Why is Kde cloning micro$oft apps?

[Marcel2008]

Just look at this:

Microsoft app - Kde clone
-------------------------------
Word - Kword
Excel - Kspread
Visio - Kivio
Powerpoint - Kpresenter

I just don't understand why kde would want copy the microsoft app, and rebuild it into a linux clone. Look at kivio screenshots... exact copy of ms visio.
Sure, it's easier for the windows-user, but why copy it? Gnome has great apps, like dia and dict.

I think it's frustating that suse and mandrake "push" the user towards kde, while gnome is more stable and better.

Anyone else feel the same way?

[ 29 March 2001: Message edited by: Marcel2008 ]

[ 29 March 2001: Message edited by: Marcel2008 ]

[MBMarduk]

Well, maybe a thought is: then more people with M$Office experience will think about using Linux, maybe even fulltime.

Remember, all those tens of millions of businesses running Win2k or WinNT with M$Office can't afford to re-train everyone to use something else.
So if they wouldn't NEED to, AND it were free, the choice would be made a lot harder. :) Businesses don't REALLY have a lot of choice right now.

Employees AND employers alike started using Office 5-10 years ago, maybe more, so all they KNOW is Office. You think they wanna change to something else just for the heck of trying something new?

That's my view, but the Linux-using community is thoroughly divided on this issue: bending over for M$ users is a no-no, but we all welcome new blood!?

Something's gotta give.

My 2 eurocents
-Mike

[debiandude]

Maybe I am just dense but how difficult can it be to learn to use a word processor? I am sorry you just open it up and type? Am I missing something, maybe the presentation tool or the spreadsheet require some actual thinking to use, but not much... You mean they hire people that need to be taught how to use office tools. Maybe they should hire more knowledgeable people.

[Nehal Mistry]

i say its a good way to appeal to newcomers who have just converted to linux from M$... ;)

[IMcool]

I have to agree that it should be easy to port to. I like Linux, and I would like to develop in it, but I am short on extra time. Although I have learned some Unix, I don't have time to adjust to all the different apps. Everybody is busy. :(

The Linux interface is changing because the demand is. Linux was originally for a small community of techie geeks, such as myself. Now, it is going to a huge audience. I think KDE has a big part in that. :p

[RTFM]

<devils advocate>
Why does KDE clone windows?

Why do so many people use Windows?

How do you make it easy for a windows user to convert? Bring Windows to Unix...

[ifred]

Interesting . . . I actually prefer KDE to Gnome. KDE has always struck me as the more stable and less erratic of the two desktop environments. While there are many good GTK-based apps out there(I'm using gFTP right now) KDE does come with a lot of kick-*** apps on board including Konqueror--my browser of choice. I'm so partial to so many other KDE applications, such as Konsole and Kmail, that even when I run a "stand alone" window manager such as Blackbox I still use mainly KDE apps.
Although KDE can also(subjectively) be criticized for resembling windows 9x I personally find KDE to be more visually appealing than the Windows 9x GUI and I don't feel like I'm just using a Windows clone. I'm not really answering any questions here, I simply prefer KDE over Gnome and derive a grat deal of enjoyment from using my desktop environment of choice.

[Neurotica]

I dispise KDE and GNOME.

Worthless! If I use any "Office Tools" its StarOffice. Star office is backwards compatable(ehehehe) with all ms office junk for the most part.

Although I dont like Star Offices wanna be interface.. The apps themseles like Starwrite and their spread sheet work great.

[Marcel2008]

Linux should not be a windows wannabe.

Linux is linux, not a windows clone.

Kde thinks the way of making userfriendly linux apps is to clone the windows one...

[Lovechild]

AMEN

being a debian guy myself I like Gnome alot.. faster and more stable - yet it has all the features from KDE... what can I say, it's also easier to use...

[cga]

Myself, I hate big, bloated office programs, including M$ Office. I am forced to use Word at my office, but I loath it with every fiber of my being.

These programs tend to have lots of weird control characters and formating problems. Documents are seldom as they they seem in a WYSIWYG environment. Thanks but no thanks. I'll stick to LaTeX, thank you very much.

[ 30 March 2001: Message edited by: cga ]

[dilligaf]

I think it's great to have the windows apps. I look forward to the day when I can pull a "Foldgers Crystals commercial" on the partners of my firm.

Imagine it! An office full of Linboxes. Windows for the idiots and the full power of Linux for me. :D

Sounds like a win-win to me. Remember it's not M$, I'm free to use or NOT USE anything I want with Linux. It's kinda cool.

But until the suite is complete and WINE is 100% for the rest of it, I guess I'llkepp my hopes up for VMWare.

[bdg1983]

I also hate big and bloated apps, but to be honest though, I think Word and Excel aren't that bad - bloated, yes, but not bad. Actually I haven't found any spreadsheet for Linux that is better than Excel.

StarOffice isn't bad but it's also big and bloated. That's why I use it only because I sometimes need to open those fsckn Word and Excel documents. :mad:

I'm currently using LyX and I'm very satisfied with it. It's a nice frontend for LaTeX and a way better than Word or StarOffice's word processor. :cool:

[cga]

I use LyX quite a bit. Actually, I tend to write in vim, then import the text into LyX to format it. It is a damn fine program.

[buzz lightyear]

Have you stopped to consider why M$ is where it is (aside from the illegal activity, consumer fear, and over-advertising)????

Most of M$'s dev't money is spent in people sitting in rooms together and testing things over and over to make them simple as possible to use. Say "people are dumb" as often as you like, but we can't be pros at everything.

If a company is gonna copy M$ stuff, it's only because M$ has already put in the research $$$ and therefore has tested material.

buzz lightyear

[usual]

GNOME is lightyears behind KDE, and if it wants to stick around they better get serious. In no way shape or form is GNOME more stable then KDE, as far as speed I don't see a difference and as far as looking like windows as so many people like to put it, it looks better then windows and it only gets better looking with every release. I don't know about any of you but I don't hate MS windows for its GUI I hate the actual OS behind it. I have yet to hear a TRUE and more reasonable response from GNOME users as to why its better then KDE, all i hear is complete stupidity like gnome is more stable or faster, or GNOME looks better, or the all time great KDE SUCKS! GNOME RULEZ!. even though kde can use gtk themes as well, I still wont base the desktop enviroment I use on something as dumb as the theming. KDE is by far ahead of gnome in everything from functionality to stability and it continues to lead. I am not much of a newbie and I have tried them ALL, you name it I've tried it as far as WM's and DE's go even dists, I was a KDE hater back when KDE 1 was out, but KDE2 is amazing and I have recently switched to it from enlightenment and sometimes GNOME, its just the best thing out as far as a desktop enviroment is concerned. For any of you GNOME users that use one of the excuses I mentioned as your reason for using GNOME or not using KDE, think about it hard and maybe you should give KDE a try, its a great product and its getting better and better. to the guy asking why they clone MS apps, all the apps you named are pretty much from MS office, wich is a suite of apps that any linux user would kill to have running, they clone it for a very simple reason...they are great apps, trying to be different and make a new app thats actually still a copy but looks semi different may be a noble effort but its pretty dumb in my book when someones already got it right.

I dunno, to each his/her own thats whats great about linux.

cya

[vhg119]

good speech.
I like kde, but i use gnome. :)

[Tyr-7BE]

Originally posted by usual:
GNOME is lightyears behind KDE, and if it wants to stick around they better get serious. In no way shape or form is GNOME more stable then KDE, as far as speed I don't see a difference and as far as looking like windows as so many people like to put it, it looks better then windows and it only gets better looking with every release. I don't know about any of you but I don't hate MS windows for its GUI I hate the actual OS behind it. I have yet to hear a TRUE and more reasonable response from GNOME users as to why its better then KDE, all i hear is complete stupidity like gnome is more stable or faster, or GNOME looks better, or the all time great KDE SUCKS! GNOME RULEZ!. even though kde can use gtk themes as well, I still wont base the desktop enviroment I use on something as dumb as the theming. KDE is by far ahead of gnome in everything from functionality to stability and it continues to lead. I am not much of a newbie and I have tried them ALL, you name it I've tried it as far as WM's and DE's go even dists, I was a KDE hater back when KDE 1 was out, but KDE2 is amazing and I have recently switched to it from enlightenment and sometimes GNOME, its just the best thing out as far as a desktop enviroment is concerned. For any of you GNOME users that use one of the excuses I mentioned as your reason for using GNOME or not using KDE, think about it hard and maybe you should give KDE a try, its a great product and its getting better and better. to the guy asking why they clone MS apps, all the apps you named are pretty much from MS office, wich is a suite of apps that any linux user would kill to have running, they clone it for a very simple reason...they are great apps, trying to be different and make a new app thats actually still a copy but looks semi different may be a noble effort but its pretty dumb in my book when someones already got it right.

I dunno, to each his/her own thats whats great about linux.

cya

Sigh...I guess I'll take this one...

RE: KDE:
Two words: Memory HAWG!! On my old Drake system with KDE 2 and Gnome, KDE 2 sucked back a good 20 megs more of RAM. There IS a difference in speed between the two, assuming you're not using Gnome with E. E will slow anything down. KDE does have a reasonably light WM (something close to sawfish) but the sheer bulk of its desktop overhead is staggering. They simplify everything to almost an MS level and pay in the performance area. As for stability, the two are both bloody stable...it just depends on who's configuring them. It's for these reasons that KDE is often seen as a "first" desktop to introduce people to the linux world. Gnome is not far behind in simplification, but its two-tier system with Gtk and a separate WM makes it a little more tricky (and a little more easy to customize!).
If Gnome wants to stick around? Obviously not an open-source zealot! Another reason why a whole lot of people use Gnome is moral issues. GNOME stands for "GNU Network Object Modelling Environment", I believe. The vital part of that is "GNU". Gnome is like Debian: non-profit, by-the-people-for-the-people. KDE is more of a company (although I don't know whether or not it's a profit organization). Anyone who believes in open source will be tempted to use Gnome just for its moral value.
Myself, I think KDE is ridiculously bloated and drags my system down with its overhead. I use Gnome sometimes, but that's only when I want a fully-featured desktop with moderate overhead. If I just need a desktop environment, I use XFCE (http://www.xfce.org/ ). Otherwise I use Blackbox or IceWM.
KDE and Gnome are both perfectly good desktop environments. KDE is a little more newbie-oriented, Gnome is a little more GNU. KDE 2 is currently a standard in the desktop environment world because it's a MAJOR release that KDE has worked on for years, while Gnome has focused on gradual updates. If you compare the two, the only real difference is memory usage and the single-click vs double-click. KDE makes things look pretty and makes your system look like it's working (the little spinning CD's when you open an app), while Gnome isn't quite as nice-looking but gets the job done that much faster.
Me, I'm a Gnome user. I'm not a KDE hater, I just feel that Gnome will deliver similar performance with less of an overhead, plus the added customizability (KDE's WM CAN be changed, but it's not easy, and KDE isn't nearly as widely compatible). So here it is...my yin to your yan. Use what you will people, be it KDE, Gnome, XFCE (I'm using it right now...try it it's lightweight!), WMs, or :cool: Terminal :cool:.

Cloning MS apps? Office is probably the only thing MS does really really well. StarOffice is quite feature rich, but it's slow as hell and it just doesn't have the feel that MS office does. I've never tried WordPerfect for linux but if anyone has tried it, drop me a review :) I'd LOVE a port of Office to linux, but it ain't gonna happen :(

[bdg1983]

Nice speeches, usual and TYR. You both have some point in there. My opinion: they're both great looking desktop environments and they're both too bloated for me!!! Blackbox and CLI for me, thank you. :D

Have you ppl ever wondered why KDE is cloning M$ apps? Ok, so one reason may be that the Winders users feel more comfortable in Linux. But if some apps really suck arse, do you think anybody bothers to clone them? Nope. Office apps are bloated but they're easy to use and they don't suck arse so why not clone them for the ppl that like them?

Remember, Office was one reason why ppl started using Winders. M$ put a nice office software suite with their OS and ppl bought it because of the apps. There are many desktop users that have to use Winders just because of its office software. Now think of it: M$ Office must be something very good because it makes ppl use so bad OS!

Oh... and look at Gnome, KDE and IceWM. What do you see there? A task bar and start button in each one of them! It's worthless to even mention where they got the task bar and start button... :rolleyes:

[Neurotica]

Nice speaches, they are almost as bloated as KDE and GNOME :)

I hate them both, worthless attempts to dumb-down linux and make it SLOW and BLOATED. GNOME IS BLOATED TOO!

Staroffice is bloated and nasty as well, but as far as office aps go, its the only one that does everything.

Why in gods name would you want MS-office ported to linux!?!?!

MS-office is worthless too!

Id rather see something like staroffice cleaned up.. There IS an "Open Office" project, which is based on staroffice. I have a feeling that it will turn out nice clean code. --->> www.openoffice.org (http://www.openoffice.org)

p.s. Blackbox 4 ever :)

[Aikidoka]

I prefer Enlightenment by itself. I mainly use gnome apps though.

[dilligaf]

Originally posted by Neurotica:

Why in gods name would you want MS-office ported to linux!?!?!



Simple.

To get my office ported over to Linux.

[cga]

The idea for the task bar and start button is actually pretty good GUI design, if you ask me. That's one of the reasons why I use iceWM. M$ did not invent them, however, they simply implemented them in Windows 95.

[kuber]

Who needs a panel or taskbar? I'll stick with my right-click menu in blackbox. It is in fact faster to access than a taskbar.

[TaeShadow]

Originally posted by Tyr-7BE:
If Gnome wants to stick around? Obviously not an open-source zealot! Another reason why a whole lot of people use Gnome is moral issues. GNOME stands for "GNU Network Object Modelling Environment", I believe. The vital part of that is "GNU". Gnome is like Debian: non-profit, by-the-people-for-the-people. KDE is more of a company (although I don't know whether or not it's a profit organization). Anyone who believes in open source will be tempted to use Gnome just for its moral value.[/B]

KDE is just as free as GNOME is. KDE does not make a profit an more than GNOME does. You are saying that simply because a project has the word GNU in its name it is automatically more free than something that doesn't? That is ridiculous.

[Neurotica]

Task bars are extreamly annoying.
Or "panels", whtaever you want to call them.

Love the Blackbox menu :)

[[GoRN]]

Originally posted by TaeShadow:
KDE is just as free as GNOME is. KDE does not make a profit an more than GNOME does. You are saying that simply because a project has the word GNU in its name it is automatically more free than something that doesn't? That is ridiculous.

the way it was said it does sound ridiculous.

Qt vs gtk.

there was the old argument that qt wasn't free because it was under the qpl. Now it's under the gpl so it's free write? wrong. It's a library, if i wanted to make a comercial qt application i would have to buy a licenese from them. The GPL says any work off of the code must be under the GPL too. the LGPL (lesser i belive, library would make sense too though) protects the code but allows linking so comerical apps can be made with it.

So kde is less free because it can't be made not free....
okay now i sound ridiculous

personal gnome and kde are both too slow. I loved kde when i was a newbie, then switched to gnome and loved it. now i use icewm and thats all. But i use konq for web browsing, much better than netscape.

back to topic,
supply and demand. there is demand for microsoft like applications for linux. you might not be part of that demand, (i'm not either) but it's still there and kde is filling the gap, good for them.


-out-

[vvx]

Originally posted by debiandude:
Maybe I am just dense but how difficult can it be to learn to use a word processor? I am sorry you just open it up and type? Am I missing something, maybe the presentation tool or the spreadsheet require some actual thinking to use, but not much... You mean they hire people that need to be taught how to use office tools. Maybe they should hire more knowledgeable people.

Remember, the 'avg' user took a college class to learn how to use word. Well, maybe not 'avg', but people do..

[binary_boy]

I figure, you use what you like. With Linux, you have the option. All the desktop/wms have strengths/weaknesses.

I've tried just about everything. I like and dislike things about all of them. Now I'm into Blackbox. Its fast and looks cool. No overhead from seldom used taskbars, panels, and icons. However, I use a variety of the Gnome and KDE applications I like, launched from Blackbox. I find myself using mostly GNOME apps though.

By the way I noticed a utility in KDE 2 which looks EXACTLY like the Device Manager utility in Windows. What's up with that?

[mindwarp.out]

All I know is my gnome with enlightenment almost never works right, crashes, and makes me go in a fix a whole buncha stuff. KDE has not crashed on me yet, and is very functional.

[TaeShadow]

Originally posted by binary_boy:

By the way I noticed a utility in KDE 2 which looks EXACTLY like the Device Manager utility in Windows. What's up with that?

Yeah, we KDE people try to ignore that program...

[TaeShadow]

Originally posted by binary_boy:

By the way I noticed a utility in KDE 2 which looks EXACTLY like the Device Manager utility in Windows. What's up with that?

Yeah, we KDE people try to ignore that program...

[Ig0r]

Oh... and look at Gnome, KDE and IceWM. What do you see there? A task bar and start button in each one of them! It's worthless to even mention where they got the task bar and start button... :rolleyes:[/B]

Yes; we all know that they ripped it right from Xerox PARC demo systems.

[sandy0]

I guess this has already been said in one way or another, but the only way Linux will ever make the transition to a desktop user environment is if it becomes as easy to learn and use as everyone thinks Windows is! Frankly Windows was not that easy to learn and is not that easy to use........for a beginner computer user. But most of the world has been using Windows now for years and so everyone is familiar with it. I suppose Linux could remain the purview of the development community, or be satisfied to make some inroads into the server market, but why limit it? Unfortunately, most people don't have the time or inclination to learn a totally new operating system or new applications. Most Windows users don't know crap about "command line" stuff, nor do they want to mess with it. They just want to get on their computers and do their jobs, cruise the net, etc., etc. ;) So...........Linux developers interested in capturing some of those "average Joe computer users" (these are the same ones who buy millions of dollars of Microsoft crap every year!) must figure out ways to make them feel comfortable!! That's the reason Linux now has a GUI and Window Managers that resemble Windows and applications that try to look like those found on MS Windoze :) So what's the big deal! Those who hate Windows still have the option of running a non GUI version of Linux! That's the beauty of Linux......a distro to match every taste and level of expertise :)

As for the Window Manager Wars.......I personally prefer Window Maker and Black Box, but use KDE for most file management stuff when I'm at root :) I recently uninstalled Gnome/starfish/enlightenment/xfce and all the rest. I have found Window Maker to be the most stable and easy to use and have been able to add icons for all the kde apps that I use, including Konqueror (the amazing file manager/browser combination that does the things that Bill Gates can only wish his "integrated desktop" could do!) I haven't found KDE or Gnome to be as stable as Window Maker.........and it's pretty too ;)

Have not used the KOffice series that much. I actually prefer AbiWord for word processing......anyone else use it?? I don't run Star Office in Linux.....can't get it to install on my machine.....think it's a problem with the video card. I run it on my Windows ME machine instead :)

[Neurotica]

In reality Linux is about choice. So the logical conclusion here of which "this or that is better", is:

"Use what you like" (TM)

...And everyone is happy, YAY :)

[Pierre Lambion]

In reality Linux is about choice. So the logical conclusion here of which "this or that is better", is:

"Use what you like" (TM)

...And everyone is happy, YAY


That should be the final word I guess, and we just should be enjoying having two valid choices as desktops (plus the alternative not to use a desktop environment of course!).

I just wanted to answer to people disregarding the taskbar and prefering a right-click root menu like in blackbox. Once again, please try to accept that people have diffrent needs and different way to use computers.

I much prefer a taskbar: I'm on a 15 inch screen and my apps take all the scree real estate. Should I go chasing a few free desktop square centimeters? No, I prefer my taskbar.

So, if you have large screens, I understand the blackbox way may be better for you, but I really hope we will keep alternatives!

Pierre

[Neurotica]

Hehehehe, well thats why you use multipul desktops silly. :)

Blackbox has a neato program called "bbkeys" that lets you assign just about any keycombo to do a varaiety of things :)

I have 7 desktops and use them all. lol.

But I do have a very large monitor, so I guess I cant say much for the "small screen issue".... But my laptop is only 15inches (hehe only), and blackbox is just as great on that as it is on this 21inch :)

Oh well... as I said

"Use what you like" :)


"But its the principal of the matter!!" ... another quote :)

I got tons of them.... Most of them are my own quotes. :)

[Ami Hughes]

While I would have liked to remove my profile and personal information from LinuxNewbie.org, I am not permitted to do so. While I have contacted internet.com for the abuse from the administration at linuxnewbie.org I have to wait for any further action. I used to do the popular posts for Pretty Fonts in Netscapes which was closed to because of Derek who goes under the username "Neurotica". They also have a habit of sabotaging your member ratings so becareful of that. You can learn more about that by visiting my web site or calling me at home. That information is in my signature.

[Ami Hughes]

While I would have liked to remove my profile and personal information from LinuxNewbie.org, I am not permitted to do so. While I have contacted internet.com for the abuse from the administration at linuxnewbie.org I have to wait for any further action. I used to do the popular posts for Pretty Fonts in Netscapes which was closed to because of Derek who goes under the username "Neurotica". They also have a habit of sabotaging your member ratings so becareful of that. You can learn more about that by visiting my web site or calling me at home. That information is in my signature.

[cga]

With all the pro-Blackbox posts here of late, I decided to install it and give it a spin last night. I can sure see why the BB people love their wm so much- it is sweet! Smaller even than icewm and fast!

Of course now I have to figure out everthing about it and tweak it to my liking...

Does this mean that I'll dump ice? Hehe, we'll have to wait to wait and see. I am still playing with my new toy...

[cga]

With all the pro-Blackbox posts here of late, I decided to install it and give it a spin last night. I can sure see why the BB people love their wm so much- it is sweet! Smaller even than icewm and fast!

Of course now I have to figure out everthing about it and tweak it to my liking...

Does this mean that I'll dump ice? Hehe, we'll have to wait to wait and see. I am still playing with my new toy...

[Tyr-7BE]

Originally posted by TaeShadow:
KDE is just as free as GNOME is. KDE does not make a profit an more than GNOME does. You are saying that simply because a project has the word GNU in its name it is automatically more free than something that doesn't? That is ridiculous.

KDE began as a non-free DE...I refer you to the QT vs GTK post. They later made it as free as they could. I agree that I sounded kinda stupid in retrospect.
And as for the DE "war", must I remind you all that KDE 1.0 sucked virtually everything it could get its hands on? There were a whole lot of people who HATED KDE 1.0. Now that 2.x is out, everyone's crazy about it. Gnome, on the other hand, hasn't released anything major since before KDE 2.x came out....until now. With the advent of Gnome 1.4 comes Nautilus, which I can't WAIT to try out. I'm just trying to collect all the dependencies right now without bringing down my system and soon I'll be sailing from 1.4 :) Remember that these two are in competition...no one has any hand over the other for any extended period of time. It's by no means hostile competition (as opposed to linux vs MS in the server world)...it's just a reason to keep coming out with new features and a better product. Gnome will have the upper hand, then KDE will shoot ahead, giving Gnome a reason to develop something sweet to put them back on top, giving KDE a reason to make a new release, etc etc.... Rumour has it that both sides talk to each other regularily and help each other out.

[ 03 April 2001: Message edited by: Tyr-7BE ]

[Tyr-7BE]

Yeah bbox is a thing of beauty. My WM of choice. But if I want something that's pure eye-candy and convenience, I'll go with Gnome. Sure it may bloat my system like nothing else save Mandrake, but it is really convenient, and Ximian + my themes make it look great. Bbox just doesn't have the same scheming capabilities.
Neurotica: I can speak from experience that DE's are not an attempt to dumb anything down. It's just an introduction to linux. I can safely say that I NEVER would have installed linux if it didn't have Gnome or KDE. Remember that virtually all converts come from a linux environment, where the terminal is a no-zone. I started off with KDE, and was forced to use a command line when one of my GUIs wouldn't work very well for RPMs (I was using Drake). I learned how to RPM from bash, and the rest is history. Now I pretty much can't function without several Xterms opened at once, and I make use of all desktops including the virtual terminals.
Granted, I'm no guru by any means. Guruhood is just my goal, and if it weren't for our friends at Gnome and KDE, you'd have one less future Guru roaming the 'net.

[Visionary]

Originally posted by NGene:
It's worthless to even mention where they got the task bar and start button... :rolleyes:

The first time a "Start Button" and "Taskbar" was used in an OS was foir Mac OS.

"Why didn't Apple sue M$?"

Bill Gates designed the interface while working at Apple. At that time the design was the right of the designer not the company. Hence Apple can not sue M$

[janneo]

OK, first of all: Gnome is better than KDE because it's non-profit?

Well, is it just me but isn't there alot of commercial companies involved with Gnome? There's Ximian with it's desktop, there's Eazel with it's glorified Konqueror-wannabe... There's nothing like that in KDE (well, there's The Kompany, but it doesn't seem to be as bad as Ximian or Eazel). There's alot of venture capital involved with Gnome, and still you say that "Gnome is better because it's non-profit". To me, KDE seems more non-profit than Gnome is!

as for the freedom. First people said that Gnome is more free than KDE because Qt is under QPL, not GPL. Then when Qt is licensed under GPL, people still say that Gnome is more free, because you can't make KDE "un-free" because of GPL? Huh? to me that sounds ridiculous!

I guess some people are never happy...

As for being Windows-clone. Well, both Gnome and KDE seem to have some similarities with Windows. They both have a taskbar, they both have a start-menu... So I fail to see the difference there...

As for bloatness... Well, Arts takes quite alot of resources in KDE. Just don't run it if if you don't want to! People have been complaining that Eazels Nautilus is slow and eats alot of resources, so Gnome isn't any better...