On 04/14/2017 02:10 PM, Farhad Mohammadi Majd wrote:
On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 15:40 +0200, Vojtěch Zeisek wrote:
There are hundreds distributions at https://distrowatch.com/ You listed few. Does it prove anything?
Those are most popular and big Linux distros.
Isn't KDE more configurable, powerful, feature-rich, with more modern architecture, etc.?
Yes, KDE is extremely configurable and feature-rich, but I think this is a bad approach, because KDE is a little confusing, I'm not fan of minimalism, but I think it is better that KDE reduce some less-usable features and focus on stability and productivity.
What does prevent anyone from install and use anything he/she likes?
It is not about personal preference, it is about *technical competence*.
Is not GNOME more secure than KDE even?
Any evidence? No? If not, this is just useless blah blah statement without any value.
I don't know about security of KDE, I asked that question in the hope that someone provide a good technical description. Because GNOME is more used than KDE and is used by big distros, I got the impression that GNOME is more secure than KDE, of course I know that GNOME is not impeccable in this field, for example, WebKitGTK+ has many security vulnerabilities:
https://webkitgtk.org/security.html
134 vulnerabilities only in one Security Advisory:
Counting security advisories for desktops isn't a fair comparison, I can find you many a security advisory for something that is pretty trivial and pointless given the access a untrusted app has in X11 anyway. Looking at browser engines is equally unfair, as they get a far greater focus due to more often running untrusted code. The Qt Webkit module probably has a similar Advisory with similar vun's given they share a bunch of code. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B