true comparison

And other memes made by people who have never used KDE.
- Gnome and KDE are equally good.
  
  Imo they are both solid technologically, but KDE delivers much more with it's defaults. Obviously you can theme both to hell and back and make them look however you want and get whatever functionality you want, but default KDE is so much more usable than default gnome it's not even a competition.

That would be way more accurate with KDE on the left and XFCE on the right. GNOME is completely different (and also, hands down, very ugly) out of the box.

I like the template but the KDE GUI is simply beautiful, and looks very modern, so this is not really a real thing

Everyone here is super salty, meanwhile I just thought this was suggesting that GNOME is like a rounder KDE

I feel like this is used either by someone who hasn't used KDE in a decade or has been using Linux (Ubuntu) for less than a year.
The worst thing you can say about KDE is that the default configuration is pretty basic. However, that's arguably a good thing because that format is straight up better for productivity.
KDE has also embraced user choice. Not only do they design the desktop and applications to be much more configurable than GNOME. A power user can customize KDE in a way that seems to personally offend GNOME developers. In addition, KDE 5 designed their libraries in a way that other DEs can leverage them while still doing their own thing. I haven't kept up, but at one point that was a huge boon to LxQT development.
Above all else, the KDE team seems a lot more reasonable than the GNOME team. Over the past decade, KDE has worked hard to rebuild trust after their disastrous 4.0 rollout. Meanwhile in that same period four different groups of developers have decided to go their own way because they felt the GNOME team was impossible to work with.

That would work a lot better with XFCE, Mate or LXQT! (Not that I dislike any of those but unlike KDE they actually look old af)

XFCE is better than both.
- Good joke
  XCFE feels like it came from that XP/Vista period where UIs were moving away from looking like they were drawn in a terminal but hadn't quite reached "fluidity" or whatever other bs marketers call modern UIs... I could understand a tiling dm being called better than both but given XCFE is only better at being lightweight, that's a self-placed restriction because it's very reasonable to say most people can run either KDE or Gnome with virtually undetectable overhead
  
  Xfce is highly customizable (definitely more than gnome) and can look modern with a little theming. Its also much easier to replace components of the de (like the xfce wm or app launcher for example)

Gnome reminds me of MacOS(derogatory). I mean at least Gnome lets me change shit if I fidget and fennagle enough, but it is still far too locked down for me. Extensions are a half-measure that also doesn't do enough.
KDE is good but it's a bit pudgy, I'm a XFCE user.

Gnome feels stale... i cant describe it better but when using it it feels like im 20 years older.
Kde feels more modern but customizeing it is a pain in the ass for me
Window managers it is!

Anything based or forked from GNOME 3 or 2 is considered very solid
GNOME 4(0)+ is a practical joke made by canonical that has the only benefit of leading wayland support, which itself is also a practical joke made to scare the X.Org devs
- It's happening, the nostalgic idiots start to embrace Gnome 3 too! Every version people call the older one good but this time most who disliked 3 actually seemed more happy with 4...
- I actually really love the workflow of workspaces. Not to mention it keeps the screen really clean with just the thin top bar. Compare that to windows-like desktops where you are cycling through alt-tab a lot of the time.