Linux

Very critical. GNOME and KDE have two very different UX paradigms.

Usually people used to Windows opt for KDE, and Mac or older Ubuntu users opt for GNOME.

The thing is though, a golden standard DE can easily be setup to act as both. XFCE is so customizable that I've seen both DE types setup as UNIX like or Windows like workflow.

I'm not sure if KDE or GNOME can do the same because I'm pretty sure they focus on a target audience.

What are your issues with KDE exactly? I always hated GNOME's lack of standard window buttons and handling multiple windows in a Mac like fashion. Also the app menu which gives me flashbacks of ChromeOS.

Gnome is where the heart is for me! It's just so customizable, the extension framework is such a cool concept. And yes, I know, KDE has a lot of bells and whistles, and I think think that's why I dislike it. It's cluttered, Gnome is simple. I like the polish and the smoothness, KDE is nice for people who want more but I'm happy with less. Thanks for coming to my TED talk!

I don't care at all about DE, as long as it is not gnome. I run vanilla kde with minimal configuration. I tried many DEs through the years, tiling wm and so on. Now I just want something that works and that I don't worry about. But gnome, I don't get it. I did try it a couple years ago and my colleagues at work use it, it feels like it is hindering me. I don't like how the application switcher works, the software launcher and so on. When I use it it feels to me I'm fighting the UI in order to do very simple things.

It is important. But I find the ones I have tried good, and would survive if I had to use either of them. I use KDE Plasma on my main personal laptop, I have Cinnamon running on a living room computer connected to my TV (not an ideal solution, but I've so far not taken the time to optimize the setup) and GNOME om my work laptop. I much prefer KDE Plasma out of them, but I like the others also.

Extremely. I've tried KDE flavors of various distros and one thing that trips me up every single time is the workflow for connecting to my hidden WiFi network. On Gnome and Cinnamon I can do this in a few clicks from the network icon in the task bar. On KDE I always have to spend several minutes fumbling my way around the network settings before I can start using it. Every. Single. Time. I don't know why, it's like my brain just works a certain way and because this is such an early and crucial step in setting up a fresh install, I've never been able to stick w/ KDE despite all the rave reviews it receives in these types of posts.

I just wish I could have AfterStep's mini desktop pager in a modern window manager. It was so cool seeing an overview of my virtual desktops next to each other and being able to drag windows from one to the other without switching desktops.

Super important. I do also choose a DE first and look for a distro that supports it out of the box second.

This being said, while I think Gnome looks amazing, it's whole UX is killing me. I tried it over and over again, because it looks so beautyful. But it always starts to frustrate and annoy me.

I was ling term Cinnamon user and recently switched to KDE Plasma. Luckily, as Linux users we have a choice.

Very important.

At this stage, I see no reason to use anything other than KDE.

When going over to Linux from Windows full time I landed on Gnome. Despite KDE being superficially like Windows, Gnome keyboard shortcuts are closer to what I’m used to, the defaults feel more sane to me, and the DE gets out of my way faster when in the terminal. I really want to like KDE but it hasn’t clicked for me.

One of the early irritants was way back in the KDE v1 days- the injection of the letter ’K’ in the app names - it harkens back to frat house level shenanigans (at least in the college I attended, except they liked the letter ’Q’). It hasn’t felt right with me.

Dash to panel and a couple of other extensions fixes the main gripes I have with Gnome DE. After testing Cosmic recently I am pretty close to that with my current configuration, and will likely try a transition that DE once it stabilizes.

I can technically manage in any DE generally - heck, I ran CDE on Digital OpenVMS back in the day and it did the job then. It a tool. The terminal is still where things happen for me.

Edits: reformatting the wall of text, added nuance.

I currently use KDE Plasma, Cinnamon and LXQt on three different computers. On most DEs I can manage myself just well. I never liked GNOME post 2. I have recently used MATE, LXDE and Xfce

Interface matters a ton, of course. But once you switch between a few it gets easier, even if you retain your preferences.

i've tried gnome, cinnamon, hyprland, lxqt and whatnot... but everything i have settles on KDE

I used to feel the same. At some point I put some time into setting up KDE how I wanted it and then I just kinda kept using it. Still use it today. I do find the editing tools of the toolbars etc to be extremely chaotic. But once that's in place it's actually nicer than Gnome imo

Distro is more an alignment of philosophy between you and the distro. Something slowly updated but really stable? Debian. Something cutting edge, but with lots of guides? Arch, etc. etc.

Any of them can pretty much run any shell, DE or WM, and as that's what you spend the most of the time interacting with, that's a more personal touch point. The distro is really just the package manager that you regularly interact with, and thats easy enough to hide behind something like topgrade.

I have only used Sway for a few years and anything else feels bloated and slow to use to me now. I spent a long time tweaking to get it how I wanted both in terms of add ons and config, then setting the keyboard shortcuts that work for me. I even have a bunch of them configured on my actual keyboard on layers to make them even easier to activate.

Its worth the investment for me as its now transparent to my workflow. I run the same config across all my machines and its been a stable config for the longest time. Long term stability is the key for me.

What DE you like is very much dependant on your work flow and how well you can adjust to changes.

Personally, I love KDE Plasma. It's the right amount of "bling", bells, whistles, aestetic and settings for me. Gnome feels way to "simple" and XFCE feels reliable but old.

For me, the DE is often more important than the base underneath, but I do like my rolling release. :)

For me it's pretty important because I want my computer to feel good to use, so I'll spend quite a lot of time making sure everything's set up the way I like it. In terms of GNOME vs KDE, I'm definitely a KDE person. Not that I hate GNOME or think there's anything wrong with other people using it, I just don't get along with it personally. For me it feels like there's too much stuff in GNOME that should be part of the core DE that relies on extensions, which tend to break with updates so there's always something that's not quite working.

I've used several iterations of Gnome, several iterations of KDE, Mate, Cinnamon, Hyprland, XFCE, LXDE, Fluxbox, and several other things I can't be bothered to remember. I can be productive on any of them given some time to set them up.

I do have preferences though, and I like KDE on a laptop/desktop and Gnome on a tablet. I just wish Gnome would do something about its horrid onscreen keyboard.

About 0.00001% of my worth as a human being. Wait till you venture out of the DE world and into the WM world. i3, BSPWM, Openbox. Go even farther and try Wayland with Sway, Hyprland, Niri, MangoWC. Make your own bars. Configure your own keybindings. Cuss a lot. Pull your hair out. Feel the pain. When you come out the other side you'll wonder why you ever bothered with so much bloat to begin with. And all of a sudden you might know some CSS and json.

I prefer KDE. It works well out of the box and offers a good amount of customization. I tried gnome for a bit and didn’t like it.

What I like about Linux is that it’s easy to switch between DE. Just try out a few ones until you find something you like. I can recommend looking into Cinnamon (the DE of Mint).

I've changed DE multiple times, most of them are fine. KDE is a bit obtuse but it's ultimately what I settled on because I want good built-in themes. If KDE didn't exist I'd go with Xfce, followed by LXQt (never tried LXQt though).

In terms of how important a DE is, I think picking the right distro is more important. This basically means staying away from anything Ubuntu or Ubuntu-based because in my experience those are the least stable.

The DE is very important to me, and for me that is KDE. Tbh I find Gnome horrendous to use - too locked down, too uncompromising in it's design. If you like the paradigm then I imagine it's decent - certainly looks very slick. KDE on the other hand is very flexible and has been easy to tune it to exactly what I want.

But i'd say switching DE shouldn't be a "barrier". Almost all distros support multiple DEs, and Gnome or KDE is a common choice.

When is comes to VR, you can set up an alternate X11 session which only runs Steam in gamescope mode, with minimal or no desktop environment. /usr/share/xsessions/ contains defined X11 sessions; you can manually add one that literally only launches one program via a .desktop file pointing to a script (e.g. launches steam in gamescope mode with a specified resolution). Or you can install a very minimal DE such as OpenBox or i3 and set that up to autolaunch Steam in a window or big picture/gamescope mode. This way whenever you want to VR, you log out of your Gnome desktop session and then login to your "Steam" session, and almost all resources are available for Steam and games with minimal overhead. The minimal DE route is probably the better route just because of options to get out of crashes and problem solve. Either way, this route bypasses the Gnome / and general Wayland issues with VR.

After 2y on Linux I can say with full confidence that switching from GNOME to KDE (for me) is a bigger barrier than switching from Windows to Linux ever was.

Huh?

How's that a bigger barrier?

You install it, you select it from your login("display") manager on next login, et viola, you're using it... and you still have access to all your prior installed programs too. No backup required, no complete operating system install, no great leap of learning an entirely different operating system paradigm, no reading new software licenses... it's just install it, and log in to it.

How important is a DE to you?

None at all.

Xmonad's been my fave since around 2007-2008ish.

Tried dozens of other window managers. [Special honourable mention to herbstluftwm.]

Tried over half the desktop environments too.

Much more nice without unnecessary clutter and resource wastage and faff of a desktop environment, and just a window manager.

And, as for trying new DE/WM, and needing to log out and back in to try them... even that hurdle can be eliminated. ;) There be ways to switch them without losing everything you're currently running. https://codeberg.org/Digit/wminizer

i prefer WMs

Every decade since 1999 (the year of the Linux desktop—for me) I spend a few weeks trying out all the hot new shit in terms of desktop environments. I'll switch to Gnome for a few days, get disappointed at how much I miss from KDE, and then try one of the newer ones like Cosmic. Then I'll play with the latest versions of the classics (xfce) and marvel that they still make you configure everything in a single file or they still lack basic shit that normal people want like a clipboard manager.

All the actually useful or just plain really, really nice/handy stuff is built into KDE Plasma. I've been using so many of those features for so long, I can't fathom having to go back to a world without say, being able to navigate the filesystems on all my other PCs via ssh:// (and other KIO workers).

I remember when KDE 2.0 came out and it added support for kioslaves (now called KIO Workers) and it completely changed how I viewed desktops. That was in the year 2000. How is it that literally nothing else (not other FOSS desktops nor Windows or Macs) has implemented the same feature?

It's not just the file manager, either. I can access ssh:// (or any other KIO worker) from any file dialog! The closest thing is shared drives in Windows but even that isn't nearly as flexible or feature rich (or efficient, haha).

Then there's the clipboard manager (klipper), Activities, and a control panel that lets you customize everything to extreme degrees. It even supports fractional scaling and has supported that since forever. I remember when they introduced that feature over a decade ago and it still blows my mind to this day just how forward thinking the devs were.

Monitors since forever have had a different X DPI than the Y DPI. Yet only the KDE devs bothered to both query the monitor's DDC info to figure that out and set it correctly when the desktop starts.

There's other features that drive me nuts when I don't have them! For example, the ability to disable global shortcuts on specific windows. So if I've got a remote desktop open to my work I can send Super-. (Win-.) and that'll open the Windows emoji picker in the remote desktop instead of the KDE one (locally). And it will remember this setting for that application!

I can make any window I want stay above others temporarily to take notes, enter values into the calculator, or just turn any window into something like a HUD (you can control any window's transparency on the fly!).

It even supports window tiling! A feature most people aren't aware of. Like, if you're already running KDE, why bother with a tiling window manager? You've already got it (though the keyboard shortcuts to manage the tiling layout in real time are lacking).

TL;DR: KDE Plasma is the best desktop in existence across all platforms and this is easy to prove with empircal evidence.

I honestly think DE is one of the main reasons people don’t switch from windows.

They just want to use what’s comfortable. The large majority of people would be fine with Linux alternatives, but they don’t want to deal with the different designs.

I've been using Linux for considerably longer, and I started off with things like BB4Win (meant to mimic the Blackbox window manager but on Windows) before I switched, so I was constantly trying different UI experiences and seeking out more customization options even before moving to Linux. Part of the Winamp, "skin all the things," generation. Switching DEs is a non-issue these days but I have my preferences. I loved old Gnome 2 so I found Cinnamon nice enough. xfce too. I don't dislike current Gnome but I've settled in to KDE these day. I lived in Xmonad for a while so I'll also happily take any TWM that preferably isn't it's own hobby project to configure and maintain.

I hate a fee things about Gnome, like how hacky it is to get any screen shot app other than Gnome's to work. Having said that, I tried KDE for a few days, then I tried to customize it to simulate my workflow I think it Gnome as much as possible. Both experiences were a complete fail. It's very hard for me to move from Gnome. Let's see what Cosmic brings to the table in 2026. It's way closer to Gnome in many ways.

As for tour question, to me the DE is 80% of the experience.

Pretty?

In my mind, I equate Gnome with OS X, while KDE is more like Windows.

I can use both competently, but I prefer KDE. Back when I used Ubuntu, I'd always use Kubuntu.

Functionally, not really. I can get my work done on anything from FVWM to GNOME without a hitch.

Aesthetically, very much. The Chicago95 theme sparks joy and makes work just a bit more enjoyable. KDE and GNOME might have more creature comforts, but I will happily tolerate XFCE because it works well with Chicago95. I don't even do fresh installs anymore because of the time it takes for me to configure the visual style just right. I'll instead image from an install I've prepared on a VM.

DE completely depends on your workflow. The way you do things directly impacts what DEs you'll like and which ones you won't.

I'm with you on KDE: I respect it and it clearly seems to be one of the most feature-rich DEs, but I've had trouble actually using it regularly.

I have been using Cosmic DE for the last 6 months or so. I love it because it seamlessly blends tiled and non-tiled workspaces in an effective way. Part of me really enjoys the simplicity of things like i3, but part of me just wants floating windows. It fully depends on what I'm working on and sometimes just my mood, so for me, the seamless blending in Cosmic has felt perfect.

But how important is DE? Tbh I think it is the most important part of a setup, because you interact with it more than any other piece of the system.

GNOME and KDE have large philosophical differences and those show when you use them. I really like KDE and the way I can turn it into a tiling window manager.

Comparing a full DE to a WM is a massive difference. DEs have batteries included, you don't need to worry about which notification daemon to use, which tool can do power management or what renders your task bar. You just get every tool and it works.

I used to use i3, then migrated to sway, but the finding of tools that do X or Y got annoying after a while. In KDE everything just works together with no or minimal configuration and I get more features more easily.

My priority is speed. I don't want a beautiful but slow DE, especially since the PCs I install linux on are usually older. That's why I usually just run openbox most of the time.