what is difference between kde and gnome? is ubuntu and kubuntu exactly same except for desktop environment?

Answer 1

this might be overkill but did a uni paper on it so here it is

“There are two principal graphical front-ends used on Linux desktop machines, namely Gnome and KDE. Write an essay entitled "Gnome and KDE" in which you compare and contrast the two technologies.”

Gnome and KDE are two free desktop environments for the Linux family developed by a collective of people/companies, and this is one of the few similarities between the two. The first difference I will look at is the different approaches to how they are developed and supported because I feel that these different approaches are the cause of most the other difference. KDE is developed by a organised group of users each contributing pieces which are then put together to create the whole desktop environment. They have only recently incorporated companies into the “KDE community” in the form of the KDE League. (which includes Borland, HP and IBM) This exists only to provided funding for advertising and promotion, and are not included in development decisions. Gnome however is run by a group of influential companies including IBM, Redhat and Sun Microsystems and many more, these form the Gnome Foundation that oversee the entire development process. This give Gnome a far more corporate edge and there have been suggestions in the past that the companies have tried to use Gnome for economic gain. This I feel is the core cause for their many similarities and differences, the different approaches and view points of the users and the large companies. Both have their advantages, having users develop it means that they have a far better grasp of what the average person requires, and do not need to use methods like focus groups etc. However the companies are some of the leaders in the field so they will have some of the brightest and best minds in the field and have far more money available. The first major difference is that KDE has specially made programs created expressly for KDE at the heart of the desktop, while gnome uses existing programs that have been ported or slightly adapted for most of the major functions including the window manager and the desktop. Gnome supporters would say you are using tried and tested software while KDE supporters would say it is better to have something costume made as it suits the system better. This is just one of the many points that caused a threat of fractioning that was set to tear the Linux community into two and become the new Windows/Mac of the computer community. This however was avoided by careful co-operation between the core groups to stop this happening. Many people say that they have nearly merged and the differences lessoned greatly in the past couple of year. However I feel that there are still many difference even if they are more in the look and feel than in the core programming as it used to be. This is what this essay is going to look at, trying to find the differences that still exist today.
Window mangers is one of the big differences as I have already discussed they both take different approaches, KDE specially designed and created windows mangers while traditional Gnome has used pre existing window mangers. Users can choose from a number of Gnome compatible software, including Sawfish, IceWin and FVWM to name but a few, the default window manger changes regular with the different versions. This makes it hard to compare Gnome’s window manger to anything because it can be any one of many. This could be seen as an advantage as most users like to have a choice however there is benefit to the one windows manger. These include:
•extremely efficient in coding (no need for compatibility with more then one environment)
•designed by the same group of people who made the system so know exactly what it can do and how to do it best.
•Has had time to evolve and with most problems being easily ironed out and found easier (more people using it that can do something about it)
•Allows for far greater integration with other packages like word processors, image editors, and games etc.
•However of course if you dislike the look, feel or workings you have far less options other than using themes to change its appearance, or trying to find a good KDE compatible windows manger, (which there are less of due to far less need).


The user interface design, look and feel has some significant differences between the two however due to themes it is possible to make Gnome look like KDE and vica versa. There is one very interesting point that I found KDE can render gtk themes faster than gtk itself. (http://www.kde.org/announcements/k3c-announce.html), which does give weight to the consensus, that KDE is far more efficient than Gnome. Personally out of the two basic/default themes I feel that Gnome looks more professional and aesthetically pleasing, however it only goes to show you can’t judge a desktop environment by looks alone (just look at Macs). The first difference I noticed (no matter what theme is used) was the differing start menu icons, Gnome with its bare foot and KDE with its K and cog wheel. These are purely cosmetic differences as they both do the same job but there are lots of people who take pride in which ever icon is in there bottom left hand corner. However after you start using Gnome more differences become more noticeable. The best example being the multiple panels that can be produced by selecting create panel entry in the panel menu. This then gives you the option of what panel you want and how you want it to be displayed which includes, edge, floating, sliding or aligned. The type of panel can be selected from a list or you can create your own by adding links to applications and applets, which can then be organized into draws or menus. KDE does not have the ability to produce multiple panels built in, however all you need to do is go to the KDE site and you will find an appropriate program that you can download for free and which will have been specially made for KDE. But this means you have to have an internet connection so it is not available to all users. As mentioned before you can add applets to the menu, these display useful information such as the time, and battery level (on laptops). They can also perform tasks which include a mail checker, CD player controller, weather forecaster, and a volume control. These applets can be placed on any of the panels you have on the desktop. KDE does have a far more limited number of applets which can be added to the taskbar however these do include a weather forecaster, color picker, new ticker, application launcher, dictionary, system guard and pager. The only applet that I feel KDE is missing would be the battery monitor. One of the most important applets is Gnome desk guide, which allows for better virtual desktop control. However with Gnome it does not do it efficiently and does not create different desktops like KDE but uses one big desktop which you can split up into different screens. Apart from the different approach they both have very similar functionality, as is so much the case with KDE and Gnome they both take different approaches to the same problem/program and get very similar results, but usually KDE is more efficient.

The file mangers are one of the most important parts of the desktop environment, and they are also the part with the most differences. Gnome comes with a below par file manger that does not even properly view web pages without some serious tweaking, (it will display the code instead of running it). Gnome does have many of the features that make the KDE manger great but somehow does not manage to make them work as well. For instance KDE has a preview feature that works on nearly all text based documents, as well as the usual pictures and videos, and displays about six lines at normal zoom level. The Gnome file manger works on only a very limited number of text based files and will only display five characters wide and four lines at the normal zoom level, which is useless for distinguish between files. KDE has a side panel that includes a tree, history, bookmarks, services (including a print manger, devices and LAN browser), and a media player, whereas Gnome has a very simple side panel that includes, history, tree (that does not work properly), notes (a reasonable handy notepad), and a jazzy little feature called emblems which allows you to put small little icons on top of the icons to distinguish the different files. This feature is useful but KDE can filter the folder to only include the file type(s) you want to see without you having to go around and add these little icons to your files which can be time consuming and wastes space if used too much. KDE can customize the toolbars far more in the windows manger whereas Gnome can not and only has seven different icons, (back, forward, up, stop, reload, home and a zoom controller). KDE allows you to customize your toolbars completely and has dozens of different buttons that include zoom, filter, background image, create image gallery, open terminal, translator (for web pages), and shred. It has so many features it takes hours to investigate them all. They also tend to be extremely useful and not frivolous like the emblems. KDE also has a brilliant file search tool which includes the ability to search using regular expressions which makes it the most powerful search tool I have ever seen integrated into a desktop environment. The file manger provided with gnome does not include a search feature, yet another feature that only KDE includes is the ability to have more than one folder/webpage up inside a single file manger window. This is achieved by having tabs just below the toolbars. This makes it far easier to navigate around multiple folders or webpages and makes it exceptionally better when moving files around.
The KDE file manger out classes the Gnome file manger so much that it is in completely another league, however you must take into consideration that Gnome users can easily download a better file manger.

Developer libraries have historically been the biggest difference between the two desktop environments, with each using a different library. KDE traditional used QT a free to use library with the advantage of relying on commercially developed and supported GUI (Graphical User Interface) library, however, The Harmony project has been developing a free alternative. QT allows anyone to use it as long as the software produced is freely distributed and open sourced. This is brilliant for the development of programs as developers can look at the different methods used by other developers which means that the best bits end up being used by everyone. This makes it very efficient and means that if you ever get stuck there is lots of help available to you. These methods have lead to the production of a very efficient and effective office application, Koffice. This is one of the smallest around and one of the best. It shames Microsoft’s office’s size with the latest office being provided on up to ten CDs, and not having a vector/bitmap editor of any use, unlike Koffice. However many people think that Microsoft Office is designed this way to prevent piracy, and when you are paying over £300 for a bit of software and it comes on multiple CDs you feel you have got your moneys worth. These incentives/tricks are not needed for KDE office because it is free and you can download it off lots of sites legally. Gnome programs have not all been developed unlike KDE so there is less emphasis on the development. The programs that are not savaged and are developed use GUI libraries as provided by gnome. One the most commonly used developer tool is GTK+ which uses the Library General Public License. Unlike programs developed with QT, programs developed with LGPL/GTK+ can be sold without have to pay a license to the library. Again there are two ways of seeing this, the first view is that it encourages developers to charge for their software reducing the amount of free software, however others think it reduces the cost of software because they do not need to pay a license. However apart from the libraries used and the system, the final product’s design is extremely similar, mainly because they both take the simple method and use WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) front end. This allows you to simple drag and drop buttons and all other interactive objects to design what the user sees and then work on the coding and linking up all the GUI elements. This is one of the easiest ways of making programs and makes the process available to less advanced users, as well as preventing the usual little bugs that often pop up when trying to code a layout.

Having looked at all the different benefits of each desktop environment I personally feel that KDE is far more useful and more efficient than Gnome. This is mainly because of the file manger and all its features but the number of programs provided was also a major point. Gnome does however have a far more useful desktop with the panel and applets.

Answer 2

KDE is much more powerfull than Gnome. Even linus torvalds says this.