What is the web page ???????????

KDE is nice but it reminds me of windows... Many KDE applications run very good
on GNOME (can't say the same thing for running GNOME applications inside
KDE...). GNOME is more clear and in a way more easier to use, but this really
depends on the user. I like it more then KDE.

I suppose it's a matter of personal preference, but a few thoughts.

I downloaded all the files necessary to use the KDE desktop instead of
Gnome for my 10.04 install of Ubuntu. It looked really pretty, very
colorful. But, forgive me, a bit obscure? I switched back to Gnome.
It was functional, it works, and I can navigate through it fairly
easily.

Rumor has it that 10.10 will resemble KDE. If this is the case, I do
hope they consider keeping an option to use the Gnome desktop, or one
similarly simple.

I'm sure others have had a different experience.

When I tried KDE, it was about the time they made these radical changes,
I couldn't make head nor tail of it so I went back to Gnome. Then I
found Avant (AWN) and I use that almost exclusively now, I've cut my
Gnome panels down to a minimum (AWN doesn't quite stand on its own,
unfortunately). Mind you I'd long abandoned the Windows desktop in
favour of QuickLaunch and I disable it now (when I'm forced to use
Windows). I wish I could switch off the Ubuntu desktop, just have a nice
wallpaper with no icons.

So as long as I can still strip it bare and run AWN I don't much mind
what happens to Gnome.

I will try again to start AWN and compiz in Failsafe Terminal. Compiz can be
run without Gnome, in Failsafe Terminal. I will try to slam a desktop
background there. Sincerelly, for me desktop icons are helpful. Even some
convinced Windows users hate desktop icons, including my boss and a good
friend. In Openbox, JWM, IceWM, FVWM-Crystal all I really lack are desktop
icons.

I'll have to search for it. Perhaps Canonical has it in its
repositories?

GNOME is deliberately dumbed down. KDE has all of the bells and whistles and
everything is configurable. I use both. GNOME on my netbook and KDE on my
desktop computer.

GNOME 3 will have plasmas (they are not called that, but essentially are)
like KDE but aside from that it will be quite different. It will look more
like UNE than the current GNOME with big icons that will give you options
when you hover over them. The main parts are the GNOME Shell and Zeitgeist.

Personally I don't think that the average GNOME suer will be impressed. It
is too radical for them. KDE users went over this when 3.5 was replaced with
4.0 and many users elected to run 3.5 or even switch to GNOME. GNOME users
are worse than KDE users when it comes to change, so I expect lots of
resistance.

See:
www.workswithu.com/.../

The answer to the old Gnome vs KDE question is easy. Try them both.
The one that you like better is the better desktop environment, for you.

I can't say that I don't like KDE just because I prefer Gnome. If there
were no such thing as Gnome, I would most certainly be using, well,
XFCE, but KDE would certainly be a consideration.

Description of Gnome users is a bit on the rough side. When I
upgraded to my spiffy new computer that could handle all of the visual
effects, I turned them on. I must have played with them for almost a
half an hour before I shut them off and got back to using my computer as
a tool instead of a toy.

Do you mean by saying that they don't like change? Truthfully most computer
users don't but GNOME users especially don't like it. They tend to be more
old school. Most Ubuntu users who complain aren't thinking about the future,
but the past. Their motto is, if it isn't broken why fix it? Most Ubuntu
users want straight up GNOME. I listen to dozens of podcasts each week, read
numerous blogs and subscribe to hundreds of RSS feeds. You would not believe
the complaining. I think that I am being gentle, if anything.

Maybe, they are just whiners. First they hate the brown and orange, now it
is aubergine that they hate. Some even want brown and orange to return. They
don't want GIMP replaced and now don't like Shotwell and think that F-Spot
is just great. Wait a minute, they complained that F-Spot trashed EXIF data.
They don't like the notifications, but now that they are changing them they
all of a sudden defend them. They hated the sound applet when it was
horizontal and then hate it when it is switched to vertical. They hate the
MeMenu because it is linked to Gwibber which overuses their resources. They
hate the Music Store because it does not have ogg file support and is linked
to Ubuntu One, but they like Ubuntu One because it can sync their Tomboy
notes. They hate switching buttons to the left and the new theme because it
is too Mac like but proudly state that Ubuntu is not like KDE which is too
Windows like because it has the panel on the bottom, forgetting that GNOME
has one on the top and bottom. They complain that KDE has too many settings
but they are always looking for workarounds for GNOME limitations. I could
go on and on... but, you get the idea.

BTW, I like both GNOME and KDE. When I used KDE 3.5 I looked forward to KDE
4.0 and even put up with its crashes and problems because I knew that the
kinks would work out. I had faith and patience. I look forward to GNOME 3 in
the same way. I know that their will be problems, but don't care. It is all
part of being part of something. You take the bad with the good. I don't
feel that the rest of the community shares my values. I see Linux as
organic.It is a growing and living entity to me and I want to be part of
that change. I get the feeling that many Linux users increasingly see it as
a static product like Windows. But Windows users don't complain nearly as
much; they are even willing to pay for the privilege.

I agree that users should try both and use what works for them. I don't
think that users should try to impose their values on others. That is why we
have choice. If you don't like something then try something else. That
applies to desktop environment and distribution. Personally, I am not wild
about buttons on the left because I use a mixed environment, but am not one
to get my knickers in a knot over it. A computer is a tool. The OS is the
toy.

I can't speak for all of the Gnome users of the world. Gnome and KDE
are the premier desktop environments in Linux. They are the public
faces of Linux. I can, have and do use them both. They are both good
desktop environments and both superior to Windows. To the average end
user, there are minimal functional differences and cosmetic differences
between the two desktop environments. To me Gnome is the simpler, more
straight forward of the two environments. This is because I use it
everyday. If I used KDE everyday, I would probably see it the other way
around.

The main reasons why I choose Gnome over KDE are mostly minor.

* I like the extra toolbar to place quick launch icons to my most used
applications.

* The extra toolbar gives me more places to put my notification area,
system monitor and weather tool.

* I like Gnome's weather tool better than KDE's because I can install a
custom weather radar.

* When I switch workspaces in Gnome, the applications running in the
other workspaces do not follow in the toolbar. For me there is no
reason to switch workspaces if the toolbar is still going to be
cluttered with what is running in all the other workspaces. This makes
multiple workspaces in KDE useless to me.

* Gnome used to be easier to install printers into. KDE caught up and
this is now a moot reason.

These mostly superficial things are important to me and why I prefer
Gnome. It's more than likely true that most KDE users have equally
superficial reasons why they use KDE.

Saying that Gnome users are "whiners" is bunk. The reason why you see
more "whiners" using Gnome in Ubuntu is because there are more people
using Gnome in Ubuntu than there are people using any other desktop
environment in all the other distros, combined. How many "whiners"
would there be if the majority of Linux users were using Slackware or
Gentoo?

This is an old debate and not one we can resolve. It has raged since GNOME
first came on the scene. The biggest thing that GNOME has going for it is
that Ubuntu is the distro of choice for many users. People do not choose
GNOME, but rather Ubuntu. Many new users are surprised that there is an
alternative.

I was a GNOME user once, but changed when Mono was being forced on me. You
can't install Ubuntu without Mono at present. That may change. Fedora has
removed Mono from its default GNOME installation. Ubuntu is replacing F-Spot
and now there are only two Mono applications in Ubuntu's Live CD, gBrainy
and Tomboy. Yes, I can remove Mono, but I don't even want it on my system
temporarily. It is the principle that is important. The only thing that will
chamge my mind is when Microsoft desists from alleging patent violation and
says that Mono is free and open.

As I said, I like GNOME. I like variety. I have KDE, GNOME, LXDE, XFCE,
Fluxbox, Openbox and Enlightenment installed. Choice is important to me. I
don't want everyone choosing GNOME or Ubuntu or any other distro or desktop
because once we are all the same then we will have no choice.

I like KDE because it gives me more options and therefore more choice. I
change just about everything that I can in KDE or GNOME. I move the KDE
panel to the top so that I can run AWN along the bottom. I add widgets and
tailor it to my personal preferences. In GNOME, I remove the bottom panel
and change double click to single click. When I am done there is little
difference between KDE and GNOME. As for the weather applet, KDE has several
weather widgets. If you don't like that you can run Google Gadgets in either
KDE or GNOME.

KDE is on the desktop on steriods. I can have different wallpaper on each
virtual desktop without running a separate application. I can have many more
widgets. I can have a different location shown on each desktop. If you want
to do things to the max then it is no contest. But, this is not everyone's
cup of tea. Many people want simplicity. This brings us back to choice. It
is great that we have a great selection of top notch desktop environments.

As for the whiners comment, I can only draw a parallel. I use Kubuntu and
Ubuntu, both from Canonical. In Kubuntu there was no complaining with
changes made in Lucid. There was no end of it in the blogosphere and online
journals for Ubuntu. Kubuntu was smooth sailing. Enough said. You can
attribute that to more users if it makes you feel better, but I know because
I have covered Ubuntu for years now. Every Ubuntu release brings complaints
about what they have done or sometimes not done. Fedora which I also use is
nearly as popular and it never is steeped in controversy despite being
considered to be more cutting edge than Ubuntu.

It wasn't always this bad. The harping is getting worse and it is sometimes
mean spirited. Perhaps division is inevitable once you get large. My take on
it is that Ubuntu extolled the community to become popular, but now that
they are they are taking users for granted. That is the source of some of
the discontent. Shuttleworth's comment about Ubuntu not being a democracy
while true was not what people wanted to hear and he has fed the beast
rather than calmed nerves. I hope that I am wrong and that we are more
unified than we are coming across.

It is not a bad thing if users are defecting to other distributions. Look
for Mint to pass Ubuntu in popularity sometime soon. They will capitalise
from the dissension by not following Ubuntu's changes. They are already
doing this by keeping buttons on the right. They are in the enviable
position of being able to cherry pick. I will stick with Ubuntu, BTW,
because I like change.

It's not meant to ever be resolved. The debate spurs competition and
the competition results in better desktop environments. Better desktop
environments result in better operating systems. The Gnome vs KDE
battle is smoke & mirrors. They are both highly capable and there are
many good distros out there that use them both.

The real challenge these days is in the area of light distros and
lighter applications for those distros. Gnome and KDE are not even
going to be in that discussion. With a global depression looming,
people are going to be trying to keep older and older machines on line
for a longer time. The biggest challenge will be to create distros to
keep the older boxes up and running as best as possible. Right now only
one distro stands out for older boxes and that is Mepis AntiX. A few
more contenders making serious distros for older machines will not only
be good for the older machines, but much of what comes from such a
competition would be useful in larger, heavier distros on newer machines.

I'm looking forward to seeing progress in the refining of Fluxbox,
IceWM, XFCE and LXDE into mainstream user friendly desktop environments.