Kde Vs Gnome  

879 members have voted

  1. 1. Kde Vs Gnome

    • Kde
      236
    • Gnome
      378
    • Other (please post)
      30


Recommended Posts

I voted for Gnome because I prefer it as a DE, it is simple and does the job pretty quickly. Imho KDE looks shiny and bloated, and I never liked it. The default Ubuntu Gnome theme also looks really earthy and I like it.

However, I just discovered pwm (like 2 hours ago lol) and I really like it. I realize it is only a Window Manager, but who needs a panel? :p

I would probably still use Gnome for general usage, but for my schoolwork (programming, or just looking at PDFs) I think I will use pwm.

For developing I much prefer KDE as it and the applications built for it have many features that just don't exist on the GNOME equivalents, and I find I can get complex jobs done considerably quicker. However, I've recently been using GNOME at work, even though it runs slower than KDE on my work machine, as I need some GTK apps running most the time and the PC I'm given isn't up to running GNOME and KDE apps simultaneously (thanks to my dumb university not giving postgrads even half-decent desktop machines). Luckily I can do my programming work at home, using my KDE box.

I've used KDE, Gnome, XFCE, all the Boxes, Enlightenment and I find myself wandering back to Gnome. Its the only one that seems to do everything that I need it to do. I like KDE, but I just don't see the need to customize everything that I possibly can. Plus as a Gentoo user I find myself confused as hell over the monolithic versus split-ebuilds.

I'm growing sick of Gnome. I've been using it religiously for a while, but it's growing annoying. I'm going to give KDE another spin and see how I like it. KDE is annoying to configure, but is a decent environment. I think Gnome hit the nail on the head when it comes to configuring things. KDE applications seem better integrated, and they have a more promising future with plasma and all the new KDE4 stuff. I'll post impressions of KDE later :p.

I've heard more about GNOME, but i've never used either...

i have a couple of questions on the subject, though...

1) which would be more compatible on an older computer?

2) which would be easier to use/get accustomed to?

3) how do you install them/which linux version should you be using?

any help would be appreciated

Gnome is by far better for more serious users.....kde is to cluttered for me ...i love the gnome setup

Speaking about a troll.

KDE is a totally different desktop environment, gnome ain't better then KDE. It's a personal preference.

It's better for you, but it ain't better generally

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This got me thinking, would you rather a self driving car prioritise protecting its passengers or everyone else? I'd choose the one that keeps me and my kids safest. At some point, these cars have to make those choices already, don't they? Wonder if we have a way to find out what way they lean.
    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      565
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      79
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    5. 5
      neufuse
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!