Live data from Hacker News

KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

ocsmag.com

51–60 of 85 posts

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#51
post #31
post #10

Is it really still an either/or choice between KDE and Gnome? I'm not a Linux expert but I thought there were more options than just these two. The article seems like it presents a false dichotomy.

Besides KDE and GNOME (and some GNOME forks like Cinnamon), none of the other choices are particularly close to a decent full desktop experience. They are generally either limited in nature or require you to be one of those people that likes to dig around for hours cobbling together scripts and adjusting the minutiae of scattered, poorly documented config files exactly to their specification. I have certainly done al…

This is not true. Ubuntu MATE works ootb. Linux Mint Cinnamon works ootb. Both have GUI to install apps. Just like KDE and GNOME.

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#52
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I recall correctly it didn't have a dock. Everyone seems to have settled on the dock being the best paradigm for managing open apps, and launching favorites, for most users. You might disagree, but the ux people at Apple, Microsoft, Google, Gnome, and KDE seem to think it's the best approach for the vast majority of users.

Microsoft doesn't have a dock does it? It's not in my Windows 10 installation, which has this weird combo of Awesome Bar + lag and Start Menu. Unless maybe it's an option I'm not aware of (as I actively try to avoid time in Windows) I don't really trust GNOME and KDE to have done actual UI research. Maybe Google did, but given the Android experience, I strongly doubt it. So that leaves Apple as believing in the dock,…

The Windows task bar these days behaves almost exactly like the Mac OS dock and has since Windows 7. The main difference is if you click on an application with multiple windows open, it pops up a window selector (tip, ctrl+click to cycle through the windows instead) instead of whatever Mac OS does (some combo of bring up the main/latest-used window of the application). You can enable the Vista and earlier behavior—listing all open windows and not grouping by application—but I imagine very few people do.

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#53
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I recall correctly it didn't have a dock. Everyone seems to have settled on the dock being the best paradigm for managing open apps, and launching favorites, for most users. You might disagree, but the ux people at Apple, Microsoft, Google, Gnome, and KDE seem to think it's the best approach for the vast majority of users.

Microsoft doesn't have a dock does it? It's not in my Windows 10 installation, which has this weird combo of Awesome Bar + lag and Start Menu. Unless maybe it's an option I'm not aware of (as I actively try to avoid time in Windows) I don't really trust GNOME and KDE to have done actual UI research. Maybe Google did, but given the Android experience, I strongly doubt it. So that leaves Apple as believing in the dock,…

The Microsoft taskbar has always had the most prominent feature of the dock: Allowing you to organize and launch apps from a bar on the left/right/bottom of your screen. Prior to Windows 7 though, you could only add shortcuts to the taskbar and when you launched an app from that shortcut a wholly separate taskbar button would appear.

Starting with Windows 7, Microsoft merged the functionality of launching apps into the taskbar buttons. This way, when you "pin" an app to the taskbar and then click on the pinned item, the pinned item became the taskbar button which represented the running app. This is how the Mac dock works. I think that the only major feature of the Mac dock that Microsoft doesn't offer is "recent apps" but I could be forgetting something since I haven't used Windows for work in a while.

In the end, as per usual, Microsoft lets you have it both ways. If you want a dock you can leave the taskbar configured as default (grouping taskbar buttons and collapsing them into a single button) or you can turn that off and have the original taskbar functionality. If you add something like 7+ Taskbar Tweaker you can even ungroup them, drag and drop taskbar buttons to re-organize them and enable "middle click" to close the window represented by the taskbar buttons like you would with browser tabs.

When I moved my workstations/work laptop all to Manjaro/XFCE I was happily surprised to find that XFCE taskbar has all the features of 7+ Taskbar Tweaker. I don't know what XFCE's design philosophy is, but if I had to guess it's "Implement all the desirable features of Windows in a minimalist fashion and add features for power users."

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#54
post #51
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides KDE and GNOME (and some GNOME forks like Cinnamon), none of the other choices are particularly close to a decent full desktop experience. They are generally either limited in nature or require you to be one of those people that likes to dig around for hours cobbling together scripts and adjusting the minutiae of scattered, poorly documented config files exactly to their specification. I have certainly done al…

This is not true. Ubuntu MATE works ootb. Linux Mint Cinnamon works ootb. Both have GUI to install apps. Just like KDE and GNOME.

Depends on the definition of "works ootb". For the most part I would say yes but a few little things here and there not, IMHO. It also depends on the distro but "ALt-Tab" through windows across workspaces (virtual desktops) often requires an install of dconf and setting it yourself. Just as a minor example. But that perhaps admittedly is nitpicking. Overall Mate works perfectly fine of course.

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#55
post #12

I'm curious is anyone else feels like I do about these things. I've used linux off and on over the years, various distros, various GUIs, sometimes KDE based, sometimes Gnome, sometimes others. I've never noticed any differences that seem substantive. It just seems like a random walk around the usual gui design space. Which I think makes sense as there isn't really a whole lot to do there. Is it just me? Do other peop…

My preferences aren't religious-strong, but I have enough of a preference that I installed KDE Plasma on Pop! OS instead of the Gnome-base default. And I've struggled to get the network manager working in KDE which has been a nuisance and never a problem on distros who ship KDE as the default - so there's at least some importance in a distro's default, even if others are available. I've been known to pull up a Gnome…

My problem with KDE has essentially been the same now for years. To me, it feels too fragile.

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#56

Anyone think that ubuntu around 2011, final days of Gnome 2, really had perfected the desktop UI experience, before all the forays into wanton novelty for noveltys sake made it the confusing mess it became later? To think that a linux distro had the almost ideal desktop UI realised and then squandered it all away, seems puzzling now.

I disagree. Gnome3 for me is perfect. I think tastes are tastes but gnome 3 gives me the function as well aesthetics. The zoom out functionality to show all windows open is essential given i have a lot of windows open at the same time. Alt-tab icons are a huge cognitive load.

We had all this with Gnome 2, although you had to apt-get install it.

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#57

Anyone think that ubuntu around 2011, final days of Gnome 2, really had perfected the desktop UI experience, before all the forays into wanton novelty for noveltys sake made it the confusing mess it became later? To think that a linux distro had the almost ideal desktop UI realised and then squandered it all away, seems puzzling now.

I'm still on Unity, and will probably delay update for a long time because I just cause use Gnome 3.

It's not for lack of trying, but it requires to many plugins to be just usable, and then they break, some features is missing in nautilus or other shit.

I don't want to fight with my desktop manager. I have work to do.

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#58

Anyone think that ubuntu around 2011, final days of Gnome 2, really had perfected the desktop UI experience, before all the forays into wanton novelty for noveltys sake made it the confusing mess it became later? To think that a linux distro had the almost ideal desktop UI realised and then squandered it all away, seems puzzling now.

I disagree. Gnome3 for me is perfect. I think tastes are tastes but gnome 3 gives me the function as well aesthetics. The zoom out functionality to show all windows open is essential given i have a lot of windows open at the same time. Alt-tab icons are a huge cognitive load.

I agree. GNOME 3 stays out of my way.

Good dynamic virtual desktop.

Windows key (or Alt-F1) to see all open windows.

Windows keys + typing to start an app.

I don't understand why Tweaks is not part of GNOME vanilla, but it's easy enough to install.

I have to work on Windows and Mac OS when working for some customers and that is an absolutely miserable experience for me.

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#59

Anyone think that ubuntu around 2011, final days of Gnome 2, really had perfected the desktop UI experience, before all the forays into wanton novelty for noveltys sake made it the confusing mess it became later? To think that a linux distro had the almost ideal desktop UI realised and then squandered it all away, seems puzzling now.

>To think that a linux distro had the almost ideal desktop UI realised and then squandered it all away, seems puzzling now.

Hard to say how much truth is in this story, but there was some speculation that this was caused by Microsoft. They started to make some noise about Linux desktop infringing their patents, and while Novell (who was contributing to KDE) signed patent-sharing deal, neither Red Hat nor Canonical (big contributors to GNOME) did, presumably choosing redesign instead.

https://www.theregister.com/2013/06/03/thank_microsoft_for_l...

Re: KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)

#60
post #8

I found it interesting that they compare CD burning software and a music player. In 2017 I am not sure how relevant these software were... I myself haven't used CDs for around 10 years now. And apart from my love of ncmpp, I would also suppose the majority of desktop users would listen to music from a streamer service. I'd rather had a look on the Settings / configuration dialogs, file pickers (as it's been mentioned…

To my knowledge there aren't a whole lot of dedicated apps for streaming services. So the comparisons would be: - How a Spotify tab looks in a browser in KDE vs GNOME. - How the unofficial Spotify Flatpak looks in KDE vs GNOME.

So compare apps in other categories which have remained relevent: file browser, settings, calendar, reminders, notes, etc
Post reply on HN