Re: KDE vs Gnome

[Steven Pritchard <steve@silug.org>]

KoReE said:
> Okay, I'm trying Gnome right now, and I'll tell ya, I like it.  Problem
> is, it coredumps constantly, and now my panel won't even come up.  I
> haven't tried KDE, but I've heard it's nice.

It is quite nice.  I've been using it since Beta-3.  It is rock-solid.

> The thing I don't like about
> it is that it's slowly being killed by those users that are anti-Qt
> (Richard Stallman effect).

I'm going to attempt to *not* get started on an anti-RMS rant here...

There are some issues surrounding the licensing of Qt.  When you look
at Qt's license, understand that Troll Tech is in the business of
selling a *supported* cross-platform toolkit.  They have some *very*
large clients who would be upset if there were major bugs in Qt.
Besides that, though, the guys at Troll Tech are *very* big fans of
free software.  The guy who wrote most of Qt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, has
written quite a bit of Open SourceTM software.  If you grep through
the Linux kernel source, you'll notice that his name is in there a few
times even.

So Troll Tech has this nice product that they *must* have absolute
control over in order to keep their large paying clients happy.
That's why they don't allow modifications.  They like free software
though, so they allow it to be used free of charge for GPL'd software.
Also, they know that Linux (and other Unix) people like to have source
for stuff, so they distribute the source code for Qt.

To me, this all makes perfect sense.  (Of course, I'm probably a bit
biased, since Arnt is a good friend of mine.)  Unfortunately though,
it drives RMS and his bunch insane, because it isn't Free Software,
and it isn't normal (evil) proprietary software, it's the Ultra-Evil
Semi-Free Software.  (OK, I have to rant a little...)  This is a
perfect example of RMS's fanaticism...  It drives him absolutely
insane that he is neither winning nor losing with Qt.  Qt is in what
would be a happy middle ground to everyone else, but to RMS is
completely off limits.

> Is there anyone that has tried both that could
> tell me why or why not to switch to KDE?

I've never had Gnome installed, but I've seen it "working"...

There's a really simple reason for switching to KDE...  It works.  It
is stable.  If anyone tells you that Gnome is stable, they are lying.

> Also, has anyone gotten Gnome
> working in any kind of stable form?

Some versions of it have worked to some degree or other...  I've
actually seen some spiffy stuff done with Gnome.  When it finally
stabilizes, it will probably be very nice.

Setting aside all the religious licensing issues, it seems to me that
Gnome, if it lives up to the goals of the developers, will be greatly
superior to KDE.  The thing is, the KDE people have working code
*now*.  It is entirely possible that they will overhaul their
architecture to the point that it is technically equal or superior to
the Gnome architecture.  About the only thing that concerns me about
KDE is the fact that it is almost 100% C++, where Gnome is almost 100%
C.  Gnome will almost have to be faster and smaller than KDE.  Of
course, as cheap as disks, memory, and processors are these days, I'm
not sure that a significant number of people will give a damn about
the difference in speed & size...

Does that answer your question?  :-)

Steve
-- 
steve@silug.org           | Linux Users of Central Illinois
(217)698-1694             | Meetings the 4th Tuesday of every month
Steven Pritchard          | http://www.luci.org/ for more info

--
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.