Gnome or KDE?

[Wikt]

I am quite curious. What do you think is better out of those 2 major WM's?
I am voting Both are equally good.

[Rootman]

KDE seems more refined and more complete. I load both on all my PC's - even if just for the libs for each others apps.

[desire]

I like both, more often than not I'm in Gnome. :D

[gowator]

Perhaps its just familiarity but I prefer KDE...
Theirs nothing wrong with gnome .... I just got used to KDE.

For heavy use its more efficient although that seems to be a matter of great debate.
Basically KDE takes forever to startup....
but then its starting a lot of background stuff.
However this background stuff is reusable, mostly libraries and the DCOP server, Qt etc.
When you open a pure KDE app it only needs a slight incremental increase over whats already running.
For truly minimalist you can't beat flux or waimia or about 10 other choices but if you use a KDE app it still loads up loads crap anyhow.

Gnome (without evolution) is lighter but less reusable in terms of resources. However starting a single Gnome app in KDE is not like starting a KDE app in Gnome.
Gmome reuses the gtk libs but not much else. Therefore if you use mainly KDE apps your better with a full KDE. If you occaisionally use a single KDE app then use Gnome.

Both are great but with different philosophies.

I like KDE becuase its more integrated in terms of the control panel and functionality in a single set of libraries.
Konqueror is pretty great, its a pretty good browser, especially the new one and a pretty good file manager/network browser/smb browser/cups etc.
Its certainly not the best of breed in any of these but overall i think it does the combination best.
Just my 2c really

[Cuddles]

I have never tried GNome, had stuck with KDE from the start...

From the first time I ran the Knoppix Live CD, to the point of having two HD Installed systems, with at least 10 user accounts on these systems, KDE is what I have used.

I got used to using KDE from the start, and figure, it works for me, even though I have no clue about GNome, I guess, not knowing what you are missing, is okey, I guess. :?:

Now, as a defense for GNome, if Knoppix had GNome as its default GUI, I guess I would have swayed to GNome, instead of KDE. But, it didn't go that way. This could also be a good reason why a lot of people have issues with Knoppix/Linux - they learned on a M$ Win system, and since it does what they want, why change, kinda thing. (just a guess)

I for one, can't imagine going back to any flavor of M$ Windoze, not after firing up Knoppix, and begining to get used to it now.

Thats just my 2 cents worth, though,
Cuddles

[Kethinov]

KDE
But only because I despise nautilus in gnome with a passion. I much prefer GTK apps over QT apps, and I really like XFce4.

That said, because KDE is (ironically) faster than GNOME because konq is faster and more fully featured than nautilus, KDE wins the DE war for me.

At work, Knoppix with good ol' KDE. At home, Gentoo with XFce4 ;)

[probono]

KDE rocks, especially things like ftp:// and fish:// urls in file open/save dialogs are afaik unparalleled.

[dewd]

KDE has many more configuration options than GNOME. That is good because you can use the GUI to change the configurations with KDE, while in GNOME you could have to edit more files and restart/reboot more.

For example, with KDE I was able to set my locale easily (region + keyboard). With GNOME I don't think I could have done that that easily.

But sometimes when I copy/paste among programs it seems to work best with the GTK+ ones.

For example, I copied something on Wine to the clipboard and I was able to paste it on GEdit.

Both are good. KDE has more configurations and GNOME looks better (look and feel, less clutter).

I am using KDE for the first time and I like it.

[aay]

KDE rocks, especially things like ftp:// and fish:// urls in file open/save dialogs are afaik unparalleled.

Yes and KDE 3.2 continues to capitalize on things like this. If you have 3.2 try typing "fonts:/" or "system:/" in Konq. Very cool. There are of course tons of other great features found in 3.2. Probably we should put together a nice summary whenever it makes it into knoppix. Nevertheless, I'm looking forward to see what's in Gnome 2.6.

[A. Jorge Garcia]

Yup, a nice summary or HOWTO would be good as I find some new feature, strictly by accident, every day it seems....

Regards,
AJG

[Crusader]

Well, I've only seen KDE 3 (Knoppix and Suse 8.0/.1 liveeval) and Gnome 1 (the Red Hat 7 machines in the department) but there's just something cleaner and rounder about Gnome (not to mention antialiasing)... Not having worked extensively with either, I don't know what their strengths and weaknesses are. At my stage I'd have to say they're both good, though I prefer the way Gnome looks. And I know guys who swear by fluxbox, too.

[times_r_shitty]

I'm firmly in the KDE camp. Gnome just lacks style. And, it's my understanding that it doesn't use a lot less resources that KDE, I could be mistaken about this. I like many of the Gnome apps. I just don't care for the Gnome environment.

When I want a stripped down window manager, I just use fluxbox or windowmaker etc...