Genuine Concerns with KDE, Gnome, and the Overall Desktop/Installation Situation

English Open Chat
#1

I’m an experienced computer user, and while I have not yet invested a lot of time learning about openSUSE, I have to get some things off my chest right now.

  1. When I was first downloading openSUSE, I looked and looked and couldn’t find CD ISO’s for the full release anywhere. At the time, this was extremely frustrating. I didn’t have a network connection on the machine I wanted to install openSUSE on, and the Live CD’s do not install the same as the full release. This whole thing just created unnecessary confusion. The CD ISO’s should be right there.

  2. In general, openSUSE seems bloated to me. I just want a minimal install. The whole installation process should be ten minutes. Additional features should always be options. This would also allow me to install the OS on my older computers… which, as it stands, seems to be impossible. Since when did Linux became a fat, ugly, feature-bloated OS?

  3. Having tried both Gnome and KDE, I’m left scratching my head as to why the Linux community is bothering to emulate Windows or Mac OS X at all. If I wanted Windows or Mac OS X, I would use Windows or Mac OS X.

Historically, the best window manager I’ve used was Windowmaker. The #1 priority for me (and IMHO, any Unix user) is to be able to get to a terminal window. That should be the OFFICIAL #1 menu selection, the first thing you see, not only for its practicality, but also as a clear indication to everyone that this is NOT WINDOWS OR MAC OS!!

Beyond being able to bring up a command shell with just one or two clicks, all I want is a window manager that stays the f**k out of my way. Which brings me to:

  1. KDE. This is the first time I’ve used KDE, so admittedly, I was not used to it. But it was driving me absolutely crazy, popping up windows, resizing windows, dragging windows, bringing up extra **** left, right, and center, doing XYZ, asking me things I didn’t care about, offering me things I didn’t want, and just being a general nuisance. It just would not leave me alone!! It’s like a little puppy humping your leg, trying so hard to be helpful and to do things for you that, finally, you just have to shoo it out to the back yard.

To anyone who has contributed to KDE, what the hell is going on??? There has to be a less intrusive way to provide the features that this interface seems so proud to offer. It is way too eager to please, and I found it incredibly annoying. Also, IMHO, it just looked cluttered. Too many menu bars, too much of everything. I’m getting tense just thinking about it! Yuck!!!

  1. Since when should I need to reinstall Linux to switch desktops? That is wrong on so many levels. The whole Unix and X Windows philosophy lends itself to easily switching desktops. If the people behind Gnome and KDE are f**king this up by doing things they shouldn’t do, then the people behind each of the distros simply need to go in and hack Gnome and KDE to make them play nice. Not only should I be able to switch between Gnome and KDE without reinstalling my OS, I should be able to switch between Gnome and KDE WITHOUT LOGGING OUT!!!

**** That is not a “feature.” That is essential Unix/X Windows design. ****

Please, whoever reads this, cut and paste these comments and keep them on-hand for the next time ideas are being thrown around. It seems as though the Linux community is getting way too trigger-happy adding features and they have totally forgotten what the design philosophy behind it really is.

A) The core OS is very minimal. I should be able to run it on any Pentium PC. There should be a Minimal Install option on every installer.

B) While it’s impressive how much Linux developers have been able to do, they really need to establish their own identity. Linux is not Windows and not Mac OS X. **** To that end, Linux desktops should avoid being fancy. ****

C) Unix/X Windows are clean, elegant systems. The way they’re organized, I should be able to turn the desktop on and off like a switch, and jump between different desktops just as easily. This is basic, basic, basic stuff here. Under no circumstances should that change, in any Linux distro, for any reason.

Even if someone were to invent a desktop that is so great and wonderful that no one ever needs another desktop… I should still be able to turn it on and off with ease. Desktops are not the whole OS, they are just the icing on the cake.

I hope all of that is clear, and I hope these issues get fixed in future releases of openSUSE. Thanks for reading this.

#2

sigh…

#3

Holy ****… are you for real? I have a commodore 64 that sounds like it’s right up your alley.

#4

Ha ha… that’s funny! That’s exactly what I said when I tried KDE!!

#5

I’m using multiple computers. One of them happens to be older. What difference does it make? Was what I said accurate or not?

#6

Was what I said accurate or not?
No…:open_mouth:

#7

caf4926 adjusted his/her AFDB on Sat 17 July 2010 20:46 to write:

>
> sigh…
>
>

Well I give it 2 out of 10, Not enough use of the “!!11!!one!!elebenty!!”,
no enough CAPSLOCK and the spelling was spot on.

::Trolling error! redo from start::

–
Mark
Caveat emptor
Nullus in verba
Nil illegitimi carborundum

#8

Hmmmm was there a new release of openSUSE??? :wink:

–
Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11 (i586) Kernel 2.6.32.13-0.4-pae
up 1:52, 2 users, load average: 0.44, 0.15, 0.04
ASUS eeePC 1000HE ATOM N280 1.66GHz | GPU Mobile 945GM/GMS/GME

#9

There’s been a rumor circulating…

#10

On 07/17/2010 01:06 PM, unbuhleevubble wrote:
> Ha ha… that’s funny! That’s exactly what I said when I tried KDE!!
>
>
Let’s get real here for a bit. You say you have an older machine. Fine.
There is nothing wrong with that. But why install KDE or GNOME on a
machine that you know is old like that. You already know it’s going to
take up space and not run well. When installing 11.3 there are several
options, KDE (default), GNOME, and minimal. Minimal would leave you with
just a console, but then you could add the packages you want.

I find it funny the complaints we get. openSUSE doesn’t run speedily on
my <fill in the blank older hardware>, and openSUSE doesn’t work out of
the bx <doesn’t play all the multimedia>. Generally the first group
claims to be computer geeks, UNIX people, and so on, yet they can’t
manage to do a bit of research and learn a few details before
installing. The other group are usually converts from Windows, or distro
hoppers from Ubuntu or some other distro.

unbuhleevubble, I find your name appropriate. You claim to be a UNIX
person, yet failed to do your homework. Getting to know YaST and zypper
would have been prudent. I find it, unbuhleevubble, that a UNIX person
would do the very thing you did. Someone familiar with UNIX would know
to read up on things first. Read the man pages, the wikis, and so on.

As to the installation media, it’s now cd’s for the LiveCD, or DVD and
USB sticks (LiveCD images). It’s simple. There is no 5 CD installation
media any more. The multiple cd images haven’t been used by major
distros in years.

openSUSE is as bloated as YOU make it. You can add hundreds of
repositories and install all the software, if you want, or you can
install just the base system. It IS in YOUR control.

It’s not us trying to emulate Windows or Mac. Project Looking Glass was
started before Areo (forgive the spelling). KDE started working on
plasma and phonon and there was beryl and emerald (now compiz). Again,
this is one of those things where you don’t have your facts right.

The rest of your post makes no sense. If you wanted a windowmanager to
stay out of your way, you should not have installed KDE or GNOME. It’s
that simple.

You don’t need to reinstall Linux to use other desktop environments or
windowmanagers. Go to YaST and Software Manager. Viola. Or, if you
prefer, zypper. This isn’t Linux’s fault, or openSUSE’s, but yours.

The Linux community is not trigger happy about adding features.
Generally, people complain cause Linux lags so far behind. Again, the
problem here was, you didn’t do your homework.

#11

Ha ha ha… very funny, all of you. Being condescending won’t make openSUSE a better Linux distribution, though.

(Evaluating me by my spelling? Really? How sadd.)

Maybe you didn’t actually read my post, but I said I’m an EXPERIENCED computer user. Flame me all you want for miscellaneous oversights, but regardless, that’s a fact. So… if I have ANY complaints about openSUSE, you should listen, because it’s relevant.

(All complaints are relevant. It just takes a mature individual to interpret them properly.)

Specifically: no matter how many things I may have overlooked, you have a responsibility to make installing and using openSUSE straightforward. Your web site is full of links, but very few actually go anywhere or reflect any real organization not imposed by the site itself.

Don’t get me wrong: OpenSUSE represents a magnificent effort. But you’re shooting yourselves in the foot in several obvious ways. So listen, for a change, and do something useful, instead of copying other OS’es.

#12

unbuhleevubble, this is a community support forum. The developers don’t hang out here, we’re mainly openSUSE users, mostly happy at that. Before accusing any of us of “flaming,” do some research before attacking the namesake of these forums. We have thousands of members, apparently openSUSE does something right.

#13

First of all, thanks for your somewhat well thought-out reply. I appreciate that you actually tried to address my concerns.

Now, for the rest:

  1. I didn’t WANT KDE or Gnome!!! But I thought: why not try them out?

On my older systems, I wouldn’t have installed either one (knowing my system couldn’t handle it)… but I didn’t have a choice, since THE (#$&@(#*$ing INSTALLER WOULDN’T RUN ON THEM!!! (Can you explain that? Why a Pentium PC is not “powerful” enough to run the INSTALLER for Linux?..)

As for my newer systems, I am only experimenting with KDE and Gnome. I’m giving them a shot. So far, I’ve found them to be gloriously inept. They want to be Windows, and they want to be Mac OS, but they lack all of the clout and expertise of the people who work for those companies, and so they inevitably fall short.

(Gnome is pretty awesome. But still, it tries too hard, and it does some ridiculous things.)

You say that “people complain cause Linux lags so far behind”… and that’s exactly the problem. You are trying to please the WRONG PEOPLE. Tell those people to go use Windows and Mac OS. Design Linux for developers and for users who know a thing or two. I can install VLC myself if I want to watch DVD’s… I don’t need anyone to do that for me. What I want is a sensible god**** desktop. What I don’t want is to not even be able to install Linux because the well-intended developers behind it assumed that everybody wants a high-end, fancy desktop. Pardon my choice of words, but F**K THAT!

  1. I would love to learn all the details of YaST and zypper. And about a hundred other things. What the f**k does that have to do with a basic install of Linux, though? I shouldn’t need to know the installer and the package manager backwards and forward in order to get a basic, functional installation.

  2. The Linux community is trigger-happy about adding features. I respect everybody’s efforts, so I won’t go further into that, but you have to recognize that a lot of this is just being done by people who want to compete with Windows and Apple. Those people may or may not know what Unix is really based on. They’re just going to pile on features as much as they can… which may or may not help the overall effort.

At the bottom of my original post, I listed three things that I think are essential part of any distribution. Do you agree with those points, or not? Because, if you do, then it should be very simple how to proceed. Try not to be judgmental, and just look at what I’m saying. It’s obvious that I had some pent-up anger about things, but that shouldn’t discredit any of those points.

Anyone who knows the first thing about Unix or X knows that desktops and window managers are not fixed entities. Therefore, when I install Linux, I shouldn’t be confined by them.

#14

On the bottom of the download page, there is a link to openSUSE derivatives. This will show Live CD downloads using lighter desktops such as Xfce and LXDE, or direct you to Suse Studio to roll your own. Did you see this?

Once openSUSE is installed, use zypper/Yast to install alternate DEs.

#15

How helpful!.. (he said sarcastically)…

This may surprise you, but it’s far from obvious for someone who’s using openSUSE for the first time to go sorting through the “derivatives” category to look for a “minimal install.”

The word derivative implies “extension of”… not “substantially less than.”

All of which is beside the point, because the minimal install option should be mandatory. Even the dummies who make Windows know this much. Every installer has a Recommended install, and a Custom install. The Custom install will generally give you the option to install the BARE MINIMUM to get what you want.

Is that too much to ask?

#16

Plenty of options are provided. The fact that you could not find them does not reflect on openSUSE.

#17

Dude, seriously, I looked.

If I couldn’t find it quickly, that’s a problem.

Go back to my original post.

#18

First of all, welcome to our forums.

You may have noticed that some users have responded to your criticisms
with what might be taken as hostility. I would suggest that rather than
making your first post in our community forums (where we do have a few
developers, but generally is users helping other users), you structure
your criticisms of the distribution in a way that doesn’t look like
you’re opening up with a double-barreled shotgun.

The shotgun approach is not going to get people to respond with “oh, gee,
you’re right”, but rather is going to tend to get people shooting back.
That’s what you’re seeing - you’ve been perceived to be attacking
rather than helping.

If you want to help the openSUSE distribution become better, I would
suggest opening bugs in bugzilla for those things that are bugs, and
tickets in openFATE that are enhancements.

In installing openSUSE 11.3, you can select an other desktop
environment which includes LXDE - you don’t have to install GNOME or KDE
if you don’t want to. This is from the standard 4 GB installation DVD.

You will doubtless find that there are people here with more experience
than you in computing, and more experience than you in openSUSE.
Starting off by trying to come across as “I know it all and you should do
it my way or not at all” isn’t going to help you make your case.

So sit back, relax, and have a friendly conversation - and put the
shotgun away. :wink:

Jim

Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator

#19

Windowmaker (selectable in the gdm login screen) is there as well as
lynx, pine and slrn and if you need an enhancement use vim instead of
vi…

–
Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
openSUSE 11.3 (i586) Kernel 2.6.34-12-desktop
up 3:39, 2 users, load average: 0.26, 0.40, 0.36
ASUS eeePC 1000HE ATOM N280 1.66GHz | GPU Mobile 945GM/GMS/GME

#20

On 07/17/2010 05:56 PM, unbuhleevubble wrote:
> First of all, thanks for your somewhat well thought-out reply. I
> appreciate that you actually tried to address my concerns.
>
> Now, for the rest:
>
> 1. I didn’t WANT KDE or Gnome!!! But I thought: why not try them out?
>
> On my older systems, I wouldn’t have installed either one (knowing my
> system couldn’t handle it)… but I didn’t have a choice, since THE
> (#$&@(#$ing INSTALLER WOULDN’T RUN ON THEM!!! (Can you explain
> that? Why a Pentium PC is not “powerful” enough to run the INSTALLER
> for Linux?..)
>
> As for my newer systems, I am only experimenting with KDE and Gnome.
> I’m giving them a shot. So far, I’ve found them to be gloriously inept.
> They want to be Windows, and they want to be Mac OS, but they lack all
> of the clout and expertise of the people who work for those companies,
> and so they inevitably fall short.
>
> (Gnome is pretty awesome. But still, it tries too hard, and it does
> some ridiculous things.)
>
> You say that “people complain cause Linux lags so far behind”… and
> that’s exactly the problem. You are trying to please the WRONG PEOPLE.
> Tell those people to go use Windows and Mac OS. Design Linux for
> developers and for users who know a thing or two. I can install VLC
> myself if I want to watch DVD’s… I don’t need anyone to do that for
> me. What I want is a sensible god*** desktop. What I don’t want is to
> not even be able to install Linux because the well-intended developers
> behind it assumed that everybody wants a high-end, fancy desktop.
> Pardon my choice of words, but FK THAT!
>
> 2. I would love to learn all the details of YaST and zypper. And
> about a hundred other things. What the fk does that have to do with a
> basic install of Linux, though? I shouldn’t need to know the installer
> and the package manager backwards and forward in order to get a basic,
> functional installation.
>
> 3. The Linux community is trigger-happy about adding features. I
> respect everybody’s efforts, so I won’t go further into that, but you
> have to recognize that a lot of this is just being done by people who
> want to compete with Windows and Apple. Those people may or may not
> know what Unix is really based on. They’re just going to pile on
> features as much as they can… which may or may not help the overall
> effort.
>
> At the bottom of my original post, I listed three things that I think
> are essential part of any distribution. Do you agree with those points,
> or not? Because, if you do, then it should be very simple how to
> proceed. Try not to be judgmental, and just look at what I’m saying.
> It’s obvious that I had some pent-up anger about things, but that
> shouldn’t discredit any of those points.
>
> Anyone who knows the first thing about Unix or X knows that desktops
> and window managers are not fixed entities. Therefore, when I install
> Linux, I shouldn’t be confined by them.
>
>
Then don’t get the LiveCD if you don’t want KDE or GNOME. Get, as was
suggested, one of the derivatives. Secondly, on this point, the reason
why, this takes up so much on an older system is because the entire
system is loaded into ram. The kernel, X, and GNOME or KDE (which ever
one you have). So you need at least 1GB of ram. Part of that is for the
system loaded into the ram, the rest is for the installation itself.

As to Linux “lagging behind”, I don’t think that’s an accurate
assessment. See, it’s really a double edged sword. Company A develops
software and is closed source. This software is critical and a must
have, so the open source community begins on this, but to do this, they
must reverse engineer the software. That doesn’t mean decompile it and
then rewrite the software. It literally means to reverse engineer it.

As to the rest of point 1, you don’t have to have a high end, fancy
desktop to have a functional desktop. Personally, I use KDE 4, and it
works for me. I don’t use compiz as I have no need for it. Multimedia
works for me just fine.

You didn’t learn Windows in a day, you didn’t learn UNIX in a day. Back
in the day of UNIX, you had to read the README’s to know what the
specific instructions were. Had you taken even a little time, you would
have noticed that on the review, before packages start installing, there
is a Software section and if you click that it shows you patterns,
groups and so on where you can choose from. You can further drill that
down by clicking “Details” in the lower left hand corner. You can
literally have control over every single package.

It’s funny what you say you want, and then you gripe about it. You see,
the way to do that now-a-days is with LiveCD’s, which as I explained
earlier load the entire system into ram. They also don’t offer the
flexibility of installing more than one desktop during install, but on
post-install yo can do as you wish. We are starting to do LiveDVD’s.

As to your third point, I don’t think you know what Linux/UNIX is based
on. Can you tell me what features are in the kernel? Can you tell me
what features are in the desktops? I could go into the history and
philosophy of Linux and UNIX and MINIX and VAX VMS and NT and the good
ol’ GPL, and how the good people of MIT started on X in 1984 (don’t
believe me? Look it up). The point is, is that Linux/UNIX is modular so
it’s kernel, then Xserver, then desktop, then applications. Not like
Windows. Unix is similar, the main difference is the licensing. UNIX
developed by AT&T Bell Labs.

I don’t think the points you mentioned were worth responding to. They
are little more than your opinion. Nothing else.

I’m not sure what you mean by “fixed entries”, but they have always had
their own directories and config files. I call that “fixed entries”.
They are their own projects. They are unique in every way. Now, if you
mean “fixed entries” as in reinstalling, or installing another LiveCD,
then that is because you didn’t do your homework. That has absolutely
nothing to do with “fixed entries”. You could have pulled up YaST in
post install and installed WindowManager, Sawfish, XFCE, LXDE, and many
others. I, in my system, can choose from twelve desktop
environments/Window managers. I know several others who have several
desktop environments and window managers. So, again, not “fixed entries”.