This is in no way to start a war but;
I'm really curious what Gnome can do that KDE can't or what it is more accurately that you don't like about KDE. I only used Gnome when I first started out with default Ubuntu but the graphical glitches and death of taskbars (yes they actually died and needed "force quit") did not make me a happy camper. I would have given up on Linux if someone hadn't reminded me that my first love, SLAX was KDE and so maybe I could try out variants with it. Since then I haven't been able to bear Gnome since.
I'm however happy Gnome exists because when I show people Linux distros I can give them the "Look at how much variety Linux has" argument and they are usually impressed with the common two, Gnome and KDE. I can't even take the Gnome is less resource intensive argument because on a netbook I had KDE down to just 200MB of RAM usage. On my sig rig Gnome in ubuntu 10.04 used only 50-100MB less RAM than Kubuntu 10.04
openSUSE11.3 I liked but because I did the full DVD install seemed a bit slow and bloated. So if you're judging KDE off of that experience give it a try in another distro as well.
OT: Anyone 1337 enough to go terminal only?
So yes, so far so good... the more I use it and start to understand it the better it goes (and I suspect that was the only reason I preffered Gnome over anything else was because I knew it better)... at the end of the day, it is just an OS, and these are just desktop environments... nothing to get to upset about