Three reasons NOT to use Gnome
I've always been a proponent of choice. Maybe it has to do with my biology study, I don't know. Variation makes a population stronger and resilient. A few days ago, I wrote an article on comp.lang.forth, passionately arguing that the ANS Forth standard should allow even more diversity in architectures, command sets and design objectives. That's why I like Open Source. Whatever you're looking for, somebody has done it. If not, you can always start a new project.
So, it is only logical that there is a large variety of desktop environments and window managers. Even more than you can imagine. One of my favorite Linux magazines, the German "Linux User" has a monthly section dedicated to it. Although I don't have any intention to change my desktop, it is nice to see what people come up with. Some solutions I find even tempting.
One of the better qualities of the Open Source community is mutual respect. Developers make different choices, but they usually show understanding for the choices others have made. One of the characteristics of respect is honesty. You don't spread any FUD to harm your opponent or his product. That is why "Three reasons to use Gnome" shocked me.
I don't object to the article itself; Sal Cangeloso is free to use what ever he wants and list his reasons for using it. But he is not free to spread FUD and use some very questionable arguments. I've used KDE from the first moment I installed Linux and I've never been disappointed. I've even used it on a 166 MHz, 32 MB Pentium II. Sure, it wasn't a speed demon, but I've used the machine for 18 months at a stretch. I like my KDE and when you look at the comments this dubious article received, I'm not the only one.
I've always had the idea that this whole KDE vs. Gnome thing has been kept alive by Gnome proponents (see the last paragraph). I can imagine why. Somebody starts a desktop environment based on non-free software. A year later, in 1997, you found a project with the aim to create an entirely free desktop. After three years, you find that you've done it all for nothing, because somebody changed the licensing. What a bummer! What now?
Okay, you start a project called Mono to give it a boost, based on a totally nonfree architecture (sic) - designed and promoted by a company I choose not to mention. It's still not working. Even worse, the father of the single piece of software that started it all says in public that "your whole mentality is a disease" and your baby will only be used "by idiots". On top of all the guy who gave your favorite desktop environment the long awaited recognition becomes the first patron of KDE. Apart from driving off a cliff, what can you do. Easy, let's do what the professionals do. Spread FUD.
First of all, SuSE has always defaulted to KDE until it was bought by Novell. Novell also bought Ximian. Right, that company was founded and owned by the guy who wrote both Gnome and Mono, Miguel de Icaza. It is safe to say that this choice was made for political and not technical reasons.
Second, Gnome is far from "lightweight" as these figures will show you. Personally, I find Gnome sluggish and not quite as snappy and responsive as KDE. That is quite understandable if you know how Gnome came to be. The Gimp Tool Kit was originally developed to make GIMP, a Photoshop clone – not to build an entire desktop on top of it. It has the most horrible API you've ever seen. KDE has one of the most well designed APIs I've ever seen. Absolutely no comparison.
Third, I absolutely prefer most of the KDE applications to their Gnome counterparts. If you've ever worked with LyX, you'll never go back to Open Office Writer again – except for compatibility reasons concerning an Office suite whose name I choose not to mention. Konquerer is the fastest browser around – with the possible exception of Dillo. Bluefish or Quanta? Don't give it a second thought - Bluefish even lacks a preview or help feature. I prefer Kmail over Evolution, because the latter resembles a PIM whose name I choose not to mention. Krita is quickly becoming the image editor of choice. And Koffice is a better suite than the bunch of unrelated applications like Gnumeric and Abiword that form the "Gnome office" suite. Not to mention that "Gnome office" is lacking a Kexi equivalent. I have to admit I really like Dia, though!
Finally, Sal Cangeloso resorts to the ever lasting Gnome FUD trump card, licensing. Okay, I'll repeat it here for the very last time: since September 2000 KDE is 100% GPL. No "licensing issues" at all. The next one who tries that trick gets his lights punched out.
I really don't care which window manager you use. I really don't care what desktop environment you use. But you should not reward a project that has and keeps on spreading FUD just to force its eternal nemesis out of the market. If you want a sluggish memory hog that leaves you no choice unless you happen to like XML hacking, be my guest. But note that when there is no KDE anymore, you will be left with no choice at all - except of course with what the good Gnome people think is good for you – welcome to the cathedral!
Note that there are a lot of people that are very passionate where KDE is concerned. Why? Because it is their tool of choice and they use it every day. Some have used Gnome for a while and switched. For some, KDE is too heavy (e.g. DSL, Puppy Linux) and they were happy to see that there are alternatives - the bazaar. That is what Open Source is all about. And don't you forget it.
you look like my world history teacher mr jones
Posted by: Jasmine Cooper | 2009.04.02 at 16:06
If i'd have to choose between qt and gtk i'd go with neither. I hate them both. But i hate qt more.
Posted by: Alex | 2006.11.27 at 01:39
I happen to use KDE, having switched from GNOME after the first version of GNOME; and never looked back. Reasonable ?
No, but..... I'm still happy with KDE.
More importantly: comp.lang.forth ! It's been YEARS - 15+ - but after "Extended" BASIC, FORTH saved me ! Since DOS 3, I've been loose of Microsuck, initially due to FORTH. I was finally inundated by C/Tcl/Tk/Blt, etc., etc., but have always had
a soft spot for that beautifully simple, powerful, wonderful FORTH ! I thought it had faded away; it's great to hear it still mentioned !
Posted by: L.Anthony | 2006.10.23 at 22:59
"Personally, I find Gnome sluggish and not quite as snappy and responsive as KDE. That is quite understandable if you know how Gnome came to be. The Gimp Tool Kit was originally developed to make GIMP, a Photoshop clone – not to build an entire desktop on top of it. It has the most horrible API you've ever seen. KDE has one of the most well designed APIs I've ever seen. Absolutely no comparison".
Interesting note, could we get a "get the facts" from Gnome side? Always kde-lovers spread this point ( and no one give an conclusive observation about this).
Posted by: Edson | 2006.10.23 at 13:45
What a disappointment !! It's a bit sad to see what the " ego of mortals " can do !
I like both KDE and Gnome and the rest that is available out there.
I guess some have forgotten the basics ! Linux community !
I've lived the evolution of Linux since the early days, from compiling the raw code to the distributions , the momentum that was bringing hackers together, It was fantastic to see that all the efforts pave the way for Linux.
Linux will go through many changes again, no doubt on that , are those changes for the benefit of the "community" or to feed the ego of some individuals.
Al,
"There are some that only employ words for the purpose of disguising their thoughts."
Voltaire,
Posted by: Al | 2006.10.22 at 21:51
After reading original article, I can only say 2 things.
1. Not even near as much FUD as yours. Clumsy? Yes. FUD? Not really, just clumsy.
In point 1 for example he forgot to name why vendors choose Gnome over KDE. Licensing.While Gnome can be completely free, proprietary vendors can make use of LGPL. A case which is not so clean in KDE.
In point 2 named Features author without any sense involved HIG (HIG is separate topic not involved with features, it defines how features should be presented). Yes, it is true Gnome has much cleaner HIG than KDE, yes it has more thought features, but the basis is that KDE is being a lot used by hackers who want to tweak everything and Gnome is intended for both begginers and hackers (and diversity is nice). I for one am too lazy to tweak, so I preffer Gnome. And for the last both can satisfy all needs of their users.
While 3rd point in original article was a pure non sense it was not even worth to mention it. One can freely use KDE only just as Gnome only.
2. You need to get on some relaxing drugs. Your article was written with so much of anger it even lost contact with it self . It started nice and then contradicted everything said. In the middle part I started expecting "Gnome will eat your babies, and Ximian/Novell will grind you with their teeth". Article you've ben so disgusted never get so low. But unfortunate event is that this wasn't the lowest you got.
Peace, and do visit pharmacy to get some drugs
Posted by: a | 2006.10.22 at 17:28
I link neither, both too slow and L A R G E. I dislike any bloated software. For several years I have been using icewm which is small and quick.
However to use gnumeric I need lots of gnome stuff.
To use kstars I need lots of kde stuff, so much of it I decided to drop it.
Generally now I use Debian on 3 laptops and 2 desktops. But also occasionally use Suse(icewm) and Ubuntu(gnome) on my new Thinkpad-T42, my main PC.
Posted by: George Hein | 2006.10.22 at 15:53
I was disappointed by this article. Good start, but it degrades into the same FUD slinging the article you're complaining about did. In fact, you completely contradicted yourself.
Posted by: vk | 2006.10.22 at 11:39
I have used both Gnome and KDE for years. Primarily KDE. I don't mean to add fuel to the fire here but Gnome is frustrating. It has limited functionality.
When I have alot to do on my boxes I find in every case that KDE allows me to be far more productive. This is the bottom line.
I'm a long time SuSE user and I will say that Novell has made me nervous at times with what seems to be their preference for Gnome. They have however so far done right by KDE in their distributions. I run SLED 10 on a laptop. Novell did alot of cosmetic work on Gnome and redesigned the menu functionality. They claim that they completed numerous usability studies which led them to their new design but I'm wondering who actually participated in these studies because I find the whole thing to be counter productive.
Every poll I've seen demonstrates that KDE is preferred by users but we see many big distributors pushing Gnome. In my experience (which is backed-up by benchmarks i've seen recently) KDE is faser than Gnome.
If you like Gnome then more power to you but don't try to impede the majority of GUI users who clearly prefer KDE.
Posted by: Tsp | 2006.10.22 at 07:00
>> I've used KDE from the first moment I installed Linux and I've never been disappointed. I've even used it on a 166 MHz, 32 MB Pentium II.
Curious, I've never been able to run KDE with less than 128 Mb of RAM and and no less than 256 Mb to work decently.
>> "After three years, you find that you've done it all for nothing, because somebody changed the licensing. What a bummer!"
We are in 2006 and KDE licence problems persist! Qt, the base of KDE is dual licenced and if someone wants to make commercial software based on it, he has to pay licences to Trolltech. GPL doesn't is not enough with libraries and that's why LGPL was born. GNOME uses LGPL from the first moment, KDE doesn't. Even M$ MFC are cheaper than Qt when developing commercial software. That exclude Qt for software like flash, or Java, or *Messenger without which, a moderm desktop is unimaginable.
>> "Okay, you start a project called Mono to give it a boost, based on a totally nonfree architecture (sic) - designed and promoted by a company I choose not to mention."
Mono is based on the standardized pieced on .Net, submited to ECMA. That's, Mono is based on a totally free, well defined architecture, that has even the support from Microsoft (yes, like or not, it's still the first software company in the World).
"On top of all the guy who gave your favorite desktop environment the long awaited recognition becomes the first patron of KDE."
I think you are talking about Ubuntu. The long awaited reconition was already there when RedHat (the first linux company), Sun and Novell opted for GNOME as well as Nokia (770/Maemo), IBM (Eclipse), Google(Firefox), Adobe(Acrobat/Flash). And you think that just because someone decides to promote KDE (while promoting GNOME as first platform -Ubuntu-) changes it all. Wake up mate!
>> "First of all, SuSE has always defaulted to KDE until it was bought by Novell. Novell also bought Ximian. Right, that company was founded and owned by the guy who wrote both Gnome and Mono, Miguel de Icaza. It is safe to say that this choice was made for political and not technical reasons."
Sorry, how can it be possible that Novell wanted to buy Ximian?. Because they were interested in Ximian stuff, that's, Mono, RedCarpet, Evolution, ... Do you thin k they decided to pay tens millions of dollars without any technicall reason, without even having a look a the software, just because of "political reasons"?.
>> "Second, Gnome is far from "lightweight" as these figures will show you."
GNOME is the base of Nokia 770, the successfull PDA/Table PC which clearly probes GNOME is a "lightweight" stack. Maybe Nokia (70% share of mobile world market) don't have the expertise to choose the right platform.
>> "That is quite understandable if you know how Gnome came to be. The Gimp Tool Kit was originally developed to make GIMP, a Photoshop clone – not to build an entire desktop on top of it. It has the most horrible API you've ever seen. KDE has one of the most well designed APIs I've ever seen. Absolutely no comparison."
GNOME is developed around well designed and separated modules following well defined engineering patterns. The object model is defined in gobject, the high-level data-algorithms and struts -list, hash tables- are defined in glib, the GUI is also divided in developer's API and its underlaying cross-platform portability library. So basically you have no piece idea what you are talking about. Also, GNOME was designed to be language independent with a series of "hooks" to link any language at hand (C++,Ada, PHP, Python, Java, C#,...). On the opposite KDE/Qt have always been closelly tied to C++, whith all the problems it bears -On 2006 C++ even lack i18n support, compare it with Java or C#-. Just recently a "decent" support for python has been added (and quite poor when compared with the one in GNOME).
>> "Third, I absolutely prefer most of the KDE applications to their Gnome counterparts. ..."
OK!. Great for you. Enjoy them.
>> "Okay, I'll repeat it here for the very last time: since September 2000 KDE is 100% GPL. No "licensing issues" at all."
Sorry, many "licensing issues" still persists. Again, if you want to develop commercial software with KDE you need to pay Trolltech lot of royalties for a bunch of libraries that you already have for free with GNOME, so KDE is doomed to fail with commercial software (Flash, Adobe,...). Is not FUD, is real world, but KDEers (most of which, curiosly work for Trolltech) just want to ignore the problem.
>> "But note that when there is no KDE anymore, you will be left with no choice at all - except of course with what the good Gnome people think is good for you – welcome to the cathedral!"
Uhhh, uhhh, the World goes to one end without Trolltech, sorry I wanted to say KDE.
Cathedrals and bazars have nothing to do with Trolltech wanting to attrack developers cheating them with crap DUAL licence:
QT licence = GPL (Free marketing) + Commercial Licence(get money from naïve developers trapped by the "GPL" brand)
KDE lost the "battle" time ago, and there is no reason to blame anyone else that KDE developers for not changing in time Qt for anything better (Gtk,...)
Posted by: Shamar | 2006.10.21 at 16:55
I read the article that this one is in response to and my jaw nearly hit the floor. I couldn't believe that someone from the free software world would stoop to slinging around so much BS.
Personally I use both desktops. I run KDE at work and on my power desktop at home. I run gnome on my laptop. It depends on what I do with the system I'm using.
I think Gnome feels more refined in some aspects, but it just is not flexible in any way shape or form. I sometimes use Gnome 2.0 at work and then Gnome 2.16 and I'd swear that 2.0 has more features! The truth is though that KDE offers the features that power users need. Gnome has very little built-in and you have to spend forever finding add-ons to do what you need. I feel like the Gnome developers think they know whats best for everyone and offer no customizable features. Nautilus is so bad for a power user it makes me nauseous.
I feel like there's such a giant philosophical divide between the two that there will always be these rifts, however it would be nice if people didn't write articles with half-truths or outright lies like the Sal Cangeloso article.
Just my 2 cents.
Posted by: pants | 2006.10.21 at 16:02
"But you should not reward a project that has and keeps on spreading FUD"
You clearly cannot tell the difference between the actions of the GNOME project team and GNOME users. Idiot. You go on to do the exact thing you are criticising, which makes you a total hypocrite.
Posted by: Ashley | 2006.10.21 at 14:54
i think everybody (except these enlightened 2-cents-writers) is sick of this gnome vs kde sequel. DO YOU THINK WE CANNOT DECIDE BY OURSELVES? we don't need to borrow your musty ideas, trust me. pathetic...
Posted by: fabio | 2006.10.21 at 14:10
Hans Bezemer makes some intelligent points about Gnome, and it's about
time Linux people grow up and deal with the real world of computing.
The "play nice" or "don't complain" ideal of Linux users is
counter-productive, with no real criticism, or even reviews of Linux
projects.
>
>
Umm...Who wants comments or reviews from semi-literate moronic PC Gamers like yourself and Hans who couldn't even begin to explain how to format a 1.44 meg floppy from a DOS prompt?
Posted by: Rick James | 2006.10.21 at 13:43
Hans Bezemer makes some intelligent points about Gnome, and it's about time Linux people grow up and deal with the real world of computing.
The "play nice" or "don't complain" ideal of Linux users is counter-productive, with no real criticism, or even reviews of Linux projects.
Competition between KDE and Gnome should be encouraged, with the goal of two excellent desktops (instead, both are mediocre and broken right now).
Furthermore, it is obvious many Linux developers/users have no formal education in computer science. They may not realize it, but they're lacking important computing concepts and experience.
So, Linux people, grow up, encourage competition, and take some computer science courses. . . Because Microsoft is going down. :)
Posted by: Helms | 2006.10.21 at 12:04
I really dislike KDE & prefer Gnome but I wish all these space cadets would shut up & let people choose their desktop by its merits i.e. how it performs on their system.
Posted by: Guy | 2006.10.21 at 11:46
Sal Cangeloso may be stretching things a bit on the momentum and KDE bloat arguments, but still they could be considered valid points.
Historically KDE development has focused more on KDE and less on where KDE fits in the bigger picture where Gnome has been more open to using things that were developed independently to make the whole feel more connected. Since Freedesktop.org came along things have improved a bit, but both camps are still products of their respective histories and the early attitudes are sometimes still apparent in the current day.
Looking at:
"Finally, Sal Cangeloso resorts to the ever lasting Gnome FUD trump card, licensing. Okay, I'll repeat it here for the very last time: since September 2000 KDE is 100% GPL. No "licensing issues" at all. The next one who tries that trick gets his lights punched out."
Since when is licensing not an issue?
GPL is a fine license for many things, but LGPL provides compatibility for a wider range of usage scenarios, so when it comes to libraries that are intended for use as core parts of the infrastructure LGPL seems like a better fit. That's not FUD it's just taking a look at how things fit in the bigger picture and determining what level of freedoms/restrictions should be applied to various parts of the whole based on how they are intended to be used within the whole. Not everyone will agree on what license should be used for what and that's OK, it doesn't mean it's not an issue.
Posted by: Don | 2006.10.21 at 10:23
I've used KDE, which is great, and Gnome, which is great too, oh and Xfce, that was pretty great also.
Woohoo! Go Linux!
Posted by: spaulding | 2006.10.21 at 09:14
I really don't see what the fuss is about. Probably because I'm using XFce. I never look at applications I don't know from the viewpoint of which UI they are coming from; I simply choose the application I like best. I thought that was what it was all about... I happily install Ubuntu for my newly liberated friends (not mentioning what they have been liberated from, to keep the spirit of the article), and give them k3b to burn their CDs with along with Open Office to write their letters with. For most of the other applications I couldn't even tell you where they are coming from. And nobody cares.
Robin
Posted by: Robin | 2006.10.21 at 09:04
I hate everbody and everything. I even hate myself.
There - ive taken this to a whole new level. Anyone top that?
Posted by: Stolennomenclature | 2006.10.21 at 08:30
GNOME? KDE? i rather use KDE because the tools it has are more complete. And think it run a little bit faster, specially if you the amount of thing that kde has and gnome doesn't. the settings for the window manager is more complete and easier to use. It has better admistrative tools. But I acctually use enligthenment 17, using kde's tools (like konqueror as file manager, and kate as text editor), I like it couse its very eye candy, configurable and lightweight
Posted by: Wido | 2006.10.21 at 06:49
so, some Gnome user says some things about Gnome and KDE, so the Gnome Project (!?) is FUDding?
So to balance things out, you, a KDE user, do the exact same thing you're compaining about. I guess the KDE project is full of FUD too, then.
Not. I for one won't judge the KDE project on anything you just said, because if I did I'd come away with a really bad impression.
I'd suggest you do the same - the only KDE/Gnome "war" is the one people like you and the Gnome user you're responding too keep alive.
Posted by: nona | 2006.10.21 at 06:43
I've used KDE from the time it was first available and have been very pleased. I also like and use some GNOME apps. One problem with GNOME that KDE is impervious to is upgrading applications - you see a new or updated GNOME application and try to build it, you are in a death clasp with dependencies, ones that will eventually break other installed stuff. If you use GNOME as comes with your distro and leave it untouched, it's sound.
Posted by: Sid Boyce | 2006.10.21 at 05:57
Why is he not free to post alleged FUD?
You said, "But he is not free to spread FUD and use some very questionable arguments."
If this is true, then you are not free to post your opinion about him and his article. After all, both yours and his articles are just that, opinions. Your both free to have them, and you are certainly BOTH free to express/spread them. And we are all free to agree with either of you or consider you to be a self-righteous, narrow-minded jerk.
Posted by: phillip | 2006.10.21 at 05:23
Gnome isn't the root of the problem. Those spoiled brats from Ximian are the problem. They've got this "not invented here" disease that seems to cause schism after schism in the Linux community. And now they're at the helm at Novell, which is scary. People like to say that Red Hat is the Microsoft of Linux, but these guys are serious about it. Ximian (who call themselves "Novell" these days) really do want to be the Microsoft of Linux.
Posted by: ig | 2006.10.21 at 05:08