Gnome users who have tried KDE: convince me!

[nepal]

On Thursday 31 Dec 2009 09:51:24 marc wrote:
> Dotan Cohen wrote:
> > In this whole thread I haven't seen a single Gnome feature
> > mentioned that does not have a KDE counterpart. It seems that the
> > only reason people like Gnome is because "it is not Windows" and
> > these people avoid KDE because "it is similar to Windows". Being
> > unfamiliar with Windows, this does not bother me.
> 
> I've never understood this meme. You can make gnome look like
>  windows and kde look like a mac; kde is nothing like windows, and
>  certainly no more than gnome.

AFAIU the 'meme' you refer to is simply the fact that KDE shat on its 
users.They broke huge amounts of functionality to provide us with 
something whose basic function is to look pretty. I cannot put into 
words my feelings about this in a satisfactory way. This apparent new 
direction of kde sounds a bit like microsoft to me. That is the reason 
I abandoned 8.10 kubuntu and moved to Ubuntu and the Gnome desktop 
when 9.04 was released and decided I'd give Gnome a reasonable try 
out.

(Actually I'm still upset with KDE particularly on discovering they 
are working on a windblows version too. :(

For me, the only app that gnome provides that kde doesn't is 
gmusicbrowser. This is the best of all the very many music players out 
there. To put into perspective, on discovering gmb and what it offered 
I was inspired to rip my entire music collection to hard disk, and 
listened using the random feature. I love my music all over again.

Sorry, but I have never had anything but trouble with Ama[c]rok and I 
have had any number of attempts to get it to perform for me, all 
ending in failure and disappointment. When I moved to kde 4.3.3 I was 
persuaded to abondon my vow to never try ama[c]rok again, give it 
another chance. I tried and it ended in failure. But then kde is so 
broken for me this is not surprising.
> 
> > Does Gnome not have any merits of it's own?

Yes, it seems to be messy by comparison. ;)

I don't mean that to be disparaging, but that is the best I can come 
up with regarding the experience of going to gnome from kde. I also 
get the sense that gnome and applications are less flexible than kde. 
Overall configuration and set up in gnome is more fragmented than in 
kde.
 
> In a way, it's an odd question, because, as you know, you can run
>  apps from either in both. Although some don't work very well.
> 
> That said, I find gnome Do reason enough too use gnome, and the
>  whole compiz thing is a lot more stable than kde, but perhaps kde
>  has stabilized since the kde4 mess.
 
> I initially used kde over gnome because it provided more
>  flexibility and was far less limiting than gnome. That all changed
>  with kde4 when very, very basic things broke and I had endless
>  kde-related display issues. I filed bugs, chased and chased them,
>  but things moved far too slowly -- I still receive updates to some
>  of those bugs many of which are still unresolved.

Most of the problems I have are intermittent bugs, particularly with 
graphics processing. Sadly the nvidia driver is broken and usually 
effects everything that needs accelerating, but never in exactly the 
same way. These are non duplicatable difficulties. Flash is another 
obvious problem. I'm presently using KDE from the kubuntu ppa repo.
 
> I was seriously considering a move to a mac (I also tried all the
>  other usual Linux candidates) when I found gnome Do. This app
>  masks and counters most of gnome's inflexibility, imo, and made
>  gnome usable. Unfortunately, gnome Do doesn't, or didn't, work in
>  kde.
> 
> As it stands, I see no compelling reason to go back to kde; gnome
>  just works, at least, for now.
> 
My experience is different. I actually missed the more integrated 
structure of KDE (at least that is my perception). I don't know if 
that is because I first learned and familiarized myself with Linux 
using the KDE desktop. I don't know what it is about Gnome that I 
don't like, but I do prefer kde, still, but am in the situation of 
waiting. 

Being an ex develper, my feeling is that linux is a disaster waiting 
to happen because of how the libraries are developed and contributed 
to i.e. the whole dependency nightmare... The scripts needed to keep 
order are just getting more and more complex, and the greater the 
complexity the greater the opportunity for something to break. 

I guess I'm waiting for something as a real alternative to linux 
itself, something that is free and developed by people who love doing 
that kind of thing, not BSD, not m$, and not in competition with m$, 
who completely ignore what m$ does. I guess it would be a more 
artistic approach, "here is my creation, if you like it, you are 
welcome."

nepal.