A reflection on GNOME and KDE [Opinion]

desktop environments are our link with the internal processes that are happening on your computer. We could say that are like our limbs, usefully controllable, unlike our internal organs that are always there working. It would be difficult to imagine the days when computers were not something everyday, when necessary to know to use them and do something useful. Of course, innovations are we covering the memories of the old story computational things more and more colorful and more intuitive to use. keys, then mice and now to the tips of our fingers .

The story could go back to Xerox Alto but we desviaríamos the approach in question. Once popularized personal computers, once written and once made Linux operating system, had to be improved appearance . In the first instance, wanting to achieve a unified suite of applications that the user experience, there Kool Desktop Manager in 1996, better known as KDE.

his eternal competition arises, GNOME, in 1997. However, this latter arose due to the dependence of the first with Qt, a library at that time was not yet free. Miguel de Icaza, co-founder of GNOME, said to have thought of writing a free replacement for Qt following the refusal to include KDE Red Hat. This would have required much work and not getting the expected results. Then came the idea of ​​GNOME desktop environment and component of the GNU project.

After a couple of years of work environments, in 1998, appeared KDE 1.0 and a year later, GNOME 1.0. This time, KDE had already begun to address the Qt licensing issues would be solved finally in 2000 to release the code and adhere to the GPL. Thus we enter the new millennium, and GNOME with KDE version 1.2 and 2.0 develop. Both continued an important development path that led them to produce their large version : GNOME 2.6 and KDE 3.5 in 2004 in 2005.

So begins a story of two great free software which, at some point, the user must decide for one or the other. For every new version release, an endless series of reviews published. Or KDE 4 or GNOME 3. Again, sometime you have to decide on one , but not generate an absurd confrontation but by its nature so different and sometimes incompatible.

dispute extends even within each environment: some people prefer the line of GNOME 2 or KDE 3.5 compared to current versions. Then it is inevitable to ask, why insist on change rather than adapt to change and remain stable for longer? Well, it’s understandable ambition of the developers. While the program is much more related to mathematics and logic to art, no denying that the person behind the developer consider an alternative art work .

course could be criticized the way in which change occurs . I remember when I came out KDE 4, the new output distributions Fedora 17, continues to attract me.

Well, I did not say much (although it would be interesting to follow the subject in the comments), but to round I could say that the effort both environments are doing is great version to version . Whether we like it or not, have come to put the face of a system, which used to be seen as a completely unsightly container terminals, and take it to levels comparable graphical quality with any other commercial product. Although most magnificent I think these projects were born of young minds that might show how far you can push a project community.

No related posts.