Should Ubuntu Have Gone With KDE Instead Of GNOME?

[eggbert]

I am a KDE user. I find it is the most "sane" Linux desktop. However, I think Canonical probably made the right decision. It seems as if Gnome is more stable and polished from release to release. While KDE usability is better (IMHO), stability from release to release is a mixed bag at best.

[boxie]

There's already Kubuntu, what would be the point? If you are feeling adventurous you can also install kubuntu-desktop right from within vanilla Ubuntu. So they already do provide both...

The point would be more developers working on KDE full time, which is always welcome

[boxie]

I am a KDE user. I find it is the most "sane" Linux desktop. However, I think Canonical probably made the right decision. It seems as if Gnome is more stable and polished from release to release. While KDE usability is better (IMHO), stability from release to release is a mixed bag at best.

I have found it (in general) is getting better and better each release.

[edoantonioco]

I am a KDE user. I find it is the most "sane" Linux desktop. However, I think Canonical probably made the right decision. It seems as if Gnome is more stable and polished from release to release. While KDE usability is better (IMHO), stability from release to release is a mixed bag at best.

Exactly. I also love KDE and I dont like Gnome, but this is a real thing. KDE has little control over Qt and all what they can do is just to fill a bug report, while Gnome devs has a lot of control on what happens on GTK.

[smartalgorithm]

ubuntu was always with gnome apps... abandoning unity is already something big, but switching to another desktop would be dramatic... and the article looks kind of a joke

[Toyoracer]

Since it is really just about choice. Why not embrace the option and display Ubuntu Flavours list at the top of the Desktop page and not at the bottom of the Downloads.

[DMJC]

I'm an XFCE user and I think that Canonical should have thrown out KDE and GNOME and should have used GNUstep to ripoff OSX. The gnome-control-center is obviously a ripoff of Apple's System Settings. Why stop at knocking off that one app from Apple? Why not go all in and clone the bulk of the Mac Desktop using GNUstep. Heck with Canonical's resources they could have gotten webkit running in GNUstep and finished off CoreAnimation, CoreVideo, CoreAudio etc. This would have pushed Linux forward in leaps and bounds in support for Multimedia applications. As an added bonus it would have made porting Adobe's suite a lot easier/more appealing and could have resulted in a whole range of Apple applications being ported to Linux.

[Rofineli]

I can understand staying with GTK+, but why pick Gnome over Xfce? Xubuntu is more popular than Ubuntu Gnome or Kubuntu and I'm guessing Xfce is the most popular desktop in general. Most people aren't power users and don't want a bunch of senseless desktop features or eye candy that they'll never use.

[pracedru]

I use both gnome and kde. At work I use kde at home I use gnome. I like both environments so I think they should be optional during installation.

[Kver]

KDE contributor here. My post here is personal, does not represent the KDE community or my employer, etc...

I personally think Canonical probably made the right decision.

Gnome is a simpler experience. The primary goal of Ubuntu Desktop is to make computing easy, and Gnome is generally harder to screw up. I hate the workflow, other environments do it better, but once the basics are understood there's not too many intimidating things going on, and Gnome is a generally healthy project at the core of GTK with less chance of significant issues.

Gnome is generally doing a good job providing a suite of applications which I think users would enjoy. Weather, Maps, Calculators, Photos, simple stuff. It's all there. All those apps are simple. They do not require users reconfigure the desktop, or lock/unlock things. With KDE applications we often have more capable offerings, but precious few of our apps can really be called suitable for beginners.

It has fewer apparent bugs. Maybe this is 40% me only using Gnome on HTPCs so I simply don't encounter them, but the simplicity of the system certainly puts a ceiling on their issues. Gnome is also focused on polishing their apps, so the bugs they do have aren't going to be as apparent.

Now... I'll also catch-22 this whole "things are less buggy" moment and say what's on my mind every day; GTK today simply plays poorly with most non-Gnome environments, to an extent they are directly responsible for crippling other DEs when it comes to the use of GTK applications. I only say Gnome is more suitable because the developers to an extent (in my very personal opinion not to be construed as fact) have used anticompetitive practices. Outside of Gnome and Pantheon the menus are broken, CSDs are broken, often the styling is broken... They have systematically broken desktop compatibility on several levels, and some of the developers in the camp stated outright they really couldn't care less and even rejected patches which fix things.

So, while Plasma as a desktop is better, there's a word to be said for keeping the same applications. If core Gnome apps were reliable on Plasma I'd recommend full-stop to use Plasma as the environment and Gnome applications for user familiarity. I wouldn't recommend to Ubuntu that they switch to KDE applications, because it would catch users off-guard. But, you simply cannot rely on GTK applications in Plasma because of the mess they cause, so... y'know... EEE. :/

...

Now, me, personally as an experienced user? I wouldn't use Gnome on my daily desktop if they paid me to do it. But here's the thing; I look at Ubuntu as the "gateway drug" of Linux, where users get a taste of a simple and competent system, then branch out to greener pastures when they are comfortable. If Ubuntu uses Gnome, that's fine, because I think in the long run Gnome is a fantastic gateway into Linux too - it's where I started - and some will stick with it, others will migrate. To me, it really doesn't change much, Canonical is offloading an unnecessary burden and sticking pretty close to their family of applications.