I wish KDE worked well on Touch screens. It seems to really fail at that. Don't tell me it's X11. X11 on Gnome doesn't think my touches are a mouse. KDE thinks it is though.
It works fine for me, and I use Wayland.
I am really glad both exist. Gnome is awesome because of its simplicity and ease of use and KDE is really cool because it makes me feel like a superior human being
Honestly I can't imagine why anyone would use either of these when there are lightweight DEs like XFCE and Cinnamon that are not only easier on the system resources, but also more stable, customizeable, user-friendly and more pleasant to look at. I stopped taking gnome seriously ever since they came up with GTK3. They had a chance to fix it with GTK4 but instead they somehow made it even worse (as if client-side decorations wasn't bad enough, now theyre doing clientside shadows? Seriously!?!?). KDE is allegedly better because it gives the user more options, but anyone who's actually used it will tell you that it suffers from the same kind of bloat and braindead design decisions as gnome.
KDE is allegedly better because it gives the user more options, but anyone who's actually used it will tell you that it suffers from the same kind of bloat and braindead design decisions as gnome.
I've used KDE on and off for the past 20 years or so. These days I use KDE on my work laptop and Cinnamon on my personal one. Personally I think they both do their job just fine, but apparently I'm in the wrong.
None of those support Wayland as of writing this so that's a no for me. Also Cinnamon uses about the same resources as gnome as it is gnome based.
KDE is allegedly better because it gives the user more options, but anyone who's actually used it will tell you that it suffers from the same kind of bloat and braindead design decisions as gnome.
I have used it & can't tell you this. What am I doing wrong?
I wanna go back to XFCE when support for Wayland is okay.
I think both have their use cases. Gnome is absolutely fantastic, if you use it on a laptop with a touch screen (for university, school, etc), but on desktop I dont really like it that much. I like the simple design, but KDEs customisability is much better. However, their virtual desktops are kinda ass, but I dont really use them on my desktop PC anyways.
I think KDE reworked virtual desktops with Plasma 6. I haven't use KDE in years but I saw a comment about it a while back.
Where is TempleOS when you need it, huh?
Meanwhile openbox: black screen
Gnome was the main obstacle in Wayland adoption, by not implementing "server-side decorations".
Both KDE and GNOME are good when you compare it to anything Windows have today.
I personally prefer KDE because of much customization support. I have it working with many keyboard shortcuts. I would miss the settings panel in hyperland.
GNOME is simple and elegant. Showing only what is needed. I can really understand people liking it. I like but just miss some small details like the keyboard shortcuts thing and focusing etc. How GNOME works is different mindset which O just have not learned. But GNOME looks good and have everything covered.
Xfc and lxd just need some more love from the developers. There are very few of them so I completely understand. Money issue.
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.