←back to thread

KDE is now my favorite desktop

(kokada.dev)
892 points todsacerdoti | 6 comments | 18 Sep 25 12:17 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
christophilus ◴[18 Sep 25 13:23 UTC] No.45289397[source]▶
I just find it ugly vs Gnome or Mac. Inconsistent padding, font sizes, colors. Admittedly, this was maybe 5 years ago. Has that improved?

These days, I daily drive Niri and love it. I love the workflow of a scrolling WM. I love that I can configure it via a single text file in the standard configuration directory, I love how lightweight it is. It’s just about perfect for me.

replies(13): >>45289419 #>>45289430 #>>45289490 #>>45289539 #>>45289557 #>>45289563 #>>45289635 #>>45289660 #>>45289913 #>>45290028 #>>45290403 #>>45291741 #>>45305167 #
dmd ◴[18 Sep 25 13:26 UTC] No.45289419[source]▶
> Inconsistent padding, font sizes, colors.

But enough about Mac OS Tahoe!

replies(1): >>45289528 #
carlosjobim ◴[18 Sep 25 13:35 UTC] No.45289528[source]▶
Gnome has been the best looking desktop for about 5 years now, with OS X in second place. KDE and Windows (after 7) are so far below that they're a category of their own.

Apple should at once hire the people who are responsible for Gnome's UI, because they've got it figured out. Even better, put back together the Nokia N9 GUI team.

replies(7): >>45289587 #>>45289589 #>>45289704 #>>45289821 #>>45289845 #>>45294556 #>>45295626 #
cosmic_cheese ◴[18 Sep 25 14:01 UTC] No.45289821[source]▶
GNOME is pretty, but it’s not great when it comes to progressive disclosure – what you see is what you get; there’s no depth in which power user features can be found.

macOS is nearly the opposite in this regard. I wouldn’t mind giving it a facelift but doing it GNOME style would mean it losing much of what has kept many users on it.

replies(2): >>45290547 #>>45290597 #
1. skydhash ◴[18 Sep 25 15:00 UTC] No.45290547[source]▶
The way for power using gnome is through extensions. But once you got used to the gnome philosophy, you find that you don’t have to fiddle with the UI that much.
replies(2): >>45290834 #>>45290959 #
2. cosmic_cheese ◴[18 Sep 25 15:26 UTC] No.45290834[source]▶
Nice in theory, but my experience has been that extension devs burn out from having to update their extensions so often to keep them from breaking. There’s also some things that extensions can’t fix.
replies(1): >>45292612 #
3. kevin_thibedeau ◴[18 Sep 25 15:35 UTC] No.45290959[source]▶
The silly thing about Gnome extensions is that you have to configure them through a web browser rather than OS dialogs rendered with their own graphical toolkit.
replies(1): >>45292589 #
4. skydhash ◴[18 Sep 25 17:38 UTC] No.45292589[source]▶
That is untrue! There’s a CLI for loading them, and a settings api. The web thing is just one of the distribution channel.
5. skydhash ◴[18 Sep 25 17:40 UTC] No.45292612[source]▶
Don’t use private API then. While the public API is not stable, there’s few changes there.
replies(1): >>45293796 #
6. cosmic_cheese ◴[18 Sep 25 19:17 UTC] No.45293796{3}[source]▶
I don't know what falls under public and private API but across my GNOME installs over the years there are numerous extensions that've broken and been abandoned, which suggests that most of the things that people want to customize sit on the private side of the line.