On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Robert Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > I am think of changing my main PC to Gnome but thought first I might > canvas the list for reasons why I should (or should not) change. > > I do not want personal preferences (for example I currently prefer KDE > probably because I am more used to it). > > How about posting short pros and cons to start a discussion? > > Rob
Spoiling for a fight on Monday morning Rob? For me its simple. I went to *buntu because I heard good things and was sick of futzing with gentoo. (I discounted Suse as too anal, fedora as too unstable and too shy of non free components, debian as too out of date. These conceptions may be wrong now but influenced me at the time.) I tried kubuntu and ubuntu, and decided that things were more polished in the ubuntu (gnome) world. That was a few releases ago and kubuntu may be better now. Therefore I use ubuntu and therefore I use gnome. It was a practical choice, but I can't see anything wrong with gnome. Most things on ubuntu 'just work' and those that don't probably have nothing to do with the choice between gnome and kde. So my answer is 'gnome, because my distro of choice seemed better supported in the gnome version.' I still use k3b for writing disks, theres no real need to exclude programs from either camp, unless you are trying to keep your system libraries as small as possible. My main desktop usage is web browsing, email (same thing really given I use gmail), media playing, occasional instant messaging. I have other machines I use for storage and mythtv, but thay don't run desktops as such.
