Posted on Thursday 18th of January 2007 at 13:46 in Linux

KDE or Gnome? Some useful advice for new users

In a continued effort to help the GNU/Linux movement I've taken it upon myself to write some guidelines on a topic that is rather confusing for someone new the Linux. I aim to help answer the second question that most people ask.

The first question
The first question people ask when nudged in the direction of Linux (besides "what is it?") is "what distribution should I use?". This question cannot be answered by anyone other than themselves because that decision is based primarily on your individual needs and there is plenty of distro advice available on the internet.

kde or gnome KDE or Gnome?
This is the killer question that can be quite difficult to answer and there appears to be very little information available on the first couple of pages of search engine results for the new Linux user. Which is best for someone moving from Windows? What about someone moving from a Mac? I aim to help answer these questions.

What "people" say


It's a common belief that Gnome is the most natural environment for the newly converted, with a lot of time and developed focused on a more intuitive user experience. The success of distros such as Ubuntu are evidence of this but there's still an awful lot that relies on the user - what you prefer, what you use your machine for, what your requirements are, what your specifications are... The list goes on.

A quoted comparison
Alan Cox (a Red Hat exec) commented in The Register that "Everything else in the free software world gives you a package and the best (distro) is used. The fact KDE and Gnome exists suggest they serve different groups of users, KDE provides more configuration and control, and Gnome more ease of use while giving up that control." An ambiguous quote true enough but this almost summarises what you'll find when comparing the two environments - which is surprisingly un-useful for the end user - what you actually want is a summary of what you could expect from each given your requirements.

KDE


As a matter of personal preference, I find KDE the most intuitive for a native Windows user because the layout seems the most obvious. However, personal preference aside, here are the characteristics associated with KDE:

- Graphical tools to make life easier (such as the 'browse as root' option seen in Knoppix)
- Most Linux programs written for the X-display are designed for KDE (this was true in the past, maybe less so now)
- Plenty of eye candy available (distros such as PCLinuxOS come with full Vista-esq window transparencies)
- Typically very customisable

Overall KDE is noted as being more 'flashy' and customisable, some may call it bloated, others may call it 'fully formed'. It has been slated as being slow when compared to Gnome but it's probably more like what you would expect from an operating system having come from Windows.

KDE of Choice
I have two very clear KDE recommendations:
kubuntu pclinuxos

Gnome


Gnome has been made mainstream through distros such as Ubuntu, broadcasted as the most intuitive interface possible - in an attempt to make Linux more approachable for Windows convertees. Here are some of the characteristics associated with Gnome:

- Quoted to be faster on older hardware (450mhz for example) than KDE due to focusing more on function over form.
- Easy visual customisability (installing themes is 'easier' than in KDE)
- Gnome is less 'cluttered' and more simple than KDE
- Nautilus is quoted as being more stable than Konqueror


Gnome of choice
One word, Ubuntu.
ubuntu

A basic rule of thumb


If you're running an old machine and just require stability and an uncluttered approach then you're best looking into Gnome. However, if you love eye-candy and pretty window managers then KDE is your best bet.

Conclusion
To be fair, the barriers between the two are decreasing as time goes by, saying KDE is for eye-candy is almost a redundant statement seeing as the Beryl/Compiz stuff can be added to Gnome environments... Conversely saying Gnome is faster than KDE is also a slightly odd statement, as certain precompiled KDE releases are notably faster than their Gnome equivalents... Not that I'm saying the content in this article isn't of any use, but I feel that it should be down to personal preference.

KDE - the GUI child of OSX and XP?
I read somewhere that they felt KDE environments look a lot like the OSX GUI and I suppose there's an element of truth in that - but my experience of KDE (especially PCLinuxOS) is that it's far more "Windows-y" than Gnome - despite Gnome being popularised as "the environment to convert windows users".

As always, time well tell, I just hope this information was useful to someone trying to work out which is right for them, KDE or Gnome.

Please, I WILL have missed things out because I'm not an expert so if you see a glaring omission - place it in the comments.

 

Enjoy this article? Why not subscribe to the full RSS feed?

Add Your Comments








Comments

Showing most recent 17 of 17 comments

An example of what I meant:

Instead of telling someone "try Open Office; try KOffice; decide". Tell them instead "Open Office has this feature that KOffice lacks; KOffice has that one." This will save the prospective user a long time playing around sorting through different features to see how they line up, in the hopes that they come across the ones that will be crucial to them.
Suggestions like "try both, and see which you like", while laudable, aren’t helpful to a new Linux user for several reasons: often you use a system for weeks or months before discovering little tricks and devices that you really like about it; or discovering that something new that you have to do, or something you only do once in a while, can’t be done on this system.

Suggestions like "Look at what programs you’ll use, and see which desktop they’re available for", while a necessary consideration, isn’t helpful to someone new to Linux because they’ll almost certainly start using a lot of entirely new programs.

Remarks like "Gnome resembles OS/X"; "KDE resembles WinXP", while perhaps true, need more fleshing out. Obviously on first glance Gnome resembles the Mac interface in having toolbars at both top and bottom of the screen, and having functions distributed between several menus; while KDE resembles Windows in having a unified start menu and a peculiar obsession with blue and silver. Neither of these first impressions is very important, since they can be changed very easily (in ways that Windows and OSX can’t).

If this page is to be the basis of a systematic comparison between the two, it would be most helpful to the prospective Linux convert--here or elsewhere--to compile a list of comparisons that do better than these kind of abstractions. (Which is what i looked for and couldn’t find.) A list of:

(1) Applications (organized by function) that will run on KDE but won’t run on GNOME unless you install a lot of the basic KDE software--i.e. will only run on Gnome insofar as you’ve added KDE functionality to it. And vice versa of course.
(1a) Applications known to work *a lot* better or worse on one than on the other
(2) Things--basic interface tasks, configuration--that can be done on one but not at all on the other. (Unchangeable parts of the interface, e.g.)
(2b) Things that are easy to do on one desktop and a great hassle to do on the other
(3) Specific, rather than general, comparisons with XP and OSX (like the ones I offered above, but hopefully more significant).

Is there a unified, updated list of these somewhere? And if so why aren’t there a lot more pointers to it floating around?
So much idle chatter over a simple choice. I tell the newcomer "try GNOME, then try KDE, then select the one one ya want." With OpenSuse 10.2 it’s so simple. You get both GUI’s in the install package with an option for others. My final choice is the same as Linus Torvald’s, KDE.
I ran KDE on my 3 home computers used by 4 people for 2 years. One weekend I changed all three computers to Gnome. At the time I got only one complaint because I failed to move the bookmarks over from Konqueror to Firefox. We have now used Gnome for 2 years and there have been no other complaints or even comments.

My conclusion: KDE and Gnome are both so good that the choice is simply a matter of preference. Their quality is higher than the point were the average user cares about the difference.

I usually tell people to start with Gnome since I think it is easier to use and to check out KDE if they are curious or unhappy with Gnome.
And what about IceWM? Once properly configured, it is powerful windows manager. Very good VM for user that comes from Windows. The main problem of IceWM is that it is not mainstream VM and it is not well configured in most Linux distributions.

One thing I cant understand is why does every article I read always compare the GNU/Linux desktops with windows? For crying out loud GNU/Linux is nothing like windows! The problem here is when ppl who have never used GNU/Linux hear aobut it being (just) like windows and decide to give GNU/Linux a try they\’re going to be very disapointed when they encounter their first problems and they cant solve them like they did in windows.

To the guy/gal who complained about the KDE app names, why dont you start distributing your own version of KDE and cal the apps wtf you want, you fucking tool!
A few years ago, when I was just getting my feet wet with Linux and trying several distributions, I was immediately struck by how Mac-like Gnome was, and how Windows-like KDE was in their looks. I wasn’t particularly interested in a "browse as root", or that interested in changing my Start/Apple [equivalents] Menu. I just wanted to get some work done. I’d been using Macintoshes since 1984, and gave up on Apple in 2004 when I figured out that the Mac I’d bought with OS-9.1 installed couldn’t run OS-10 [aka "OS-X"]. I never made the transition to OS-X, but I was a whiz at OS-9, knowing the "tricks", ResEditing, writing applications, etc.

Gnome seemed the more "natural" transition from OS-9 for me. It was more familiar, more subtle, and I felt more comfortable with it. KDE, on the other hand, reminded me more of XP, with an icon theme which looked more comfortable on an x86 machine than on a PPC.

A lot of water has gone under the bridge since then, and I’ve learned that KDE has some powerful features. I just don’t happen to need them for nearly all of what I do, so I’ve remained with Gnome. Version 1.16.1 is what I’m using right now. Are there things I’d like to change? Sure! I miss the hell out of command-key functions like "Find", which I had under OS-9 (Shortcuts’ equivalents aren’t quite the same.)

Is Gnome right for everyone? Definitely not. Is KDE? Also, definitely not. Is either perfect? Again, definitely not. But there’s also definitely things I just abhor about the Windows desktop and a few I personally find annoying about the Mac desktop as well. So nobody’s perfect.

My suggestion is to install a distribution with BOTH KDE and GNOME Desktop Environments (and maybe one or two others as well) and try them out. You might find you like one over the other(s). If so, use it. But don’t b---h if someone else finds a different one to their liking. It is simply a matter of taste for MOST end-users, just like their choice of background images or colors, or choice of icons. That’s the beauty of Open Software - Choice.
I really wish the KDE people would choose a new naming convention. I like KDE but I can’t stand that every application Kbegins Kwith a K. Sure, it’s nothing more than an aesthetic preference, but it drives me crazy. It’s juvenile, uncreative, and no longer necessary. Just come up with a REAL name for your app, instead of just prefixing a noun or verb with a freakin’ K. Konqueror makes sense. So does Amarok... but KMail? KDevelop? KWrite? KPlayer? Stupid, stupid.

My rant aside, I think both KDE and Gnome are great desktops. I started off as a KDE fan, but now I lean toward Gnome. In my personal experience, Gnome has been more stable on my machine and I’ve really come to enjoy the clean look of it. Regardless, KDE is still a fantastic desktop.

Apart from performance and usability, as I Chinese I also have to consider the multi language and font support.

I used to be a KDE user when using Mandrake. It\’s more flexible and configurable. It can display Chinese (or others, I guess), but its font and layout control are not as good as Gnome. When I used Ubuntu 5.10 the first time I was surprised that it was a very distribution for displaying foreign fonts. Now I am still using Ubuntu6.10 and there is no reason to switch back to KUbuntu or other KDE based distro.

The number of people working for translation is also a main factor. From my understanding, the Chinese translation is still active in Gnome. If I have choose which one is good for new user \’around the world\’, I guess Gnome is better, at least for those whole need a translated version.

If you freely admit to not knowing enough about these things why take it on yourself to post erroneous material?


I think a more valid question is, what applications do you need?
You may prefer Konqueror over Nautilus, but Evolution over KMail.
Sure you can install say Evolution on a KDE distro, but it’s getting harder and harder to make it work.

Just check out bugzilla for Fedora on keyring problem when opening Evolution under KDE, Fedora has so far been unable to roll out what amounts to an very simple fix through Yum since mid November. Trouble is, that new users to Linux will not know how to fix these problems by writing scripts. They need a software installer that works and install the applications they need.
Kde, Gnome, other.

Which car do you drive? Why did you buy it? Did you like the look? Did it have a particular feature you found compelling?

Avg person: Views web pages, views pictures, plays movies, stores files, talks with their friends.

Guess what? Both KDE and Gnome allow you to do that these days!! Amazing!! ;)

Most people just aren’t used to having to choose something in their computing experience. They are so used to MS choosing for them they have forgotten what it is like to choose A over B or even take a peek at C once in a while.

The only correct choice is your choice.
I’ve spent a good deal of time with both KDE and Gnome, and found that I prefer Gnome. Personally I think it’s just another great fact about Linux: you can do what you want with what you want. I can’t say exactly why it is I prefer Gnome, but I was first exposed to Linux using KDE and it didn’t seem as nice to me as Gnome. Many people feel that KDE is more robust and has more options, but I have yet to find myself limited by Gnome and will probably continue to use it for some time. Beyond that... Beryl is completely awesome :)

It took me a while to figure out Rysiek’s point about being able to run KDE apps in Gnome and vice versa, but there are definitely some KDE apps that I use on a daily basis which are great (Amarok for one). So keep in mind that you’re not limited by the desktop environment you choose.
Fedora’s default is Gnome, but I’ve been using KDE basically from the start. And I think I somehow broke my Gnome. : ) I like KDE and I’m REALLY waiting to get my hands on KDE 4. I mean KDE 4 and Beryl or Compiz, whichever is leading by that time, will make a killer desktop.

It’s basically just a matter of taste, one can’t really be called better than the other.


And I’ve always thought that Mac OS X looks like KDE. : |
after working with openSUSE that interestingly promotes GNOME, I found that KDE offered more configurability, and I got a similar, if not more functional-simple look on KDE.

Regarding speed, I think with faster computers the speed issue is basically nulified, and so my vote goes for KDE.

However, however... there are excellent GNOME applications I could just not do without... ie. like BEAGLE (and I don’t know why, I like gedit better than kwrite). And so, I hope GNOME too continues to grow.

For an initial screenshot comparison between GNOME and KDE in openSUSE 10.2 see: http://alternativenayk.wordpress.com/2007/01/06/opensuse-102-kdegnome-screenshot/
I have used Windows in many many years, and have now first tried Ubuntu for some month and lately Kbuntu for some weeks. After learning about both, I would give noobs like me a different tip: Take a look of witch programs you are going to run. If most of them are from the “KDE line”, then choose KDE. Why? Yes, you can run all KDE programs on GNOME, and visa verca. But, as I have read several times: KDE programs will start faster on KDE then in GNOME. Further; it will look nicer in its own environment.

As coming from Windows I have no doubt; KDE is best for people coming from Windows. You dont need to ask for everything, cus there is a GUI for so much -and we Windows people are good with that. And when we want to do more – we have the powerful konsol. And dont forget; KDE is made to be as easy as possible, and “Windows” like.

Well, the noobs thoughts :-)


actually, kde is a bit more lightweight than gnome, according to some memory testing I have found on the net; this might not be true, though, as the tests were made on kde and gnome a few versions back. the point is - they both are about evenly memory- and cpu-consuming.

if you want to go lightweight for an old machine - go for xfce. I have xfce running well enough to use without foul language on an ancient celeron 333Mhz with 192MB of RAM (which also does some background processing, as it’s serving a few services), and I have xfce running *brisk* fast on a similarly old pentium II 400Mhz with 256MB of RAM on-board, that does not do any background work.

you can really easily check out all three (kde, gnome, xfce) by installing on your (k|x)ubuntu setup the kubuntu-desktop (for kde), ubuntu-desktop (for gnome) and xubuntu-desktop (for xfce) packages; you’ll be given a chance to select which one you wish to log-into in the log-in manager you use (kdm/gdm/xdm, it actually does not matter). I have both kde and xfce installed on one of my machines this way.

oh, and one more *important* thing: you’ve forgot to mention, that regardless of which desktop environment a user choses, (s)he still can use applications "written for" the other DE’s. if someone is completely new to the linux world, they might not know that.

cheers, and welcome to the linux world ;)
rysiek

Subscribe to the RSS Feed

Stay up to date with Seopher.com by subscribing to the RSS feed, either in your browser or subscribe via email using the form below

Updates by Email

By subscribing by email you’re also subscribing to the Seopher.com newsletter; a periodical email outlining new reviews, competitions and other subscriber-only content

  • 125x125 banner only $50 pcm
  • make money online with t3leads
Want to give your product/website exposure?

Paying for a featured review is a great way to give your product, service or website exposure. For as little as $50 you can have a full review on the site forever.

Advertising Bundle! Review + Banner = $70

To kick start the new improved Seopher.com, buy a review and get a 125x125 advert half price. Your banner gets displayed on over 450 pages for a full month.