Desktop Environment / Window Manager Preference/Comparison Thread

[Chris Ferrell]

I guess there's some KDE people that would rather bury their heads in the sand and act like the QT license isn't an issue, when it is.

There's reasons why the major players are choosing Gnome over KDE, and yes, the more liberal gtk+ license is one of them.

[poofyhairguy]

For people who really do know KDE, though, KDE is probably faster than GNOME.

Is this because you can set the KDE settings lower? I know that KDE at MEPIS settings (which I think is all the way up or near it) cripples my poor 128mb laptop. But when I apt-get the universe KDE and tell it to use less eye candy, it runs faster than Gnome

[TravisNewman]

To judge from some of the responses so far your experiment has failed once again and the flamewar/fud-slinging has already started.
Some points I'd like to respond to:

1. Kde is similar to Windows
This one always amazes me as my kde has never been similar to windows so I'm starting to wonder, what am I doing wrong? On top of it, nobody so far explained to me why he considers it to be more similar to windows than for example gnome and the only thing I've read so far in this thread is that both the WinXP and kde default themes are ugly (btw. kde3.4 defaults to plastik now). While I agree that hardly establishes that KDE is similar to Windows.

It FEELS similar to me at times, but I don't think it looks similar. They ARE both ugly, but I'm glad it's defaulting to Plastik now.

2. KDE is bloated
Another one of my favorites. Please define bloat and how kde is bloated. Mine isn't. Closely related to this seems to be the often heard FUD that there are 15 programs for any given task. Again, I really don't know what you are talking about, please give examples.

KDE IS bloated on many distributions (Ubuntu included) because the freakin' barcode reader and ham radio tools get installed. How many people really need those? BUT if you install KDE-base instead of the full KDE meta-package it's nowhere near as bloated. The interfaces, to me, are very bloated just because they're so flashy and showy. This is NOT FUD. It's an opinion, and there are a buttload of programs for some tasks, but its more that there are programs for MANY obscure tasks.

3. KDE is slow
No, it isn't. On the contrary, it's more responsive than gnome/gtk in my experience and it has been getting more responsive with every new release lately, so please, stop the fud.

Yes, yes it is. Much slower than Gnome for me. Not FUD again.

4. KDE is somehow not free software
This hasn't been explicitly stated yet, but citing gnome being free software from top to bottom as one of its advantages somehow seems to imply that this is not the case with KDE. Please, state specifically where KDE is not build on free software from top to bottom. Thanks.

The QT licensing is a bit wishy-washy, and though it doesn't appear that they plan on doing this any time soon, but they could go proprietary again at any time. Gnome/GTK can't.

In conclusion, I agree with about half your points. I don't really LOVE KDE or anything, but I used to hate it and now sometimes I actually CHOOSE to use it.

But please, please, please don't accuse people of spreading FUD unless they're spreading FUD. In the open source/free software community, accusing someone of this is a big insult, and I'm not trying to be mean, but by falsely accusing people of spreading FUD, you are kinda doing it yourself.

[TravisNewman]

Good point. I hated KDE until I tried Xandros, a large part of it due to Konqueror's replacement

What replacement was that? Is it Free (as in freedom)? Because I DESPISE Konqueror.

[TravisNewman]

Seriously, I'm with azz on this one (glad you brought back Shatner )

It's a messy situation, and the fact that there's no GPL means that they could change stances at any time. Why would they license the software in this way if they didn't have at least an inkling of a plan for this?

[Ironi]

[KDE] FEELS similar [to Windows] to me at times, but I don't think it looks similar.

That's very subjective. FWIW, I think that KDE does feel a bit like Windows as well -- but that's because it borrows some design elements from Windows (among others). Of course, GNOME also borrows design ideas from others, and it too feels rather similar to Windows (and OS X) albeit dumbed-down, especially with the registry... er, I mean gconf.

They ARE both ugly, but I'm glad it's defaulting to Plastik now.

Again, a subjective matter. Personally, I don't care whether or not an interface or app is "ugly" as long as it does what I need it to do and has the features that I need. I don't know about GNOME advocates, but "sexy" applications and interfaces just don't ... erm, excite me (besides, I have other stuff for that ).

KDE IS bloated on many distributions (Ubuntu included) because the freakin' barcode reader and ham radio tools get installed.

That appears to be a problem with the metapackages, not something intrinsic to KDE.

The interfaces, to me, are very bloated just because they're so flashy and showy.

Yeah, that's what you get when the apps have features that people might use. Of course, many of the extras can be disabled or hidden.

there are a buttload of programs for some tasks, but its more that there are programs for MANY obscure tasks.

Taken a look at /usr/bin and /usr/sbin lately? No?

[KDE is much] slower than Gnome for me. Not FUD again.

KDE seems fast enough for me. In fact, I've seen people claim that KDE is faster than GNOME. YMMV, I guess.

The QT licensing is a bit wishy-washy, and though it doesn't appear that they plan on doing this any time soon, but they could go proprietary again at any time. Gnome/GTK can't.

How is it "wishy-washy?" The open source edition of Qt has been released under the GPL since September 2000. Even if TrollTech were to hypothetically become extremely hostile to the open source community (and the KDE project didn't have written assurances), we still have the current versions of Qt that were released under the GPL. Meaning that anyone can fork it and continue development, as long as they abide by the rules of the full GPL. Were that to happen, we'd have a situation very similar to the current one with... wait for it... MONO (except that there is no ... patent problem ... surrounding Qt as there may be with Mono).

BTW, let's not get into the legal uncertanties surrounding Mono and Miguel's plans to base GNOME around it, eh? After all, picking on KDE and Qt is so much easier than facing the harsh realities surrounding something that currently exists in its current state only because of Microsoft's failure to seriously oppose it... and remember who is said to be pushing very hard behind the scenes for software patents in the EU. How's that for FUD?

[Ironi]

It's a messy situation, and the fact that there's no GPL means that they could change stances at any time. Why would they license the software in this way if they didn't have at least an inkling of a plan for this?

You're making the very same claim in two different threads. As I pointed out in that other thread, you're wrong as well. Perhaps if you didn't put forth such misinformed assertions, you wouldn't be accused of spreading FUD.

[ralph_ubuntu]

But the licensing issue is FUD:
http://kdemyths.urbanlizard.com/viewMyth.php?mythID=13

[asimon]

" If I only want to use free software then Qt is no obstacle, I am not forced to use the commercial lisence, am I"

The point is it is the same software. How can it be both free and commercial at the same time?

It's because of the law. I know of no land with copyright laws where a software can only be lisenced under one license only.

You either feel software should be free and you will fight to keep it free (GPL) or you do not (non-free) You cannot say that you beleive in both.

Qt is free and will stay free, that's the essence of the Foundation, no need to fight. And on top of that for our propritary friends it's also available with a commercial lisence. One could see it as a additional feature.
This black&white view is very common under free software people but a lot of developers do propritary stuff in their job and contribute to free software projects in their spare time. There are not only fanatics, there are people who think that there is a place for both free and propritary software. But know I see the thorn in your side, you wan't all software free (that is okay), thus Qt is not good enough for you because it's also available under commercial lisence.

Which brings me to your other point. If Trollteck thought that it was in it's advantage to close off Qt, do you actually think that the free (forked) version would be able to compete with the proprietairy version? Don't you think that the proprietairy version would have all the features that make it indispensable. It would not be cloesed off otherwise. The developers of the now-BSD-licenced Qt libraries would be left in the dust holding sheets of obsolete source code.

The advantage is that the free Qt would be free and projects like KDE.org would use it no matter what new features the closed version would get. But this is a completly other discussion. There are a lot of examples where propritary software exists which is much better than the respective free software but still people use the free one because it's free and good enough for them (Visual Studio.NET vs. MonoDevelop, Photoshop vs. Gimp, etc.).

This is my opinion based on the fact that Trolltech cannot sustain the Open Source stance that they presently have. They either go all the way or their word is not worth bupkus.

I understand, there are people who want all propritary software die. They want that all software is free. Qt with it's multiple lisences does not fit into their view. But I find it hypocritical that those people often defend the LGPL which allows propritary software to be developed on top of free software without the requirement that the propritary software developer gives anything back.

[jsgotangco]

There was a time when KDE was superior to everything. But times have changed and I have the belief that GNOME matured much faster than KDE as a dekstop environment and a state of mind. KDE looks too noisy for me now.