "kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk"
wanderingk88 Member since:
2008-06-26

There are LOTS of Qt-based non-KDE apps. Skype, Google Earth, Opera... ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk
by shiny on Mon 30th Mar 2009 21:04 in reply to "RE: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk"
shiny Member since:
2005-08-09

Just check this: http://qt-apps.org/

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk
by cycoj on Tue 31st Mar 2009 02:45 in reply to "RE: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk"
cycoj Member since:
2007-11-04

There are LOTS of Qt-based non-KDE apps. Skype, Google Earth, Opera... ;)


Well yes all non-FOSS ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk
by lemur2 on Mon 30th Mar 2009 22:40 in reply to "kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Most applications which are not made for a specific desktop are GTK apps, why I get the impression that there's hardly any QT but non-KDE apps around. I'm actually quite interested in the technology behind QT and I believe it is currently a lot better than GTK but there's just no apps if I don't want to use KDE.


At least two that I can think of:

http://smplayer.sourceforge.net/

http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

Now that Qt4.5 is out, licensed under the LGPL, I would imagine there will be a lot more like these.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk
by KAMiKAZOW on Tue 31st Mar 2009 01:22 in reply to "kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk"
KAMiKAZOW Member since:
2005-07-06

KDE applications seem to be designed to only be running on a KDE desktop. Starting any KDE application usually takes forever on my machine, because of all the KDE libs that are being loaded.

Well, that is done on purpose... not to annoy you, but the tight integration within the KDE eco system. KDE takes a bit longer to start than GNOME and according to an article that I've read a few weeks ago it also uses more RAM initially.
A result of that is that many KDE applications load quite fast -- much of the needed stuff is already in memory. There are a few exceptions (KOrganizer takes forever to load), but overall it's true.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk
by cycoj on Tue 31st Mar 2009 03:02 in reply to "RE: kde vs gnome, qt vs gtk"
cycoj Member since:
2007-11-04

"KDE applications seem to be designed to only be running on a KDE desktop. Starting any KDE application usually takes forever on my machine, because of all the KDE libs that are being loaded.

Well, that is done on purpose... not to annoy you, but the tight integration within the KDE eco system. KDE takes a bit longer to start than GNOME and according to an article that I've read a few weeks ago it also uses more RAM initially.
A result of that is that many KDE applications load quite fast -- much of the needed stuff is already in memory. There are a few exceptions (KOrganizer takes forever to load), but overall it's true.
"

Well that design decision tells me that my impression is right, KDE applications are made only for the KDE desktop. That makes the applications really unsuitable for any non-KDE environment. I don't want to 10s longer for digikam to start because it loads the KDE components just by Amorak, just because I might use it. I think it's a stupid design decision as well, it limits the scope of KDE apps, and the same job is better done by something like the preload daemon.

J

Reply Parent Score: 0