I wonder why devs need to work on multiple different environments. I only have (user)experience with KDE and GNOME but what’s the difference between them?
- It’s not the default layout, you could ship another default version
- goals can be to maximize customizability (features) while minimizing ressources. Or the other way round. (Or simplicity)
- is it because devs like different frameworks (qt, gtk)? Or language?
Until 1999, Qt was proprietary software. GNOME was started as a free/open/libre alternative. In 1995-1997, we had Fvwm and LessTif, but IMO they looked from the 80s.
If GTK wasn’t released in 1998, perhaps Qt would still be proprietary software. If corporates and people abandon GTK, perhaps Qt will become fully proprietary software again.
So I suppose having one DE is too risk for the whole eco-system. Unlike Microsoft or Apple, we are not one company.
If GTK wasn’t released in 1998, perhaps Qt would still be proprietary software. If corporates and people abandon GTK, perhaps Qt will become fully proprietary software again.
It’s what we call fork time.
deleted by creator
Everything in the linux world is about giving multiple choices, so the user can try and pick whatever suits best for him/her/*. DEs make a fair impact on workflows, so if you’re a designer, programmer, whatever, for sure there is one out there that meets your criteria. And if it doesn’t you can always tweak it to your will, as the crazy people in !unixporn@lemmy.ml do
Yes, that’s the result of it but not the reason
Sure it is, you use what you like, developers develop what they like, Businesses build what they think their users like etc. It just boils down to different tastes and visions.
DE is the shell, the difference between them is this:
Development rules, Development philosophies, Language made in, Purpose of creation, and the differing features.
KDE can be highly customizable, to the point you could make it look like Gnome, but it’ll never run nor be Gnome. Gnome is more closed off, any customization is reliant on extensions. LXQT allows you a more windows XP look without customization to the level of KDE, but you have more modularity with certain parts of it. XFCE can have plugins to Thunar, and the desktop of xfdesktop, all panels are custimzable to look more like what you want too, but there’s not that giant variety of Themes, unlike KDE.
On the terms of philosophy: You can’t just yank a project to a direction you want, you will either Fork that (making another DE) or you will make your own DE to make it so you’ll command the direction and philosophy. This is the most complete answer you’re ever going to get without having a multiple page essay
I’m not sure if I like this answer. It basically boils down to, everyone wants to cook his own soup.
If you want to have it less customizable, you can build on the same fundament but don’t enable the functionality.
The issue might be that gtk and qt are so different from a low-level that it’s more work to try to fork it than it is to just make something else.
This isn’t an educated response btw, just throwing out ideas
Desktop Environment = Graphical Shell (GUI) + Apps.
What a shitty answer, all those apps can be installed completely without the desktop environment. It’s just more practical to do it directly with all those packages
I never said you could not.
I tell you what is a complete definition of what a Desktop Environment is.
You could prefetly just install the Shell and the WM.
A DE is a collection of a bunch of apps. Its the shell, window manager and apps. These all can be made by different people, with different frameworks, appearance, and resource usage.
Joos use windblows
