Gotta make it sound like it's a big deal or something. After all, I write this more to stroke my own ego than to entertain those who read this. But hey - if you like it, then my ego thanks you. It's small and shy, and so needs as much attention as it can get.
One thing that's bothered and confused me lately is this almost religious-like fervor in the debates about KDE versus GNOME. GNOME is better for this, KDE is better for that, blah blah blah. If half the amount of the effort that was wasted in arguing the merits of one over the other was channeled into programming effort, then every app in existence would support both GNOME and KDE, and the point would be moot.
What's got me confused is the concept that such an argument would even exist in the first place. After all, isn't Linux (where they are most commonly used) designed with the purpose of providing multiple application choices for any particular task? Isn't that what makes Linux (and other *nix's) better than Microsoft? Most people think of specific utility programs - server daemons, word processors, etc., as examples of multiple choices in apps. But when it comes to the GUI and desktop environment.....oh no no no, such a concept is inconceivable! (/sarcasm)
I like the idea of multiple desktop environments. I spend most of my time in GNOME, and I like it mainly because the interface is less Microsoft-ish - as if their purpose was to create the interface from scratch. Compare it to KDE, whose aim seems to provide "Windows-On-Linux" look and feel. But that's just my personal opinion. I like the fact that I can switch from one style interface to another with no major problems.
I think the whole basis for arguing KDE versus GNOME is plain foolishness. You don't hear this type of argument over Apache versus Tux, or AbiWord over OpenOffice.org. Use what you find works best for you, and if you can, contribute to that app's growth. People have forgotten that choice is far more beneficial than a single unified option. The cream will rise to the top, and the scum will sink to the bottom.
You want a gui interface that is consistent across the board, and works the same everywhere (mostly)? Then use Windows. But be prepared to accept the limitations that come with the system. With greater interface consistency comes less room for innovation and improvements. You're locked in to ensure that things stay consistent.
For those who say choice is a bad thing, I have only one thing to say, and that is - you chose to stick with the status quo. Congratulations. But I want to make a different choice. In fact, I want to be able to change my choice whenever I feel the need. You may be happy where you are, but dont expect to insist others do it just because you are.