Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: mobrien_12 on 30 January 2006, 08:35
-
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20060129
This cartoon got me thinking. I prefer KDE as a desktop environment overall, but I like a lot of GNOME/GTK programs and prefer them to many (if not most) kde programs. Gnome loads a little faster, I think.
However, I can't freaking stand spatial Nautilus. I finally found out how to make it behave rationally, but it pisses me off that you have to use gnomeconf to do it, and it's not well documented.
What do you guys think?
-
Editing the configuration file has got to be one of the most annoying things about Gnome, it's a bloody desktop, that means it's supposed to be user friendly and having to edit configuration files is not user friendly.
-
I don't use Nautilus or Konqueror I use aterm/Konsole.. :)
The kde settings editor is great, there is some much stuff to change that cd'ing and vi'ing is a pain.
-
Gnome is too user friendly. I want my desktop evironment to have a configure panel (or good conf files, don't matter) with lots of (useless) options and configurations.
Gnome is hardly adjustable. And I really don't like Nautilus. The interface just isn't fast enough. I'd even use that weird XFCE file browser, than use Nautilus. The only thing Nautilus is useful for, is browsing under root as a user, by typing su -
***
nautilus --no-desktop and don't forget --no-desktop, or you'll get Gnome stuff in your KDE.
Also, I do like K apps, but I use some GTK's like The GIMP, and... uhm... the GIMP.
-
Well I think that both projects are doing amazingly well. I think they are making great strides. Everyoneś a winner here :thumbup:
If I had to guess I say at this point KDE has everything to lose and Gnome nothing. Give me an hour and even I could program a couple configurators in GTK. For KDE to be at this popularity this early stage of the OSOS boom is probably not good. K has a LOT of kinks to work out and gnome has a firm base. K is expected to offer all these great visual miracles in 4.0 and I just don see it happening (not very soon anyway and not without great cost to the rest of development.) Gnome is expected to match k3.5 nearly in configurability and fully with looks with the release of 2.14, now that, I can believe. I
-
Editing the configuration file has got to be one of the most annoying things about Gnome, it's a bloody desktop, that means it's supposed to be user friendly and having to edit configuration files is not user friendly.
He didn't have to edit any configuration file, he could've used gconftool or it's GUI equivalent gconf-editor. You don't usually have to modify gconf settings manually, unless some application developers were either too lazy or didn't want to over-populate preference windows with unnecessary/unfriendly options and expected any users interested in the setting to consult gconf anyhow. gconf is a bit like the Windows registry, except it's actually user-friendly, each setting with (probably optional, but every setting seems to have them) short and longer descriptions (image (http://illhostit.com/files/3457597570747925/gconf-editor.png)). Check it out, master it. It'll take you three and a half seconds.
I use GNOME, but don't mind KDE. Most of the programs I use are GTK+/GNOME, that's why I started using GNOME in the first place.
I used XFCE for a good long while before switching back to GNOME, and I wouldn't mind going back to XFCE at all.
File browsers... Haven't used one in ages. I'm far more productive on the command line.
-
What do you click on to get this?
And Fuck does this look complex, it reminds me of regedit! :eek:
-
What do you click on to get this?
Applications > System Tools > Configuration Editor
And Fuck does this look complex, it reminds me of regedit! :eek:
Relax, it is like regedit in that it's for configuration, but not all configuration tools are nonsensical. Only the Windows one really.
-
I like GNOME ... I never had to edit any gconf ... ever ... as for nautilus the best interface is this:
nautilus --no-desktop --browser
-
And Fuck does this look complex, it reminds me of regedit! :eek:
It's essentially the same idea. But it's cleaner. The only reason for that, though, is that it doesn't store that much compared to regedit.
-
It's not that much better though, this is simply horrible, give me KDE's configureation editor anyday.
-
It's not that much better though, this is simply horrible, give me KDE's configureation editor anyday.
Not much better than what, regedit? I hope you are kidding. KDE's configuration thing isn't bad, but you can't do a whole pile with it IIRC. Editing gconf settings manually is for stuff that people rarely configure, you rarely need to do it.
I'm not sure exactly how configuration stuff is done in KDE, but if you're referring to the KDE control center, which I would only compare to the Desktop > Preferences menu in GNOME, I cannot imagine it giving me access to all the stuff I see in gconf-editor, because the settings in gconf-editor aren't friendly and they AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE. They're for power users, not newbies. However, the damn thing is so friendly that I could ALWAYS find what I wanted without getting lost/confused, without reading anything.
-
Well I don't know but a nube like myself should easilly be able to figure out how to add programs to the menu.
And I don't know whate you mean by Desktop > Preferences are you sure you don't mean System > Preferences?
-
Well I don't know but a nube like myself should easilly be able to figure out how to add programs to the menu.
The menu info isn't stored in gconf, it's stored in standardized .desktop files usually found in /usr/share/applications. If KDE has a menu editor, it should work with the GNOME menu too. They retrieve the menu info from the same locations.
And I don't know whate you mean by Desktop > Preferences are you sure you don't mean System > Preferences?
It's Desktop > Preferences in my GNOME 2.12.0 mostly-default compilation. What GNOME version are you using?
-
The menu info isn't stored in gconf, it's stored in standardized .desktop files usually found in /usr/share/applications.
Yes but how the fuck was I suppose to know?
If KDE has a menu editor, it should work with the GNOME menu too. They retrieve the menu info from the same locations.
Come to think of it I can't really remember about KDE, Xfce had an excellent menu editor - most of the configureation was point and click, perhapps the more advanced stuff was in the configureation file just like it should be.
It's Desktop > Preferences in my GNOME 2.12.0 mostly-default compilation. What GNOME version are you using?
2.10.0 - that's not too old is it?
-
Yes but how the fuck was I suppose to know?
Maybe because I told you before (http://www.microsuck.com/forums/showpost.php?p=108828&postcount=21)? :p
Come to think of it I can't really remember about KDE, Xfce had an excellent menu editor - most of the configureation was point and click, perhapps the more advanced stuff was in the configureation file just like it should be.
In KDE you just right click a menu item and chose "Edit Item", that launches the KDE menu editor with the selected item like http://illhostit.com/files/1032938238597521/kde_menu_editor.png, which is pretty damn nice.2.10.0 - that's not too old is it?
No, they must've changed "System" to "Desktop" in 2.14.
-
My two cents - I think gtk looks cooler than qt. And that's all it really comes down to. It's what you're used to. I've been using Gnome since Fedora began. But I used KDE in Suse before that. If some "everything must be standardized" asshat decided that there would be no more Gnome, I wouldn't commit suicide - I'd just get used to something else.
-
But Worker, while freedom of choice is very important, I'm 100% behind that, however, standards are important. The whole lack of unix GUI standards is a big problem. While it doesn't inhibit development and use, I feel it would enhance the whole user experience. Seeing as how one of the goals of this orginazition is to eradicate Microsoft, in my experience, having a standardized UI is a great asset to new users. Few people have time to sit around for hours, reading the help files and dicking around figuring out how to make a folder or something. Now don't get me wrong, I have nothing against any of the Unix GUI's, but I do feel that they could be improved with some standards.
Though I haven't been able to use them much lately. I just had a motherboard blow out, so I'm back to my old Pentium Pro box. Though I just did get my new RAM in, that'll speed it up.
-
I was wondering where to put this thought I had the other day, might as well be here...
What is Linux? Is it the mass market desktop of the future? Is it the ideal computing environment? Is it the best operating system that has ever been made or will ever be made? No. Linux was written so a guy could run Unix programs on his PC. That's what Linux is. I use it because there are some Unix tools that I use all the time, and even when Windows ports or Mac ports exist, they suck.
If you try and turn what is, when you get right down to the bare metal, an x86 Unix emulator (although it has grown well beyond that), into some kind of universal replacement, you will change things. This Linux that newbs are learning and Ubuntu is distributing and people here are fantasizing about is something else altogether. While that particular mystery OS might be enjoyable to use and perfectly fine, it won't really be Linux. It'll be something else. Because Linux, at its core, doesn't want to be the desktop panacea. It doesn't even want to be user friendly, and it would probably be served rather well by dumping all GUIs.
So I don't know how I feel about dragging things in that direction. I of course enjoy the GUI, I think it is convenient and pretty if nothing else. But if it was gone, I would still use Linux for certain *nix apps. At home I use OSX, and it is pretty much everything everyone here ever dreamed of. All Apple would have to do to satisfy everyone is make it free and open, and have multiple window managers to choose from. Nobody seems to be going in that direction with Linux - nor do they seem to even be interested in it. Which is probably best for the OS as a whole.
-
But one of the things that makes OSX great is the consistancy. I think the Mac UI is great. It's nice, light, and intuitive. I find the Windows XP interface horrible, you have loads of flashing icons and pointless eye candy. While eye candy is nice, I detest it in large amounts, it produces undue amounts of clutter. The Mac UI is consistant, and that's what's necessary in a good GUI.
-
The GNOME UI is consistent, and so is KDE's.
Desktop market share in GNU/Linux is probably split between GNOME and KDE and then the rest. I think people should consider graphical applications not GNU/Linux applications, but GNOME/KDE/GTK+/Qt/FLTK/whatever applications. KDE has KOffice, Krita, Konqueror and Kopete and GNOME has GNOME office, the GIMP, Epiphany and GAIM.
While I think it is good that GTK+ and Qt applications use the same clipboard and that DND between GNOME and KDE apps works like a charm, I don't think such functionality should be depended on. It should be assumed that GNOME and KDE apps won't be completely consistent with one another, for almost precisely the same reason it should be assumed that Windows and Mac OS X won't be completely consistent with one another either.
-
KOffice is a joke to say the least ... has anyone tried that shit besides me ? I was curious about it one day ... thinking hey KDE has some nice, clean apps ... I wonder how their office software is ... well it's shit ... it's highly unstable, not very usable, or compatible (with the ever popular M$ formats I am forced to use :mad: ), or productive (just start trying to do productive stuff with it). OpenOffice is the only 'real' open-source office suite. GNOME office is quite unstable too (Gnumeric especially) ... Abiword is quite good tho.
-
The GNOME UI is consistent, and so is KDE's.
Desktop market share in GNU/Linux is probably split between GNOME and KDE and then the rest. I think people should consider graphical applications not GNU/Linux applications, but GNOME/KDE/GTK+/Qt/FLTK/whatever applications. KDE has KOffice, Krita, Konqueror and Kopete and GNOME has GNOME office, the GIMP, Epiphany and GAIM.
While I think it is good that GTK+ and Qt applications use the same clipboard and that DND between GNOME and KDE apps works like a charm, I don't think such functionality should be depended on. It should be assumed that GNOME and KDE apps won't be completely consistent with one another, for almost precisely the same reason it should be assumed that Windows and Mac OS X won't be completely consistent with one another either.
While they are consistant with themselves, it's consistancy with others that matters. The problem is that you have 'GNOME standards', and 'KDE Standards', but not Linux standards, or X11 standards, or Unix standards.
-
KOffice is a joke to say the least ... has anyone tried that shit besides me ? I was curious about it one day ... thinking hey KDE has some nice, clean apps ... I wonder how their office software is ... well it's shit ... it's highly unstable, not very usable, or compatible (with the ever popular M$ formats I am forced to use :mad: ), or productive (just start trying to do productive stuff with it). OpenOffice is the only 'real' open-source office suite. GNOME office is quite unstable too (Gnumeric especially) ... Abiword is quite good tho.
I have KOffice, just to have an office suite. GNOME office wouldn't compile on the first try (could've needed a GCC 4 patch), and it's not increadibly easy to get OOo play good with gcj.
The only KOffice program that's crashed on me is KWord, and it crashes every flipping time I try to type something, so it's not usable. Krita has also crashed a bit, and it seems seriously crap, but it'll probably improve with time.
I've no need for an office suite anyhow.
-
While they are consistant with themselves, it's consistancy with others that matters. The problem is that you have 'GNOME standards', and 'KDE Standards', but not Linux standards, or X11 standards, or Unix standards.
Is Mac OS X consistent with KDE?
-
No. KDE is an X11 desktop environment. Mac OS X doesn't use X11 natively, it can support X applications; however, it uses Aqua/ Quartz to provide the GUI. X isn't involved, thus making it exempt from X standards.
-
Yeah I think that the best gift that Apple could give back to OSS is the source for Aqua/Quartz OS X (the first foray atleast) once they`ve gone down the road a bit. Not so much as it`s own desktop diseperate but more of a base for another GUI server and DE or for comparison and analysis for tweaking of X11 and Gnome, Flux or KDE.
Well it`s the most we could expect. I doubt we could convince them to hand over the deep deep dark secrets of Spotlight ;)
:macos::tux::bsd:=:thumbup:
-
No. KDE is an X11 desktop environment. Mac OS X doesn't use X11 natively, it can support X applications; however, it uses Aqua/ Quartz to provide the GUI. X isn't involved, thus making it exempt from X standards.
Exactly what X11 standards? A few of the ones the KDE and GNOME developers like, they conform to.
http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Standards
KDE and GNOME are different desktop enviornments just like Windows and Mac OS X have different desktop enviornments. What exactly do you expect from KDE and GNOME? They draw with Xlib, so they should be the same? They have pretty big architectural differences and exist for different reasons. KDE is mostly C++, GNOME is mostly C. KDE I don't think has ever put usability before the application of a patch, GNOME has (hence, Linus Torvalds hates GNOME). GNOME is supposed to be network object model and all sorts of crap, I dunno if KDE was/is the same. KDE exists because some guy wanted to make a consistent desktop enviornment, GNOME exists because some guy wanted to be able to run a consistent desktop enviornment on a completely free system (KDE depended on Qt, which wasn't free at the time) and is still alive because said-guy and hundreds of other developers felt like continuing the project even after Qt was GPLed.I doubt we could convince them to hand over the deep deep dark secrets of Spotlight
I read someone's working on a spotlight-like thing for KDE4, and I think it's supposed to be better. KDE4 will also have a dashboard thing, too, muhaha Apple.
-
It would be cool if they could make KOffice more stable and usable ... then people would have a choice other than OpenOffice in case it didn't work or they didn't like it. As for OpenOffice ... what I do to install it (slightly unconventional, but is probably the best option for me) is I download the rpm version from their site and extract them all manually to one folder, which will end up being a folder called opt ... inside opt is a folder called openoffice.org2.0 which should contain all components if they were extracted correctly. Then I move this folder into the /usr directory and make a launcher with the target /usr/openoffice.org2.0/program/soffice and it works without being installed or having to compile it (which has failed for strange reasons) ... this keeps yum from trying to update it to the fucked up version in the Fedora repo :D
-
It would be cool if they could make KOffice more stable and usable ... then people would have a choice other than OpenOffice in case it didn't work or they didn't like it. As for OpenOffice ... what I do to install it (slightly unconventional, but is probably the best option for me) is I download the rpm version from their site and extract them all manually to one folder, which will end up being a folder called opt ... inside opt is a folder called openoffice.org2.0 which should contain all components if they were extracted correctly. Then I move this folder into the /usr directory and make a launcher with the target /usr/openoffice.org2.0/program/soffice and it works without being installed or having to compile it (which has failed for strange reasons) ... this keeps yum from trying to update it to the fucked up version in the Fedora repo :D
Do you have a Java VM installed?
I might try that, it could work.
EDIT: Nah I think I'll wait 'till I get round to installing Debian...
-
GNOME office is quite unstable too (Gnumeric especially)
I don't know what the fuck is up with those guys - I have reported numerous gnumeric crashes, and they haven't done anything. It's like gnumeric has been abandoned. Which sucks, because I liked its interface and functionality better than OOCalc.
IMHO AbiWord is the 3rd greatest word processor of all time, in my opinion (after WordPerfect 8 and Mariner Write). No spreadsheet will ever trump Quattro.
-
Yeah I like gnumeric more than Calc ... except for the random crashing :(
I have Java installed ... and OpenOffice can use it, it should auto-detect it ... if not it's under Tools->Options->OpenOffice.org->Java
-
My two cents - I think gtk looks cooler than qt.
Yes, it does. I tend to favor the GNOME apps as well. Galeon over Konqueror, at least until Firefox came along. Gedit over Kate, at least until Jedit. As for all the silly time wasting games, the GNOME collection is much better. :D
As for desktop environments, nothing beats Enlightenment (http://www.enlightenment.org) :p