Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Why Ubuntu/Gnome and not Ubuntu/KDE?

It is a very sad day folks, at least for me. I've heard that they are porting KDE 4 to Windows, now why would anyone want to do this is beyond me. Well if you run KD4 in it's native Linux environment why even bother running it in Windows, well let's take a look at some of the possibilities.

  • So you can laugh hard on how much it sucks
  • So you can use some of the applications that you love to use on Linux and because you are too lazy to just install VirtualBox+Windows(much better windows performance and security).
  • So you can say yes KDE4 finally on Windows(why would anyone want this again?)
  • So you can promote a Linux app?(I doubt that)
  • So that Windows developers consider developing for KDE?(nope they want to get paid).
Well ok you don't like any of those suggestions then stick to Gnome+Ubuntu. To me KD version x just sucks, everything is huge on your screen by default (made for people who have some type of vision disorder, blind...cough). Although the new version seems user friendly and the file manager dolphin is really good, I just can't see my self using it. The funny thing is that Gnome for some reason seems alot more like windows to me. So to all you KDE 4 users stick to Linux platform there is nothing to gain by running a windows port of it. Jesus it's a 4 hour install on a Windows pc (can you say insane), don't believe me then read this "Can KDE Save a Dying Windows Platform? ". So I say to all you KDE developers stick to Linux because you don't see Windows developers porting their software to Linux so why should you!
Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,

3 comments:

Igor said...

IMHO I think its just a marketing campaign... GTK(Gnome is build on top of this) have already a lot of apps running on Windows, and some people is actually using it(VMware for example)

KDE devs just want to say... "Hey me too!" to everyone.

February 6, 2008 at 9:57 AM
MrCopilot said...

KDE on Windows will be a boon to those of us stuck using windows at work, where sticking your workstation in a VM is not an option.

As for the installation time, I was on a bandwidth limited connection and chose to install the entire suite including the hefty development packages.

I grant you, the installer still needs some work, but that is what betas are for.

Windows developers who develop in house applications will be grateful for the KDE-libs port and get paid for using them. QT is already in use widely and the KDE extension make cross compatible apps prettier and more useful, IMHO.

You doubt the promotion of a Linux app in windows? Firefox, Open Office and others prove you wrong. Amarok on Windows will be the next app that gets all the buzz.

KDE vs Gnome. Can't we all just get along? I hate Gnome, you hate KDE, at least we both like Open Source code that allows us to choose.

So I say to all you KDE developers stick to Linux because you don't see Windows developers porting their software to Linux so why should you!

We measure ourselves by a different metric than windows developers.

February 6, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Reya276 said...

Yeah I guess your right about the whole KDE on Windows, however I don't think that developers should be making applications for Windows, because we are trying to get users to switch from Windows to Linux not have them use Linux apps on Windows and stick to it, I'm glad your OK with it, but me I stopped using Windoze a long time ago and I'm never going back to it. So much in fact that I found every application to replace it's Windows counter part except Abobe Flash Professional since there is nothing that's available, but photshop = Gimp, Illustrator = InkScape, IE = FireFox, Quickbooks = KMymoney, dreamweaver = Aptana IDE, MS Office = OpenOffice name some more and I use them so again, developers should focus on the Linux platform not Windows what has that platform done for anyone other than headches!

February 6, 2008 at 9:51 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)