KDE Kicked Off October With Dolphin Improvements, Continued HiDPI Work

[Britoid]

GNOME vs KDE arguments are dumb because they target two different sorts of people. KDE attracts people who like customizing their desktop to make it feel and look whatever way they want, whilst GNOME attracts people who just want an elegent desktop that just works and feels cohesive out the box but gets out the way (which is one of the reasons more distros use it as default).

[uid313]

So does Linux in general, yet here you are. If you disagree, well, that's how KDE users feel about KDE.
Usability is relative. I personally find KDE (and Linux, for that matter) to be pretty easy, but I've also been using it for several years.

Most of which are easily ignorable, and can only be seen when you go out of your way to see them. If you need to find something, the System Settings has a very helpful search feature.
Kind of the point of KDE is to be highly customizable in a relatively user-friendly manner, and it does that a lot better than you think. It's not possible to have so many options at your fingertips without being initially overwhelming. Although I personally think GNOME is a well-built interface, it lacks way too many features for me. To access those features, you need Tweak Tool, which is a hell of a lot more cumbersome, ugly, and user-unfriendly than how KDE would allow you to tweak the same features (where applicable). Tweak Tool is basically just a slightly more user-friendly approach to the Windows registry, and that's not a compliment.

But y'know what's great about open-source platforms like Linux? You get a choice. If KDE doesn't suit your needs, fine - don't use it. That doesn't mean it's terrible. GNOME is too crippling for me to use but I often find myself recommending it to a lot of people, because even though it doesn't suit my needs, I can still acknowledge that it's good.

How? For the most part, it functions like Windows but with some additional things here and there (again, stuff you can easily ignore).

How often does it need to be said that you can change the appearance? Same thing goes for people who bitch about XFCE or LXDE/LXQt - it doesn't have to look ugly and outdated. It's not hard to make it look good. It really boggles my mind how people judge an entire UI because of it's default appearance.
Meanwhile, although GNOME doesn't look bad, it's the most visually limiting of every desktop environment. If someone happened to not like it, there's not a whole lot they can do to change that.

While it is true that the Linux usability was poor, I think it nowadays is more of a myth. Using Ubuntu is easy, it's not much different from macOS or Windows, and i I commonly see people working on their Ubuntu laptops when commuting on the train.

Most people don't care about having all these options, and being able to configure every little tiny thing. They just want well thought out, sane defaults.

GNOME isn't visually limiting. It can be customized with tons of extensions and themes.

Well, that's your opinion. You have to learn KDE to get the most out of it, just like any other OS/DE. Personally, I like options. In fact, that's why I stopped using GNOME after 2.x, because they ripped out or obscured important options.
As for the look, it's very customizable. You sound like debianxfce trying to tell everyone Xubuntu sucks because they don't have the workspace switcher in the panel by default. (Hint: No one takes you seriously when you sound like debianxfce.)

But with Windows, macOS, iPhone, Android, people don't have to learn it to get the most out of it. People just immediatly use those and understand. They are beautiful and intuitive, and people love those systems.

[Shiba]

Is it just me, or is KDE terrible?

It's not just you. Basically it feels like Windows 95 with blur transparency.

[Vistaus]

How often does it need to be said that you can change the appearance? Same thing goes for people who bitch about XFCE or LXDE/LXQt - it doesn't have to look ugly and outdated. It's not hard to make it look good. It really boggles my mind how people judge an entire UI because of it's default appearance.
Meanwhile, although GNOME doesn't look bad, it's the most visually limiting of every desktop environment. If someone happened to not like it, there's not a whole lot they can do to change that.

In fact, KDE and Plasma are the easiest to skin out of all DE's and OS's because of GHNS.

[tomtomme]

KDE have terrible usability. It has a million of buttons, menus, and options. It is super confusing. It looks like shit.

very constructive indeed!

[tildearrow]

GNOME have terrible usability. It has buttons all over the place, weird menus, and lack of options. It is super confusing. It looks like shit.

Fixed.

[Britoid]

Britoid That’s not entirely true. Distributions who want to differentiate also prefer GNOME.

I said one of the reasons, another big reason that distros (for example Debian) choose GNOME is because of the attention to accessibility in both the shell and gtk.

[ferry]

Is it just me, or is KDE terrible?

I feel like KDE is probably the last thing I would want to use.
I would prefer GNOME, Windows 10, Xfce, macOS, last on the list would be KDE, just before Weston and Enlightenment. I think probably like Sway, i3, wmii, etc before KDE too maybe.

Yeaah it's just you.

[tildearrow]

I am proud to announce that uid313 and 144Hz are my competition!

He prefers:
- GNOME

- Desktop with wicked UX
- No customization except when you're allowed to (e.g. extensions, and even extensions break)

- Open-source all the way, even if it is utopic
- Complaining over fixing
- Deprecation:

- Absolutely no old hardware support. The next thing is out, and what you have is deprecated.
- Absolutely no X (even for apps that have not been ported yet)
- API/ABI compatibility doesn't matter. Let your apps break on every upgrade.

I prefer:
- KDE

- Desktop with full flexibility

- Open-source as much as possible/feasible (can accept closed-source if necessary)
- Fixing over complaining
- Compatibility:

- Old hardware support. People (especially companies) don't feel like replacing the hardware yet.
- X is acceptable
- API/ABI compatibility is paramount. I don't want the Curse of Linux ("error while loading shared libraries") to hit me.

[archsway]

144Hz But wouldn't that make Debian want to use Qt, as then they would have an excuse for exercising their freedom to keep a pile of downstream patches and not submit them upstream?