Originally Posted by cavallino
Gnome is like the starbucks of de's it is not great but it is consistent. Kde can vary a lot in implementation from distro to distro. I never liked kde that much until I set it up piece by piece in arch.
One thing that can seriously affect the experience with KDE on different distro's, is the maintainers experience with KDE compilation. it is a very complex thing to compile from source and frustrating. Most KDE implementations suffer at the hands most of the time by inexpeirenced maintainers.
Kubuntu and Slackware imho are the two best KDE distro's, i know opensuse uses KDE as their default, but i haven't played with OpenSuse in a few years, so i can't comment on their quality of KDE.
when i tested out arch, i used KDE for it, and i found that release was actually piss poor in comparison to Kubuntu's and slackware (as slackware imo has the best implementation of it.), i had numerious crashes of the default startup programs that i didn't have in slackware/kubuntu, and it was noticeable slower in its startup when it wouldn't bug out.
now gnome can be tricky to compile like KDE, but i have noticed most distro's concentrate more of their efforts on Gnome, as gnome requires additional tweaks to get it to work correctly (its not many tweaks, but it can effect the way the other DE's operate as well, its one of the main reasons why slackware dropped gnome support all together a few releases back, as it required additional workarounds with no benefit to the end user, and the community releases of gnome are really bad...)
their developer communities are quite different as well...KDE's seem to listen to their users, where gnome's well, seems to think they know what is best and move forward without the blessing of their users...KDE did this once, and it took 4 years to get their following back up...
it will be interesting to following Gnome's 3 development, hopefully it wont be a blunder like KDE4 introduction was.