With Natty a day away from release, I thought I'd do my testimony as to how I've tried Kubuntu and become a die-hard KDE fanboi. I'll put forward my point of view regarding the differences between KDE and Gnome, some with the Windows Aero interface and why I think we're running the best desktop out there.
Intro
Some background. I'm relatively new to Linux this time arround, although the last batch is not my first encounter with using it. I was an openSUSE user some years ago, with KDE 3.something. I don't really remember much of it, except for the fact that there were few problems, because Yast was doing a good job, and I had a friend who helped me solve all the problems with sound and Flash. Other than that, I was really happy with the package management idea, and KDE was rocking. Circumstances dictated that i start using Windows for work, and since I don't beleive in dual booting at the time, I went with XP, which was allright, but terribly boring, and Vista, which was not all that easy to get to behave properly. Little less than a year ago, the work requirements were no longer there, so I could go back to Linux. I went with Ubuntu, don't ask me why, I wasn't really thinking about it.
Now, Ubuntu's implementation of Gnome is really good, and the fact that the system requires little to no setup is a plus, but for all the goodies you get, the simple fact is that GTK2 and especially the Gnome panel are 9 year old software technologies that had the life hacked out of them. Compiz, as a non-native WM to Gnome, has pretty good features, and behaves right most of the time, but with enough use you'll get to notice that it's been thrust upon a DE that doesn't want it. Memory leaks and strange crashes are just something that can't really be avoided. Ubuntu's decision to build its new DE on top of Compiz alone is pretty godd, and I do believe it will be beneficial to both projects. However, I soon found out that I couldn't depend on GTK programs. The first thing I did was apt-get Amarok, so I could once again stand in awe of its might, but that's neither here nor there - it's just the best music player eva. Then there was Brasero, which couldn't burn CD's at a predictable rate. No prob, there's k3b. Totem could play some files, but it was hit and miss. And so on... So I thought, let's do some KDE-ing. Kubuntu was the obvious choice, because of the stable release - up to date relation. Also, I kinda got on board with apt, and really don't wanna live without it any more. When Kubuntu Maverick came out, I tried it, but for some reason it didn't appeal to me. now that I think about it, the reason was probably very trivial - it had the taskbar at teh bottom by default, and my intense dislike for Vista made the connection. Following the Gnome3/Unity process I soon became aware that although good loking and functional to an extent, they were both severely lacking in the most basic of tasks - window management. So i decided I'd try Kubuntu Natty. Two hours later, and after another Compiz freak-out, it was installed. After a few weeks of using it, here's some pointers.
Window management
While the Gnome panel is a hacked-out beast, it does the window management thing pretty good. You do need an external appllication, like Docky or AWN, to utilize it properly, but that's not a weakness. The October mockup of Gnome Shell was pretty good, but what they did from then on is just horrible. Shell is good looking, but that's about it. Like on many occasions, the design team decided that they would strip away useful features and replace them with a half baked product. Shell is neither functional, nor customizable, so while you could get used to it, you wouldn't have any fun. Unity is better in the window management respect by far, but it is a young and green project, that needs some years to mature. It might be awesome by 12.04, just as Shell might be by 3,6, but I need a functional window management system now. Let us say they're both fighting with the same problem that OSX has been fighting in introducing their Dock. The KDE project has had it right since, like, forever, and that hasn't change with the 4.x series, it only got better. Between the Activites and setting each workspace to have different widgets, you get a monster, limited only by hardware and imagination. Kwin's grouping of windows, presenting them in an imporved Windows classic style, or even in Windows7-like style with Smooth tasks is unmatched in any desktop environment today. You could stop there, but there are other KDE goodies that need to be pointed out.
Compositing and desktop stability
If you want compositing on the Gnome 2 desktop, you need Compiz. Metacity does some work, but that's really basic. Gnome 3's Mutter is far too young to be a real contender. The problem that arrises is that the Gnome 2 codebase is obviously too "dirty" to allow Compiz to behave porperly. I think pretty much every Gnome user has had those bizzare situations where the desktop effects stopped working for no apparetn reason, and getting them enebled again could be troublesome, to say the least. Compiz as a standalone WM is pretty good, from what i've heard, but that's for people who want to build their desktop from the ground up - not everyone's idea of joy. That's why I think it's good that Ubuntu has decided to build its DE on top of Compiz, which is a move that will help both projects a great deal. While Kwin is not necessarily as fast as Compiz all the time, it does its job - handling the KDE desktop - perfectly. From what I've heard, Compiz in KDE behaves much more stable than Compiz in Gnome, which is probably due to the more mature code in KDE, but I couldn't give any pointers there, because I didn't try it out, and have noo need to.
Customizability
Well, Torvalds said it best all those years ago, but there are some elements of the Gnome project that are hard to understand, and incredibly irritating. It's not just the desktop, like the rigidness of Shell, but the same problem crops up with other applications. Take Epiphany as an example. i don't know how many of you used it in a Gnome desktop, but it's a fantastic browser. It's as fast as Chrome, as good looking as Firefox, and as integrated into the dekstop as rekonq. all good, right? Nope, because for some reason they decided on one of the latter versions that they would remove the option to search the web for a highlighted word from the right-click context menu. Why? Nobody knows, it's just not there anymore. They have a roadmap for Epiphany 3.x, and it looks promising, but without the missing option, it's just not a very usable browser. The same insane logic extends many other programs. You kinda get the feeling that they could be doing so much more if they had some kind of clear vision. On the other hand, you can do pretty much anything to KDE you want, but you don't need to hack it, everything is presented in a user friendly dialog. Also, you do get to notice the fact that while a good Gnome experience depends on third party GTK applications, KDE users are mostly concerned with coming up with new themes, because you mostly don't need anything that comes outside of Ke, and a handful of highly integrated QT projects.
And yeah, gconf-editor. QED.
Multimedia
I have no gripes there with Gnome. The experience I've had with Ubuntu and Fedora has been plug and play, and even easier to an extent than in Kubuntu. On the other hand, there's nothing in Gnome like Phonon (which does have some gripes in Kubuntu, but as i understand it, they are puseaudio based), nor is there a plethora of dedicated GTK video players, or a decent CD/DVD burner. In fact, k3b and VLC are on top of the install list for most Gnome users upon bringing up a distro.
All being said, I like Gnome, and do plan to revisit it from time to time, but as one guy at ubuntuforums said, once you get used to KDE, it's hard to go back to anything else.
Intro
Some background. I'm relatively new to Linux this time arround, although the last batch is not my first encounter with using it. I was an openSUSE user some years ago, with KDE 3.something. I don't really remember much of it, except for the fact that there were few problems, because Yast was doing a good job, and I had a friend who helped me solve all the problems with sound and Flash. Other than that, I was really happy with the package management idea, and KDE was rocking. Circumstances dictated that i start using Windows for work, and since I don't beleive in dual booting at the time, I went with XP, which was allright, but terribly boring, and Vista, which was not all that easy to get to behave properly. Little less than a year ago, the work requirements were no longer there, so I could go back to Linux. I went with Ubuntu, don't ask me why, I wasn't really thinking about it.
Now, Ubuntu's implementation of Gnome is really good, and the fact that the system requires little to no setup is a plus, but for all the goodies you get, the simple fact is that GTK2 and especially the Gnome panel are 9 year old software technologies that had the life hacked out of them. Compiz, as a non-native WM to Gnome, has pretty good features, and behaves right most of the time, but with enough use you'll get to notice that it's been thrust upon a DE that doesn't want it. Memory leaks and strange crashes are just something that can't really be avoided. Ubuntu's decision to build its new DE on top of Compiz alone is pretty godd, and I do believe it will be beneficial to both projects. However, I soon found out that I couldn't depend on GTK programs. The first thing I did was apt-get Amarok, so I could once again stand in awe of its might, but that's neither here nor there - it's just the best music player eva. Then there was Brasero, which couldn't burn CD's at a predictable rate. No prob, there's k3b. Totem could play some files, but it was hit and miss. And so on... So I thought, let's do some KDE-ing. Kubuntu was the obvious choice, because of the stable release - up to date relation. Also, I kinda got on board with apt, and really don't wanna live without it any more. When Kubuntu Maverick came out, I tried it, but for some reason it didn't appeal to me. now that I think about it, the reason was probably very trivial - it had the taskbar at teh bottom by default, and my intense dislike for Vista made the connection. Following the Gnome3/Unity process I soon became aware that although good loking and functional to an extent, they were both severely lacking in the most basic of tasks - window management. So i decided I'd try Kubuntu Natty. Two hours later, and after another Compiz freak-out, it was installed. After a few weeks of using it, here's some pointers.
Window management
While the Gnome panel is a hacked-out beast, it does the window management thing pretty good. You do need an external appllication, like Docky or AWN, to utilize it properly, but that's not a weakness. The October mockup of Gnome Shell was pretty good, but what they did from then on is just horrible. Shell is good looking, but that's about it. Like on many occasions, the design team decided that they would strip away useful features and replace them with a half baked product. Shell is neither functional, nor customizable, so while you could get used to it, you wouldn't have any fun. Unity is better in the window management respect by far, but it is a young and green project, that needs some years to mature. It might be awesome by 12.04, just as Shell might be by 3,6, but I need a functional window management system now. Let us say they're both fighting with the same problem that OSX has been fighting in introducing their Dock. The KDE project has had it right since, like, forever, and that hasn't change with the 4.x series, it only got better. Between the Activites and setting each workspace to have different widgets, you get a monster, limited only by hardware and imagination. Kwin's grouping of windows, presenting them in an imporved Windows classic style, or even in Windows7-like style with Smooth tasks is unmatched in any desktop environment today. You could stop there, but there are other KDE goodies that need to be pointed out.
Compositing and desktop stability
If you want compositing on the Gnome 2 desktop, you need Compiz. Metacity does some work, but that's really basic. Gnome 3's Mutter is far too young to be a real contender. The problem that arrises is that the Gnome 2 codebase is obviously too "dirty" to allow Compiz to behave porperly. I think pretty much every Gnome user has had those bizzare situations where the desktop effects stopped working for no apparetn reason, and getting them enebled again could be troublesome, to say the least. Compiz as a standalone WM is pretty good, from what i've heard, but that's for people who want to build their desktop from the ground up - not everyone's idea of joy. That's why I think it's good that Ubuntu has decided to build its DE on top of Compiz, which is a move that will help both projects a great deal. While Kwin is not necessarily as fast as Compiz all the time, it does its job - handling the KDE desktop - perfectly. From what I've heard, Compiz in KDE behaves much more stable than Compiz in Gnome, which is probably due to the more mature code in KDE, but I couldn't give any pointers there, because I didn't try it out, and have noo need to.
Customizability
Well, Torvalds said it best all those years ago, but there are some elements of the Gnome project that are hard to understand, and incredibly irritating. It's not just the desktop, like the rigidness of Shell, but the same problem crops up with other applications. Take Epiphany as an example. i don't know how many of you used it in a Gnome desktop, but it's a fantastic browser. It's as fast as Chrome, as good looking as Firefox, and as integrated into the dekstop as rekonq. all good, right? Nope, because for some reason they decided on one of the latter versions that they would remove the option to search the web for a highlighted word from the right-click context menu. Why? Nobody knows, it's just not there anymore. They have a roadmap for Epiphany 3.x, and it looks promising, but without the missing option, it's just not a very usable browser. The same insane logic extends many other programs. You kinda get the feeling that they could be doing so much more if they had some kind of clear vision. On the other hand, you can do pretty much anything to KDE you want, but you don't need to hack it, everything is presented in a user friendly dialog. Also, you do get to notice the fact that while a good Gnome experience depends on third party GTK applications, KDE users are mostly concerned with coming up with new themes, because you mostly don't need anything that comes outside of Ke, and a handful of highly integrated QT projects.
And yeah, gconf-editor. QED.
Multimedia
I have no gripes there with Gnome. The experience I've had with Ubuntu and Fedora has been plug and play, and even easier to an extent than in Kubuntu. On the other hand, there's nothing in Gnome like Phonon (which does have some gripes in Kubuntu, but as i understand it, they are puseaudio based), nor is there a plethora of dedicated GTK video players, or a decent CD/DVD burner. In fact, k3b and VLC are on top of the install list for most Gnome users upon bringing up a distro.
All being said, I like Gnome, and do plan to revisit it from time to time, but as one guy at ubuntuforums said, once you get used to KDE, it's hard to go back to anything else.
Comment