okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to know
what the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for example, what is
best?

Chris Mantoulidis wrote:
> okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to know
> what the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for example, what is
> best?

They are both window managers. Some people like KDE some like
GNOME. Which one you use is more of a personal preference, kind
of like ice cream. Which flavor do you like? There are also
several others available.

--
Confucius: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
Registered with The Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org/
Slackware 9.1.0 Kernel 2.4.22 SMP i686 (GCC) 3.3.2
Uptime: 15 days, 19:22, 1 user, load average: 1.03, 1.02, 1.00

David wrote:

> Chris Mantoulidis wrote:
>> okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to
>> know what the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for
>> example, what is best?
>
> They are both window managers. Some people like KDE some like
> GNOME. Which one you use is more of a personal preference, kind
> of like ice cream. Which flavor do you like? There are also
> several others available.
>

No, there are desktop environments which is something very
different.

Ransom
--
For real email get public key 0xF6BB5695 from www.keyserver.net

Chris Mantoulidis wrote:

> okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to know
> what the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for example, what is
> best?

.... the one that is "best" is the one that works best
for YOUR needs. my suggestion is to run gnome for 3-4
weeks, then switch to kde and work it for 3-4 weeks,
then YOU decide which is best.

at the highest level, gnome isnt quite as 'feature-rich'
as kde, but many people like that sort of 'minimalist'
approach to a desktop environment. let it be known that
they are built with different GUI libs, which means the
"look" will be diff between kde/gnome.

it's hard to say which has the most market share, but
i'll bet that kde is the more popular choice
..
--
/// Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer, skydiver, \\\
\\\ and author: "Inside Linux", "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed" ///
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to
alter it every six months. - Oscar Wilde

David wrote:

> They are both window managers.

.... BZZZZZZZZT !!!! sorry, thanks for playing. they are
"desktop [environment]" (which includes a window manager).
http://www.plig.org/xwinman/
..
--
/// Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer, skydiver, \\\
\\\ and author: "Inside Linux", "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed" ///
Beware of the Turing Tar-pit in which everything is possible but
nothing of interest is easy.

"mjt" <mjtobler@removethis_consultant.com> wrote in message
news:ilzlb.991$I04.233@newsread4.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> Chris Mantoulidis wrote:
>
> > okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to know
> > what the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for example, what is
> > best?
>
> ... the one that is "best" is the one that works best
> for YOUR needs. my suggestion is to run gnome for 3-4
> weeks, then switch to kde and work it for 3-4 weeks,
> then YOU decide which is best.
>
> at the highest level, gnome isnt quite as 'feature-rich'
> as kde, but many people like that sort of 'minimalist'
> approach to a desktop environment. let it be known that
> they are built with different GUI libs, which means the
> "look" will be diff between kde/gnome.
>
> it's hard to say which has the most market share, but
> i'll bet that kde is the more popular choice

Both are *stunningly* bloated with dozens, even hundreds, of tools you will
never want or use. How many badly written and incomplete dialup handlers and
file browsers and badly color coordinated shell terminals do you really
need? Throw them *both* the hell out, and use twm. Install only specific
components that you want, and the most basic libraries to support them.
(Some folks like Konqueror, for example.)

Your local disk and CPU and X-Windows behavior will benefit greatly from
dumping all the eye candy.

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

>> it's hard to say which has the most market share, but
>> i'll bet that kde is the more popular choice
>
> Both are stunningly bloated with dozens, even hundreds, of tools you will
> never want or use. How many badly written and incomplete dialup handlers
> and file browsers and badly color coordinated shell terminals do you
> really need? Throw them both the hell out, and use twm. Install only
> specific components that you want, and the most basic libraries to support
> them. (Some folks like Konqueror, for example.)
>
> Your local disk and CPU and X-Windows behavior will benefit greatly from
> dumping all the eye candy

.... i agree that a smart, trimmed down user interface has its
advantages, esp for those that have a trimmed-down machine
(h/w wise). although slightly dated, this is a good read:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6169
..
--
/// Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer, skydiver, \\\
\\\ and author: "Inside Linux", "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed" ///
Command, n.: Statement presented by a human and accepted by a computer
in such a manner as to make the human feel as if he is in control.

On 22 Oct 2003 06:30:23 -0700, Chris Mantoulidis <cmad_x@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to know
> what the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for example, what is
> best?

They both suck, and are for people who just can't get over Windoze.

--
Alan C
Post validation at http://tinyurl.com/rv0y

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 06:30:23 -0700, Chris Mantoulidis wrote:

> okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to know what
> the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for example, what is best?


Neither. I like gnome. I know a lot of people that like KDE. I have
both installed. Then again, fvwm is not bad if you do not mind doing hand
configuration. I used fvwm for years.

Paul

--
/********************** Running Debian Linux ************************
* For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, *
* that whoever believes in Him should not perish... John 3:16 *
* W. Paul Mills * mailto:Paul@Mills-USA.com * http://Mills-USA.com/ *
* GnuPGPrint = 09BB FDEA 69E5 0E55 3843 B063 BB8B 518A B293 3D8C *
************************************************** ******************/

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 19:24:00 +0000, Alan Connor wrote:

> On 22 Oct 2003 06:30:23 -0700, Chris Mantoulidis <cmad_x@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> okay... since i'm gonna get my linux shortly, i would like to know what
>> the difference between KDE and GNOME is... for example, what is best?
>
> They both suck, and are for people who just can't get over Windoze.

FLAME ON
EXCUSE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FLAME OFF

KDE supports thousands of things that Windoze will never support:
translucent menus, virtual desktops, and comes with an office suite. GNOME
is similarly configured. I recommend GNOME for a slower machine and KDE
for a 500MHz+ machine. For both you should have around 128MB of memory to
be able to use them to their full potential.