Out of my stinker of a flamebait I only get one retort? Poor show! > I think you mean spatial vs browser. Now that I am used to spatial I > don't think I could give it up. Browser mode is still supported, you > can enable it in the preferences.
Yep, I mean spatial vs browser. I know you can switch it off. It's hidden in some horrid menu that I have to go to the Gnome website every time I wanna find out how to switch off. Spatial browsing makes no sense to a normal user either - ask my dad; he much preferred KDE's file manager. > Not sure what you mean here, my Fedora Core 6 system has very nice > integrated menus. I mean that the System / Applications menu make no sense. I hate Red Hat / Fedora so I can't vouch for what they did with it, but I think it's fairly different from the Ubuntu/default Gnome way of doing it - doesn't the Fedora gnome menus etc look similar to the KDE setup? > I would say the same thing about KDE and QT :-) That's coz you are using Fedora. They uglified it there. Use Kubuntu, tis a much better distro all round. Yum is a pathetic hack of apt etc, etc. But thats a different argument. > GNOME does the right thing for burning CDs, pop in a blank CD and it > asks if you want to burn files to it. From Nautilus (the file manager) > I can right click on files or directories and burn them to CD, this also > works for ISO images. Maybe now it does, but it didn't do it very well for a long time - Last time I used Gnome, they had just integrated cd burning into nautilus which was pretty flaky and it didn't do audio cds or multi-session etc, etc. I haven't heard from the gnome world that this isn't the case so I think that's particularly guff in that department. > GNOME isn't perfect with iPods. GNOME isn't perfect for a great many things. That's why I switched. It's too much of a hassle to get working. KDE mainly 'just works'. > It sounds like you haven't used a recent GNOME desktop, perhaps you > should give a recent Ubuntu or Fedora Core a try. Admittedly no, I have given up on gnome for the forseeable. I last used it properly with Ubuntu 5.04 (Hoary). I might have used it for a while on 5.10 but it was around then when I switched. > > The end :) > Never, from debating the merits of GNOME and KDE we can move onto Emacs > vs VI, Bourne Shell vs C Shell, C vs C++, Mono/C# vs Java. etc etc :-) That's easy: * ViM rules. Emacs is a stinky pile of bloat reserved for hairy, sandle wearing hippies. * Bourne Shell. C shell is just a shell on crack. * I don't code in Either C or C++, nor Mono/C# so I can't really say for those. Enjoy! Ali On Tuesday 05 December 2006 22:01, Keith Sharp wrote: > On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 19:13 +0000, Alistair J. Ross wrote: > > To answer all queries in one rather long rant-ish email: > > > > * ion is indeed a fantastic wm. I prefer it's predecessor, pwm however, > > and when I need a very fast lightweight desktop, that's what I still use. > > I have a website-shrine dedicated to pwm: http://pwm.aliross.co.uk > > > > * Enough of that twaddle - what you wanted to know was why do I think KDE > > is better than Gnome? > > > > I've used both Gnome and KDE since their very early incarnations (KDE 1, > > first version of Gnome etc). I used KDE first of all, because that came > > first (if memory serves). I thought it was pretty slow and it wasn't too > > usable in some areas. I felt that things got worse in KDE2 on the > > slowness factor as well (however I was using a PII or the likes at the > > time). I used multiple desktops (including ion!) inbetween for a while, > > and then plonked for Gnome. > > > > Whilst on the whole, I have no severe disaffection for Gnome, and for the > > people that use it, however, I find that I often end up asking myself two > > questions when I use it: > > > > 1) That makes NO sense! Why the hell did the developers do that? It's > > not logical to do this? (eg: WTF is Behavioural browsing? Why do I want > > it?) > > I think you mean spatial vs browser. Now that I am used to spatial I > don't think I could give it up. Browser mode is still supported, you > can enable it in the preferences. > > > 2) Why is everything not integrated into easy to find/use menus, why is > > it strewn between programs that have weird names. > > Not sure what you mean here, my Fedora Core 6 system has very nice > integrated menus. > > > Oh - and why is it so ugly, despite all the things that Red Hat / Ubuntu > > etc have tried to do to make it look nicer. GTK2 *is* nasty-looking. > > I would say the same thing about KDE and QT :-) > > > Let's take CD burning as example 1 of how KDE is better: > > > > If I use KDE, and I want to burn a CD, I pop a blank in, it pops up with > > a cd burner. Good. Last time I did that with Gnome, it had no bloody idea > > what to do with it. I spent hours tweaking the program 'Graveman???' to > > get the cd burning working. > > GNOME does the right thing for burning CDs, pop in a blank CD and it > asks if you want to burn files to it. From Nautilus (the file manager) > I can right click on files or directories and burn them to CD, this also > works for ISO images. > > > And for example 2, My Ipod: > > > > plugging in the ipod in KDE remarks, "Open up ipod, or do nothing", click > > on Open up Ipod and then you can see all your tunes in Amarok. simply > > drag the music you want to the ipod from your collection and then click > > transfer. > > > > In gnome - you use a selection of tools, gtkpod being the best I believe. > > The last time I used that fugly piece of turdware I ended up installing > > kubuntu in frustration, just to see what KDE was like in 3.5. Gtkpod > > never mounted my ipod properly once and when i mounted via command line, > > it would unmount it corrupt via the interface after transferring the > > tunes. Bad, broken software that works on some pcs, but not others, is > > not welcome on my pc. KDE stuff generally has more options, is more > > mature than Gnome apps, and works faster. > > GNOME isn't perfect with iPods. When I plug in my iPod it automatically > appears on my desktop as a USB storage device, and I can browse and > create files on it. If I launch Rhythmbox (music library application > like iTunes) my iPod appears and I can browse and play all of the music. > Where I am let down, with Rhythmbox 0.9.5, is that I cannot drag and > drop music from my computer to my iPod. I believe this is supported in > more recent versions. > > > Don't take my word for it, listen to the words of Linus Torvalds himself, > > or the recent critique on KDE vs Gnome in Linux Format. > > I am not sure that being a low-level kernel hacker gives someones views > of desktop usability any more credibility :-) I don't read Linux Format > so I cannot comment on their review. > > > Gnome sucks. Plain and simple. It's ugly and its never worked quite > > right. KDE is almost there, although I don't understand why they use such > > stupid names for all their software! > > It sounds like you haven't used a recent GNOME desktop, perhaps you > should give a recent Ubuntu or Fedora Core a try. > > In fact if you take the above sentence and swap GNOME and KDE about and > you would have a reasonable statement of my opinion :-) > > > The end :) > > Never, from debating the merits of GNOME and KDE we can move onto Emacs > vs VI, Bourne Shell vs C Shell, C vs C++, Mono/C# vs Java. etc etc :-) > > Keith. > > > _______________________________________________ > Scottish mailing list > Scottish@mailman.lug.org.uk > https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/scottish -- Check out The Ultimate Linux Newbie Guide [www.linuxnewbieguide.org] No nonsense beginners tutorial to choosing, installing and using Linux! -------------------------------------------[ Web Services Since 2002 ]-- Alistair Ross, CEO XBOLT Network --[ www.xbolt.net ]----------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Scottish mailing list Scottish@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/scottish