hi,
Just as you said its shifting from the platform to the realm of distribution, i can very well state that your experience of KDE is distribution dependent. And well talking of my distro its RH 9.0 with a nice stable complete gnome/kde distribution.
If you wanted screenshots I could send you plenty. But well the question comes of posting them. I don't really like the idea of posting them on a list.
And about there's lot more going on in KDE is quite not the case. If you checked the release schedules of gnome and all the gtk based software i'd say gnome is far more active ;) Both the desktops have been releasing neck to neck.
As far as memory usage, startup times is concerned i can say a trifle unscientifically that gnome starts about 5-6 seconds faster than kde. Then again memory usage: on rh 9.0 with gnome the usage on immediate startup is 128 mb. for kde ? 213 mb. eh ? A quick look at system-monitor will tell you all the story. and my suggestion use gnome-monitor.
i don't think its right to call the decision of selecting gtk over kde for programming as legacy. Even the latest and the finest software that turns out today on freshmeat.net is gtk based.
While there is a wide difference in the philosophies of these two toolkits both have very stable and viable reasoning behind them. On a general principle developers prefer gtk for its "lightness" and simplicity with enough power to modify it.
The visual clutter that i referred to is not due to bad distro. I wouldn't go so far as to call debian-sid,rh9.0,knoppix3.2 as bad distros. The visual distraction is what the gnome developers trying to fight. Agreed there are many sharp edges to gtk but they are rapidly being addressed by the developers. That is what exactly the lead developer for gnome recently gave a call for.
What software you prefer is matter of personal taste. I prefer mozilla for my surfing and mail. I dislike konquerer for too many reasons that i do not care to list here for the sake of sanity.
There are far too many non-default softwares that work n-times better than the default softies of kde or gnome.
And if you are talking of startup times etc. gnome beats the pants off kde anytime. U definitely don't need me to give quanitative comparisons for that ?
I don't know what customization you are talking of but its equally easy to customize a gnome toolbar/desktop ! Its all a matter of personal taste,familiarity and as far as mine goes i love speed, neatness and min. of visual clutter. gnome fits the bill. I was a lover of kde till rh 8.1(psyche) until rh 9.0 came along.
Its no going back now for me. The choice is yours buddy, thats what linux about ~!
later,
C Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com
Buy The Best In BOOKS at http://www.bestsellers.indiatimes.com
Bid for for Air Tickets @ Re.1 on Air Sahara Flights. Just log on to http://airsahara.indiatimes.com and Bid Now!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 03 Jun 2003 8:50 pm, linuxdev wrote:
Just as you said its shifting from the platform to the realm of distribution, i can very well state that your experience of KDE is
Nagging users with setting is what is shifting on the distribution side, not other things.
distribution dependent. And well talking of my distro its RH 9.0 with a nice stable complete gnome/kde distribution.
:-) Can there be somthing like "nice stable complete KDE on RH"? I dont think so. Go to one of KDE devel lists, and tell them you have RH and they will kick you out. Employess of RH *privately* create KDE rpms, and for more official rpms you have to go to redhat-kde sourceforge page. Do I need to say more on why your experience maybe bad. Redhat has been arrogant and explotative of KDE, making changes to it without giving developers due credit, leave alone their permission.
And about there's lot more going on in KDE is quite not the case. If you checked the release schedules of gnome and all the gtk based software i'd say gnome is far more active ;) Both the desktops have been releasing neck to neck.
Is that all? Do a check, can you open a file on remote ssh server or from behind a firewall off a ftp server for editing, using the default File Open dialog of Gnome? Do you think it will ever be supported? Number of releases is the only criteria?
As far as memory usage, startup times is concerned i can say a trifle unscientifically that gnome starts about 5-6 seconds faster than kde. Then
Its more a c++ "feature" than KDE's. KDE is well aware of this thing yet there is little short of improving gcc that can be done about it.
again memory usage: on rh 9.0 with gnome the usage on immediate startup is 128 mb. for kde ? 213 mb. eh ? A quick look at system-monitor will tell you all the story. and my suggestion use gnome-monitor.
Frankly I dont care, I mean I can play DivX movies while simultaneously downloading them and having 3 connections on my FTP server downloading from me at near top speed with KDE running in all its glory, and I have only 128MB RAM. Stats are for staticians.
i don't think its right to call the decision of selecting gtk over kde for programming as legacy. Even the latest and the finest software that turns out today on freshmeat.net is gtk based.
Well I dont know of one good reason to choose GTK over QT. [GTK folks hope to make GTK as powerful as QT in coming days, but then QT wont sit idle either].
While there is a wide difference in the philosophies of these two toolkits both have very stable and viable reasoning behind them. On a general principle developers prefer gtk for its "lightness" and simplicity with enough power to modify it.
I have been involved with KDE-devel at times, and been generally programming for quite sometime, and I have little idea what you are talking about. Developers want neat api-s, good docu, responsive support community. What is lightness? Anything that is GPL gives equal level of powers to modify it. I dont see how GTK is simpler than kdelibs/QT, my experience have been different.
The visual clutter that i referred to is not due to bad distro. I wouldn't go so far as to call debian-sid,rh9.0,knoppix3.2 as bad distros. The visual
They are not bad, but they also may not focus on looks as much, everyone i persuing their own philosophies. For example Suse, comes with loads of RPMs but I can bet they dont have any qualified graphic expert. Try mandrake and see some difference.
What software you prefer is matter of personal taste. I prefer mozilla for my surfing and mail. I dislike konquerer for too many reasons that i do not care to list here for the sake of sanity.
I like xyz is different from saying xyz is better.
I don't know what customization you are talking of but its equally easy to customize a gnome toolbar/desktop ! Its all a matter of personal
AFAIK Toolbar is what come below the Menu bar, may be docked and undocked. You have great deal of customization of Toolbars in KDE [by default, as in provided in kdelibs, and app has little to do to enable it]. Similerly application shortcuts, like Ctrl-O to open a file is customizable in KDE, while in Gnome its not possible without implementing these functionalities at app level. Are they important? In fact Redhat may even have disabled those features to make KDE at par with Gnome. Back to are they important? May be for someone who considers visual clutter an important criteria of quality of software ;)
taste,familiarity and as far as mine goes i love speed, neatness and min. of visual clutter. gnome fits the bill. I was a lover of kde till rh 8.1(psyche) until rh 9.0 came along.
See what RH is doing to KDE. Give mandrake a try, and you may rediscover your love again.
Its no going back now for me. The choice is yours buddy, thats what linux about ~!
And there are choices to RH too.
- -- Amit Upadhyay Senior Undergraduate Student Department of Mechanical Engg. Indian Institute of Technology Bombay Mumbai-76, India Phone: (91) 9820325940
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 22:19:56 +0530 Amit Upadhyay wrote:
As far as memory usage, startup times is concerned i can say a trifle unscientifically that gnome starts about 5-6 seconds faster than kde. Then
Its more a c++ "feature" than KDE's. KDE is well aware of this thing yet there is little short of improving gcc that can be done about it.
Do you have a reference to back up this claim? I know virtual function invokations, exceptions and RTTI have overheads. I would like a reference in context of KDE's performance - especially if the reference covers design flaws, if any.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 04 Jun 2003 9:20 am, Tahir Hashmi wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 22:19:56 +0530
Amit Upadhyay wrote:
As far as memory usage, startup times is concerned i can say a trifle unscientifically that gnome starts about 5-6 seconds faster than kde. Then
Its more a c++ "feature" than KDE's. KDE is well aware of this thing yet there is little short of improving gcc that can be done about it.
Do you have a reference to back up this claim? I know virtual function invokations, exceptions and RTTI have overheads. I would like a reference in context of KDE's performance - especially if the reference covers design flaws, if any.
http://kdemyths.urbanlizard.com/viewMyth.php?mythID=20
- -- Amit Upadhyay Senior Undergraduate Student Department of Mechanical Engg. Indian Institute of Technology Bombay Mumbai-76, India Phone: (91) 9820325940
-
Amit Upadhyay -
linuxdev -
Tahir Hashmi