[techtalk] KDE / OpenSource

[Caitlyn M. Martin]

Hi, Dan
>
> Make sure to try Gnome 1.2, (use sawfish not E) if you have not
> already.  However when comparing Gnome and KDE, they are very
> diffrent.  My opinion about both products that they are bloated, and
> designed to hold a newbie's hand.  Gnome does less of this, than KDE.

Please understand where I am coming from. =20

Right now I am building a firewall solution for a client who has never us=
ed=20
anything but Windows, conceded that this might not be great for security=20
(has doubts, at least), and graciously gave NetFerrets his business.  The=
=20
company is an ASP, and a pretty rapidly growing one.  Security was nil. =20
They are shockingly non-technical, despite running an Internet business. =
=20
It's really pretty scary, and they know it, which is why I was brought in.

I needed to give them a GUI that was easy for their pseudo-tech guy to=20
understand and stable.  KDE fits the bill better than Gnome precisely=20
because it is easier for a newbie to pick up.  I went with the most=20
Checkpoint-like interface I could find because it's the only other firewa=
ll=20
the client has ever seen.

In order to sell to this client, I had to make Linux non-threatening, whi=
ch=20
I sucessfully did.  So...  the solution?  Caldera OpenLinux eDesktop 2.4 =
and=20
KDE/kwm.  I realize that combo makes some purists nauseous, but for weani=
ng=20
people from Windows, there is nothing better.  Once they decide that Linu=
x=20
is OK, then it's time to move them further.  They have to crawl before th=
ey=20
walk.

> I really feel that if anyone is serious about learning how to use
> Linux should avoid both desktop enviroment, and learn how to use the
> CLI more effectively.=20

I can't quite agree.  While I find the CLI more efficient for some things=
,=20
there are pretty much good graphical tools for everything.  The thing is,=
 to=20
use them well, you still need an understanding of how it all works.  Let'=
s=20
say I'm running Caldera, and using COAS, for example, and I am unloading=20
unnecessary daemons from the kernel.  I still have to understand what tho=
se=20
daemons are and what they do, don't I? =20

GUIs aren't evil, and they let the folks who are only interested in=20
application level stuff do their work.  Let's face it, most of the work t=
hat=20
makes most non-high tech businesses go is done by folks in operations,=20
sales, customer service, the warehouse, and so on.  To them the computer =
is=20
just a tool, and they really don't want to know how it works, only how to=
=20
make it do their job for them.

> I haven't used KDE very much, infact the only
> QT application I have installed is Licq, whisch isn't even a KDE
> application.

There are some apps which are worth ignoring, and some which are simply=20
brilliant.  My favorite so far is the mail client in KDE2.  KMail is fina=
lly=20
making me stop longing for a post of PMMail.  Konqueror looks nice if the=
y=20
can get it to work properly, which so far it doesn't.  The frames support=
 is=20
pretty broken, for example.  KIllustrator is quite nice, and the whole=20
KOffice suite looks really promising.

> Gnome's stability has much improved,
> most core applications are stable, though a large number of Gnome
> applications aren't. =20

This is one area where KDE is simply more mature.  Please realize that an=
y=20
judgements I make are for today, not for tomorrow.  Gnome 2.0 may make a=20
convert of me yet. :)

> Their file browser, gmc, is very bloated and is
> barely usable.

Agreed.  Again, KFM is pretty nice.

>  My preference is to have several xterms (actually
> Eterm) and work from there.

Eterm is eye candy, especially if you load the backgrounds, but I have to=
=20
admit that it works well.  I do like it.
>
> The problem is Debian's intreptation of the GPL.  KDE2
> (KDE1 is a different story) is released under the GPL.  However KDE2
> requires liking against QT2 released under the QPL.  The GPL prohibits
> ditributing softawre that is linke to non-GPL libraries, unless they
> are system libraries.  Debian does not consider the QT libraries to be
> system libraries.  It is Debian's opinion that they and everyone else
> cannot legally distribute KDE.  But in the end it's up to you to
> decide.

Thank you for the clarification.  The fact is, the KDE people and TrollTe=
ch=20
both say it's fine to distribute it.  Maybe they need to fine-tune their=20
license, but really, it's their call what to do with their product, isn't=
 it?

I guess what set me off was someone with a gnu.org address throwing out a=
=20
gratuitous "Gnome is better/more free than KDE" post without a single=20
explanation.  That's like an obnoxious geek version of "My Pop is better=20
than your Pop".  We're adults here, aren't we?

All the best,
Caity

--=20
Caitlyn M=E1ire Martin
caitlyn at netferrets.net
http://www.caitys-world.com