KDE vs GNOME

KDE vs GNOME

Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:53 pm

i have only used GNOME and im wondering how hard it is to change to KDE and get used to it?

i have only used GNOME and im wondering how hard it is to change to KDE and get used to it?

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:41 am

This would probably depend on the person, as some would adjust to it easier than others.

I've been a big KDE fan for about 8 years, but I've not been able to get comfortable with KDE4 just yet. I'm not giving up, though, and try each new release as soon as it hits the streets. In the interim, others seem to have adapted to it quite well.

You should probably try it and decide for yourself what you think. Best of luck with it.

This would probably depend on the person, as some would adjust to it easier than others.

I've been a big KDE fan for about 8 years, but I've not been able to get comfortable with KDE4 just yet. I'm not giving up, though, and try each new release as soon as it hits the streets. In the interim, others seem to have adapted to it quite well.

You should probably try it and decide for yourself what you think. Best of luck with it.

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:09 am

well, I like gnome because is simple, easy to configure, more applications, and integrates with Compiz Fusion. also, Gnome Is faster than KDE even, but it's uglier. (this is my opinion certainly)

well, I like gnome because is simple, easy to configure, more applications, and integrates with Compiz Fusion. also, Gnome Is faster than KDE even, but it's uglier. (this is my opinion certainly)

[Primoz]

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:41 am

well, I like gnome because is simple, easy to configure, more applications, and integrates with Compiz Fusion. also, Gnome Is faster than KDE even, but it's uglier. (this is my opinion certainly)

Most of points presented in your post are somehow inaccurate, but I guess that when you're coming from Gnome environment they may hold some merit.
I think that KDE is very configurable and has all the applications you might need or not.
Also I personally think that KDE doesn't need to integrate with compiz as Kwin has all of needed effects (it lacks some purely eye-candy effects such as paint with fire, or broken glass or something like that I've seen a lot lately but I don't use compiz since KDE4...). The perception of fast can differ and last time I used Gnome was with Gutsy Gibbon, so I can't say about that. I just feel that KDE is very fast and lightweight.
And I do use LXDE when I feel like using it. And I feel that biggest difference between KDE and LXDE is just in app startup nothing more.
I would agree with you that definetly Gnome is uglier, but again that's just my view. Even though that most "tricked out" Gnome desktops didn't made me go wow. The only Gnome desktop that made me go wow was the Linux XP desktop and now I'm not even sure that's Gnome (it could be LXDE; but it's strangely not KDE).

[quote="PoL666"]
well, I like gnome because is simple, easy to configure, more applications, and integrates with Compiz Fusion. also, Gnome Is faster than KDE even, but it's uglier. (this is my opinion certainly)
[/quote]
Most of points presented in your post are somehow inaccurate, but I guess that when you're coming from Gnome environment they may hold some merit.
I think that KDE is very configurable and has all the applications you might need or not.
Also I personally think that KDE doesn't need to integrate with compiz as Kwin has all of needed effects (it lacks some purely eye-candy effects such as paint with fire, or broken glass or something like that I've seen a lot lately but I don't use compiz since KDE4...). The perception of fast can differ and last time I used Gnome was with Gutsy Gibbon, so I can't say about that. I just feel that KDE is very fast and lightweight.
And I do use LXDE when I feel like using it. And I feel that biggest difference between KDE and LXDE is just in app startup nothing more.
I would agree with you that definetly Gnome is uglier, but again that's just my view. Even though that most "tricked out" Gnome desktops didn't made me go wow. The only Gnome desktop that made me go wow was the [url=http://www.linux-xp.com/]Linux XP[/url] desktop and now I'm not even sure that's Gnome (it could be LXDE; but it's strangely not KDE).

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:08 am

ahá, it's the reason for I use KDE haha, but I like the both desktop.

I think that KDE is very configurable and has all the applications you might need or not.

yes is very configurable, I only said that Gnome is easier.

Also I personally think that KDE doesn't need to integrate with compiz as Kwin has all of needed effects

yes, I only said that Gnome integrates with compiz ^^

If I would want criticizes KDE, I would never registred here, It's no my intention. take it easy

ahá, it's the reason for I use KDE haha, but I like the both desktop.

[quote]I think that KDE is very configurable and has all the applications you might need or not.[/quote]

yes is very configurable, I only said that Gnome is easier.

[quote]
Also I personally think that KDE doesn't need to integrate with compiz as Kwin has all of needed effects[/quote]
yes, I only said that Gnome integrates with compiz ^^

If I would want criticizes KDE, I would never registred here, It's no my intention. take it easy

[Moult]

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Wed Feb 11, 2009 12:12 pm

Excuse me for interrupting the discussion but I believe we've totally ignored the users initial request

Well, when first coming to Linux (Gentoo), I installed Fluxbox because that was the WM that required the least amount of dependencies to be installed (to my knowledge at the time). Then moved to XFCE, then to GNOME, then to KDE 3.5, then to KDE 4. Since KDE 3.5-4 I've flitted to Fluxbox and Gnome every so often again but I've always stuck back to KDE. KDE had given me a good first experience. It was easy to adapt to - common sense told me where the main menu was, and things just moved on from there. The keyboard shortcuts were guessable, and though there were some things (mostly aesthetics) I wasn't too pleased with, the configure options were easy to find (exploring the K Menu should give you a good idea of what KDE offers).

It was an easy change.

However, what might be difficult to change is your applications. If you are used to a series of GNOME applications, and you are extremely comfortable with them, you might find you will want to change to KDE equivalents as some people do not like having extra non-KDE packages on their system, and non-qt applications take a bit of tweaking in order to blend into the visual style that KDE gives (check out gtk-engines-qt and so on). Therefore exploring what applications can substitute for your current ones might be something to do if you want an easy switchover.

Excuse me for interrupting the discussion but I believe we've totally ignored the users initial request ;)

Well, when first coming to Linux (Gentoo), I installed Fluxbox because that was the WM that required the least amount of dependencies to be installed (to my knowledge at the time). Then moved to XFCE, then to GNOME, then to KDE 3.5, then to KDE 4. Since KDE 3.5-4 I've flitted to Fluxbox and Gnome every so often again but I've always stuck back to KDE. KDE had given me a good first experience. It was easy to adapt to - common sense told me where the main menu was, and things just moved on from there. The keyboard shortcuts were guessable, and though there were some things (mostly aesthetics) I wasn't too pleased with, the configure options were easy to find (exploring the K Menu should give you a good idea of what KDE offers).

It was an easy change.

However, what might be difficult to change is your applications. If you are used to a series of GNOME applications, and you are extremely comfortable with them, you might find you will want to change to KDE equivalents as some people do not like having extra non-KDE packages on their system, and non-qt applications take a bit of tweaking in order to blend into the visual style that KDE gives (check out gtk-engines-qt and so on). Therefore exploring what applications can substitute for your current ones might be something to do if you want an easy switchover.

[Brandybuck]

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:05 am

I think it's easier for GNOME users to get used to KDE, than for KDE users to get used to GNOME. Why? Because GNOME is not quite as integrated as KDE is (KDE 3.5 is best integration, 4.2 is not far behind though). What I mean by "integrated" is that all of the apps works seamlessly together and with the desktop. There is not single big reason for this, just lots of little tiny ones so minor it's embarassing to mention just one of them. But put together it feels like KDE has a bit more integration.

I think this is because GNOME is split up more into more independent sub-projects. This is not a bad thing, and has it advantages, but it does lead to a bit less overall integration.

Just my opinion!

I think it's easier for GNOME users to get used to KDE, than for KDE users to get used to GNOME. Why? Because GNOME is not quite as integrated as KDE is (KDE 3.5 is best integration, 4.2 is not far behind though). What I mean by "integrated" is that all of the apps works seamlessly together and with the desktop. There is not single big reason for this, just lots of little tiny ones so minor it's embarassing to mention just one of them. But put together it feels like KDE has a bit more integration.

I think this is because GNOME is split up more into more independent sub-projects. This is not a bad thing, and has it advantages, but it does lead to a bit less overall integration.

Just my opinion!

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:56 am

Why you want to switch to KDE? If you don't have problems with GNOME I suggest you to continue using it.

GNOME is stable and well-tested desktop while KDE 4 still crashes frequently. There are some things that just don't work (and I don't think this is going to change soon).

I am using KDE since I started using Linux (2005) and KDE 3 was the best desktop at this time. I tried GNOME for few months but I returned to KDE 3. Since KDE 3 is stalled and GNOME is under development I suggest you to stay with GNOME. KDE 4 is usable after version 4.2 but still worse than KDE 3. KDE 4 is much slower than GNOME (and any other desktop environment). It has more graphical effects but there are also a lot of graphical bugs so it is uglier in some ways.

I think some of the people here won't agree with what I am saying but this is my opinion. Of couse KDE 4 has its advantages and you can try it and decide for yourself but I don't think it is better than GNOME.

Why you want to switch to KDE? If you don't have problems with GNOME I suggest you to continue using it.

GNOME is stable and well-tested desktop while KDE 4 still crashes frequently. There are some things that just don't work (and I don't think this is going to change soon).

I am using KDE since I started using Linux (2005) and KDE 3 was the best desktop at this time. I tried GNOME for few months but I returned to KDE 3. Since KDE 3 is stalled and GNOME is under development I suggest you to stay with GNOME. KDE 4 is usable after version 4.2 but still worse than KDE 3. KDE 4 is much slower than GNOME (and any other desktop environment). It has more graphical effects but there are also a lot of graphical bugs so it is uglier in some ways.

I think some of the people here won't agree with what I am saying but this is my opinion. Of couse KDE 4 has its advantages and you can try it and decide for yourself but I don't think it is better than GNOME.

[JontheEchinda]

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:53 am

KDE4 has been quite stable for me since 4.1. It's pretty much solid in 4.2.

KDE4 has been quite stable for me since 4.1. It's pretty much solid in 4.2.

RE: KDE vs GNOME

Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:23 am

i second that.. one month everyday use and NO crash at all.. (i have to admit that my desktop setup is almost perfect for my needs and i am not messing around much neither with the plasmoids nor with the effectplugins these days...)

i have a gnome installation for testing purposes and it feels sometimes faster and sometimes much slower.. if you resist playing around hours with your 3d effects and plasmoids (and abandon some of them at all ^^ like "blur plugin") kde4 is ready for you to work with ...

(use the newest nvidia driver.. it will help gain stability and speed)

i second that.. one month everyday use and NO crash at all.. (i have to admit that my desktop setup is almost perfect for my needs and i am not messing around much neither with the plasmoids nor with the effectplugins these days...)

i have a gnome installation for testing purposes and it feels sometimes faster and sometimes much slower.. if you resist playing around hours with your 3d effects and plasmoids (and abandon some of them at all ^^ like "blur plugin") kde4 is ready for you to work with ...

(use the newest nvidia driver.. it will help gain stability and speed)