Re: If this starts another flamewar please ignore

[Chad Robinson <crj lucubration com>]

Rikke D. Giles wrote:
> On 2005.12.20 04:22, Yiannis wrote:
>
> >  For those not knowing the story... Linus Torvalds made the   
> > following  statement and is posted on 13/12/05  "This 'users are  
> > idiots, and are confused by functionality'  mentality of  Gnome is  a 
> > disease."
>
> There are only two things I dislike about the changes:
> 1.  My windows don't remember their spots when I start up the  
> application again, after shutdown, etc.
> 2.  I don't really like spatial nautilus, so I turn it off.   And  
> there's that functionality that everyone says is gone; I _can_ turn  it 
> off.

My beefs are:
1. The Gnome window manager is less sophisticated than KDE's. For example, 
Kwin includes built-in window edge snapping, so it's easy to quickly lay out a 
set of terminal windows so they look nice. The File Open dialog is much less 
sophisticated than KDE's, too.

I don't mind losing SETTINGS, but when I lose FEATURES I get unhappy.

2. Gnome's widgets always seem so oversized and inefficient. I feel like I'm 
on a Windows NT 3.5 box. Sure, you can use theme engines, but why does the 
file open box have to be so darned unattractive out of the box? When they 
released the most recent updates I said "Finally! They're almost up to Windows 
2000's level!" KDE's facilities are just so much more "beautiful".

Sorry, folks, Gnome is still very ugly to me. But beauty is an opinionated 
issue - I just LIKE KDE better.

Frankly, I prefer to DEVELOP in Gnome. KDE is slow and obfuscated in 
comparison. Ever double-click a PDF file and open either Gnome's or KDE's PDF 
viewer in the file browser? KDE takes about 5x as long to open. I also feel I 
can more quickly get my programs written, and focus on functionality, not the 
UI. But that's all Gtk, not Gnome. For my desktop, I just can't stand Gnome 
itself. I put up with KDE's slowness and occasional quirks because its beauty 
and functionality are exactly what I expect in a modern desktop environment.

This isn't just about tinkering with a thousand settings. Even a dozen would 
be nice. Or, jeez, how about an "Advanced Settings" option? Even Windows and 
OS X put Advanced buttons in. And Windows has hundreds of registry settings 
for those that want to tinker. I'm not advocating that model, but note that 
the features are THERE. Those that don't care to tinker, don't have to. Those 
that do, can.

To each his own. I also like choice - I'd hate to see either environment go away.

Regards,
Chad