I agree that KDE looks nicer compared to metacity, especially KDE-4. However, KDE doesn't work on my machine. It's just too buggy. In KDE-4 I've not once opened the settings manager without the screen going black on me except the pointer, and all keyboard events being swallowed so I can't even change terminals, forcing me to restart. It also has a very buggy or very lacking in features panel. You can't move items around on it, and every item you add is put on the right. If you somehow manage to remove the panel you better had mapped a keyboard shortcut to open a terminal, because there's no other way you can start a program. And whatever you do, don't close any of the terminals you open, because the shortcut only works five times anyway. Oh, and only about half of the Kwin settings actually work, and if you select the wrong one you'll never be able to restart X ever again. Which one seems to vary, but the last time it was mouse trail (no, I don't normally use it. I just wanted to see if it worked). Fun times.
I tried KDE-3.5 as well, because I figured KDE-4 might be suffering from just-released-syndrome. It was even worse. I never really got to try it out, because windows would randomly lock up or bug in the weirdest ways. Sometimes it would refuse to change the focused window no matter what I did, so I was forced to work in the only window that was focused at the time the bug happened. Interesting things happen when an unfocused modal window pops up. Other times it would refuse to move windows. Well, they would for all intents and purposes be moved, except their position on the screen remained the same. They would be redrawn, but not moved or change position in the stack. Fun things happened when other windows got wrong information about which parts of it were visible. Not redrawing visible parts we've all seen before, but redrawing invisible parts on top of a window that should be in front of it, but isn't, is a first.
Also, neither version seemed to have as many configuration options as GNOME available from the launcher menu. Maybe if I had known about the specific programs to run, or packages to get, I would've found them, but it's a problem I didn't have in GNOME.
GNOME with Compiz looks wonderful on my machine, and behaves just the way I want it to. Emerald has some pretty neat themes available for download, and I absolutely love the wall. Combined with expo it's like I've got eight screens at once. Also, wobbly windows and other effects makes it so much nicer that other window managers I've tried (as long as you don't overdo it. I've found the settings perfect for me). When I enabled wobbly windows in KDE absolutely nothing happened, and then it crashed. Overall it felt like ME.
The only thing that bothers me about GNOME right now is that Tk, and to a lesser extent, wxWidgets, look ugly. Tk looks like win 95, and wx looks, well... confused. Tk didn't look especially good in windows either, but at least it had most of the look and feel, except for a few buttons that were slightly off. I don't know if this is actually GNOME's fault thought. Seems to me like it's the toolkits' responsibility thought.
Finally I must say that I agree with the KDE philosophy more than I do GNOME, but thus far I haven't seen any of it. I'm also probably the odd man out when it comes to bugs, but that still doesn't change the fact that KDE is absolutely useless on my machine.
(I've only tested KDE with Kubuntu. I've testen GNOME both on ubuntu and Gentoo, but it was basically identical.)
TheGZeus wrote:By "Win2k" I mean "Grey, squared-off, and boring."
To a degree aesthetics are personal preference, and I've stated my case, so there's not much more for me to say there. *shrug*
If I remember correctly, metacity is designed to be grey and square.
Wikipedia wrote:Metacity's focus is on simplicity and usability rather than novelties or gimmicks. Its author has characterized it as a "Boring window manager for the adult in you. Many window managers are like Marshmallow Froot Loops; Metacity is like Cheerios."
As I've said, I use compiz, so this isn't an issue for me.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.