4 ms·

I'm curious is anyone else feels like I do about these things. I've used linux off and on over the years, various distros, various GUIs, sometimes KDE based, s

I'm curious is anyone else feels like I do about these things. I've used linux off and on over the years, various distros, various GUIs, sometimes KDE based, sometimes Gnome, sometimes others. I've never noticed any differences that seem substantive. It just seems like a random walk around the usual gui design space. Which I think makes sense as there isn't really a whole lot to do there. Is it just me? Do other people feel strongly about any of these differences?

EdwardDiego 6y ago
I'm in the same boat. Switched from Gnome on Pop_OS to KDE on Arch Linux and well, they both work, I guess? I mean, I'm using Linux to work, so as long as I can pull up a terminal, run Zoom, run my browser, and run IDEA, I'm sorted, I'm not overly fussed about what the MP3 players look like, I can just open Spotify in a browser if I need tunes.
macksd 6y ago
My preferences aren't religious-strong, but I have enough of a preference that I installed KDE Plasma on Pop! OS instead of the Gnome-base default. And I've struggled to get the network manager working in KDE which has been a nuisance and never a problem on distros who ship KDE as the default - so there's at least some importance in a distro's default, even if others are available. I've been known to pull up a Gnome version of some application in KDE and vice-versa because of individual preferences. But as a desktop / window manager yeah I actually have a strong preference. The article actually isn't loading for me, so I'm not sure if these are the same design philosophies addressed, but some of the key things are: * I find Gnome's dock-like things very annoying. I find it easier to get KDE's task bar to take up a very small number of pixels and I feel it stays out of my way more while I'm focusing on other applications. It feels like Gnome takes after Mac and KDE takes after Windows, and I just prefer the latter, UI-wise. * KDE is far more configurable for keyboard shortcuts. I use the ability to pin a window to the left / right half, or one of the quadrants using they key-binding of my choice all the time. I hadn't been using KDE for very long when I would miss that every time I was on another machine. Even after being back on Gnome for a couple of years I wanted it. There are some third-party add-ons that do it, but they were buggy for me. I'd rather just have KDE out-of-the-box. This is one example, but keyboard shortcuts in general are for more widely used and configurable on KDE. edit: Clarified a few things, but also have now read the article: yes I like this "completist" philosophy, especially since much of the complexity is hidden away in drop-down menus. I think it's the best of both worlds.
- ip34162 6y ago
  Try KDE Neon. It has the latest Plasma on top of stable Ubuntu LTS. https://neon.kde.org/ https://neon.kde.org/ Also KDE Connect is awesome for integration with android phones. It's available in non-KDE distros too. Available on Fdroid too. https://kdeconnect.kde.org/ https://kdeconnect.kde.org/ https://f-droid.org/packages/org.kde.kdeconnect_tp/ https://f-droid.org/packages/org.kde.kdeconnect_tp/
- mustermannBB 6y ago
  My problem with KDE has essentially been the same now for years. To me, it feels too fragile.
  - SirLotsaLocks 6y ago
    I know exactly what you mean, my personal tolerance is higher so I don't care as much but I think everything being customizable also makes it less solid feeling.
simion314 6y ago
I am familiar with KDE and years ago when I was in the community I know that most of the apps are just a few unpaid volunteers/developers, in their free time add missing features and fix bugs. There was no big ego designer that had to approve if we add a new menu or feature or any study to decide if a new feature might segfault the brain of some user. Each maintainer decides if a feature makes sense and the design was usually the generic Qt/KDE layouts , no freacking custom widgets that a user can't theme. I would be interested to hear if there is a major difference between GTK apps that are not part of GNOME and GNOME first apps .
skinkestek 6y ago
I am opinionated. To each their own, here are my opinions: KDE is near Windows defaults, maximum configuration (you can even emulate Mac OS X if you want.) Gnome 2 was Windows-like and somewhat customizable. Gnome 3 is Mac-like and harder to customize. Unity is Mac-like and unnecessary hard to customize. Elementary looks Mac-like but isn't rage-inducing in the same way for me as they have a working application switcher.
eldaisfish 6y ago
I do not feel strongly about any of this but i've found myself happier with KDE over the years. Gnome seems to combine the worst aspects of OSX and windows with some things in side panel, some persistent menu bars, some applications with double menu bars... it's annoying is all. KDE tends to stick to what i understand and what i want is usually where i expect it to be. I would disagree with you in that the differences are substantive.
munchbunny 6y ago
I've used both Gnome and KDE based UI's, and yeah, I don't feel strongly about the differences, but also I've never felt like either one was actually good. They both get the job done, but they both feel designed by developers for developers, on the assumption that anything you can't figure out in the UI you'll Google or open a terminal and text editor to deal with it. Compared to, say, the iPad 2 which felt clearly designed for lay users down to the settings UI. (I feel like the later versions of iOS got more complex and harder to parse, so I'm picking the iteration I liked the most.) But then again, it's Linux, I'm a developer, I'm used to Googling how to do things, and I play my video games on Windows, so 90%+ of my time in Linux is in the terminal, text editor (or IDE), and browser anyway. So no complaints - the presence of a fully featured UI isn't why I use Linux.
- inetknght 6y ago
  > * they both feel designed by developers for developers* As a developer, I disagree. KDE's interface is often broken and/or unintuitive for what I want to do. At least it usually provides the levers if they're hard to use or find. Gnome's interface is almost always too simplified and doesn't present the powerful levers at all unless you go digging behind the scenes and hope that an update doesn't break some "private" implementation detail.
  - munchbunny 6y ago
    > KDE's interface is often broken and/or unintuitive for what I want to do. At least it usually provides the levers if they're hard to use or find. I'm not so sure that we're saying different things. I didn't mean it as a compliment, more as an explanation. In general developers aren't good at designing UX (not their job), and in general developers are used to often byzantine UX, including falling back to terminal rituals, and both UI's feel (to me) like they're 80% of the way there and left that way because of the tacit understanding that there's always the terminal and text configs.
  - ip34162 6y ago
    KDE recently improved it's interface. https://kde.org/announcements/plasma/5/5.21.0/ https://kde.org/announcements/plasma/5/5.21.0/ If anyone want to try the latest KDE Plasma, KDE Neon has it on top of a stable Ubuntu LTS base. https://neon.kde.org/ https://neon.kde.org/
ud_0 6y ago
I switched to Linux/Gnome from macOS about 3 years ago. From my perspective, they're both frustrating in different ways, but I would be okay using either one. Gnome is too simplistic and opinionated, KDE is too heavy and fragile (but I also don't have a lot of experience with it). Overall, Desktop Linux works well enough for me to live with it. A few years earlier, that was not an option if you wanted to live a relatively normal computing life without missing out on too much or spending an inordinate amount of time on keeping your system alive.
jrm4 6y ago
I'll go a step further and say that these projects end up being net harmful to the Linux space precisely because they're seeking a goal that the last 10-15 years has proven that they are not good at. The goal is something like "a unified Mac-like system space," but as people here have correctly noted, I don't think its possible to bring a bunch of developers together to create a universally "nice" space unless one of them is named Steve Jobs. What makes it worse is that we have these two large projects with a lot of good history behind them that nonetheless have not really done anything good (in terms of a unified experience, many of the individual apps are great) recently. They have a lot of the mindshare and very little to show for it. Obviously, developers are free to run their projects how they wish, but my wish is that they'd wake up and realize they're not Apple; but there is something they could do that would actually be helpful. Not try to work on carving out their own space -- but the opposite -- try to figure out how to create modular parts of a workspace that really work well together and across WMs and platforms. Until then, I'll do what I've been doing, which is Openbox plus the things I need and like. I see cool things in Gnome and KDE that I'd love to have, but then they bring the rest of their baggage that just gets in the way, so no.
johannes1234321 6y ago
It depends a bit on what you do and use. If you primarily use a terminal, Firefox and thunderbird there isn't much of a difference between those. Yeah, taskbar etc look a bit different but not much. If you switch between KDE and Gnome apps (kedit vs gnome-edit, kmail vs gnome evolution, KDE dolphin vs. Gnome nautilus, kmines vs. Gnome mines game ...) you see more of the differences in App Design principles.
2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
Terminal. Check Web browser. Check They're the same

EdwardDiego 6y ago

I'm in the same boat. Switched from Gnome on Pop_OS to KDE on Arch Linux and well, they both work, I guess? I mean, I'm using Linux to work, so as long as I can pull up a terminal, run Zoom, run my browser, and run IDEA, I'm sorted, I'm not overly fussed about what the MP3 players look like, I can just open Spotify in a browser if I need tunes.

macksd 6y ago

My preferences aren't religious-strong, but I have enough of a preference that I installed KDE Plasma on Pop! OS instead of the Gnome-base default. And I've struggled to get the network manager working in KDE which has been a nuisance and never a problem on distros who ship KDE as the default - so there's at least some importance in a distro's default, even if others are available. I've been known to pull up a Gnome version of some application in KDE and vice-versa because of individual preferences. But as a desktop / window manager yeah I actually have a strong preference. The article actually isn't loading for me, so I'm not sure if these are the same design philosophies addressed, but some of the key things are: * I find Gnome's dock-like things very annoying. I find it easier to get KDE's task bar to take up a very small number of pixels and I feel it stays out of my way more while I'm focusing on other applications. It feels like Gnome takes after Mac and KDE takes after Windows, and I just prefer the latter, UI-wise. * KDE is far more configurable for keyboard shortcuts. I use the ability to pin a window to the left / right half, or one of the quadrants using they key-binding of my choice all the time. I hadn't been using KDE for very long when I would miss that every time I was on another machine. Even after being back on Gnome for a couple of years I wanted it. There are some third-party add-ons that do it, but they were buggy for me. I'd rather just have KDE out-of-the-box. This is one example, but keyboard shortcuts in general are for more widely used and configurable on KDE. edit: Clarified a few things, but also have now read the article: yes I like this "completist" philosophy, especially since much of the complexity is hidden away in drop-down menus. I think it's the best of both worlds.

ip34162 6y ago
Try KDE Neon. It has the latest Plasma on top of stable Ubuntu LTS. https://neon.kde.org/ https://neon.kde.org/ Also KDE Connect is awesome for integration with android phones. It's available in non-KDE distros too. Available on Fdroid too. https://kdeconnect.kde.org/ https://kdeconnect.kde.org/ https://f-droid.org/packages/org.kde.kdeconnect_tp/ https://f-droid.org/packages/org.kde.kdeconnect_tp/
mustermannBB 6y ago
My problem with KDE has essentially been the same now for years. To me, it feels too fragile.
- SirLotsaLocks 6y ago
  I know exactly what you mean, my personal tolerance is higher so I don't care as much but I think everything being customizable also makes it less solid feeling.

simion314 6y ago

I am familiar with KDE and years ago when I was in the community I know that most of the apps are just a few unpaid volunteers/developers, in their free time add missing features and fix bugs. There was no big ego designer that had to approve if we add a new menu or feature or any study to decide if a new feature might segfault the brain of some user. Each maintainer decides if a feature makes sense and the design was usually the generic Qt/KDE layouts , no freacking custom widgets that a user can't theme. I would be interested to hear if there is a major difference between GTK apps that are not part of GNOME and GNOME first apps .

skinkestek 6y ago

I am opinionated. To each their own, here are my opinions: KDE is near Windows defaults, maximum configuration (you can even emulate Mac OS X if you want.) Gnome 2 was Windows-like and somewhat customizable. Gnome 3 is Mac-like and harder to customize. Unity is Mac-like and unnecessary hard to customize. Elementary looks Mac-like but isn't rage-inducing in the same way for me as they have a working application switcher.

eldaisfish 6y ago

I do not feel strongly about any of this but i've found myself happier with KDE over the years. Gnome seems to combine the worst aspects of OSX and windows with some things in side panel, some persistent menu bars, some applications with double menu bars... it's annoying is all. KDE tends to stick to what i understand and what i want is usually where i expect it to be. I would disagree with you in that the differences are substantive.

munchbunny 6y ago

I've used both Gnome and KDE based UI's, and yeah, I don't feel strongly about the differences, but also I've never felt like either one was actually good. They both get the job done, but they both feel designed by developers for developers, on the assumption that anything you can't figure out in the UI you'll Google or open a terminal and text editor to deal with it. Compared to, say, the iPad 2 which felt clearly designed for lay users down to the settings UI. (I feel like the later versions of iOS got more complex and harder to parse, so I'm picking the iteration I liked the most.) But then again, it's Linux, I'm a developer, I'm used to Googling how to do things, and I play my video games on Windows, so 90%+ of my time in Linux is in the terminal, text editor (or IDE), and browser anyway. So no complaints - the presence of a fully featured UI isn't why I use Linux.

inetknght 6y ago
> * they both feel designed by developers for developers* As a developer, I disagree. KDE's interface is often broken and/or unintuitive for what I want to do. At least it usually provides the levers if they're hard to use or find. Gnome's interface is almost always too simplified and doesn't present the powerful levers at all unless you go digging behind the scenes and hope that an update doesn't break some "private" implementation detail.
- munchbunny 6y ago
  > KDE's interface is often broken and/or unintuitive for what I want to do. At least it usually provides the levers if they're hard to use or find. I'm not so sure that we're saying different things. I didn't mean it as a compliment, more as an explanation. In general developers aren't good at designing UX (not their job), and in general developers are used to often byzantine UX, including falling back to terminal rituals, and both UI's feel (to me) like they're 80% of the way there and left that way because of the tacit understanding that there's always the terminal and text configs.
- ip34162 6y ago
  KDE recently improved it's interface. https://kde.org/announcements/plasma/5/5.21.0/ https://kde.org/announcements/plasma/5/5.21.0/ If anyone want to try the latest KDE Plasma, KDE Neon has it on top of a stable Ubuntu LTS base. https://neon.kde.org/ https://neon.kde.org/

ud_0 6y ago

I switched to Linux/Gnome from macOS about 3 years ago. From my perspective, they're both frustrating in different ways, but I would be okay using either one. Gnome is too simplistic and opinionated, KDE is too heavy and fragile (but I also don't have a lot of experience with it). Overall, Desktop Linux works well enough for me to live with it. A few years earlier, that was not an option if you wanted to live a relatively normal computing life without missing out on too much or spending an inordinate amount of time on keeping your system alive.

jrm4 6y ago

I'll go a step further and say that these projects end up being net harmful to the Linux space precisely because they're seeking a goal that the last 10-15 years has proven that they are not good at. The goal is something like "a unified Mac-like system space," but as people here have correctly noted, I don't think its possible to bring a bunch of developers together to create a universally "nice" space unless one of them is named Steve Jobs. What makes it worse is that we have these two large projects with a lot of good history behind them that nonetheless have not really done anything good (in terms of a unified experience, many of the individual apps are great) recently. They have a lot of the mindshare and very little to show for it. Obviously, developers are free to run their projects how they wish, but my wish is that they'd wake up and realize they're not Apple; but there is something they could do that would actually be helpful. Not try to work on carving out their own space -- but the opposite -- try to figure out how to create modular parts of a workspace that really work well together and across WMs and platforms. Until then, I'll do what I've been doing, which is Openbox plus the things I need and like. I see cool things in Gnome and KDE that I'd love to have, but then they bring the rest of their baggage that just gets in the way, so no.

johannes1234321 6y ago

It depends a bit on what you do and use. If you primarily use a terminal, Firefox and thunderbird there isn't much of a difference between those. Yeah, taskbar etc look a bit different but not much. If you switch between KDE and Gnome apps (kedit vs gnome-edit, kmail vs gnome evolution, KDE dolphin vs. Gnome nautilus, kmines vs. Gnome mines game ...) you see more of the differences in App Design principles.

2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago

Terminal. Check Web browser. Check They're the same