Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 23rd May 2014 21:51 UTC
Gnome Remember back when GNOME and KDE dominated Linux desktops? Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it? Yet it was only three years ago, in April 2011, that GNOME 3 was released. Its radically redesigned interface shook up everyone. Some eagerly adopted it. Others left GNOME.

In this brief review I take a fresh look at GNOME today, as it's currently distributed in several popular Linux distributions.
Thread beginning with comment 589491
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Qt Apps
by Lobotomik on Sat 24th May 2014 08:46 UTC
Lobotomik
Member since:
2006-01-03

Linux desktop will never happen until the rift between Qt and GTK applications is closed. I wouldn't be sad to see GTK go, but even if it never did, all applications should run and integrate with your desktop whatever that desktop is. It is ridiculous how choosing a desktop in Linux means choosing a set of apps, and apps from another look ugly and integrate badly if they run at all.

After all, a nice desktop is nice, but it is the applications that make the difference. I should be able to run a years old desktop, yet still run my choice of apps, not worrying about the desktop, much less about the toolkit.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Qt Apps
by Treza on Sat 24th May 2014 09:25 in reply to "Qt Apps"
Treza Member since:
2006-01-11

I have never seen any problem or unbearable ugliness in mixing KDE and gnome apps.

As text editors, I'm often using simultaneously gedit (syntax colouring for a few languages, fonts), nedit (very fast, good search/replace features) and emacs (because emacs) on a KDE desktop.

The problem is that no editor is good enough to match all my needs, and no KDE editor suits me (KATE, Kedit...)

The fact that the very old nedit surpasses recent editors from KDE and gnome show how little progress has been done.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Qt Apps
by Lobotomik on Sat 24th May 2014 11:54 in reply to "RE: Qt Apps"
Lobotomik Member since:
2006-01-03

Maybe not "unbearable" ugliness, but bothersome nonetheless. And then Kate is absent from your Gnome menu, and Gedit or Transmission are missing from yor KDE menu, and when you manage to bring them up in the rival desktop they ignore your font settings, or printing settings, or they bring up the wrong console, or do not find the media player.

It is far from a seamless and pleasant experience.

I like the Gnome desktop far better than KDE, although I don't like how it has been dumbed down over the years. But I Qt apps are easier to develop and maintain, and in any case I would like to *seamlessly* run any app I liked in whatever desktop I chose, without even having to know what a gui toolkit is.

Possibly, uniting the Qt and the GTK world is one of the things Ubuntu Unity pretends. But oh, do I hate the Unity launcher!

Edited 2014-05-24 11:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Qt Apps
by ddc_ on Sat 24th May 2014 19:02 in reply to "Qt Apps"
ddc_ Member since:
2006-12-05

I strongly disagree with both setiments of yours.

all applications should run and integrate with your desktop whatever that desktop is.

It would lead to the OSX-like desktop where you can't configure much. If that is what you want, quit whinning and go to OSX. Really.

I should be able to run a years old desktop, yet still run my choice of apps, not worrying about the desktop, much less about the toolkit.

This requires a lot of effort, limits developers in many ways and screws the ability to implement new features within reasonable timeframes. And all of these just in order to satisfy one's baby ducksyndrome? Huh...

Edited 2014-05-24 19:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Qt Apps
by Lobotomik on Sun 25th May 2014 10:05 in reply to "RE: Qt Apps"
Lobotomik Member since:
2006-01-03

Why should I go Mac? I have a perfectly serviceable PC that cost me a fraction of the money. And I hate iTunes and iDependency in general. Though Garage Band and iMovies are spectacularly good. And Linux Desktop is good, if not perfect: I just want it to be more perfect!

Development would be more agile with more developers, more users and a more appropriate development kit. Cantonization helps none of this. This is not fragmentation, it is disintegration along a myriad fracture lines, by distro, by release, by desktop, by toolkit... All this variety and inconvenience for a relatively small pool of development resources.

Look at Android to see how a Linux "desktop" can progress and evolve while maintaining compatibility, and how it gains thousands of contributors with its nice development kits and detailed, easy to find documentation. To acquire any sort of critical mass, unification is key.

Reply Parent Score: 3