5 ms·
I think it's historic reasons. KDE used to be the "bloated" desktop way back when (I know, pretty silly and laughable now given the current state of things).
by cogman10 2y ago
I think it's historic reasons.
KDE used to be the "bloated" desktop way back when (I know, pretty silly and laughable now given the current state of things).
That cemented Gnome/Mate into a lot of major distros as the primary DME. Ubuntu being the most famous.
The QT licensing situation is also a bit of a bizarre quagmire. There are certainly people that don't like KDE for more ideological reasons.
Personally, none of this bothers me and it's what I use for my personal computer. KDE is just so close to exactly how I'm used to interacting with computers anyways growing up through the Win95 era. It is so close to the Windows experience you want to have.
- queenkjuul 2y agoKDE still seems pretty bloated
- skyyler 2y agoOne person's "bloat" is another person's "batteries included".
- gymbeaux 2y agoKDE Wallet though?
- tremon 2y agoWhat about it?
- woolion 2y agoFunny, I used to think it was bloat but then I got to use it to store passwords for remote servers accessed with ssh, and now it's a nice 'batteries included' for me, as GP mentioned. It has become so because it is nicely and seamlessly integrated.
- const_cast 2y agoGnome has the same thing, and it's equally as annoying. Also you can just disable it if you really don't want it.
- queenkjuul 2y agoCinnamon includes all the batteries I've ever needed without feeling bloated
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jlpom 2y agoI rather think the right word is clunky: one of the dev is attached to Server-Side Decoration/against CSD for some reason (none of his arguments make sense), so every stock app are difficult to read and taking unneeded screen space. It's just bad UX.
- foresto 2y agoAre you suggesting that avoiding client-side window decorations in favor of the traditional server-side approach is bad UX?
- jlpom 2y ago*It causes bad UX.
- queenkjuul 2y agoI think clunky and bloated both describe KDE actually
- refulgentis 2y agoThey're not arguing with you, they're yes-anding you. Read as "ah a one word opinionated description...let's steelman that. here's my one-word opinionated term: clunky. Here's what smells make me get that vibe. What smells contribute to the bloat one? :)" Doubling down on short judge-y stacatto contributes to an aggressive "I don't need to tell you" vibe that would be sassy and fun, maybe, if in person. In writing online comments, it just means we need to get a 3rd comment from you before we get to anything I'm interested in (I don't particularly care what your one word description is, I don't know you)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- sheepdestroyer 2y agoAre you being purposefully controversial (to not say trollish)? To the exact contrary to what you assert, one of the prominent argument against Gnome that I've been seing times and times again in DE debates, is the "dogmatic" opposition to SSD from the Gnome project.
- Der_Einzige 2y agoxfce remains the best GUI for Linux (outside of the tiling WMs which are far superior). No I will never change my mind.
- wkat4242 2y agoIt's not bloated, it just has lots of options. If you like someone else to decide everything for you: buy a Mac or use gnome. But KDE is not for you then. Don't try to make it into something it was never meant to be.
- queenkjuul 2y agoI use Cinnamon. Less bloat, more coherent, still plenty of options
- wkat4242 2y agoYeah cinnamon is basically a remake of Gnome 2, from before the devs went batshit crazy and went more opinionated than Apple. It's not bad but I really prefer KDE, also because I think Qt is a much better desktop framework than GTK is. But what things in KDE do you consider 'bloat'?
- bmicraft 2y agoIf you think that then don't install everything under the sun or choose a better distro. You can just install only Plasma Desktop, Doplhin and the handful of utilities you actually use, you know?
- eadmund 2y ago> KDE used to be the "bloated" desktop That’s not my recollection. I believe that the non-free license you mention was the major factor, in addition to the fact that KDE was written in C++ at a time when the free software community still preferred to write software primarily in C. GNOME was written using a free software toolkit, and it was written in C, and it was associated with the FSF.
- throwup238 2y agoThere were several eras of user and developer consternation. I definitely had the impression that the GP describes in the mid to late 2000s.
- ryandrake 2y agoI distinctly recall people criticizing C++ programs as "bloated" and slow compared to pure C programs.
- anthk 2y agoIt depends. KDE3 under Debian was much faster than Fedora Core with Gnome 2.
- lotharcable 2y agoC++ is definitely a drawback for a long time. Not because it is 'bloated', but because of how ABI changes were handled. It is all history now. Nowadays the major problem with KDE is that by the time it is stable a new QT major version gets released and along with that it essentially gets a major rewrite, which takes years to stabilize and once it does a new QT version is released, etc etc etc.
- anthk 2y agoKde3 was already free when Ubuntu started.
- lotharcable 2y agoGnome is a acquired taste, but it is also a lot less work to keep working then KDE or other desktop options. There are a lot of people that bitch about it, but that is only because it is the most popular one and they think that Linux desktop is a zero sum game. They don't use Gnome most of the time and arguments tend to be parroting somebody else and probably out of date for years or just kinda made up conspiracy theories about Redhat or something. The whole thing is pretty confused. Gnome being popular doesn't make KDE not be popular.