There is a controversy in the Linux world. It doesn't have to do with Microsoft, or anything overtly technical. It may seem, to the outsider, the open source equivalent of the question, "Boxers or briefs?" But it's much more serious than that.GNOME or KDE? There's a lot of emotion on both sides of the argument. Because we here at Download Squad value our lives, we're not going to tell you which is the best (yeah, as if we agree anyway). What matters is what works best for you. That's why we're spending this week and next discussing the virtues and pitfalls of GNOME and KDE.
The GNOME project began in 1997. GNOME is built from entirely open software under the LGPL (Lesser General Public License), unlike KDE, which uses the dual-licensed Qt toolkit. This means that both proprietary software and open software can link to the libraries that make up GNOME -- free of charge. Encouraging developers in this way brings more choices and stronger applications to Linux.GNOME is built with the GTK+ toolkit (a toolkit is programmer-speak for libraries of things like windows and buttons that are used to create a graphical interface). It determines much about how the programs you use integrate into the desktop.
GNOME aims for an uncluttered, simple interface. This is one reason it's a particularly good choice for new Linux users. Old pros who like GNOME cite different reasons. "It's a 'productivity-oriented' desktop," they'll tell you. They'll say, "It installs the programs I use most as part of the desktop environment." Or they'll tell you, "It just works for me."
GNOME is laid out a bit differently than Windows, so it's worth taking a look at the desktop itself. The default desktop has two panels located at the top and bottom of the screen. These panels, like most everything in Linux, are completely customizable. The top panel has three menus: Applications, Places, and System. On this panel you can place launchers (program shortcuts) and applets (little programs ranging from fun to functional). The panel may have a system tray area, with the obligatory clock and calender, mixer controls, and (depending on your distribution) an update alert.The bottom panel typically lists your open windows and shows available workspaces (in Linux, you can have more than one desktop workspace). Applets and launchers can be added to this panel as well (oftentimes the "trash" function is an applet on this panel). Don't like where these panels are located? Move them! Simply drag the panel to the desired edge of the screen, and there it sticks. Don't like having a bottom panel at all? Go ahead and remove it.
The desktop workspace (where your slick wallpaper goes) works much the same way it does in Windows. You can place launchers here, or files and folders. You'll notice as you open windows on your desktop th
at the corresponding "workspace" in the bottom panel area gets window shaped icons on it. This little feature makes it easy to group windows and tasks on dedicated virtual desktops. Though not a feature unique to GNOME (or even to desktop environments), it is a strange concept to many new Linux users and is worth a mention.GNOME is designed to work best with GTK+ applications. It can work swimmingly with Qt (KDE) applications, but most people like to keep the mixing to a minimum (at best it looks funny. At worst, it starts services you don't need). So what are some of the applications that are available for GNOME?
Nautilus is GNOME's file manager. Think of it as your Windows Explorer replacement. It's extensible, with the ability to add useful scripts and plugins.
Browsers that play well include Epiphany, and any of the Mozilla-based browsers. Evolution is the default email client, but once again, Mozilla-based mail clients, should you prefer them, work fine.
For photo editing, the GIMP is a great application (GTK stands for the GIMP Toolkit, after all). Photos can be downloaded from a variety of digital cameras with gtkam. For slide shows and basic picture manipulation, gthumbviewer and Eye of GNOME are native applications that are easy to use.
OpenOffice works well the GNOME desktop environment, and we admit to using it most of the time. You may want to try GNOME Office, the suite of Abiword, Gnumeric, and GNOME-DB. Simple text editing is done with gedit, a lightweight editor with features such as spell check, syntax highlighting, and document statistics. Notes can be made on the desktop with Tomboy.
Video and audio files are played with the Totem movie player by default. There are a number of compatible music players, such as Exaile and Songbird, if playing your music and videos through the same player doesn't really suit you.
GNOME has been called overly simplistic. (We're actually being kind here. Linus Torvalds, the man behind the Linux kernel, used much harsher words.) There are many more opportunities for "tweaking" on a KDE desktop than there are on a GNOME desktop. That doesn't mean you can't tweak. It just makes it a little harder in the long run.
For the average computer user -- someone who uses their Linux machine to go online, create documents, and access multimedia files, GNOME is a solid choice. Developers and those who like their systems completely free (as in speech) also find GNOME appealing. GNOME is the default desktop in distributions such as Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian and Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
12-24-2007 @ 12:50PM
Stuart Jones said...
I've always stuck with Gnome as my desktop environment when I fiddle with Linux. Sadly, my reasoning is just that if it's good enough for the default Ubuntu distro, it's good enough for me. I've never actually done any research between the two. I'm looking forward to your article on KDE.
Reply
12-24-2007 @ 8:31PM
Rumble said...
I've use both KDE and GNOME. It may be conflicts with my machine, but after one test Kubuntu install, a second buggy Kubuntu install, and a very instable and eventually unbootable PCLinuxOS install, I decided I wouldn't give KDE another try until version 4.
To me, GNOME is more aesthetically pleasing. The icons and window art are smooth and warm and make your computing experience very enjoyable. As far as productivity goes, GNOME just plain gets the job done. It does what it needs to beautifully while remaining unobtrusive. Stability is a strong point as well. I've yet to see a crash handler like I did with KDE several times a day.
Just install the ubuntu-restricted-extras package, Firefox for browsing, Exaile for music, VLC media player for video, Deluge for BitTorrent, and you've got a regular powerhouse of an OS.
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 1:23AM
eh? said...
I have tried Gnome for a bit. Gnome simply wasn't for me. Too simplistic. It may suit some but i could never see the appeal.
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 2:48AM
xfce said...
What about xfce? Sure, some people will say it's even more simplistic than gnome, but I love it. Gnome tries to be too artsy and creative. kde, i really cant say too much about, since I haven't used it too much.
I do use multiple gnome and kde apps though. Kolourpaint, krusader, gnome-terminal, gedit, etc.
For those coming into linux, the may or may not care. I like having lots of choices, other people just like having most stuff done for them. So you can argue all you want about what is the best default environment, but it comes down to what is pre-installed. That is what most people will use. They will get used to it. And if you try to show them something better, they will come up with as many excuses as you can think of, for reasons not to switch over.
That's half the reason why linux/mac isn't doing as well as what a perfect world would bring. People just don't like change.
There's my little lecture. Merry Xmas.
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 12:12PM
Rumble said...
I have no qualms with Xfce. I installed Xubuntu on my grandparents' computer after XP became unbearably slow and beyond repair. It runs great on their older hardware and has given me no problems. I don't have to run over to their place every second week to fix something different.
Xfce is almost like GNOME with customization cut down to a minimum. I prefer GNOME for the personal changes I can make to it, but Xfce comes after GNOME and before KDE on my list.
12-25-2007 @ 11:49AM
Dazed said...
KDE is too MS Windows like, so if I wanted to use windows I wouldn's use the KDE
Gnome is nice, fast, stable and configurable - one just needs to look under the hood a lil more to find the configuration options.
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 1:30PM
Kevin said...
I was always under the impression that the two targetted slightly different users. Gnome, with it's strong UI guidelines seemed aimed at switchers and more casual users, whereas KDE, seemed to offer a more configurable interface which can do a lot of things, but with some sacrifice in the initial usability.
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 2:43PM
El Diablo said...
I've used linux for some 7 years now, starting off with SuSE, which was shipping with KDE. I stuck with SuSE for many years until trying Kubuntu. I eventually tried out SLED10, which ships with a pimped up Gnome, which just sold me on Gnome. I run Ubuntu now, no more KDE, however I find the default Ubuntu desktop vile, and every desktop install I do with Ubuntu, I add gnome-main-menu etc, to get it more inline with SLED10. I noticed a comment about Gnomes nice icons etc, I find generally that the quality of submitted artwork to gnome-look.org etc is inferior to that of kde-look.org, having said that, there are still some outstanding icons etc for Gnome, but I just feel less choice when it comes to quality ones.
As I program also, I must say I love Mono, and recently pumped out a Mono application at the company where I work. One happy dept. boss, works on Linux, Windows and OSX ... yeah yeah, QT could, I know... :-)
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 4:07PM
Brian said...
Most of you would consider me a newb with linux since I've only been using it for about 8 or 9 months now but I really have tried several distros including pclinuxos, ubuntu, kubuntu, xubuntu, fedora and sam linux. Of those, Ubuntu with gnome has been the most stable abd easy to use. Both pclinuxos and Kubuntu gave me problems with graphics. I'm not saying kde isn't good for many, it just didn't run well on my Dell Inspiron B130 laptop. With Ubuntu, I have even been able to network with my desktop computer which is something I could not do with any other Distro.
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 4:20PM
Adi said...
I just use KDE with the gnome-panel. This way I have the best of both worlds :-D
Reply
12-25-2007 @ 5:06PM
Ufomies said...
I have never found GNOME any easier to use than KDE. Way more restricted, yes, but not really any easier. I see no point in using it.
Reply
12-26-2007 @ 6:59AM
Janvl said...
I use both, depending on the task. They shoul integrate more and more because both are great. If you make a choice based on the task it also very visible what you are doing, not much chance making mistakes ;-).
Reply
12-26-2007 @ 10:42AM
Zachary said...
After my 6 years of running Slackware (I've tried both KDE and GNOME) and cannot use either of them. I settled on WindowMaker.
Reply
12-26-2007 @ 2:44PM
hitest said...
I've used Linux for over 5 years. I use Gnome and KDE and like them both. Currently I'm running Gnome on Debian; and I also run XFce on Slackware and FreeBSD.
Reply
12-26-2007 @ 10:39PM
Dirk R. Gently said...
After my MacBook was hacked severely, I had doubts I would use Gnome again on an older 350Mhz machine. I've installed Gnome 2.20 on this beast, and it's absolutely incredible. I haven't tried KDE for years and, I admit, I'm curious but I have no cause to switch.
Reply
12-26-2007 @ 10:58PM
Ted King said...
FYI - Both KDE and Gnome are broken desktops. They may work but are lacking a key maintenance tool - an import/export settings option. This would allow one to backup, restore, migrate system-to-system or desktop-to-desktop, and repair a broken desktop (I've had a dinged Gnome desktop with some bad settings and no way to fix them).
Also, has anyone else spotted the missing system option (the one that controls the button order) ? In KDE the buttons are Go-NoGo but in Gnome they are flipped (NoGo-Go). Firefox, which is a Gnome app. (it uses their rules and libraries) can be flipped to KDE-style but it takes an ugly CSS hack. I wonder how many people have been tripped up by this subtle boobytrap.
NB - Linux : Mandrake 9, SUSE 9.1, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, UBL-EL4/5, Open-SUSE 10.3, etc./usw. Before them : CP/M-80, DOS-370, VM/SP, DOS-x86, MS-Win., etc./usw.
Reply
12-27-2007 @ 12:14AM
technofreak said...
Been using Linux for 6 years now, been with both GNOME and KDE for
considerable amount of time that I have seen the best and worst of
both of the lands.
IMHO, think both of them are good with what they do. Calling either
of them bad, counting on personal experiences especially those based
on distro's failure to impress you is not right. This is because each
distribution offers their own customized version of both the desktops,
especially KDE.
I like a few things in GNOME, as well as KDE. I love amarok, digikam,
akregator, kflickr from KDE and I use them with GNOME desktop as well.
But otherwise I prefer using Gaim, XChat, Thunderbird, Firefox on both
the desktops. I rate Gedit and Kate to be on equal level, so do all
the audi video players provided by default.
At the end, it all comes to the point that its your comfort that
matters and you can use tools from one Desktop in another without any
problem (believe me). Both are as good as the other is, just use what
you feel it works for you (and don't conclude the other is bad) :)
Reply
12-27-2007 @ 4:03AM
Hussam Al-Tayeb said...
Other than gtk+ themes looking nicer than KDE themes, I mainly like gnome because it looks good by default in a vanilla installation without any need for customization while KDE needs extra customization to look decently good. This is why most distribution incorporate artwork into KDE. I use ArchLinux and we ship a vanilla gnome so it looks exactly the same as if you compiled it from source using official tarballs. And it still looks very nice.
Reply
12-27-2007 @ 12:21PM
Mahenda said...
For those afraid of switching to Linux because of lack of Photoshop like alternative ... well GIMP doesn't cut it for me and for many others, there's one really nice alternative. I would say 1:1 copy of Photoshop, it's called Pixel image editor - http://www.pixelimageeditor.com
Reply
12-27-2007 @ 6:18PM
prakash JK said...
I have completely switched to Linux,since 2003.the day i started using Linux,the confusing thing was which Desktop Environment to use?I felt ease with Gnome and its simplicity;but when i was trying livecds esp knoppix,they showed a different DE(kde) this confused me a lot back in the starting days.
Now I know that Gnome is the answer for serious Desktop GNU/Linux users.you dont need to care for customizing each and everything to get a workable desktop like in kde.
although,i am waiting for Kde4+dolphin.
So,as of now Debian Sid apt-pinned with Lenny+experimental and Gnome-2.20.x rocks for me and many a people!
I feel every useful kde tools must be ported to gtk+,as it helps Gnome users and other 100's of window manager's including xfce people to save installing kdelibs and qt as dependencies in a gtk+ system :) a good example is Amarock ported to gtk+ as Exaile player which is rocking in Gnome and other wm's.
I must say,Kde is here,only for the purpose of luring cross platform development via qt libs,while GTK+ gives as far more freedom via single GPL license unlike Kde licensing model
Reply