KDE 3.1 vs. GNOME 2.2: How GNOME became LAME
Prepare for a flamefest of moderate proportions, courtesy of LinuxWorld.
If Nick Petreley had written this article, say, two years ago, it would have generated enough heat to pop all the corn in Mexico, though.
Special ironic demerits for the use of a forced acronym as mechanism for criticism.
What worries me the most is the stuff I've read about GConf on Slashdot from GNOME users. They seem to have experienced some serious issues with it.
Since GConf is being pushed for adoption by KDE by the maintainer (and who knows Red Hat might go ahead and do it to their fork regardless), I'd hate to think what that would mean for KDE.
Oh, I am confident that KDE wouldn't have much of a problem, or, if it did, it would be detected on beta and dropped.
The problem with the GNOME config system I think is more related to this:
Since their cnfig system wasn't too documented when they started using it, maybe the switch to GConf triggered weird usage. KDE has had a very uniform API for config access since a looooong time ago, so that shouldn't be a problem.
All the corn in Mexico? That doesn't say too much, with americans subsidizing their farmers like crazy, mexican corn farmers are switching to other activities :P