GNOME vs. KDE revisited

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by mjt » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 02:44:26



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Summary
I understand there are several different philosophies of application
development. Some people prefer GTK not because it is the better tool
kit, but because the approach makes more sense to them, because GTK
is more granular than Qt, prefer C to C++, or another reason. I cannot
address all of these factors, but I will try to take them into account
wherever they matter.  (1,200 words)

http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2002/0522.gnomevkde.html

- --
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer,  #    Black holes result
 skydiver, and author: "Inside Linux",     #   when God divides the  
 "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed"              #     universe by zero

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD4DBQE8/A1AtTveLPAHcDIRAjF5AJ4u+of+4GOz96kuSR7Ir6TVRlQyKwCYsp2M
6RNks3hnKsw9lweic2Sxlg==
=vP83
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Linonu » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 04:42:40


After takin' a swig o' grog, mjt belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Quote:> I understand there are several different philosophies of application
> development. Some people prefer GTK not because it is the better tool
> kit, but because the approach makes more sense to them, because GTK
> is more granular than Qt, prefer C to C++, or another reason. I cannot
> address all of these factors, but I will try to take them into account
> wherever they matter.  (1,200 words)

> http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2002/0522.gnomevkde.html

I like Gnome.  KDE looks cool, too, but seems much slower to me.

Our programming group will probably use Qt in preference to GTK+
for the following reasons:

        o Qt looks and acts more like Windoze
        o Trolltech charges for commercial usage; a stupid reason.  In
          fact, our boss acted surprised when told that Qt was
          free... for personal development and GPL stuff.  And I consider
          him an intelligent fellow.
        o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

But, what the hell, at least we're getting away from MFC
and Borland's VCL.

Chris

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by timeOda » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 05:25:15



> After takin' a swig o' grog, mjt belched out this bit o' wisdom:

>> I understand there are several different philosophies of application
>> development. Some people prefer GTK not because it is the better tool
>> kit, but because the approach makes more sense to them, because GTK
>> is more granular than Qt, prefer C to C++, or another reason. I cannot
>> address all of these factors, but I will try to take them into account
>> wherever they matter.  (1,200 words)

>> http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2002/0522.gnomevkde.html

> I like Gnome.  KDE looks cool, too, but seems much slower to me.

> Our programming group will probably use Qt in preference to GTK+
> for the following reasons:

> o Qt looks and acts more like Windoze
> o Trolltech charges for commercial usage; a stupid reason.  In
> fact, our boss acted surprised when told that Qt was
> free... for personal development and GPL stuff.  And I consider
> him an intelligent fellow.
> o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

> But, what the hell, at least we're getting away from MFC
> and Borland's VCL.

> Chris

I use  Gnome at work and KDE at home, and I think they're so similar it
doesn't matter much.  I hope which ever is nicer to program wins.
 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Billy O'Conno » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 07:02:03



> After takin' a swig o' grog, mjt belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> > I understand there are several different philosophies of application
> > development. Some people prefer GTK not because it is the better tool
> > kit, but because the approach makes more sense to them, because GTK
> > is more granular than Qt, prefer C to C++, or another reason. I cannot
> > address all of these factors, but I will try to take them into account
> > wherever they matter.  (1,200 words)

> > http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2002/0522.gnomevkde.html

> I like Gnome.  KDE looks cool, too, but seems much slower to me.

> Our programming group will probably use Qt in preference to GTK+
> for the following reasons:

>    o Qt looks and acts more like Windoze
>    o Trolltech charges for commercial usage; a stupid reason.  In
>      fact, our boss acted surprised when told that Qt was
>      free... for personal development and GPL stuff.  And I consider
>      him an intelligent fellow.

I think many managers think this way, they like commercial software
with paid support.  Makes them feel better, like their asses are
covered.  Not a slam, just something I've observed.

Quote:>    o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

> But, what the hell, at least we're getting away from MFC
> and Borland's VCL.

> Chris

Exactly.  Besides, one look at kdevelop and Qt, you can see any MFC
or Borland trained developer isn't going to have any problems with
Qt.
 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by AndrĂ© P?nit » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 09:56:44



>    o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

And anybody knows that GUIs are best coded in assembler. And pigs can fly...

Andre'

--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Jan » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 19:24:40


Quote:> I use  Gnome at work and KDE at home, and I think they're so similar it
> doesn't matter much.  I hope which ever is nicer to program wins.

And I hope www.freedesktop.org works out, so there's no question about a
  desktop 'winning' or 'losing'.
 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by michael brow » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 11:47:01


Quote:> --
> Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
> will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Are you sure it wasn't Ben Franklin that said that?

michael brown

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Florian S » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 13:16:40




>> o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

> And anybody knows that GUIs are best coded in assembler. And pigs can
> fly...

So that's what i've been doing wrong all the time...

--
Add the next two proper digits to the e-mail to mail me. (Think of pi ;)

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by mjt » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 12:31:54


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1




>>> o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

>> And anybody knows that GUIs are best coded in assembler. And pigs can
>> fly...

> So that's what i've been doing wrong all the time...

... what?  fly like a pig?  or code a GUI in assembly?  :)

- --
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer,  #    Black holes result
 skydiver, and author: "Inside Linux",     #   when God divides the  
 "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed"              #     universe by zero

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8/JaitTveLPAHcDIRAtt4AJ4m0YkZb4bya5bed96XSQU/Ifh1HACZAcUi
WZbi7kscQMNbmK6Pd0cNtBU=
=W0TV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Florian S » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 14:07:43



> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1




>>>> o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

>>> And anybody knows that GUIs are best coded in assembler. And pigs can
>>> fly...

>> So that's what i've been doing wrong all the time...

> ... what?  fly like a pig?  or code a GUI in assembly?  :)

Fly like a pig. ;)

--
Add the next two proper digits to the e-mail to mail me. (Think of pi ;)

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Linonu » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 13:48:44


After takin' a swig o' grog, Jan belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Quote:>> I use  Gnome at work and KDE at home, and I think they're so similar it
>> doesn't matter much.  I hope which ever is nicer to program wins.

> And I hope www.freedesktop.org works out, so there's no question about a
>   desktop 'winning' or 'losing'.

GTK+ loses out automatically at work because it is free.  Go figure.
 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Linonu » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 13:50:08


After takin' a swig o' grog, Florian S. belched out this bit o' wisdom:


>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1




>>>>> o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

>>>> And anybody knows that GUIs are best coded in assembler. And pigs can
>>>> fly...

>>> So that's what i've been doing wrong all the time...

>> ... what?  fly like a pig?  or code a GUI in assembly?  :)

> Fly like a pig. ;)

To paraphrase flatty:

        COLA threads are self-hijacking <grin>

--

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Florian S » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 14:59:18



> After takin' a swig o' grog, Florian S. belched out this bit o' wisdom:


>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1




>>>>>> o Qt is C++; again, not a good reason.

>>>>> And anybody knows that GUIs are best coded in assembler. And pigs can
>>>>> fly...

>>>> So that's what i've been doing wrong all the time...

>>> ... what?  fly like a pig?  or code a GUI in assembly?  :)

>> Fly like a pig. ;)

> To paraphrase flatty:

> COLA threads are self-hijacking <grin>

To paraphrase flatty / peter ;)

Prove it.

        Florian

--
Add the next two proper digits to the e-mail to mail me. (Think of pi ;)

 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by Spiceru » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 13:32:51


In a maze of twisty little passages all alike,  Billy O'Connor wrote on
Tue, 04 Jun 2002 00:02:03 -0500:

Quote:> Exactly.  Besides, one look at kdevelop and Qt, you can see any MFC or
> Borland trained developer isn't going to have any problems with Qt.

...Until they discover that using Qt in a commercial environment suddenly
incurs fairly significant royalties and fees.  This is my complaint about
Qt, you either have to make your program totally non-commercial under the
GPL, or pay the fines for being commercial.
 
 
 

GNOME vs. KDE revisited

Post by michael brow » Wed, 05 Jun 2002 15:09:01


Quote:> >> --
> >> Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
> >> will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

> >Are you sure it wasn't Ben Franklin that said that?

> >michael brown

> It was Jefferson: while President.

That's funny, because http://www.monticello.org/library/quotes.html only
lists it as an "unconfirmed" quote as they can't seem to find it in any of
his works.  Yet scores of websites attribute virtually the same quote to
Franklin.

"Those who sacrifice freedom for safety deserves neither."   Jefferson
(unconfirmed)

"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety
deserves neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Comments?

michael brown

 
 
 

1. KDE vs. GNOME vs CDE (?)

Hi All.

    This is a relatively simple question, but can anyone tell me the
relative merits/drawbacks to these three environments?  Is there one
that stands out as technically superior?  I am using KDE, but have Gnome
because it shipped with my distribution of Linux... Should I use KDE or
Gnome?  I am also interested in CDE...  Any opinions or help would be
great.

                                                                Thanks
in Advance

2. Question about the dd command

3. WindowMaker vs KDE vs GNOME

4. bootX problem

5. Xfree vs Sis chipset -- gnome vs kde

6. KDevelop Question

7. KDE vs. Openlook vs. Xfree86 vs. MetroX vs. CDE

8. matrix -frog3

9. KDE Vs. GNOME... which one?

10. KDE vs. GNOME

11. KDE 1.1 vs GNOME 1.0 and flames, flames, flames

12. Gnome vs KDE

13. KDE vs. GNOME