7 ms·

I use both and I enjoy the simplicity of Gnome recently and some of the polish, but the constant decisions and weird stuff from Gnome as developers and as an or

I use both and I enjoy the simplicity of Gnome recently and some of the polish, but the constant decisions and weird stuff from Gnome as developers and as an organization send me running every time. Almost anything you want to do in Gnome touches a spec or design that someone made there and has some obscure thing that kills it entirely for practical use but they won't change their spec or designs foe bizarre and nearly political reasons. It's their project and they are free to do what they want. But, contrast this with my time as a KDE developer or user and it's night and day. The KDE people want to get everything done by any means possible and we will clean it up to get it shippable. We have moved entire code bases and specs to do it. Ever since Valve got involved that aspect only improved IMO. My bet has been on KDE for a bit now, even if it's not my current daily driver.

kwanbix 2y ago
I’ve always wanted to like GNOME—it’s polished and has an undeniable appeal—but I just can’t get behind its UI metaphor. For my workflow, simplicity is key. That’s why I prefer desktops like XFCE, Budgie, or Cinnamon (edit: or KDE). Even MATE with the "Redmond" skin feels more intuitive to me. Why? It comes down to how I manage my work. I often set up one browser window per project or topic, labeled accordingly (e.g., Project1, Project2). I even have a window called MAIN for my daily essentials like Mail, Calendar, WhatsApp, and Signal. With a macOS-style UI, I only get one taskbar icon for all these windows, making it difficult to find what I need quickly. On the other hand, with the classic Win95-style interface, I can easily and intuitively spot my open projects at a glance. No guessing, just muscle memory. Just my thoughts—your mileage may vary. Curious if anyone else feels the same way?
- bityard 2y ago
  I feel exactly the same way. Back when KDE was a bit messier and perhaps buggier, I tried to muddle along with GNOME for a number of years. Lots of little daily annoyances especially around the file management windows, multiple screens, audio configuration, etc. I prefer focus-follows-mouse, which required some kind of add-on plus changing a hidden setting somewhere and it still never worked properly. Switched to KDE two years ago and ALL of those things just worked out of the box. And everything else, is easy to customize without jumping through any hoops.
  - kwanbix 2y ago
    Yes, KDE6 surprised me in a good way. I still prefer the other desktops, but I know I can use KDE just fine.
  - BenjiWiebe 2y ago
    I believe it was the KDE4 release that went down in history as being horribly buggy.
    - ddtaylor 2y ago
      KDE 4 was pretty bad and we had to use it via Whonix for years.
- ruthmarx 2y ago
  > Just my thoughts—your mileage may vary. Curious if anyone else feels the same way? I sure do. The default MacOS interface, to me, feels like it's for children. It's too much work to use it for serious work. These days I've settled on AwesomeWM. I've been slowly building my ideal desktop since the pandemic. It's super lightweight and completely, completely customizable. I can add code in to do whatever I want pretty much anywhere and it is setup to make that super easy to do so. It's a true joy. I have a super lightweight, efficient and attractive version of the way I have my Windows desktop setup, except there I have to use a bunch of add-ons that take up memory to achieve the same result. Things liek adding a titlebar button to be on top or to send to a different screen with just a click, or to have a quake style terminal dropdown.
- gawa 2y ago
  I also think the taskbar showing only icons is confusing when we have the same app opened multiple time. I have a similar organization as you for work: a Firefox window on desktop 10 for Calendar, Mail, another on desktop 9 for company Chat, another (main) window on desktop 1, another on desktop 2 for a different project, ... By default on Gnome they would be all grouped into 1 Firefox icon. We can change the settings to not group apps, but a bunch of Firefox icons next to each others doesn't help either. I recently discovered in the Fluxbox edition of MX Linux the taskbar Tint2. It was configured in a way that split the taskbar into dedicated and fixed workspace areas. It's an efficient way to see quickly what app is on which desktop, and clicking on one app will bring me to the desktop where the app is. I can also move apps to different desktop with the mouse by dragging them in the bar (for instance drag terminal of desktop 2 in desktop 3 next to the file browser opened there). It looks like this: https://imgur.com/a/FGNfL7e https://imgur.com/a/FGNfL7e I currently use this taskbar with Openbox, but it should work with other DE/WMs. It has some bugs in some edge-cases so it's not perfect, but I like the concept. I went on a quest to configure the same behavior on different DEs. I couldn't reproduce it with the default bars of Budgie, Cinamon, Gnome, Mate. KDE was the only one where I was close to achieve this. In the default KDE bar, it's possible to sort the apps by their workspaces. But it only sorts them, it doesn't split clearly by static desktops like you can do in Tint2. Still, KDE showed once again it was one of the most customizable :)
  - kwanbix 2y ago
    What I understand is that people that use multiple desktops they do because they might have 2 apps not fully maximized in desktop 1, another 3 in desktop 2, etc. But for me, I have maximized maximized apps 99.9% of the time, so I can not see and advantage on alt-tab to another app vs shift-alt-tab (or whatever the option) to switch desktops. Or am I missing somthing here?
    - graemep 2y ago
      Organisation. Personal windows on one desktop,work ones on another, for example.
    - gawa 2y ago
- ddtaylor 2y ago
  > Why? It comes down to how I manage my work. I often set up one browser window per project or topic, labeled accordingly (e.g., Project1, Project2). I even have a window called MAIN for my daily essentials like Mail, Calendar, WhatsApp, and Signal. This is very similar to my workflow in some ways and I was just talking to another developer about this. I keep most of my projects on separate workspaces. I feel very confident in my ability to leave each workspace in whatever state I need. I'm on an AMD system running an open stack of GPU drivers, which means if I want I can pop open a new workspace and play a run of Darkest Dungeon if needed and leave that running on the workspace too.
bityard 2y ago
I think GNOME is what you get when devs think of themselves as "opinionated" and keep trying to chase the latest trends in UX. The thing I like about KDE is that they adhere to the classic tried-and-true desktop experience while being ready and willing to accept that everyone has different preferences that they should accommodate. That is pragmatism, and that is treating your users with respect. (Whereas the GNOME philosophy is more, "our way or the highway.")
- tristan957 2y ago
  > everyone has different preferences that they should accommodate. That is pragmatism, and that is treating your users with respect. I completely disagree. Not every product is made for every person. If you don't like it, use a different product. It's not like there aren't a plethora of desktop environments to choose from. There is obviously a sizeable portion of the desktop Linux market that finds GNOME to be a perfectly usable desktop environment. Your comment is similar to asking why Tesla does not create cars with internal combustion engines.
  - exe34 2y ago
    > There is obviously a sizeable portion of the desktop Linux market that finds GNOME to be a perfectly usable desktop environment yeah the ones who don't know how to change it.
    - tristan957 2y ago
      I've been using Linux since Ubuntu 12.10-ish days, and I use vanilla GNOME on Fedora Workstation while knowing how to add extensions. Why are you discounting experiences like mine?
      - exe34 2y ago
        I hope your extensions still work at the next update!
        2y ago
buttercraft 2y ago
I tried out Ubuntu with Gnome a few years ago after a lot of experience with KDE on Gentoo. I guess I don't get it. No task bar. Had to Google for the command to install one. It's worthless. Icons change order. I have 5 instances of the same program open, and I can't tell which is which because they change order in the task bar. Can't even enumerate them since their order changes while I'm switching through them! This is the most basic function of a window manager and it doesn't work. Oh, am I supposed to use that full screen task switcher thing? No, all my windows contain text, and I can't tell their thumbnails apart. Yet, so many people prefer it. What the hell am I missing?
- tristan957 2y ago
  Ubuntu runs a heavily modified GNOME, and your issue is entirely in their taskbar extension. Vanilla GNOME on Fedora works fine for me.
  - forgotpwd16 2y ago
    GP said: >No task bar. Had to Google for the command to install one. >Oh, am I supposed to use that full screen task switcher thing? No, all my windows contain text, and I can't tell their thumbnails apart. It looks like they installed Ubuntu with vanilla GNOME (considering the "few years ago" part perhaps even the now discontinued GNOME flavor) rather using Ubuntu's interface. And their issue seems to lie in GNOME itself (no taskbar, activities overview-oriented interface) rather something Ubuntu is doing.
- jandudulski 2y ago
  I feel the opposite - so many people prefer KDE, what the hell am I missing? KDE used to look ugly comparing to Gnome. Now it's fine but still worse. KDE offers plenty of shiny things that I don't like and need - graphical effects, application menu, widgets. Most of the time I have a terminal and browser full screen and all I need is cmd key that triggers search and allows me to enter the name of the application I want to run and hit enter. Gnome is much cleaner, simpler and logical to use.
  - 2y ago
hollerith 2y ago
Until earlier this year, KDE let anyone upload a "global theme" to the official KDE Store. When a KDE user browsed the themes, he received no warning that the themes could run arbitrary code and that no one at KDE was vetting the themes. Then in March 2024 a KDE user installed a global KDE theme which did rm -rf to his home directory: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/linux/kde-advises-extreme-caution-after-theme-wipes-linux-users-files/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/linux/kde-advises-extr... So, although I agree with most of the criticisms of Gnome I see here on HN, I use it because I found a way to work in it without being annoyed too much by the overconfidence and lack of skill of Gnome's UI designers and the lack of customizability and because at least the Gnome project seems to pay enough attention to security to avoid a security hole as blatant and obvious as the one I just described in KDE. Here is an example of Gnome paying attention to security: >[Gnome] implements permission control for privileged Wayland protocols like screencopy. There are other desktop environments and window managers with Wayland support, but I am not aware of any permission control implemented by them. https://privsec.dev/posts/linux/choosing-your-desktop-linux-distribution/ https://privsec.dev/posts/linux/choosing-your-desktop-linux-... I.e., Gnome is the only DE the author quoted above knows of that actually takes the trouble to make use of a design feature that X lacks, but Wayland has: namely, an architecture that allows a DE to prevent the deplorable situation of most Linux installs in which any app can read the contents of the window of any other app.

kwanbix 2y ago

I’ve always wanted to like GNOME—it’s polished and has an undeniable appeal—but I just can’t get behind its UI metaphor. For my workflow, simplicity is key. That’s why I prefer desktops like XFCE, Budgie, or Cinnamon (edit: or KDE). Even MATE with the "Redmond" skin feels more intuitive to me. Why? It comes down to how I manage my work. I often set up one browser window per project or topic, labeled accordingly (e.g., Project1, Project2). I even have a window called MAIN for my daily essentials like Mail, Calendar, WhatsApp, and Signal. With a macOS-style UI, I only get one taskbar icon for all these windows, making it difficult to find what I need quickly. On the other hand, with the classic Win95-style interface, I can easily and intuitively spot my open projects at a glance. No guessing, just muscle memory. Just my thoughts—your mileage may vary. Curious if anyone else feels the same way?

bityard 2y ago
I feel exactly the same way. Back when KDE was a bit messier and perhaps buggier, I tried to muddle along with GNOME for a number of years. Lots of little daily annoyances especially around the file management windows, multiple screens, audio configuration, etc. I prefer focus-follows-mouse, which required some kind of add-on plus changing a hidden setting somewhere and it still never worked properly. Switched to KDE two years ago and ALL of those things just worked out of the box. And everything else, is easy to customize without jumping through any hoops.
- kwanbix 2y ago
  Yes, KDE6 surprised me in a good way. I still prefer the other desktops, but I know I can use KDE just fine.
- BenjiWiebe 2y ago
  I believe it was the KDE4 release that went down in history as being horribly buggy.
  - ddtaylor 2y ago
    KDE 4 was pretty bad and we had to use it via Whonix for years.
ruthmarx 2y ago
> Just my thoughts—your mileage may vary. Curious if anyone else feels the same way? I sure do. The default MacOS interface, to me, feels like it's for children. It's too much work to use it for serious work. These days I've settled on AwesomeWM. I've been slowly building my ideal desktop since the pandemic. It's super lightweight and completely, completely customizable. I can add code in to do whatever I want pretty much anywhere and it is setup to make that super easy to do so. It's a true joy. I have a super lightweight, efficient and attractive version of the way I have my Windows desktop setup, except there I have to use a bunch of add-ons that take up memory to achieve the same result. Things liek adding a titlebar button to be on top or to send to a different screen with just a click, or to have a quake style terminal dropdown.
gawa 2y ago
I also think the taskbar showing only icons is confusing when we have the same app opened multiple time. I have a similar organization as you for work: a Firefox window on desktop 10 for Calendar, Mail, another on desktop 9 for company Chat, another (main) window on desktop 1, another on desktop 2 for a different project, ... By default on Gnome they would be all grouped into 1 Firefox icon. We can change the settings to not group apps, but a bunch of Firefox icons next to each others doesn't help either. I recently discovered in the Fluxbox edition of MX Linux the taskbar Tint2. It was configured in a way that split the taskbar into dedicated and fixed workspace areas. It's an efficient way to see quickly what app is on which desktop, and clicking on one app will bring me to the desktop where the app is. I can also move apps to different desktop with the mouse by dragging them in the bar (for instance drag terminal of desktop 2 in desktop 3 next to the file browser opened there). It looks like this: https://imgur.com/a/FGNfL7e https://imgur.com/a/FGNfL7e I currently use this taskbar with Openbox, but it should work with other DE/WMs. It has some bugs in some edge-cases so it's not perfect, but I like the concept. I went on a quest to configure the same behavior on different DEs. I couldn't reproduce it with the default bars of Budgie, Cinamon, Gnome, Mate. KDE was the only one where I was close to achieve this. In the default KDE bar, it's possible to sort the apps by their workspaces. But it only sorts them, it doesn't split clearly by static desktops like you can do in Tint2. Still, KDE showed once again it was one of the most customizable :)
- kwanbix 2y ago
  What I understand is that people that use multiple desktops they do because they might have 2 apps not fully maximized in desktop 1, another 3 in desktop 2, etc. But for me, I have maximized maximized apps 99.9% of the time, so I can not see and advantage on alt-tab to another app vs shift-alt-tab (or whatever the option) to switch desktops. Or am I missing somthing here?
  - graemep 2y ago
    Organisation. Personal windows on one desktop,work ones on another, for example.
  - gawa 2y ago
ddtaylor 2y ago
> Why? It comes down to how I manage my work. I often set up one browser window per project or topic, labeled accordingly (e.g., Project1, Project2). I even have a window called MAIN for my daily essentials like Mail, Calendar, WhatsApp, and Signal. This is very similar to my workflow in some ways and I was just talking to another developer about this. I keep most of my projects on separate workspaces. I feel very confident in my ability to leave each workspace in whatever state I need. I'm on an AMD system running an open stack of GPU drivers, which means if I want I can pop open a new workspace and play a run of Darkest Dungeon if needed and leave that running on the workspace too.

bityard 2y ago

I think GNOME is what you get when devs think of themselves as "opinionated" and keep trying to chase the latest trends in UX. The thing I like about KDE is that they adhere to the classic tried-and-true desktop experience while being ready and willing to accept that everyone has different preferences that they should accommodate. That is pragmatism, and that is treating your users with respect. (Whereas the GNOME philosophy is more, "our way or the highway.")

tristan957 2y ago
> everyone has different preferences that they should accommodate. That is pragmatism, and that is treating your users with respect. I completely disagree. Not every product is made for every person. If you don't like it, use a different product. It's not like there aren't a plethora of desktop environments to choose from. There is obviously a sizeable portion of the desktop Linux market that finds GNOME to be a perfectly usable desktop environment. Your comment is similar to asking why Tesla does not create cars with internal combustion engines.
- exe34 2y ago
  > There is obviously a sizeable portion of the desktop Linux market that finds GNOME to be a perfectly usable desktop environment yeah the ones who don't know how to change it.
  - tristan957 2y ago
    I've been using Linux since Ubuntu 12.10-ish days, and I use vanilla GNOME on Fedora Workstation while knowing how to add extensions. Why are you discounting experiences like mine?
    - exe34 2y ago
      I hope your extensions still work at the next update!
      - 2y ago

buttercraft 2y ago

I tried out Ubuntu with Gnome a few years ago after a lot of experience with KDE on Gentoo. I guess I don't get it. No task bar. Had to Google for the command to install one. It's worthless. Icons change order. I have 5 instances of the same program open, and I can't tell which is which because they change order in the task bar. Can't even enumerate them since their order changes while I'm switching through them! This is the most basic function of a window manager and it doesn't work. Oh, am I supposed to use that full screen task switcher thing? No, all my windows contain text, and I can't tell their thumbnails apart. Yet, so many people prefer it. What the hell am I missing?

tristan957 2y ago
Ubuntu runs a heavily modified GNOME, and your issue is entirely in their taskbar extension. Vanilla GNOME on Fedora works fine for me.
- forgotpwd16 2y ago
  GP said: >No task bar. Had to Google for the command to install one. >Oh, am I supposed to use that full screen task switcher thing? No, all my windows contain text, and I can't tell their thumbnails apart. It looks like they installed Ubuntu with vanilla GNOME (considering the "few years ago" part perhaps even the now discontinued GNOME flavor) rather using Ubuntu's interface. And their issue seems to lie in GNOME itself (no taskbar, activities overview-oriented interface) rather something Ubuntu is doing.
jandudulski 2y ago
I feel the opposite - so many people prefer KDE, what the hell am I missing? KDE used to look ugly comparing to Gnome. Now it's fine but still worse. KDE offers plenty of shiny things that I don't like and need - graphical effects, application menu, widgets. Most of the time I have a terminal and browser full screen and all I need is cmd key that triggers search and allows me to enter the name of the application I want to run and hit enter. Gnome is much cleaner, simpler and logical to use.
- 2y ago

hollerith 2y ago

Until earlier this year, KDE let anyone upload a "global theme" to the official KDE Store. When a KDE user browsed the themes, he received no warning that the themes could run arbitrary code and that no one at KDE was vetting the themes. Then in March 2024 a KDE user installed a global KDE theme which did rm -rf to his home directory: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/linux/kde-advises-extreme-caution-after-theme-wipes-linux-users-files/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/linux/kde-advises-extr... So, although I agree with most of the criticisms of Gnome I see here on HN, I use it because I found a way to work in it without being annoyed too much by the overconfidence and lack of skill of Gnome's UI designers and the lack of customizability and because at least the Gnome project seems to pay enough attention to security to avoid a security hole as blatant and obvious as the one I just described in KDE. Here is an example of Gnome paying attention to security: >[Gnome] implements permission control for privileged Wayland protocols like screencopy. There are other desktop environments and window managers with Wayland support, but I am not aware of any permission control implemented by them. https://privsec.dev/posts/linux/choosing-your-desktop-linux-distribution/ https://privsec.dev/posts/linux/choosing-your-desktop-linux-... I.e., Gnome is the only DE the author quoted above knows of that actually takes the trouble to make use of a design feature that X lacks, but Wayland has: namely, an architecture that allows a DE to prevent the deplorable situation of most Linux installs in which any app can read the contents of the window of any other app.