I totally understand that your article is not here to bash GNOME or create another GNOME vs KDE flame war, but I felt compelled to reply to get my point across about my feelings towards GNOME, after reading some of your readers comments.

I think looking at it from a fair perspective, with GNOME you get simplicity and not necessarily the best looking interface, while with KDE you get a more aesthetic look with a new focus on the whole desktop environment interface. Really at the end of the day it’s personal preference isn’t it?

I can relate to your point about Ubuntu’s default theme to an extent, in older versions I don’t think the default theme stood out much, OK you can easily download a custom theme from GNOME Art after the installation, but if your someone new to the Linux side and had just installed Ubuntu, you’d probably want to have a decent theme that at least catches the eye of the new user making them at least welcome to their new OS and DE. In recent versions I think Canonical have been focusing on this, I’m not sure what you views are on this but I think Ubuntu 10.04′s new default theme, Radiance is very respectable as a default theme.

I am in agreement however that the use of brown in Ubuntu 9.10 was a very big mistake for the default theme.

The only thing I fear is Ubuntu becoming more like Mac OSX, I mean they moved the close minimize and maximize buttons to left on window pane on Ubuntu 10.04, which is beyond me as to why this change was committed, but oh well, a simply gconf edit and boom, back on the right again. But I was slightly worried as to why they felt such a change was needed when a out cry in the community was to change it back. Something to ponder eh?

Like you said GNOME and KDE are both good DE’s and have great points.

Indeed bring on GNOME 3, we can certainly revisit this discussion then!

- James

1) Kubuntu is widely regarded as a poor demonstration of KDE. Any distro that makes Gnome its primary emphasis is likely to offer a KDE version that lags in features, polish, and implementation. This describes Kubuntu to a T.

If you’re interesting in trying a more polished and refined KDE implementation, I’d strongly recommend PCLinuxOS 2010.1. After using both it and Kubuntu, I can understand the frustration KDE users have with how poorly Kubuntu implements their DE.

2) To quote you:

…with GNOME I know where everything is and can find it very quickly.

This is more a function of familiarity than it is a problem with the desktop. Other individuals have reported the same problem with Gnome, with its odd system menu as opposed to a true control center.

Let me ask you this – if KDE’s Control Center is so difficult to understand, why do so many Ubuntu users download programs like Ubuntu Tweak? Personally, I find KDE’s Control Center to be a very simple analog to Window’s Control Panel when explaining Linux to new users. It’s also much easier to navigate in an exploratory fashion (as opposed to launching dialog after dialog from the Gnome system menu).

3) To quote you:

After all an operating system is not all about looks and it’s feel, it’s about practicality too…

I absolutely agree on this point. As the first quote in my article states, looks are not as important as functionality. But they aren’t mutually exclusive, and in many cases looks can support better functionality. KWin is so, so, SO far ahead of Metacity in terms of customizable usability. Yes, Metacity+Compiz improves functionality, but it’s a kludgy solution at best. KWin is also lighter on resources than a Metacity+Compiz solution – which further promotes usability.

4) To quote you:

Why all of a sudden is GNOME ugly?

The title of this article isn’t an attempt to bash Gnome – it’s an attempt to beautify Ubuntu. Not ALL Gnome implementations are ugly. Fedora and Linux Mint are two examples of much more aesthetically pleasing Gnome implementations.

5) To quote you:

Appearance isn’t everything…

I never, ever claim that it is. :)

6) In summation:

KDE and Gnome both have their strengths. This article is just one of TEN that discusses improvements Ubuntu should make by the time 10.10 is released. Since 10.04 focused heavily on aesthetic improvements, you could say that Canonical has already taken my advice to heart.

Certainly the KDE/Gnome argument will get more interesting with Gnome 3.0. We’ll have to revisit this conversation then!

I began my Linux venture with Ubuntu 9.04 which of course uses GNOME. After reading about Linux and it’s different distro’s I tried out others like Kubuntu and even installed the KDE desktop interface on Ubuntu, so I could choose between which one I wanted, but I have to say KDE is just too fancy, sure it may be more aesthetically pleasing but that doesn’t make it better.

If I’m honest I find KDE a ball ache to navigate around as it’s structure is poor, with GNOME I know where everything is and can find it very quickly, while in KDE I get to look at lovely graphics while still not being able to find things. And thats not me being harsh, I actually tried to use KDE for a few weeks during the beginning of my Linux venture but I just couldn’t get to like it and instantly switched back to GNOME. I really did try and yet I couldn’t

After all an operating system is not all about looks and it’s feel, it’s about practicality too. So really if you use an operating system simply because of it’s looks then you should probably go ahead and switch to Mac OSX right now.

Besides, why all of a sudden is GNOME ugly? GNOME + Compiz work great together and there are nice themes for GNOME too? Just because they aren’t as fancy doesn’t make them bad.

Appearance isn’t everything, the phrase “Don’t judge a book by it’s cover” really applies here. GNOME may not look as fancy as KDE, but under the botox injections, plastic surgery and glossiness, GNOME is more practical. My opinion obviously, but how you’ve put it here

“It makes Gnome look RIDICULOUS. You are in the very, very, very small minority if you think a default Gnome install beats KDE”

The keyword is looks, how something looks is just ONE point, if we compared the two on other areas I think your “very small minority” would turn into more of 50/50.

*Hoping I haven’t started a flame war*

- James

And don’t even get me started on Qt vs GTK applications. Use wiki to compare the applications written with each toolkit, and it quickly becomes apparent which is preferable for appearance (using default settings; obviously the developers play a role as well).