On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 09:33 -0400, George Galt wrote: > The general > characterization of the two different desktops is that KDE is more > like a "Windows" environment and Gnome is more like a "Mac". My own > view is that is far too simplistic a description, but you are likely > to hear it often enough, and it is based primarily on the main > interface of each environment -- KDE has a task bar that is very > similar to Windows's, with a "launch" menu in the lower-left and > status icons in the lower right (though you can configure this how you > want), while Gnome's default is to have a menu bar at the top of the > screen (kind of like a Mac) and a status bar at the bottom. I know you aren't defending this view, but Gnome isn't any more like a Mac than KDE is. Putting the menu bar at the top is a design decision, but its behaviour is not remotely like the Mac's. For one thing, on a Mac the menu bar changes depending on which program has the user's attention. On Gnome it behaves just like in every other GUI out there (excepting those that consciously try to emulate MacOS of course). As you say, the main design criterion of Gnome appears to be to limit user choice so as to make things easier. In KDE it's pretty much the other way round. There are also important differences in visual design, at least with the default settings. To the OP: I think it's not out of place to point out that Fedora is a Gnome distro that also supports KDE. For example a lot of the system documentation, not to mention a lot of mailing list traffic, implicitly assumes you're using Gnome. Make no mistake: KDE is fully functional and fully supported, but Fedora's main emphasis is on Gnome, while other distros such as Suse are the other way round. I personally don't care, but it's something you might want to know. poc
