Re: kde or gnome?

[Felix Natter <fnatter@gmx.net>]

Ian Zimmerman <itz@speakeasy.org> writes:

> >>>>> "Felix" == Felix Natter <fnatter@gmx.net> writes:
> 
> Helgi> Of course it depends on who you ask.....:-) Generally I like
> Helgi> KDE because it is locical in so many ways, but I don't like how
> Helgi> big it is and therefore takes a lot of resources, and it's not
> Helgi> 'free'.  Gnome is faster (for me) but I got problems with using
> Helgi> different
> 
> Felix> kde 2.0 might well be faster than GNOME 1.2, because GNOME
> Felix> still uses CORBA for object embedding, while KDE uses DCOP,
> Felix> which "builds on inter- process communication". Thus, DCOP is
> Felix> more lightweight, but not fully network-aware (although network
> Felix> communcations will be possible by connecting the DCOP-servers).
> 
> This is from someone who just half a year ago wouldn't leave text
> mode, so take it with a grain of salt.
> 
> First, KDE _is_ totally free.  The only problem with it, license-wise,
> is that it uses Qt, whose license, although _also_ free, is
> incompatible with GPL.
> 
> I tried both KDE and Gnome; in fact I tried installing Gnome multiple
> times, and always came to the same conclusion (which is: I run KDE :).
> The problem I have with Gnome is a bit subtle, and not obvious to
> someone who's installing Linux or even a Linux GUI for the first time
> and deciding between what's out there.
> 
> Namely, Gnome does not include its own window manager; KDE does.
> Gnome depends on hooks for Gnome support compiled into an external
> window manager, and at present the only window manager with full
> support for Gnome seems to be Enlightenment, AKA `E'.

sawfish is now called the "official" GNOME wm (although you can still change).
 
> And E is a _HOG_.  I mean, it's a hogggg.  There seems to be no easy
> way to make it not use bitmap textures for everything imaginable on
> the screen, including caption bars and even menus.  The results are
> predictable.  With KDE, the entire Linux boot sequence is still much
> faster than Windoze; with Gnome and E, it's a toss-up :-(  That's on a
> 32M/P160 machine, which doesn't strike me as minimalistic.

Sawfish is highly scriptable via lisp, so it probably isn't fast, either.
On the other hand, it doesn't use lots of graphics, so I guess it's better
than enlightenment. One great thing about sawfish is that it's very easy
for beginners: using the configuration-tool and the pop-up-menu, you can
easily try many things, for example creating window-groups, and saving
attributes. Another good thing is that you can move windows by grabbing
the edges (this is very convenient for 640x480, when some windows don't
fit on the screen).

-- 
Felix Natter