Print
GNOME uses Nautilus as its file manager. This program is a cross between Mac OS X's Finder and the version of Windows Explorer used in Windows Vista. Nautilus's main strength and weakness is its simplicity; although Nautilus is easy to use, it also omits tools that are found in much more powerful applications like Konqueror. Nautilus also supports remote connections (SSH, FTP, etc) through a “Connect to Server” dialog that is very similar to OS X.
If you appreciate simple, uncluttered interfaces or come from a Mac OS X background, you should give GNOME a try.
The Xfce desktop environment is very similar to GNOME, but has much less demanding system requirements. (recent versions of Xfce are based on GTK just like GNOME is) Due to this similarity, we chose to classify Xfce as a subset of GNOME rather than give it a section of its own.
Xfce's applications greatly resemble GNOME, but are designed for greater efficiency. For instance, Xfce's Thunar file manager looks like a trimmed-down version of Nautilus. If you like GNOME but have an older computer that can't run it very well, you should definitely consider Xfce.
KDE (K Desktop Environment) is as widely distributed and popular as GNOME. As a true desktop environment, it caters to power users with a wide selection of robust software built using the QT toolkit. (the previously non-free component mentioned in the previous section) KDE 3.5 was the last version of “classic” KDE. KDE 3.5 is the one of the most Windows-like desktop environments in common use today, since most programs are accessed from a “K” menu in the same position as the Windows Start menu. In addition to this, KDE 3.5 has a large control panel application that many Windows users will feel at home with. (in contrast, GNOME's system administration tools are more decentralized and exist as separate “modules” on the administration menu)
Although KDE 4 is presently being adopted by more and more people, KDE 3.5 is far from being obsolete. It is still a fully mature and well-tested desktop environment ideal for production use and will remain so as long as security patches continue to be released. While GNOME emphasizes simplicity, KDE 3.5 emphasizes options; any program written for KDE likely has more options and features in it than you can shake a stick at. While many users praise this design for allowing them to know exactly what they have at their disposal, others claim that KDE programs are overcomplicated and appear cluttered as a result. As with the GNOME simplicity debate, the KDE clutter debate is largely a matter of opinion.
KDE's real power comes from the amazingly versatile Konqueror program. The misspelling is deliberate and correct in this instance; versions of KDE prior to 4.x had a trend of including a k in the name of an application or proceeding the name with a k (e.g. kontact or kwrite) to indicate an association with KDE. This naming convention has since been abandoned in KDE4, but some existing programs still use it.
Konqueror (a play on Internet Explorer) doubles as an excellent browser (using KHTML, a relative of the Webkit engine) and a very full-featured file manager with more versatility than Nautilus. Konqueror's file manager supports FTP/Graphical SSH in addition to local file management and features split views, tabs, and close integration with the terminal. Likewise, the web browser component of Konqueror supports tabbed browsing and very good standards compliance, even though it is not as customizable as Firefox.
However, KDE 3.5 has a few problems. Late in KDE 3.5's development, the KDE team decided to split web browsing and file management into two separate applications: Konqueror (now officially classed as a web browser) and Dolphin. (the new file manager) Many users criticize the KDE 3.5 version of Dolphin for lacking essential features like directory trees and consider the KDE team's decision to replace Konqueror with it as a mistake. Fortunately, Konqueror still has its file management capability, so it is easy to keep using Konqueror for this purpose instead of Dolphin. Many of the applications also tend to flicker slightly at certain times (particularly when you scroll) but this is not very noticeable unless you are specifically looking for it or are overly sensitive to things like that.
If you like using a well-proven desktop environment that is somewhat similar to Windows and comes loaded with options, you might feel at home with KDE 3.5.
Comments are closed on this article
grayscare0
March 24, 2009 at 8:27pm
Fluxbox all the way. I haven't bothered with KDE4 at all, and GNOME is okay but doesn't have enough customization options.
Keith E. Whisman
March 24, 2009 at 9:05am
I prefer whatever the Distro uses as it's main desktop. Usually that desktop will have all the tweaks and good looks and support and just plain look the best. I've experimented with different desktops in different distros and pretty much the only distro that I know of that gave full support did it's best to make it look cool for both KDE and Gnome was Fedora Core. I like Mandriva, Open Suse, Fedora Core and Ubuntu as my favorite.
For me at least I can look at a Distro's default desktop and decide if I like it and if not I'll move on. Remember the Default Desktop environment is always going to look the best and be the easiest to use.
That's why there is a seperate KDE version of Ubuntu instead of just using KDE one day and Gnome the next it's best with Ubuntu to either install KDE Ubuntu or Kbuntu or standard Gnome Ubuntu.
praetor_alpha
March 24, 2009 at 8:29am
Almost forgot... Where's Compiz?
Although this is great for an introduction to desktop environments and window managers, this artice should include at least a mention of Compiz. Sure it requires a desktop environment to run on top of, but it's one of the coolest things ever on Linux.
Keith E. Whisman
March 24, 2009 at 8:55am
I believe they covered Compiz in their last article or was that number 1. Oh well it's just an application that gives you some nifty 3D desktop effects and turns your desktop into a giant cube that allows you to use all the side of the cube as different desktops. Very excellent virtual desktop.
AntiHero
March 24, 2009 at 8:44am
Compiz isn't really a desktop environment, it's more just an application like RocketDock is to Windows. It's just special effects to lure someone to finding linux cooler and more aesthetically pleasing, or making linux a little simpler to use (the cube function is what makes it a tad simpler to use multiple workspaces) however the thing is, like you said, it needs a desktop environment to run on, since it isn't one of its own.
cfmwarren
March 24, 2009 at 10:49am
From what people are saying, Compiz sounds like Deskspace for windows. Rocketdock is not nearly as good as ObjectDock BTW.
AMD Athlon X2 5400+ OC'd 3 GHz
2 9600 GT OC'd 700
4GB DDR2-800 OC'd 870
X-Fi Professional Fatal1ty Ed
AntiHero
March 24, 2009 at 12:17pm
Yes and no to it being deskspace. Linux has integrated desk space. adding extra "Workspaces" which by default are transferrable, by a click on the bar, where there can be as many as you'd like. There is the option in Compiz to make it a cube, (or pentagon, or hexatuplemegagon or whatever you want depending on the variable of sides (workspaces) you have.) you can also have compiz display every window as a 3d object when you go into the cube mode, and you can pick ones behind other ones, and bring them up (mainly an aesthetic thing, not very efficient) and you can also instead of a cube, bring all workspaces into the monitor as a grid (think multiplayer on one tv with consoles..) The cube works with 3 or more (if you have 2, it flips like a piece of paper), so not really a cube, but it's cube because most of the time people have 4 workspaces, like myself. The rest of compiz, is visual effects like burining windows, fire writing on the screen, raindrops while you're working, with wipers to remove rain ripples, water effect like dropping the windows into a puddle, folding windows when you minimize/close (same for the fire really) and a whole slew of visuals, like making the cube see through, so you can watch a movie (a little backwards mind you) on the opposite side of the cube, or having an aquarium in the cube when you go to rotate it. It's all for making it flashy, you need to have special effects enabled through the display settings.
Tagge
March 24, 2009 at 5:25am
I personally pefer Xfce. I ended up having it forced on me when I installed MythDora back in the day, and slowly it grew on me. It became that odd flavoured bevage that you slowly start to love over time. Finally about a year ago, I switched to using it on my main Desktop machine, and also my Netbook. Now? Well it's all I use. Simple, fast, and very little overhead. Lets me run Linux in all its glory w/out the large footprint Gnome and KDE leave... though comparative to Windows? They're pretty small too.
praetor_alpha
March 24, 2009 at 6:42am
Once I discovered a serious security flaw with the (hidden) emergency partition on my notebook, I began to look for distros the could fit in about 4 gigs. I eventually settled with Xubuntu, and I love it. Can't wait for 9.04, with EXT4 and Xfce 4.6!
MAXPCreader07
March 23, 2009 at 10:03pm
I like my Openbox. Its blazing fast compared to Gnome and KDE.
justinmc
March 23, 2009 at 9:37pm
Xfce has a different file manager, different system apps, and a whole hell of a lot less resource usage. Just because it uses GTK doesn't mean it's the same thing!
