KDE or GNOME or?

Yes, it's the age old question -- what is your preferred desktop manager? This time we ask you to not only cast your vote but to follow-up with a comment below. We'd like to know if you've switched your "favorite" in the last year or two and why. Did you use to be a KDE fan but recently switched to GNOME? Or perhaps you're exploring with something less mainstream (so to speak) and are loving it. Inquiring minds want to know...

46% (2586 votes)
34% (1914 votes)
7% (384 votes)
1% (79 votes)
3% (166 votes)
1% (45 votes)
1% (35 votes)
1% (46 votes)
1% (83 votes)
2% (95 votes)
4% (209 votes)
Total votes: 5642


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

thread necromancy

dave adfasdfasdf's picture

I realize this is an old article to be commenting upon.. but if you skim over the comments, it's hilarious to see how many contradictions there are between users.



Clearly, these retards don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

One fucking retard commenting

Anonymous's picture

One fucking retard commenting on the postings of other retards
is one step backwards !

i like gnome best, a also

christian baxter's picture

i like gnome best, a also like xfce and hate kde - is sucks. it blows. it annoys the living hell out of me and makes me want to never return to my computer. it's a complete hell-like user experience. i'd rather stand on my head and pour gasoline into my a-hole than use kde for 10 minutes. that's the way i feel about it. i hope it dies.


Josh's picture

KDE, no doubt. I started Linux with Xubuntu (XFCE), then tried Kubuntu (KDE), then Ubuntu (Gnome). I have also tried many other distros, but for the sake of consistancy, I'm using Ubuntu and its counterparts for my example. I've been dual-booting Linux with Windows for a bit over a year, and I'm going to share the short, short version of my opinions of what I've tried.

XFCE appears to have been designed after Gnome in its default dual-panel setup. It has limited desktop-specific applications, as compared to Gnome and KDE. I tried Kubuntu and was blown away at the difference in appearance, ease of use, functionality, and familiarity (as this was only the 2nd Linux distro I had ever tried). With KDE, things just worked the way that I thought they should. Gnome is configurable and offers a lot of applications, but I just seem to prefer KDE to it.

I currently have a netbook with Windows Vista and Ubuntu running dual-boot. I am going to replace the Ubuntu with Kubuntu and leave it at that. I really like the Ubuntu family of OS's, and wouldn't even have Windows on my computer if I didn't need it for school. ITT Tech's School of IT is Windows centric (of course), and though they teach a lot about Linux, Windows is their main OS focus. Therefore, I need something Windows for school. Anyway, keep up the good work KDE!! :-D

KDE 4.3

Anonymous's picture

I'm a fan of KDE! it's user-friendly.

KDE 3.5

KenD's picture

Mimicking Windows may be a way to ease the transition for new immigrants from Windows, but it's a superficial tactic at best. When usability and flexibility are reduced, as is the case of KDE 4 (relative to KDE 3.5), you alienate long-time users. If Linux developers want Linux to be anything more than a third-world OS, substantive, non-cartoonish improvements must be made.

I use Kubuntu 8.10. Future upgrades to Kubuntu will only be made when KDE 3.5 is an option, or KDE x regains the usability and flexibility that I enjoy now.

kde or gnome

theweasle's picture

I have been using kde for a few years now, i just installed Sabayon 4.2 with kde 4 and i realized i was looking at vista. everything on the desktop, even the clock its an APP belonging to PLASMA that uses up half my cpu! that is absurd, things are so slow, every time i click on something it takes seconds to respond. (i am running a 3 gig core 2 duo - 4Gb RAM and 1 Gb sli nvidia card) I do love multitasking and I run virtual machines too but never had and such a slow DE.
I decided to ged rid of my perfectly tuned configuration and switch to gnome. I must say that I had no problem with ANYTHING at all on ked, k3b, compiz, amarok, virtual box, konqueror and a lot of wine programs. I have now every one of my favorite apps and progs installed and running on GNOME and i must say that it's smooth and fast, pretty impressive compared to kde.
Good old kde 3.5 was more flexible and customizable, and the apps... tons of them compared to gnome.
In final i have to say that if kde sorts things out in the next version, i will probably switch back.(just for the apps)

KDE for more beauty

IZZe's picture

Well, I choose KDE because KDE is a complex and highly configurable desktop environment. GNOME is not as configurable as KDE. also, KDE is more aesthetic and beautiful in my opinion. Well, I like something seems artistic and it is KDE. KDE 4 is more beautiful than KDE 3, so I choose KDE 4.

I used KDE for years - and I

FrankW's picture

I used KDE for years - and I liked it.
Now I tried KDE4 and, honestly, I was shocked.
Don't know why, but it eats up way to much processing power.
Everything is slow and look & feel is also too different
I don't know if I could get used to it - but I just don't want to have everything different. I simply don't understand the reason why the look & feel has to be sooo different.

Ok - I don't have the latest power hardware - but I don't want it and I don't need it.

Well - that's why I switched to gnome and my computer runs stable and smooth again.

Kde, for sure

DaBonzo's picture

My first Slackware installation was about 1994-1995. I can't remember what DE it had but I know it was ugly and not usable. So I switched to console for the next years. Some day I got a Suse-CD and tried it out. It came with KDE as the standard DE. Since this day I use KDE. I perfectly suits my needs. I don't break my head about licenses (QT is GPL) In my opinion GTK/GNOME is somehow ugly, sterile. Like hospital. I've tried GNOME several times but if you started with KDE there so many things you miss in GNOME. Probably it is on the other way around the same. Recently I've tried KDE4. I've needed a few attempts but with 4.2 it's usable and I switched all my desktops to KDE 4. I'm happy with it. I'm afraid that with this Ubuntu-Hype there will be coming heavy seas for KDE. And I hope that this developement will not impact the KDE-Developement

Actually, Qt is now LGPL and

Anonymous's picture

Actually, Qt is now LGPL and GPL.

Enlightenment... the DR16 WM please, not the bloated '17 DE

Jean-Philippe "tropical Ice Cube" Monteiro's picture

[ I use DR16 since October 2005 precisely :) ]
I agree with the 'WM' not 'DE' comments above: E DR16 is a true fast WM that would run quick & nice on most anything with 64mb of ram... Then I am tired of Gnome's limitations and slowliness, and I quite can't, at all, get the grip on KDE4 (And I've had terminal, data-loss issues with KDE4.2.1 apps while KDE3.5.10 ones still serves me well), XFCE is less-and-less cholesterol free over the years... Really and truly, Distros should work more towards their own customised, specialised interfaces based on nice WM's + their own take at it (Like Puppy with JWM) rather than giving the whole Linux World a sense of tasteless experience where "kde-or-gnome" becomes the single question asked. I want difference! I demand it!


ActionParsnip's picture

I used to use KDE religiously and I still use KDE apps but I just got sick of KWin being unsteady and bloated. I switched to fluxbox and loved it heartily but longed for a menu in the bottom left so switched to LXDE. Its snappy and light and runs well. I do miss the easy shortcut keys in fluxbox but I'm using the app bar and I'm fine with that. To all the nay sayers and the hailer of "best", I say what I always say. There is no single "best" ANYTHING in life! one mans best is the next man's worst and I think it is hugely immature to use such language. Best only applies when analyzing something with value to personal requirements.
Just avoid stupd compiz as it genuinely breaks things is my advice but someone said it well above, try a few, try them all, then retry some more. One will suit you. For some its gnome, for some, kde, whatever, just use what you use and let others get on with what they use. Other peoples DE choice does not affect your system running a different DE.
Welcome to Linux (and BSD), welcome to choice

Xfce works on my 4-headed machine where GNOME and KDE do not

Rod Montgomery's picture

I wanted to have two logical desktops, each covering two physical displays, on a machine running Ubuntu Intrepid 8.10 AMD64.

Neither GNOME nor KDE produced the effect I wanted, but Xfce produced it immediately I tried it.

Details at http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=6779844

I've been using mostly KDE with Debian, but this will make me switch to Xfce.


Carion's picture

I tried Gnome in the past but always felt limited and switched back to KDE.
We Linux fans can fight about GNOME or KDE, but this is irrelevant.
If Linux will ever conquer the desktop, we will have to give the end-user the desired look and feel.
Most non-geek users have used Windows XP and don't want to bother with a different user interface (Vista or whatever) and they are right.
The winner could probably be a XP-ish desktop with Linux under the hood.
KDE 3 is the best candidate to achieve this.
The problem is that some killer-apps (e.g. Firefox, Openoffice) are not KDE friendly.
The fragmentation in the Linux world will continue to stifle it's success on the desktop.
The solution could be a new distribution which focuses on the needs of ordinary users and not on the needs of the nerds.
UserLinux for Users, the nerds (including myself) can have fun with the ??? other distributions...

Doesnt Ubuntu do that

ActionParsnip's picture

Doesn't ubuntu give a solution for ordinary users? Firefox runs fine on KDE in KUbuntu, just use the tar.gz from mozill.com instead of apt-get which is dependant on stupid gnome look or something so bloats to 100Mb. Maybe try a different browser like swiftfox, abrowser or even opera (not open sourced but decent, and better imho)
Try looking further than the usual apps that folks install, sure they are different but without experimentation you may miss an app that suits your needs better. You tried Linux instead of Windows, why not maintain the trend?

Mostly KDE 3.5

Alan's picture

I have been using Linux for about 6 years, and originally started with KDE from a philosophical point of view - C++ (as an object oriented language) should have provided a faster developing and more consistent environment.

I have tried several times to switch to Gnome - but always ended up switching back - familiarity is a strong reason, when you get frustrated because you can't do something and you don't know whether its you or the environment. This was mostly around burning CD/DVDs (k3b I know) and using konqueror's KIO handling to ftp or sftp into other servers and carry on as though it was local.

I have argued with myself that its because I haven't found an e-mail program as friendly to handle high volumes of mail as kmail (If you have several hundred e-mails a day from mailing lists that you want to scan through, pressing space bar to get to the next unread mail in the current folder, and then the next folder with an unread message is essential - I am biased, because I added that piece of functionality to kmail several years ago). This is nonsense, because I regularly use Gimp, or OpenOffice, or Firefox or lots of other GTK apps and I could just as easily run another desktop with Kmail as the mail program.

I've tried KDE 4 twice, but the stability and functionality around useful things (seeing the dimensions of pictures in the file manager) has been missing and I have ended up going back to the familiar. But, this is begining to drive me away from KDE - Konqueror (3.5) regularly crashes on web sites - I have to assume all development is going on in KDE4. I think its just a question now of when to jump.

So why is gnome winning the votes

alleyoopster's picture

I think Ubuntu has a lot to do with this. People are basically lazy and the distribution that has most installs at the moment is Ubuntu, which ships with Gnome. Don't get me wrong, I like Gnome, in fact I still recommend it and encourage people to use it over others. Why, because of its design and goals to be human interactive. It is less obtrusive and arguably easier to use than others. But with all this I don't actually use it. Why, because I use so many KDE apps, I use konquorer a lot more now with fish etc for web site maintenance and for speed that I just found XFCE to be a better choice. I do run KDE 3.5 on my desktop still and have kde 4.1 on laptop, but kde4.1 does not compete with functionality at the moment.

The more I use XFCE the more I like it. It still needs a bit of setting up to get it how you like it, but it can be powerful, it is very quick, feature packed and still can be made to look good.


jaebird's picture

I like Gnome and really like the underlying license of gtk+ much better than qt. I want the freedom to be able to create an app that may not be OSS without paying licensing fees.

Could it be you slept over

Bonzos's picture

Could it be you slept over the last years? (many years)

KDE for now

chasashmore's picture

I've used Linux for twelve years, almost exclusively for the last seven years, having gone from RedHat to Caldera to SuSE to Ubuntu to Kubuntu to Mint (with Mandrake and Xandros and other distros mixed in), and I've used several desktop managers and window managers. For a long time I was a fan of Gnome because of the debate over Qt's "orthodoxy." But I have to admit, I much prefer KDE because of the apps, because of a greater sense of integration (even the kapp1, kapp2, kapp3 naming thing doesn't bother me as it does some), and contrary to the experience of some here, I find it less buggy, and I find a greater sense of aesthetic style to it. Yes, sometimes I'd like a clean break from anything resembling windoze (which is why I loved AfterStep at one time), but for now it's KDE.


Gnome followed by Window

Anonymous's picture

Gnome followed by Window Maker.

Gnome simply works, all the time, you're never left wondering where this option is or where this went or why this menu entry was not created after running pacman (Arch Linux).

Not only that Gnome is rock-solid and keeps the file manager to what it should do - manage files, no more no less. - The whole problem with KDE is everything is bound up with that stupid Konqueror - And Konqueror may be the most "Signal 11" catching app in all Gnu/Linux land - it's always crashing, we all know it.

I also picked Window Maker - it's nice, speedy and highly customizable however it does get on my nerves after a while.. there is something "ugly" about it...

Afterstep is colorful yet astrocious in every other way - the color guys on Afterstep should help Window Maker.

(Oh and I must admit.. E-17 is very VERY sexy.)

kde too messy

tennisbob's picture

For me KDE is just to complicated and messy. There are too many options and programs to choose from. Every menu item like Internet or Graphics contains a list of around 30 different programs on just a default install. kprogram this and kprogram that and kprogram the other. Help the k's are killing me :-}.

I guess I'm just a simple person and only need so many options and programs. Gnome fits the bill for me. When I go to Internet or Graphics on a fresh install, I've only got a handful of programs and only need a handful of programs. I can then simply add the programs I want and not be overwhelmed with dozens and dozens of kprograms.

Just my 0.02$

Fluxbox All the Way

manpage's picture

I love Fluxbox. It's not a desktop manager, just a window manager. Someone mentioned tabbed windows. That's awesome, especially for apps like Evince that don't have tabs. Also it has customizable mouse clicks on desktop and keyboard shortcuts that are easy to configure.

Fluxbox has no useless junk like icons (although you can get an icon manager if you want), it loads really fast, and has some great themes.

The only thing it doesn't have is window shading on mouse scrolling. Once it gets this it will be perfect.

To do window shading using

Anonymous's picture

To do window shading using mouse scrollbar over the title bar of the window:

Edit the ~/.fluxbox/keys file and add the last 3 lines below:

!mouse actions added by fluxbox-update_configs
OnTitlebar Double Mouse1 :Shade
! add shading with mouse wheel - either direction
OnTitlebar Mouse4 :Shade
OnTitlebar Mouse5 :Shade

Gnome for the time being

Ron T.'s picture

Gnome for the time being
I've recently moved to Gnome after I've been using K.D.E for 2 years (ever since I've used Linux). Gnome seems to be faster than K.D.E on my ~5 years PC (using ubuntu).
I liked K.D.E and especially the built-in photos viewers and video players into konqueror. However, it was slow and a little bit buggy and less compatible with compiz than Gnome.
I'm waiting to kde4 to be more mature in order to try it and then we'll see...

Discount those who have not made their choice after trying a few

Anonymous's picture

Although the question is about "preferred" desktop manager, it's not clear how many respondents vote after trying out a few of them before deciding a preferred one. Many distros pack a default desktop manager which may be contributing to their widespread use. The "used to" factor may lead to "preferred one" feeling.


Anonymous's picture

KDE has been my display manager of choice for about 6 years. let me list a few favorites and the gnome addicts can respond. Konqueror does multiple split screens (in the same window), makes FTP access to websites easy, allows you to change the browser identification and allows you to add service menus to your right-click context menus (nautilus does not seem to implement this as well). Amarok is an excellent music player. K3B burns CDs and DVDs easier and better than any other burning software I know.

several, actually

xtifr's picture

I mostly use Fvwm at home and Gnome at work, but I occasionally switch to other systems as the mood strikes. I'm still not very fond of KDE, but it has it's attractions. Mostly I find it too cluttered and intrusive, but some parts are very well done. Fluxbox is excellent. Enlightenment has, despite a checkered past, turned into something pretty solid and reliable. I haven't really played with Xfce much, mostly because it reminds me of CDE, which is a nightmare I prefer to forget, but I can understand the attraction. Windowmaker seems to be a bit stagnant these days, but it's still a good system.

Still, the majority of what I do is either under Fvwm or Gnome. Since the poll forced me to pick one, I went with Fvwm, which I've been using longer, but I do use Gnome just about as often these days.

I prefer Gnome desktop environment..

Vasu's picture

Hi friends,

when my life with Linux started from that time I am using the Gnome desktop environment.It has very intresting and eye candy look and contains more features that we can use easily even for new user for linux environment.I some times used the KDE it is also very fine at look and working but some times it becomes hangs
and shows the bug error.But I never faced the problems when I used Gnome.Both are best but some improvements needed in KDE.I hope that in KDE 4 the problems ware rectified and more improved.


I just like Gnome Desktop

sleggy_allen's picture

hi there!...i just started using ubuntu for about a month and a half...and i had fun configuring my pc...and the first time i installed it i was also interested with some other distributions like xubuntu and kubuntu...i tried installing xubuntu and it lasted for 5 days in my machine...i like the design of xfce but i had problems when it comes to customizing it...and i tried also kubuntu but it lasted for less than an hour in my machine...well i think the reason why i don't like kde it's becuase of the appearance...i don't really like the idea of navigating like WINDOWS style...well for me i like gnome over kde because i can customize it with no problem...

I started with KDE (and SuSE

nqs's picture

I started with KDE (and SuSE 7.3), found it was too similar to windows, then went xfce 3.x, which i like because it reminded me of CDE, but i developed an aversion to icons, and switched on a whim to fluxbox ( was on gentoo by this time), which I use with the console gaining favor as far as being most productive

Gnome...For the time being

Seth Paxton's picture

I have used GNOME, KDE, Xfce, Enlightenment, Fluxbox, and Openbox. I prefer Gnome, but Xfce comes in at a close second. I plan on switching to KDE 4.1 once its available. I really enjoy KDE 4, but its not stable in its current state. I believe that once KDE 4 becomes more mature and stable, this pole might change drastically.


Seth Paxton's picture

I have used GNOME, KDE, Xfce, Enlightenment, Fluxbox, and Openbox. I prefer Gnome, but Xfce comes in at a close second. I plan on switching to KDE 4.1 once its available. I really enjoy KDE 4, but its not stable in its current state. I believe that once KDE 4 becomes more mature and stable, this pole might change drastically.

KDE, but...

Anonymous's picture

The way "unclutter" keeps destroying carefully
laid-out multi-window configurations (and the
fact that it is hard-coded in the KDE source
code and is *not*configurable*) gets me so upset
from time to time that I run IceWM for a while...

Gnome for us

Anonymous's picture

We used to use KDE for our office implementation but changed to Gnome when we switched to using Ubuntu - why, its simpler than KDE and does everything we need. KDE was good for tinkering around but at work when you just need to get stuff done Gnome seems the smoother option.

Ubuntu and GNOME

WillyWonka's picture

I've been running Ubuntu for a while now and I have another machine running KUbuntu on it and it just seems like my Ubuntu system is so much more customizable and stable. KDE may have a lot of programs and a certain look to it, but overall GNOME is, well nicer looking and much easier (for me) to use.

GNOME has made some really

sadsfae's picture

GNOME has made some really great improvements from 2.0.x -> 2.22+

I was a long-time KDE user during the 2.x era. I also used fluxbox, XFCE and Windowmaker. I abandoned GNOME in the 1.9.x -2.0.x series because it felt clunky and unusable for the amount of resources it used, it seems a lot better now; improvements in Nautilus and the overall UI have brought me back. Thanks GNOME team!

KDE, leaning towards XFCE

DrCR's picture

I'm still using KDE. In fact, I'm still using VectorLinux 5.1.1 (SW10.1). I guess it's simply because it does everything I need it to do, and I haven't really had time to play around with something newer. But I am starting to like XFCE more and more.


Anonymous's picture

Well, I still go for KDE, at least functionality wise, everything is there. GNOME has a lot of eyecandy, but if you consider the applications made for Linux, KDE still outnumbers GNOME. What I would love though is a common graphical platform for linux, so that every application can run irregardless if you run GNOME or KDE, without pulling in the associated libraries needed to run one application in a different environment. This would greatly enhance linux as a choice of OS not just for techies and hobbyist, but for the general microsoft windows users as well.

A team of successful entrepreneurs credited for www.SelectWealthSystem.com
A new home-based-business marketing system that provides the strategic high ground for internet marketing.
Pro Team Marketing uses an automated marketing system that is currently promoting a cutting-edge young company, entering the early growth stage, that targets the largest consumer base in the United States with their financial educational products.

Oh ... the line "KDE is far

myke's picture

Oh ... the line "KDE is far superior to Brasero." should've said k3b is far superior to Brasero. My typo bad.

Oh ... the line "KDE is far

myke's picture

Oh ... the line "KDE is far superior to Brasero." should've said k3b is far superior to Brasero. My typo bad.

Gnome for Desktop, KDE for apps

myke's picture

Strictly speaking for the desktop environment, I prefer Gnome and did switch from KDE 3.5x this past year. KDE was more elegant in a way but I found it much much buggier, slower, more prone to crashes, and less hardware configurable. Particularly with respect to the volume manager. I'd have problems constantly under KDE with properly mounting or unmounting or both regarding most removable media (hard drives, etc.). Also half the time wouldn't recognize a simple audio CD.

I like the simplicity and most of all the reliability of Gnome. Since switching over to it, my drive all work as they're supposed to and I don't need to mount my scanner as root as I did in KDE.

So for desktop environment in general ... Gnome.

Apps/packages ... a totally different story. No matter how many apps they try to get to match the QT based ones, GTK apps are often inferior. Amarok crushes Banshee. KDE is far superior to Brasero. Etc. Etc. I even prefer kFTP grabber over the gtk version. kFlickr for flickr uploading. DigiKam for photo management. k9copy for dvd ripping. I mean, with GTK based apps, you can't even customize the toolbar buttons. That is simply archaic. The only GTK apps I tend to use are really simplistic ones such as the calculator, audio tag tool, and sound converter that don't need much customization. Oh .. and Kaffeine is much more elegant and refined than Totem by far.

Linux users and pundit need to start distinguishing between the desktop environment and also notice a clear break between the QT vs. GTK packages. THAT, to me, is where the real difference lies.

Gnome should stay focused on what it does best. Provide a stable, nice looking, easy to configure, peripheral supporting desktop environment. But ... they oughta also realize that QT based packages/applications themselves are most often more elegant and simply nicer to use. And nicer looking. Compare a toolbar on k3b v Brasero or Kaffeine vs Brasero. No comparison. The GTK ones look absolutely archaic ... horrible even ... compared to there QT cousins.

THAT's what I like Linux and the greater move toward interoperability. I can like one desktop environment while preferring another system based packages.

I used to be a KDE user when

Anonymous's picture

I used to be a KDE user when I had openSUSE v.9 / v.10.. on my computer. But in my univercity where I work, most of linux pcs had distros with GNOME on them. And that was my first time I'd tried GNOME. After that, when I went home, I'd uninstalled KDE snd I'd installed GNOME.
I think that is much more easy, more beautiful and better for compiling.


Anonymous's picture

I just seem to fight with GNOME much more. I have been an Ubuntu user for a year and a half. It took me a great deal of time to get the desk top configured the way I wanted. I recently switched to openSUSE with KDE and I am very impressed with it. In one evening I had the desktop looking the way I wanted and install multimedia support. This was mostly because there was less to do, SUSE came out of the box ready to use. I'm sticking with openSUSE and KDE.

KDE, but for how much longer?

Theosch's picture

I like KDE mainly because of Konqueror and its kio slaves. Now that KDE has ditched Konqueror as its standard file manager and started the so-far gruesome KDE 4, I may switch if things get too bad, especially as Konqueror will run under any other WM. I don't like Gnome because I can't seem to get rid of the double clicking.

Getting Rid of Double-Clicking in Gnome

mjrd's picture

On Fedora 8 using the menu: System / Preferences / File Management / Behavior - select the radio button 'Single click to open item'

KDE - Gnome too much like windozes

Anonymous's picture

I use both Gnome at work and KDE at home. It really depends who's
using it. If I have a basic user Gnome is good because most couldn't
figure out where things are configured mainly because the configuration
is buried using a syntax that most can't understand. I personally
prefer KDE because it doesn't hide the configuration. I usually use
the command line and vi and find most GUIs only allow simple configuration changes whereby the command line all options are available.

Where Gnome 'Buries' Configuration

mjrd's picture

On Fedora 8, most of the items you can configure are under the "System" menu item - which is divided in 2 sets of items under "Preferences" and "Administration". On my machine, I get 37 items to administer. In addition, under the "Applications" menu, there is "System Tools" which contains 12 administration tools. That is a lot of stuff right in the top menu - enabled by a simple GUI, not hidden by some obscure syntax ...

If that's not enough, you can install the "Gnome Control Center" which will put most of the tools in the same place.


mingus's picture

I've used Gnome, both when I used Ubuntu and even after I went back to SuSE (which still is better than Ubuntu, esp with sysadmin). But every time I find myself wanting to do things that Gnome doesn't support, except perhaps by getting deep inside its guts. Gnome is great for the Ubuntu targeted first-time user, because of its simplicity. But if you want granular control of the desktop, the ability to bolt-on your own via dcop, the extraordinary power of Konqueror, etc., you have to go with KDE. I think it's noteworthy that KDE is more popular in Europe, where users have more history with Linux and are more hands-on proficient - broad generality, but true - than their U.S. counterparts.