I've been playing around.

ChrisC

Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
just an observation.

--
" If you can empty your mind of all thoughts your
heart will embrace the tranquility of peace.
Watch the workings of all of creation, but
contemplate their return to the source. "
-Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu-

ChrisC

Bit Twister

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:53:26 +0000, ChrisC wrote:
> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.

Change distributions. I run Mandriva Linux and yet to have a crash.

I recommend you boot a rescue cd and run memtest overnight.

ray

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:53:26 +0000, ChrisC wrote:

> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.

I had not noticed that - I've never had any issues like that with either
one.

Meat Plow

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:53:26 +0000, ChrisC wrote:

> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.

Haven't noticed. I haven't had a crash in KDE 3.5.6 that I can remember.
I use gnome and qt apps also in kde.

ray

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 06:06:06 +0000, Bit Twister wrote:

> On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:53:26 +0000, ChrisC wrote:
>> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
>> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
>> just an observation.
>
> Change distributions. I run Mandriva Linux and yet to have a crash.
>
> I recommend you boot a rescue cd and run memtest overnight.

Good point - I would suspect hardware problems if either one has
significant problems. The only desktop I've ever had problems with was E17
about two years ago - and it's still under development.

ray

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:12:28 -0500, George Peatty wrote:

> On 7 Dec 2007 11:43:18 +0100, Mark South <mark.south@null.invalid> wrote:
>
>>So, did we ever definitively decide which is better, emacs or vi?
>
> Such mystical, transcendental questions have no solution. It's like asking,
> what is the value of pi?

3.141592653589+

Dan C

On 2007-12-07, ChrisC wrote:
> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.

I'd score this a 1.25 (out of 10) on the Troll-O-Meter.


--
"Ubuntu" - an African word meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Meat Plow

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 05:53:26 +0000, ChrisC wrote:

> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.

Haven't noticed. I haven't had a crash in KDE 3.5.6 that I can remember.
I use gnome and qt apps also in kde.

Dirk T. Verbeek

ChrisC wrote:
> Does any one notice that KDE is less stable than Gnome. I find Gnome
> crashes less and is a lot more solid. This isn't Gnome Vs KDE debate,
> just an observation.
>
Hmm, am I feeding a troll?

Anyway, I only use KDE as in Kubuntu and yet I can compare it with Gnome.
That's because KDE does not crash, I've seen the odd application with a
problem but not KDE itself that's causing trouble.

Mark South

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:12:28 -0500, George Peatty wrote:

> On 7 Dec 2007 11:43:18 +0100, Mark South <mark.south@null.invalid> wrote:
>
>>So, did we ever definitively decide which is better, emacs or vi?
>
> Such mystical, transcendental questions have no solution. It's like asking,
> what is the value of pi?

355/113 :-)

If you need a better approximation, you're building very big things, or
taking the universe apart.