Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 3.10 Continues Pushing Ahead With Wayland

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Personally I think both KDE and gnome go to two different extremes and I'd like them to both move towards a middle ground.

    KDE's interface is still quite convoluted and janky, and its just massively overloaded with many features, many of which really aren't necessary. It is nice to have a very tweakable and customizable desktop, but its impossible to have a properly polished and not-super-buggy UI when you have a shitload of features to maintain. You run into issues where some features may interact poorly with each other, or features that are so rarely used/tested that they are broken and buggy and things like that. I really dislike KDE's plasma shell, its very customizable but very rough and "clunky", it still suffers from tons of padding and alignment issues too. There are a few things I really love about KDE, for example Kwin is by far the best compositing window manager on linux, very good performance, very customizable, and very stable (far less buggy than compiz too ). KDE is always a desktop I "want to like", but I always end up feeling its too convoluted and buggy when using it.

    Now on the gnome side, I would say they went too far, they removed some very popular and pretty objectively useful features. Interacting with the gnome developers it can often seem that they are very much "in their own little world" and don't respond very well to critisism. However in the end I do still prefer gnome, I just find its interface to be much cleaner, polished and more usable. For the most part it still gives me the features I need, and anything else I've been able to easily add via the tweak tool or extensions.

    When it comes to a balance of features and customization I actually prefer XFCE. It has a very simple and usable interface, that is sane and reasonably customizable. However I don't like how outdated XFCE is under the hood, its very slow development pace, and lack of opengl compositing (using 3rd party compositors always results in problems for me, compiz is extremely buggy and I don't like the way compton handles shadows, as far as I'm concerned proper opengl compositing is an absolute necessity, I loathe video-tearing and like the features an open gl compositing can provide, such as shadows, expose and nicer alt tab switching etc...)

    In the end what I'd prefer is something simple, light and customizable like XFCE, but built on modern gnome 3/gnome-shell like technology (and no cinnamon does not fit this bill, its interface is a total mess and its quite sluggish and buggy. From a tech standpoint elementary's pantheon comes close, but its not very customizable)
    Last edited by bwat47; 08-23-2013, 10:15 AM.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Honton View Post
      That is how you do away with software with non-free contributor agreements. Watch and learn KDE.
      Oh, funky is back. I hadn't noticed.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
        Personally I think both KDE and gnome go to two different extremes and I'd like them to both move towards a middle ground.

        KDE's interface is still quite convoluted and janky, and its just massively overloaded with many features, many of which really aren't necessary. It is nice to have a very tweakable and customizable desktop, but its impossible to have a properly polished and not-super-buggy UI when you have a shitload of features to maintain. You run into issues where some features may interact poorly with each other, or features that are so rarely used/tested that they are broken and buggy and things like that. I really dislike KDE's plasma shell, its very customizable but very rough and "clunky", it still suffers from tons of padding and alignment issues too. There are a few things I really love about KDE, for example Kwin is by far the best compositing window manager on linux, very good performance, very customizable, and very stable (far less buggy than compiz too ). KDE is always a desktop I "want to like", but I always end up feeling its too convoluted and buggy when using it.
        I found KDE 3 to be an absolute mess and I don't think its cartoonish theme helped either. I find KDE 4 to be more refined but I find that in some instances the customisability can be overwhelming. On the positive side there seems to be a move towards simplifying some aspects with the KlyDE project. I hope they don't take it too far though!

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
          KDE's interface is still quite convoluted and janky, and its just massively overloaded with many features, many of which really aren't necessary.
          Then don't use them and STFU.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
            Then don't use them and STFU.
            Why the hate, Awesomeness? bwat seemed to be fair-handed and hardly a troll that deserves such a response. Complain about Honton, if you must (but I'd rather you didn't), but bwat's post didn't smell trollish to me.

            Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
            6.) phasing out KDM and focus on a lean solution and systemd logind for wayland/XCB[for now QDDM seem the best candidate]
            I hadn't heard that KDE was tying themselves to systemd. That's a good thing, IMHO, but surprising since I'd thought they'd described themselves as very much a crossplatform environment.
            I think gnome is doing the same thing, and is also the the right choice since being able to assume systemd makes things a decent amount simpler.
            Last edited by liam; 08-23-2013, 02:06 PM.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by liam View Post
              I hadn't heard that KDE was tying themselves to systemd.
              They are not although some functionality might not be available. For example there seems to be intrest in using systemd for user sessions in KDE (leading to faster and better managed user session startup). That doesn't mean system without systemd won't be supported, kdeinit will be "maintained" (it hasn't changed much at all in many years). Display managers usually aren't tied to desktop environments so even if KDM is dropped and adopted SDDM it wouldn't tie KDE into it. SDDM doesn't even depend on systemd at the moment and I'm not aware of any such plans.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by liam View Post
                I hadn't heard that KDE was tying themselves to systemd. That's a good thing, IMHO, but surprising since I'd thought they'd described themselves as very much a crossplatform environment. I think gnome is doing the same thing, and is also the the right choice since being able to assume systemd makes things a decent amount simpler.
                I have clarified this before but it keeps cropping up. GNOME does not assume systemd at all. It uses a D-Bus API that is implemented by systemd but not limited to it. Alternative implementations are possible and already exist. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Soft...tabilityChart/

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                  Then don't use them and STFU.
                  Thank you for your valuable contribution to the discussion. /s

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I don't get the KDE / Qt bashing. Yes, you give the right to digia to use your code, but the code is also under GPL, which I think is a strong enough warranty, isn't it ?

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by Honton View Post
                      You can't upstream free code to Qt. Doing so requires you to sign a contributor agreement stripping away the copyleft. KDE is blind to Qt's non-free nature just as Ubuntu users are blind to Canonical's non-free nature. Expressing concerns why this is very wrong is as valid as caring about software freedom.
                      ???
                      http://qt-project.org/legal.html

                      It says very precisely that the submitted code must be LGPL V2.1, that's not what I would call non-free...
                      Also, " each person retains ownership of the code as well as related IP they create"

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X