Lightweight window managers

Message

Superfly · Post by **Superfly** » Sat May 03, 2003 7:54 pm

bkhl wrote:
Superfly wrote:I used WindowMaker for a LONG time and loved it... but those icons were just so damn ugly. When I tried Gentoo, I noticed a lot of people raving about Fluxbox, so I tried that out, and fell in love.
You couldn't just change the icons? :?

Well... it wasn't so much the icons I had, but it was more that there were icons there. And the size of them. I tried making them smaller... but then I couldn't find icons that look good smaller and, I guess I was lazy, so I didn't just resize all my icons...

magnet · Post by **magnet** » Sat May 03, 2003 8:59 pm

as some ppl said, I'll recommend xfce4 , nice fast and quite flexible...who need more ?

if you don t need menu , taskbars icons , background, or even window's border, evilwm is a very good wm based on aewm, I use it sometimes on my laptop,it's very fast and don t need a mouse ( those touchpad are just awfulls ).

Superfly · Post by **Superfly** » Sun May 04, 2003 1:18 am

bkhl wrote: For more info on simplistic X usage I recommend this fm.net article.

Oh, and thanks for the article! It'll give me a good start on ratpoison.

-Ryan

d3c3it · Post by **d3c3it** » Sun May 04, 2003 6:06 pm

personally i use fluxbox i tried out pekwm but found it too cutdown but i really like fluxbox as for the icons thing i never use a taskbar anyway and i always group things together and use the cool tab feature, i dont really like bloated stuff really each to there own:)

ghetto · Post by **ghetto** » Sun May 04, 2003 7:48 pm

When looking for a good windowmanager becareful who's advice you take:

"'Not this way, master!' he pleaded. 'There is another way. O yes indeed there is. Another way, darker, more difficult to find, more secret. But Smeagol knows it. Let Smeagol show you!'"
--smeagol

BECAREFUL!! HE DOESNT CARE ABOUT YOUR DESKTOP EXPERIENCE!! HE JUST WANTS HIS PRECIOUS!!

If all else fails good hobits.. dont forget to look to the Gnomes of Younicks they are good and honest and will care deeply for you, just as they do for all the good things of middle earth..

Post by **pjp** » Sun May 04, 2003 8:33 pm

Moved from Desktop Environments.

d3c3it · Post by **d3c3it** » Sun May 04, 2003 8:46 pm

ghetto wrote:When looking for a good windowmanager becareful who's advice you take:

"'Not this way, master!' he pleaded. 'There is another way. O yes indeed there is. Another way, darker, more difficult to find, more secret. But Smeagol knows it. Let Smeagol show you!'"
--smeagol

BECAREFUL!! HE DOESNT CARE ABOUT YOUR DESKTOP EXPERIENCE!! HE JUST WANTS HIS PRECIOUS!!

If all else fails good hobits.. dont forget to look to the Gnomes of Younicks they are good and honest and will care deeply for you, just as they do for all the good things of middle earth..

your nuts:D:D

panserg · Post by **panserg** » Sun May 04, 2003 8:56 pm

My favorite windowmanager is Enlightenment. Unfortunately E16 is already outdated from the rest of Gnome, while E17 is still unstable. So, temporary I stick to Sawfish, which will be the best untill E17 released.

ghetto · Post by **ghetto** » Sun May 04, 2003 9:04 pm

d3c3it wrote:your nuts :D

so it would seem..

nerdbert · Post by **nerdbert** » Tue May 06, 2003 9:21 am

I know E's development is quite slow, but I don't know why this should count as a disadvantage. I'm using Enlightenment 16.5 because it offers all the features I need. It's fast and reliable and everything I need is just one left mouse click away...

panserg · Post by **panserg** » Tue May 06, 2003 2:19 pm

nerdbert wrote:I know E's development is quite slow, but I don't know why this should count as a disadvantage. I'm using Enlightenment 16.5 because it offers all the features I need. It's fast and reliable and everything I need is just one left mouse click away...

I would be fine with E16, but the problem is that last time I've tried E16 with Gnome-2.2 it didn't work. What Gnome do you use? And is your E16.5 a vanilla or from portage?

Ellidi · Post by **Ellidi** » Tue May 06, 2003 2:34 pm

Fluxbox. :)

nerdbert · Post by **nerdbert** » Wed May 07, 2003 9:25 am

panserg wrote:
nerdbert wrote:I know E's development is quite slow, but I don't know why this should count as a disadvantage. I'm using Enlightenment 16.5 because it offers all the features I need. It's fast and reliable and everything I need is just one left mouse click away...
I would be fine with E16, but the problem is that last time I've tried E16 with Gnome-2.2 it didn't work. What Gnome do you use? And is your E16.5 a vanilla or from portage?

it's from portage

Code: Select all

*  x11-wm/enlightenment
      Latest version available: 0.16.5-r4
      Latest version installed: 0.16.5-r4
      Size of downloaded files: 11,117 kB
      Homepage:    http://www.enlightenment.org/
      Description: Enlightenment Window Manager

dunno about gnome - I don't have gnome-base installed.

Post by **pjp** » Wed May 07, 2003 2:36 pm

panserg wrote:And is your E16.5 a vanilla or from portage?

What is your perceived difference between portage E16.5 and "vanilla" E16.5?

nrl · Post by **nrl** » Wed May 07, 2003 2:56 pm

I was once a fan of anything that ended with "box" but I tried out pekwm and now I don't use anything else. My favourite feature is that the tabs are part of the title bar rather than those ugly tabs in fluxbox (although I think fluxbox may be going to have tabs like pekwm in the future). Anyway as was said before you should try as many as possible until you find the one you like since they take no time to compile and consume very little disk space.
Have fun finding the wm of your choice

.

dna42 · Post by **dna42** » Wed May 07, 2003 8:24 pm

i've been using windowmaker for years and have been quite happy with it. basically it features everything a good window manager ought to.

the other day i switched to afterstep however and i have to say i'm impressed. it is probably one of the most advanced window managers out there. i admit, that it's not as easy to configure as windowmaker, but it's definitely worth to do so. as an example you can configure it to have all sorts of keyboard shortcuts (including the usage of those windows keys as modifiers) or to scroll through workspaces with the mouse wheel (on the root window without any modifier -- which is rather common these days -- and with the windows key pressed on top of other windows). while there are other window managers which offer simmilar functionality (for example sawfish) afterstep is *relatively* easy for advanced usage.
i wonder, why hardly anyone uses afterstep anymore. sure it doesn't look too beatiful (that is out of the box, i definitely like it the way it looks now)

so long,
--seidel

masseya · Post by **masseya** » Thu May 08, 2003 12:22 am

Favorite Window Manager?

Mystilleef · Post by **Mystilleef** » Thu May 08, 2003 2:51 am

Hello Gents,

Huh?!?...windows what? Bah, I use a full blown desktop, what true power users use! Window managers are for sisis...

Just kiddin

I use KDE and I'm thinking about giving fluxbox a try, window managers just make my computing experience incomplete, it is totally understandable to use them if you have hardware resource constraints, otherwise buy a new computer and get the real deal.

Mystilleef

Edit: Ignore me. I forgot you mentioned you had a slow laptop. In that case go with nice window manager.

ghetto · Post by **ghetto** » Thu May 08, 2003 6:13 am

I have to take exception to what you just said, but I should first say that I use a DE not just a WM, but I know people who prefer to run only in terminal mode on their brand spanking new computers.. and I am sure there are LOTS of people that are incredibly productive using nothing but a flux(black)box and terminal because they have spent the time to become thouroughly faminliar with those environments.... and if you put those people behind the wheel of a GNOME/KDE desktop environment they would probably feel cluttered and claustrophobic. So in a lot of cases I think hardware has nothing to do with the style of a persons desktop.

I think the idea is not to have the flashiest desktop imaginable, but simply to have an environment that allows YOU personally to be maximumly productive. Exactly what the environment happens to be is very individual.

This is one of the major features of the Gnu/Linux OS: total customization.

Mystilleef · Post by **Mystilleef** » Thu May 08, 2003 7:43 am

Hello ghetto,

I totally agree with except when you referred to DE's being cluttered. Being an anti-clutter junkie myself, my DE interface is less cluttered than all the users of WM's that posted what their desktop looks like in the 'what your desktop looks like' thread.

I do agree that DE environments do have a redundant array of apps, which I sparingly use, but I don't see how they cause any clutter. Frankly, the only logical reasons I can accept for anyone using a WM is because of hardware constraints, or they are running a non-user box e.g a server, or they are just not impressed with the DEs available, which is totally acceptable and understandable.

Most people tend to use WMs over DEs due to hardware constraint. It will be interesting to find someone using a 3GHz rig with >512MB RAM on a >20GB hard disk for reasons not mentioned above. Outside the clutter issue, I totally agree with you.

Mystilleef

ghetto · Post by **ghetto** » Thu May 08, 2003 8:14 am

yeah maybe 'clutter' isnt the right word, but since you meantioned that you use KDE i cant think of a better example of a cluttered menu system than that.
If you take a person that is used to a mostly selfwritten menu like fluxbox then you show them KDE's menu and ask them to use it to find out system properties they will probably give up after 2 minutes, open a terminal.. type in a few command.. and 0.002 seconds later have the answer for you about system properties.. even though KDE has an entry for almost anything you could ever want to know in its menu.. but to a person who isnt familiar with it thats a draw back because there is just so much stuff that it could seem cluttered.. but again.. maybe clutter isnt the right word.. but i just cant think of the word that describes what im talking about..

drakonite · Post by **drakonite** » Thu May 08, 2003 8:29 am

Mystilleef wrote:Hello ghetto,

I totally agree with except when you referred to DE's being cluttered. Being an anti-clutter junkie myself, my DE interface is less cluttered than all the users of WM's that posted what their desktop looks like in the 'what your desktop looks like' thread.

I do agree that DE environments do have a redundant array of apps, which I sparingly use, but I don't see how they cause any clutter. Frankly, the only logical reasons I can accept for anyone using a WM is because of hardware constraints, or they are running a non-user box e.g a server, or they are just not impressed with the DEs available, which is totally acceptable and understandable.

Most people tend to use WMs over DEs due to hardware constraint. It will be interesting to find someone using a 3GHz rig with >512MB RAM on a >20GB hard disk for reasons not mentioned above. Outside the clutter issue, I totally agree with you.

Mystilleef

I'm not sure if this counts... I don't have a "3GHz rig with >512MB RAM on a >20GB hard disk" but if I did I'd be either running E or flux on it. I have both Gnome and KDE installed on my current (slow) box, but never use either of them.
If you don't believe me feel free to give me El Top O' The Line Box and I'll show you that I'm serious

abracadaver · Post by **abracadaver** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 7:00 pm

i'll throw in another recommendation for xfce(4), i just started using this to escape from the *box obsession because i just needed a change, and it's a great window manager (desktop environment?), it's nice and fast, i'd describe it as the offspring of a *box and trimmed down gnome, the only thing i don't like about it is it's pretty much all gui configured, i like the box 'hack method' where you have to do everything from config files, it makes me feel special and smart :]

and for something that i don't think has been mentioned in this thread..or maybe it has, Pekwm is great for a box style lightweight wm, it's very configurable and has some awesome themes, its only drawback is its "harbour" the fluxbox slit clone that has about a third of the functionality, it's a work in progress, and as a whole not too shabby

here's another thread on the same topic....

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php? ... ow+manager

H0bb3z · Post by **H0bb3z** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 9:01 pm

Here's my recommendation:

Boot your box with a Knoppix CD (http://www.knoppix.com) and use a kernel cheat code (http://download.linuxtag.org/knoppix/kn ... tcodes.txt) to try the various different window managers out there and decide which one you like.

When you've decided, emerge the wm of choice on your Gentoo box.

This way, you don't screw up anything on your harddrive while testing out the different window manglers.

blubber · Post by **blubber** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 9:07 pm

xfce4 looks nice. But I can't find it anywhere in portage... Is it in there somewhere? Or should I must get it from cvs?

Lightweight window managers

What is a Window Mangager?