Torvalds vs Waugh, KDE vs. GNOME [ was Re: "Revolution OS" (The Movie).]
geekboy at angrykeyboarder.com
Mon Jan 1 10:47:42 GMT 2007
Jeff Waugh spake thusly on 12/31/2006 08:12 PM:
> <quote who="Scott">
>> I like both of you, but I had to go with Linus on that KDE thing. :-)
> Oh, that KDE developers are not idiots or Nazis? Thanks man, they'll really
> appreciate your sentiment. I'll make sure to pass it on. I'm sure they were
I wasn't concerned about how GNOME or KDE developers think about how I
feel about them (OK perhaps with one exception ).
I was referring specifically to when Linus wrote :
"I personally just encourage people to switch to KDE.
This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of
Gnome is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will
use it. I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long
since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do.
Please, just tell people to use KDE."
It's downright sad and discouraging that an otherwise very impressive
Desktop Environment (GNOME) has seemingly come to have such contempt for
a group of people that comprise the majority of it's users.
The fast is, most Linux users ARE *somewhat* experienced with a GUI.
And those new to Linux (and to a lesser degree *BSD/Solaris/*ix,etc) are
mostly (former) Mac and Windows users.
GNOME is missing features Mac and Windows (and KDE...) users are
accustomed to. I'm talking such "high tech" or "difficult" things like:
A) Configuring one's sreensaver as one wishes (based on options the
screensaver author had built in). Strangely this worked quite well in
GNOME until someone *cough*billy*cough*jon*cough*mccann* decided that
this wasn't a feature and in fact was a "bug"
B) REALLY simple stuff dating back to Windows 3.1. The ability for a
user to easily change the colors of Widgets and Window Borders (i.e.
Metacity and GTK themes).
I recently read that someone is *just now* working on such a utility
for GNOME. Better late than never I suppose...
There is this perception by many that KDE is more difficult for "new
users" than GNOME is. Granted KDE does give one more configuration
options than GNOME. And yes I will argue they are the direct opposite,
they give you too many (but I'd prefer that to too few).
But the fact is, that for several years, a KDE based distribution was
immensely popular with "newbies" because it was similar to Windows. It
was then called LinuxMandrake. I know, it was my first distro (1998).
And yes the Windows-like KDE interface was helpful.
But in 2007 I also like the fact that I can still tweak KDE to my hearts
content (*without* manually editing any configuration files or hacking
my way through the Windows Registry um..er I mean gconf).
I can even make it more "Mac Like" than GNOME is (many claim GNOME is
more Mac-like than KDE). Can you say "(built in) Application Menu Bar"?
It's not enabled by default but can be added in the control center
with a few mouse clicks. No Gdesklets/SuperKaramba necessary.
But despite all this I actually like and use GNOME. I also use KDE (whch
generally I like better than GNOME). But what I really llike is choice.
That's why I also use Windows XP, Windows Vista, and sometimes BSD,
It's too bad GNOME doesn't think as much of "choice" as KDE does (well
least when it comes to basics anyway).
But I digress...
© 2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wights Wesewved
More information about the sounder