On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:06:28 -0500 Ric Moore <wayward4now@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 00:37 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > To get back on-topic, the redhat supplied kde parts often leave > > something to be desired. However, I just installed 3.5.5, complete > > on the lappy, and its working quite well despite RH's obvious > > disdain for anything kde. My questions about its failures as they > > (RH) installed it on fc2 were always met with a "use gnome" > > attitude and no real answers, so I simply bypassed them and did my > > own, which has worked well for quite some time > > I think that attitude will only hurt FC. Gnome plainly reeks, > according to my perspectives. > > It was borne from a bunch of Stallman style politics, with the Gnome > crowd being the most vicious I've seen in their attacks in online > forums. THAT turned me off more than anything. > > The KDE folks maintained their cool and remained polite. So, it was > and is the humanity of KDE that I appreciate, and shall never ever > use Gnome unless someone figures out how to imprint it onto toilet > paper. That's my two cents; Fedora, dump gnome and get with KDE for > real if you guys really want this Distro to get anyplace. Ric When I started using Linux I accepted the default of Gnome since then I have tried KDE and find I do not like it, not for any weighty Technical reason, just a simple I prefer Gnome. I suspect that most have no real reason why they need one over the other. While most I have set up for a Gnome box I find by default some KDE gets installed so apparently the situation is the same for those wishing KDE, they end up with some Gnome. As long as the box works and I can do as I wish I really don't care if some KDE gets installed with my Gnome. The best part of using Linux is I have more choices than M$ gives me. While some can probably come up with technical justifications for there choice of interface, I feel the real reason most of us make the choice is based on selecting the one we are most familiar with.
